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.