Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Taking the Dissident Database Seriously
Power Line ^ | August 6, 2009 | John Hinderaker

Posted on 08/06/2009 12:12:35 PM PDT by yoe

We and many others have ridiculed the Obama administration's heavy-handed effort to gather information on the "fishy" opponents of its government medicine proposal (Bryon York), meanwhile, takes a serious look at the legal implications of the administration's data-gathering program:

In a letter to Obama Tuesday, Republican Sen. John Cornyn wrote that, given Phillips' request, "it is inevitable that the names, email address, IP addresses, and private speech of U.S. citizens will be reported to the White House." Cornyn warned the president that "these actions taken by your White House staff raise the specter of a data collection program."

"I can only imagine the level of justifiable outrage had your predecessor asked Americans to forward emails critical of his policies to the White House," Cornyn continued. "I urge you to cease this program immediately."

Senate Judiciary Committee lawyers studying the proposal say that although there is no absolutely settled law on the matter, the White House plan is likely not covered by the Privacy Act, which prohibits government agencies from keeping any records "describing how any individual exercises rights guaranteed by the First Amendment unless expressly authorized by statute or by the individual about whom the record is maintained." Therefore, it appears the White House can legally keep records of the emails and other communications it receives in response to Phillips' request.

Those lawyers also point out that the White House is not covered by the Freedom of Information Act, which means it would not have to release any information on the plan to members of the public who make a request.

In addition, the lawyers say the collected emails likely will be covered by the Presidential Records Act, which requires the White House to preserve and maintain its records for permanent storage in a government database. ...

if "fishy" information is indeed collected, as Phillips' request suggested, the laws involved mean that the information obtained by the White House could not only be secret but permanent. A dissident database, in whatever precise form it ultimately takes, could be around for a long time to come.

A secret and more or less permanent dissident database--in America! That's quite an accomplishment for an administration still in its seventh month. It seems longer, somehow.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Government
KEYWORDS: reichsmarks4rats
Tyranny

* Main Entry: tyr·an·ny
* Pronunciation: \ˈtir-ə-nē\
* Function: noun
* Inflected Form(s): plural tyr·an·nies
* Etymology: Middle English tyrannie, from Middle French, from Medieval Latin tyrannia, from Latin tyrannus tyrant
* Date: 14th century

1 : oppressive power ; especially : oppressive power exerted by government

2 a : a government in which absolute power is vested in a single ruler; especially : one characteristic of an ancient Greek city-state b : the office, authority, and administration of a tyrant

3 : a rigorous condition imposed by some outside agency or force 4 : a tyrannical act

1 posted on 08/06/2009 12:12:35 PM PDT by yoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: yoe

All one has to do is somehow convince a mainstream journalist that Bush did it, and see the reaction.

Wouldn’t it be great if somehow a person like Kouric, Gibson or Lauer were “punked” - give them a report that Bush had done something that one knows the host would rip apart, and then correct them and say it was an Obama program? Even if it just happened in a casual conversation, or at a public speech, it would be sweet - especially if recorded.

I don’t see the opportunity to do such a thing, but I can dream. :)


2 posted on 08/06/2009 12:16:28 PM PDT by cvq3842 (Countless thousands of our ancestors died to give us the freedoms we have today. Stay involved!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe

Obama’s Enemies List Member No. 08- 3 -722976


3 posted on 08/06/2009 12:16:41 PM PDT by fortunate sun ("HIS JUDGEMENT COMETH AND THAT RIGHT SOON")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe

At what point do our government officials become domestic enemies of the Constitution?
At what point should the military say to them “F-ck you!” and then proceed to march in on them, hold military tribunals for such crimes as negligence, dereliction of duty, fraud, and treason?

How much blood, when the dam breaks, will flood across the country?


4 posted on 08/06/2009 12:17:28 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe

Be sure to write your Congress Critters. Ask them about the program. Ask how they intend to protect us from government spying. Ask what steps they will take to honor our Constitution, that they have sworn to uphold.

In other words; Get the Bastards on record and make them deny it. They can wear their lies around their necks. 0bama will soon be one very heavy stone.


5 posted on 08/06/2009 12:23:50 PM PDT by Steamburg ( Your wallet speaks the only language most politicians understand.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe

Something like this could not have been started and implemented without Obama’s expressed consent. No way !! We are heading down a dark dark dusty road.


6 posted on 08/06/2009 12:24:23 PM PDT by Don Corleone ("Oil the gun..eat the cannolis. Take it to the Mattress.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark; yoe
Be careful, wouldn't want to intimidate anyone. Thanks again, W.

Game, Set, Match:

Patriot Act

SEC. 802. DEFINITION OF DOMESTIC TERRORISM
(5) the term `domestic terrorism' means activities that--
`(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
`(B) appear to be intended--

`(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
`(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
`(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
`(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.'.

7 posted on 08/06/2009 12:27:37 PM PDT by BGHater (Insanity is voting for Republicans and expecting Conservatism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: BGHater

SEC. 802. DEFINITION OF DOMESTIC TERRORISM
(5) the term `domestic terrorism’ means activities that—
`(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
`(B) appear to be intended—
`(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, and
`(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.’.

Well, while B and C are fulfilled, the connecting clause is an ‘AND’ which means that only if the Military honoring their oath to the Constitution (which is the supreme law of the land) is illegal could it be considered that I was advocating domestic terrorism.


8 posted on 08/06/2009 12:45:59 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

I am sure that all these “duck and cover” legal aspects were well fleshed out by the Obamaites before publicizing this Obamastapo program.


9 posted on 08/06/2009 12:59:50 PM PDT by Eleven Bravo 6 319thID
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Don Corleone
We are heading down a dark dark dusty road.

It's a dark road, but I disagree with you...it's muddy, not dusty.

10 posted on 08/06/2009 1:16:03 PM PDT by Lou L
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: cvq3842

Having been news-deficient all day today, does anyone know whether there has been any public reaction by the 0bama, Gibbs, the lady who made the “turn them in” video? as to this letter from the senator?


11 posted on 08/06/2009 1:28:05 PM PDT by NEMDF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: yoe
Senate Judiciary Committee lawyers studying the proposal say that although there is no absolutely settled law on the matter

Didn't we hear that from Algore in the 90s regarding fundraising from Buddhist nuns?

12 posted on 08/06/2009 5:46:13 PM PDT by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe
Senate Judiciary Committee lawyers studying the proposal say that although there is no absolutely settled law on the matter

Didn't we hear that from Algore in the 90s regarding fundraising from Buddhist nuns?

13 posted on 08/06/2009 5:47:16 PM PDT by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SuziQ

I could say that again. ;o)


14 posted on 08/06/2009 5:48:31 PM PDT by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson