AP: Lawyer gets dramatic in support of president's use of wiretaps

[Eugene]

Lawyer gets dramatic in support of president's use of wiretaps
By LARRY NEUMEISTER
Associated Press Writer

September 5, 2006, 7:13 PM EDT

NEW YORK -- A government lawyer argued in the strongest language to date Tuesday
in defense of President Bush's warrantless wiretapping program to stop terrorists,
raising a hypothetical scenario of a nuclear attack on Washington to illustrate
his point.

Anthony Coppolino, a special litigation counsel based in Washington, said the
Constitution gives Bush the right as commander in chief to do what is necessary to
surveil terrorists and stop them from attacking the United States, including
interrogating someone who might have information about an imminent attack.

"Suppose for example the president obtains intelligence that a nuclear bomb was
planted in Georgetown, you know, right there in Washington, and the only way he was
going to find out whether that was going to happen was to grab the person and
interrogate him," Coppolino said in U.S. District Court in Manhattan. "Would that be
in his constitutional authority? I would say so."

-snip-

He was responding in oral arguments before U.S. District Judge Gerard E. Lynch to a
lawsuit brought by the Center for Constitutional Rights seeking to stop Bush and
government agencies from conducting warrantless surveillance of communications in the
United States.

-snip-

Full article: http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/newyork/ny-bc-ny--domesticspying-la0905sep05,0,6614709.story

Alternate AP headline: Wiretap Program Justified, Lawyer Says

[Ignacio Upton]

1. This isn't 24

And Bush is no Jack Bauer.
Anyway, the FISA ALREADY allows for warrantless wiretaps, as long as a warrant is obtained retroactively within 72 hours. Courts also rarely deny warrants. Even if we had a "24" scenario, the feds would still be able to get their job done without needing the NSA program.

[John Gauger]

2. Wait, what?

Am I the only one to whom this does not make sense? What did that statement have to do with wiretapping?

[leesa]

9. I think he got his Bush crimes confused...torture war crimes vs illegal

wire tapping. This guy SUCKS as a lawyer. Must be Gonzales' cousin or something.

[originalpckelly]

3. I am too worried about putting food on my family, to worry about this.

Did I ever tell you it is getting real hard to practice my love with women as a gynecologist? Of course why all this matters is beyond me, as it is a given that United States and America don't have a close relationship.

[MisterP]

4. "and suppose the Moon was to come crashing down

who would stand against sacrificing 2,000,000 Americans to keep the Moon Gods happy? It's the only way, and otherwise everything on earth would die!!!"

[Eric J in MN]

5. FISA already lets them get the warrant 72 hours AFTER

...they start wiretapping in case of an emergency.

I don't get how that example is supposed to prove that FISA can legally be broken.

[leesa]

6. Irrelevant.

[Kingshakabobo]

7. Ah, the old "ticking time-bomb" theory from make-believe life......

.......where terrorists march in to your jurisdiction with flowing robes and turbans, announce they are terrorists, announce they know the location of the bomb and yell "do your worst infidel"!

[PresidentWar]

8. Hyperbole is their friend.

Without it, they simply have no case.