 Quote: |
Originally Posted by sgtdmski Assuming Bush is breaking the law, I would be more than happy to lead the charge for his impeachment. However, you seem to fail to realize it is not been shown that he is breaking the law. Your assuming he is, but time and again the Court has given the President broad authority when it comes to national security, FDR ring a bell??
dmk | Didn't we already have a discussion regarding what the law EXPLICITLY said on this matter?
The quoted section specifies that the law can be used to justify wire-tapping without a warrant IF and ONLY IF "there is no substantial likelihood that the surveillance will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party".
In other words, that law cannot be used to justify tapping a conversation where one of the parties is a U.S. "person".
If BOTH the participants were NON-U.S. persons, that would be okay. We could use that law, previously discussed, to wire-tap the conversation without a warrant.
The VERY LAW he tries to use to justify his wire-tapping of U.S. citizens EXPLICITLY SAYS it cannot be used to justify wire-tapping of U.S. citizens.
How is this not crystal clear that he is breaking the law?
There is a specific recourse that MUST be taken for a LEGAL wire-tapping of a phone conversation where one of the participants is a U.S. person.
It starts with a "W", which he should maybe use as a mnemonic.
It ends with a "arrant"...
He needs to get one... |