That's just it though. Was this an "illegal" act? That's what is in dispute. Specifically, does the authority granted by congress to the president to pursue terrorists include the power to tap foriegn-native phone calls without a warrant. This is not semantics, its law, and the courts have not ruled on this.

>No. Like I said, it's a question of semantics. An illegal act is illegal at the time it is committed. An illegal act doesn't only become illegal at the time of the court pronouncement. The court pronouncement just validates it. At the same time, judges and juries are not infallible as you seem to believe. If a judge/jury screws up, does that mean the act was, in fact, legal?
>
>>So accusations are criminal now. No trial, no evidence, just the opinion of someone who leaks classified information and a reporter willing to publish are enough.
>>
>>Your example is not relevant as you have stated as fact that you killed your neighbor, there is no dispute. The facts in the wiretap case are in dispute, hence the need for a legal verdict.
>>
>>>Sounds a bit like semantics though, doesn't it? If I go out and murder my neighbour by shooting him in the head while he sleeps in his hammock, your contention is that I haven't committed an illegal act until such time as I've been convicted. I contend that the act itself is illegal, and the conviction simply acknowledges and affirms that fact, and allows the system to punish me for it.
>>>
>>>>I was specifically responding to the "illegal" comment. You made my obvious point, there has been no legal ruling. To me this goes hand in hand with the accusations of rape and murder against our soldiers, or the Duke case for that matter. There is a ton of rhetoric about murderers and rapists, but the trials have not been conducted. I know its a symptom of politics in the 24 hour news cycle, but that doesn't make it right.
>>>>
>>>>>Interesting conundrum: How do you prove you've been eavesdropped on if the NSA's surveillance program is so secret? Frankly, it is too soon Jake, you know that. No cases have gone completely through the courts yet. Even so, with those pending, i don't know how they will 'prove' anything. Here are a couple to watch though:
>>>>>
>>>>>ACLU v. NSA, Docket No. 06-10204 (Michigan) US District Court
>>>>>Terkel v. AT&T, Docket No. 06-02837 (Illinois) (AT&T participation case)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Site the case where this has been proven please. Articles and opinions do not count, I'm talking about a legal ruling on the specific issue.