Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
The issue is when there is conflict with FISA and other legislation. I think Bush used war authority to defend his actions. Congress authorizing the use of military force, etc, was pretty open ended, don't you agree?
|
It comes down to this....the AUMFs authorize the use of
military force...there is NO etc, etc.
There was no sweeping "war authority" that is limited solely to a formal Declaration of War and there was no "open ended" authorization to use the NSA, CIA, FBI, etc outside of existing law.
Testimony from Alberto gonzales in 2006 demonstrate how this administration operated:
Quote:
|
GONZALES: There was not a war declaration, either in connection with Al Qaida or in Iraq. It was an authorization to use military force. I only want to clarify that, because there are implications. Obviously, when you talk about a war declaration, you're possibly talking about affecting treaties, diplomatic relations. And so there is a distinction in law and in practice. And we're not talking about a war declaration. This is an authorization only to use military force.
|
...alll the while knowing that he and Bush had already unilaterally determined that the AUMF gave the president the authority to go beyond just the use of military force and authorize warrantless wiretapping by the NSA for the four previous years.