The Legislative Branch has no oversight responsibility over the White House.

[TheMercenary]

Ok now we are finally at the meat of the matter. The ACLU got one judge to stop the wiretaps. This does not make them illegal because it would need to go to the Supreme Court for that final ruling. Only the ACLU, through one judge, said so. Do you follow the appeals of the 9th Circuit Court out on the Left Coast much? Do you know how many of those rulings are overturned?

Your "they" is the ACLU???

So Muller appears on Capitol Hill under fire from the Dems. Ok, no problem there. Mistakes in the issuing of letters by the FBI for information were made. Nothing to do with wire taps there sparky.

The difference is that you are willing to let a few, say 9 or 10, terrorists slip through the cracks because you feel your rights are being violated, even though we have pretty much proven that none of your personal rights have been violated, while I am willing to let the Federal Government snoop around the people they suspect of wrong doing at the chance that a few people may be inconvenienced, and capture the 9 or 10 terrorists.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Ok now we are finally at the meat of the matter. The ACLU got one judge to stop the wiretaps. This does not make them illegal because it would need to go to the Supreme Court for that final ruling.

No, warrantless wiretaps are inherently illegal. The judge just confirmed it.

So Muller appears on Capitol Hill under fire from the Dems. Ok, no problem there. Mistakes in the issuing of letters by the FBI for information were made. Nothing to do with wire taps there sparky.

I never said it was, as you could discover by reading the paragraph I wrote immediately after the link. They have not confined their illegal activities to wiretaps.

The difference is that you are willing to let a few, say 9 or 10, terrorists slip through the cracks because you feel your rights are being violated,

Nope.

even though we have pretty much proven that none of your personal rights have been violated,

Nope. Nothing of the sort has been proven. It is, however, irrelevant.

while I am willing to let the Federal Government snoop around the people they suspect of wrong doing at the chance that a few people may be inconvenienced, and capture the 9 or 10 terrorists.

Suspicion is enough to negate the need for warrants and subpoenas? Why have warrants and subpoenas at all, then?

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

No, warrantless wiretaps are inherently illegal. The judge just confirmed it.
I never said it was, as you could discover by reading the paragraph I wrote immediately after the link. They have not confined their illegal activities to wiretaps.
Nope.
Nope. Nothing of the sort has been proven. It is, however, irrelevant.Suspicion is enough to negate the need for warrants and subpoenas? Why have warrants and subpoenas at all, then?

You need to read the above article. The wiretaps go on. They found away around it. The letters from the FBI are perfectly legal. None of it is irrelevent and you have not been affected. I do suspect that acts have been thwarted, and I may not be able to prove it, I trust that it has.