FISA Is Unconstitutional
Opinion Editorialist for
‘THE
BOTTOM LINE’
Posted March 9, 2017
I'm really surprised by what was
said by Judge Andrew Napolitano on Fox and Friends
on Tuesday. He claims that a president can legally order a wiretap, like the
one Barack Hussein Obama AKA Soetoro Sobarkah is being accused of doing to Donald Trump and his advisers
prior to the election in 2016. He claims it is unconstitutional,
but lawful because Congress knowingly passed an unconstitutional Statute.
In commenting on the allegations against Obama by Trump,
Judge Napolitano said, "The president of the United
States, on his own, may conduct surveillance or order surveillance of any
person in the United States upon the filing of a certification with the
attorney general." Under
FISA no warrant needed.
"So, the idea that it was illegal for
Barack Obama to listen to the phone calls and in person conversations of Donald
Trump is wrong, in my view," he added. "It was
immoral and profoundly unconstitutional and utterly wrong, but it's lawful because Congress has said it is lawful."
"This is power that was given to every
president from Jimmy Carter up
to and including Donald Trump," he concluded.
Now look, I
like Judge Napolitano for a lot of things he has taken a stand on, but this is
just doublespeak
Judge. And in addition you are
wrong, wrong, wrong. Who am I to
tell a judge – he is wrong? Because I
know history and the U.S. Constitution and sadly, he doesn’t.
This action cannot be "lawful" as the
Judge says, and at the same time be "immoral and profoundly unconstitutional and
utterly wrong"? Because
Congress said so? Pffft! You must be joking Judge! Or is it just a matter of semantics? If so you should have explained that. People will think it’s okay for the Congress
to override the Constitution, as well as presidents to violate the U.S.
Constitution.
This is like saying that the Nazis were
"lawful" because they made laws to enforce severe gun control and the
punishment for having a weapon found on you in the street was grounds for immediate
execution! It's the same thing!
Judge Napolitano knows it's unconstitutional and he says
so. Therefore, since the Constitution states clearly in Article VI:
“This
Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in
pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the
authority of the United States,
shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be
bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the
contrary notwithstanding.
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and
the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial
officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound
by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution;”
And what are Congress and the president violating? Well
the Fourth Amendment my friend, which clearly states:
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.”
No, Judge Napolitano, sorry, but it is not
constitutional and therefore not lawful for the president to engage in this
kind of behavior. It’s criminal. Nor for Congress to write legislation that
violates the Constitution. It is criminal, period! This again supports my
statement that the Federal Government has been nothing but a criminal Gestapo
organization for many years my friend and needs to be abolished and
reconstructed.
The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA)
is unconstitutional. Congress is not allowed to write law
that undermines and or violates the Constitution. They
must have a constitutional amendment for that, which would intern be rigidified
by the majority of the states. It’s the
law!
Sadly, too many people
have elevated the central government to the status of God and believe just
because words are put on a piece of paper they are law, this philosophy is
Marxist. They are failing to realize they are creating a beast and bowing down
and serving that beast. Any fabricated law that does not comport with the law
of God is to be utterly rejected and so are those "laws" that Congress
comes up with by usurping their constitutional authority and undermining the
restraints the people place on them in the Constitution.
FISA had sunseted in 2012 but was illegally continued
under Obama. Freedom Outpost previously reported it on January 1,
2013:
Congress had only up until the end of 2012 to either reauthorize FISA
and the FAA, or let the bill expire. Despite a large grassroots campaign from
privacy advocates and civil liberties organization to ensure the acts would
fade from history, the
Senate approved a five-year extension of the legislation, and just
two days later, Pres. Obama signed his name to the act, illegally opening up
the inboxes and phone records and any other property of US citizens to the
federal government through the end of 2017.
FISA, like the unconstitutional
Obamacare, should be repealed since it is at odds with law.
A Supreme Court Opinion 1790
“No legislative act,
therefore, contrary to the Constitution,
can be valid.
To deny this
would be to
affirm that the
deputy is greater
than his principal;
that the servant
is above his
master; that the
representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves.”- John Jay, First chief justice US
Supreme Court.
As I said: “I know my history as well as the U.S. Constitution.”
Thanks
for listening my friend! Now go do the
right thing and fight for freedom.
-
de Andréa
Please pass on this
article to everyone on your email list.
It may be the only chance for your friends to hear the truth.
The Fine
Print
Copyright © 2014 by Bottom Line Publishing, All Rights
Reserved - Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted,
provided full credit is given.
Disclaimer - The writer of this blog is not responsible
for the language or advertisements used in links to referenced articles as
source materials.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment