Nailed. Links from Whitehouse.gov and Vote Smart
…Secondly, there are such things as roving wiretaps. Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires-a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we’re talking about chasing down terrorists, we’re talking about getting a court order before we do so. It’s important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution.
But a roving wiretap means-it was primarily used for drug lords. A guy, a pretty intelligence drug lord would have a phone, and in old days they could just get a tap on that phone. So guess what he’d do? He’d get him another phone, particularly with the advent of the cell phones. And so he’d start changing cell phones, which made it hard for our DEA types to listen, to run down these guys polluting our streets. And that changed, the law changed on-roving wiretaps were available for chasing down drug lords. They weren’t available for chasing down terrorists, see? And that didn’t make any sense in the post-9/11 era. If we couldn’t use a tool that we’re using against mobsters on terrorists, something needed to happen.
More on the flip…
The Patriot Act changed that. So with court order, law enforcement officials can now use what’s called roving wiretaps, which will prevent a terrorist from switching cell phones in order to get a message out to one of his buddies.
Thirdly, to give you an example of what we’re talking about, there’s something called delayed notification warrants. Those are very important. I see some people, first responders nodding their heads about what they mean. These are a common tool used to catch mobsters. In other words, it allows people to collect data before everybody is aware of what’s going on. It requires a court order. It requires protection under the law. We couldn’t use these against terrorists, but we could use against gangs.
Spotted at Democraticunderground.com
Fabulous catch!Couls this be a nail in the coffin?
It’s firing up at Daily Kos and brewing a storm over at democratic underground so I think it’s got some ‘legs’.
I sent this to CNN via their commement page asking:
“Secret wiretaps
Under what conditions would secret eavesdropping on U.S. citizens be acceptable, if ever?”
Here was my response and the CNN link is here.
http://edition.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form1k.html
___
Secret eavesdropping on U.S. citizens should only be acceptable with a court order from FISA. As per George Bush’s comments in Buffalo in 1994.
_
_
President Bush: Information Sharing, Patriot Act Vital to Homeland Security
Remarks by the President in a Conversation on the USA Patriot Act
Kleinshans Music Hall
Buffalo, New York
Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires-a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we’re talking about chasing down terrorists, we’re talking about getting a court order before we do so. It’s important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/04/20040420-2.html
___
I meant to type Could…too early…more coffee…lol.
Present
Bush Caught – a video. I put together a short film. It’s so nice to see him utter the words below. Edited with footage of his recent defense of wire tapping without court order. It’s also available for download in .wmv format on the page.
To see the video – click here.