Constant's pations

If it's more than 30 minutes old, it's not news. It's a blog.

Friday, March 17, 2006

Unlawful Presidential Program: Illegal searches

Addition at bottom: 18 Mar 2006

The news is dribbling out: They've confirmed what we've long suspected -- there was on official illegal Presidential classified program to engage in warrantless searches and seizures.

"Bush administration lawyers (Torture Yoo and Abu Gonzales presumably) after 9/11 made the case that Bush had the power to engage in warrantless physical searches of terrorism suspects on domestic soil." [ REf ] Also

Let's presume this is true -- in that the policy was actually implemented. The issues are:

  • A. What was done to cover-up what was going on;

  • B. How was the illegal activity explained away: BOgus reasons for the illegal conduct;

  • C. If this "legal argument" is "valid" why the big push for secret NSLs?

  • D. How does this fit in with the FBI-I drive and the Brady Requests: If you're engaging in lllegal searches, how are the records of that illegal conduct -- hidden from the defense counsel; and how has fraud been committed on the court?

  • E. How does the conduct -- the suppression of evidence that evidence was illegally obtained -- compare to the NSA activity; and how many people have been convicted using evidence that should have been suppressed?

    Curious the government can get away with "suppressing illegal conduct" but they want to introduce NSA infrmation that should also be suppressed.

    * * *

    It only makes sense to independently push for NSLs -- on top of the "legal" warrantless surveillance/searches -- if they had another motive besides the law for doing what they were doing.

    Blutnly, things to do not add up. It appears they are trying to say, "We legalized" what we have now just been caught doing: Engaging in illegal survilleance. This is the same non-sense we heard over the GITMO.

    In otherwords, the "legal arguments" to justify violations of the law have been applied to AMericans.

    Surprise: Guess who's tracking this: [ Click ]

    Using adverse inferences, we already knew the answers:

    A. Does this explain the DHS illegal interrogation program: Yes, but there's more.

    B. Is this another program on top of what we have been told of the "illegal Presidential conduct"? Yes, and there's more.

    C. HOw does this square with the apprent domestic rendition program? It's part of it.

    D. How does this activity mesh with the apparent ulnawful use of military personnel in violation fo Posse Comitatus during Operation Falcon? Part of the same thing.

    Bluntly there's no reason to have any confidence that the President's power has been checked, or that he has respected our rights. He's failed to protect the Constitution. His efforts to "legalize the activity" and "shut down investigatiosn" is at odds with our system of accountability. Congress unlawfully assents to this illegal conduct.

    * * *

    Like Pre-emptive war? There were Pre-emptive attacks on pre-emptive "rioters": [ Click ]

    OK, let's turn that around on government: Where are the "pre-emptive 42 USC 1983 claims" against poublic officials? [ Jurisprudence needed ]

    * * *

    Speaking of illegal activity and rendition, how many Americans were on the aircraft flying out of the US to the UK? [ BBC: Click ]

    The flights revealed by Mr Darling included one stopover on the way between the Afghan capital Kabul and Washington and others stopping [in the UK -- huh?] on their way to destinations in the Middle East such as Amman in Jordan and Riyadh in Saudi Arabia.

    Same questions: Where were the aircraft coming from; and why were they not already where they were needed in the middle east?

    * * *

    There's always a problem when a government says something "cannot be true due to lack of evidence" but the evidence shows up:
    Earlier this week, Mr Straw said claims the US has secretly flown terror suspects through the UK would eventually "fall away" due to lack of evidence.

    Here are the list of stopovers from the US to elswhere: List [ Click ]

    * * *

    The interesting thing is to see how thees many programs are shedding light on eachother: [ Click ]

    Added: 18 Mar 2006

    Tainted evidence used for warrants with new GOP Bill: [ Click ]

    * * *

    Made a list of the abuses, which violate the US Constitution:

    The US Government abuses the Public

    Unlawflyuly self-delegates illegal, abusive powers

    Uses power not delegated

    Rlies on words not written

    Enforces non-existing laws

    Sanctions conduct not yet occurred

    Produces evidence which does not exist

    Uses illegally obtained evidence

    The US government creates immunity for government, feeding more abuse

    Ignores well documented crimes

    Changes laws which sanction crimes already committed

    Legalizes illegal conduct

    Silences discussion of the illegality