Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill who wrote (731653)	3/13/2006 4:46:41 PM
From: Karen Lawrence	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

I don't think it's a political stunt. Bush could have followed the law as readily as he broke it. He chose not to follow the law, then he chose to say...yeah, I did it, so what?!!! If say...Clinton had done that, what would be your thoughts about violating the Constitution then?

To: Bill who wrote (731653)	3/13/2006 5:07:45 PM
From: JBTFD	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

You seem to think the law is whatever the administration says it is. But the law is what it is. The FISA law is that wiretaps need judicial approval. Bush approved wiretaps to be done without judicial approval. Seems pretty clear cut to me.

To: Bill who wrote (731653)	3/13/2006 7:12:44 PM
From: Karen Lawrence	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

"Section 1802 does impose some conditions, including that "there is no substantial likelihood that the surveillance will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party." But the law defines "United States person" somewhat narrowly, so that it would not include illegal aliens or, arguably, those who fraudulently obtained legal status. And if Section 1802 isn't enough, regard section 1811 of the same subchapter of the United States Code, "Authorization during time of war." It states, "Notwithstanding any other law, the President, through the Attorney General, may authorize electronic surveillance without a court order under this subchapter to acquire foreign intelligence information for a period not to exceed fifteen calendar days following a declaration of war by the Congress." Again, mark the phrase, "without a court order." mediamatters.org Summary: Conservatives in the media claimed that Bush's authorization of domestic surveillance by the NSA without warrants is legal under the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. However, provisions of the law allow warrantless surveillance of foreign powers only, or for just 15 days following a declaration of war. Nationally syndicated radio host Rush Limbaugh and Bay Buchanan, president of conservative group The American Cause, claimed that Bush's authorization of domestic surveillance by the National Security Administration (NSA) without warrants is legal under the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). However, FISA contains provisions that limit such warrantless surveillance to communications "exclusively between foreign powers." Those provisions do not apply to Bush's conduct, as he authorized domestic surveillance of communications between persons inside the United States and parties outside the country. FISA specifically states that the president may authorize electronic surveillance without a court order only if there is "no substantial likelihood" that the communications of "a United States person" will be acquired. FISA also allows the president and the attorney general to conduct surveillance without a court order for the purpose of gathering "foreign intelligence information" for no more than 15 days "following a declaration of war by the Congress." This provision does not permit Bush's conduct either, as he acknowledged reauthorizing the program more than 30 times since 2001. The FISA (Title 50, Chapter 36 of the United States Code) provision (Title 50, Section 1802 -- or "50 USC 1802") which Limbaugh was explicitly and Buchanan was apparently referring to allows the president to authorize surveillance without a court order if the attorney general certifies that the surveillance is "solely directed" at "the acquisition of the contents of communications transmitted by means of communications used exclusively between or among foreign powers;" or, "the acquisition of technical intelligence, other than the spoken communications of individuals, from property or premises under the open and exclusive control of a foreign power." The law also states that warrantless surveillance is permissible only if the attorney general certifies that "there is no substantial likelihood that the surveillance will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party." mediamatters.org