[P-40]

the presence of FISA provides a significant measure of predictability to prosecutions

I generally would prefer the use of the FISA court...but I see some problems that I don't think have been fully addressed just yet. Most notably, if I take my investigation of a suspected terrorist to the court, and that court determines that my evidence does not meet with their approval...the suspect gets notified...and that might not be such a good thing. The 911 Commission Report goes into detail on the FISA application and the laptop...and it is a sad tale indeed.

I'll have to take a look at your FISA court postings.

[Cboldt]

I generally would prefer the use of the FISA court...but I see some problems that I don't think have been fully addressed just yet.

It's jurisdiction is limited to issuing of warrants according to a rigid formula. I am quite sure there is an area of executive action that is easily within the constitution, and outside of FISA, and in particular point to the 1802 as not including 1801(a)(4) actors in its scope.

if I take my investigation of a suspected terrorist to the court, and that court determines that my evidence does not meet with their approval...the suspect gets notified.

I checked that, and agree that it represents a risk. I don't now how big the risk is in practice. Note too, the notification takes place ONLY if surveillance has taken place - so the risk is an impediment to getting warrants in that 72 hour after the fact window. It isn't a blanket impediment.

I'll have to take a look at your FISA court postings.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1578052/posts?page=37#37 <- FISA Genesis