American Big Man VI: The One Party State

Today the NY Times has reported that G.O.P. Senators Say Accord Is Set on Wiretapping


Ok. See anything wrong here? Anything?
Ok. Let me clue you in. HOw does the GOP or a group of Republican Senators get to sit down and re-write law in a so called representative democracy of laws?
Please, someone explain this one to me.

Moving to tamp down Democratic calls for an investigation of the administration's domestic eavesdropping program, Republicans on the Senate Intelligence Committee said Tuesday that they had reached agreement with the White House on proposed bills to impose new oversight but allow wiretapping without warrants for up to 45 days.

Ok. You get caught breaking the law. No one makes an arrest. there is no investigation. Instead we "admit no fault" and propose legislation to "fix" the law.

Please, someone explain this one to me.

"We are reasserting Congressional responsibility and oversight," Ms. Snowe said.

The proposed legislation would create a seven-member "terrorist surveillance subcommittee" and require the administration to give it full access to the details of the program's operations.

Ms. Snowe said the panel would start work on Wednesday, and called it "the beginning, not the end of the process."

Please, someone explain to me how not holding the administration to account for breaking the law is "reasserting Congressional responsibility."

Please, someone explain that one to me.

The agreement would reinforce the authority of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which was created in 1978 to issue special warrants for spying but was sidestepped by the administration. The measure would require the administration to seek a warrant from the court whenever possible.

If the administration elects not to do so after 45 days, the attorney general must certify that the surveillance is necessary to protect the country and explain to the subcommittee why the administration has not sought a warrant. The attorney general would be required to give an update to the subcommittee every 45 days.



Please, someone explain to me how this one works. Where in the constitution does it say that warrants are optional? Where exactly does Title III say warrants are optional:? Where in FISA, which these people say they are "reinforcing" say that it is optional? What the hell is "whenever possible?" What kind of non-specific law is this?
Please, someone explain that one to me.

The proposed bill would allow the president to authorize wiretapping without seeking a warrant for up to 45 days if the communication under surveillance involved someone suspected of being a member of or a collaborator with a specified list of terrorist groups and if at least one party to the conversation was outside the United States.



Please someone explain to me how someone is determined to be a "member of" or a "collaborator with" a specified list of terrorist groups? Someone explain to me how then that person , having not been convicted of a damn thing can now have their Fourth Amendment "rights" revoked?

This so called proposal basically allows the government to arbitrarily place anyone on a "terrorist list" and then having done that surveil their conversations, in addition to the fact that if one is "suspected" of being a terrorist collaborator or terrorist, you can already be taken odd the streets and held in detention without access to lawyers, without knowing why you are in custody and without knowing how long you will be in custody.


I wont even discuss the Democrats here. That group is not worth the effort it would take to discuss their complete lack of action on this matter.

Technorati Tags: politics, US Constitution