Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Bush Uses Signing Statement to Legalize Warrantless Searches of US Citizens' Mail

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
marmar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-06-08 07:10 PM
Original message
Bush Uses Signing Statement to Legalize Warrantless Searches of US Citizens' Mail
from AlterNet's PEEK:



Bush Uses Signing Statement to Legalize Warrantless Searches of US Citizens' Mail

Posted by Jesse Wendel, Group News Blog at 10:13 AM on March 6, 2008.





On December 20, 2007, President Bush signed routine postal legislation. In a "Signing Statement", the President claims Executive Power to search the mail of U.S. citizens inside the United States without a warrant, in direct contradiction of the bill he had just signed.

The Seattle Times

The move, one year after The New York Times' disclosure of a secret program that allowed warrantless monitoring of Americans' phone calls and e-mail, caught Capitol Hill by surprise.

"Despite the president's statement that he may be able to circumvent a basic privacy protection, the new postal law continues to prohibit the government from snooping into people's mail without a warrant," said Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., the incoming House Government Reform Committee chairman, who co-sponsored the bill.

"You have to be concerned," a senior U.S. official agreed. "It takes executive-branch authority beyond anything we've ever known."

Yet, in his statement, Bush said he will "construe" an exception, "which provides for opening of an item of a class of mail otherwise sealed against inspection in a manner consistent ... with the need to conduct searches in exigent circumstances."

White House spokeswoman Emily Lawrimore denied Bush was claiming new authority.

"In certain circumstances -- such as with the proverbial 'ticking bomb' -- the Constitution does not require warrants for reasonable searches," she said.

Bush, however, cited "exigent circumstances" that could refer to an imminent danger or a long-standing state of emergency.


I feel safer already.

If you were wondering what Keith Olbermann was going to talk about tonight, we've got you covered... This.

The only real question is, will Keith have video of The President actually wiping his ass with The Constitution, or are those films Top-Secret Presidential -- like the list of people Dick Cheney has shotgunned, then made to apologize?

Reading our mail? Letters from soldiers to their boyfriends and girlfriends. Strategy memos from Fortune 500 Companies to strategic partners including how they'll bid on government jobs. Whistle-blower memos. Letters to criminal defense lawyers, priests and rabbis.

If the U.S. Mail isn't private, next thing you know the Feds will be listening to our damn phone calls! Reading our emails! Restricting our ability to travel or arresting us for trying to get into a political event if we're not assimilated.

Worst. President. Ever.


http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/78885/

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
blunorsk Donating Member (20 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-06-08 07:21 PM
Response to Original message
1. letter openers
Yes, my annual letter of donor thanks from the ACLU
came opened, in a little taped plastic bag, with a note of
apology from the postmaster for damaging my mail...

Hah!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wildbilln864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-06-08 07:23 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. k&r! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
0007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-06-08 07:23 PM
Response to Original message
2. Big Brother believes in the magic "pixie party"? It is now officially
1984.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MidwestTransplant Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-06-08 07:26 PM
Response to Original message
4. Isn't it the Republicans who say the Constitution is not a living, breathing document
that must be strictly construed?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ashling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-06-08 07:36 PM
Response to Original message
5. Every time he does this crap its reported in the MSM that
"Bush uses signing statement to legalize ..."!!! That is crap!!!

It should read (at best) the "Bozo uses signing statement to simulate the legality of his blatant power grab bu the urinary executive."

:puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
malaise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-06-08 07:39 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. This will go on until he is
IMPEACHED!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim Lane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-06-08 11:45 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. Right! The headline in the OP (copied from the linked article) is seriously misleading. (n/t)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Voice for Peace Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-06-08 07:47 PM
Response to Original message
7. I doubt he knows
the meaning of the word exigent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ashling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-07-08 01:20 AM
Response to Reply #7
11. This crap is NOT legal!
:puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Voice for Peace Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-07-08 09:02 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. Not legal? Has that ever been an obstacle for that guy?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Canuckistanian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-06-08 07:57 PM
Response to Original message
8. Bye, bye, 4th Amendment - nice knowing you
Edited on Thu Mar-06-08 07:57 PM by Canuckistanian
Could there be any more uncostitutional action than this?

Using a constitutionally questionable method to enable a direct violation of the letter and spirit of the 4th amendment.

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."


Worst. President. Ever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluesmail Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-06-08 09:35 PM
Response to Original message
9. Big Kick & Reccomend
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThomWV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-07-08 09:11 AM
Response to Original message
13. Just a reminder: Bush didn't 'legalize' anything. What he did isn't a bit legal.
Just because he writes a letter doesn't mean its legal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
crimsonblue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-07-08 06:45 PM
Response to Original message
14. I hope Obama pushes for signing statement eradication as Prez..
Historically, signing statements were used by the Pres to direct his admin how to use a law. The statements were never intended to be a back alley veto. It is unConstitutional, and inherently contemptuous, to approve a law and then disregard it. If the President does not like a law, the only recourse can be a veto. When our douchebag-in-chief for a president first started this illegal crap, we shoulda recognized this and thrown his ass out of office.. Then again, most Americans at that time were too busy screaming abt "terrists" and watching Survivor to notice. Fuck you King George.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 08:54 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC