Posted on 12/22/2008 8:59:18 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
It does not register to you that all three branches already have the means through the powers enumerated to them through the Constitution to check and balance each other. You seem to think though that the Executive cannot execute its power as Commander in Chief without having Congress act as supervisor. The interpretation that you have given of the power granted to Congress would mean that the Executive should turn over all of its communications and records to Congress on a daily basis for supervision. Your view of the Constitution is ridiculous and dangerous.
Ha ha! You must really crack yourself up.
>>Were they complicit in the Bush Administration’s violation of the law?
You gotta ask, why do you think that despite the 2006 takeover of Congress, Pelosi/Reid, never pursued any hearings or drama as demanded by Moveon and the like?
Bush had the Dems over a barrel, they couldn’t go after him without exposing their twofaced, hypocritical “outrage” at the Bush programs, because they had been briefed and briefed and briefed.
Strategery and Poker. Glass Houses.
The Dems were hoisted on their own petard. If they went after Bush, they naive, gullible voter base would’ve been totally disillusioned.
Not to mention the fact that they also would of found out that they hold the wrong view on the Constitution in regards to this issue. Even the FISA Court had ALREADY ruled that the Commander in Chief has this power.
That’s almost not even the issue, since I doubt Obama is going to give up any executive powers, especially any pertaining to security and defense.
And, agreeing with your statement, only adds to the blatantly political aspects of the Democrats stance.
Strictly expediency for political gain.
But, they preserved that illusion through the election.
I will have to disagree with you here, there is no reason what so ever to doubt Vice President(not Mr.)Cheney here, or any other time.
LOL not just that but this author had no historical knowledge whatsoever. Lincoln (one of my favorites) probably violated the constitution more often than all the presidents since.
I am not the author of this article, thank The Lord!
Among other things, Lincoln kept the Maryland legislayure from meeting to keep it from voting for secession. He must have been thinking: Dang, why did those guys not keep the capital in Philadelphia or New York!
Among other things, Lincoln kept the Maryland legislayure from meeting to keep it from voting for secession. He must have been thinking: Dang, why did those guys not keep the capital in Philadelphia or New York!
“I will have to disagree with you here, there is no reason what so ever to doubt Vice President(not Mr.)Cheney here, or any other time.”
No doubts here; I posted two links to support his claim, one from 2005 and one from 2006, that he did, in fact, call in the Dem leaders.
We are in a war with terrorists, domestic & foreign. GWB mostly knows who the terrorists are, but the Left in this country are very confused about who the terrorist are.
The liberals make the case that it is the USA. GWB, Israel, & conservatives (rich, white, homophobe racists) who are the terrorists. So, if say, Senator Shelby or Rush or YOU is talking to someone of the same conservative persuasion in a foreign country, Obama & co. have the legal right to record this conversation & use it against you. We are, you are a terrorist in their eyes, so the surveillance laws will likely now be directed at us conservatives.
And since when do our leaders follow the letter & spirit of our laws? Ask Joe the Plumber about that! On the contrary, our leaders on BOTH sides of the aisle & in all 3 branches routinely use their positions to further their own personal, political & partisan greed, with little regard for the constitution or the people.
I don't want the gov’t to have MORE power over our lives - I want them to have less.
Frankly, I would rather have a few bombs go off here in the USA, than to give our gov’t unlimited power to spy on Americans. I'd rather a US police state be blown to Hell. The USA has survived a civil war & several wars w/o the Patriot Act & its "enhancements".
And yes, monitoring conversations between an American citizen & a foreigner is spying on US citizens. Monitoring conversations between foreigners, either here in the USA or abroad is completely OK with me. But if a US citizen is involved, a warrant is required I believe.
Finally, as we are at war, let's take that war to the sources - Pakistan, Iran, Gaza, Syria, Saudi Arabia, & more - rather that play defense on the streets of America, & give unchecked power to our politicians. Many people believe this war on terror will take upwards of 100 years to win, or lose. And already a warrant is not required. Scary!
“W may have been working to protect us, but with Gang Obama and the Demoncrats in control of Congress this power is “DANGEROUS”.”
I wonder how many Pub proponents of the Patriot act will regret the day they approved this criminal nonsense. Or will they just be glad that the ruling class has more power?
I believe the weakness & eventual collapse of our current republican form of gov’t will be directly related to the ruling class & their unlimited ability to pass innumerable laws favoring themselves at the expense of the rest of us.
You said:
“My point is this:
We are in a war with terrorists, domestic & foreign. GWB mostly knows who the terrorists are, but the Left in this country are very confused about who the terrorist are.
The liberals make the case that it is the USA. GWB, Israel, & conservatives (rich, white, homophobe racists) who are the terrorists. So, if say, Senator Shelby or Rush or YOU is talking to someone of the same conservative persuasion in a foreign country, Obama & co. have the legal right to record this conversation & use it against you. We are, you are a terrorist in their eyes, so the surveillance laws will likely now be directed at us conservatives.”
______________
You claim above that surveillance without a warrant will be used against American citizens yet there has been no conservative who has argued for that in this case. There also has been NO examples of Americans being targeted for surveillance without a warrant. The Bush administration has never argued for this power to be used against American citizens but instead has made it clear that this was not the case. Again there have been NO cases of Americans being the target of warrantless surveillance. It is just pure spin on your part to make it seem like that is what the argument is about.
If a President wants to target Americans who oppose him politically then he will probally do it anyway but it will not be the result of the arguments that are made to continue to allow the President to intercept possible enemy communications crossing our border.
________________
You said:
And since when do our leaders follow the letter & spirit of our laws? Ask Joe the Plumber about that! On the contrary, our leaders on BOTH sides of the aisle & in all 3 branches routinely use their positions to further their own personal, political & partisan greed, with little regard for the constitution or the people.
I don’t want the gov’t to have MORE power over our lives - I want them to have less.
____________________________
If you do not trust anyone in all three branches of government then how is going to the other two branches for permission to surveil make our freedoms any safer in your view anyway.
Besides you are relying on spin again that somehow this has to do with targeting American citizens when it does not. So it does not give the gov’t MORE power over our lives as you claim.
_________________________
You said:
Frankly, I would rather have a few bombs go off here in the USA
________________________
Oh really? Well the next bomb to go off may kill 300,000 or possibly 3 million. You claim to care about freedom but I do not believe you really do.
When these bombs go off that do not seem to bother you it will bother many other people though for sure. Under your acceptable scenerio of bombs going off I am sure that we will end up losing much much MORE of our freedom.
_________________________
You said:
And yes, monitoring conversations between an American citizen & a foreigner is spying on US citizens.
________________________________
Sorry but no it is not. You (US citizen) do not have a right to privacy with the foreign enemies of this nation. If you (US citizen) become a target then a warrant will be needed but if you are on the phone with some cave in Pakistan then our Commander in Chief has the duty to intercept this communication.
________________________
You said:
Monitoring conversations between foreigners, either here in the USA or abroad is completely OK with me. But if a US citizen is involved, a warrant is required I believe.
________________________
No it is not. If a conversation is to be used against an American citizen then yes it is but if the target is the enemy then no it is not.
You said:
“Monitoring conversations between foreigners, either here in the USA or abroad is completely OK with me. But if a US citizen is involved, a warrant is required I believe.”
Let me give you a “what if” question to answer.
Let’s say that foreign entities (terrorists) are being monitored in Pakistan.
They are talking together about giving the signal to their American cell that all is in position and for them to go ahead and set off a massive dirty bomb and release chemical warfare in a major city. They are planning to kill 100s of thousands of Americans. Let’s say that we are hearing all of this go on and have established the seiousness and capabilities of the terrorists involved even.
You have already said that you are ok with this type of monitoring because so far in my “what if” scenerio it is all foreigners outside of the United States even that are being monitred (no US citizen involved... yet).
Next a call is coming in to these terrorists and guess what? The other end of the line is to an American citizen.
What do you do?
Do you suspend the surviellance (not listen to the enemy) and rush to the Court for permission?
Or what do you think is appropiate in this instance?
Read today’s news yet?
“WASHINGTON — A federal intelligence court, in a rare public opinion, is expected to issue a major ruling validating the power of the president and Congress to wiretap international phone calls and intercept e-mail messages without a court order, even when Americans’ private communications may be involved”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/16/washington/16fisa.html?_r=3&hp
As I have said before - there is no Constitutional right to privacy in communicating with our enemies overseas. Only if an American citizen is the target of the intercept is there a need for ‘due process’. The Commander-in-Chief does not require permission in order to intercept enemy communications.
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.