JACKSON: "Amen to that!"
Posted on 08/17/2006 9:06:43 AM PDT by sinkspur
A federal district judge in Detroit has ruled that the Bush administration's NSA surveillance of phone conversations is unconstitutional.
No one except perhaps the largest anti-American, anti-israeli, Pro-Hizbollah cummunity in the county which is more than likely to result in the most endictments handed out for suspected terrorist sympathizers than anywhere else in this country.
What better place to have a Federal judge in your back pocket than in Detroit?
Now, isn't it time for you to go back to school?
Gonzalez is taking the wrong approach. The courts have already ruled that Article II allows for warrantless searches for the purpose of gathering foreign intelligence. Gonzalez needs to stick to that point.
So all the president needs to do is declare he is acting as Commander In Chief, and no matter what, he is correct? We just let him evoke that power to whatever end, with no oversight or restraint? Or do you mean something a bit less than dictatorship?
OTOH, this judge DID break the law. She has NO power, none whatsoever, with which to rule as she has done. Another court ( a HIGHER ONE ! ) has already said that the FISA rules are okay.
Yes, this IS politics.....DEM politics, at a time of WAR; whether you don't want to call it that or not.
You know what? You think like a damned DEM. There is absolutely NOTHING illegal in tapping phone calls of terrorist/al Qaeda, non-American citizens in another country and someone here. That has already been ruled on. Pakistanis and Egyptians and Afghanis et al, are NOT covered by the 4th Amendment to the Constitution of the USA.
It really, really, REALLY sticks in your craw, doesn't it, that the blowing up of TEN or more plane loads of people, flying on American owned carriers was foiled. What a shame, what a pity, how dreadful it was that their plot was foiled, with the help of WIRE TAPPING! OMG......their "RIGHTS" were trampled on. The horror, oh the horror!
Of course you think that President Bush's "crimes" are far worse than Bill Clinton's perjury involving SEXUAL ASSAULT. After all, Clinton was only trying to save his own hide and his presidency, whilst he allowed those poor, poor terrorists to live free and plane the murder of thousand of INNOCENT Americans. Clinton wouldn't take bin Laden, THREE TIMES, because old binny hadn't committed any crime. Naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaw3, it was NO CRIME whatsoever, planning, funding and sending out terrorists to blow up the USS COLE, bomb two American embassies, or even bombing the WTC in '93. Of course, I understand completely now.....NOT!
Nope, YOU don't want us to fight terrorism at all. You want President Bush to treat TERRORISM the same way Clinton did.....as petty crimes, to be handled by local policemen and women. Yeah.......that's the ticket. That sure worked, when it was tried; didn't it?
You are NOT a conservative at all and you don't belong on this forum.
This should be on the nightly news. Far too few Americans understands what we all face.
Lincoln had no "oversight" and neither did FDR nor Truman, in the way that you mean.
I know that you disagree with fjord, but do you really think that he is upset that people didn't die?
All he is saying is that our form of government that has worked pretty darn well for over 200 years is setup to have checks and balances.
It's not clear where you got from that to fjord wanting thousands of people to die.
So they are only monitoring traffic between foreign nationals and there is no substantial likelihood that the surveillance will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party?
Well if that's the case, then I guess the administration is 100% in the clear.
That does sound complicated...but which category should talking to a terrorist fall under?
Female Afro Amererican apointee of Jimmy Carter. This will go to SCOTUS and she'll be B**ch Slapped.
IN 200+ years, we have had presidents who during a tine of WAR, Americans were separated out of the general populace; both Japanese and Germans. Wire tapping was used during WW II as well. Spies and terrorists have been hung, shot, and given the electric chair, Habeas Corpus has been rescinded, and American citizens, who have supported our enemies have had their phones tapped and their mail read.
Do you agree with the other poster? COMPLETELY? Has President Bush committed far worse CRIMES than Bill Clinton did?
JACKSON: "Amen to that!"
Detroitistan? It's not even THAT good. More like Dresden II.
That area of the state is one huge Liberal sink-hole and the judge, I believe, is a Clinton appointee who is probably worried about breathing...if you catch my drift.
The president answers to the electorate every 4 years. Wrongs are generally righted at those times. In the interism, gross misbehavior can result in an impeachment and removal from office.
In the meantime, if the President says "I tapped the line of terrorist sympathizers because of an immediate need regarding those who murdered 3000 of our citizens on 9/11, and with whom we are officially in conflict by act of Congress." then I'm going to believe him.
If he says, "I'm requiring as commander in chief that all commercial enterprises to send me a thousand bucks a year.", then I won't.
I'm able to tell the difference.
"Clinton appointee." I was wrong, even worse, a Carter appointee. At least the judge is rather up there in years.
I think there are sleepers.
There will always be sacrifices required for a people at war. I believe we're operating pretty much at standard level regarding our civil liberties in this country considering our war effort.
To expect that all liberties will remain at consistent levels whether it's wartime or peacetime is silly.
I believe that you are correct on ALL points. :-)
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.