Is it true that Bush implemented warrantless wiretaps?
99436
You should only be concerned if you are making or receiving calls or communications from entities that are at war or in conflict with the government of the United States. \n\nAs stated SO many times. This is no different than communications interception that has happened during every other war the US has been involved with. Whether the communications that are interecpted by US intel are mail, radio, package, person-to-person, or various other means.\n\nThis is not about the wiretapping over Mr. or Mrs. Average American's everyday phone calls to their friends or whatever.
157188
No.\n\nBush led our country into a war that is and was totally unnecessary.  His original WMD argument for war has been disproved and it seems that each time he speaks his reason for the war changes.  The bottom line is that over 2,200 American military and over 25,000 Iraqi civillians are dead  and the question remains, Why?...\n\nHis medicare drug program is proving itself to be a disaster for seniors but great for insurance companies.  He then wants to privatize Social Security which will only benefit his friends on Wall Street, certainly not the retirees.\n\nMore and more Americans are losing health care benefits. His answer: Health Savings Accounts.  The trouble with these are that the people who need health care benefits the most are living paycheck to paycheck and can't afford to contribute to these accounts.  They also can't afford the out-of-pocket of up to $5,000 that has to be paid to health care providers before the insurance that's associated with these things even begins to start paying.  The winners again: his friends in the insurance industry.  This is from personal experience, I'm stuck with one of these.\n\nHis "Domestic Spying Program" has directed the NSA to wiretap American citizens without warrants.  Not to say we shouldn't wiretap terrorists, we have to.  A warrant to conduct these wiretaps is easy to get and can even be obtained up to three days after the fact.  So why won't he do it "By the Book"? It almost seems he is intentionally trying to show us that he feels he's above the law. \n\nThis attempt to greatly expand Presidential power in the name of the "War on Terror" is especially frightening since it affects the Executive / Legislative / Judicial balance of goverment as defined in our Constitution.\n\nUnfortunately, Mr. Bush seems to think that stubborness is a virtue and, despite the ill effects his policies have had on our country, insists on "Staying the course".  I just hope we'll someday be able to repair the damage this "Course" is causing.
150333
Well, obviously they didn't approve electronic surveillance at all, seeing as electionics didn't exist then. They DID, however, spy on Americans, but at the time there weren't any laws against them. In Bush's case, there is clearly a law (called FISA) that specifically doesn't allow electronic surveillance without a warrant.
936835
In a word 'YES'. He knew the consequences.  Colin Powell warned him (and got railroaded for it), but instead of listening to a more experienced smarter voice, he listened to The Three Blind Rats - Condi, Rove and Cheney.  \n\nIf a Democratic president had done a fraction of what Bush did, we'll be spending our days watching him defend himself on CourtTV.
28306
Warrants are still used for wiretaps between individuals within the country who may be aiding or abetting terrorists. Warrants are not required for contacts between terrorists outside the country and individuals within the country (who therefore may also be suspect).  Only Liberals seem to deliberately confuse the issue at every chance.  However that mearly tells us about the way Liberals think during a time of war.
612903
How would the NSA know if two al-Qaeda members were talking inside the USA, they don't listen to conversations, so they say. The terrorists with box cutters responsible for the 9-11 attacks were already here, and now that president G.W. Bush has announced what the NSA is not doing, they will probably have conversations in code if their known to be terrorists or suspected.
780186
Isn't that something you should know, President Bush?
1069944
President Bush didn't "rig" anything.  What I find interesting is that these people seem to forget that there is a record of things they said in the past.   Thanks for pointing this out though.
87813
Yes, as others said, it takes a court order from a Judge and the legal requirements are very tough.  Patriot Act!  I wish idiots would learn to read something before criticizing.  The Patriot Act has many, many parts.  Wiretapping has been allowed for years - way before the Patriot Act.   Wire taps pertaining to spying and domestic terrorism have been authorized, again for years, when signed a Judge in a Secret Court.  None of this has anything to do with what Bush has been recently accused of or the Patriot Act.  Yes, wiretapping is Constitutional and legal under law.
154150
Absolutely. The USA PATRIOT Act violated the amendment. As did Bush's wiretapping.
1048847
did you read the papers last week about finding wmds? is the American president the only one in charge of the environment or are we not all in charge of caring for the earth? and last but not the wire phone tabs was pass in 1994 and a federal court just upheld the decsion .also the next law was passed in Jan. 2000 not passed by this president. \n\n http://www.eff.org/Privacy/Surveillance/200001_us_fed_wiretap_laws.html
609661
No president invented the concept of spying on telephone calls but Woodrow Wilson gets credit for being the first to authorize the interception of all cabled messages to and from Europe during World War 1. Herbert Hoover used wiretaps during his war on bootleggers during the twenties prompting the creation of the communications act in 1934 that Franklin Roosevelt ignored during World War two saying it didn't apply to threats of national security. Sound familiar? Truman authorized wiretapping during his hunt for communists. Kennedy and Johnson both tapped Martin Luther King's phones saying he had ties to communism and was a threat to national security. Nixon ordered his brother's phones tapped! Republican or Democrat presidents will find excuses to get around the bill of rights they take oaths to defend.\n\nVin
1136292
Do you have proof Bush has a copy?  \nThat data was used in the same way our phone and internet information was gathered and used.  And, the collection of that data resulted in going over and above the corrupt Mexican law enforcement agencies to capture known really bad guys.\n\nOh and by the way, have you ever checked what information Choicepoint has on you?  I've checked mine and was shocked to find out how much wrong information they've been reporting.
605462
somebody has to do the dirty work for the administration... yes its true.. do you really think all of the ideas of this certain Leader in a computer company was his own? He just stole it by monitoring... in the Philippines, even the former president Fidel V. Ramos' Telephone were wiretapped... How much more we ordinary citizens!!?\n\n\n\nP.S i just added you to my watch list... i'm monitoring you now...hehehehehe
264150
Yes, with warrants.  But if you are suspected of terrorist ties, they might monitor you without a warrant.
157044
There's this little news story now,  it takes a large chunk of time on national news and print and tv,  remember its the thing about Bush authorizing the NSA to listen to cell phone calls.\n\nSo able danger ended with some admiral or general saying we were told not to pursue what we had cause some white house clinton lawyer told us not to go any farther,\nand now george bush's lawyer, the attorney general, is saying its legal for us to spy and take action\n\nkick @ss
152789
It was either Nixon or Clinton that said it before.\n\nOne thing for sure Clinton definetly believed it.\n\nBy the way if anyone is asking whether the spying thing is Legal, it sure is cause it's been used to bust Drug dealers, why can't the same be done to Terrorists?