Posted on 08/18/2006 1:48:59 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
CAMP DAVID, Md. - President Bush on Friday criticized a federal court ruling that said his warrantless wiretapping program is unconstitutional, declaring that opponents "do not understand the nature of the world in which we live."
"I strongly disagree with that decision, strongly disagree," Bush said, striking his finger on a podium to underscore his point. "That's why I instructed the Justice Department to appeal immediately, and I believe our appeals will be upheld."
U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor in Detroit on Thursday was the first to find the National Security Agency surveillance program unconstitutional. The program involves monitoring international phone calls and e-mails to and from the United States involving people with suspected ties to terrorists.
"If al-Qaida is calling in to the United States, we want to know why they're calling," Bush said.
Critics say the surveillance program skirts the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which requires court warrants for domestic eavesdropping. The administration has argued that obtaining warrants from a secret court set up under FISA is a time-consuming process unsuited for the government's fast-moving war on terror.
The judge said the government, in defending the program, appeared to be saying the president had the "inherent power" to violate laws of Congress.
"It was never the intent of the framers to give the president such unfettered control," Taylor wrote in a 43-page opinion. "... There are no hereditary Kings in America and no powers not created by the Constitution. So all 'inherent powers' must derive from that Constitution."
On other issues, Bush said it would take the world time to view the war between Israel and Hezbollah as a loss for the Islamic militant group.
"The first reaction, of course, of Hezbollah and its supporters is, declare victory," Bush said. "I guess I would have done the same thing if I were them, but sometimes it takes people a while to come to the sober realization of what forces create stability and which don't. Hezbollah is a force of instability."
Bush also expressed some disappointment with France's contribution to an expanded peacekeeping force in Lebanon.
France had been expected to make a significant new contribution that would form the backbone of the expanded force. But French President Jacques Chirac disappointed the United Nations and other countries by announcing France would contribute just 200 combat engineers to its current 200-member contingent in Lebanon.
"France has said they will send some troops," the president said. "We hope they'll send more."
Members of Bush's economic team stood alongside the president as he spoke under bright sunshine at the Camp David helipad. Among attendees were Vice President Dick Cheney, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez, Labor Secretary Elaine Chao, National Economic Council Director Allan Hubbard and White House budget chief Rob Portman.
The meeting came at a time when only 37 percent of Americans support Bush's handling of the economy, according to AP-Ipsos polling in early August. It's also just weeks before congressional midterm elections that will determine whether Republicans continue to control the House and the Senate.
Bush declared the economy solid and strong because of tax cuts his administration pushed through Congress. He rattled off a series of economic indicators, including the nation's 4.8 percent jobless rate in July and 4 percent annual economic growth rate through the first half of the year.
But House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi took issue with Bush's upbeat comments on the economy, saying, "President Bush may think the economy is moving forward, but many hard working Americans are stuck living paycheck to paycheck.
"Under President Bush and the Republican Congress, the economic situation for too many Americans is going in the wrong direction," said the California Democrat. Since Bush took office, she said, "real median family income has dropped by $1,700 while families are paying $3,200 more in household costs."
Bush did not mention that the July unemployment rate had inched up from 4.6 percent in June, reflecting a slowdown in job creation that reflects weaker economic growth. And while the gross domestic product expanded at an annual rate of 5.6 percent in the first quarter, it slowed to just 2.5 percent in the April-June quarter.
On Friday, a University of Michigan survey showed consumer confidence fell sharply in early August to the lowest level in 10 months as Americans were rattled by new terrorism concerns and gasoline prices above $3 per gallon.
Bush did not mention the jump in gasoline prices, although he did discuss the need to invest in new energy technologies.
Paulson, speaking to reporters later, said the team spent much time talking about long-term challenges such as changing Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid in view of the pending retirement of 78 million baby boomers.
"We think it is quite possible to come up with a fix that is quite doable," Paulson said of reforming the government programs. "The question is whether we can get the support of Congress to get something done."
___
AP Economics Writer Martin Crutsinger contributed to this report.
Or do you believe that it is implicit within the Constitutional duties of the Commander in Chief to protect American citizens from being blown into bits by terrorists?
I gave you my opinion of the Fourth Amendment. You disagree.
I'd wager that the Courts will agree with my interpretation.
Not really. Terrorism cannot be fought well unless it is done thoroughly and correctly. An open and fully porous border does not indicate that the war on terror is being intelligently waged. This being the case, government and political stupidity undermines the war on terror, making what would normally be mundane issues more important. It is obvious that many "counter terrorism" measures are merely window dressing for political purposes. I am very concerned about what must be lurking beneath the fluff.
There is a constant parade of unconstitutional and heavy-handed acts against American people committed by the government. Reason itself escapes from the day-to-day operations of government entities under the guise of "political correctness". I see a lot more rot on the inside than I do from without.
Bush and major contingencies of our represenatives are globalists. They do not make policy that is in the best interest of this Nation. This concerns me very much, much more than terrorism. I have seen the degradation of life caused by the unmonitored influx of Mexicans who don't give a crap about our Nation. I see this everyday. I haven't seen a single act of terrorism in my own neighborhood. Terrorism does not seem to be as pervasive a problem as the others.
No, I didn't notice but I think the man has a right to be "down" occasionally. After all he is only human. If you had to put up with ignorant and rude people all day long, you wouldn't be skipping rope either.
I didn't see an interpretation. I saw what you wish it meant. The 4th Amendment is clearly stated. Please provide an interpretation.
I'm definately on board. I got on the unholy end of this thread because I stupidly thought Bush was defying the Supreme Court. There has been a long line of folks who set out to put me straight. ;-D
These wire tapes are not searching or seizing or depriving individuals of private property. So I do not see where the 4th amendment applies to these wire tapes.
north korea about to explode a Nuke.
iran attacking our Country on August 22.
chirac promising Bush 3000 french troops in lebanon, in exchange for Bush agreeing to accept france's watered down un resolution. chirac stated that if it were to be their troops on the ground as the commanding force, they wanted to set the rules.
Economy booming but media selling it as if we had carter back in office.
Success in Iraq being lied about using the same deceptive techniques as used to talk down booming economy
Threats that we do not know about.
Half the country hating his guts for keeping their unappreciative arses robustly wealthy and safe.
A$$holes on Free Republic constantly bashing him for their pet-peeve issue.
I am surprised the man can get out of bed in the morning. His faith in GOD, and love for America and her people are all that sustains him!
LLS
That being the case, you don't think the government needs a warrant to tap your phone?
Not my phone. I am not a terrorist nor do I have a malicious agenda of any sort. Nothing to hide here.
well, let me ask you - what are you going to say if he has to violate the supreme court - because there is a 50/50 chance this case will be upheld.
can the supreme court issue an unconstitutional decision? what are they, infallible? OK you say, then its up to Congress to get involved. But look at the Gitmo decision, the SCOTUS had laws passed by congress specifically to curb their involvement with certain types of cases - they simply sidestep them. the SCOTUS essentially amended the Geneva treaties, where did they get the consitutional power to do that?
so what do you do next? impeach those justices? its not going to happen.
do you see now why the left, above all else, seeks to control the judicial branch of government? its the most powerful branch, the most arbitrary, with the fewest (if any) checks and balances.
I have nothing to hide, but I don't want the government tapping my phones or taking my guns!
just don't call pakistan, and you'll be fine.
No. I told you what it means. "Probable cause" is not a standard for surveilling non-American citizens. There is no standard.
And American citizens talking to these up-to-no-good non-citizens have to be surveilled right along with them.
I will ask again: do you believe terrorists have the protection of the Constitution? And, if you say they should, why should they?
Where does this come from? I have not found it in the Constitution.
Now you're sounding like a conspiracy nut.
Bush and major contingencies of our represenatives are globalists. They do not make policy that is in the best interest of this Nation.
More Birchite conspiracy nonsense.
With all these other boogeymen in your life, it's no wonder you don't recognize the threat of terrorism.
For the third time: does the Constitution protect the rights of foreign terrorists?
Your unwillingness to answer this question is a flashing red light.
"I strongly disagree with that decision, strongly disagree," Bush said, striking his finger on a podium to underscore his point. "That's why I instructed the Justice Department to appeal immediately, and I believe our appeals will be upheld."
Prayers up for that.. How the hell can some idiot district judge have the power to put this Nation in jeopardy from the very people we are in a war with?? Also, where is the GOP, they should be shouting from the rooftops.
Over and over again I find myself saying that there are no words to express by anger at these liberal pieces of dirt. WE ARE AT WAR YOU IDIOTS! This is all for politics, which should make American citizens run like the wind from democrats.
Before you get too deep in this, search the Constitution for "person" versus "citizen". You will find that the BOR applies to person, not citizens.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.