http://www.forbes.com/business/manufacturing/feeds/ap/2006/01/17/ap2456266.htmlMcClellan said the Clinton-Gore administration had engaged in warrantless physical searches, and he cited an FBI search of the home of CIA turncoat Aldrich Ames without permission from a judge. He said Clinton's deputy attorney general, Jamie Gorelick, had testified before Congress that the president had the inherent authority to engage in physical searches without warrants.
"I think his hypocrisy knows no bounds," McClellan said of Gore.
But at the time of the Ames search in 1993 and when Gorelick testified a year later, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act required warrants for electronic surveillance for intelligence purposes, but did not cover physical searches. The law was changed to cover physical searches in 1995 under legislation that Clinton supported and signed. Bush's attorney general, Alberto Gonzales, made the same arguments as McClellan during interviews Monday on CNN's "Larry King Live" and Fox News Channel's "Hannity & Colmes."
Gore said Gonzales made a "political defense" of the president, showing why the attorney general should not be in charge of reviewing charges against Bush and should instead name a special counsel.
"His charges are factually wrong," Gore said in a written statement Tuesday. "Both before and after the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was amended in 1995, the Clinton-Gore administration complied fully and completely with the terms of the law." __________________
Former President Clinton said Thursday that he never ordered wiretaps of American citizens without obtaining a court order, as President Bush has acknowledged he has done. Clinton, in an interview broadcast Thursday on the ABC News program 'Nightline', said his administration either received court approval before authorizing a wiretap or went to court within three days after to get permission, as required by law. 'We either went there and asked for the approval or, if there was an emergency and we had to do it beforehand, then we filed within three days afterward and gave them a chance to second guess it,'' Clinton told ABC.
http://www.sltrib.com/nationworld/ci_3398375>For your reading enjoyment:
>
>
'Warrentless' searches not unprecedented>
>Here's a key paragraph:
>
>
In 1994, President Clinton expanded the use of warrantless searches to entirely domestic situations with no foreign intelligence value whatsoever. In a radio address promoting a crime-fighting bill, Mr. Clinton discussed a new policy to conduct warrantless searches in highly violent public housing projects.>
>Highlights are mine.
>
>Meanwhile, here is another eye-opening article regarding the history of FISA:
>
>
Constitutional Spying - The solution to the FISA problem>
>This, to me, sums up the problem:
>
>
The Founders, in the words of The Federalist, did not think it was wise or even possible to set a "limitation of that authority which is to provide for the defense and protection of the community." At the end of the day, a government has to do what is necessary to protect itself and its people. Yet, at the same time, the Founders believed in limited government. How did they square the circle? When it comes to the conduct of war, the history is pretty clear: They expected presidents to do what was required to secure the country's safety. But they did anticipate that Congress would play the role of Monday--morning quarterback: exposing malfeasance when called for, adding or cutting off funds when necessary, passing laws to regularize the exercise of executive discretion without undermining it, and, in the face of truly egregious behavior, being ready to impeach a president.>
>Elizabeth Holtzman charged in
The Nation that Bush's actions are equivalent to what Nixon did. That is utterly ridiculous. Bush has done what he thinks necessary "for the defense and protection of the community", IMHO. Nixon authorized wiretaps out of paranoia. A pretty big difference, in my view.
