You ain't seen nothing yet! The White House says spying on terror suspects without court approval is ok. What about physical searches? In the dark days after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, a small group of lawyers from the White House and the Justice Department began meeting to debate a number of novel legal strategies to help prevent another attack. Soon after, President Bush authorized the National Security Agency to begin conducting electronic eavesdropping on terrorism suspects in the United States, including American citizens, without court approval. Meeting in the FBI's state-of-the-art command center in the J. Edgar Hoover Building, the lawyers talked with senior FBI officials about using the same legal authority to conduct physical searches of homes and businesses of terrorism suspects--also without court approval, one current and one former government official tell U.S. News. "There was a fair amount of discussion at Justice on the warrantless physical search issue," says a former senior FBI official. "Discussions about--if [the searches] happened--where would the information go, and would it taint cases." .... At least one defense attorney representing a subject of a terrorism investigation believes he was the target of warrantless clandestine searches. On Sept. 23, 2005--nearly three months before the Times broke the NSA story--Thomas Nelson wrote to U.S. Attorney Karin Immergut in Oregon that in the previous nine months, "I and others have seen strong indications that my office and my home have been the target of clandestine searches." .... In October, Immergut wrote to Nelson reassuring him that the FBI would not target terrorism suspects' lawyers without warrants and, even then, only "under the most exceptional circumstances," because the government takes attorney-client relationships "extremely seriously." Nelson nevertheless filed requests, under the Freedom of Information Act, with the NSA. The agency's director of policy, Louis Giles, wrote back, saying, "The fact of the existence or nonexistence of responsive records is a currently and properly classified matter." http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/060327/27fbi_3.htm
Bush is McCarthy all over again, he is one president that will go down in history as an utter failure. DD
This is shameful. I hope that we have a congress and President soon, that decide to follow the constitution and truly hold those principles dear to them.
This deserves repeating, DaDakota. I've frequently said that there is a disconnect between Bush's ardent, "He can do no wrong! Don't tell me about that! I don't want to hear it!!" supporters, and those I talk to in the real world outside of this BBS, where I keep running into former Bush supporters, that regret ever voting for the man, and are angry and disgusted with what he and his Administration have been doing. I know you used to be a pretty staunch Bush supporter, DD, if I remember correctly, and how far you've come is a great example of what I'm talking about. Oh, and I agree with you. (but I didn't go to church today! ) Keep D&D Civil.
To be clear, I voted for John Kerry in the last election, and Bush in the one against Gore. I think the country has swung WAY to far to the right, and needs a correction, all things being equal I will vote democrat until we get some more sense in the way things are run. I might vote for McCain though...... DD
I knew you voted for Bush in 2000. That was what I was thinking of. I also thought you supported his Iraq policy for a long time, but you wouldn't be the first person to change their mind about that. McCain is evil!!!!!!!! (I'm just practicing.) Keep D&D Civil.
Bush Says He's Above the Law Again -- Bush Shuns Patriot Act Requirement Washington - When President Bush signed the reauthorization of the USA Patriot Act this month, he included an addendum saying that he did not feel obliged to obey requirements that he inform Congress about how the FBI was using the act's expanded police powers. The bill contained several oversight provisions intended to make sure the FBI did not abuse the special terrorism-related powers to search homes and secretly seize papers. The provisions require Justice Department officials to keep closer track of how often the FBI uses the new powers and in what type of situations. Under the law, the administration would have to provide the information to Congress by certain dates. Bush signed the bill with fanfare at a White House ceremony March 9, calling it "a piece of legislation that's vital to win the war on terror and to protect the American people." But after the reporters and guests had left, the White House quietly issued a "signing statement," an official document in which a president lays out his interpretation of a new law. In the statement, Bush said that he did not consider himself bound to tell Congress how the Patriot Act powers were being used and that, despite the law's requirements, he could withhold the information if he decided that disclosure would "impair foreign relations, national security, the deliberative process of the executive, or the performance of the executive's constitutional duties." http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/032406J.shtml
