Skip to content. Share this: Tweet. Email Print. Like this: Like Loading My source spoke to British agents who confirmed that their colleagues had spied on Trump. Reporters Once Challenged the Spy State. The U. Napolitano Posted on March 18, Leave a comment.
Hero or Traitor? Now Snowden hides from American authorities. Unlike many websites, Straight Line Logic does not solicit donations. If you're going to lay out your hard-earned money, you should get something in exchange. If you like the site and want to support it, buy The Golden Pinnacle or The Gordian Knot, either as a book or download.
The links are on the right-hand side of the page, in the Blogroll section. You'll be supporting the site, and getting a great book and hours of enjoyable reading. Search for:. Blog at WordPress. Follow Following. Sign me up. Already have a WordPress. Log in now. Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
The Justice Department argued that the AUMF implied the power of the president to conduct electronic surveillance in ways he judged necessary to defend the nation. The Justice Department further asserted that the NSA surveillance program was a "fundamental incident of waging war" a major part of warfare. Conducting intelligence operations during wartime, Justice Department attorneys stressed, are well within the "inherent authority" of the president as commander-in-chief of the armed forces.
Thus, President Bush broke no law, they said. Justice Department lawyers also denied that the NSA warrantless wiretap program violated Fourth Amendment privacy rights of innocent Americans. The lawyers listed several safeguards in the program to prevent constitutional violations:. NSA and Justice Department attorneys continually monitor the operation of the program for compliance with the Constitution.
In "A letter to Congress," the scholars pointed out that it had made the secret FISA court the "exclusive means" for conducting electronic surveillance on citizens within the United States in foreign intelligence cases. First, the scholars argued that when Congress passed the FISA law, it explicitly declared warrantless wiretapping of citizens limited to only the first 15 days of war. The scholars also asserted that Congress would have had to repeal the "exclusive means" provision of FISA to empower the president to order warrantless wiretaps on citizens.
But most in Congress did not favor granting this power to the president in the deliberations leading up to the AUMF. The scholars pointed out that the president ordered warrantless wiretaps anyway and thus violated the FISA law.
The scholars responded to the argument that the president, as commander-in-chief of the military, may order any electronic surveillance as a "fundamental incident of waging war.
It does not include "unchecked warrantless domestic spying. Finally, the constitutional law scholars contended that the NSA warrantless wiretap program threatened fundamental protections in the U. When the need to eavesdrop is immediate, NSA may go ahead and conduct wiretaps without a warrant for up to three days. The government argued that the court should throw the cases out because of the "state secrets" rule.
In , the U. Supreme Court decided that courts could bar cases when there was a "reasonable danger" that evidence during the trial would expose national security matters. In August , a federal district judge ruled that state secrets were not at stake because there had been so much public discussion of the NSA warrantless wiretap program. Then, the federal judge ruled that the NSA program of electronic surveillance without warrants was unconstitutional. Second, the same telecommunications companies also allowed the NSA to install sophisticated communications surveillance equipment in secret rooms at key telecommunications facilities around the country.
This equipment gave the NSA unfettered access to large streams of domestic and international communications in real time—what amounted to at least 1. The NSA could then data mine and analyze this traffic for suspicious key words, patterns and connections. Again, all of this was done without a warrant in violation of federal law and the Constitution. But how did the government accomplish this task and how do we know?
It works like this: when you send an email or otherwise use the internet, the data travels from your computer, through telecommunication companies' wires and fiber optics networks, to your intended recipient. The bill still allowed for the circumventing of FISA. Democrats accuse the administration of attempting to justify their past actions violating citizens' civil liberties.
The bill never passes the Senate. November 7 Midterm Elections The entire House of Representatives and one-third of the Senate face election, amidst growing concerns over the Iraq war and other scandals. The Democrats gain control of both legislative chambers and promise sweeping reforms and oversight of all government activities.
This document is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License, which means that you can copy and modify it as long as the entire work including additions remains under this license. Facebook Twitter Reddit Email Print. However, an exception is created allowing the President to use warrantless wiretapping to respond to national security issues.
The Committee's final report condemns these abuses as excessive, undemocratic, and unconstitutional. The report also suggests that Congress create rules limiting intelligence gathering tactics.
0コメント