Government spying

[RANDY P]

Originally posted by oldsam

Now that's funny~!

rjp

[Rodeo]

Originally posted by lendaddy
You want me to prove the unprovable.

Precisely my point. It's unprovable whether the president is spying on actual terrorists, potential terrorists, common criminals, or people like you and me.

It's unprovable. There is no way to know. All we can do is accept his word.

When legal process is followed, the unprovable becomes provable. Not perfect, but a heck of a lot better than relying on the good graces of one man.

When legal process is followed, they could still spy on you illegally, but it would take a conspiracy. Investigating officers, supervisors, prosecutors, court clerks, judges. Everybody would have to be in on it, and everybody's story would have to be consistent.

As opposed to one man.

Checks and balances. That's why we are still free.

[lendaddy]

Originally posted by Rodeo
Precisely my point. It's unprovable whether the president is spying on actual terrorists, potential terrorists, common criminals, or people like you and me.

It's unprovable. There is no way to know. All we can do is accept his word.

When legal process is followed, the unprovable becomes provable. Not perfect, but a heck of a lot better than relying on the good graces of one man.

When legal process is followed, they could still spy on you illegally, but it would take a conspiracy. Investigating officers, supervisors, prosecutors, court clerks, judges. Everybody would have to be in on it, and everybody's story would have to be consistent.

As opposed to one man.

Checks and balances. That's why we are still free.

Why couldn't they just spy without telling anyone? How would you know?

[Rodeo]

Originally posted by lendaddy
Why couldn't they just spy without telling anyone? How would you know?

That's what they're doing!

The only reason we know is because, thankfully, some honest soul told the NY Times about it, and, thankfully, the NY Times finally printed it. Otherwise, we'd never know.

And by the way, I don't have to know what they are doing, and would not expect to know. All I want is for the president to operate within the confines of the law, that way the people that are supposed to know, the agents and the judges and the legislature, can keep a check on what the executive is doing.

[Rodeo]

Think we'd know if the NY Times did not have the guts to print it? (thanks OldSam):

"Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires—a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so. It's important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution."

—President Bush, at a Q and A in Buffalo, N.Y., April 20, 2004.

So the president told us he only wiretaps after going to court and getting a warrant. The president was lying.

Now that the truth has come out, he tells us he only wiretaps without a warrant on known terrorists. He's now telling the truth?

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by oldsam

What is not funny is this is precisely what the Democrats did to Newt Gingrich, made a scandal out of the non-authorized wire-tap, and then were forced to serve jail time...They rationalized the illicit wire-tapping on just dumb luck that an old leftist couple picked up and intercepted Newt's cell conversation.

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by Rodeo
When legal process is followed, the unprovable becomes provable. Not perfect, but a heck of a lot better than relying on the good graces of one man.

Legal process was followed. To say otherwise is buying into the treasonous left's spin...Not one case of abuse, Rodeo...Not one...We have evolved in civil rights significantly from the rights violation of previous Democrat administrations. From FDR to Clinton...In fact if Republicans agreed with Senate Democrats during Al Gore's daddy's, and Robert "KKK" Byrd's times, we would still have segregation. Although we Republicans eradicated state sanctioned segregation, you and your leftist brethern have transposed segregation to self-imposed cultural and dependency segregation. Keeping the black man down with lowered expectations and celebrating the worst and most animalistic of human behavior in their communities.

Why does it seem that every time the Democrats are demanding solutions they are creating the problems in the background. It comes into clear relief why the inner cities are failing, the incestuous promotion of education producers (the unions are subsidized, not the children) is corrupt, and terrorism flew under the radar quite successfully during the Clinton Administration.

[cool_chick]

Originally posted by lendaddy
The argument is that it's implied in the powers of the Commander in Chief during wartime.

But where is this "implied?" I honestly cannot think of any place in the constitution where this is "implied." This, in theory, could be very scary. We've been at war one way or another since the early 90s.....

[snowman]

They can search all they want, as long as they don't prosecute anyone Do you reject spying is the info obtained is never used to prosecute, but only to stop terrorist acts? I do not. If they intend to prosecute then they must, under all circumstanses, get a warrent. Info obtained without a warrent could never be used to obtain a warrent as well. I beleive that is their overall mode of operation at this point. For non citizens I say thay can do whatever they want to do. No warrents, no anything. Problem is that PAST presidents, mostly democrats, have abused this authority. Political purposes mainly. There are two checks to this power, first is political, the second ammendment, the final check.

[stevepaa]

snowman, get your facts correct. The biggest proven abuser of wiretaps was Nixon.

As for the others, got any documentation?

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by stevepaa
snowman, get your facts correct. The biggest proven abuser of wiretaps was Nixon.

Flash in the pan of abuse of power considering the Clinton White House somehow had 900 FBI files, illegally obtained BTW, on Clinton's political enemies. What is worse?...Certainly not wire-taps...Who dragged the country through the mud?...Who used the White House to attack the prosecutor, who obstructed justice to the tune of over 70 million bucks?...Who sold missile technology to the Chinese Military?...Whose weakened national security policies led to the greatest loss of military secrets due to espionage?

Who really knows who or what the Clinton regime was wire-tapping. Reno and the media were in his back pocket...We do know that Clinton was granted more wire-taps by FISA than Bush has been...We do know that the IRS was used as a weapon by the Clinton Administration. We do know that Clinton is proven and pattern liar.

[t951]

so is bush (a liar)

not to mention the damage he has done to our reputation and status around the world.

[fastpat]

Originally posted by 56chevy
Question - Does the Government's spying on possible terrorists REALLY bother you??? or NOT !!

I, for one, do NOT have a problem with it.

I truly believe that locating and stopping a terrorist attack BEFORE it happens, is quite important.

I do trust the Pres on this.
Am I wrong here??

It doesn't matter if you're OK with it or not; it's illegal pure and simple. Further, if you permit the government to act illegally, then nothing is safe.

[fastpat]

Originally posted by Mulhollanddose
Flash in the pan of abuse of power considering the Clinton White House somehow had 900 FBI files, illegally obtained BTW, on Clinton's political enemies. What is worse?...Certainly not wire-taps...Who dragged the country through the mud?...Who used the White House to attack the prosecutor, who obstructed justice to the tune of over 70 million bucks?...Who sold missile technology to the Chinese Military?...Whose weakened national security policies led to the greatest loss of military secrets due to espionage?

Who really knows who or what the Clinton regime was wire-tapping. Reno and the media were in his back pocket...We do know that Clinton was granted more wire-taps by FISA than Bush has been...We do know that the IRS was used as a weapon by the Clinton Administration. We do know that Clinton is proven and pattern liar.

Clinton was a war criminal and should have been impeached for abuse of power, but that's no longer relevant since he's not president now.

Bush is currently committing war crimes and abusing power, and should be impeached.

[t951]

I couldnt agree more. He needs to be impeached, and tried for crimes. He is sentencing so many people to death for oil. He uses 9-11 as a reason, but its not what its about.

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by t951
not to mention the damage he has done to our reputation and status around the world.

You can blame American leftist media and the state controlled medias of the world for false impressions of America and GW Bush...Although their motives are different they achieve a result that they both appreciate. The world-wide corrupt, socialists and dictators lie to their people. The American leftist press has an agenda. They feed off one another.

[t951]

Your right, it has nothing to do with his decisions and actions......

This has nothing to do with spin. He is moron that is causing harm and should be impeached.

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by fastpat
It doesn't matter if you're OK with it or not; it's illegal pure and simple. Further, if you permit the government to act illegally, then nothing is safe.

It is not illegal "pure and simple."...The power Bush is wielding falls far short of those used by wartime Presidents of the past. Remember those wartime Presidents weren't dealing with a terrorist situation, they were dealing with defined enemies (save Lincoln)...The problem we have is liberals. All this money and monkey-dust that was thrown up in the air by the 9-11 Commission was apparently an effort in political drama. Sitting on the Commission was Jamie Goerlick who was in charge of hamstringing intelligence sharing. Now we have a plan and are implementing the plan, to cripple and capture terrorist, and now we demonize GW?

The problem is liberals. If they were "loyal" , which they are not, and wouldn't stab Bush in the back with the knife of blame (if another attack occured as we preserved our towel-headed friends' civil rights) if another attack occured, then I would join this call to allowing terrorists to communicate with impugnity. That is not the case. The Democrats and their media friends would drag Bush through the streets and hang him from the Capitol with piano wire if that happened.

As it stands Bush has not abused his power. Bush hasn't entered within a mile of the powers previous wartime Presidents have exercised.

You are damned if you do, you are dead if you don't.

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by t951
This has nothing to do with spin. He is moron that is causing harm and should be impeached.

Bush is a moron?...What Republican isn't, according to the leftist drones?...Let us not forget that Bush was a better student than Kerry and Gore. Let us not forget Bush wasn't a draft-dodger like the left's goldenboy, Bill Clinton.

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by fastpat
Bush is currently committing war crimes and abusing power, and should be impeached.

Neither is true...Bush will go down as the greatest liberator of oppressed people since Ronald Reagan.