I find it rather amusing that the main "source" for the story detailed in Newsmax is;

Echelon expert Mike Frost, who spent 20 years as a spy for the Canadian equivalent of the National Security Agency, told "60 Minutes" that the agency was monitoring "everything from data transfers to cell phones to portable phones to baby monitors to ATMs."

Seriously? A Canadian spy? And he has all the inside info? O....k

Great post.

Many American presidents have abused their authority and have issued democracy-destroying executive orders.

Presidents have routinely made the habit of consolidating self-declared power to the executive branch.

Here's the list which begins with Hoover and ends with Bush the 43rd. JFK was one of the first to sign in dictatorial powers following WWII with Nixon consolidating them, Carter Amending them, and Clinton cementing them.

http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/disposition.html

If you are going to post the FISA act you should probably post a bit more instead of picking the parts that fit your assertions. You have included this part;

1-101. Pursuant to Section 102(a)(1) of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1802(a)), the Attorney General is authorized to approve electronic surveillance to acquire foreign intelligence information without a court order, but only if the Attorney General makes the certifications required by that Section.

But you conveniently left out the following details;

Emergency situations are addressed in 50 U.S.C. § 1805(f).39 Notwithstanding
other provisions of this subchapter, if the Attorney General reasonably determines
that an emergency situation exists with respect to the employment of electronic
surveillance to obtain foreign intelligence information before an order authorizing
such surveillance can with due diligence be obtained and that the factual basis for
issuance of an order under this subchapter to approve such surveillance exists, he
may authorize electronic surveillance if specified steps are taken. At the time of the
Attorney General’s emergency authorization, he or his designee must inform an FISC
judge that the decision to employ emergency electronic surveillance has been made.
An application for a court order under Section 1804 must be made to that judge as
soon as practicable, but not more than 72 hours after the Attorney General authorizes
such surveillance. If the Attorney General authorizes emergency electronic
surveillance, he must require compliance with the minimization procedures required
for the issuance of a judicial order under this subchapter. Absent a judicial order
approving the emergency electronic surveillance, the surveillance must terminate
when the information sought is obtained, when the application for the order is denied,
or after 72 hours from the time of the Attorney General’s authorization, whichever
is earliest.40 If no judicial order approving the surveillance is issued, the information
garnered may not be received in evidence or otherwise disclosed in any court.

Basically they are only authorized to perform these acts without a warrant for 72 hours.

When you have no real argument, attack Clinton!

Nobody is attacking Clinton. But as usual nobody addresses the fact that democratic Presidents did this "spying" also.

It's funny, even when Clinton is used as just an example, they think it's an attack. ;~D

It's no so much an attack as a logical conundrum.

If Clinton and Bush adopt the same policies and tactics, then either Bush is right or Clinton is wrong.

Then comes the fun part!

Nobody is attacking Clinton. But as usual nobody addresses the fact that democratic Presidents did this "spying" also.

They cannot mount a decent defense! They would just shoot themselves! You caught a couple of trolls! Well done!

But as usual nobody addresses the fact that democratic Presidents did this "spying" also.

Ok, I'll address your baseless claim that Clinton did the same thing. The "Echelon" program that you refer to was nto the same thing. George Tenet testified before Congress that before any US person's conversations were targeted they obtianed FISA warrants for them.

So yes Bush and Clinton did the same thing. The difference is that the Clinton administration obtained warrants and Bush's did not. That's a pretty major difference don't you think?

From Tenet's testimony on 4/12/2000;

I’m here today to discuss specific issues about and allegations regarding Signals Intelligence activities and the so-called Echelon Program of the National Security Agency…

There is a rigorous regime of checks and balances which we, the Central Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency and the FBI scrupulously adhere to whenever conversations of U.S. persons are involved, whether directly or indirectly. We do not collect against U.S. persons unless they are agents of a foreign power as that term is defined in the law. We do not target their conversations for collection in the United States unless a FISA warrant has been obtained from the FISA court by the Justice Department.

And here is more information regarding Carter's executive order;

1-101. Pursuant to Section 102(a)(1) of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1802(a)), the Attorney General is authorized to approve electronic surveillance to acquire foreign intelligence information without a court order, but only if the Attorney General makes the certifications required by that Section.

What the Attorney General has to certify under that section is that the surveillance will not contain “the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party.” So again, no U.S. persons are involved.

Link

So how is it exactly that you assert that "democrats get away with these things"?

Many American presidents have abused their authority and have issued democracy-destroying executive orders.

So that makes it right!

Basically they are only authorized to perform these acts without a warrant for 72 hours.

Still, they must document cause; otherwise they can shoot from the hip for 72hrs without accountability.

Basically they are only authorized to perform these acts without a warrant for 72 hours. Still, they must document cause; otherwise they can shoot from the hip for 72hrs without accountability.

Actually if you take the time to read thru FISA, he doesn't have to document a thing unless it goes beyond 72 hours. After that though, he god-damned "better" have a warrent "before" he continues!

drmiler

Bush NEVER got a warrent. He has also said he plans to continue violating the law.

I have serious issues of wiretaps and other methods of "spying" without judicial oversight regardless of who the President is. We have certain protections from the government for a very good reason, and it seems as of the past few decades (really since the start of the Cold War) many of those protections have been tossed to the side in the name of "The Nation".

The 72hr rule is a bad loophole to begin with, one I'd like to see closed period. Clinton abused it and was wrong for it, now Bush is abusing it too and is just as wrong.

The problem right now is that you can toss up any violation of the law when it comes to law enforcement and security and claim that it's to fight terrorism, can claim that it's for our national security, and that's the end of it. We have some very convenient explanations that completely give the government a "Get Out of Jail Free" card when it comes to just about anything right now. And to question those actions or demand accountability quickly gets you labled a "Terrorist Sympathizer" or Un-American.