Posted on 08/18/2006 8:47:18 AM PDT by MNJohnnie
A couple of articles why the NSA ruling by the Carter Appointee is so much garbage.
http://levin.nationalreview.com/
By Mark Levin
Judge Not
Are there no limits to which activist judges won’t go to advance their political and policy agendas? Answer: No. I wrote an entire book about it. And U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor, appointed in the twilight of the Carter administration, is the latest in a long list of disgraceful lawyers who abuse their power.
There are four things that strike me most about Taylor’s opinion. First, she grants standing to such plaintiffs as the ACLU, CAIR, Greenpeace, National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, Christopher Hitchens, and others, without a shred of information showing any connection between the plaintiffs’ assertions of constitutional violations and any harm to them. However, Taylor reveals herself in this excerpt from her ruling:
… [T]he court need not speculate upon the kind of activity the Plaintiffs want to engage in – they want to engage in conversations with individuals abroad without fear that their First Amendment rights are being infringed upon. Therefore, this court concludes that Plaintiffs have satisfied the requirement of alleging “actual or threatened injury” as a result of Defendants’ conduct
Taylor writes later:
Although this court is persuaded that Plaintiffs have alleged sufficient injury to establish standing, it is important to note that if the court were to deny standing based on the unsubstantiated minor distinctions drawn by Defendants, the President’s action in warrantless wiretapping, in contravention of FISA, Title III, and the First and Fourth Amendments, would be immunized from judicial scrutiny. …
In other words, if Taylor had ruled properly and found that the Plaintiffs had no standing to bring their lawsuit, she would have denied herself the ability to strike down the NSA intercept program by throwing out the lawsuit.
Second, Taylor fails to address adequately that which has been debated here and elsewhere for months, i.e., the president’s inherent constitutional powers as commander-in-chief, and the long line of court cases (and historical evidence) related to it.
Third, in many places, the opinion reads like a political screed.
Fourth, Taylor insists on the immediate implementation of her decision, meaning that the NSA must stop intercepting enemy communications at this very moment, unless it succeeds in getting judicial relief elsewhere.
The ACLU et al have won the day, as they often do these days when they take their agenda to our courts. Forum shopping works. The judiciary does not.
The opinion is here. (H/T: Andy McCarthy)
UPDATE: This from the Justice Department: "The parties have also agreed to a stay of the injunction until the District Court can hear the Department's motion for a stay pending appeal."
UPDATE II: Just to be clear, Taylor ruled that the president/NSA violated the FISA, Title III, the First and Fourth Amendments, and the Separation of Powers doctrine.
Well that's just more of the liberal hypocrisy. They ignore severe things done by their own, but highlight minor things done by Republicans. That is their voluntary disconnect from reality and why they're so dangerous. They're like idiots that have no comprehension of cause and effect. Fire good for warming and cooking. Fire bad for touching and furnature. Liberals have no common sense.
No, this one... the Judge's father.
Charles C. Diggs, Jr.
Democrat, Michigan (1955-1980)
The Honorable Charles C. Diggs, Jr. was found guilty in 1978 for taking kickbacks from three of his congressional staffers; he was re-elected to office; then censured by the House, and finally resigned, then went to prison for 7 months.
Indicted of 11 counts of mail fraud and 18 counts of falsifying congressional payrolls. Prosecutors said he received $66,000 in kickbacks from 1973-1977 from several staffers, and used some of that money for his personal business and congressional expenses.
Guilty of: Diggs was found guilty of all 29 counts against him in October 1978, then the next month he was re-elected to his 13th term in Congress.
The Jailbird Count. Prison term: 7 months at minimum-security prison at Maxwell Air Force Base in Alabama. Diggs became a member of the Congressional Prison Caucus.
Congressional censure: In July 1979, the House of Representatives unanimously censured Diggs, after half an hour of floor discussion. No Member of Congress stood up to defend him. In a letter to his colleagues, Diggs admitted misuse of public funds for private use. He apologized to Congress and agreed to repay the House more than $45,000 and accept the censure. The fine would come out of his paycheck, at $500 a month. (A nice sweet deal: that means Diggs would have to stay in office another 7-1/2 years and have $500 deducted each month to pay restitution. But that didn't happen.)
Diggs also faced a $29,000 tax bill from the IRS for failing to pay income taxes on the payroll kickback money.
After having been found guilty, then disgraced by his colleagues in Congress, it still took Diggs another full year to resign from Congress, in June 1980. He probably waited until June so that he could still collect his Congressional salary and to wait the verdict of the U.S. Supreme Court. Diggs appealed to the Court to review his conviction; the Court let his conviction stand without comment.
Historical note: Only once before in the twentieth century had the House censured a member, and that was 60 years earlier in a case of a Texas Congressman who was punished for inserting objectionable material into the Congressional Record
The C.B.B. Spin
Diggs's excuse: The employees willingly gave him the kick-backs because he was in "very dire financial straits."
Sources: Richard L. Lyons, "Rep. Diggs Admits Misuse of Funds, Accepts Censure," Washington Post, June 30, 1979, A1. Irvin Molotsky, "Obituary: Charles Diggs, 75, Congressman Censured Over Kickbacks," New York Times, August 26, 1998, D18
http://www.congressionalbadboys.com/Diggs.htm
From: Vn_survivor_67-68
Howdy!
Thankfully. If all idiots and people ignorant of historical fact never voted, the Democrats would lose 60% of their voters at the very least.
LOL!
God works in mysterious ways. Great story!
Yeah it's amazing isn't it? I imagine if I had gone into psychology, I could be on my fourth or fifth book now that deals with the conscious and deliberate disconnect of liberal Americans from reality, historical truth, and fact in evidence that contradict liberal perceptions of thos things.
I agree with you, but it won't play out like that in the press. It will be back to The "President's controversial warantless domestic eavesdropping program."
You watch.
It's been my experience that most makers (around here at least - Minnesota) of real maple syrup stop boiling it too soon, leaving too high a water content so as to have more product left to put in the bottles. It ends up too watery and devoid of the rich, deep flavor and texture I remember from the real maple syrup I tasted in my youth, which came from a now-defunct maker in western Wisconsin.
I prefer a brand sold by WalMart called Roddenberry's Butter-Maple syrup. I like it better than the real thing or any of the national brands I've tried.
The talkies and the blogs haven't touched it like they did with Miers and Dubai, which were hot topics till they were dropped. This battle hasn't even been started.
We know the DBM has to be happy about that.
Well it's really exciting to know that you're here and truth and information was all it really took!!! Awesome! :) Do you try frequently do repeat that process with your friends and family that are liberals? What a great thing to do! :) Living in the information age as we do, that can't be good for liberals that can be shown the light, and see it. :)
Ya mean they don't?????
I'm sure it is against existing precedent, but I don't believe any Circuit has ruled on the same issue. I'm sure it will happen...the advantage is you get a quicker resolution. But, it'll still take at least a year if it is accepted by the Supremes. It might not be...if a Circuit were to overrule, the Supreme Court could simply not grant certiori and the Court of Appeals would be the last stop.
I defer to your greater experience on real maple syrup. I've only bought the bottled kind, and probably don't know enough to recognize "the good stuff". I'll keep the brand you recommended in mind--thanks for the tip.
Dang... excuse me, it's her ex-husband... not her dad... according to Time. So where'd the Taylor fit in?
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1228714,00.html
I just give my brother Dean the Stoner $20 on Monday. He buys a bag of ditchweed and stays out of it all day Tuesday.
Now, if you could do the same thing to my Radic-Lib Mother....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.