This goes right along with Krugman's column today which says that the Justice department indictments were against 298 Democrats out of some 375 indictments being sought in the 6 years Bush has had the administration.
So we've had the equivalent of the Saturday Night Massacre, FBI lawlessness and a President run amok. When do we get impeachment?
& By way of Greenwald: What did you expect. Bush said as much when he wrote the signing statement when he signed the re-authorization of the Patriot Act.
Abu Al is on his way out the door.
This sounds terrible and no, I am not surprised either. However, I'm not getting your"about a quarter of these cases" reference.How'dyu
figure?
CNN this morning discussion an interview with Louis Farakkan where the interviewer is setting up the segment and says that Farrakkan states that Bush should be impeached for lying to the American people...and Rick Sanchez says innocently, and which lie is this, taking us to war?? Only in Bush world would there be so many lies to choose from.
Posted by mainsailset at March 9, 2007 08:53 AMUS Constitution
Amendment IV - Search and Seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Posted by Don Bacon at March 9, 2007 09:39 AMWell Don, don't ya know, we don't need no stinking Constitution. "It's just a piece of paper."
Posted by Judith at March 9, 2007 09:50 AMDon don't mention radical things like Amendment IV. Scalia said there is no right to privacy in the Constitution.
Posted by JohnT at March 9, 2007 10:07 AMOf course I'm not sure whether Scalia has ever read and understood the Constitution.
Posted by JohnT at March 9, 2007 10:12 AMIn other words, the Patriot Act is itself unconstitutional. It clearly says warrants and not national security letters. We need strict constitutionalists on the Supreme Court, not president-picking sycophants.
JohnT: There is in fact no express right to privacy in the Constitution, and also no right to have an abortion (as Chief Justice Roberts pointed out), breathe air, piss in a pot or eat burritos. So what? The USA was formed under the principles of the Declaration of Independence: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator [not the government!!] with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" . Our freedom was codified in the Constitution: . . ."secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity . . .".
There are some rights stipulated in the Constitution--like freedom from arbitrary search and seizure--but these rights do not include all of our basic rights "endowed by their Creator" and this is clearly stipulated in the Ninth Amendment to the Constitution: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
Sorry, guys, I got carried away there.
Don I guess you and Scalia are right. I must have misinterpreted what it says. All these years I thought I had these rights.
Posted by JohnT at March 9, 2007 10:59 AM...but these rights do not include all of our basic rights "endowed by their Creator"
I'm sure bu$h will be ready to declare himself, "I'm The Creator"!
Posted by Seven of Six at March 9, 2007 11:34 AMNo accountability, no incentive to get it right. Those caught up in the FBI net, via Bush's top down disregard for the law; ie, will now have a get out of jail free card. It really may not matter if this is intentional, sloppy or plain stupid, the end result is this group once again protects us with words only and delivers vulnerability.
Posted by mainsailset at March 9, 2007 11:46 AMBush may not be the Creator, but he gets his foreign policy directly from Him.
Posted by TIKI AL at March 9, 2007 12:04 PMJohnT: Please read my post again. You do have natural rights even though they are not stipulated in the Constitution. If you give me Scalia's quote I can comment on it.
Generally what I'm saying is that the US government, which was supposedly formed to protect our liberties, is instead limiting them. That extends to the Patriot Act itself, passed with overwhelming support on both sides of the aisle, which is obviously unconstitutional. The allowance for national security letters in lieu of constitutionally-required warrants has been an invitation for government malfeasance and so the correct solution is not to refine the Patriot Act but to abolish it.
18 USC § 1016. Acknowledgment of appearance or oath
PART I - CRIMES
Whoever, being an officer authorized to administer oaths or to take and certify acknowledgments, knowingly makes any false acknowledgment, certificate, or statement concerning the appearance before him or the taking of an oath or affirmation by any person with respect to any proposal, contract, bond, undertaking, or other matter submitted to, made with, or taken on behalf of the United States or any department or agency thereof, concerning which an oath or affirmation is required by law or lawful regulation, or with respect to the financial standing of any principal, surety, or other party to any such proposal, contract, bond, undertaking, or other instrument, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.
(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 753; Pub. L. 103-322, title XXXIII, Sec. 330016(1)(I), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)
The FBI has before it a large group of its agents who have violated this statute.
The members of the FBI and the US attorneys and their assistants all have the obligation to arrest and to detain and to prosecute those who break the laws of the US.
When do the arrests begin?
Posted by Nobody at March 9, 2007 01:45 PMOf course it was.
We knew this all along. We wrote letters, we spoke to our representatives, we marched in the streets saying exactly this.
All that happened is that we were called "anti-american," "unpatriotic," and lunatics.
Posted by Simp at March 9, 2007 01:49 PMAnother statute violated"
18 USC § 1018. Official certificates or writings
PART I - CRIMES
Whoever, being a public officer or other person authorized by any law of the United States to make or give a certificate or other writing, knowingly makes and delivers as true such a certificate or writing, containing any statement which he knows to be false, in a case where the punishment thereof is not elsewhere expressly provided by law, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 753; Pub. L. 103-322, title XXXIII, Sec. 330016(1)(G), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)
When will the arrests begin?
Posted by Nobody at March 9, 2007 01:56 PMThe names and offices of the FBI officials who signed the fraudulent exigent letters should be public and each one should be arrested,tried, and if guilty, pusnished
Posted by Nobody at March 9, 2007 02:05 PMGee, boy assholes playing cowboys and indians are going to rape me in the name of saving me? I'm shocked, shocked.
Posted by Sharkbabe at March 9, 2007 06:33 PMNothing we can't fix with a couple "benchmarks!"
Here, have a dozen! All better now?
Posted by Kagro X at March 9, 2007 07:57 PMare they going to tell those persons who were actually a victim of this illegal activity. And if all things hold true, this is just the tip of the iceberg.
Posted by americanforliberty at March 9, 2007 08:19 PMOf course none of us are surprised. It's one of the reasons we were against the Patriot Act. We all knew where it would lead. We always know what they are doing, but it's the waiting for the information to get into the media that is frustrating.
Posted by Judith at March 10, 2007 06:09 AM