• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Mr. President, will you just shut the fukk up!

Caine said:
Ummm... are you ****ing stupid?

CLINTON - NO EVIDENCE OF UNWARRANTED SPYING

BUSH - ADMITTED TO NON WARRANTED SPYING, AND AVOIDED THE QUESTIONS ON THE ISSUE.

CLINTON - NO EVIDENCE OF UNWARRANTED SPYING

BUSH - ADMITTED TO NON WARRANTED SPYING, AND AVOIDED THE QUESTIONS ON THE ISSUE.

CLINTON - NO EVIDENCE OF UNWARRANTED SPYING

BUSH - ADMITTED TO NON WARRANTED SPYING, AND AVOIDED THE QUESTIONS ON THE ISSUE.



WHAT THE **** DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND?
Do I need to beat it into you with my size 11 combat boot?

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/12/18/221452.shtml

Any day you want to try to beat me with anything you feel free. Cause I got no problem stomping a mudhole in your ass. Bring your combat boots if you would like, makes no never mind to me
 
Caine said:
Ummm... are you ****ing stupid?

CLINTON - NO EVIDENCE OF UNWARRANTED SPYING

You responded to another post in another thread AFTER I wrote this...If you didn't see it, you should check it out...

cnredd said:
Does anyone remember Aldrich Ames?

Reportedly, the Clinton administration had not always been enthusiastic about expanding the court's powers. Like its predecessors, it operated under the assumption that the executive already had inherent authority to exempt itself from Fourth Amendment constraints and could order warrantless searches to protect national security. Nonetheless, the government avoided allowing this inherent authority to be tested in the courts...

...Thanks to a warrant authorized by Attorney General Janet Reno, a team of agents from the sprawling National Security Division had permission to enter the Ames home in Arlington, Va. There was only one minor problem. The attorney general of the United States does not have the authority to order a warrantless physical search of a citizen's home, argued Professor Jonathan Turley of George Washington University National Law Center. The Aldrich Ames search in my view was obviously and egregiously unconstitutional...

continued...
 
cnredd said:
You responded to another post in another thread AFTER I wrote this...If you didn't see it, you should check it out...

Was the use of Echelon and the NSA a warranted or approved bugging of the US People?
 
cnredd said:
You responded to another post in another thread AFTER I wrote this...If you didn't see it, you should check it out...

Okay, when I said NO EVIDENCE, I was referring to the fact that nobody had shown anything.

Okay, so Janet Reno thought she had the authority to do something.

Bush already stated that these things require court order, in April of 04.
Then he turned around and Says he DOESN'T need a court order.
Which is it Mr President? Which is it?

Somewhere, in one situation or the other, he lied to the American People.

As far as the legality of his unwarranted searches, I think Congress will be working to figure that one out.
 
Back
Top Bottom