Some feel the warrentless wiretapes violates the third and fifth amendments
2007-10-25 16:02:20
·
answer #1
·
answered by Experto Credo 7
·
4⤊
1⤋
President of the United States of America George W. Bush DOES NOT Break The Constitution of the United States of America. President Bush is a very religious Christian Man who relies his Faith to get through life and he reads his Bible everyday and parts of the Constitution is based off the Bible.
2007-10-26 07:35:38
·
answer #2
·
answered by Mr. Knowledgeable VI 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Article II, Section 1, paragraph 7 of the Constitution states;
"Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:--'I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.'"
It has been well documented that this administration began wiretapping American citizens without warrant prior to 911 and repeatedly lied about it. That was a violation of Amendment IV, which guarantees "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 Warrant 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."
As a result of those violations Bush failed to uphold his Constitutional oath of office.
It is very well documented that Bush was repeatedly warned that the United States faced iminent attack from bin Laden's al Qaeda. He wilfully ignored the warnings violating his Constitutional responsibility as Commander in Chief.
Since 911 Bush has signed legislation that has effectively authorized the violation of Amendments IV, V, VI, and VIII.
At the whim of the Unitary Executive YOU can be held without charge indefinitely. YOU no longer have the right to a speedy and public trial or to be confronted with the witnesses against you. YOU can now be subjected to cruel and unusual punishment.
As a result of his signing these violations of the Constitution into law, he has failed in his oath of office.
I do not care who is in office. If Hillary or Huckabee is elected I will continue to fight against the Patriot Act, the Unitary Executive interpretation of the Constitution and for the restoration of the Bill of Rights.
Could the same be said for you? Or are you okay with a serial monarchy as long as the monarch is from your party?
2007-10-25 16:51:30
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
FISA You have to get a warrent before you tap someones communications, he didnt he broke the 4th ammendment all you righties are idiots are civial liberties are getting trampled and you are all like well im not doing nothing wrong so who cares if hes tapping my phone dir dir dir, excuse my spelling but he suspened hapious corpous so he can hold someone in overseas jails for as long as he wants and never let the see a lawyer or be told what they are being charged with that is just wrong. wow you righties are idiots and a bunch of sheep
2007-10-25 16:05:13
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋
it is not in basic terms the Iraqis that detest him.whilst he took ability the USA of a became between the wealthiest and maximum respected international places on earth.He leaves place of work with the yank financial device on the verge of total cave in and u . s . of america's recognition decreased to that of a maverick state with out admire for sovereign borders,blindly charging around the globe killing defenceless human beings in that is greed for narcotics and oil.
2016-10-14 01:49:37
·
answer #5
·
answered by macfarland 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Article I, Section 8, Item 11 of the Constitution of the United States of America clearly states:
"The Congress shall have power.....to declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water..."
There has not been a legal, Constitutional war officially declared by Congress since World War II.
675,000 Iraqis and 3,900 U.S. soldiers have sacrified their lives so that a handful of OIL barons, wealthy industrialists and elitists could become wealthier and more powerful. From its very first day, this stupid 'war' was all about OIL and WAR PROFITEERING. It is the most obscene, evil, immoral sham ever perpetrated on the American people.
This 'war' was initiated by George W. Bush because his family had a personal vendetta against Saddam Hussein dating all the way back to Desert Storm when George H.W. Bush was criticized, ridiculed and humiliated for not 'finishing the job' and ousting Hussein at that time;
because Dick Cheney covets all that OIL swimming underneath Iraq's sands, which is why the number one non-military 'benchmark' Bush insists the Iraqi Parliament pass require surrendering two-thirds of Iraq's OIL fields to private foreign OIL companies. This means that corporations like Exxon-Mobil can literally STEAL all of Iraq's oil fields, which is that nation's most valuable economic resource;
because the giant U.S. military-industrial complex [which Eisenhower warned us about] needed to boost its sagging profits after too many years of 'peace' and the two newest government contractors bellying up to the money trough were the Carlyle Group and Halliburton, BOTH of whom have direct ties to the Bush-Cheney White House.
Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and all their war-mongering friends deserve a special OIL-soaked, blood-stained corner of Hell where they rot for eternity along with:
* All 535 members of the most arrogant, incompetent, evil, contemptible, cowardly, corrupt Republican-led Congress in U.S. history which stood by and allowed Bush to violate our Constitution
-AND-
* All 535 members of the most arrogant, incompetent, evil, contemptible, cowardly, corrupt Democratic-led Congress in U.S. history which promised to get us out of this immoral 'war' if elected - and, to date - have done nothing to keep that promise.
May God DAMN them all!!! -RKO- 10/25/07
2007-10-25 16:09:18
·
answer #6
·
answered by -RKO- 7
·
3⤊
1⤋
He didnt. He waged an aggressive preemptive war, maybe it can be seen as defensive-idk. Some people think that if we hugged Saddam enough, everything would have worked out. Of course, some people are wrong.
2007-10-25 15:57:55
·
answer #7
·
answered by Daniel 6
·
1⤊
3⤋
Study the Constitution, learn it, and then you won't need to ask this question.
2007-10-25 15:56:23
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
he didn't, he hasn't. don't listen to the liberal bloggers who use rumors, half-truths and down right lies. the ACLU is the one who misuses the Constitution to their liberal benefit and have watered it down to represent the lowest of the low.
read the opposition with an open mind sometime and you might learn something. i did.
2007-10-25 15:58:35
·
answer #9
·
answered by ? 7
·
1⤊
4⤋
He didn't the libs just say that cause they can't discuss issues
2007-10-25 15:56:15
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
4⤋