The saddest bit of all about the criminal acts by Bush

Walt Starr

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Dec-17-05 09:35 PM
Original message

The saddest bit of all about the criminal acts by Bush

He had a LEGAL way to get authority to do the wire taps.

We can only assume that the wire taps were performed upon his political enemies and had nothing to do with National Security because the mechanism to do this legally and within the bounds of the Constitution have existed for nearly three decades!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

BuyingThyme

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Dec-17-05 09:37 PM
Response to Original message

1. Yep.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Name removed

(0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Dec-17-05 09:40 PM
Response to Reply #1

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

StClone

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Dec-17-05 09:48 PM
Response to Reply #3

7. If he had warrant

Yes. But willy nilly on any and all using 9/11 as a springboard is no way to adhere to Constitutional thinking.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

doublethink

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Dec-17-05 09:51 PM
Response to Reply #3

9. I don't speak for the OP ...... but yes ......

there is a legal way and an illegal way to do this. Bush chose the later .. illegal way to do this. Start here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Act and be sure to read through all the links too. Peace. :)

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Walt Starr

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Dec-17-05 10:00 PM
Response to Reply #9

10. Bingo

There are legal provisions for how to conduct secret wire taps, and this asshole chose not to follow th law.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

doublethink

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Dec-17-05 10:36 PM
Response to Reply #10

14. Which begs the question ............

Why circumvent 'The United States Constitution' and choose an illegal way of going about this? First thing that comes to my mind is the Nixon 'Enemy's List' back in the day. Maybe it's not all that easy to obtain certain warrants against your political enemy's as it would be actual terrorists under investigation? I du know, hopefully time will tell. Peace. :)

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Metta

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Dec-17-05 09:39 PM
Response to Original message

2. His arrogance is only exceeded by his ignorance.

Truth out.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

StClone

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Dec-17-05 09:51 PM
Response to Reply #2

8. LOL Bush is the terroist

Not an Osamma level genius but a blundering boob lliving in a bubble to the detriment of all.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mike_c

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Dec-17-05 09:44 PM
Response to Original message

4. not without a court order, or without notifying congress...

...in every individual case. I'm not a lawyer, but DUer understandinglife has posted links to the relevent sections of U.S. code (currently near the top of the Greatest Page). It looks pretty clear to me-- you should check that thread out if you haven't already. I think that's the crux of this-- there is no way to legally spy on American citizens and to keep it secret. That's what they really wanted-- the secrecy, the abuse of power.

"Sunlight is the best disinfectant." --US Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Walt Starr

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Dec-17-05 09:47 PM
Response to Reply #4

5. Yes, that's the LEGAL way...

and it's all kept SECRET.

The point is, he didn't do that!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mrcheerful

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Dec-17-05 09:48 PM
Response to Original message

6. Put it into context

this was exactually the same thing that got Nixon to resign. How is spying on Mike Moore keeping america safe? From what I read that was just one of the many Bushco was protecting america from.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mike_c

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Dec-17-05 10:00 PM
Response to Reply #6

11. can you provide a link about that...?

Edited on Sat Dec-17-05 10:01 PM by mike_c

Michael Moore?

on edit-- let's not perpetuate this unless it can be substantiated!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mrcheerful

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Dec-17-05 10:03 PM
Response to Reply #11

12. I read it on either yahoo or MSN this morning around 10am,

to be honest I haven't seen anything else on it since.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mike_c

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Dec-17-05 10:24 PM
Response to Reply #12

13. I think this might trace back to a CHB article....

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_7625.shtml

If so, I'd be a bit leery of it. It might very well be true, and it certainly SOUNDS like the Bush WH, but CHB is not a very reliable source nonetheless.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mrcheerful

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Dec-17-05 10:55 PM
Response to Reply #13

15. Could be, as what CHB said was pretty much what

I read on either MSN or yahoo this morning. Hey even the national inquirer gets something right once in awhile lol.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Sun May 05th 2024, 02:25 PM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.