Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Russ Feingold: Obama Super PAC Reversal Will Lead To 'A Legalized Abramoff System' [View all]boppers
(16,588 posts)Re: War, the Supreme Court and congress said otherwise.
Re: Awlaki, his tribunal said he was a clear and present danger.
"You seem to want to do away with the presumption of innocence."
Well, that's a memetic fabrication that resulted from some linguistic messiness. "Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat" is the original. Proof was given, Awlaki did not deny it, but even boasted of his guilt. A show trial was not needed to repeat this exchange.
Re: Tapping,
We've been wiretapping without warrants since there were wires.
Nothing illegal about, oh, the phone company listening to the traffic on their wires. Always been legal. Law enforcement can't *force* a tap without a warrant, but voluntarily listening in on equipment a company or person owns is legal. They can even tap for months, or years, without a warrant, and if they get something interesting, ask for a warrant. Sure, they can't admit it as *evidence* without a warrant, but if they get other evidence, they don't need the tapping evidence.
That's part of what the Jewel case was all about, the strange society assumption that wiretapping requires a warrant... it doesn't. Third party doctrine killed it, many, many, years ago, along with common carrier laws, and border laws.
The US government is more than happy to let people believe otherwise.