How come liberals shy away from this question?

Question

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AoEwTPJROjnYA0E3IbHh.97sy6IX?qid=20060904070716AAWVhfG

Coragryph- What do you think of what the judge said?
“I think that the president would be remiss exercising his constitutional authority by giving all of that power over to a statute.”

From George Washington to Abraham Lincoln to George W. Bush, American presidents have taken drastic steps during wartime in crucial efforts to maintain national security. These Presidents believed it necessary tointercept any communications that potentially involved an enemy to the United States in an effort to protect U.S. citizens in times of war.

doug- Can't take it both ways? You don't notice the 1000's of bush bashing questions on here? Maybe it bothers you that what I have to say makes sense. If the Judge who wrote FISA thinks Bush should do whatever he needs to for our national security, maybe people should think about that.

coragryph-here's my original source.

"Judge Allan Kornblum, magistrate judge of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida and an author of the 1978 FISA Act"

http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20060329-120346-1901r.htm

FISA judges say Bush within law
By Brian DeBose
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
March 29, 2006

Answer 1

I am a Democrat, and I take offense to some of your questions. I believe that we can debate an issue without bashing. President Bush is not the first president to use that technology and he will not be the last and that is demarcate and republication alike!


I am not trying to have it both ways, I agree that some bash President Bush as well, that too is wrong. I think we can debate without bashing. I also think I would rather have incoming calls from terrorist taped then to have another 9-11

Answer 2

I have no idea, not being a liberal. But here's my answer.

The specific claims Bush is making were addressed by Congress when the law was first passed. During the Congressional hearings, Cheney and Rumsfeld (yep, same ones) argued for exactly the type of presidential exemption that Bush is now claiming.

Congress rejected that argument, and explicitly said that FISA was the sole means by which electronic surveillance may be carried out. So, according to the legislative history, they rejected Bush's claims.

Read 18 U.S.C. § 2511: Compliance with FISA "shall be the **exclusive means** by which electronic surveillance... may be conducted". (emphasis added). There is nothing in Article II that allows the President to just ignore the plain text of the law. And the Supreme Court has confirmed that principle several times.

{EDIT} I found the original quote, in context. (second link) First, the judge quoted served on the FISA court. He was not an author of the law itself. And his comments are not in the legislative history of the actual law, so they have no legal force or effect. Nor can a retired judge issue a binding legal opinion in an advisory context.

Second, the reference to "necessary and proper" in the original quote is amusing, because there is no "necessary and proper" Clause in Article II dealing with presidential authority. Read it yourself.

Third, the quote just repeats the argument, rejected by both Congress and other federal courts, that the President has inherent authority to ignore Congressional requirements in the law. That argument was rejected by the Supreme Court several times, and was rejected by Congress in this specific instance.

What you have is a bunch of judges, possibly even quoted out of context, but at best expressing their personal opinion. An opinion that has been rejected by current federal courts.

{EDIT} In 1999, Allan Kornblum was an attorney with the Justice Department, who consulted on FISA interpretations (fourth link). He was appointed as a magistrate judge in 2003. He was in private practice from 1954 to 1981, and County Court Judge in Florida from 1981 to 1986. Neither his resume nor his published works list him as having been involved in any legislative drafting in 1978. In fact, there is no indication from any government site that he was ever involved as an author of FISA. So, absent some confirmation, I don't accept sixth-hand rumors as sources.

Answer 3

I never saw that question. I think the wire tapping program should be illegal but since I have no clue the opinions of those who wrote FISA I can't answer.

Answer 4

The judge is incompetent and should be removed. Bush can always get a warrant AFTER THE FACT.
Get it??
Liberals answer the question. You point to bull$hit.

Answer 5

hmmm...i think the 2 responses are fine.

1. its not Bush's wiretapping program
2. your question makes little sense.

i think youve got a hardon for liberals. trying to bash and demonize them...the reality of the matter, as we can see here, is that youve failed....and now look like an asshat.

Answer 6

What's the question? If that's the question, then you have way to much time on your hands. Liberals can't shy away from a question if there really isn't one.

Answer 7

welp theres goes the fun!:(

Answer 8

because the Liberals can not stand fact or truth.

Liberalism is based on lies, half truth and knee jerk reaction.