Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 56

Thread: Bush-ordered wiretaps illegal, judge says

  1. #41
    Hippie Hater
    texmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Dallas TEXAS
    Last Seen
    08-20-15 @ 01:17 AM
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    3,969

    Re: Bush-ordered wiretaps illegal, judge says

    Quote Originally Posted by MrVicchio View Post
    A San Fran Judge ruled something Bush did was illegal? Well **** color me Fred and call me shocked! This must truly be a monumental day in Jurisprudence! For all the land knows that Judges from San Francisco are the epitome of fair, balanced and stick to the Constitution.
    LOL No worries on this. It will be appealed
    Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

    John Adams

  2. #42
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,301

    Re: Bush-ordered wiretaps illegal, judge says

    Quote Originally Posted by ADK_Forever View Post
    Aren't warrants needed in both instances?
    Seems to me it might depend on how personal it is. Is tapping the phone company the same as tapping your personal phone line? I don't know, but then we don't know to was level the Bush wiretapping went. How about NSA scanning of emails? You think they get a warrant for every email?
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  3. #43
    Jedi Master
    Captain America's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    18,664

    Re: Bush-ordered wiretaps illegal, judge says

    I can't prove it but I still believe that illegal wiretaps have been going on since the telephone was invented. Always have and always will.

    Call me jaded. Just don't call me collect.

    It's GREAT to be me. --- "45% liberal/55% conservative"
    Diplomacy is the art of saying 'nice doggy" until you can find a gun.

  4. #44
    Guru
    ADK_Forever's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Seen
    05-07-11 @ 09:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,706

    Re: Bush-ordered wiretaps illegal, judge says

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    Seems to me it might depend on how personal it is. Is tapping the phone company the same as tapping your personal phone line? I don't know, but then we don't know to was level the Bush wiretapping went. How about NSA scanning of emails? You think they get a warrant for every email?
    I believe they need a warrant for all of the above.

    Whether or not they get one doesn't change whether they should have. And yes, I believe it goes on probably more than we would like.
    Thank You Barack Obama for Restoring Honor To The Presidency.
    President Obama will rank as one of our greatest presidents!

  5. #45
    In a house by the river
    MetalGear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Denmark, Grena
    Last Seen
    05-16-11 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    1,233

    Re: Bush-ordered wiretaps illegal, judge says

    Where's the breaking news?

  6. #46
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:29 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,691

    Re: Bush-ordered wiretaps illegal, judge says

    Quote Originally Posted by ADK_Forever View Post
    In what events does the Constitution require a warrant?
    It is my understanding that the case in question concerned the narrower argument whether the Executive Department's compliance with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act's (FISA) provisions on electronic surveillance is mandatory. The court ruled that it is.

    FWIW, the relevant provisions of FISA that address warrantless surveillance can be found at:

    US CODE: Title 50,1802. Electronic surveillance authorization without court order; certification by Attorney General; reports to Congressional committees; transmittal under seal; duties and compensation of communication common carrier; applications;

    IMO, FISA is sufficiently robust and flexible to deal with the terrorist threat in a timely fashion, while safeguarding the basic constitutional rights of Americans. Therefore, I agree with the Court's ruling that compliance with FISA is mandatory and do not believe that the ruling should have any significant adverse impact on national security. Indeed, if its effect is to prioritize efforts based on the existence of reasonable evidence (necessary to obtain a court order), the benefits of focusing where such evidence exists might be greater than those associated with simply laying out a broad "net" with the hope of discovering something.
    Last edited by donsutherland1; 04-01-10 at 04:55 PM.

  7. #47
    long standing member
    justabubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:15 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    36,136

    Re: Bush-ordered wiretaps illegal, judge says

    Quote Originally Posted by texmaster View Post
    LOL No worries on this. It will be appealed
    i fear you may be right
    if Obama chooses to take the same position as the shrub on this issue, and appeal it, such a stand will be quite revealing (and ominous)
    we are negotiating about dividing a pizza and in the meantime israel is eating it
    once you're over the hill you begin to pick up speed

  8. #48
    Dispenser of Negativity
    Cold Highway's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Newburgh, New York and World 8: Dark Land
    Last Seen
    12-24-12 @ 11:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    9,596
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: Bush-ordered wiretaps illegal, judge says

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    Seems to me it might depend on how personal it is. Is tapping the phone company the same as tapping your personal phone line? I don't know, but then we don't know to was level the Bush wiretapping went. How about NSA scanning of emails? You think they get a warrant for every email?
    You get a warrant for the email accounts.


    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    i fear you may be right
    if Obama will the same position as the shrub on this issue, and appeal it, such a stand will be quite revealing (and ominous)
    Fixed for you
    Jackboots always come in matched pairs, a left boot and a right boot.

  9. #49
    Sage
    mpg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Milford, CT
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,769

    Re: Bush-ordered wiretaps illegal, judge says

    Quote Originally Posted by Chappy View Post
    You seem to be saying that there is a significant number of people who are changing their minds between then and now and attaching it to the election of the new president.

    Is there any evidence that there has been a real shift in public sentiment? I would think not.
    There's been a major shift in the media coverage. Journalists thought it was so heinous when Bush did it, they were willing to sacrifice national security to make a big deal out of it. Now that the cats out of the bag and there's no risk to national security, they barely mentioned the fact that Obama is continuing the policy.
    If you expect people to be rational, you aren't being rational.

  10. #50
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Bush-ordered wiretaps illegal, judge says

    Quote Originally Posted by mpg View Post
    There's been a major shift in the media coverage. Journalists thought it was so heinous when Bush did it, they were willing to sacrifice national security to make a big deal out of it. Now that the cats out of the bag and there's no risk to national security, they barely mentioned the fact that Obama is continuing the policy.
    Nonsense. It was uncovered under Bush, making it news. We know where everyone is on this. The ruling is the news, and it's being reported. And national security was never at risk. In fact, doing it was more risky than following the law in the first place. If you have too many dots, you really can't connect any. Not to mention that if we break one law, breaking others becomes less difficult to do.

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •