Rotating Header Image


Picture 758.gif Powerline provides excellent review, insight and commentary about the recent uproar: “ON THE LEGALITY OF THE NSA INTERCEPT PROGRAM“:

“…in 2002, the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review decided Sealed Case No. 02-001. This case arose out of a provision of the Patriot Act that was intended to break down the ‘wall’ between law enforcement and intelligence gathering. The Patriot Act modified Truong’s ‘primary purpose’ test by providing that surveillance under FISA was proper if intelligence gathering was one ‘significant’ purpose of the intercept. In the course of discussing the constitutional underpinnings (or lack thereof) of the Truong test, the court wrote:

“The Truong court, as did all the other courts to have decided the issue, held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information. It was incumbent upon the court, therefore, to determine the boundaries of that constitutional authority in the case before it. We take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President’s constitutional power. The question before us is the reverse, does FISA amplify the President’s power by providing a mechanism that at least approaches a classic warrant and which therefore supports the government’s contention that FISA searches are constitutionally reasonable.

“That is the current state of the law. The federal appellate courts have unanimously held that the President has the inherent constitutional authority to order warrantless searches for purposes of gathering foreign intelligence information, which includes information about terrorist threats. Furthermore, since this power is derived from Article II of the Constitution, the FISA Review Court has specifically recognized that it cannot be taken away or limited by Congressional action.

“That being the case, the NSA intercept program, which consists of warrantless electronic intercepts for purposes of foreign intelligence gathering, is legal.

Picture 758.gif Read it. Excellent. I ask after reading it as to why the mainstream media cannot even begin to get the information organized nearly as well, or, if, perhaps, they intentionally do not.

2 C O M M E N T S

  1. epador says:

    Unfortunately, organizing a coherent and unbiased story is beyond the skills of the MSM.

  2. -S- says:

    What’s suggested here if not outright blasted loud and clear as to this issue is that the mainstream media was all too well prepared to announce “impeachment” along with the Democrats in Congress and hasn’t devoted much to any attention to the realities involved, and that is that there’s no “impeachable offense” except, rather, in the minds and delusions of Democrats.

    Even DER SPIEGEL was yesterday blaring that Bush had committed an “impeachable offense” based upon “Constitutional scholars” (unamed!), and yet gave no attention to the Constitution itself, as to contents. Had they, as has PowerLine (link, here), they’d see that they’re being suckered by their unidentified sources, or else DER SPIEGEL is unable to include reality as to this very important area.