• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Exclusive: U.S. directs agents to cover up program used to investigate Americans

trfjr

trfjr

Banned
Joined
Feb 27, 2013
Messages
3,114
Reaction score
1,004
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
(Reuters) - A secretive U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration unit is funneling information from intelligence intercepts, wiretaps, informants and a massive database of telephone records to authorities across the nation to help them launch criminal investigations of Americans
Click to expand...
.

Exclusive: U.S. directs agents to cover up program used to investigate Americans | Reuters


Federal Agents, Under Eric Holder, Caught Using NSA Wiretaps To Prosecute Americans… And Hiding Where Info Came From!

1984 anyone
 
Before there was the War On Terror, there was the War On Drugs. Both are utterly corrupt, and undermine the US Constitution.
 
I continue to believe that the role of the domestic surveillance deserves a thorough independent investigation with the findings (not sources and methods) made public and necessary corrections to the program made. Unfortunately, Congress does not appear capable or willing to examine a matter that has potential constitutional implications.
 
i'm very not-alarmed by this. Its only mildly related to the recent NSA leaks and doesn't seem to have anything to do with the "Meta Data" database. Most of these tips come from legal wiretaps that revealed information on someone who wasn't the target of the initial investigation. I.E. court order to tap drug dealers phone results in info about incoming shipments in another state, tip is given to appropriate state police, shipment intercepted. The "Parallel Construction" concept isn't inherently wrong imo, but the legal problems and unfairness it can cause at trial are enough to condemn that particular aspect of this.
 
donsutherland1 said:
I continue to believe that the role of the domestic surveillance deserves a thorough independent investigation with the findings (not sources and methods) made public and necessary corrections to the program made. Unfortunately, Congress does not appear capable or willing to examine a matter that has potential constitutional implications.
Click to expand...

That is a proposal, I think I like. Who should make up the independent investigation group?
 
It's amazing how some on the right are up in arms over this survellience thing, when under Bush many of them said "If you aren't doing anything wrong you don't have anything to worry about" yet are up in arms over this. The same goes for the left in the fact many were outraged by the fact Bush was doing this, yet many are now supportive of Obama doing it.

If Romney were president, the program would most likely still be in effect, yet I think we would see many on the right supportive of it while many on the left would be outraged.
 
joG said:
That is a proposal, I think I like. Who should make up the independent investigation group?
Click to expand...

There are several ways this could be done:

1. Congress could direct the Office of the Special Counsel to review the matter.
2. Congress could adopt legislation to create an independent committee with robust authority to look into the matter (this approach was used to create the 9/11 Commission).
3. Congress could charge one of its existing committees or create a special select committee to look into the matter.

The second option would probably be best, but it is least likely. The President could veto the legislation. It currently appears that a comprehensive examination of the domestic surveillance issue lacks sufficient Congressional support to override any veto.
 
trfjr said:
.

Exclusive: U.S. directs agents to cover up program used to investigate Americans | Reuters


Federal Agents, Under Eric Holder, Caught Using NSA Wiretaps To Prosecute Americans… And Hiding Where Info Came From!

1984 anyone
Click to expand...

the war on drugs really set us down the road to the destruction of rights and protections. With the unprecedented amount of technology around today it is not surprising we have a problem. I personally think the US needs to define some new limits to what people can reasonably expect to privacy in the way of a constitutional convention more governed by representatives with much more connection to the people. These things are just going to keep getting worse and worse because we have little to nothing to go on here in regards to what the founding fathers intended because they probably could not even imagine this level of technology.
 
donsutherland1 said:
There are several ways this could be done:

1. Congress could direct the Office of the Special Counsel to review the matter.
2. Congress could adopt legislation to create an independent committee with robust authority to look into the matter (this approach was used to create the 9/11 Commission).
3. Congress could charge one of its existing committees or create a special select committee to look into the matter.

The second option would probably be best, but it is least likely. The President could veto the legislation. It currently appears that a comprehensive examination of the domestic surveillance issue lacks sufficient Congressional support to override any veto.
Click to expand...

Congress could do a lot of things, but I don't think it is realistic to expect the present system to start cutting back these powers in any meaningful way. You are right that they have the power, but to get to that point you need to be entrenched in that system and a person who becomes so will not go against the power of that system.
 
donsutherland1 said:
There are several ways this could be done:

1. Congress could direct the Office of the Special Counsel to review the matter.
2. Congress could adopt legislation to create an independent committee with robust authority to look into the matter (this approach was used to create the 9/11 Commission).
3. Congress could charge one of its existing committees or create a special select committee to look into the matter.

The second option would probably be best, but it is least likely. The President could veto the legislation. It currently appears that a comprehensive examination of the domestic surveillance issue lacks sufficient Congressional support to override any veto.
Click to expand...

Any of the above would probably do the trick of clearing the air. But probably a a robust alternative would be more convincing.
 
The DEA has a Special Operations Division (SOD) whose work is classified for the most part. They work on the coattails of the warrantless wiretapping program, which was intended to thwart terrorist activity, to eavesdrop on American citizens without a warrant. Once they illegally and unconstitutionally determine that a person might be involved in illicit drug activity, they contact local law enforcement who then make up some reason to perform a "routine" traffic stop on the individual, at which point drug dogs are brought in.

If an arrest is made, the true nature of how the defendant became a suspect is kept hidden from the defense, and in some cases even from the prosecution and judge. Instead, a process known as "parallel construction" is invoked, whereby a "good" reason to perform the traffic stop is fabricated by the police.

"It's just like laundering money - you work it backwards to make it clean," said Finn Selander, a DEA agent from 1991 to 2008 and now a member of a group called Law Enforcement Against Prohibition

"That's outrageous," said Tampa attorney James Felman, a vice chairman of the criminal justice section of the American Bar Association. "It strikes me as indefensible."

Lawrence Lustberg, a New Jersey defense lawyer, said any systematic government effort to conceal the circumstances under which cases begin "would not only be alarming but pretty blatantly unconstitutional."

Exclusive: U.S. directs agents to cover up program used to investigate Americans

Yet more civil liberties lost and Constitutional restrictions on government circumvented and ignored in the name of enforcing already unconstitutional drug laws. Boogey men make people stupid.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/war-drugs/168776-more-lost-liberties-thanks-wod.html
 
rocket88 said:
AS much as I disagree with what the NSA is doing, I don't think this would be any different if Romney were President. Except that the Liberals would be outraged and the Conservatives would be falling all over themselves to defend it.
Click to expand...

Quite true. I dislike it under both, however.
 
Many americans positively LOVE being spied on. Perverse, to be sure, but they actually feel safer.
 
Henry David said:
Many americans positively LOVE being spied on. Perverse, to be sure, but they actually feel safer.
Click to expand...

Its part of that if you ain't got nothing to hide then you have nothing to worry about mentality.
 
jamesrage said:
Its part of that if you ain't got nothing to hide then you have nothing to worry about mentality.
Click to expand...

Yep.

Oliver STone remarked on this last few weeks: The question is not "do you have something to hide?" The question is whether we control the government or the government controls us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom