please provide proof for your assumptions. where has the bush administration circumvented the constitution?
and FB, get a grip. with a phone number I can find your name, addess, and a whole lot of additiona info right here..
w/o going into each and every one of those, many of them seem redundant, or the issues have been covered elsewhere, or perhpas they're just not interesting to me, such as the diebold thread. i don't post in every single thread, but i wouldn't take that as evidence i'm "avoiding criticising bush."
That is exactly the point. With the numbers of everyone who has called me, or that I have called, they can then get names and addresses. That stuff is none of their business. I am not wanted for anything, nor I have done anything to merit suspicion so they shouldn't be able to do spy in any way shape or form to find out who I am talking to.
btw, deckard, i'm going out of town tomorrow morning and will be gone for a few days. please do not take my inactivity as evidence i love bush less.
the bush administration applied laws congress had enacted, and was upheld by the appelate court. IOW, they acted w/in the law. that the decision was later overturned merely means they were wrong in their interpretation, not that they tried to circumvent the constitutiuon.
The Supreme Court ruled that the Bush Administration's attempts to deny the detainees due process was unconstitutional. Not only did they rule that their attempt to deny them counsel & access to courts was not within the law, but that it was impermissible under the highest law of the land. I don't know how big of a sign that your operating outside the bounds of the constitution one can get than a Supreme Court ruling that your actions are not constitutionally permitted. Honestly, you asked the question - that's the answer. No way for you to spin your way out of that one.
According to my interpretation it is constitutional to round up, and hold indefinitely, all people who continue to serve as apologists for the Bush Administration. It is a national security issue, as their actions are demonstrably harming the military's ability to respond to real rather than fantasy security threats. What? Your's saying my interpretation is r****ded and proposed in bad faith. Okay, whatever. But don't say I tried to circumvent the constitution.
let's say there's a terrorist attack, and some time after the attack, a suspect is identified at a house in piscataway, with a phone number of 201-555.1234. A search of phone records will reveal who was called from that number. however, there would be no way to determin who called that number from another. Now, let's say the NSA had at it's diposal a database of calls covering the entire US. Through datamining, they could determin that, in addition to all the telemarketers and other junk calls to 201.555.1234, for six months prior to the attack, every tuesday at 9PM, someone at 415.555.4321 called the first number, and those calls ceased after the attack. might the governement have an interest in whoever owned the second number? would they have other means of discovering that info?
Yes, the government can subpoena the records it wants. Hell I do it every week and I'm just using weak-ass civil subpoenas. You just fill out a goddamned form. It's not really hard. Which is why it's so inexcusable that the government can't be bothered to do this or comply with FISA retroactively in the case of the illegal wiretaps - it shows the contempt for the law and arrogance that has gotten it into so much trouble over the past 5+ years. By the way 201 is not in Piscataway if this is a trick question, that's a DC area code. Piscataway is probably 973 or one of those jersey codes.
Not only does it show contempt for the law and arrogance -- it shows that that's not the only thing the program's being used for. There is zero reason the admin wouldn't or couldn't get a secret warrant from a secret court to investigate the scenario described by basso. In all the stories and hearings on this, we have yet to read anywhere a justification for continuing this program without the oversight of a secret court devised for the exact situation basso described. Therefore, all we are left to do is theorize about what sorts of spying Bush et al wants to do that they believe FISA would deny them to right to do. Maybe it's spying on journalists they don't like, political enemies, dissenters, we just don't know. Because they flatly refuse to follow the law put in place to allow them to do their job of protecting America while ensuring they do not abuse the power.
I wouldn't dream of it! (I'm glad you post, basso, believe it or not) Thanks, Sam. It's nice to have lawyers around here, Max included. Personally, I think Bush has done far more than that, but with the current GOP Congress, and Bush's grip on the Executive, it's pulling teeth trying to get anything in the way of an investigation. (maybe I should say everything possible is put in the way of an investigation) It's why some of us place a lot of hope in the Fitzgerald probe of the Plame Affair. It seems to be one of the few honest attempts to look into the machinations of the Bush Cabal. I freely admit that I'll be very disappointed if it doesn't lead to further indictments. Keep D&D Civil.
and batman and sam, you're both wrong, since there's no way to obtain these records w/o having access to the initiating phone number. and the only way to get that is through the type of database the government has alledgedly acquired from the carriers.
You're wrong. I can design a document request to get the information you want in about 5 seconds: You are commanded to produce: See schedule A Schedule A Documents Requested: 1. All records reflecting all calls to (number) during (time period) sufficient to reflect (intiting number, duration,) etc. etc etc Easy peasy.
