Chris Dodd Earns Your Vote

I understand that the government /president has the right to bypass FISA court in the case of an imminent security threat and I believe after 9/11 we were under a imminent threat. However, this has continued for five years- that is where I find an abuse of power. When did national security issues go from imminent to possible? I don’t know> We have to keep in context purpose, which is terrorism. I (note just I) am willing to defer rights I have to internet privacy and telephone privacy if it is necessary to keep me safe. However, all are subject to this under the law- to call it illegal is a gross misinterpretation of search and seizure. Note the clause: “no unreasonable searches and seizures“, and a necessity for warrants. If there is a search without a warrant-it is okay if it is reasonable, according to the clause. It is not unreasonable to believe there are people plotting via email and phone that could be foiled if monitored.
So, basically my take is that the president should have already and most certainly now turned off the imminent threat excuse to continue this practice and put the warrant issue back in play through FISA. The Gov. can start a wire tap and cont it for 30 days before obtaining a warrant- Patriot Act. So , that erases the immediacy issue. With immediacy and imminent out of the way, Bush hasn’t a choice but to return to FISA regulation.

Second, I do not think that national security issues should be dragged through the PUBLIC. If these cases go forward they must remained sealed from the public. If the public knows >>>terrorist will know too. Giving terrorist accessibility to information about how, when, why, and whos are monitoring them would be a grave mistake. Long and short.. Immunity, no. Public trial, no.

Also, I add that I commend Dodd for calling for a cease and desist on the warrant-less taps. I do not see where he is calling for the information obtained to be sealed by the courts and that is my problem.