This is the thanks Bush/Rove gets for saving Specter's rear during the 2004 GOP Senatorial primaries.
Funny, but right after that Specter said FISA was probably unconstitutional. Wonder why that was left off?
Time for a new chairman ~ calling Bill Frist!
Spectre is long overdue for defeat and relegation to the ash heap of Senate history.
Specter is the gift that keeps on giving.
That was not the most important quote. Specter said FISA was probably UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
I guess he is basing this on Scottish law?
Does he have John McCain disease? I know he's not up for election for 4 yrs but maybe he'll get phlebitis and have to retire.
That's it, I want Arlen's head on a platter. What an oaf.
Sounds like the chemo roasted a few more brain cells than anyone expected.
 "Specter: Administration broke lawHmmm.... that's not what Senator Spector said at all. He said that the administration may be in violation of the FISA laws, but that if those laws are in conflict with the President's constitutionally mandated powers in Article II, then no he didn't break any laws and FISA is unconstitutional. So in short what Specter said was that; it appears Congress may have written a law that is against the law in 1978. |
'Cause whatever it is, your handlers must really have your butt against the wall.
Either that or YOU have it across the line.
If it is the latter, just make the Jeffords jump and get it over with, OK?
And it was illegal to intercept Axis communications during WWII
And of course it was illegal to intercept communicaitons during the cold war.
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Title 50 of the U.S. Code, Chapter 36, Subchapter I, Section 1802, "Electronic surveillance authorization without court order," reads: "[T]he President, through the Attorney General, may authorize electronic surveillance without a court order under this subchapter to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year," provided a series of conditions are met. Surveillance must be directed only at agents of foreign powers; there can be no likely surveillance of a "U.S. person"
The "U.S. person" definition "does not include a corporation or an association which is a foreign power," according to the same law. An "agent of a foreign power" is anyone, citizen or otherwise, who "knowingly engages in sabotage or international terrorism, or activities that are in preparation therefor, for or on behalf of a foreign power." Which means that people who do not help al-Qaeda or other terrorists are safe from surveillance
14th Circuit's 1980 decision case, involving the surveillance of a Vietnamese spy named David Truong, "The Truong court, as did all the other courts to have decided the issue, held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information." The court added, "We take it for granted that the President does have that authority."
The court in the Truong case noted that the executive "not only has superior expertise in the area of foreign intelligence, it is also constitutionally designated as the pre-eminent authority in foreign affairs." And the Constitution's framers knew what they were about, according to the Truong court: "Attempts to counter foreign threats to the national security require the utmost stealth, speed and secrecy. A warrant requirement would add a procedural hurdle that would reduce the flexibility of executive foreign-intelligence initiatives."
Way to go, Arlo! Draw a foregone conclusion, and announce it the day before you hold your ego-massaging hearings. Two big wastes of taxpayer money exposed: The Sphincter AND his hearings.
term limits, the only way to get our gov't back.....
The program is not in violation of FISA.What a ditz.
Gee, Arlen, why didn't you tell him that 3 years ago?
Sphincter you mean?