Will Our Next President Still Endorse Spying on Citizens?
The recent headline on the Wired website said it all: "McCain: I'd Spy on Americans Secretly, Too."
What prompted this disturbing, possibly inaccurate statement was a June 6 New York Times report, which read:
"A top adviser to Senator John McCain says Mr. McCain believes that President Bush's program of wiretapping without warrants was lawful, a position that appears to bring him into closer alignment with the sweeping theories of executive authority pushed by the Bush administration legal team."
The Times report also noted that in a letter, McCain adviser, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, said Sen. McCain believed that the Constitution gave Mr. Bush the power to authorize the National Security Agency to monitor Americans' international phone calls and emails. Mr. Bush had the right to do so without warrants, despite a 1978 federal statute that requires court approval and oversight of all such surveillance.
"The President Doesn't Have the Right to Disobey Law" - Care to Clarify Mr. McCain?
However, in an interview about his views on the limits of executive power with The Boston Globe in January, Sen. McCain clearly suggested that if he became commander in chief, he felt that he would be obligated to obey a law restricting what he might do in national security matters.
A reporter asked Sen. McCain whether he believed the president had constitutional power to conduct surveillance inside America without a warrant - as long as he did it for national security purposes - regardless of contrary federal statutes.
He replied: "There are some areas where the statutes don't apply, such as in the surveillance of overseas communications. Where they do apply, however, I think that presidents have the obligation to obey and enforce laws that are passed by Congress and signed into law by the president, no matter what the situation is."
The interviewer then asked whether Sen. McCain was saying a statute overruled a president's claimed powers as commander in chief when it came to a surveillance law. "I don't think the president has the right to disobey any law," Sen. McCain replied.
That statement sounds mighty good to me - but Sen. McCain now badly needs to clarify his position on illegal surveillance and what's arguably become an imperial presidency under President Bush.
A Questionable Bush Surveillance Plan
Sen. McCain may soon get a chance to show exactly where he stands on this important constitutional issue - by casting his vote in the U.S. Senate.
President Bush is NOT a lawyer. He's also certainly not a student of the Constitution. But nevertheless, he has proposed legislation, thankfully now stalled in Congress that would in effect ratify his past illegal actions. Bush's plan would allow the government to intercept, without a warrant, every communication into or out of any country, including the United States.
With Congress currently at an impasse over the government's spy powers, there is a real possibility that the government might have to revert to the old rules of terrorist surveillance. In other words, the government would be forced to obey the Constitution. Now I ask you: Would that be so bad?
The U.S. government first cast the Constitution aside to fight the failed war on drugs. Now, the Bush government is using the questionable justification of an undefined war against terrorism to further dilute and distort America's constitutional rights. And it is simply not necessary to do so to fight terrorism.
In my opinion, this is a clear violation of the Fourth Amendment. This Amendment guarantees against unreasonable police searches, unless a warrant based on probable cause authorizes the search.
The proposed Bush law would give the U.S. government virtually unchecked power secretly to wiretap all our phone calls, spy on and read our emails, faxes or other electronic communications, all without any court order and with no due process of law.
Will McCain Follow Bush's Well-Laid Foot Steps?
What is at issue here is a radical, subversive departure from American legal traditions. As an attorney, I see this proposed wiretap surveillance law is yet another abandonment of the rule of law in America.
In light the contradictory statement by Senator McCain and his "advisor" on secret wiretapping and surveillance, Americans need to know what the Republican presidential candidate really does believe when it comes to the United States Constitution and the rights it guarantees us as citizens.
I say: One spying president is more than enough. Senator McCain should speak for himself on this dangerous surveillance plan.
Has McCain changed his admirable past position? For at least this one voter, the answers will make a difference.
The recent headline on the Wired website said it all: "McCain: I'd Spy on Americans Secretly, Too."
What prompted this disturbing, possibly inaccurate statement was a June 6 New York Times report, which read:
"A top adviser to Senator John McCain says Mr. McCain believes that President Bush's program of wiretapping without warrants was lawful, a position that appears to bring him into closer alignment with the sweeping theories of executive authority pushed by the Bush administration legal team."
The Times report also noted that in a letter, McCain adviser, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, said Sen. McCain believed that the Constitution gave Mr. Bush the power to authorize the National Security Agency to monitor Americans' international phone calls and emails. Mr. Bush had the right to do so without warrants, despite a 1978 federal statute that requires court approval and oversight of all such surveillance.
"The President Doesn't Have the Right to Disobey Law" - Care to Clarify Mr. McCain?
However, in an interview about his views on the limits of executive power with The Boston Globe in January, Sen. McCain clearly suggested that if he became commander in chief, he felt that he would be obligated to obey a law restricting what he might do in national security matters.
A reporter asked Sen. McCain whether he believed the president had constitutional power to conduct surveillance inside America without a warrant - as long as he did it for national security purposes - regardless of contrary federal statutes.
He replied: "There are some areas where the statutes don't apply, such as in the surveillance of overseas communications. Where they do apply, however, I think that presidents have the obligation to obey and enforce laws that are passed by Congress and signed into law by the president, no matter what the situation is."
The interviewer then asked whether Sen. McCain was saying a statute overruled a president's claimed powers as commander in chief when it came to a surveillance law. "I don't think the president has the right to disobey any law," Sen. McCain replied.
That statement sounds mighty good to me - but Sen. McCain now badly needs to clarify his position on illegal surveillance and what's arguably become an imperial presidency under President Bush.
A Questionable Bush Surveillance Plan
Sen. McCain may soon get a chance to show exactly where he stands on this important constitutional issue - by casting his vote in the U.S. Senate.
President Bush is NOT a lawyer. He's also certainly not a student of the Constitution. But nevertheless, he has proposed legislation, thankfully now stalled in Congress that would in effect ratify his past illegal actions. Bush's plan would allow the government to intercept, without a warrant, every communication into or out of any country, including the United States.
With Congress currently at an impasse over the government's spy powers, there is a real possibility that the government might have to revert to the old rules of terrorist surveillance. In other words, the government would be forced to obey the Constitution. Now I ask you: Would that be so bad?
The U.S. government first cast the Constitution aside to fight the failed war on drugs. Now, the Bush government is using the questionable justification of an undefined war against terrorism to further dilute and distort America's constitutional rights. And it is simply not necessary to do so to fight terrorism.
In my opinion, this is a clear violation of the Fourth Amendment. This Amendment guarantees against unreasonable police searches, unless a warrant based on probable cause authorizes the search.
The proposed Bush law would give the U.S. government virtually unchecked power secretly to wiretap all our phone calls, spy on and read our emails, faxes or other electronic communications, all without any court order and with no due process of law.
Will McCain Follow Bush's Well-Laid Foot Steps?
What is at issue here is a radical, subversive departure from American legal traditions. As an attorney, I see this proposed wiretap surveillance law is yet another abandonment of the rule of law in America.
In light the contradictory statement by Senator McCain and his "advisor" on secret wiretapping and surveillance, Americans need to know what the Republican presidential candidate really does believe when it comes to the United States Constitution and the rights it guarantees us as citizens.
I say: One spying president is more than enough. Senator McCain should speak for himself on this dangerous surveillance plan.
Has McCain changed his admirable past position? For at least this one voter, the answers will make a difference.
1 comment:
Interesting review! I didn't even know that somebody hides information in this way. But I know one great phone app http://copy9.com/hidden-call-recorder/ . It is a program which will hack phone. I find it very useful in some situations.
Post a Comment