bush/cheney used cia to spy on american critics of the war

[Nic_Driver]

For the record, most probably don't even know about this.

Federal Judge Finds N.S.A. Wiretaps Were Illegal - NYTimes.com

Federal Judge Finds N.S.A. Wiretaps Were Illegal

The ruling delivered a blow to the Bush administration’s claims that its surveillance program, which Mr. Bush secretly authorized shortly after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, was lawful.

There's a court ruling against the Bush administration for an unlawful surveillance program that targeted Americans on American soil.

There is no way to spin this away neo-cons, sorry, it is a fact on record and it sets precedent for future Presidents. The fact that no one was held to account for this criminal behavior also sets a precedent but it set a very dangerous one.

"... rejecting the Obama administration’s effort to keep shrouded in secrecy one of the most disputed counterterrorism policies..."

Once Obama was elected, the program was his. Obama fought to keep it. He wasted to keep spying on Americans.

Yet you give him a free pass. Gasp.

The conviction is against the Bush administration, not the Obama administration, and you actually apologize for the criminals...gasp...anti-American much?



And I didn't give Obama a pass, I listed his choice not to pursue criminal charges against the Bush administration as one of the things that disappointed me about Obama in a different thread.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Guess what? Your Government is still doing this. It's not just Bush/Cheney. The Patriot Act allows many things all Americans should be appalled over. Let me know when the Hopey Changey One and the Democrats get rid of the Patriot Act like they promised. So far nothing has changed. You're still being spied on 24/7. All you Hopey Changey/Democrat supporters should be just as angry today as you were back when your BOOOOOOOSH Boogeyman was in there. Nothing has changed.

 

[Nic_Driver]

The point you and others keep missing is THERE IS A CONVICTION ON RECORD AGAINST BUSH!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[daveman]

For the record, most probably don't even know about this.

Federal Judge Finds N.S.A. Wiretaps Were Illegal - NYTimes.com







There's a court ruling against the Bush administration for an unlawful surveillance program that targeted Americans on American soil.

There is no way to spin this away neo-cons, sorry, it is a fact on record and it sets precedent for future Presidents. The fact that no one was held to account for this criminal behavior also sets a precedent but it set a very dangerous one.

"... rejecting the Obama administration’s effort to keep shrouded in secrecy one of the most disputed counterterrorism policies..."

Once Obama was elected, the program was his. Obama fought to keep it. He wasted to keep spying on Americans.

Yet you give him a free pass. Gasp.

The conviction is against the Bush administration, not the Obama administration, and you actually apologize for the criminals...gasp...anti-American much?



And I didn't give Obama a pass, I listed his choice not to pursue criminal charges against the Bush administration as one of the things that disappointed me about Obama in a different thread.

Didn't read the article, did you?

The ruling by Judge Walker, the chief judge of the Federal District Court in San Francisco, rejected the Justice Department’s claim — first asserted by the Bush administration and continued under President Obama — that the charity’s lawsuit should be dismissed without a ruling on the merits because allowing it to go forward could reveal state secrets.​

It's Obama's program.

 

[Nic_Driver]

Didn't read the article, did you?

The ruling by Judge Walker, the chief judge of the Federal District Court in San Francisco, rejected the Justice Department’s claim — first asserted by the Bush administration and continued under President Obama — that the charity’s lawsuit should be dismissed without a ruling on the merits because allowing it to go forward could reveal state secrets.
It's Obama's program.

You're not really that stupid are you Dave?

The paragraph states that the Justice Departments claim "that the charity’s lawsuit should be dismissed without a ruling on the merits because allowing it to go forward could reveal state secrets". The article states the Obama administration continued that same claim (not the program) and the claim was rejected by the courts.

Subsequently, the Bush administration was found guilty.

Is English your second language or something?

 

[LibocalypseNow]

The Hopey Changey One hasn't changed anything. Remember when him and the Democrats promised to get rid of that bad ole Patriot Act? Yea that still hasn't happened. In fact they just granted themselves even more powers under the Patriot Act. I just wish these Leftists/Democrats would be as angry today as they were back when their BOOOOOOSH Boogeyman was in there. Because nothing has changed.

 

[Nic_Driver]

The Hopey Changey One hasn't changed anything. Remember when him and the Democrats promised to get rid of that bad ole Patriot Act? Yea that still hasn't happened. In fact they just granted themselves even more powers under the Patriot Act. I just wish these Leftists/Democrats would be as angry today as they were back when their BOOOOOOSH Boogeyman was in there. Because nothing has changed.

Obfuscation doesn’t change the fact that there is documented evidence that Bush violated the law and the Constitution.

 

[daveman]

Didn't read the article, did you?

The ruling by Judge Walker, the chief judge of the Federal District Court in San Francisco, rejected the Justice Department’s claim — first asserted by the Bush administration and continued under President Obama — that the charity’s lawsuit should be dismissed without a ruling on the merits because allowing it to go forward could reveal state secrets.
It's Obama's program.

You're not really that stupid are you Dave?

The paragraph states that the Justice Departments claim "that the charity’s lawsuit should be dismissed without a ruling on the merits because allowing it to go forward could reveal state secrets". The article states the Obama administration continued that same claim (not the program) and the claim was rejected by the courts.

Subsequently, the Bush administration was found guilty.

Is English your second language or something?

And you STILL haven't read the article.

As a senator then, Barack Obama voted in favor of the new law, despite objections from many of his supporters. President Obama’s administration now relies heavily on such surveillance in its fight against Al Qaeda.

The overhauled law, however, still requires the government to obtain a warrant if it is focusing on an American citizen or an organization inside the United States. The surveillance of Al Haramain would still be unlawful today if no court had approved it, current and former Justice Department officials said.

But since Mr. Obama took office, the N.S.A. has sometimes violated the limits imposed on spying on Americans by the new FISA law. The administration has acknowledged the lapses but said they had been corrected.​

 

[LibocalypseNow]

The Hopey Changey One hasn't changed anything. Remember when him and the Democrats promised to get rid of that bad ole Patriot Act? Yea that still hasn't happened. In fact they just granted themselves even more powers under the Patriot Act. I just wish these Leftists/Democrats would be as angry today as they were back when their BOOOOOOSH Boogeyman was in there. Because nothing has changed.

Obfuscation doesn’t change the fact that there is documented evidence that Bush violated the law and the Constitution.

Still happens everyday with our Government. There are very few in our Government today who care about adhering to our Constitution. You're just kidding yourself if you think anything has changed. Your own Hopey Changey One defended this in Court. So obviously he agreed with Bush on it. And he still hasn't gotten rid of the Patriot Act like he promised. You should be just as angry today as you were back when your BOOOOOOSH Boogeyman was in there.

 

[Nic_Driver]

Didn't read the article, did you?

The ruling by Judge Walker, the chief judge of the Federal District Court in San Francisco, rejected the Justice Department’s claim — first asserted by the Bush administration and continued under President Obama — that the charity’s lawsuit should be dismissed without a ruling on the merits because allowing it to go forward could reveal state secrets.
It's Obama's program.

You're not really that stupid are you Dave?

The paragraph states that the Justice Departments claim "that the charity’s lawsuit should be dismissed without a ruling on the merits because allowing it to go forward could reveal state secrets". The article states the Obama administration continued that same claim (not the program) and the claim was rejected by the courts.

Subsequently, the Bush administration was found guilty.

Is English your second language or something?

And you STILL haven't read the article.

As a senator then, Barack Obama voted in favor of the new law, despite objections from many of his supporters. President Obama’s administration now relies heavily on such surveillance in its fight against Al Qaeda.

The overhauled law, however, still requires the government to obtain a warrant if it is focusing on an American citizen or an organization inside the United States. The surveillance of Al Haramain would still be unlawful today if no court had approved it, current and former Justice Department officials said.

But since Mr. Obama took office, the N.S.A. has sometimes violated the limits imposed on spying on Americans by the new FISA law. The administration has acknowledged the lapses but said they had been corrected.​

So the link to the recorded conviction against Obama for violating the right of Americans is where?

 

[LibocalypseNow]

If the Hopey Changey One hated this so much,why did he defend it in Court? I guess the Hopey Changey cattle just conveniently ignore things. For them I guess it will always be..."DAT BOOOOOOOOOOSH!!!!"

 

[daveman]

You're not really that stupid are you Dave?

The paragraph states that the Justice Departments claim "that the charity’s lawsuit should be dismissed without a ruling on the merits because allowing it to go forward could reveal state secrets". The article states the Obama administration continued that same claim (not the program) and the claim was rejected by the courts.

Subsequently, the Bush administration was found guilty.

Is English your second language or something?

And you STILL haven't read the article.

As a senator then, Barack Obama voted in favor of the new law, despite objections from many of his supporters. President Obama’s administration now relies heavily on such surveillance in its fight against Al Qaeda.

The overhauled law, however, still requires the government to obtain a warrant if it is focusing on an American citizen or an organization inside the United States. The surveillance of Al Haramain would still be unlawful today if no court had approved it, current and former Justice Department officials said.

But since Mr. Obama took office, the N.S.A. has sometimes violated the limits imposed on spying on Americans by the new FISA law. The administration has acknowledged the lapses but said they had been corrected.​

So the link to the recorded conviction against Obama for violating the right of Americans is where?

It's President Obama's program. He voted for it when he was a senator, and he uses it today. And he's acknowledged he's gone over the line with it.

But it's all BOOOOOOSH!!!'s fault.

 

[Nic_Driver]

And you STILL haven't read the article.

As a senator then, Barack Obama voted in favor of the new law, despite objections from many of his supporters. President Obama’s administration now relies heavily on such surveillance in its fight against Al Qaeda.

The overhauled law, however, still requires the government to obtain a warrant if it is focusing on an American citizen or an organization inside the United States. The surveillance of Al Haramain would still be unlawful today if no court had approved it, current and former Justice Department officials said.

But since Mr. Obama took office, the N.S.A. has sometimes violated the limits imposed on spying on Americans by the new FISA law. The administration has acknowledged the lapses but said they had been corrected.​

So the link to the recorded conviction against Obama for violating the right of Americans is where?

It's President Obama's program. He voted for it when he was a senator, and he uses it today. And he's acknowledged he's gone over the line with it.

But it's all BOOOOOOSH!!!'s fault.

So nothing Dave, you couldn't find anything?

Bush's legacy will include this conviction.

It really is too bad you're ok with a POTUS that violates the law and the Constitution but on the other hand, what possible complaint could you have against Obama if your this forgiving to a criminal?

 

[Nic_Driver]

The point you and others keep missing is THERE IS A CONVICTION ON RECORD AGAINST BUSH!!!!!!!!!!!!!

No way to spin it away, there it is on record.

 

[daveman]

So the link to the recorded conviction against Obama for violating the right of Americans is where?

It's President Obama's program. He voted for it when he was a senator, and he uses it today. And he's acknowledged he's gone over the line with it.

But it's all BOOOOOOSH!!!'s fault.

So nothing Dave, you couldn't find anything?

Bush's legacy will include this conviction.

It really is too bad you're ok with a POTUS that violates the law and the Constitution but on the other hand, what possible complaint could you have against Obama if your this forgiving to a criminal?

Apparently, you're okay with a POTUS that violates the law and the Constitution, too. Because, you know, pretending that Obama isn't doing the exact same thing, when the article YOU linked shows he is, is pretty stupid.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Wake me up when the Hopey Changey One & Democrats get rid of the Patriot Act like they promised. Till then this stuff is just a big Yawner. Back to my nap now. Night.

 

[daveman]

The point you and others keep missing is THERE IS A CONVICTION ON RECORD AGAINST BUSH!!!!!!!!!!!!!

No way to spin it away, there it is on record.

In other words:

 

[Jarhead]

The point you and others keep missing is THERE IS A CONVICTION ON RECORD AGAINST BUSH!!!!!!!!!!!!!

No way to spin it away, there it is on record.

You are naive and partisan.

Bush was advised by the WH legal advisers and he proceeded based on THEIR interpretation of the law.
It was not found that the legal advisers intentionally advised the President to break the law. It was determined by the judge that their interpretation was not the same as the judges interpretation.

Whereas this is technically "breaking the law"....only a Bush hater would scontinaully point out that "Bush was convicted".

You are only showing all of us how naive AND partisan you are.

Some are claiming that, according to their interpretation of the law, Obama is "breaking the law" as it pertains to Libya.

Regardless of the outcome, I will fight tooth and nail ANYONE who claims he intentioanlly broke the law. His advisers advised him based on THEIR interpretation of the law....and that is what he should follow. If it is found such an interpreation conflicts with a judges...so be it.....but I will not do as you do....continually spew crap about "the president was convected"

 

[Nic_Driver]

You are naive and partisan.

Bush was advised by the WH legal advisers and he proceeded based on THEIR interpretation of the law.
It was not found that the legal advisers intentionally advised the President to break the law. It was determined by the judge that their interpretation was not the same as the judges interpretation.

Please review the case, at least read the link. You are not talking about the same issue that I am.

 

[Nic_Driver]

Regardless of the outcome, I will fight tooth and nail ANYONE who claims he intentioanlly broke the law.

How are you going to fight the Federal courts on this one since they're the ones who convicted him of intentionally breaking the law?


That should be good, please be sure to tape it for us ok?