There was no trial. Ames and his wife entered a plea bargain.
Where the quandary and stigma comes from is that Nixon said things like the Watergate burglary were done for National Security as a dodge.
Quite true. That is part of the "nub," of what will constitute adequate justification for intruding on what the pulic thinks is privacy. Does there need to be a reason? Does the reason need to attach to the person under surveillance? Does the agent who is asserting he has a reason to intrude need to share the reason with anybody?
Generalities just don't do - but that's all we're gonna get.
Don't let them define the terms of the debate. It's NOT DOMESTIC SURVEILLANCE.
It's not foreign surveillance either. And to the charge of it being domesitc, I think a good response is "So what? If the terrorists are in the country, should we stop listening?"
Absolutely strange that this argument is not used more or do the Republicans fear this will not be viewed favorably by the public.
According to the libs .. we shouldn't be
According to the libs .. it's ok for terrorists to plot and murder Americans within our borders
They have have rights you know .... / sac >
I'm not surprised, but I think I remember there being an evidentiary ruling allowing the results of the search of his house to be used before that.