GOP senator says judges were told of phone spying

I've known this for many months, Rev.

Of course, individual rights alarmists ignore it in order to continue their Bush bashing.

Even the FISA Appeals Court ruled that FISA did not take away the President's war fighting authority granted under the Constitution and Congressional statutes.

This , too, is ignored.

Truth and facts are usually the first casualties of the liberal agenda.

 

So, are you all claiming that "informing" a judge of an action is the same as obtaining a warrant? Or as good as?

To get a warrant, the monitors would've had to make a rudimentary case for why it was necessary. Did they not ask for one or was it not approved? Well, Hatch didn't say the judges approved the actions, but he didn't say they were asked either. All this is still pretty dodgy.

 

Hmmm....

Maybe I should just tell a judge I am going to knock off a liquor store. Then it will be perfectly legal.

 

The data gathered was not your phone conversation, but who you are calling . . .

It cannot be used in a court without a warrant . . .

And the notification of the court . . . was a classified court . . . they approve legal monitoring, and they did not object.

Minor points.

PS - your data is public domain . . . major point.

 

No it isn't. It is private between you and your phone company. They need it to render an invoice. It is NOT public domain in any sense.

 

Post your phone number and I'll post your phone records . . .

Your phone records have been in the public domain. I personally think that is illegal, but I have been told repeatedly that foreign entities should have access while the USA cannot . . . A different view of American Liberty.

I have told you and others repeatedly, that the privacy that you think you have and that you think the ACLU fought for is not what you have. The ACLU fought to protect lawyers from wiretapping when lawyers choose to represent terrorists.

The conversations cannot be used in a court of law - because they are intel and not warranted surveillance. Big difference - intel is to prevent the enemy from killing US citizens. Warrants are to prosecute lawbreakers. I agree with this requirement - just because a lawyer gets greedy is no reason to send him or her to jail.

Again, let's surf up your phone number.

 

"I would say the most powerful investigative tool right now is cell records,"

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060106-5919.html

 

EG, you won't find mine! However, just because something is published doesn't make it "public domain". Look in your phone directory. It probably has a copyright notice.

The latest John Grishom novel can be purchased, but just because I can locate it, doesn't make it public domain. I have worked for a number of phone companies, and one of the most sacred trusts was, and still should be, privacy of customer conversations and call detail records.

I can assure you, they are not public domain in any legal sense.

 

Actually, terrorists already have yours . . .

 

Well, when Osama calls, I'll tell him you send your regards! :laugh:

 

He will kill you and you will have earned my respect - just make certain that you mention pre__dent . . . and assassination in the same sentance so that my colleagues (and their software) will have a Constitutional chance of avenging your sacrifice.