Damn it. In plotting our conspiracy to violently overthrow the government of the United States, my comrades and I have been careful not to communicate via email or telephone because we know how easily these communications can be intercepted by a Bush administration unfettered by the First Amendment. But now we can’t even rely on old-fashioned snail mail anymore:
President Bush has quietly claimed sweeping new powers to open Americans’ mail without a judge’s warrant, the Daily News has learned.
The President asserted his new authority when he signed a postal reform bill into law on Dec. 20. Bush then issued a “signing statement” that declared his right to open people’s mail under emergency conditions.
That claim is contrary to existing law and contradicted the bill he had just signed, say experts who have reviewed it.
[…] Most of the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act deals with mundane reform measures. But it also explicitly reinforced protections of first-class mail from searches without a court’s approval.
Yet in his statement Bush said he will “construe” an exception, “which provides for opening of an item of a class of mail otherwise sealed against inspection in a manner consistent … with the need to conduct searches in exigent circumstances.”
Yeah… yeah… I know what the righty trolls are going to say. I hate America. I love Osama bin Laden. Lefty wingbats like me are at least as dangerous as the terrorists we mollycoddle.
But I’d just like you righties to pause for a moment and imagine it was a President Clinton (Bill or Hillary) who was asserting the unitary executive doctrine and the power to “construe” legislation as he or she chooses. Imagine it was a President Clinton claiming the power to invade your privacy simply by declaring “exigent circumstances.”
Would you still defend the President? Or might you start wondering if the means by which the administration is fighting the War on Terror might be destroying the very democratic principles we’re attempting to defend?
I’m just askin’.
Well, if your mail is opened when it gets to your box, at least you will know if your being spied on right?
First of all, this is the sort of power that will never, ever be abused because we are fighting for freedom.
Second, military experts have long known that the US Postal service is the most economical delivery system for Nuclear Devices. Terrorists would not use Fed Ex or UPS to mail their Atomic Bombs or canisters of nerve gas because they are cheap bastards. It’s been known for years that the former Soviet Union had at least five hundred thermonuclear devices wrapped up in plain cardboard boxes with the proper postage on them in case of war. It was the rising postage rates that caused the commies to go bankrupt.
Goldy
Let me know when you become important enough for the “Spies” to open your mail.
I wouldn’t say that you hate america, but I do believe you to be paraniod. In addition, what are you hiding in your mailbox? An extra ballot or two?
This is simply another example of the hubris of these evil people. But the remaining BushBots will never agree that this is a rotten condition, as they will be admitting that they were sold a giant load o’ poles.
You’ll know they opened your mail when they die of Anthrax poisioning………..
This news is among many other pieces of similar news that act as proof positive that America has ALREADY been defeated. We lost. It’s over. We are no longer number one. We’re not even number 10. We’re shit.
Historians will write that America was defeated under Republican George Bush when he single-handedly, destroyed the protections offered to US citizens by the US Constitution. It took no bomb or gun to overthrow the US, only an idiot draft-dodger, coke-snorter, drunk driver and failed businessman named George Bush was required to do the deed.
Goldy,
Take heart my good man. Only the intelligent citizens of this country see this as another encroachment on our freedom. Fortunately, we have elected them to control congress. Congress has the authority to reign in an out of control president. Perhaps we can take some comfort in that.
Ladies and Gentleman, introducing Speaker of the House, the Honorable Nancy Pelosi.
Auntie liberal:
You want that beer?
Suck on that you fucktards.
Let’s hear some of you righties out there who claim to be libertarians condemn this action. Show a little consistency. Bush hates civil liberties. Any fan of freedom, of whatever partisan stripe, should acknowledge Bush’s obvious disregard for the Bill of Rights.
I don’t think the feds reading Goldy’s mail is right, and I’m willing to bet that all Libertarians will agree with me on that one.
This government has gotten too big for it brithces. Only 2 years to go of Bush and all this eavesdropping. Right?
Well, at least I hope the Dems won’t resort to the same stuff when they get into 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
Proud Leftist,
I read the article that Goldy linked to and I didn’t read all that much into it.
Do you want the post office delivering a ticking bomb to your front door? or how about a letter full of acid spewing off fumes?
You don’t need a warrant for ALL searches.
Hilary won’t ever be president and YES, I would support President Obama reading my mail!
mac
Warrants are not hard to obtain. “Exigent circumstances” justifying failure to obtain a warrant before conducting a search almost invariably involve a time element–that if the time were taken to seek a warrant, either evidence would be destroyed (e.g., flushed down the toilet) or a suspect would escape (e.g., out the back window). Packages placed in the mail do not involve such a time element. Postal authorities, if suspicious about a particular package, can simply hold onto it until a search warrant is obtained. If the package is actually ticking, the traditional test for a warrantless search (i.e., exigent circumstances) is likely met. Bush wants to go beyond this traditional analysis which has served us well for quite a long time. I don’t want any president, even President Obama (lord, that was fun to type) with such power.
What a HORRIBLE day for the inbred racist righties. We have a black Dem taking the Governor’s seat in MASS. We have a black US Congressman from MINN taking a ceremonial picture with the Muslim holy book. (And by the way what a brilliant FUCK YOU to the republican asshole from VA who tried to make this an issue. Ellison gets THOMAS JEFFERSON’s copy of the book and Jefferson is from the same district where the retarded right wing turd is from! Brilliant)
Man no wonder most of the right wing trolls who used to frequent this board have cut and run! HE HE!
the best thing about today (and the dumbass ramblings of immature morons like stupid up above) will be the stark contrast between conservatism and the peHOsi brand of socialism.
Proud Leftist @ 11: A small, irrelevant quibble: bombs don’t tick anymore, unless you have a terrorist who insists on using his father’s timex. Other than that, I agree with your comment.
By the way, anybody else remember the Darwin Award winners from a few years back, the Palestenian bombers who didn’t want to follow “Israeli time” (Daylight Savings Time)? Apparantly there was some confusion between the bombmaker and the bomb-planters on which time they were following. The bomb blew up in the van as they headed for their destination.
Warrants take time – it isn’t that they are hard to get.
It is a law enforcement decision that is at times very difficult to make. The officers searching OJ’s place obviously made the wrong decision and he is free. The post office personnel aren’t going to start handing over mail and packages to the NSA, CIA, FBI, etc, without very good justification. I doubt that the President himself ever makes that decision and I wouldn’t have a problem with any of them making it, except maybe the crook Nixon!
Harriet Miers Resigns As White House Counsel
According to an AP news story, White House press secretary Tony Snow said, “was a scrupulous lawyer who aggressively defended the Constitution.” (Note, this is a quote of the AP story, not of Snow.)
Roger Rabbit Commentary: It’s not altogether clear what Miers aggressively defended, as she seemed to not know much about Constitution:
“In an unprecedented move, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter and ranking Senator Patrick Leahy also requested that Miers re-do some of her answers to the questionnaire submitted to her by the Committee …. Her answers … included an error on constitutional law where she mentioned a constitutional right for proportional representation which the Supreme Court had previously ruled did not exist. In addition to the demand for new questionnaire responses, the Committee repeated its request to review internal White House documents that would illustrate her experience as White House Counsel and the constitutional issues she worked on.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harriet_Miers
However, Miers doesn’t fit the typical wingnut mold. Despite being a personal friend and fawning supporter of George W. Bush, she’s an independent thinker and clearly does not fit into a typecast conservative mold, having been a Democrat in the past who fought efforts to politicize the Texas Bar Association by forcing it to abandon its neutrality on abortion, in the course of which she made the arcane but very respectable argument that because the TBA is a unified bar in which membership is mandatory, adopting an official position on abortion would force lawyers who do not agree with that position to belong to an organization espousing it. In fact, it was conservative opposition that sank her Supreme Court nomination.
According to the Wikipedia article on Miers, she is forming an exploratory committee to run for president, apparently hoping to parlay her prior experience in elective office as a city councilwoman into a promotion.
Hey asshole righties. How’s it feel to sit in the back seat – LITERALLY!
http://movies.crooksandliars.c.....ckSeat.mov
@3 “…, but I do believe you to be paraniod. In addition, what are you hiding in your mailbox? An extra ballot or two?”
Whooooo’s being paranoid?
@9 “Well, at least I hope the Dems won’t resort to the same stuff when they get into 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.”
What prompted this blast, Lib? There’s certainly no historical foundation for it. Nixon burglarized the DNC and Ellsworth’s psychiatrist, and used the FBI to spy on his political enemies; Bush is treating the Fourth Amendment like it doesn’t exist. You have to go back to Woodrow Wilson to find a Democrat who trampled on civil liberties, and in those days party roles were reversed: Progressives were Teddy Roosevelt Republicans and reactionaries were Dixie Democrats. Nobody would take seriously your evident assertion that modern Democrats stifle dissent or conduct witch hunts against their political opponents, whereas it’s clear from the Nixon and Bush regimes that conservatives pose a clear and present danger to our political freedoms. Looks like a cheap shot to me.
@10 “You don’t need a warrant for ALL searches.”
So now you’re an expert on Fourth Amendment law?
@12 Even better, Rep. Ellison walked over and introduced himself to Rep. Goode … I hope he was clutching Jefferson’s Quran in his left hand as he extended his right hand to Goode for a handshake. Did someone say they heard choking noises on the floor of the House?
I sure hope Republicans continue making disparaging and insulting remarks about the religion of millions of African-American voters … he he
@13 “the best thing about today … will be the stark contrast between conservatism and the peHOsi brand of socialism.”
The only sentiment you’ve ever expressed, or are ever likely to express, that I agree with wholeheartedly. You guys and your ideology are so OVER …
@15 Geez, Mac, are you that abysmally ignorant of the Constitution? Apparently so. The Constitution explicitly makes it the JUDGE’S decision, NOT the cop’s decision, whether reasonable grounds exist to let law enforcement conduct a search. You need to take a refresher course in history and civics; we haven’t lived under the divine right of kings for 225 years now.
Well, the 110th Congress convened today; and I can visualize Bush’s teeth clenching and jaw setting. Get ready for two years of thick-headed Republican obstructionism. Absolutely nothing will get done between now and 2008, except to feed more young Americans into the Iraq meat grinder while Osama waits to die of old age.
Roger @ 19,
I simply do not trust either the Republicans or the Democrats. That’s it.
How’s Hawaii?
My understanding is that it takes about an hour to get a search warrant. Judges and Assistant D.A.s are on duty 24 hours a day on a rotating basis for this purpose. In terms of snail mail, that’s an eternity. I’m having a hard time imagining an “exigent circumstance” which wouldn’t allow for that much time to get a warrant.
Unless the “exigent circumstance” is that (a) the judge wouldn’t issue a warrant because there is no valid reason for doing so, or (b) the administration wouldn’t want any record of the request for the warrant, even if it is sealed (i.e., potentially embarrasing or politically harmful).
Roger,
No-one’s talking about “reasonable” grounds, not me, not Proud Lefist and not President Bush….
We are talking about “exigent” circumstances, those listed in the article Goldy cited. The constitution does allow for warrantless searches under certain circumstances and you damn well know it!
No, I’m not an expert on the constitution, neither is anyone else, that’s why we have a US Supreme Court.
Before reading the article, I was ready side with Goldy on this issue. But after reading the article, I have to say this seems like much ado about nothing. I found this particualar quote telling:
As long as the circumstances are truly “exigent” I don’t have a problem with mail being opened.
What’s the difference between this and probable cause? It seems like another path to the same result to me.
As a longtime postal employee who worked at the customs Bldg. and with the DEA – this is nuts!!!!!! We always had warrants and 1st Class mail was sacred. What is wrong with this nutcase Bush??? This makes me crazy. They don’t need this exemption for terrorism – they want to spy on Democrats and progressives. We must rid the country of this whole Neo-Con cult and never let it happen again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You know, if it helps prevent the next abortion clinic bombing then obviously it’s All Worth It, right?
“No, I’m not an expert on the constitution, neither is anyone else, that’s why we have a US Supreme Court.”
Lawrence Tribe would probably disagree with this statement.
rhp6033,
I’m sure a lot of people disagree with it, but their opinions are just opinions until they are a US Supreme Court Justice whose opinion will help determine the constitutionality of our laws and hopefully keep our country on a fairly straight path……………
Interesting that as much rhetoric that has been thrown around about our civil rights and the constitution that 89 Senators voted for that Patriot Act. There wasn’t 89 Republicans in the last Congress.
We all need to make it clear to Ms. Pelosi that she needs to revisit her previously stated decision not to pursue impeachment.
cf @ 30
Constitutionally speaking, the difference between “exigent” and “probable cause” is quite significant. Exigent always implies urgency, that time is a-wastin’. Probable cause can just mean “Your honor, we have reason to believe that the trunk of this car, which we have impounded, has a gallon of moonshine in it. We have reason to so believe because the passenger told us so. Can we have a warrant to open up the trunk?” See the difference? No urgency in probable cause.
BUSH SIGNS STATEMENT TO BOTH READ AMERICA’S MAIL AND SNIFF THEIR UNDERWEAR :)
President Bush has claimed sweeping powers to check both American’s mail and underwear without first obtaining a warrant. Bush asserted this authority in a signing statement attached to December’s postal overhaul bill, causing a minor uproar on Capital Hill. “I’m all for fighting terrorism, and for giving the President all the tools he needs in that fight.” said Representative Henry Waxman D-Los Angeles, “But to have him going around and checking everybody’s underwear? That just seems ridiculous.”
White House Spokesperson Tony Snow answered an avalanche of questions concerning Bush’s controversial new authority. “I know it sounds strange,” he said in today’s press conference, “and there’s a lot of people out there who want to turn this into some kind of weird, fetishistic thing the dry drunk President has for America’s underpants, and nothing could be further from the truth. The President’s number one duty is to protect the American People, however he sees fit to do so and that’s all there is to it.”
Several psychiatrists were quick to agree that the President’s motivation, if not entirely based on security concerns, was probably not sexually based either: “The President and the American People are suffering a highly dysfunctional relationship these days, filled with anger, resentment and frankly, disgust… and it runs both ways. Bush’s desire to check our mail and underwear doesn’t stem so much from the need to actually do it as it does the need to show us he can. These sorts of control issues are typical in almost all abusive relationships.”
From now on, instead of signing letters with “Sincerely Yours,” I’m gonna sign ’em with “Yours for impeaching Bush” — I figure if the Bush-Nazis go to the trouble of opening and reading my mail, I’ll make it worth their time.
So what authority will Bush claim next? The right to sniff women’s shoes?
@37 “Bush’s desire to check our mail and underwear doesn’t stem so much from the need to actually do it as it does the need to show us he can. These sorts of control issues are typical in almost all abusive relationships.”
Actually I think there’s a lot of truth to this. When you get right down to it, Bush is a bully.
Thanks for the clarification. I think the term I was looking for was “reasonable suspicion” rather than probable cause.
So the analogy to your example would be, the police stop a person for traffic violation and the odor of moonshine is eminating from the trunk. So the police officer has reasonable suspicion that there is moonshine in the trunk so the trunk is searched and moonshine seized. The evidence is admissible since there was reasonable suspicion to search the trunk. While there’s no urgency, there’s an immediate search and seizure with no warrant required.
Like I said before, on the surface this seems like an attempt to abridge people’s rights, but after reading the article, I don’t see that as likely. Seems like more left wing Bush paranoia to me.
re 41:(your moniker) What are you after that? A pencil-dick geek?
Conservativefirst @ 27:
It was called a vacation. I am sure if you could afford one, you would take one.
Oh, before I forget:
FUCK YOU!
So I’m less of a person than you if I can’t afford a vacation? Do you hate poor people?
Thanks Goldy for spreading the word about this. I’m a letter carrier as well as a left-wing revolutionary and I am pissed.
I’ve set up a website for postal workers to organize the opposition to this insanity- I’d appreciate it if you’d spread the word:
http://www.postalworkersunited.blogspot.com
Rocketdog – I’m also a postal worker – I’ve set up a site to fight back – check it out and join the fight!
http://www.postalworkersunited.blogspot.com