Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
You didn't hear/read the Q and A session did you. One thing the pesident pointed out was they were legally only able to monitor calls that were sent out of or into the USA, not inside the USA itself. They could monitor calls to France but not calls from NY to LA. For someone so blatently breaking the law, why would they follow this policy? Perhaps, again, no laws were in fact broken.
|
hmm, they should build that aspect into a law instead of just doing it. is there a case where legislators were told that they needed to enact such a provision and refused? was it even suggested?
another argument i heard was relating to the urgent nature of the searches/taps. as already mentioned, the law allows for retroactive warrants. the approval is basically a rubber stamp, even moreso for the doomsday scenarios used to justify these secret procedures.
i don't think vague language about doing "anything necessary" legally trumps all specific laws that stand in the way. if no laws are being broken, i would hope either 1) they aren't doing what has been alleged or 2) they have a better justification. gonzales has demonstrated his flawed legal understanding before...as a result our country has had to deal with many problems concerning torture.