Hmmm - new RW talking point (via Drudge) Clinton did same on searches

[The Straight Story]

CLINTON ADMINISTRATION SECRET SEARCH ON AMERICANS -- WITHOUT COURT ORDER

CARTER EXECUTIVE ORDER: 'ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE' WITHOUT COURT ORDER

Bill Clinton Signed Executive Order that allowed Attorney General to do searches without court approval

Clinton, February 9, 1995: "The Attorney General is authorized to approve physical searches, without a court order"

Jimmy Carter Signed Executive Order on May 23, 1979: "Attorney General is authorized to approve electronic surveillance to acquire foreign intelligence information without a court order."

WASH POST, July 15, 1994: Extend not only to searches of the homes of U.S. citizens but also -- in the delicate words of a Justice Department official -- to "places where you wouldn't find or would be unlikely to find information involving a U.S. citizen... would allow the government to use classified electronic surveillance techniques, such as infrared sensors to observe people inside their homes, without a court order."

Deputy Attorney General Jamie S. Gorelick, the Clinton administration believes the president "has inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches for foreign intelligence purposes."

Secret searches of Aldrich Ames's office and home in June and October 1993, both without a federal warrant.

[havocmom]

1. Then the thugs were pretty silly to settle for nailing him for lying

about nailing an intern, weren't they? :rofl:

[bowens43]

2. It's a poor variation of the "Clinton's Penis" defense.

[ddeclue]

3. And two wrongs make a right???

If it's true (and I doubt it) then Clinton would also belong in jail.

The law is the law is the law and "but mom the other Presidents are all doing it" excuse doesn't work here.

Clearly they are desperately grabbing at any straw they can.

www.brainshrub.com/president-wiretap

"Listening in without a warrant isn't just impolite, it's a felony."

Doug De Clue
Orlando, FL

[bahrbearian]

4. There was caller on Ed Schultz today saying the same thing..

I want to hear more ,, bring the facts,,I want to know, just who to trust. I know I can't trust Chimpy, and his Patriot Act.

[Sal316]

5. It's been debunked 9 ways to Sunday./

http://thinkprogress.org/index.php?cat=10

That and the Eschelon one.

The CDID is so old and worn out, it takes all of 5 minutes to debunk their crap anymore.

[bloom]

10. Here's one post...

The Gorelick Myth
In the National Review, Byron York has an article called “Clinton Claimed Authority to Order No-Warrant Searches.” In it, he cites then-Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick’s July 14, 1994 testimony where she argues “the President has inherent authority to conduct warrantless physical searches for foreign intelligence purposes.” (This afternoon, Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) quoted her testimony on the Senate floor.)

Here is what York obscures: at the time of Gorelick’s testimony, physical searches weren’t covered under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). It’s not surprising that, in 1994, Gorelick argued that physical searches weren’t covered by FISA. They weren’t. With Clinton’s backing, the law was amended in 1995 to include physical searches.

York claims that, after the law was amended, “the Clinton administration did not back down from its contention that the president had the authority to act when necessary.” That’s false. Neither Gorelick or the Clinton administration ever argued that president’s inherent “authority” allowed him to ignore FISA. (We’ve posted the full text of Gorelick’s testimony here).

The Clinton administration viewed FISA, a criminal statute, as the law. The Bush administration viewed it as a recommendations they could ignore. That’s the difference.

[louis-t]

6. I was waiting for this. It was only a matter of time.

I'll believe it when I see evidence.

[Iris]

7. Man, those assholes can always, always, ALWAYS bring shit back to Clinton

can't they?

[The Straight Story]

9. Their base logic is:

If clinton did it and dems were ok with it, why aren't they now. But then there is 'crime is crime'.

[LSK]

8. then Drudge can explain HR 1555 Sec 309

http://www.actionamerica.org/echelon/echelon1555.html