In the last few years the presiding judge of the secret surveillance court was told on two separate occasions that information that had been obtained via the “President’s” domestic eavesdropping program “may have been” used inappropriately in order to get additional wiretap’s from the court, this according to a special article in the Washington Post (or WaPo for those of you in the know)
Naturally, these disclosures have pissed-off U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly (who is the current presiding judge of the FISA court that issues the aforementioned wiretapping warrants)
Seems Judge Kollar-Kotelly has, in the past, expressed some doubts as to whether or not the warrant-less monitoring ordered by BushCo was legal. (It should also be noted that her predecessor as presiding judge, Royce C. Lamberth, also expressed severe reservations about the legality of the program)
Now, you would think that if the judge(s) that presides over the FISA court is herself unsure if the wiretapping is illegal or not, that the Bush(Whacked) administration would get a clue… not so… at least not so as long as Commander Cuckoo-Bananas is in charge.
Read the complete article and decide for yourself.
More to come…
Thursday, February 09, 2006
A Short Post about Secret Courts and FISA Judges
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
4 comments:
Do you know anything about the law? They don't issue warrants without cause so there was cause for the warrants in the first place. Their questions are regarding the way the proof of cause was obtained, which according to one of your own Demodopes yesterday sounded necessary and right.
If you haven't learned how to read, the main complaint Congress has had is the fact they haven't been informed as to what was going on. Now he's informing them and their tune is changing so now some other idiot has to step up and say something.
It all boils down to this. Would you rather Bush be able to stop the next planned attack or not? Is your ignorance and self-grandisement more important than American lives? It sure seems that is the case with most of you Demodopes but I would rather have my family and friends safe than worry about the rights of the terrorists and their family and friends.
When the conservatives can't grasp the fundementals of a democracy why is it they always jump right into an inane argument like 'wiretaps save lives'?
No where in any of the posts have Kemp or Scott talked or even hinted at the anything close to your comment of "the rights of terrorists"!
Get a clue, the administration had info on terrorist group activities prior to 9/11 but couldn't get their heads out of their asses long enough to actually do something to prevent the attacks from happening in the first place.
Or maybe they did, but decided not to take action in order to force the public to get behind sending troops to the middle east in support of the presidents personal desire to flex his military muscle.
We are rapidly close to having lost as many american lives in the middle east since 2003 as we did in the 9/11 attacks. What about those lost American lives?
We should bring back the safety and security of the pre-9/11 days. I would not want to trample on the rights of an Al Quada operative just to save a few American civilian lives
Another conservative 'lemming' rant. Show me where anyone has said anything in thier opposition to the NSA wiretaps about protecting the rights of anyone connected with al quada. Get a clue....
Post a Comment