Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

Carter did it, Clinton did it..........

Dec 20, 2005 10:22AM PST

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
Horrors!
Dec 20, 2005 11:37AM PST

Can we impeach them both retroactively?

- Collapse -
I'd get an F from my Poli Sci prof
Dec 20, 2005 12:43PM PST

for handing in such a "scholarly" piece of work... Bush's Press Sec explained today that last year when Bush stated that no wiretaps would be done without a court order (said this on camera no less) he was refering to taps done under the auspices of the Patriot Act and the NSA taps are completely different which makes it OK.

Since good old Scott put that in perspective for us, do you think you or Mr Drudge could be a little more specific on how these presidents did their dirty little deeds ?

grim

- Collapse -
(NT) (NT) It is hitting the news. It's true.
Dec 20, 2005 1:01PM PST
- Collapse -
(NT) (NT) So did Nixon. And your point is?
Dec 20, 2005 10:51PM PST
- Collapse -
(NT) (NT) its allowed under the wars act
Dec 20, 2005 10:54PM PST
- Collapse -
There's nothing new about it the activities under President
Dec 20, 2005 11:04PM PST

Bush. It's an established procedure which has been used for a long time.

- Collapse -
I'm unclear. That citizenship test that we were all
Dec 24, 2005 9:00AM PST

encouraged to try had a question on who has the right to declare war. The correct answer was the Congress, not the President. When did Congress declare war on Afghanistan, or Iraq, both of which conflicts we have won by the way, and against which nation or national leader are we fighting this war? Osama bin Laden is not a leader of anything but an ad hoc bunch of terrorists. Same for Al Zarqawi.

There is no war. There has not even been a declaration of war on terrorism by Congress. There are no war powers for the President and all of this behavior is illegal however predictable given Bush's absence of character or common sense. Now as it happens I have no problem with the NSA examining international communications without a specific warrant. I thought that was essentially its mandate. But Bush arrogating to himself the powers of a wartime president (debatable during the Viet Nam War where there was a nation we were fighting with its very own leader too, but far more justified because it was at least closer to being a war) is delusionary behavior.

The established procedures you talk about are derived specifically from a declaration of war by the US Congress. Soon as you get one, Bush's subsequent actions will be legal but not the ones he's been engaging in for the last 4 years, they're impeachable offences if the Congress had any spine or self respect.

Rob

- Collapse -
According to NPR yesterday
Dec 24, 2005 1:59AM PST

the Secret Court that is in place to review all wiretaps of this sort and the present laws that cover the issue were put in place 27 years ago.

The wire taps Per Se... are not illegal to perform immediately as the need arises as long as it is reviewed with the secret court in a timely manner.

Other interesting points that were raised in the story was the fact that the administration tried to amend the war powers act days after it was passed to cover such issues and that further reviews of how to approach congress re: this matter have been done as recently as USAG gonzalez attaining his post. This raises the question that if Bush (et al) really believed he was within his legal rights to do these taps then why has further legislative proposals been under consideration as recently as this past year?

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5068151

grim