THIS IS NOT ->Delawareliberal


Thursday, August 17, 2006


Republicans on warrentless wire taps

Common sense is breaking out all over. According to Crooks and Liars Republicans are beginning to see the light:

Jack Cafferty ripped into the Republican leadership today over the recent ruling that the NSA warrantless program is illegal. For all the wingers that say the NSA helped in the UK terror plot, they should turn to their good pal O’Reilly, who said that they got FISA warrants in that case which proves the point.

Cafferty: It’s not hypothetical. There are laws on the books against what the administration is doing. And it is about time somebody said it out loud. This federal district judge said today that President Bush is breaking the law–by spying on people in this country without a warrant… I hope it means the arrogant inner circle of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. may finally have to start answering to the people who own that address. That would be us–About how they conduct our country’s affairs.

For the local Republican reaction to the Bush Administration being criminals see First State Politics

Dave wants to take the high road but still holds onto the fantasy that illegial wire taps make us safer.

Tyler Nixon (who seems to have kept his wits about him throughout Bush-mania) calls it right: These people (Bush/Cheney et al.) have hijacked our party and are driving it like madmen to the brink of disaster as we speak, along with everything for which patriots past have laid down their lives.


Someone with more experience in this let me know one thing. Do defendants get a "heads-up" when a decision like this is about to be made public? In other words - Did Bush know about this wire tap decision at the same time that he pushed the Brits for maximum PR value instead of maximum security value over the (alleged) bomb plot?

GAO reports that Bushco has spent 1.6 BILLION of our money on creating news etc...PR....FSPn can you really spin this one out of the crapper?
Jase: Sorry dude, but the NSA program will continue (the judge's immediate mandated cease order was stayed), and the 6th circuit will most likely overrule the judge.
The idiot guest blogging on Michelle Malkin's blog is already claiming this decision was handed down because the judge was appointed by Jimmy Carter and because she's a liberal. So, obviously, judicial activism is only relevant when it's a liberal handing down the decisions.I mean, it's ONLY warrentless wire taps on unsuspecting citizens...what's so unconstitutional about that?
"warrentless wiretaps"

not exactly...

the NSA is authorized by our Gov. to spy on the entire world - outside the USA.

in effect the NSA has a warrent to wiretap.

in regular police work, a wiretap warrant only covers one party in the conversation.

So if I have a warrant to tap FSP's phone, I am not limited to listening to his "side" of the converstion. I also record the voices and tel#'s of the people FSP calls and is called by.

Likewise, the NSA has a "warrant" to tap Bin Ladin's phone and the administration believes they are auhorized to record both sides of the conversation, even if one side is in the USA.

What the Anti-NSA crowd (Tyler,Jason,ACLU) are saying is that when Bin Ladin inc. talks to in Jordan, we listen but when they talk to someone in the USA, we should turn off the wiretap.

This is irrational and it makes us less safe.

(borrowed from steamboat willy)
"Do defendants get a "heads-up" when a decision like this is about to be made public?"

naah, we just bugged the judges office.

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home


November 2005   December 2005   January 2006   February 2006   March 2006   April 2006   May 2006   June 2006   July 2006   August 2006   September 2006   October 2006   May 2007  

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Subscribe to Posts [Atom]