How about criminal prosecution of Dick Cheney? He seems to be the real power in the White Houst.
Justice Department lawyers defied President Bush over secret surveillance—but not for the reasons you might think.
How about criminal prosecution of Dick Cheney? He seems to be the real power in the White Houst.
This article clearly states that Bush directed illegal spying on US citizens. Is or will, Newsweek call for criminal prosecution of Bush?
Mr. Comey may have endorsed Mr. Holder as a strategic move. Lockheed is under investigation by the Justice Department and Mr. Comey is in the thick of it.
http://www.law.com/jsp/ihc/PubArticleIHC.jsp?id=1198058693078
Mr. Comey may have endorsed Mr. Holder as a strategic move. Lockheed is under investigation by the Justice Department and Mr. Comey is in the thick of it.
http://www.law.com/jsp/ihc/PubArticleIHC.jsp?id=1198058693078
Thank God we are getting a Regine change in Washington. It's just coming a lot later than is really heathy for a Great counyrty like the USA.
The program described is intelligent, useful and sane. The objections are technical and legalistic. Unfortunately, congress is incapable of sensible judgment these days, so the programs will only happen illegally. But they will happen, because they must happen.
"The objections are technical and legalistic."
Yeah, that happens in a country bound by the rule of law.
........and the President until this day continues to spin the ramifications of a failed administration to further advance his so-called legacy which will put him somewhere at the bottom with Jimmy Carter. One could say it is a "toss-up"!
"At the end of the day, the dispute was a legal one, not a policy one," says one participant. "It was about upholding the rule of law, not about what was appropriate from a civil-libertarian standpoint or any other standpoint."
In a nation of laws, this is heartening. The law needs to take precedence in situations like this, not ideology.
Speaking of ideology, calling John Yoo and "ultraconservative" seems a bit off-base. No "true" conservative in the American tradition would endorse this level of intrusion. Unfortunately, The Republican party (of which I am a member) and conservatism are no longer synonymous.
I see absolutely nothing wrong with mining the sea of data that is composed of 99% innocent exchanges - so long as key words are used to identify potential terrorism threats (that's easily done). The criterion should be just that - the limitation by court order to mining for only data very specifically so identified. Once the data is revealed to be potentially actionable, a warrent should be sought and one issued.
I believe our Justice personnel are so afraid of law suits themselves that they have lost the ability to reason effectively. This constitutes one of the gravest threats to our way of life. Apropos to that - our court system in general is failing society - going the extra mile to protect miscreants - but sending Ramos and Compean to jail for 11 and 12 years respectively. Is this a great country or what? Shame on us.
If all they're sifting through is the subject headings of emails, that isn't going to give them much of a clue as to what's in the emails. A big waste of government money...but then Bush and his co-workers have never cared anymore about their indiscriminate spending than they have upholding the Constitution.
yes big brother has been watching for years before this crisis and now with the new digital tv waves and every household must convert the eyes and ears will be able to reach anyone anywhere there is a tv on.
What is the name of Tamm's defense fund and how can a person contribute to it????
This illegal survance has already been in place for years! Now it is a crisis because it has been brought to the medias eye? Big Brother is here. Gee I am shocked! Resistance is futile, you will be assimilated.
A very interesting article! BUT: How can I actually know that Newswweek this time has presented an accurate, honest and balanced work of journalism and not just an 'opinion' piece a la staff writer Lisa Miller's cover story in Newsweek?
By checking other sources, of course.
The left-wingers at Newsweak are at it again. The simple fact is that calls or emails to or from a foreign country are not constitutionally protected; therefore, the wiretaps and data collection are NOT illegal. The NSA has been doing this program siince the cold-war, and guess what, we all survived and in fact WON the cold war!
Must be an especially slow day at Newsweak. What, no hidden defects in soldier's body armor to disclose to our enemies this week? Oh yeah, that was the New York Times...same thing!
" The simple fact is that calls or emails to or from a foreign country are not constitutionally protected; therefore, the wiretaps and data collection are NOT illegal. "
Not according to Bush's own Protect America Act. If one side of the phone call is in America, a FISA warrant is required.
You are not even close to understanding the nature of this.
"The left-wingers at Newsweak are at it again. The simple fact is that calls or emails to or from a foreign country are not constitutionally protected"
You are incorrect. If one side of the conversation is in America, a FISA warrant is required.
Actually NJimbo calls to and from a foreign country ARE constitutionally protected when an American citizen is involved that's why the FISA court was established with the authority to issue warrants for this. NJimbo you are correct in that this activity has been going on for decades however they government obtained warrants when doing so. This is not hard for the government to do. The FISA court has only turned down three warrant requests in over 30 years. They aren't very hard to deal with. The Bush Administration insisted on the right to do do so whenever they felt like it for any reason without a warrant. That was the illegal part.
However, we never had a 911 before. President Roosevelt never had a Pearl Harbor before and the things he did to protect us may not pass muster today. But then, FDR was a Democrat so that makes it all OK....Double standard?
So one bad act 50 years ago justifies a myriad of bad acts now?
tmncedar,
You may be right, but you may also be wrong. Can you point to reports suggesting Roosevelt broke laws? Bush was arrogant enough to think that no one would go against him. He should be tried in a military court for his transgresions. Executive privilege shoud come with exuctive responsibility, and executive accountability.
I hated Ashcroft. Turns out he knew his job better than his appointer. Kudos to him and his staff for doing the right thing.
"I hated Ashcroft. Turns out he knew his job better than his appointer. Kudos to him and his staff for doing the right thing."
That's why they canned him and put Alberto "Torture boy" Gonzales in.
I have never seen so much hate for a group of people as in these comments. We live in the undisputed greatest country in the world, yet so many here want to change how it came to be so. The rich get richer because they work hard. If you work hard, you can have a great life too. I have never received work from a poor person. And by the way, the government is the richest entity in the world, yet we look to them to solve the problems they created. This country was founded in rebellion to government, not individuals.
http://www.usefulopinions.blogspot.com
"I have never seen so much hate for a group of people as in these comments. We live in the undisputed greatest country in the world"
You USED to live in the undisputed greatest country in the world. Then you pissed it all away in fear, and now you're just another nation that had a chance to play the empire game.
Dear Newsweek:
This is marginally interesting. What IS interesting to me is: Why did the MSM roll over and play dead while all of this was happening? You guys wasted more column inches on a wayward cigar and a semen-stained dress than you did on the entire whack job Bush and Cheney did on the constitution. Where were the stories about the "at an undisclosed site" Dick? Or the idiot legal opinions from Yoo, Gonzales, et al. You guys drank the Kool-Aid and abdicated your responsibility to the American people. There is a circle in hell for journalists who fail to speak truth to power: somewhere between the Simonists and the Pederasts.
"There is a circle in hell for journalists who fail to speak truth to power: somewhere between the Simonists and the Pederasts."
Preach on!
FREEDOM OF SPEECH = FREEDOM OF PRESS = CITIZEN AWARENESS.
The Ideas of OUR CONSTITUTION.
Enter comments if any for reporting abuse
Discuss