Browse By

Obama Threatens to Seize Control Over Judiciary in Fight to Preserve Big Brother Power

If you paid attention during history and civics classes in high school, you learned that the U.S. Government cannot search or seize either a person, or his property, or his private effects without a warrant signed by a judge on the basis of probable cause to believe a crime has been committed. That limitation comes from the 4th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America, the Supreme Law of the land, taking precedence over the declarations of any power from police officer to president.

If you’ve been paying attention within the past few year, you’ll be aware that although Barack Obama promised during the primaries to oppose it, after the primaries he turned around and supported the FISA Amendments Act, a bill that’s now law with Obama’s help. The FISA Amendments Act drives right on by the 4th Amendment, allowing government agents to search, seize and spy on people, their offices, their homes, and their communications for more than two months at a time without a warrant.

If you’ve been paying attention during the past month, you’ll know that as President, Barack Obama has moved to quash a lawsuit by people who were spied on without a warrant, trying to deny them the opportunity to present the evidence they have of such activity. According to Barack Obama’s lawyers, any such evidence is a state secret. Yes, you read that right: evidence that the U.S. Government is violating the 4th Amendment to the Constitution is a state secret that must be protected, justice be damned. That’s a direct continuation of Bush Homeland Security policy.

Fortunately, a federal appeals court rejected this Obama-Bush position, declaring that in the United States people’s constitutional rights come first.

Unfortunately, today comes the news that the Obama administration is getting even more draconian than the Bush administration on this issue, threatening to swoop in and take the evidence of unconstitutional spying away from the court if the court won’t change its tune. That would be an executive branch violation of judicial branch authority, yet another blow against the rule of law.

This is not the change I can believe in. This is not the change Barack Obama promised me before the Ohio primaries. This is not the change I voted for.

2 thoughts on “Obama Threatens to Seize Control Over Judiciary in Fight to Preserve Big Brother Power”

  1. Bruce Dekalb, IL says:

    Barry OMG surprised you well he is after all a south-side democratic machine politician from Chicago. Just wait you ain’t seen nothing yet. All that stuff bush put in and used people complained about and now you have a person who was raised in the politics of Chicago with the same power don’t you feel safe now? LOL

  2. Tom says:

    Well, there you go, we’re now STEALTHILY continuing to head in the direction of a fascist state. At least Bush was overt about it – lying to us and keeping us “out of the loop” about tele-com spying until citizen eye-witnesses brought it to light, same with torture and his totally wrong response to Katrina – we could figure it out from there. The corporate take-over had commenced.

    Is Obama some kind of secret fascist? i don’t get it. Why would he want to keep these illegal powers in place when they clearly violate the oath of office AND the Constitution? This seems to completely negate his “nice guy” who cares about us citizens and who is trying to get us back on the road to prosperity (whatever that means).

    The only reasonable excuse is that they (the administration) know that the country is going to implode, that we’re going to default on all this debt we’ve accrued though Bush and now Obama (trying to fix the mess Bush created), and that this will lead to mass breakdowns in society. Maybe he’s using this to keep a lid on the populace so that we don’t revolt as unemployment hits double digits, fuel costs skyrocket, food becomes scarce and people start to riot. This way he can nip any fomenting of trouble in the bud by declaring Martial Law, (which is of course aptly named after Martial Wyatt Earp).

    i’d say more, but the FBI is in my neighborhood and they’re probably reading my e-mail, so i gotta go hide. Where’s my tin-foil hat?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Psst... what kind of person doesn't support pacifism?

Fight the Republican beast!