Laws Schmlaws
 

I was just trying to think of a way that W can get out of this mess his in. Seems this time folks, ol' W, stepped over the line.

King George's federal crime

Jonathan Turley-on the Factor said that President Bush's spying operation is based on a federal crime.

Bill: Professor Turley, how do you see it?

Turley: I don't consider this a close case at all. I think that this operation-ahh-it was based on a federal crime.

Oh, and here's what a Judge thinks:

Napolitano: When Congress enacted the FISA act in ‘77, it also made it criminal for anyone in this country to use the power of the government to wiretap without a search warrant. It made it easy to get the search warrant with the FISA law, but it said you have to get the search warrant.

Host: So what the president’s done is a criminal act?

Napolitano: The president has violated the law in the name of national security, not wanting to violate the law, believing he’s doing the right thing, but he violated it nonetheless. He can’t pick and choose which laws to obey and not to obey any more than the rest of us can.

the fool should have been impeached a long time ago. congress has no balls.

Defend and Protect the People of the United States
 

I really don't think he's in a mess. Liberals want to believe he's in a mess, because there creating propaganda for there on cause. You know I do believe in the American Civil Liberties, but if i'm not mistaken over 3000 lives were lost on September 11, 2001. Laws that were set back in the 70's during the Nixon Administration were set because of the insecurities of Richard Nixon and his belief of enemies here at home. Those laws have led our true enemies..ie Al Queda who hate the American people and the U.S. Democratic system to do the things that they have plotted. Back in the late 90's our beloved news media revealed how the U.S. Government was secretly ease dropping on particular Cellular phones and one in particular was Osama Bien Laden. Al Queda adjusted to the way that the U.S. Government was trying to spy. He began to repeatedly change phones. So maybe had the U.S. had been able to tap into a particular individual or individuals, such as Mohammed Ata here in the U.S there may not have been a 911. Now almost 5 years later it's okay for those defeatest to try and point the finger, no attack has happened. I wonder why. Yet had there been another 911, those same defeatest would be trying to point the finger and blame "W" for not doing all that he can to protect America. He's not breaking the Law by trying to gain any political motive for himself. He's trying to protect the American People. So if we don't do all that we can to protect the American People then Al Queda will Win against the U.S. and it's people, then there will be no more. No more Civil Liberties, no more Freedom. One can only imagine what the U.S. Government and President Franklin D. Roosevelt did from 1941 to 1945 durring WWII. I know that the U.S. Government had Japanese Camps here in the U.S. Yes there will be hearings, thats normal for our Government, but it will to come to pass.

Houston We Have A Problem!!
 

THIS IS NOT TRUE!!




Back in the late 90's our beloved news media revealed how the U.S. Government was secretly ease dropping on particular Cellular phones and one in particular was Osama Bien Laden. Al Queda adjusted to the way that the U.S. Government was trying to spy. He began to repeatedly change phones. So maybe had the U.S. had been able to tap into a particular individual or individuals, such as Mohammed Ata here in the U.S there may not have been a 911. Now almost 5 years later it's okay for those defeatest to try and point the finger, no attack has happened.

Congress enacted the FISA act in ‘77, it also made it criminal for anyone in this country to use the power of the government to wiretap without a search warrant. It made it easy to get the search warrant with the FISA law, but it said you have to get the search warrant.

Napolitano: The president has violated the law in the name of national security, not wanting to violate the law, believing he’s doing the right thing, but he violated it nonetheless. He can’t pick and choose which laws to obey and not to obey any more than the rest of us can.

In the matter of Public Opinion most will beleive that what "W" did was correct in doing what he did immediately after 911. I'm glad he did. There was no political advantage for him personally. Maybe the Administration broke the law and maybe they didn't. That will be left up to our lawmakers to decide. Ask those families that lost loved ones during 911 if they had wished our on Government would have picked out potential terrorist and eased dropped on them days prior to 911. I wonder had Al Gore been President and he acted in simular fashion, when 911 happened, would the liberals be pointing the finger or would they be defending him. I'm sure the Conservatives would be calling for his head. So no matter what person is President, they have to do all that they can to protect and defend the lives of American Citizens and protect the freedom of all of us.
The Terrorist want to DESTROY the United States of America, it's form of government and it's People. So should any American President ignore ways to get an upper edge on our enemies? Our enemies laugh at how we foolishly give them detailed information on how we operate our intellgence tactics. The American people may not agree on illegal wire taps, but they do beleive in protecting it's people from enemies that wish to do us all harm.

Ok, here's the deal: The President can order to have ANYONES phones tapped. Especially when the issue is of national security.

Ok are you with me so far????

BUT, and this is a BIG BUT, he must go before a FISA Court within 72 hours to get the wire tap.

So let's recap:

1. President can order to have anyones phone tapped.

2. He(of course he doesn't, someone else goes for him) must go before FISA Court to obtain approval.

Pretty easy huh.

Oh and here's the good part:

No wire taps have been denied to date!!

Wow!!! Really?

So, gosh bouys and gulls, now I'm confused. If the President can have anyone's phone tapped and can wait up to 3 days to get the approval of the wire tap. And all prior requests have been approved, why oh why, would he NOT do it?

It wasn't the news media that revealed the methods, they just published what a senator had publicly said. The news media doesn't always know whether something is an important secret, that's not their job. And it wasn't the 1990's it was in 2001. And it wasn't a Democrat. I believe it was Orrin Hatch, though I maybe wrong. He should've been jailed then. It's not too late now.

Bot

The political part of this imbroglio that I'm enjoying is watching those coward-assed Democrats who knew about this from the beginning. Now they're looking for spiderholes to dive into.

If this is all true and if it was illegal, then the president must surely pay a price for lawbreaking, even if it was for what he believed a good cause.

And if the prez goes down so should every member of Congress who knew and did nothing. They knew the law just as surely as the president. They were accomplices aiding and abetting.

Any betters?

Bot

Regardless of the legal hair splitting......Bush's approval rating has shot up eight points.

He's released CD's of his folk songs. You're more right than you can know.

I'm not sure what the Democrats knew about the President's warrentless wire-taps, but what you say is consistent with their silly behavior about WMD intelligence. I, finally, gave up on John Kerry when he recently claimed to have been misled on WMD. W didn't mislead John Kerry about WMD, W mislead the country and made it politically difficult for John Kerry to oppose W's invasion of Iraq.

So, what you say about the Democrats is certainly consistent with their past behavior, but I'm not sure they are guilty on the wiretap issue. I think we have to wait and see on that one.

I'm inclined to agree that Mr Bush broke the law and there should be consequences but I agree the plot has taken an interesting turn with the revelation the the opposing party had been briefed on these operations right from the beginning. To my non-legal mind that seems to make them part of the crime.

I heard a quote from one of the congressmen/senators on the news this morning - he was trying to jump into a spider-hole by saying that he had taken the opportunity to review his notes from one of the meetings and he noticed that he had made some notes indicating he thought the bugging might not be legal. Bold action indeed - How can anybody take anything Congress does seriously? Many of the quotes I hear from Congress people seem like they were written by the staff of the Daily Show or Saturday night live. Remeber right before the Roman empire went down the tubes they actually had a horse installed as a member of the senate?

I'm starting to think a horse would be an improvement on some of our representatives - at least a horse can't talk.

I'd say 90% of the public is so buried in NFL and Big Macs that they have very little time to understand their Bill of Rights let alone what "W" is doing.

It's only a Democracy if people want it to be. And right now, it would seem that is NOT what they want.

Look at the conditions we went under war in!

Of course we have to wait and see. We don't know that the claims of the NY Times are accurate. It's another one of those accusations by anonymous sources. It maybe true. I don't know. I'm willing to bet there is a lot of truth in it. Is it illegal?

The Whitehouse claims, and no senator or representative has yet denied, that the senior leadership and committee members of the intel committees from both parties were all briefed several times per year. Yesterday the best that Harry Reid could say was, yes, he'd been briefed but it was the president's responsibility to make sure it was legal.

Great job of oversight, Senator Reid. He knew his fingerprints and signature were going to be attached to the thing and he didn't question it? I'd sure like to sell that silly fool some real estate.

Bot