York smites the shrill lefties screaming about GWB's terrorist intercepts. It looks like Bush's position has been blessed by the highest court to look at the issue and that while the Supremes had a chance to review that decision chose to let it stand.
1 posted on
02/11/2006 2:01:32 PM PST by
Tom D.
To: Tom D.
And then the Court of Review did one more thing, something that has repercussions in todays surveillance controversy. Not only could the FISA Court not tell the president how do to his work, the Court of Review said, but the president also had the inherent authority under the Constitution to conduct needed surveillance without obtaining any warrant from the FISA Court or anyone else.I predict a long, obscenity-filled thread over at DU in response to this. Of course, I could say that about any article.
2 posted on
02/11/2006 2:13:23 PM PST by
Darkwolf377
(An agnostic for religious freedom, not Islamofascistic multiculti PC secularism)
To: Tom D.
Ted Olson for the next Supreme Court nominee!!!!!
I saw him & Bork together where Bork talked on his book.
Both of them are real Americans - even one of the libs on the panel agreed Roe was bad law and should have been left to the states.
Their whole schtick is about serving the poor is just a ruse to increase their power to tax and control. Just like minimum wage prices those with the least skills out of job first.
This is how judicial fiat has allowed Congress to spend us into the ground with powers the Fedl Govt never had to begin with.
3 posted on
02/11/2006 2:22:48 PM PST by
Marxbites
(Freedom is the negation of Govt to the maximum extent possible)
To: Bahbah; Mo1; tiredoflaundry; FOXFANVOX; TruthNtegrity; dinasour; defconw; Fudd Fan; Txsleuth
Byron York article on NSA spying ping. It's a good read.
4 posted on
02/11/2006 2:45:04 PM PST by
saveliberty
( :-) I am a Snowflake and Bushbot.)
To: Tom D.
So the double super secret part of the super secret FISA court has already spoken. Could someone send this to Arlen Specter. I think he's been preempted.
11 posted on
02/11/2006 3:50:14 PM PST by
Bahbah
(An admitted Snow Flake and a member of Sam's Club)
To: Tom D.
Why didn't Gonzales bring this ruling by the Court of Review up at the hearings.
This is incredibly important as a legal authoriztion/ justification for the terrorist surveillance program.
15 posted on
02/11/2006 4:16:05 PM PST by
wildbill
To: Tom D.
To: Tom D.
Olson and the judges went back and forth over the history of the wall. Nobody really knew how it first came into being; the judges later said its origin was shrouded in historical mist.This is the only part where Byron sounds uninformed. "The Wall" was erected by Gorelick (at the direction of the Clintons) to protect Bill Clinton from investigations into his foreign campaign money schemes. I thought this was common knowledge.
To: Tom D.; ken5050; frankjr; Cboldt; Soul Seeker; Miss Marple; MEG33; Pukin Dog; Dog; Coop; Howlin; ...
20 posted on
02/11/2006 4:46:45 PM PST by
txrangerette
("We are fighting al-Qaeda, NOT Aunt Sadie"...Dick Cheney commenting on the wiretaps!!)
To: Tom D.
21 posted on
02/11/2006 4:59:39 PM PST by
MEG33
(GOD BLESS OUR ARMED FORCES)
To: Tom D.; txrangerette
WOW! Amazing stuff BUMP!!
22 posted on
02/11/2006 5:03:42 PM PST by
ohioWfan
(PROUD Mom of an Iraq War VET! THANKS, son!!!!)
To: sauropod
31 posted on
02/11/2006 6:22:59 PM PST by
sauropod
("Here Lies Joe Biden, Buried Under His Own Words.")
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson