--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote: > > > > > > In a message dated 8/19/06 6:18:51 P.M. Central Daylight Time, > > sparaig@ writes: > > > > Of curse, none of these polls quite asks about the real issue: should the > > president be > > allowed to ignore the law? > > > > The law states that the law enforcement types most get a warrant to monitor > > calls of the > > relevant kind within 48 hours AFTER the monitoring starts, IIRC. > > > > The President never bothered to have his people do this. IN fact, since it > > is standard > > procedure for law enforcement agents to follow the law unless told > > otherwise, someone > > must have ordered these agents NOT to follow the law. > > > > > > > > As I have now said in a couple of other posts, the issue as you state also > > involves presidential powers in a time of war when national security is > > involved. Presidential authority and powers can and has changed numerous times > > through out our history during wars. > > > > Show me the Constitutional basis for this "change in powers."
The administration argues that the Iraq war resolution allows Bush to take whatever measures he thinks are necessary. According to Gonzales: "Now, we do not have to decide whether, when we're at war and there is a vital need for the terrorist surveillance program, FISA unconstitutionally encroaches or places an unconstitutional constraint upon the President's Article II powers. We can avoid that tough question because Congress gave the President the force resolution [i.e., to use force against Iraq], and that statute removes any possible tension between what Congress said in 1978 in FISA and the President's constitutional authority today." Yes, by all means, let's try to find a way to avoid "tough questions" over whether an action is constitutional or not. (I said in an earlier post that FISA was passed in 1972; it was actually 1978.) Notice that Gonzales refers to warrantless wiretapping here as "the terrorist surveillance program," as if the FISA law already in place didn't provide for a perfectly good terrorist surveillance program that doesn't "encroach upon" the ability to wiretap terrorist suspects in the slightest. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
