If Hillary Clinton is elected President, how will you feel about her warrantless wiretapping powers?

Question

And why should it be any different that you feel about Bush's?

cvq: The Constitution specifically excludes these powers, it does not grant them.

cvq: It matters not what you think, it is explicitly spelled out in the Constitution.

Answer 1

Bush has already proven he has no respect for the Bill of Rights and has referred to our Constitution as simply a damn piece of paper. I have confidence that Hillary Clinton will not abuse the power given to her by the Patriot Act as Bush has done. In fact, I believe she will revamp the entire Patriot Act to exclude such anti-American activities.

Answer 2

I try hard to be objective - I don't care as much about what the rule is, as long as the SAME rule is applied to all!

I think a president Hillary should have all the same powers a president Bush has.

To be a bit extreme (this is the internet, after all), my answer would be the same if Charles Manson were elected president.

I would be unhappy with Hillary having these powers. But I would have to direct my ire to the voters for electing her, not the Constitution which gives these powers to every president.

EDIT: If you are correct, then I'm sure that will come out. Obviously there is a dispute. What did Lincoln and FDR do? I'd be interested. I don't think they were war criminals.

Answer 3

Considering Bush is doing nothing more than was done during the Clinton administration (truth!), I consider all the wailing and rending of garments over Bush's national security programs to have already exposed the hypocrisy of the nay-sayers.
---------------------
Since people seem unable to handle the truth, let me cite it:
Testimony of Clinton Deputy AG Jamie Gorelick: http://thinkprogress.org/gorelick-testimony/
Here's a nice snippet:
"First, the Department of Justice believes, and the case law supports, that the President has inherent authority to conduct warrantless physical searches for foreign intelligence purposes and that the President may, as has been done, delegate this authority to the Attorney General." It goes on to say this applies to electronic surveillance, also.

Who would be stupid enough to think this started with Bush or even Clinton, and won't be applied by Bush's successors? Facts, people. Not opinions created in a vaccuum. Not emotional outbursts. Facts.

Answer 4

i'm not likely to invest or upload on your record. She should not be Madam President, Queen Hillary or the like. She needs it so undesirable, whether that is slipping with the aid of her hands. She is purely not the ultimate individual for this type of time as this....

Answer 5

Bush is a better president than Hillary could ever be...and that's not saying much.

Answer 6

It isn't any different than how I feel about Bush. it is unconstitutional. I have tried to tell people to look at it this way...even if you trust Bush, do you trust EVERY president in the future to not abuse it? no good answers. Hope you do better!

Answer 7

Hillary in 2008
Obama in 2016
Newsome in 2024

Answer 8

Being that I would not have voted for her, not looking too promising. Remember hubby Bill and his town hall meetings? He had the IRS check out people who dared to ask him to give an example of a country that "taxed itself into prosperity"!!!

Answer 9

I would have to say that her hubby Bill is in deep do do. He will be the first one she taps. Those conversations will be used later in the divorce proceedings.

Answer 10

I'd be fearful. This is no different than what I feel about Bush's.