NSA (letter to Senate)

NRO ^ | KJ Lopez

[Peach]

I haven't seen that bipartisan report with the 30 new safeguards, pbrown, but maybe someone will come along and answer your question.

[Mike Darancette]

Since this an opinion of the Attorney General then it immunizes the President under the Law.

[freema]

I'm right there with ya. AlQaeda really has nothing on the left.

Do these people, or do they not, swear allegiance to the United States of America?

No, they don't.
They swear allegiance to the Democratic National Committee.
I have had enough 'death threats' from the left.
Every POS on the left who opens their mouth puts my life and our troops' lives at risk.

[shield]

I love it. Rope-a-dope...LOL

[Peach]

I should have backed up my previous post that some attorneys and judges support the president's authority to conduct the NSA program and so I looked quickly and just grabbed this:

John Schmidt, who served as an assistant attorney general during the Clinton administration, weighs in with a Chicago Tribune op-ed on the wiretapping kerfuffle: President Bush's post- Sept. 11, 2001, authorization to the National Security Agency to carry out electronic surveillance into private phone calls and e-mails is consistent with court decisions and with the positions of the Justice Department under prior presidents

[Mike Darancette]

Someone smarter than me tell me what is going on, Im a bit confused.

RATS don't get 6 months to trump up new issues such as a FISA hearing.

[lugsoul]

No, I'm not misinformed. What I stated is exactly what I've read. The program has monitored communications between two points within the US. They contend it was accidental.

[ez]

Won't the left just pretend these are not surveillances of Al Queda suspects, but of "American citizens" the same way they pretended Valerie Plame was a covert agent?

[lugsoul]

'Good idea' is not the issue. Allowed under the United States Constitution and applicable statutory law is the issue.

[lugsoul]

As far as the 'lots of attorneys,' none of them are as smart as Posner. But, then again, perhaps no one alive is.

[freema]

IMHO what Hill said, in my mind, was a threat.

[freema]

It's Christmas, a time to believe, to make your list and check it twice.

[Peach]

Well, quite a few attoreys and judges have determined that it IS Constitutional.

[freema]

Read 168 & 169... I'm having a deja' vu.

[Wristpin]

"As far as the 'lots of attorneys,' none of them are as smart as Posner. But, then again, perhaps no one alive is."

Here is the Posner piece and he flat out states these programs are no danger to our civil liberties. I suggest you actually read it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/20/AR2005122001053_pf.html

[lugsoul]

Of course. A dispute that attorneys can't argue both sides of is rare indeed. But it should not escape notice that one side of the debate is focusing on the actual language of the Constitution and statutes while the other is talking about inherent powers and authorization which is implied, not stated, in the AUMF.

Fun to watch self-described conservatives cozying up to activist interpretations of law.

[7mmMag@LeftCoast]

It's Christmas, a time to believe, to make your list and check it twice. Dear Santa, Please send Jay Rockefeller, John Kerry, James Risen, etc. to a U.S. Federal Penitentiary. And bless mommy, daddy, sissy and my uncle George with long life, health and happiness. P.S. I really would like that shiny 7mm Mag this year. Still Believing. L'il Timmy

[knews_hound]

I believe it to be true.

[Peach]

I was baking a spice cake but I'm back.

You keep saying that about conservatives, but I think it's a false argument. Conservatives are, from what I gather, far more concerned with terrorism and jihadists than democrats. And most of us recognize that an effective tool is to listen to their communications. Since those groups are notoriously difficult to infiltrate.

[Peach]

Hah.