Joseph_Botwinick
<img src=/532.jpg>Banned
Ok. I will try.
Joseph Botwinick
Joseph Botwinick
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
The President Is Not Above the Law
- Thread starter KenH
- Start date
The law is set up so that this wouldn't happen. The president can wiretap and monitor any terrorist suspect who is not a US citizen without a warrant, even the millions of illegals that he has welcomed into the country.
When a US citizen is involved he is required to get a warrant, if the issue is so time sensitive that he can't wait for the special court that is in place in Washington open 24/7 soley for warrants in relation to federal monitoring, then the law allows him to do the wiretapping and monitoring and then get the warrant after the fact within so many days. That is fine, as long as the warrant is attained at some point during the process as the law specifies.
If he has done this in every case involving any US citizens, then the Times article that started all of this is just allot of hot air, but if he has wiretapped or monitored US citizens without a warrant either before or after the fact, then he has ignored the law. Members of Congress from both sides have called for an investigation, we will know the truth in the end.
"The president can wiretap and monitor any terrorist suspect who is not a US citizen"----------------------------------------------------
And there is the rub. Some terrorist are citizens and many legal organizations in the us have been shown to be giving moral and financial support. And they have also said the time it takes for the court to grant the warrant is not the problem. They said it is all the paperwork that the court requires. The prep time can be weeks.
And there is the rub. Some terrorist are citizens and many legal organizations in the us have been shown to be giving moral and financial support. And they have also said the time it takes for the court to grant the warrant is not the problem. They said it is all the paperwork that the court requires. The prep time can be weeks.
The law is set up so that this wouldn't happen. The president can wiretap and monitor any terrorist suspect who is not a US citizen without a warrant, even the millions of illegals that he has welcomed into the country.
When a US citizen is involved he is required to get a warrant, if the issue is so time sensitive that he can't wait for the special court that is in place in Washington open 24/7 soley for warrants in relation to federal monitoring, then the law allows him to do the wiretapping and monitoring and then get the warrant after the fact within so many days. That is fine, as long as the warrant is attained at some point during the process as the law specifies.
</font>[/QUOTE]You are mistaken.
Enhanced Surveillance Provisions Affecting Library Confidentiality
Section 215: Access to Records Under Foreign Intelligence Security Act (FISA)
Amends the business records provision of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) to allow FBI agents to obtain "any tangible thing," which includes books, records, papers, floppy disks, data tapes, computers and their hard drives, and any type of record in any format. Prior to the PATRIOT Act, FISA only permitted agents to obtain car rental records, hotel records, storage locker records, and common carrier records for a foreign agent.
Allows FBI agents to ask the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) to issue an ex parte, secret court order to obtain any kind of record or tangible thing when the record sought is for an investigation into terrorism or foreign espionage.
Lowers the legal standard for obtaining a court order under FISA. Under the new FISA, the agent need only "specify that the records concerned are sought for an authorized investigation" in order to obtain a warrant from the special FISA court. Prior to the PATRIOT Act, the agent needed to demonstrate "probable cause" that the target of the investigation was an agent for a foreign power.
Allows investigations to target U.S. citizens, as long as the investigation is not based solely upon activities protected by the First Amendment. (Note that this does not exclude investigations into acts and behavior that may include First Amendment protected activities.) Prior to the PATRIOT Act, FISA could only be used when pursuing non-citizen foreign agents. Prohibits the library from notifying the patron under suspicion, the press, or anyone else that a warrant has been served upon the library, or that records have been surrendered.
Under the rules of the FISA Court, only FBI agents or authorized U.S. attorneys can appear before the FISA court, eliminating any possibility of challenging the order.
Who has said? They don't have to go down to the local court house and wait in line. They have a special court that is set up that opperates 24/7 just for this purpose, these judges hear no other cases. I saw one of these judges on television the other day, he said that while he served, he would issue many of these warrants at 2 and 3 in the morning. They wiretaps and monitoring of these citizens who are terrorist suspects can begin many weeks before the warrant is obtained, so the time involved should not be an issue.
jstrickland1989
New Member
Ken, do you just hate President Bush? It's okay to admit it.
James
James
jstrickland1989
New Member
I'm just wondering, do you think this is the first time the government has "supposedly" (and I mean supposedly) done something illegal, or do you agree that this has been going on for almost 60 years?
Also, why are you so worried about it? The government is wiretapping people who are supposedly terrorist, not the average joe. So what does this have to do with the average American giving up freedoms?
James
Also, why are you so worried about it? The government is wiretapping people who are supposedly terrorist, not the average joe. So what does this have to do with the average American giving up freedoms?
James
Joseph_Botwinick
<img src=/532.jpg>Banned
Ken: The defender of pencil pusher beaurocratic red tape that protects nobodies right to privacy.
Who'da thunk it?
Joseph Botwinick
KenH
Well-Known Member
(1) Notwithstanding any other law, the President, through the Attorney General, may authorize electronic surveillance without a court order under this subchapter to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year if the Attorney General certifies in writing under oath that—
(A) the electronic surveillance is solely directed at—
(i) the acquisition of the contents of communications transmitted by means of communications used exclusively between or among foreign powers, as defined in section 1801 (a)(1), (2), or (3) of this title; or
(ii) the acquisition of technical intelligence, other than the spoken communications of individuals, from property or premises under the open and exclusive control of a foreign power, as defined in section 1801 (a)(1), (2), or (3) of this title;
(B) there is no substantial likelihood that the surveillance will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party; and
(C) the proposed minimization procedures with respect to such surveillance meet the definition of minimization procedures under section 1801 (h) of this title; and
if the Attorney General reports such minimization procedures and any changes thereto to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence at least thirty days prior to their effective date, unless the Attorney General determines immediate action is required and notifies the committees immediately of such minimization procedures and the reason for their becoming effective immediately.
- LINK
jstrickland1989
New Member
George W. Bush will not always be the one sitting in the Oval Office. </font>[/QUOTE]But you speak of GW as if he's some kind of menace to society, and that he wants to have a dictatorship in the US. While he MAY (which is yet to be determined) have done something wrong, I highly doubt that he cares to wiretap the average Americans phonecalls. These are terrorist! Not Uncle Bill down the road! You have to put everything in perspective.
James
KenH
Well-Known Member
Unrestrained government power is a menance to society would would result in a dictatorship in the U.S. That is why The Founders crafted the U.S. constitution with limited, enumerated powers for the federal government.
But I do realize that nowadays the federal government rarely pays attention to the federal constitution about substantive matters.
jstrickland1989
New Member
But nobody has proven he is a menace to society. While we THINK we don't KNOW. You have to stop jumping to conclusions.
I know this is off-topic, but I can't imagine what the U.S would be like with Peroutka (constitutional party) as President. Could you? The terrorist would have free reign in America. It's not all about privacy. And again, what freedoms have you lost to this? Personally!
James
I know this is off-topic, but I can't imagine what the U.S would be like with Peroutka (constitutional party) as President. Could you? The terrorist would have free reign in America. It's not all about privacy. And again, what freedoms have you lost to this? Personally!
James