Re: The disgraceful right-wing distortion on the domestic spying issue
 

If Bill Clinton had done the exact same things as Bush is doing, to those on both the right and the left, would your opinion change as to whether it was appropriate?

Consider: The PATRIOT Act, the Padilla case (and similar actions), the wiretapping issues.

Re: The disgraceful right-wing distortion on the domestic spying issue
 

Thanks for the analysis andy, good stuff.

As for Bluffs: "Excerpt below from today's WSJ op-ed page gives the president's legal authority for warrantless wiretaps."

LoL..The WSJ's op-ed page supercedes the constitution? Do op-eds by NAMBLA proponents give me the legal authority to you know what? not that I want that, as I am not the member of the clergy.

Re: The disgraceful right-wing distortion on the domestic spying issue
 

LBJ was supposedly the author of that great line about Hoover. When asked whey he didn't fire him Johnson said, "I'd rather have him inside the tent pissing out, than outside pissing in."

Re: The disgraceful left-wing distortion on the law in this matter
 

andy, I want to commend you for your humility in admitting that it does indeed look like previous court decisions validate the legal opinion of the Attorney General and the legality of the president's actions. Very big of you.

Re: The disgraceful right-wing distortion on the domestic spying issue
 

[ QUOTE ]
In a time of war the executive branch has the power to do anything it wants. The only way to stop the executive branch from a specific course of action is for congress to become organized and pass a bill to stop the executive branch.

[/ QUOTE ]

An interesting theory. Where exactly is this in the Constitution? Hint: Nowhere.

We are not legally at war. No declaration of war has been pawwd by Congress since WWII.

Bush is applying Hermann Goering's theories now.

Re: The disgraceful left-wing distortion on the law in this matter
 

Touche! Very good.

I would have to read the court decisions (and know more about exactly what the wiretaps involved) to see if the Journal's take on them is correct. It is interesting that neither Gonzalez nor the president mentioned those court decisions as validating their argument. Both mentioned the 2001 authorization to use force and the Constitution. Perhaps they meant the court decisions when they said the Constitution.

Out of curiosity, do you have any fears about an imperial presidency or abuse of power in light of President Bush's, Vice President Cheney's, and Attorney General Gonzalez's comments of the past fews days?

Re: The disgraceful right-wing distortion on the domestic spying issue
 

[ QUOTE ]
It is my understanding that the approval from the special FISA court can be gotten after the fact. That is, that they can do what they want for 72 hours and get approval thereafter for what they did. And out of about 19,000 requests for approval, only five had been denied since the law was passed.

The law was passed with this in mind. Namely that the situations involving terrorism or other emergencies would require quick action that wouldn't necessarily come from regular courts.

If the Bush administration, in the aftermath of 9/11, had felt that FISA was inhibiting fighting the war on terrorism, they could have gone to Congress with a proposal to amend the law. Who in Congress would have opposed this?

The most obvious explanation for the failure to get approval from the FISA court is that is might not have been given. For the president to say that he didn't have to go to the court because of the Constitution or the congressional authorization for the use of force against Afghanistan is quite a stretch.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm going to go ahead and agree completely with andy.

The FISA court is set up for emergency situations. You can set up a tap for 72 prior to getting approval. In addition, you can get the tap extended in 15 day increments to give approval time.

It is very disingenuous to state that you "don't have time" to get approval.

I think he can argue that he was given authorization through the 9/11 act, but that is a REAL stretch and the reason that we have the judiciary.

They have the job of sorting it out. I am very leery of this whole thing. It is a very scary America if this becomes OK.

-Gryph

PS: Still wouldn't have voted for Kerry...

Re: The disgraceful right-wing distortion on the domestic spying issue
 

Bush in 2004:
"Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so. It's important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution."

Re: The disgraceful left-wing distortion on the law in this matter
 

[ QUOTE ]
Out of curiosity, do you have any fears about an imperial presidency or abuse of power in light of President Bush's, Vice President Cheney's, and Attorney General Gonzalez's comments of the past fews days?

[/ QUOTE ]

Despite all my comments in these forums, and the fact that I am a conservative christian, I actually am quite a bit of a libertarian republican and regret what I see as the temporary necessity for restrictions on our liberties. I despise government intrusion into one's private affairs, but when terrorists have obviously operated among us, there has to be sacrifices made for the time being.

I am not too troubled by a stronger presidency in general because congress, though the sovereign in our 3 branches, is too fragmented to lead in times of crisis. Another reason is that just as the Federalist Papers writers predicted two centuries ago, the biggest threat to the separation of powers can come from the judiciary, and I believe that has happened in the past 30 years and so a counterweight is needed.

And the fact of the matter is that any president who seeks to assert more privileges and power can only do so with the tacit acquiesence of the american people. If the democrats had any real cohesive agenda other than saying NOT to the repubs without offerring alternatives, then even the fact that they are currently in the minority in both houses would keep the president from enjoying as much support of the people as he does for his actions.

Re: The disgraceful left-wing distortion on the law in this matter
 

[ QUOTE ]
Despite all my comments in these forums, and the fact that I am a conservative christian, I actually am quite a bit of a libertarian republican and regret what I see as the temporary necessity for restrictions on our liberties. I despise government intrusion into one's private affairs, but when terrorists have obviously operated among us, there has to be sacrifices made for the time being.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you 100 percent sure that the government is just spying on Terrorists?