Mueller is telling Congress that the statute didn't cause the problem, but rather, the FBI's implementation of the statute did. If that's the case, then shouldn't Congress examine the statute and rewrite it so that the FBI cannot implement the statute in such a way as to tread upon the rights of U.S. citizens?
2007-03-27 04:48:31 · 13 answers · asked by Bush Invented the Google 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Shrink: There is NO oversight with regard to the PATRIOT Act. Saying it doesn't make it so.
2007-03-27 05:25:00 · update #1
Yes, everyone with at least half a brain said this type of abuse would result form the very unpatriotic Patriot Act.
So all the republicans that have defended it are wrong again.
2007-03-27 04:51:48 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 3⤋
No. The FBI should properly implement the Statute.
Before the Patriot Act, there was probably more federal abuse. I will say it until I am blue in the face, but the Patriot Act has provided oversight.
2007-03-27 05:05:20 · answer #2 · answered by Shrink 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Has there ever been anything written by government that has not been broad? Every law, every act, every this and that written by Congress have always been broad and made it possible to abuse.
Old case in point, DMCA was written for the intention of protecting digital media. If was used automatic garage door makers to try and prevent other companies from making universal remotes for their products.
2007-03-27 04:55:34 · answer #3 · answered by This Is Not Honor 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well there obviously is oversight or we would never of heard of it. Think son. Yes it should be rewritten I agree whole heartedly. The provision was used in a case where it did not apply and there should be recriminations.
2007-03-27 06:17:00 · answer #4 · answered by ? 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yeah... I mean there is obviously a problem with the statute if it can be abused.. just trying to scuffle it and make it look like the Act is still a good thing... it's a hard sell on his part.
2007-03-27 04:56:55 · answer #5 · answered by pip 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The Patriot Act is anything but. It totally goes against the Constitution. Maybe a case for the Supreme Court.
2007-03-27 04:53:30 · answer #6 · answered by guy o 5 · 2⤊ 3⤋
i wager this manner of this has to go both concepts. If he felt an same way for you, then per chance there does no longer be this manner of issue. possibly you is probably not too aggressive, on account that men CAN get scared off truthfully...
2016-12-02 21:44:45 · answer #7 · answered by sechler 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You are not confused. You have diagnosed the symptoms accurately.
The reality is the FBI did break the law as ignorance or misinterpretation of the law is no excuse. Imagine going to traffic court claiming to not understand the litany of arrows at a given intersection.
The Patriot act is America's knee jerk reaction to the fear and anxiety that followed 9/11. Americans were still traumatized and the Bush admin, tragically, took advantage of that.
2007-03-27 04:53:35 · answer #8 · answered by Chi Guy 5 · 2⤊ 5⤋
Well think about what you're asking. It doesn't matter what the law is if someone is determined to break that law. And I don't support the Patriot act.
2007-03-27 04:53:04 · answer #9 · answered by Crystal Blue Persuasion 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
In either case, the only people who should have to worry are the ones who are doing something illegal or for terrorists.
2007-03-27 04:58:01 · answer #10 · answered by az 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋