Gen. Hayden and Bush are attempting to dumb down the 4th amendment

[bigtree]

Gen. Hayden and his exchange w/reporter on the fourth amendment

from the National Press Club in January 2006: (http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/january2006/240106shakygrip.htm)

QUESTION: The legal standard is probable cause, General. You used the terms just a few minutes ago, "We reasonably believe." And a FISA court, my understanding is, would not give you a warrant if you went before them and say "we reasonably believe"; you have to go to the FISA court, or the attorney general has to go to the FISA court and say, "we have probable cause."

And so what many people believe -- and I'd like you to respond to this -- is that what you've actually done is crafted a detour around the FISA court by creating a new standard of "reasonably believe" in place of probable cause because the FISA court will not give you a warrant based on reasonable belief, you have to show probable cause. Could you respond to that, please?

GEN. HAYDEN: Sure. I didn't craft the authorization. I am responding to a lawful order. All right? The attorney general has averred to the lawfulness of the order.

Just to be very clear -- and believe me, if there's any amendment to the Constitution that employees of the National Security Agency are familiar with, it's the Fourth. And it is a reasonableness standard in the Fourth Amendment. And so what you've raised to me -- and I'm not a lawyer, and don't want to become one -- what you've raised to me is, in terms of quoting the Fourth Amendment, is an issue of the Constitution. The constitutional standard is "reasonable." And we believe -- I am convinced that we are lawful because what it is we're doing is reasonable.


disagreed:


Text of fourth amendment-

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


Probable cause is defined by the "totality of circumstance" test established in Illinois v. Gates (462 U.S. 213) (1983), overturning the two-pronged test in which prosecutors tried to rely on an informant's "veracity," "reliability" and "basis of knowledge" and were found by the Illinois Supreme Court to be "highly irrelevant". (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=462&page=213)

The flawed reasoning by the prosecution in the 'Illinois' case sounds as close as can be to Bush and Hayden's 'reasonableness standard'. Where is the 'totality of circumstances' in the wide net they cast with their random wiretaps and data mining?


All of that doesn't seem to leave any room for a loose standard of judgment. That's why they established the FISA courts. It's absurd for the Bush regime to assume they have the ability to unilaterally determine whether they have met the threshold required to conduct surveillance.

[Xeric]

1. And thanks LIE-BERMAN for supporting this guy

"U.S. Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., said that Hayden’s appointment shouldn’t be excluded solely because of his military status. In comments made during an interview with the Norwich Bulletin Editorial Board today, Lieberman said in his previous dealings with Hayden regarding the work of the 9/11 Commission the general showed himself to be extremely capable.

“On the inner workings of what we should do to reorganize America’s intelligence system, I found him to be very independent, willing to criticize people in the military intelligence apparatus and generally a straight talker,” Lieberman said of Bush’s appointee. “So, my mind is open to slightly favorably inclined to Mike Hayden as we begin this review of his nomination.”

http://www.norwichbulletin.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060508/NEWS01/60508009/1002

[bigtree]

5. Stupid to fold before any questions are asked

and answered.

[Avalux]

2. AND - it's absurd for Hayden to think it's OK

because the Attorney General and the WH told him so. Complete disregard for the Constitution, Congress and the LAW. He's either stupid or he's a criminal like the rest of them.

[bigtree]

3. notice he went on with his own absurd interpretation

even though he's 'not a lawyer' . . .

[Avalux]

4. Yeah; was told to say that -

Hayden is nothing but a tool - he'll do as instructed with his head up Negroponte's ass; doesn't matter his qualifications. If he had any integrity at all, he would have refused to participate in the illegal wiretapping program and asked to be reassigned. Instead, he put the damn thing together.

[bigtree]

6. The Perfect Bushman

"The Democrats failed to make a big to-do when Hayden inadvertently revealed himself. They failed to make a major issue out of his refusal to answer the question about targeting Bush enemies. They failed to connect Hayden's failures, his lawbreaking and his contempt for the Constitution to a pattern of conduct that exists throughout the Bush administration."

http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/06/05/con06185.html