Navy Pride
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2005
- Messages
- 39,883
- Reaction score
- 3,070
- Location
- Pacific NW
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
Your thoughts please
aps said:Navy Pride, I am guessing that the question you asked fails to address whether these wiretaps have been obtained through a court order (or would be obtained through a court order within 72 hours). I think it violates our 4th Amendment rights when wiretapping is conducted without a court order. If a court order is obtained (or will be within the appropriate time frame), then I fully support the wiretapping.
How's that?
Navy Pride said:I am sorry I did not make that clear aps..............No warrent or court order required.......Just like under the Clinton administration did it in the case of Aldrich Ames (not sure of the spelling) spy case when he did illegal phone tapping and and illegal search on Mr. Ames house without a warrant.........Isn't it odd how Al Gore forgot that little fact in his speech yesterday?
aps said:Okay, then I just voted "no." If Clinton violated the rules, he should suffer any consequences (if any) that Bush does.
Navy Pride said:You must know that every president has used this authority in a time of war especially when your dealing with terrorists that want to kill us.we will just have to agree to disagree on this one my friend.........
aps said:Hey, if they want to wiretap with court orders all over the place, I support that wholeheartedly.
Navy Pride said:Why am I not surprised that my Liberal and Liberaltarians have not responded?:roll:
Navy Pride said:Why am I not surprised that my Liberal and Liberaltarians have not responded?:roll:
Kandahar said:Wow, you gave us a whole 36 minutes to respond before concluding we were too scared of your *cough* insightful question...
The issue here is how you know that they're terrorists (which, by the way, means that this poll is yet another of the "Have you stopped beating your wife?" variety). A warrant for a wiretap can be obtained quickly with any reasonable suspicion, so if the executive can't get a warrant that means the suspicions are not reasonable. There's a reason that Congress passed a law demanding that the executive get a warrant. There's a reason that a judge is needed to give the warrant to the executive. It's part of the checks and balances of our government. To give the president the power to do this without a warrant is to give the president the power to ignore whatever laws he feels like ignoring in the name of fighting terror. What possible reason is there to always trust the president not to abuse this power?
Navy Pride said:I think the NSA knows if they are terrorists or not.
Navy Pride said:........I guess I have to ask you where was your outrage when Clinton was doing it and we were not even at war?
Navy Pride said:I am sorry I did not make that clear aps..............No warrent or court order required.......Just like under the Clinton administration did it in the case of Aldrich Ames (not sure of the spelling) spy case when he did illegal phone tapping and and illegal search on Mr. Ames house without a warrant.........Isn't it odd how Al Gore forgot that little fact in his speech yesterday?
Kandahar said:Then that means they have a reason to believe that they're terrorists, which means that they can obtain a warrant easily.
If I had known about it at the time I would've been angry. Why do you try to turn every topic of discussion into a debate about Clinton?
Hoot said:I'd like a little more info on Clinton and wiretapping, rather then just saying Clinton did it too, as a end run defense of Bush.
Ames was selling CIA secrets to the KGB since 1985...before Clinton was President.
The FISA amendment regarding home searches was not enacted until 1995, after Clinton 'supposedly' authorized a warrantless search of Ames' house. Therefore, Clinton did not ignore the existing law.
It's established that Clinton went to Congress asking for more strident wiretapping laws, and was shot down in his efforts.
Please prove to me that what Clinton did was illegal before using the republican mantra of deflecting attention away from Bush.
Kandahar said:Then that means they have a reason to believe that they're terrorists, which means that they can obtain a warrant easily.
Navy Pride said:I am sorry I did not make that clear aps..............No warrent or court order required.......Just like under the Clinton administration did it in the case of Aldrich Ames (not sure of the spelling) spy case when he did illegal phone tapping and and illegal search on Mr. Ames house without a warrant.........Isn't it odd how Al Gore forgot that little fact in his speech yesterday?
johns said:You are taking that out of context, are you not. That was with regards to "Physical" searches, which at the time, FISA had no provision for. After the fact, President Clinton supported and signed a physical search provision for FISA. Seems like you take your talking points directly from Rush and Sean
Navy Pride said:Your thoughts please
Navy Pride said:You can spin it anyway you want, bottom line Clinton did the same thing Bush did and we were not even at war then....
Hoot said:I'd like a little more info on Clinton and wiretapping, rather then just saying Clinton did it too, as a end run defense of Bush.
Ames was selling CIA secrets to the KGB since 1985...before Clinton was President.
The FISA amendment regarding home searches was not enacted until 1995, after Clinton 'supposedly' authorized a warrantless search of Ames' house. Therefore, Clinton did not ignore the existing law.
It's established that Clinton went to Congress asking for more strident wiretapping laws, and was shot down in his efforts.
Please prove to me that what Clinton did was illegal before using the republican mantra of deflecting attention away from Bush.
Kandahar said:Here's an idea. Why don't you people stop saying "Clinton did it too" and actually provide some reasons why this kind of activity should be tolerated from any president.
Kandahar said:Here's an idea. Why don't you people stop saying "Clinton did it too" and actually provide some reasons why this kind of activity should be tolerated from any president.