Judge rules Bush's wiretapping illegal

Judge rules Bush's wiretapping illegal

There are 28 comments on the The Spokesman-Review story from Aug 18, 2006, titled Judge rules Bush's wiretapping illegal. In it, The Spokesman-Review reports that:

Spying to continue pending appeal by Justic Department Taylor A federal judge in Detroit ruled Thursday that the National Security Agency's warrantless surveillance program is unconstitutional, delivering the ...

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Spokesman-Review.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
bezelt

Bloomingdale, IL

#1 Aug 18, 2006
So, once again the Bush administration is above the law. In the name of chasing terrorist. And the chase heats up near election time. Need something to persuade America to vote Republican. Need Fear. Don't have any other records to put forth. The Bush administration is the TERROR FIGHTER.

The Bush administration just tried an admitted terrorist in an American court. The prosecution had a terrorist who admitted to being a terrorist. It's an open and shut case right?

Wrong! The judge was irate about witness tampering by the prosecution. This political group has a lot of trouble staying inside the rule of law. And are they expected to try some 400 (from memory) more from Guantanamo prison camp? Surely they will be looking for ways to gain the advantage. Use the clout of the government - along with conditions that favor the government.
Bob

United States

#2 Aug 19, 2006
bezelt wrote:
.... This political group has a lot of trouble staying inside the rule of law.
Yea, and the Dems are clean. I seem to remember during the 9/11 commision hearings a certain official from the Clinton administration getting caught smuggling documents out of the national archives by stuffing them in his pants. But we'll never know what was in the documents because they where shredded.

The response? Oops, sorry, I didn't mean to do anything wrong, my mistake.

And no one cared. Why? because it was the Dems and not the hated Republicans.

Don't be naive, administrations from both parties always try to do things that later get struck down by a court. It doesn't mean the administration is criminal, it means our system of checks and balances works.
bezelt

Northbrook, IL

#3 Aug 19, 2006
This current administration is unlike any in recent memory. Is that good? No!
(1) The Joint Chiefs of staff admonished an American newspaper because of an editorial cartoon. American military against American newspaper. Was that ok with the commander-in-chief? Don't know.
(2) How about revealing the identity of a CIA operative? How far back into the history of America would you need to go to find a repeat of that political behavior? The Whitehouse really wanted to find the "culprit" until the trail started leading toward the Whitehouse. Then quiet.
(3) Courts do rule on things. But with this administration - it seems like they are constantly trying to outmaneuver this country's legal system. And their legal skills don't seem to be able to support their "desires".
(4) Did you witness their take on climate change? Put your man in NASA to muzzle climate scientists. At the same time, promote your "mouthpieces" to the airwaves of public television to "refute" scientific data.
(5) How low can they go? It has been said that 50% of Americans still believe Iraq has WMDs. What American leader would want its people to be in that "state"? I think we've found him.

Perhaps the world is flat. If that would help the Republican party - they might revive that thought.

(6) You would need to go back mamy, many years to match the incompetance of this administration. That is probably the reason why they have no record to campaign on. Nothing. Except their "war on terror". And with all the secrets that this administration has "under its belt", you can bet, America does not know the worst about this administration's performance.
(3)
Bob

United States

#4 Aug 21, 2006
I don't know anything about the editorial cartoon, so I can not respond to it.

Revealing a CIA opps identity, the law says a CIA opps identity must be protected for a certain number of years after they've been an opp. This time had expired, her identity as an ex CIA opp was not protected. Besides, her identity as a CIA opp was already known.

Legal manuverings, according to you it SEEMS like they are doing more than past administrations. Speaking of battles with the courts, have you ever heard of a president being dis-barred?

Thier "take" on climate change is the correct one. There is far more "muzzleing" of scientests who present facts that refute climate change being done by those who for political reasons support the theory of global warming.

WMD's, um, many HAVE been found in Iraq. It kind of makes you wonder about the 50% of americans who DON'T beilieve it. Kind of goes to your world is flat comment. The Bush haters would deny the fact the sun rises in the east if they thought they could harm Bush and get away with it.

As far as secrets go, it seems the prior administration had far more than it's share of secrets (billing records, land deals, hushed up rape allegations, cattle futures....)
States Born

Sudbury, Canada

#5 Aug 21, 2006
Hopefully that SOB will get impeached now, Man I can not stand Bush. He has done so much BAD for our counrty. Hopefully Hillary or hell Mickey Mouse could do better
bezelt

Arlington Heights, IL

#6 Aug 21, 2006
It is rare to see this kind of behavior of the military against American civilians. But newspapers of a certain "ILK" seem to be targets. Even a deceased columnist seems to be a "person of interest" to some current officials. The deceased columnist was a true "MUCKRAKER". He dove right in - right behind the political types who were wading in the muck. He was in search of truth. Not opinion. Not column. Not personality. But truth.

Nobody found any WMDs. Not even a trace of the uranium that was supposed to have come from an African country. If someone knows "where it's at" tell American authorities. The focus is IRAQ. Not other countries.

News sources say the CIA operative's identity was not known, even to friends. But the identity was known to spouse. And spouse was not an issue. At least-not here.
I have seen nothing in the major news sources that said the CIA operative was not actively serving in that capacity when select columnists served up the CIA operative's name to the nation's newspaper readers.

Again, if someone has a reliable source of information that changes the accepted information, that someone should go to the authorities.

I removed IP address links to information on these comments because this editor gave me a "Characters were incorrect" error message.

Got it again - next I removed the headings that had colons behind them.
Marsha

AOL

#7 Aug 21, 2006
I can't believe the people of the United States are so stupid as to object to wiretapping of terror suspects. Even if the President wants to listen to my calls, I have nothing to hide. He is not interested in the conversations of law abiding citizens. If this will protect another terror attack, I say do whatever is necessary to save lives. And any newspaper or individual leaks that information should be arrested, do not pass go and go directly to jail. Why after 9/11 did everyone work together and now, the Dems want to do opposite of whatever the Rep. mention. No matter what it is. Yes I am a Rep. but we need to work together and quit this whining if someone else thinks of something before them and then shoot it down because boo hoo they didn't get credit for it. Grow up America and try to save lives and YES, PROFILE IF THAT KEEPS US SAFE!
Marsha

AOL

#8 Aug 21, 2006
States Born wrote:
Hopefully that SOB will get impeached now, Man I can not stand Bush. He has done so much BAD for our counrty. Hopefully Hillary or hell Mickey Mouse could do better
MMMMM have you been blown up since 9/11. I think we have been safer than ever. Clinton caused this and now Bush gets into office and gets hit with 9/11, the hurricane, and any other catastrophe that could happen. Of course, Bush caused the hurricane, 9/11 and every thing that has happened. Grow up! You better hope Hillary doesn't get in and thank your lucky stars Kerry didn't get in. We need to stay the course! The President can only be as good as the people around him.
Bob

United States

#9 Aug 21, 2006
They have found some WMD's, I can't provide a news link for you but it was reported and ignored by most in the media. No, to my knowledge they have not found any nuclear material. I remember during the invasion of Baghdad they also found where the chemicals for mustard gas had been dumped in the Euphrates River, this too was largely ignored.

And as to the CIA opp, they were NOT an operative at the time and hadnít been for some years. Why do you think no one has been actually indicted on that charge? Sure, we have an aide being indicted for obstruction. That only mean the grand jury though he obstructed the investigation, but there are no charges related to the leaking of any name. Because no crime was committed.
Bob

United States

#10 Aug 21, 2006
States Born wrote:
Hopefully that SOB will get impeached now, Man I can not stand Bush. He has done so much BAD for our counrty. Hopefully Hillary or hell Mickey Mouse could do better
When you say he's done bad for our country, do you mean Canada or the USA?

Ok, with out a bunch of rhetoric and name calling, what bad things for this country (Canada or the USA)has the president done? Ya ya the war, I assume you're going to say that, all the Bush haters do. Give me more, you say he has done so much bad. Like what?
Bob

United States

#11 Aug 21, 2006
www.breitbart.com/news/2006/06/22/06062205554...

Check the article, chemical weapons found.

Chemical weapons are WMD's.
Bob

United States

#12 Aug 21, 2006
On the Plame issue. I said her identity was out prior to the leak. I also said an amount of time had lapsed since she was an agent and her name was leaked, making it no longer a crime.

Read this atricle

//www.washtimes.com/national/2 0050715-121257-9887r.htm
bezelt

Plainfield, IL

#13 Aug 21, 2006
Any politician, with a record of doing good things, will campaign on that record of good things. Nobody, but nobody hides the good that they do.

So, what good things will the current administration put before the American people this fall? Terror? Right. What else?

Katrina? Social Security plan D? FISA? DeLay? And other major corruption activities? the solution to the high price of gasoline? the Sesame Street Thug T Shirt? Attacking corruption by renaming the House Ethics committee to the "Activist House Ethics Committee", blowing up the computers of those who infringe copyrights, paying $100.00 to voting Americans to "fix" the high price of gasoline.

Should they have the talent and skills to play within the rules of the current framework? Others have - for centuries. To those who don't mind "opening the kimona" fine. But the rules protect those who do not. And the history of this country, America, proves that the current structure works. If someone is having immense trouble functioning within the current structure then the problem may be elsewhere.

The country's rules don't have to be static. There are supposed to be three major independent divisions of government. But with a little footwork here and a little there, pretty soon, you may have what looks like a kingdom controlling everything.

bezelt

Plainfield, IL

#14 Aug 21, 2006
I have read the Washington Times article. And now I may see why a congressman saw the Washington administration treating the Washington Times different from the New York Times.

I did not yet see a name of the early supervisor who said that friends and neighbors knew of the work of the covert CIA agent.

This issue may get settled in court. But I believe the President has excused himself from this issue. If he did reveal anything to anyone, the revelation immediately caused the information to be declassified.
bezelt

Plainfield, IL

#15 Aug 21, 2006
Are you saying that the WMDs were chemical weapons? Then why was the covert CIA's husband in that african country looking for a link to uranium? And it looks like the covert CIA's husband may have brought back some wrong answers to the the current administration.

And after that it looks like the "sins of the husband were visited upon the wife".
States Born

Kitchener, Canada

#16 Aug 22, 2006
Marsha wrote:
<quoted text>
MMMMM have you been blown up since 9/11. I think we have been safer than ever. Clinton caused this and now Bush gets into office and gets hit with 9/11, the hurricane, and any other catastrophe that could happen. Of course, Bush caused the hurricane, 9/11 and every thing that has happened. Grow up! You better hope Hillary doesn't get in and thank your lucky stars Kerry didn't get in. We need to stay the course! The President can only be as good as the people around him.
How funny is this, you really think that things are better now, you are stoned. My husband was sent to a war, that was so unneccasary, because of Bush lying and his father not finishing what he started. Well I'll tell when they start treating you like a communist country, don't say I didn't tell ya so. Our privacy and rights are being taking away everyday. And as far as feeling safe, no way in hell. I'm scared to go over the International,and Mackinaw Bridge. Bush is leading us straight to World War Three. Yea that is what I would like to have to be scared out of my witts because an incompatent, immature, usless qass is running a wonderful counrty of the free. And besides when is it ok for our so called President to invade our privacy by spying, but it was a big deal and a national uproar because Clinton got a blow job. Ok your priorities are on the right track.
States Born

Kitchener, Canada

#17 Aug 22, 2006
Bob wrote:
<quoted text>
When you say he's done bad for our country, do you mean Canada or the USA?
Ok, with out a bunch of rhetoric and name calling, what bad things for this country (Canada or the USA)has the president done? Ya ya the war, I assume you're going to say that, all the Bush haters do. Give me more, you say he has done so much bad. Like what?
USA, I am a US born citizen, love my country but hate the president, he is usless.
Bob

United States

#18 Aug 22, 2006
Um, yah, chemical weapons are wmds. So are biological and nuclear weapons. If you want to get technical, along with these wmdís Iraq was supposed to get rid of other conventional weapons, i.e. missiles with a range above some UN mandated limit. We found a bunch of those as well. So weíve been at war with Iraq since í91 albeit under a cease fire agreement (not peace). Iraq never adhered to the provisions of the cease fire agreement (and they where given many chances), and it was obvious they had no intention of doing so. Then add on the terrorist threat,(I know, Iraq didnít attack us on 9/11) the concern that we have this rogue regime who might decide to help the terrorists (there were terrorist training camps in Iraq) and supply them with the WMDís Iraq already had. Our government decided it was time to act, the UN sanctions were not working.

Even the Democrats agreed Iraq was a serious threat, and many campaigned for re-election make those types of statements.

As far as the connection to Africa and uranium, maybe there was a connection maybe not. Just because you and I donít know about it doesnít mean it wasnít there. But Iím not going to claim it was, however our government thought there was a connection. It was this ďcovertĒ agent who lobbied to get her husband selected to go to Africa to check this stuff out, thatís why he was there.
Bob

United States

#19 Aug 22, 2006
States Born wrote:
<quoted text>
USA, I am a US born citizen, love my country but hate the president, he is usless.
But you can't tell me what he's done that is so bad. I know, the war, we should have let poor Saddam alone. But what else, do you have any examples?
Adam

Troy, MI

#20 Aug 22, 2006
I was (and still am to an extent) a Bush supporter. I believe the man is very intelligent (despite his poor rhetoric and inability to speak properly), and I truly believe that he does what he does for our safety. I do, however, disagree with many of the routes he chose to take. I agreed with him about going to Iraq, and I think that withdrawing now would be catastophic (for the Middle East region & our international credibility). On the other hand, something else needs to be done. Having our troops their attempting to provide some law and order will do nothing for the advancement of Iraq. The experts say that a Civil War is inevitable...so what do we do about this? If the U.S. has the political and military power to invade Iraq, dispose of their leader, set up a government, and give some hint of hope to oppressed people...why can't we fix the present situation? Why can't we use our power and divide the country? The Kurds already consider themselves a seperate entity; therefor we should make three seperate countries out of Iraq, each composed of Shiites, Sunnis, and Kurds respectivly. What do you think?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Laingsburg Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Dirty Cops in Lansing (Sep '06) Wed operation gladio 103
News Judge: City wrong to bar farmer over gay marria... Oct '17 Guest 7
Murders (Oct '08) Aug '17 gnirk 10
News Ovid man charged with second-degree murder (Jan '12) Jun '17 preacher 4
News #MSU Experts Can Discuss Mental Health Issues, ... (Apr '17) Apr '17 Humanspirit 1
April (Apr '17) Apr '17 1234abcd 1
News Transgender flags raised in Michigan communitie... (Apr '17) Apr '17 TerriB1 2

Laingsburg Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Laingsburg Mortgages