The disgraceful right-wing distortion on the domestic spying issue

[Nepa]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Here is the main question that I have.

Did G.W. spy on John Kerry and his staff during the election?

[/ QUOTE ]

If he did he must have been overjoyed at the fact that Kerry's campaign was so poorly run and incompetent in crafting a winning message. But then again, that was obvious to all so there was no need to spy. There's your answer.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't ask if there was a need! I'm asking if he did!

[BluffTHIS!]

Sorry, it's classified.

[Nepa]

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry, it's classified.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't care if it does stay classified. Do you have a problem if the Senate looks into this issue?

[BluffTHIS!]

I have no problem if they do so in closed session so as not to expose our intelligence gathering capabilities. But I do have a problem if they seek to prevent what the president has authorized since it would hamper our ability to track those foreigners in American who seek to commit or aid terroristic acts, which has of course been shown to happen.

[Nepa]

[ QUOTE ]
I have no problem if they do so in closed session so as not to expose our intelligence gathering capabilities. But I do have a problem if they seek to prevent what the president has authorized since it would hamper our ability to track those foreigners in American who seek to commit or aid terroristic acts, which has of course been shown to happen.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't have a problem with the wire tapping.

There is a system in place where a wire tap can be placed and within 72 hours they would have to get this approved by a secret court. These aren't exact numbers but I'v heard there have been something like 12000 wire taps since 1980 and the court has turned down like 9.

Here is where my problem is. Why did the president order wiretaps then never take it in front of the secret court? Is there something to hide?

Would the court have disallow these wire taps? Were they spying on foes of the Bush admin? ect. ect.

Did Bush go to far this time?

[BluffTHIS!]

If you google for and read some more in depth on this issue, you will find that although it is true that the secret court is fairly speedy in its mostly rubber stamp approvals once the issue has been heard, that it nonetheless is very time consuming to prepare the matter for the court and get it on the docket and heard. That shows that there is in fact an issue of urgency in many of these matters that is hampered by the entire process.

[Nepa]

[ QUOTE ]
If you google for and read some more in depth on this issue, you will find that although it is true that the secret court is fairly speedy in its mostly rubber stamp approvals once the issue has been heard, that it nonetheless is very time consuming to prepare the matter for the court and get it on the docket and heard. That shows that there is in fact an issue of urgency in many of these matters that is hampered by the entire process.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't believe that this is the reason that they did this? At least nothing that I'v read or heard would lead me to believe this. This is a weak taking point.

[andyfox]

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 ]
If you google for and read some more right wing lies and propaganda in depth on this issue, you will be fed the canard that although it is true that the secret court is fairly speedy in its mostly rubber stamp approvals once the issue has been heard, that it nonetheless is very time consuming to prepare the matter for the court and get it on the docket and heard. That pretends that there is in fact an issue of urgency in many of these matters that is hampered by the entire process.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP. Or, just read anyfox.

[AceHigh]

[ QUOTE ]
If you google for and read some more in depth on this issue, you will find that although it is true that the secret court is fairly speedy in its mostly rubber stamp approvals once the issue has been heard, that it nonetheless is very time consuming to prepare the matter for the court and get it on the docket and heard. That shows that there is in fact an issue of urgency in many of these matters that is hampered by the entire process.

[/ QUOTE ]

That doesn't have anything to do with whether the wiretaps are legal or not. There is a process in place to legally place the wiretaps and the President is delibrately ignoring it and the law.