JONATHAN TURLEY ON BILL O'REILLY - 12192005

[7thson]

Good point.

[sportutegrl]

Didn't the 9/11 commission recently make a statement that we still weren't doing enough to prevent another attack?

Damned if you do . . .

[Tarpon]

Turley never got over his bud being defeated last election. He posed as neutral, but then along came Kerry and outed him.

Even liberals can understand if you are dead, civil liberties mean little. You go to war not to protect civil liberties, it's for saving your life. So many in our country have forgotten.

[massgopguy]

But the "Right Wing Court" stuffed us on that one didn't it?

[BlueAngel]

Turley is a DEMOCRAT, during the Clinton scandal, many would introduce him as such.

[RhoTheta]

USC1802(a)(1)(B): "there is no substantial likelihood that the surveillance will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party..."

Sections 1801(a)(4 thru 6) or 1801(b or c) have more to do with terrorists. I'm wondering if the Executive Branch action that President Bush took pursuent to the 9/11 Report modified the scope of 1801(a)(1)(A)(i) to allow the authorization of electronic surveillance to the wider group above. It would certainly seem justified. I think the 1978 wording was aimed at the espionage community tied in with foreign embassies. I guess the detail here is the definition of United States person.

1801(i): "'United States person' means a citizen of the United States, an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence (as defined in section 1101(a)(20) of title 8), an unincorporated association of a substantial number of members of which are citizens of the United States or aliens lawfully admitted for permanent residence, or a corporation which isw incorporated in the United States, but does not include a corporation or an association which is a foreign power, as defined in subsection (a)(1), (2), or (3) of this section."

I would think "lawfully admitted" would exclude aliens here on fraudulant papers and on temporary (and expired) visas.

The problem I have is that powers in this section are subject to (annual) review in a couple of Senate committees, not in the MSM. W says the parameters and particulars of these taps have been reviewed approximately every 45 days with NSA and FBI and (presumably) the appropriate committees in Congress about a dozen times (with no complaints to now). The NYT stops sitting on this leaked operation, and the Dems go on the attack publically. It isn't that this section of the law is secret; I found it with a couple of minutes in public record online.

[Wristpin]

They only secrets the MSM hasn't released are contained in John Kerry's service record.

[Dave S]

Why do you "experts". Both of the professors are well known constitutional law professors with impecable credentials. Neither liked that Bush had skirted Federal law. One was willing to admit that a case could be made in defense, although not one that he necessarily buys.

I really doubt that it raises to a high crimes and misdemeanors unless it turns out that they were intercepting calls between Michael Moore and Nancy Pelosi, etc. rather than Al Qaeda types.

[Dave S]

The Contact link does not allow the user to send him any email, only brings up Turley's bio. Must be nice to spout off and not listen to any feedback.

Sounds smart to me. Why should he be forced to accept unwanted feedback. If you dont care enough to write a letter and pay 37 cents to mail it to his Georgetown address, why is that his concern?

[Realism]

I have a problem with the illegality of the government secretly spying on American citizens. The only way around it would be to notify people via recording that their international calls may be monitored for national security reasons. That way they have a choice and if they want privacy they can always write a letter.

[7thson]

Then why have a link title "Contact Us?"

[7thson]

Read post 43.

[Dave S]

Then why have a link title "Contact Us?"

Obviously it was either never completed or was shut off as it links to the same place as his profile. If you are really interested that shouldnt hold you back.

Email: jturley@law.gwu.edu

Telephone: (202) 994-7001

Fax: (202) 994-9811

The George Washington University Law School

2000 H Street, N.W.

Washington, DC 20052

[7thson]

Thank you.

[shield]

Oh yes Turley did say impeachment. He said he broke the law which is an impeachable offense.

[shield]

Civil War

Actually...'War Between the States'

[Palladin]

Turley has gone over to the dark side. That's pretty obvious.

I bet J. Edgar Hoover (wherever he is) is having a big laugh about this so-called "illegality". Wiretaps without warrants have been going on from time immemorial.

What Turley and his ilk will not admit is that WE ARE AT WAR, the President has some exclusive wartime powers, and we are not talking about a warrant for a petty domestic criminal. We are talking about preventing another 9-11-2001, and saving the lives of tens of thousands of Americans.

All the so-called experts like Turley who are discussing this on TV, and vilifying the President for his actions, are either naive, disingenuous, stupid, or treasonous.

[Palladin]

(1) a foreign government or any component thereof, whether or not recognized by the United States;

I would interpret "any component thereof" to include any and all agents working for a foreign government on US soil, engaged in acts of espionage and terror.

Who needs that spelled out?

[Palladin]

Reall, Realism...you must have been born yesterday.

[7thson]

Possibly all four.