"Another activist judge exposed..."
The epitome of an activist judge. Ruled purely on "feeelings".
Even many who agree with her ruling admit her process was flawed.
"We can sympathize with her motives..."Speak for yourself.From what i've read,i believe the program is in fact legal and the majority of Americans support the program.This is nothing more than a leftist judge trying to impose her will(and her parties will)on the American public and negatively affect our ability to defend ourselves from terrorists.No sympathy for this judge.
The ACLU is known for "judge shopping," finding a sympathetic judge that is like to find in its favor. I am sure this was the case.
So what if the facts, law and precedent are against her? She has the New York Times on her side.
Handled properly, this is an election year issue. Activist judges are getting a bad reputation and this ruling will be another highlight.
Link to her bio.
http://www.daahp.wayne.edu/biographiesDisplay.asp?id=64
A couple million bucks in a foreign bank account can easily buy a RAT judge. People are always willing to sell to the enemy for the right price--check with Clintoon and Chicoms on this one.
America haters everywhere must be rejoicing. And communicating.
People who "mean well" often send others into slavery.
She may regret her decisions while her head is being sawed off by some islamic nutbag.
"...the only plausible explanation is that she wanted the result she wanted and was willing to ignore and misread vast portions of constitutional law to get there,..."
Golly, that sounds a lot like Affirmative Action doesn't it?
"Whatever Judge Taylor’s motives, it is critical to understand the impact of her decision, were it allowed to stand. Among many damaging results, the Terrorist Surveillance Program, publicly credited not 72 hours ago with helping to prevent the “9/11 Part 2” British airline bombings, will be shut down and our enemies will know it."
Or will they? When this idiotic leak came forward from the idiotic news media, predominantly liberal, to try to harm the administration's efforts to get the job done and delaying successes by destroying a working program for political means, couldn't this be an excellent way to fool the murdering animals into going back to using the same means thinking it is safe? Or maybe it isn't? Since the media screwed it up like a bunch of morons, couldn't they be moron enough to report the opposite for the administration in their exuberance and offer the administration to use the program during court procedings with greater successes of use or non-use by the enemy?
The media shouldn't be fed more than twice a day. They convert the means to dishonesty and stupidity, at best.
Red
Uhhah...
If a Democrat were in office with the same prudent directive to stifle terrorist acts not a word would have been uttered by Ms. Diggs-Taylor and the WOT wouldn't be scrutinized to this extent by her.
