Do you still think Nifong was a decent, honest prosecutor, just doin’ his job? Hah! And Ronnie Earle?

Fitzfong is what Scooter got. Have you all seen Clarice’s comments on the redacted info Fitz kept out of the public eye??????

And let’s see…Gonzales was supposed to out by the end of April..
I wouldn’t be throwing stones in that glass house, soothie.

Cheeses K. Rist, legal opinions from thye same people who thought Scooter Libby would be found not guilty.

Well since we already had a communication linkage then the FBI gathers additional evidence to support the warrant, you should have a good chance of getting the warrant issued.

That’s true. Basically it has been illegal for NSA to monitor US citizens who are in the country legally. Their efforts are on foreign communications. One of the “holes” in our system was brought to light by the 9/11 commission when it was revealed that it was possible that communications with the 9/11 hijackers may have been intercepted but the intercepted communications destroyed because the hijackers (the pilots, I believe) were in the country legally. These communications were intercepted in the course of monitoring known terrorists overseas, the way I understand it but since one end was in the US, NSA could had to destroy the intercept. They were not even allowed to hand it off to FBI because FBI requires a warrant BEFORE the intercept is collected so we were in a catch-22.

NSA had the intercept but must destroy it, it can’t be handed over to FBI because there is no warrant beforehand, NSA couldn’t keep it because it involved communications where a warrant was required. In this case the person on the US side of the conversation wasn’t the one being monitored, it was the person overseas. To make matters worse, NSA couldn’t even TELL FBI about the person in the US communicating with the terrorist because it wasn’t allowed to know what the conversation was about.

In other words, our system was set up so that unless a terrorist in the US was already known to us in advance and a warrant obtained, we could not in any way use communications intercepts acquired in the process of monitoring foreign terrorists when someone in the US stumbled into the picture. That was insane and was changed. First by allowing the NSA to use such intelligence without a warrant, and later by changing the FISA requirement so that a warrant could be obtained after the fact when a domestic terror suspect stumbled into the picture while foreign terrorists were being monitored.

It doesn’t. That is why that particular “warrentless wiretapping” program is no longer needed and is no longer being done. Once that compromise was made with the FISA courts, that program could be terminated and it was. In the meantime, there has been nobody who has come forward and said they have been harmed in any way. That might be because only people who were in communication with terrorists outside of the US would have been monitored and only in conversations with those terrorists.

So Sooth, unless you have been in communication with known terrorists outside of the US, you would have nothing to worry about.

They can listen to wherever intel points them. When they build up enough data they pass it to someone like the FBI who then maybe does a 72 hour tap to confirm the data and they get a warrant.

No grasp of the difference between the difference between the intel side and the justice department side.

So Sooth present stawman that have no validity.

I am sure they would also get their panties in a bunch if the goberment was accessing commercially available databases but would give a pass to mass mailers who own or access the same data bases.

You do not know what you are talking about. If it was that simple we would not even be discussing it. Really. Those impeachment proceedings you lust after would have already been under way.

I think the interesting thing is that if Bush or any other president tries to stop an attack he has people like you comparing him to Hitler or if he does not do whatever is necessary to stop an attack, he has people like you comparing him to Hitler.

The truth being that Ellison can yammer on about 9/11 and who was behind it, but if that program you are complaining about had been in effect at the time chances are the government could have stopped that attack.

Tell me, how do you thinks the Brits are rounding up these guys before they actually kill people? Psychic abilities or what? I think they are watching them and listening to them and spying on them. But that is ok, after all they aren’t Americans.

Shame poor Sooth doesn’t realize that the Patriot Act warrant requirements have be totally vetted but skips over that part.

Also it’s really makes sense that ONLY 15,000 cases where sufficient probable cause was demonstrated are not a REAL danger.

Seems to have kinda high pain threshold there don’t ya think.

Oh and there is that little thing called the AUMF under which the CIC can order tapping every phone from sea to shining sea at no more than just a gut feeling.

So there would be a good case to be adjudicated that the Patriot Act was ill formed and does not recognize the exemption for CIC powers and could be declared unconstitutional as a restriction to powers of the CIC.

And let me say this: I trust ONLY George W. Bush in the WOT. I DO NOT trust Hillary or Obama or Edwards with wiretapping ANYONE. Imho, they would not use the intel for our benefit, but rather, against their political enemies…check out the previous administration’s ACTUAL wiretapping for “economic” reasons…riiight!

Beyond BDS….

I mean, c’mon, let’s see some originality here. Howzabout comparing him to Tamerlane?

And the difference between WWII and now – is that it was a REAL threat in 1942 – and there was not a specific law that made FDR’s actions felonies. If Bush wants to change the law – then he should do so – he had 4 years when he controlled both House and Senate — but he would rather be a criminal than tell the truth.

You know for years if the government wanted to tap a phone, they just tapped it. As far as that is concerned it was not until the recent past that it was necessary to even read a man his rights when he was arrested.

For instance, back when there was a real Hitler in the world, FDR routinely monitored long distance phone calls of American citizens and tapped anyone his buddy J. Edgar Hoover said needed to be tapped.

The state did not read rights to people or even always see to it that defendants always had attorneys.

FDR could lock up Japanese American civilians because he damn well felt like it. And, the US military was not integrated until Truman came along.

So was FDR’s America a dictatorship?

The obvious truth is that these people can make stupid comments about Bush being a Chimp or a dictator or whatever, but if he was really Hitler, they would not be saying anything at all. Morons.

I’ve litigated more 4th Amendment cases than you can imagine – especially given your obviously impaired intellect – but let me make it simple for you:

Unlike all those other 4th Amendment cases you are referrring to – in this instance – a specific statute was enacted that made warrantless wiretaps illegal per se – no mens rea necessary. So whatever the state of the law is with resepct to illegal search and seizure IN GENERAL – it does not apply when a specific criminal statute addresses the issue. As the presidential signing statement made at the time says:

The bill requires, for the first time, a prior judicial warrant for all electronic surveillance for foreign intelligence or counterintelligence purposes in the United States in which communications of U.S. persons might be intercepted.

Each warrantless wiretap carries with it a penalty of up to 5 years in prison and a $10,000 fine. Read Section 1809 – criminal sanctions.

So do yourself a favor – to avoid further embarassment- try to learn the law before spouting off.