Left Turn: Is the GOP conservative?

National Review ^ | July 23, 2003 issue | National Review Editorial Board

[ApesForEvolution]

Depends on whether you support a 'living' Constitution or the original document...

[balrog666]

Is this why you don't post anything about Alberto and continue to smear me a RAT?

Geez, don't you have anything else to post about other than Alberto? He has not been nominated to any federal judicial post as yet - it's a pointless issue at the moment.

[ApesForEvolution]

Would you like to see Alberto sitting on the USSC? If so, why?

If not, would you prefer a)derailing him before nomination, b)derailing him during nomination or c)having a Justice Alberto?

Thanks.

[balrog666]

Geez, don't you have anything else to post about other than Alberto? He has not been nominated to any federal judicial post as yet - it's a pointless issue at the moment.

I guess not.

[Ken H]

From Post 502: the Patriot Act, which still requires a Court to approve a warrant, even if said warrant is only produced **after** the search.

Ken H: Isn't a court supposed to approve a warrant first?"

That hasn't changed. Only when it is displayed in some rare instances.

So under the Patriot Act, authorities are still required to obtain a warrant prior to a search. Is that correct?

[ApesForEvolution]

Yet another evader. Some of you folks truly deserve what you get.

[balrog666]

Yet another evader. Some of you folks truly deserve what you get.

Unlike you, I don't seek battles with nonexistent opponents.

[ApesForEvolution]

And, apparently, unlike you, I prepare for all battlefield possibilities before I have to confront them.

If Bush selected Alberto WH Counsel, then it's not a stretch to envision Bush nominating Alberto for the USSC.

Alberto's possible ascent should be explored and pre-empted IMO.

[PatrickHenry]

I dropped in to watch.

[f.Christian]

Political Correctness is an exercise in ... truth suffocation – nothing more.

[balrog666]

Alberto's possible ascent should be explored and pre-empted IMO.

Would you rather have Alberto or Ruth Ginsburg?

Would you rather have Alberto or John Stevens?

Would you rather have Alberto or David Souter?

[CobaltBlue]

>>So under the Patriot Act, authorities are still required to obtain a warrant prior to a search. Is that correct?<<

Yes.

[ApesForEvolution]

D)None of the above.

E)Dissolve the court and start over.

I prefer D, but E would probably be the best option at this point, while we still have a Constitution.

The next thing you know, we will have a Constitutional Convention, at the rate the current court has been moving.

You answered my question with a question. Does that mean you have no knowledge of Alberto and are dodging the direct questions I am asking?

[ApesForEvolution]

Wrong.

The new authority "is primarily designed to authorize delayed notice of searches".

The amendment permits seizure of any tangible property or communications where the court finds "reasonable necessity" for this seizure.

The law also requires that notice be given within a "reasonable period" - which can be extended by the court for "good cause."

"Reasonable period" is undefined, and the administration's Field Guidance advises that this is a "flexible standard."

This significant change in the law applies to all government searches for material that "constitutes evidence of a criminal offense in violation of the laws of the United States" and is not limited to investigations of terrorist activity.

Prior law authorized delayed notification of a search only under a very small number of circumstances (such as surreptitious electronic surveillance).

The expansion of this extraordinary authority to all searches constitutes a radical departure from 4th Am. standards - and could very well (especially in the hands of a RAT POTUS) result in routine surreptitious entries by law enforcement agents.

[balrog666]

D)None of the above.

E)Dissolve the court and start over.

I prefer D, but E would probably be the best option at this point, while we still have a Constitution.

So, to mix a few metaphors, you're still up the creek without a clue, arguing against your fantasyland demons...

Don't ping me when you come down.

[ApesForEvolution]

And you still evade the core issue, but rather take the yet again lower road. How do the mindless navigate the net and find FR? Have a good day, I'm done with you now.

[Houmatt]

Why bellyache about the Patriot Act? Most reasonable people aren't, nor should they, as Michelle Malkin explains.

[Sandy]

Alberto Gonzales

Part I: Biography/Background
Part 2: The Major Decision: Southwestern Refining
Part 3: "Liberal" civil rights issues
Parts 4 ("Conservative" Civil Rights) and 5 (Further Thoughts)

[Southack]

"Yet you insist its repugnancy is urban myth."

What I've insisted upon is that you show actual legal text evidence to support your claims.

So far, you haven't. You probably won't, either.

In contrast, I've shown some of the actual legal text.

Hmmm... No evidence from one side; plenty of evidence from the other...I wonder who's more likely to be right?!

[Southack]

"So under the Patriot Act, authorities are still required to obtain a warrant prior to a search. Is that correct?"

That is correct.