Obama and wiretaps: That was then - this is now

Discussion in 'Politics' started by targus, Apr 8, 2009.

  1. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    That was then:

    Obama: No warrantless wiretaps if you elect me:

    For one thing, under an Obama presidency, Americans will be able to leave behind the era of George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and "wiretaps without warrants," he said.

    http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9845595-7.html


    This is now:

    In a motion filed on Friday, April 3rd, the Obama Dept. of Justice (DOJ) demanded that the entire lawsuit be dismissed based on both the Bush administration's claim that a "state secrets" privilege bars any lawsuits against the executive branch for illegal spying, as well as a novel "sovereign immunity" claim that the Patriot Act bars any lawsuits of any kind for illegal government surveillance, unless there was "willful disclosure" of the illegally intercepted communications.

    http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2009/04/07/18586797.php
     
  2. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
  3. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    Leftists and other liberal kooks wrongly claimed that President Bush used the Patriot Act to seize powers. Obama is going to use the current economic crisis to actually seize power.
     
    #3 OldRegular, Apr 8, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 8, 2009
  4. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    Bumped because I am hoping to hear from those who were critical of Bush for listening in on phone calls made by terrorists but voted for Obama.
     
  5. ReformedBaptist

    ReformedBaptist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,894
    Likes Received:
    27
    I can't open the links.
     
  6. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,924
    Likes Received:
    296
    This is another one of those say anything, tell any lie to get elected items that Obama did. His adoring and blind lemmings just oohed and ahhed and kissed his feet.

    Now that he's been elected and is revealing his lies one after the other, his lemmings are afraid to be critical and be branded as racists.

    caught in their own trap.
     
  7. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,258
    Likes Received:
    4
    Actually, some conservatives claimed that as well. And we weren't wrong. Did you ever read the Patriot Act ? And who wrote it ? And when was it written ?
     
  8. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sorry.

    Try this one - http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/04/06/obama/index.html

    "...the Obama DOJ has now invented a brand new claim of government immunity, one which literally asserts that the U.S. Government is free to intercept all of your communications (calls, emails and the like) and -- even if what they're doing is blatantly illegal and they know it's illegal -- you are barred from suing them unless they "willfully disclose" to the public what they have learned."

    "This demonstrates that the Obama DOJ plans to invoke the exact radical doctrines of executive secrecy which Bush used -- not only when the Obama DOJ is taking over a case from the Bush DOJ, but even when they are deciding what response should be made in the first instance. Everything for which Bush critics excoriated the Bush DOJ -- using an absurdly broad rendition of "state secrets" to block entire lawsuits from proceeding even where they allege radical lawbreaking by the President and inventing new claims of absolute legal immunity -- are now things the Obama DOJ has left no doubt it intends to embrace itself."
     
  9. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,924
    Likes Received:
    296
  10. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't understand what there is to debate since I don't see your quote on the site. The link at the top doesn't work for me and the new one provided links to, "McCain Supports Bush Warrantless Wiretaps"...
     
  11. JustChristian

    JustChristian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    3,833
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am against wiretaps or entry into an American citizen's home without a search warrant or due cause. If Obama is going to pursue this course of action just like George Bush did I will oppose it now just as I did then Patriot Acts 1 and 2 make these activities legal. That's why I vehemently opposed them. I have a close friend whose apartment was broken into by the FBI because he was seen on the street talking to someone they were watching. He was talking to him about the gospel. The FBI refused to fix the damage they caused and warned him not to tell anyone about this incident or he would be arrested. He did tell me but I have never revealed any of the details.

    You guys supported this kind of activity during the Bush administration. Why are you against it now? Oh, there's a Democrat it the White House!

    If America is to remain free, these kinds of government actions must be stopped. I opposed it before and I oppose it NOW. What about you? Where did you stand then and where do you stand now?
     
  12. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    Is Obama actually wiretapping or just trying to get the charges dropped on those who did? That is what I can't get from the story...
     
  13. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,924
    Likes Received:
    296
    Can't see the correlation, huh?:laugh:

    I can't help it that you enjoy pretending to be dense.

    You are pretending, aren't you?
     
  14. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,258
    Likes Received:
    4
    What, President Training Wheels breaking a campaign promise.....?


    Nah, never happen.




    Snork.
     
  15. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    Nope... That is what I saw when I clicked on the link. Also, I can't tell if Obama actually wiretapping or just trying to get the charges dropped on those who did? Can someone clarify that for me? Or send me to the actual story.
     
  16. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    Post #8

    "...the Obama DOJ has now invented a brand new claim of government immunity, one which literally asserts that the U.S. Government is free to intercept all of your communications (calls, emails and the like) and -- even if what they're doing is blatantly illegal and they know it's illegal -- you are barred from suing them unless they "willfully disclose" to the public what they have learned."

    "This demonstrates that the Obama DOJ plans to invoke the exact radical doctrines of executive secrecy which Bush used -- not only when the Obama DOJ is taking over a case from the Bush DOJ, but even when they are deciding what response should be made in the first instance. Everything for which Bush critics excoriated the Bush DOJ -- using an absurdly broad rendition of "state secrets" to block entire lawsuits from proceeding even where they allege radical lawbreaking by the President and inventing new claims of absolute legal immunity -- are now things the Obama DOJ has left no doubt it intends to embrace itself."


    http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwa...ama/index.html
     
  17. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    The link you provided doesn't work...

    So Obama hasn't actually tapped anyone, the writer asserts it is what he will do? How do you know he didn't come to these conclusions to end the push to prosecute Bush? The OP said a lawsuit was dismissed...

    Also, the conclusions he is coming to are exactly the same as Bush was saying. Right? Why was it ok when Bush said it but suddenly not ok if Obama supports it? Obama was top of his Harvard law class so I would assume he knows something about law...
     
  18. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    It works for me. I am sorry that it does not work for you.

    That is not a safe conclusion since the Obama administration is continuing the policies of the Bush administration.


    It is the Obama DOJ that asserts it - in court. And the OP says more than that it says that. The DOJ is making arguements on behalf of Obama that says that Obama has sweeping new powers in the form of total immunity.

    Where did I ever say that I supported it under Bush?

    And Obama is not coming to the same conclusions as Bush - he is EXPANDING the right to warrantless wire tap. Which is EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT HE CAMPAIGNED ON.

    How do you know that he was at the top of the class? Have you seen his college transcripts? You would be the first if you have. He has buried them.
     
  19. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    I get HTTP 404 - File not found

    I don't see where it says he will continue his policies, he simply "demanded that the entire lawsuit be dismissed based on both the Bush administration's claim that a "state secrets" privilege bars any lawsuits against the executive branch for illegal spying,"... This really protect the communication companies also who merely complied with their presidents orders.

    Now you could be right that Obama may do something in the future and this decision will protect him from prosecustion but I don't see where he says he plans to continue wiretapping.

    What I see is his DOJ "claim that a "state secrets" privilege bars any lawsuits against the executive branch for illegal spying". I don't see this as new sweeping power for total immunity since this is the same thing Bush said.

    I agree this is opposite of what he campaigned on but where do you see he is expanding warrantless wiretapping? I guess that is the part I don't see, where does it say he plans to do any wire tapping?

    Perhaps I am repeating liberal rumors but just graduating Harvard Law School says he knows something about law.
     
  20. just-want-peace

    just-want-peace
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2002
    Messages:
    5,505
    Likes Received:
    40
    Basically all this says to me is that he knows how to spew forth the liberal mantras and find the loopholes in the law!
     

Share This Page

Loading...