My point is that virtually every court that has ever considered the question (pre- and post-FISA) has held the President has a cons utional prerogative to conduct warrantless searched in matters of foreign intelligence. Period.
If you take the administration's claims at face value -- this is exactly what they were (and are) doing. Add to that the general consensus it is reasonable to want to know who, in the U.S., is talking to suspected terrorists abroad and the case for such a program is only strengthened.
Therefore, it isn't a close question.
The problems do not arise over the cons utional question of the president's authority to do so, this is pretty much established. The problems arise when the president's opponents start to obfuscate and exaggerate what they know about the program into scenarios that may well be legally and cons utionally questionable. But they do so without any justification.
Absent any actual evidence of their suppositions, they remain just that and -- this administration shouldn't be forced to ruin a vital national security asset just so you and his opponents can be satisfied that what he is doing is precisely what he claims he is doing. Particularly when you can't cite an example that refutes that.
You should be forced to provide some factual evidence of uncons utional behavior or illegal acts before the President should have to answer any of your questions about this program.
That's my point.
Hey Yoni boy, you seem like Vashie and xrayhorsy,
little girls who won't go fight this war themselves just like me. Thanks for supporting me by the way, I appreciate that, and by the way you have my appreciation.
Heck of a job Yoni boy
God Bless America
^this imposter doesnt speak for my people
your lack of a "." and use of emotcons is something a lefty would be caught doing
hyeah big zak jacks it to GWB
Hey there sonny, stop usin' my name there.
And they don't call me Lefty,
however, I did get in a fight with someone named Lefty before,
he hit me with a right.
What can I say, I was in the middle,
which would make me a moderate.
Next day I woke up and declared war on all nations who harbor left handed people.
I'm George W Bush and I approve this message.
he he. mehmehmhem... a middle name can't be one letters, that would be dispronouncable to the humans ears
I don't know spanish.
So, lawyers in the Bush Justice Department who adamantly disagree with your position that this program is within the scope of the President's Article II powers are just partisan hacks who are out to undermine the President? I think it's rather remarkable to suggest that some very smart people, who have devoted their professional lives to studying the Cons ution, are somehow clueless in its application in this cir stance. Frankly -- and I don't mean this to be offensive -- I'll trust their arguments (on both sides of the debate) before I'll stand on my own or trust yours, Yoni. I certainly respect your opinion and understand your viewpoint, but I don't think there's anything other than partisanship that guides your assessment of the debate's merits.
And ultimately, my point isn't that the President's detractors are right -- though I tend to agree with the general proposition that warrantless surveillance is anathema to the 4th Amendment, and that the 4th Amendment should trump any non-expressed Article II powers -- it's that there is significant disagreement among intelligent people who are expert in Cons utional law. There's significant disagreement within the Administration (not exactly an anti-Bush crowd) and the President's party. The existence of that significant disagreement, even among the President's supporters, would seem to suggest that the question is far-from-settled in any legal sense and that its ultimate resolution is less-than-certain.
The poster "George W. Bush" is a moron who seems to think he is cute trying to imitate the President. Give it up - you just sound stupid and it certainly isn't funny.
And, before all you other anti-Bush people start making comments about how stupid the real President is, just keep your mouth shut - I don't want to hear it - we get to read it several times in every thread on this forum!
I don't know to whom or what you're referring, exactly; but, if there are people who disagree with the cons utionality of the President to authorize an NSA Program to eavesdrop on international communications between known or suspected terrorists and others, either in or out of the U.S. in order to gain foreign intelligence, then I would say they're either basing their opinion on the suppositions of others or they're not listening to the administration.
Two questions for you, FWD.
1) Does the President have article II powers, under the U. S. Cons ution, to intercept, for foreign intelligence purposes, communications -- of any type, from any person, to any person, any where in the world?
2) Has there been any evidence (anecdotal, cir stantial, or otherwise) to suggest the President has engaged in "unreasonable" searches against U. S. Citizens?
I think the "disagreement" both within and without the administration are largely due to the smoke and mirrors obfuscation of the program put forth by the administration's detractors.
I'm glad you realize that. I have no "." on my "W". That other poser needs ta get.
Besides people like me.
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=34334
And my poll numbers show that, and I don't listen to polls by the way.
God Bless America
Crookshanks, you should learn to just use the ignore feature. Posts such as yours only invites more of the same from those about which you're complaining.
Now Yoni boy, keep actin tuff even though your really just a lil girl.
You remind me of me.
DONE! George W Bush is now on my ignore list!
"Change"? Change is illusory. I have better things to do with my time than to waste it on the "political process".
You just remember elcamino,
I'm the one that people like on this basket forum.
Thanks for your support.
God Bless America
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=34334
Heh, I guess that makes the manufacturers of hand lotion and tissues happy...
If you believe you are powerless, that is a self-fulfilling prophecy.
That way you don't have to take any responsibility for the way things are. Nihilism is not a form of government.
Talk about self-centered and spoiled, jeez.
Good, I'll leave it to you and the rest of the partisan cluster to yell at each other 24/7/365. It seems rather self-centered to believe that your impact is of any consequence. Maybe you need to load up on the Charmin.
Forum cheerleader,....
elpimpo:"present!"
First and foremost. These calls are intercepted from/to outside the U.S.
They are not calls made within the U.S.
Second. We have been intercepting calls, I know for a fact, since the
1950's. Not calls within the U.S. The calls they are most interested in
are calls to/from the U.S. to/by known terrorist.
It is not illegal to do this. And I would bet my last dollar that we will
continue to do it, no matter what any court says. Proving we do may
be a little tricky, but we have plenty of other ways to get the
communications, you can take it to the bank. We are not the only
country that has monitoring capability, are we.
I believe these two opinion columns by George Will and Andrew McCarthy fairly sum up the opposing arguments in the NSA Program. I think McCarthy wins the argument hands down.
Every once in a while, there is a pretty worthwhile conversation between reasonable people.
Not often, I will admit. It *is* more fun to rag on someone through the internet than it is to have decent discussions.
BUT
Resigning any responsibility for what goes on is childish. "I can't get it my way, so I am taking my ball and going home.".
Being involved politically is far from inconsequential, and I have seen first-hand what my involvement can do. Not that I have a lot of time to spend on such things, but I have taken part in a few things with the Texas State U. Dems and actually gotten something accomplished.
One individuals contribution may not seem like much, but ten thousand people each picking up a one pound rock have just moved 5 tons in a second.
Political parties are there to provide some framework for people to band together and participate. Check out if you want, but I think the charge of me being self-centered suits you better than it does me.
good thread, good convo, really captured the legal tension of the moment and featured some legendary ST posters.
(compared with then, multi-quoting seems to have gone almost completely out of style.)
Great thread, shame no one took yoni to task once Snowden revealed the extent of the surveilance (or making legal arguments based on "how the law is currently written" or some such nonsense
I need to try that next time I get a speeding ticket. You see officer, 80 years ago there was no speed limit, I got precedent
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote