home

Judge Resigns From FISA Court in Bush Protest

D.C. District Court Judge James Robertson, one of the 11 secret judges of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, has resigned in the wake of the allegations that Bush couldn't even be bothered to get one of these rubber-stamped FISA surveillance orders, despite the fact that the government could monitor conversations for 72 hours before even applying for a warrant if the circumstances so warranted.

Two associates familiar with his decision said yesterday that Robertson privately expressed deep concern that the warrantless surveillance program authorized by the president in 2001 was legally questionable and may have tainted the FISA court's work.

....Robertson indicated privately to colleagues in recent conversations that he was concerned that information gained from warrantless NSA surveillance could have then been used to obtain FISA warrants. FISA court Presiding Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, who had been briefed on the spying program by the administration, raised the same concern in 2004 and insisted that the Justice Department certify in writing that it was not occurring.

"They just don't know if the product of wiretaps were used for FISA warrants -- to kind of cleanse the information," said one source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the classified nature of the FISA warrants. "What I've heard some of the judges say is they feel they've participated in a Potemkin court."

The President has not yet publicly reacted to Judge Robertson's resignation. He's probably glad, since it was Judge Robertson who halted the Administration's military tribanal proceedings at Guantanamo back in November, 2004,.

The 11 FISA Court judges are regular federal judges in their day jobs. Their work on the FISA Court, however, is the stuff of George Orwell. As I noted back in August, 2002, James Bamford, author of a book on the National Security Agency penned an op-ed for the New York Times, in which he wrote:

Today, like a modern Star Chamber, the F.I.S.A. court meets behind a cipher-locked door in a windowless, bug-proof, vault-like room guarded 24 hours a day on the top floor of the Justice Department building. The 11 judges (increased from seven by the U.S.A. Patriot Act) hear only the government's side.

Back then, a milestone was in the making, courtesy of former Attorney General John Ashcroft. A little background, from that time:

The FISA court has approved 10,000 interception requests in its twenty five year history. It has never turned one down. In the event it were to deny a request, there is a special FISA appeals court. It is the only appeals court in the country which has never heard a case.

The milestone was that the FISA appeals court, known as the FISA Review court, had been called into action for the first time in history, as a result of the lower FISA court taking the the FBI to task for mispresentations in 75 secret snoop applications. Ashcroft decided to appeal. The Court retaliated in August, 2002 by releasing its opinion (dated May, 17, 2002, available here pdf) to the Senate Judiciary Committee. As Bamford said,

"The release of the May 17 opinion (by the court's new presiding judge) to the Senate Judiciary Committee, and the committee's release of it to the public, can reasonably be seen as cries for help."

In the May, 17 opinion, the FISA court rejected the Justice Department's position that the Patriot Act allowed for the crumbling of the wall of separation between federal prosecutors and intelligence gatherers. The issue before it was:

"Does the USA Patriot Act remove or merely loosen previous constraints on the coordination between prosecutors and intelligence gatherers."

Why is the wall so important? As I wrote here,

In a nutshell, the FISA court was created to allow officials to obtain evidence pertaining to intelligence activities upon a less stringent showing than is required to get a search or surveillance warrant for criminal law violations. It required that the primary purpose of any application be to obtain intelligence information.

Along comes the draft of the Patriot Act. Ashcroft initially requested that the requirement that intelligence gathering be the primary purpose of the application be reduced to simply "a purpose" from "the primary purpose." Congress balked and a compromise was worked out. The final Patriot Act language (which is now law) requires FISA court warrants be issued only for applications that allege intelligence gathering is a "significant purpose" of the request.

Ashcroft's twisted interpretation of this change is that law enforcement purposes can now be the primary purpose of a FISA warrant request. And in May, 2002, he approved guidelines providing that prosecutors may "advise intelligence officials on the initiation, operation, continuation, or expansion of FISA searches or surveillance."

The lower FISA Court cried foul, finding that "such extensive collaboration would amount to law enforcement 'directing FISA surveillances and searches from start to finish,' which it considers illegal." The reason for the appeal of the FISA court's ruling is that "the FISA court based its decision on peripheral provisions of FISA left unchanged by the Patriot Act. The Justice Department asserts that FISA surveillance can now be used more extensively for law enforcement purposes" as a result of the new Patriot Act language.

As reported by Vanessa Blum at Legal Times,

In a scathing opinion made public Aug. 22, the FISA court struck down new DOJ protocols for communication between prosecutors and intelligence agents. Among the court's concerns: that the lax guidelines would allow prosecutors to spy on U.S. residents without demonstrating probable cause as required by law (my emphasis).....The ruling points to more than 70 cases in the late 1990s in which FISA judges were misled about coordination between law enforcement and intelligence agents.

More from Blum:

The sticking point is that FISA surveillance is supposed to be used "for the purpose of obtaining foreign intelligence information." A less rigorous standard of evidence is used to authorize a search or surveillance under FISA than is used by federal trial court judges to weigh the validity of searches and surveillance in mainstream criminal cases.

Under the March 2002 guidelines approved by Attorney General John Ashcroft, prosecutors would be permitted to "advise intelligence officials on the initiation, operation, continuation, or expansion of FISA searches or surveillance." According to the lower FISA court, such extensive collaboration would amount to law enforcement "directing FISA surveillances and searches from start to finish," which it considers illegal.

In other words, the Justice Department, under Ashcroft, engineered a compromise for FISA surveillance in the Patriot Act, and then pulled a bait and switch. Blum reports Georgetown Law Professor Jonathan Turley's reaction:

"The whole point of that compromise [with Congress] was to deny use of FISA in investigations that were principally law enforcement," says GWU's Turley. "After agreeing to compromise in congressional proceedings, they went on in secret to implement what was originally refused by Congress."

My shorter version:

Justice is attempting an end-run around our contstitutional right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures and the Fourth Amendment's and Title III's strict warrant requirements.

In other words, if the government gets a FISA court warrant, they don't have to show either probable cause of the commission of a crime or probable cause that evidence of a crime is likely to be uncovered by the intrusion. In a criminal court, such a showing would have to be made before the government could search our homes or businesses or wiretap our phones.

Ultimately, the secret FISA review court (before which only the Government was allowed to appear to argue the case) reversed the FISA court order and ruled in favor of the Justice Department. Attorney John Cline, who wrote the amicus brief for the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, said at the time the brief was filed:

"FISA was designed to allow a lower standard for searches in foreign intelligence cases," said Cline. "Previously, FISA searches, which do not require traditional warrants based on probable cause, took place only under the direction of foreign intelligence agents. Criminal investigators were called in only when the searches led to incidental discovery of ordinary criminal activity.

"Now, the Justice Department's interpretation of the amendments to FISA allow supervision of the relaxed-standard searches by regular criminal investigators if they can claim any non-trivial connection to foreign intelligence," Cline said. "It allows for greatly broadened use of FISA searches in cases where normal Fourth Amendment protections should apply."

To ordinary citizens, particularly those who do business internationally, that means that criminal investigators can eavesdrop on their conversations or search their businesses, homes, phone records, and e-mail correspondence without the requirement that investigators convince a judge that there is some reason to suspect criminal activity, said Joshua Dratel, a co-chair of NACDL's Amicus Curiae Committee who assisted on the brief. "There might as well not be a Fourth Amendment for people who have international dealings."

Which brings us back today and Judge Robertson's resignation. To me it signals that Bush and his Administration have been deceptive with the FISA Court and using it to cleanse illegally interecepted communications. The new revelations about Bush's executive Order confirmed this and Judge Robertson's conscience told him he just couldn't go along with it any longer.

< The Priciest Lawyer in America | Bush Pardons Denver Lawyer, a Cocaine Offender >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Re: Judge Resigns From FISA Court in Bush Protest (none / 0) (#1)
    by Dick Durata on Tue Dec 20, 2005 at 10:46:31 PM EST
    It must be upsetting to be on the court and come to realize that Bill Keller knew about this for a year, while you were being played for a chump. As was said 'The Potemkim Court'.

    James Bamford, author of a book on the National Security Agency penned an op-ed for the New York Times, in which he wrote . . . .
    Coincidentally, I just linked to Bamford's interview remarks (realaudio) on PBS's NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, in which he extends his perspective to the issues about the NSA spying/warrantless wiretaps, etc. raised in your earlier thread Analog vs. Digital Snooping: Is This Bush's Distinction?.

    You know, as everyone has been screaming about Bush violating this law, I was thinking that FISA sounds Orwellian and as my kids would say, very shady as it is. I guess that's why so many people in the government are so incredibly peeved about this: if they'd go around what is essentially a rubber-stamp formality so they can spy on whoever they want to, then we are in some serious trouble. If Bush has no respect for a law that gave him the right to snoop on pretty much anybody, then, hm, let's see, why should we have believed the government's claims of WMDs, that we don't torture, that the Feds did everything they could in regard to Katrina, that "freedom is on the march" in Iraq, that they won the last election, or the one before it? Honest to God. It's an executive branch filled with whiny, spoiled brats, isn't it? The degree of willfulness is astonishing. It reminds me of an abusive marriage. How much more BS will we rationalize away before we wise up and see that we're getting our asses kicked because the government is a bully, that all the rationalizations they use are excuses? Even Bush's "I'm doing it for your own good/trying to protect you" mantra echoes the language of domestic violence.

    Re: Judge Resigns From FISA Court in Bush Protest (none / 0) (#5)
    by Edger on Wed Dec 21, 2005 at 08:59:20 AM EST
    BlueUU:
    The degree of willfulness is astonishing. It reminds me of an abusive marriage. How much more BS will we rationalize away before we wise up...[?]
    As with abusive marriages, the rationalizations will probably continue till the marriage [country?] falls apart...

    Good, let the traiterous scumbag leave.
    Variable, Could you enlighten the rest of us as to why you consider this judge a "traitorous scumbag"?

    Re: Judge Resigns From FISA Court in Bush Protest (none / 0) (#7)
    by learned hound on Wed Dec 21, 2005 at 09:33:39 AM EST
    Judge Robertson is a hero. You have to wonder why the other FISA judges don't resign. After all, how do they know that the warrant material they're getting isn't from the illegal wiretaps? And even if it isn't, why review applications when a denial (there hasn't been one I think) means the Govt taps anyway? What a waste of judicial time. Hooray for the Judge!

    LH, you can count the number of denials on one hand, that's how few there have been since the FISA court was set up.

    Re: Judge Resigns From FISA Court in Bush Protest (none / 0) (#9)
    by Edger on Wed Dec 21, 2005 at 09:54:10 AM EST
    The FISA court has approved 10,000 interception requests in its twenty five year history. It has never turned one down. In the event it were to deny a request, there is a special FISA appeals court. It is the only appeals court in the country which has never heard a case.
    It should be obvious to all that there really can be only one reason that Bush would want to circumvent the FISA court: He knows there was a high risk of the court rejecting his planned actions.

    Re: Judge Resigns From FISA Court in Bush Protest (none / 0) (#10)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Dec 21, 2005 at 10:09:10 AM EST
    From the post:
    Robertson indicated privately to colleagues in recent conversations that he was concerned that information gained from warrantless NSA surveillance could have then been used to obtain FISA warrants.
    This doesn't make a lot of sense. First we have claims that the administration should have went for a warrant when it didn't, and now we have claims that the warrantless info could have been used to obtain FISA warrants. Chicken? Egg? Anyway, the judge did the right thing if that is his belief. Although I do wonder why he waited until all this hit the airwaves..

    Re: Judge Resigns From FISA Court in Bush Protest (none / 0) (#11)
    by glanton on Wed Dec 21, 2005 at 10:12:31 AM EST
    It's bad enough that these secret courts exist in the first place. Who would have ever thought such a thing could happen in the United States? Robertson and every other "judge" who "served" on one of these Star Chamber panels ought to be ashamed of themselves.

    This doesn't make a lot of sense. First we have claims that the administration should have went for a warrant when it didn't, and now we have claims that the warrantless info could have been used to obtain FISA warrants. Chicken? Egg?
    It does make sense.
    "They just don't know if the product of wiretaps were used for FISA warrants -- to kind of cleanse the information,"
    In other words, information obtained from a non FISA wiretap.
    Although I do wonder why he waited until all this hit the airwaves..
    Maybe he was unaware of how extensive Bush's program was. After all, if the NSA was not obtaining FISA warrants, how could the FISA court be aware of what was happening.

    This is such an interesting development. I'm looking forward to hearing more from the judge in the days that follow.

    Re: Judge Resigns From FISA Court in Bush Protest (none / 0) (#15)
    by Edger on Wed Dec 21, 2005 at 10:58:08 AM EST
    I guess the air gets a bit thin some places...

    if you were hired by the people and sent to Washington with a role to play in national security, and then turn on that mission and the people that sent you there, in order to further your own political career, you should be immediately shot dead for treason.
    This federal judge was appointed by former President Clinton to the bench, he was not elected by "the people". Former Chief Justice William Rehnquist appointed him to the FISA court. He was not elected to the FISA court by the people. What political career does Judge Robertson have to further? He is not an elected official. Also, he resigned from the FISA court because he questioned the policy. Resigning is an ethical, and legal, course of action.
    Anyone who aids or furthers the democrats and media's attack on W for conducting this type of surveillance, knowing full well that it is his responsibility and his responsibility alone to provide for our defense, are traitors.
    Perhaps you feel comfortable with unchecked power, but there are millions of US citizens that do not. Regardless of what political party heads the executive branch of the government.

    Re: Judge Resigns From FISA Court in Bush Protest (none / 0) (#17)
    by Edger on Wed Dec 21, 2005 at 11:12:09 AM EST
    "Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so. It's important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution." -- George W. Bush, April 20, 2004


    Re: Judge Resigns From FISA Court in Bush Protest (none / 0) (#18)
    by glanton on Wed Dec 21, 2005 at 11:22:01 AM EST
    Wow, from this thread you'd think the war of ideas in America was being waged between the Variables on the one hand, and secret judges with the minutest shred of conscience on the other. No wonder so many people don't vote. And it makes me sad that I have recently joined that number. To kdog, I humbly apologize for the Nader snarks. You are right. This once great beacon of liberty....

    Re: Judge Resigns From FISA Court in Bush Protest (none / 0) (#19)
    by kdog on Wed Dec 21, 2005 at 11:39:26 AM EST
    No apology necessary glanton. My feeling is if the Democratic party is all there is to stop this abuse of the constitution...the constitution is screwed. Look at Rockefeller, all proud of himself for writing a little letter, when he should have been screaming from the rafters when he learned of this.

    Re: Judge Resigns From FISA Court in Bush Protest (none / 0) (#20)
    by Dadler on Wed Dec 21, 2005 at 11:42:39 AM EST
    Good lord, my righty amigos, this is judge, who has served with dignity and actually has a sense of duty to the constitution. Bush playing fast and loose with what his "legal" responsibilities were is just cowardice on his part. Stand up and take your medicine and stop hiding behind you egomania. You are not king. You are not even bright. Stand up and BE a man, instead of just PRETENDING to be one.

    Variable,
    you should be immediately shot dead for treason.
    And skip due process? Now that would be illegal, and unconstitutional. The Bill of Rights Ammendment VI states:
    In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.


    Re: Judge Resigns From FISA Court in Bush Protest (none / 0) (#22)
    by Sailor on Wed Dec 21, 2005 at 11:52:48 AM EST
    macro, for future reference, please don't call out wingnuts. One can't have a battle of the wits with an unarmed opponent. IOW, please limit variable's scope;-) [/geekspeak]

    So now you want to talk semantics. First of all, my comments regarding "the people sending them to Washington," were clearly directed at the traiterous Senators that sat were briefed a dozen times on this matter. But don't think you can absolve the judge by merely pointing out that an idiot appointed him. Whether elected or appointed his whole purpose is to serve the interests of this nation and its people. Nobody is served by a president with his hands tied behind his back.

    Re: Judge Resigns From FISA Court in Bush Protest (none / 0) (#24)
    by Che's Lounge on Wed Dec 21, 2005 at 12:02:11 PM EST
    Yes, in my opinion, if you were hired by the people and sent to Washington with a role to play in national security, and then turn on that mission and the people that sent you there, in order to further your own political career, you should be immediately shot dead for treason. Nothing more intellectually vacant than blind rage. Garden variety fascist. And a great example of the rightard's lack of respect and understanding of the rule of law.

    Re: Judge Resigns From FISA Court in Bush Protest (none / 0) (#25)
    by Che's Lounge on Wed Dec 21, 2005 at 12:12:18 PM EST
    Variable, How much power does the president need before his hands are "untied"? You tell us, Mr. Wizard.

    Re: Judge Resigns From FISA Court in Bush Protest (none / 0) (#26)
    by kdog on Wed Dec 21, 2005 at 12:12:28 PM EST
    And skip due process? Now that would be illegal, and unconstitutional.
    And treasonous. There is no act more treasonous than violating the constitution.

    Re: Judge Resigns From FISA Court in Bush Protest (none / 0) (#27)
    by glanton on Wed Dec 21, 2005 at 12:14:16 PM EST
    kdog, The only thing I wonder about Rockefeller is, would he have been within his legal rights to go public and "scream from the rafters" about these crimes when he learned of them? My feeling is he would have ended up in jail. Which reminds me of the famous rapid-fire between Emerson and Thoreau when E visited T in jail: E: Thoreau, Thoreau, what are you doing in there? T: Emerson, Emerson, what are you doing out there? Dadler, you write:
    this is judge, who has served with dignity and actually has a sense of duty to the constitution
    Sorry, buddy, I agree with you in spirit but as far as Robertson goes, I don't see how you can say a secret judge ever served with dignity. Really. We're now officially at the bottomn of the proverbial barrell.

    Nobody is served by a president with his hands tied behind his back.
    And everyone loses when the President's power goes unchecked.
    IOW, please limit variable's scope;-) [/geekspeak]
    Sailor, it is clear to me that Variables’ scope in this instance is already limited. He has obviously been declared as a Boolean type. You are either with him and his ideology, or you are against him.

    Re: Judge Resigns From FISA Court in Bush Protest (none / 0) (#29)
    by Dadler on Wed Dec 21, 2005 at 01:12:05 PM EST
    Glanton, Can't argue with you, but I was more attempting to take the righty point of view in my assessment of him. You know, they're always respecting the hard-ass law and order judges, but when one of them comes to his senses, egad, treason!! But again, I certainly can't argue with your barrel analogy. Tho I do think the right goes through the BOTTOM of the barrel into the dirt with much more frequency and enthusiasm.

    Re: Judge Resigns From FISA Court in Bush Protest (none / 0) (#30)
    by Edger on Wed Dec 21, 2005 at 01:13:27 PM EST
    You are either with him and his ideology, or you are against him. Macro, can we change the name to "xor" ?

    Re: Judge Resigns From FISA Court in Bush Protest (none / 0) (#31)
    by Sailor on Wed Dec 21, 2005 at 01:49:05 PM EST
    Edger, how about 'Eeyore';-)

    Re: Judge Resigns From FISA Court in Bush Protest (none / 0) (#32)
    by Edger on Wed Dec 21, 2005 at 01:59:01 PM EST
    Sailor... works for me! ;-)

    Re: Judge Resigns From FISA Court in Bush Protest (none / 0) (#33)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Dec 21, 2005 at 02:08:42 PM EST
    mac writes:
    "They just don't know if the product of wiretaps were used for FISA warrants -- to kind of cleanse the information,"
    Nope, that is not what he said.
    Robertson indicated privately to colleagues in recent conversations that he was concerned that information gained from warrantless NSA surveillance could have then been used to obtain FISA warrants.


    Nope, that is not what he said.
    I never even hinted in my previous post that I was quoting Judge Robertson. I was quoting one of the sources that paraphrased Judge Robertson. The quote is directly from the Washington Post article that TL references. What you quoted should be sufficient to answer your original question.

    Re: Judge Resigns From FISA Court in Bush Protest (none / 0) (#35)
    by Sailor on Wed Dec 21, 2005 at 02:30:45 PM EST
    ooh, ppj lies .... What a surprise, But this post is about FISA, not your lies, Next!

    Re: Judge Resigns From FISA Court in Bush Protest (none / 0) (#36)
    by Slado on Wed Dec 21, 2005 at 02:47:02 PM EST
    This debate is a loser for the democrats. REPORTER: Have you identified armed enemy combatants, through this program, in the United States? GENERAL HAYDEN: This program has been successful in detecting and preventing attacks inside the United States. REPORTER: General Hayden, I know you're not going to talk about specifics about that, and you say it's been successful. But would it have been as successful -- can you unequivocally say that something has been stopped or there was an imminent attack or you got information through this that you could not have gotten through going to the court? GENERAL HAYDEN: I can say unequivocally, all right, that we have got information through this program that would not otherwise have been available. CARL ROVE: "Please make this an issue democrats. Please"

    This debate is a loser for the democrats.
    Why? Because Alberto Gonzales and General Hayden say in a press conference that they obtained information through the program, without getting into specifics, that was not otherwise available? Why was the information not otherwise available? How many people did they spy on without obtaining a warrant? Who exactly did they spy on? What did they do with that information? Did they use that info to obtain a FISA warrant? These are the types of questions that should be asked during a congressional hearing.

    Re: Judge Resigns From FISA Court in Bush Protest (none / 0) (#38)
    by kdog on Wed Dec 21, 2005 at 03:56:09 PM EST
    I hear you glanton, but if spying on American citizens isn't a scream from the rafters moment, I don't know what is. Surreal times, I guess. Thank goodness for what's left of the free press. Otherwise, we still wouldn't know about these crimes. I'd sat alleged but Bush himself has admitted to breaking the law on national television.

    Re: Judge Resigns From FISA Court in Bush Protest (none / 0) (#39)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Dec 21, 2005 at 05:50:37 PM EST
    mac -
    Robertson indicated privately to colleagues in recent conversations that he was concerned that information gained from warrantless NSA surveillance could have then been used to obtain FISA warrants. FISA court Presiding Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, who had been briefed on the spying program by the administration, raised the same concern in 2004 and insisted that the Justice Department certify in writing that it was not occurring. "They just don't know if the product of wiretaps were used for FISA warrants -- to kind of cleanse the information," said one source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the classified nature of the FISA warrants. "What I've heard some of the judges say is they feel they've participated in a Potemkin court."
    Mac, explain this. A few days ago everyone is gaga over Bush saying he didn’t need to go to a court within 72 hours of beginning a warrant less surveillance. Now this judge is saying that he is concerned that they might have cleansed the information. Again. Chicken? Egg? Obviously this judge can see no good. BTW – His Hamdan ruling was overturned in the appeals court.

    Bloggers like Variable and Ras simply must be on some Conservative ideological organization's payroll to come up with these demonization talking points and then spew them onto liberal blogs. Stooge. You apparently know nothing about the election statistics to be spouting off about majorities and minorities. But if it helps soothe your pathetic overinflated ego, go ahead and keep repeating to yourself that the majority of Americans support the crap you apologize for. The statistics aren't with you. (Scroll through the comments)

    Mac, explain this. A few days ago everyone is gaga over Bush saying he didn’t need to go to a court within 72 hours of beginning a warrant less surveillance. Now this judge is saying that he is concerned that they might have cleansed the information. Again. Chicken? Egg?
    It seems obvious that the judge is, in general, concerned since the Bush administration decided not to obtain FISA warrants and proceeded to spy on US citizens. Since the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court was not initially involved, how could they possibly know how much time passed between obtaining information in a warrant less wiretap that was used to obtain a FISA warrant?
    Obviously this judge can see no good.
    There is nothing good about the breakdown of checks and balances.

    It's bad enough that these secret courts exist in the first place. Who would have ever thought such a thing could happen in the United States?
    Glanton, I don't know how I missed your post. I agree with you 100%. I don't like these "secret" courts. This is an obvious breakdown of checks and balances.

    Re: Judge Resigns From FISA Court in Bush Protest (none / 0) (#43)
    by soccerdad on Wed Dec 21, 2005 at 07:29:16 PM EST
    Shouldn’t we have a prosecutor?
    Only after we get one for Bush

    Re: Judge Resigns From FISA Court in Bush Protest (none / 0) (#45)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Dec 22, 2005 at 06:59:49 AM EST
    charliedon'tsurf10 Hodo: Just a quick note or two. The point is in the content of the quote, not in the fact that it came from the NYT. Maybe you understand that, maybe not. Either way you have no rational comment. So what you are telling me is that you don't provide links for proof and you are just here to rant. You also don't know how to use the quote function, or maybe you just don't. Hodo, that is why I named you "Hodo." ;-)

    Re: Judge Resigns From FISA Court in Bush Protest (none / 0) (#46)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Dec 22, 2005 at 12:16:30 PM EST
    Dearest Charlie Hodo you write:
    Since I'm sure you never knew in the first place, shmendrik, it's to the reader.
    Tell that to a stockholder, Hodo. Also try telling it to the SEC if you are ever part of management and an investigation takes place. (I don't think the latter will ever happen.) Hodo, your lack of knowledge about the real world is amazing. BTW - Got any proof to offer? Election fraud? No? Didn't think so. BTW - The media is starting to pick up on the quote. It will be interesting to watch.