Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Hey Dems, impeach this! Even the FISA court's judges, to say nothing of their prior rulings, say that Bush was within the law, the constitution and his powers as president in wiretapping your Al Qaeda friends. It's too bad though really. Nutcase Democrats impeaching Bush over doing due dilligence in keeping tabs on Al Qaeda threats within our borders would have paid political dividends to the GOP for a decade. GOP candidates wouldn't even have had to campaign, they'd have just won!

Amazing the exhoneration of Bush has gotten ZERO attention from the MSM, although I hear the treasonous New York Slimes tried to spin this testimony to somehow favor their anti-Bush line on wiretapping. These people are utterly shameless. And as always happens when they create a firestorm against a Republican, the lapdog news media has totally underplayed the mitigating testimony and information which undermines the overplayed initial story.

Well, now that we have that out of the way and Bush has been cleared of any cloud from this FISA wiretapping, we can now get on with the important business of having the FBI frog march the editors of the New York Slimes out of their offices for having revealed this top secret national security program all for the benefit of feeding their Bush hating psychosis.

1 posted on 03/29/2006 9:28:20 AM PST by MikeA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-48 next last
To: MikeA

"... the president would be remiss exercising his constitutional authority by giving all of that power over to a statute."


This is the KEY. The democrats in congress want to USURP the power and authority of the President. They will take power any way they can get it.

I wonder what Specter will do now that former FISA people have said that the President has the authority to spy on foreign callers who are known or suspected to be terrorists.


31 posted on 03/29/2006 9:57:55 AM PST by CyberAnt (Democrats/Old Media: "controversy, crap and confusion" -- Amen!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MikeA
Great post!

But c'mon Mike... you know this won't make the cut of the MSM commissars!

32 posted on 03/29/2006 9:59:42 AM PST by johnny7 (“Nah, I ain’t Jewish, I just don’t dig on swine, that’s all.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Dark Wing

ping


35 posted on 03/29/2006 10:02:25 AM PST by Thud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MikeA

IMPEACH THE FISA COURT! /sarcasm


37 posted on 03/29/2006 10:03:39 AM PST by ShandaLear (Announcing you plans is a good way to hear God laugh. Al Swearengen, 1877—Deadwood)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MikeA

". . .FBI frog march the editors of the New York Slimes out of their offices for having revealed this top secret national security program. . ."

And I REALLY want the traitors who LEAKED it to the slimes in the first place.


38 posted on 03/29/2006 10:04:24 AM PST by used2BDem (Navy Vet (Navy Mom))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MikeA

Thanks Mike! I wonder if this will be on the evening news tonight!


39 posted on 03/29/2006 10:04:42 AM PST by alice_in_bubbaland (New Jersey gets the corrupt government it deserves!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MikeA; All
(Why Has the MSM Ignored This Story?)

For the same reason they ignored the entirely successful conclusion of Operation Swarmer, after wetting their collective pants over it when it started.

You all DO remember Operation Swarmer, don't you? It was the one that completely disappeared from the MSM radar when it became apparent it would succeed -- contrary to their paranoia and bias.

45 posted on 03/29/2006 10:15:31 AM PST by JennysCool (Liberals don't care what you do, as long as it's mandatory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MikeA; All

Because it dose not advance the democrat / MSM cause.

Cause .... DESTROY BUSH



Andrew Card (Whitehouse office manager) resignation is 'bigger' because it's the 'colapse' of the Bush Administration ??????????


52 posted on 03/29/2006 10:24:33 AM PST by IrishMike (Dry Powder is a plus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MikeA
The judges, however, said Mr. Bush's choice to ignore established law regarding foreign intelligence gathering was made "at his own peril," because ultimately he will have to answer to Congress and the Supreme Court if the surveillance was found not to be in the best interests of national security.

According to this quote he's not out of the woods yet.

56 posted on 03/29/2006 10:28:15 AM PST by Rockitz (Follow the money and you'll find the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MikeA

LOL. There are scads of freepers wishing that FISA would have ruled otherwise. The intent to undermine GWB is full throttle here in FR land. I swear it sounds like the DU here at times now.


60 posted on 03/29/2006 10:32:18 AM PST by pissant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MikeA

GREAT Post, thanks MikeA!!!! AP's take on it is different, but Pete Yost wrote it.

"Today: March 29, 2006 at 8:46:10 PST

"Judges Back Court Review of Eavesdropping
By PETE YOST
ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON (AP) -

Five federal judges gave a boost Tuesday to legislation that would bring court scrutiny to the Bush administration's domestic spying program.

At a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing chaired by Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., the judges reacted favorably to his proposal that would require the secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to conduct regular reviews of the four-year-old program.

The existence of the warrantless surveillance by the National Security Agency was revealed by The New York Times three months ago.

The judges stressed that they were not offering their views on the NSA operation, which they said they knew nothing about.

But they said the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court has operated capably for 28 years and is fully able to protect civil liberties and give the administration all the speed and flexibility it needs to execute the war on terror.

The administration contends the president has inherent war powers under the Constitution to order eavesdropping without warrants.

"I am very wary of inherent authority" claimed by presidents, testified U.S. Magistrate Judge Allan Kornblum. "It sounds very much like King George."

Before word of the warrantless surveillance leaked publicly, the Bush administration revealed it to just eight members of Congress and to the presiding judge on the surveillance court.

The hearing Tuesday focused on Specter's bill. A rival approach, drafted by Senate Judiciary Committee member Mike DeWine of Ohio and three other Republicans, would allow the government to conduct warrantless surveillance for up to 45 days before seeking court or congressional approval.

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts, R-Kan., expressed interest in handling legislation on the NSA effort. But the Senate Parliamentarian gave Specter jurisdiction over his bill and DeWine's.

Senate Judiciary Committee member Russ Feingold, D-Wis., has urged censure of the president for authorizing the warrantless surveillance.

Under it, the NSA can monitor international calls - when one party is inside the United States - without first getting court approval. The NSA has been conducting the surveillance when calls and e-mails are thought to involve al-Qaida.

The others testifying before Specter's panel were U.S. District Judges Harold Baker of Urbana, Ill.; Stanley Brotman of Camden, N.J.; John Keenan of the southern district of New York City; and William Stafford of Pensacola, Fla.

The careers of all five judges have been steeped in the work of the secret surveillance court.

In an interview about the program with The Associated Press last week, Specter said administration officials want to do "just as they please, for as long as they can get away with it. I think what is going on now without congressional intervention or judicial intervention is just plain wrong."

--





61 posted on 03/29/2006 10:34:07 AM PST by YaYa123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MikeA

But, but, Chuckie Shoomah and Howie Dean insist they have a plan to "eliminate" Bin Laden. You know, eliminate him by not wiretapping him, not saying mean things about him (that would just create more terrorists), not aggressively interrogating Bin Laden's associates (that would be acting like Nazis and torture as per Dick Turbin), and not taking military action to intervene on terrorist sponsoring states (Bush lied people died)!!! You know, the plan to eliminate him by going back to the Clinton standard of just ignoring him and pretending he doesn't exist. In furtherance of that, they will just pretend Bush has violated the law and impeach him. Voila, problem err, I mean Bin Laden eliminated!!!!


71 posted on 03/29/2006 10:55:22 AM PST by FlipWilson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MikeA

I think the House should impeach Feingold for his stupidity...


74 posted on 03/29/2006 10:56:02 AM PST by Toidylop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MikeA

Great article. Thanks for posting it.


75 posted on 03/29/2006 11:00:17 AM PST by Gumlegs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MikeA

Bookmarked


78 posted on 03/29/2006 11:51:04 AM PST by chaosagent (Remember, no matter how you slice it, forbidden fruit still tastes the sweetest!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Howlin

INTERESTING Ping


79 posted on 03/29/2006 11:57:00 AM PST by arasina (So there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MikeA

bump


81 posted on 03/29/2006 12:11:27 PM PST by Skooz (Chastity prays for me, piety sings............Modesty hides my thighs in her wings......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MikeA

They've discussed this on NPR, very disappointed that Bush is actually acting within the law as he protects our lives. Naturally, they'll drop it as a topic.


82 posted on 03/29/2006 12:13:06 PM PST by hershey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MikeA
For the same reason that the MSM tries to ignore the fact that Clinton was offerred Osama THREE TIMES by Sudan--and refused to accept him because Slick stated, "that he had committed no crime against the US"!

The MSM gives that fact minimal, passing mention. Why don't they focus on and highlight THAT one to remind everyone of Clinton's REAL LEGACY--and the mess that he left President Bush to clean up?

83 posted on 03/29/2006 12:15:25 PM PST by stockstrader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MikeA

Great find, Mike!

Let's keep this one bumped!!! Get it to Rush, Sean and the rest of the crowd!!


85 posted on 03/29/2006 12:43:08 PM PST by freedumb2003 (Don't call them "Illegal Aliens." Call them what they are: CRIMINAL INVADERS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-48 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson