Political Games - Where the fuck’s the reset button?

How can we say we are fighting for freedom while we subvert civil liberties? Is it just me, or does this make no sense at all?

I watched a video earlier of Condi Rice trying to defend the president’s illegal actions in ordering spying on American citizens without court oversight. Apparently according to Rice, “the president has constitutional authority and he has statutory authorities,” to give such an order. To which Russert replied:

“What Democrats and Republicans in Congress are asking, what is the authority that you keep citing? What law? What statute? Where in the Constitution does it say that the President can eavesdrop, wiretap American citizens without a court order?”

Good question. Well, I did learn alittle about Constitutional law back in the day, and although I am aware this hardly makes me an expert, I would like to shed light on the areas of law I assume I have learned enough of to comment. First of all, the president has the power to give executive orders, and a law put in place in the 1970’s allows the president to do this on issues of national security. This law was put in place to bypass the sometimes slow paced Congress in times that required speedy action in defense of our nation. Though from what I understand, Congress must approve such actions within 60(?) days for the president’s orders to still remain in effect. Rice repeatidly said that the wiretap programs we reapproved every 45 days, but who was reapproving the program? Congress is in an uproar, and the courts certainly didn’t approve anything… which is exactly the problem. Let us refer to that old document… the Constitution. Brought to you by, Cornell University’s Law School.

Amendment IV

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.

Interesting. It’s also true that no part of an Executive Order may be illegal or unconstitutional. Ooopsy! I think spying on American citizens without court oversight might just be breaking the 4th Amendment… and it is!

MR. RUSSERT: …President Nixon tried to wiretap American citizens and the Supreme Court ruled he violated the Fourth Amendment rights of Americans.

SEC’Y RICE: Tim, let’s remember that we are talking about the ability to collect information on the geographic territory that is the United States. Some people are American citizens; others are not. What the president wants to prevent is the use of American territory as a safe haven for communications between terrorist operating here or people with terrorist links operating here and people operating outside of the country.

What strikes me odd about this is that Rice is saying that we don’t want America to be a safehaven for communications between terrorists. Interesting. I’m really not sure how that would happen since courts rarely turn down a request for wiretapping a suspected terrorist.…And now that I read on I see Russert has pointed this out.

MR. RUSSERT: Well, the courts very, very seldom turn down a request. He could have gone to a court to make sure that constitutional rights were protected for all American citizens.

Read the full Transcript HERE.

Also in President Bush’s weekly radio address he said that those orders were: “fully consistent with my constitutional responsibilities and authorities.” (New York Times) But I’m still not clear on how violating the 4th Amendment is keeping with his constitutional responsiblities. Someone please explain this one to me.

~Justin

Share This