Wiretapping and Presumed Innocence

All wire taps fly in the face of a presumption of innocence.

Bush hasn't authorized wire tapping for individual events all these many times they boast about. He was reauthorizing an on-going monitoring program, his word not mine. Monitoring is a continuous process and of its nature it expects to find evidence of wrongdoing. Just like his preemption policy, it presupposes a crime is going to be committed.

And then there is the problem of the admissibility of any evidence gathered by way of an illegal wiretap. Simply put, mostly it ain't. So why, one wonders, would the Bush Administration want to gather evidence which would not be useful in the prosecution of evildoers? Easy answer, they have no intention of taking anyone to court based on information they gather. This is the Administration of secrete prisons on foreign soil held by inmates who never have and never will see a Judge. This is the administration that sees no reason to adhere to law or go to endure the oversight of the Courts. Odd for an Administration installed by the Court.

to "warrant" a search and/or seizure.

Snoopgate has to kill this undead administration. We have the stake, we have the heart, we have the hammer.

Let's dust this fucker.

since the early 90's. We had to be harsh as possible with prisoners because they were criminals and they didn't deserve the benefit of the doubt. Every homicide was an open and shut case and if one didn't agree they were blaming the victim.

No sympathy. No empathy. No redemption is the new rule, although you might get a pass if you're rich enough, white enough and you didn't murder anybody without orders.

Everybody knows that when Big Brother says you're a terrorist or "have connections" to terrorists then you have no human rights or civil liberties worth respecting. "Due process"? That's sooo pre-9/11.

We are thinking alike, from a different angle:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=5659751&mesg_id=5659751