DRUDGE: EXECUTIVE ORDER 12949 (No-warrant searches authorized by Bill Clinton in 1995)

fas,org ^ | 2/9/95 | The White House

[WhistlingPastTheGraveyard]

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

________________________________________________________________________

For Immediate Release
February 9, 1995

EXECUTIVE ORDER 12949

- - - - - - -

FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE PHYSICAL SEARCHES

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, including sections 302 and 303 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 ("Act") (50 U.S.C. 1801, et seq.), as amended by Public Law 103- 359, and in order to provide for the authorization of physical searches for foreign intelligence purposes as set forth in the Act, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Pursuant to section 302(a)(1) of the Act, the Attorney General is authorized to approve physical searches, without a court order, to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year, if the Attorney General makes the certifications required by that section.

Sec. 2. Pursuant to section 302(b) of the Act, the Attorney General is authorized to approve applications to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court under section 303 of the Act to obtain orders for physical searches for the purpose of collecting foreign intelligence information.

Sec. 3. Pursuant to section 303(a)(7) of the Act, the following officials, each of whom is employed in the area of national security or defense, is designated to make the certifications required by section 303(a)(7) of the Act in support of applications to conduct physical searches:

(a) Secretary of State;

(b) Secretary of Defense;

(c) Director of Central Intelligence;

(d) Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation;

(e) Deputy Secretary of State;

(f) Deputy Secretary of Defense; and

(g) Deputy Director of Central Intelligence.

None of the above officials, nor anyone officially acting in that capacity, may exercise the authority to make the above certifications, unless that official has been appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.

WILLIAM J. CLINTON

THE WHITE HOUSE, February 9, 1995.

[JustBackFromIraq]

Here we go again!!!???

Bush Caught on Tape:

“A Wiretap Requires A Court Order. Nothing Has Changed.”

I do support the President but I'm rapidly losing my patience. Help me out here. How do we explain this video to those bloodsucking commie leftist Democrat traitors?

[Wasanother]

He was speaking about the Patriot Act and he's not going to admit to elements of a secret program.

[DurtySanches]

You need not be in a good mood to deal with him. As i think he needs a ZOT!

[The Cuban]

No, none should be impeached. BUT THIS SURVEILANCE IS ILLEGAL! (Not that it matters, as long as the evidence is not used in a criminal prosecution because the fourth amendment only provides for the exclusion of evidence as a public remedy. Those spied upon, of course, can ALWAYS bring civil actions to recover any damaged which if you are a terrorist, is surmise, would be very hard to do).

[penelopesire]

"How do we explain this video to those bloodsucking commie leftist Democrat traitors?"

By examining why they(you) are visiting 'blood sucking commie leftist' websites that take things out of context and get left leaners to believe them! Like the one you linked to.

http://thinkprogress.org/

HOME PAGE FOLKS..tells us all we need to know

[celmak]

Lincoln set the precedent. The only way your going to win this one is to get the Democrats to win an election on this issue. LOL!

[Wasanother]

If courts have upheld the legal opinion that this is within the Presidential Powers during certain circumstances, how is it "ILLEGAL"?

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/12/20/131610.shtml

2002 case dubbed: "In Re: Sealed Case," the FISA appeals court decision cited a previous FISA case [U.S. v. Truong], where a federal court "held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information."

[WilliamofCarmichael]

"There is danger that, if the court does not temper its doctrinaire logic with a little practical wisdom, it will convert the constitutional Bill of Rights into a suicide pact."

Justice Robert Jackson.

A Roosevelt Democrat

"His liberal views were balanced by concern for maintaining public order and security, which led to his concurring with court findings against the Communist Party and in favour of the relocation of Japanese persons during World War II."

Don't be fooled by today's New Left-controlled, radicalized, New Democrat Third Way Rat Party traitors to our sovereignty. They are not Democrats.

Note the use of the word, relocation. Yes being moved (relocated) from your home is not a pleasant experience. Few Japanese, Germans, and Italians were put into internment camps. NONE were put in concentration camps!

[JustBackFromIraq]

"HOME PAGE FOLKS..tells us all we need to know"

Sure killing the messenger can be fun... but, I'm trying to understand what the President is saying in the context of the video itself, as in the historical context?

[pieces of time]

The timing of this surveillance expose really is curious. The article coming out the day after the Iraq elections to take the shine off the success. It comes out the day before the Patriot Act renewal vote. Able Danger is looking like it's finally going to get a hearing and the heat is on the release of the Barret report.
It's a shame that the glitch has been fixed on the computers in the Intell Committee. Would love to see the Rat strategy memo's for the last few months.

[ChinaGotTheGoodsOnClinton]

Thanks for this.

I realize the MSM will have to be drug kicking and screaming into this, but I wonder where the RepubOSpokesmen and FNC is on this.

Eschalon

800 FBI Files

Executive Orders

Sandy Burgerler Files

And nothing.

[penelopesire]

No one has established that it was SURVEILLANCE...it was INTERCEPTED OVERSEAS PHONE CALLS FROM/TO KNOWN TERRORISTS. SURVEILLANCE is what was going on during my shopping today..a camera following me around the store. Are my Constitutional rights violated because the store had a camera on me? There is a record of every book I check out of the library..the people that work there have access to my records..are my constitutional rights being violated?

Hell..my credit card numbers can be traced to my home address..phone number..ss number..are my constitutional rights being violated? My phone company knows everyone i call and who calls me...on and on and on.
HACKERS CAN DO TO EVERYONE OF US WHAT HAS BEEN DONE BY THIS PRESIDENT TO PROTECT THIS COUNTRY FROM ISLAMIC KILLERS!! Get a grip!!

[penelopesire]

well..why don't you go watch his entire press conference and get back to us instead of taking snipets out of context.

[rwfromkansas]

Pretty interesting show on Area 51 a couple weeks ago I think on A&E. It is definitely real.

[rwfromkansas]

I saw that on the evening news.

Look, that is the first thing that has bothered me. Bush pretty much lied to us about this.

For a good cause of course (keeping the program secret), but he lied. And that will tick some folks off, even non-liberals.

[The Cuban]

Basic con-law: (1) A search without a warrant is presumptively illegal unless; (2) it falls within one of the well-defined exceptions to the warrant requirement, one of which has never been national security. But again, if you take the no wrong without a remedy approach to legal resoning, this is not illegal. As I posted previously, the only remedy is a private civil one, that of recovering damages for either property/monetary damages or for a civil rights violation. As for the secret' court's decision, I personally do not see any precedent supportive of that decision, and most likely that decision would have been overturned on appeal.

[penelopesire]

The LSM media is LYING TO US. LOL..WHAT the NSA DOES can not be described, even remotely, as a 'roving wiretap'..

[billbears]

What makes you think I would follow the Constitution Party? I've looked at their platform and yet they do not recognize the intended sovereignty of the states in many instances

[The Cuban]

Your observation is valid but does not address the current issue. The Supreme Court, in line with your position, has held that one doe not have an expectation of privacy in communications over radio waves, as it is expected that someone will monitor them. HOWEVER the Supreme Court has always held that a person does have an expectation of privacy in a land-line phone conversation, as one does not expect such a communication to be tapped. As such, a warrantless search, "eavesdrop" of such a communication is unlawaful.

[Sandy]

The authority for the warrantless searches is found in a place other than the FISA statutes.

Exactly. I don't know why everyone here keeps looking at FISA to justify Bush's actions. Hell, even Bush isn't claiming that FISA authorized the wiretaps. His contention is that the Constitution authorizes the wiretaps, *regardless* of what's forbidden or authorized by statute. That's what the claim of inherent authority is all about--it means that statutory authority isn't required, nor can a statute constrain him. It's a cringe-inducing, arrogant, politically-damaging claim that--whether correct or not--he wouldn't be making if there were any other authority available.