'What's the big deal? Everybody does it'
This should not surprise anyone: At least two other recent presidents have issued executive orders authorizing illegal wiretaps against U.S. citizens.
Drudge reports:
"Clinton, Feb. 9, 1995: 'The Attorney General is authorized to approve physical searches, without a court order.' ...
"Washington Post, July 15, 1994: Extend not only to searches of the homes of U.S. citizens but also -- in the delicate words of a Justice Department official -- to 'places where you wouldn't find or would be unlikely to find information involving a U.S. citizen ... would allow the government to use classified electronic surveillance techniques, such as infrared sensors to observe people inside their homes, without a court order.' ...
"Jimmy Carter signed executive order on May 23, 1979: 'Attorney General is authorized to approve electronic surveillance to acquire foreign intelligence information without a court order.'"
Obviously these are being dredged up to prove George W. Bush is doing nothing that previous presidents haven't done, so what's the big deal? The big deal, of course, is that just because previous presidents jumped off the constitutional cliff doesn't mean it was OK.
This is simply further proof that the assault on our liberties is a bipartisan cooperative effort, and replacing one party's enemies of freedom with the other's will not save the republic.
Drudge reports:
"Clinton, Feb. 9, 1995: 'The Attorney General is authorized to approve physical searches, without a court order.' ...
"Washington Post, July 15, 1994: Extend not only to searches of the homes of U.S. citizens but also -- in the delicate words of a Justice Department official -- to 'places where you wouldn't find or would be unlikely to find information involving a U.S. citizen ... would allow the government to use classified electronic surveillance techniques, such as infrared sensors to observe people inside their homes, without a court order.' ...
"Jimmy Carter signed executive order on May 23, 1979: 'Attorney General is authorized to approve electronic surveillance to acquire foreign intelligence information without a court order.'"
Obviously these are being dredged up to prove George W. Bush is doing nothing that previous presidents haven't done, so what's the big deal? The big deal, of course, is that just because previous presidents jumped off the constitutional cliff doesn't mean it was OK.
This is simply further proof that the assault on our liberties is a bipartisan cooperative effort, and replacing one party's enemies of freedom with the other's will not save the republic.
posted by B.W. Richardson at
8:28 AM
5 Comments:
I figured out some time ago that anything put out by Drudge wants fact checking. Tbogg has a post that clarifies that the orders by Carter and Clinton did not, in fact, pertain to US citizens or anyone in the US.
I'm sure the presidents always follow the laws they sign and probably even follow the other laws of the land. And of course none would use their power and influence to have the IRS do anything illegal against US citizens..
"the orders by Carter and Clinton did not, in fact, pertain to US citizens or anyone in the US."
If you read the Constitution, you'll find nothing that says the rights guaranteed by our courts only apply to U.S. citizens. Carter and Clinton issued orders intended to circumvent our legal system and the Constitution, period. Bush is more brazen about it, but that doesn't make the other sh!t smell sweet.
Is the question, prior to Bush did the feds spy on U.S citizens with the knowledge and consent of former presidents? If that is the question the answer is, yes. Does anyone remember Echelon? What are the functions of the Bank Secrecy Act and finCEN? Has anyone read the USPS spying policies. We haven't turned into a totalitarian police state overnight or after 9/11. It has been a gradual and incremental journey - the only way it could be accomplished - losing our freedoms, liberties, and rights a painless little at a time . To say we haven't been spyed on for years and years and years can only be attributed to one of two things, you are either a statist apologist or you are blinder than my one-eyed potato.
My point is not that the gummint didn't spy on us before, but that Matt Drudge is an unreliable source.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home