Bell Curve The Law Talking Guy Raised by Republicans U.S. West
Well, he's kind of had it in for me ever since I accidentally ran over his dog. Actually, replace "accidentally" with "repeatedly," and replace "dog" with "son."

Friday, December 23, 2005

Another Bush Lie: On April 20, 2004 he claimed that Government Would Only Use Wiretaps With Court Orders

A friend of mine sent me an audio link to this big lie by Bush. Here he is in 2004 talking about wiretaps, which I verified from the White House web site:

"Secondly, there are such things as roving wiretaps. Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so. It's important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution."

Outright lies. Bush was, at that time, violating all those guarantees and wiretapping without warrants. Because he doesn't value the Constitution at all!

Find it at:

Bush must be impeached.


Anonymous said...

Later on that same Day, Bush added:

"So I was given a choice: Either trust the word of a madman, hope for the best with somebody who was a tyrant, or take action to defend our country. Given that choice, I will defend America every time."

Prophetic words about our current choice, whether Congress and voters will blindly trust Bush, or take action to defend our country against that tyrant who thinks he is a law unto himself.

Bush must be impeached.


// posted by Anonymous

Anonymous said...

I would add that I question roving wiretaps. The warrents get attached to the person, not the actually commuications device. Does that mean, LTG, that you can listen in on the subject's phone and monitor his e-mail without specifying that in the warrent? does that mean if the guy visits his granny and uses her phone once, then leaves, they can tap her phone now? What are the limits on those?


// posted by USWest

Anonymous said...

Actually, I can answer my own question. The answer is yes, yes, and yes. And for those who want to really dig in and learn about FISA there is an information website  where you can read all about it.

I have been trying to trace the genesis of roving wiretaps (RW) so that I can get behind the news spin a little. We have had Criminal wiretap laws on the books since 1986. It appears that Law enforcement used RWs or multi-point surveillance initially to investigate organized crime. However, by 1998 it had moved away from being device-based to user-based. Under earlier versions of Foreign Intelligence Secrecy Act (FISA), you had to apply to an FIS Court (FISC) for each device used by a suspect. So if he used Granny's phone, then a Blackberry, you had to get a specific order for each. That meant you had to know the identity of you target and the location of his activity. These had to be specified in the request to the court.

Section 206 of the Patriot Act coupled FISA section 105(c)(1)(A), removes most limitations for obtaining RW warrants. All that is required is a “description of the intended target” if the actually identity of the target cannot be provided. The identity, area of operation, or device to be tapped is no longer necessary for application to a FISC. And yes, it applied to phones and computers. The real problem to me is not the power itself so much as the lack of checks to insure that the power isn’t being abused.

Bush went even further my jumping over the FISC and avoiding all check by directly ordering the NSA to spy on Americans making phone calls abroad. These appear to be fine distinctions, but that is where the damage starts, at the margin.


// posted by USWest

Anonymous said...

The real core of this entire issue is WHO is being watched. Bush claims he's only violating the constitutional protections of "terrists." But because he's circumventing both Congress and the Courts, we have only his word on that. Given that White House Story Version 1.0 was that they don't do these things no way no how, I'm not willing to trust. White House Story Version 1.1 is "well, sure we do these secret taps but only of the terrorists and only because FISA warrants take too long." But since Bush has said that he approves his own actions every 45 days and FISA warrants can be gotten 72 hours after the tap is started, I don't believe urgency excuse.

I can only come to one logical conclusion. Bush is avoiding Congressional and Judicial oversight on these investigations because of who the targets are and they aren't people with even "probable cause" level ties to terrorists. In other words, he's spying on regular people who's only reason for attracting attention is their political and/or ethnic identity.

Impeach Bush!!  

// posted by Raised By Republicans