I am indeed "one of those guys" who think it's O.K. for the President of the United States to protect American lives whatever the cost, even if it means his impeachment. FDR also did some things during WWII that he privately speculated would be impeachable offenses had the Congress found out. Luckily, the Congress did not. And, they didn't impeach Truman for dropping two A-Bombs either. Maybe if you had lived through THAT war, you'd see things differently.

Bottom line, if I were POTUS and faced the choice between saving American lives or being impeached, I know what I would do. Do you?

That wasn't a mathematical certainty or ESP, it's called a hypothetical (which clearly draws the line between patriots and traitors). BTW: your side was able to find 29 Senators to vote with al Qaeda today -- good luck with that!!!

P.S. to sajwan -- we'll have to see which Knight is standing on January 20, 2009 ; )

I just found some rules on-line -- now I'm wondering if Yau-Man "sharing" the truck prize was O.K.: http://www.cbs.com/primetime/survivor7/about/rules.shtml

A good faith argument to enforce the Commander in Chief’s warpowers is not “lawlessness” since EVERY WARTIME PRESIDENT IN HISTORY has had the power to spy on the enemy. Especially if the ROBERTS Court approved.

What part of GAME don't you understand? It has been "lie and cheat" ever since Season One. I would really like to see a link to some rule that "stealing" is prohibited.

If the President has to crush the testicles of the person’s child to save the lives of 300,000,000 Americans, then torture away.

I don't think warrants should issue except on probable cause as well. The Commander-in-Chief doesn't need warrants to spy on the enemy during wartime though. See the distinction? These Venn diagrams wouldn't touch at all. Oh, yeah, since someone brought up an analogy to the Saturday Night Massacre all over again with a simple hospital visit, keep in mind that Comey was not a Special Prosecutor, there were no resignations or firings, no “Robert Bork” to authorize the program anyways, and the President went ahead and allowed DoJ to change what they needed to. Good luck with that canard though: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/watergate/articles/102173-2.htm

I thought you were ignoring me? So, I'm not quite sure how to respond to your "points".

Do you think atheists are "religious"?

I don’t think Supreme Court precedent is unchanging –- and I obviously disagree that the FISA should be read to enfringe on the wartime powers of the Commander-in-Chief –- so, I guess you think the ROBERTS Court is going side with you on that one?! LOL

The 4th Amendment reads “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against UNREASONABLE searches and seizures, shall not be violated . . .” (emphasis added).

If Korematsu was “reasonable” please explain how simply listening to the enemy (yes, even if they are U.S. Citizens as Mr. Korematsu was), but NOT shipping them to internment camps, would be unreasonable. Assuming you could even get that kind of ruling, first, I’d like to see the Supreme Court enforce it; second, I would advocate what is COMPLETELY LEGAL then – the President signs another Executive Order to round up every Arab-American and put them in camps with no communication whatsoever – then we won’t have to wire-tap them anymore. So much for trying to compromise with you Democrats. You people have no idea how to defend a nation.

Next?

Thank you for telling me that Stalin went to seminary -- he was also an altar boy and his mom wanted him to be a priest -- that's why I took it completely out of the last question to had_enough: do you think atheists are "religious"?

So, you actually think it was “illegal” for every wartime President to spy on the enemy within our own borders, huh? How about when FDR shipped off all those Japanese-Americans to internment camps? You don’t think it would take a legal genius to realize said program was illegal either? Well, think again –- Korematsu v. U.S.: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=323&invol=214

Stick to science, son.

So, you think even atheists are "religious"?!

Not sure if you just don't think I'm a "troll" now, but I asked you a question above in case you missed it. I've reviewed the "offending" portion of the Comey testimony over at ThinkProgress and don't see anything that Card or Gonzales did that was illegal. The "Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act" is NOT the "exclusive" authority for all electronic surveillance -- not as long as the President is Commander-in-Chief -- regardless of what OLC determined, a good faith argument for extending the law could have been made. I hereby certify, under penalty of perjury, to not reading any talking points on the issue. Is that enough "judgment passed" for you?

I was just reading up / posting about Yau-Man from Survivor. What did Gonzales do that you think was illegal now?

I read today that Dreamz AND Cassandra are getting $100,000 each, and Yau Man says he is getting $60,000 as a "3rd place finisher" -- he also says he never "touched" the title on the Ford truck, so he's not paying the taxes. Someone call the IRS again ; )

Stacy was the one who basically confirmed Yau-Man's "bad vibes" and was therefore voted out herself. Who knows if Yau-Man would have played his Immunity Idol had Stacy simply said: "I know I'm going home tonight, Jeff." I still don't know how much is edited for these Survivor airings, but based on what we saw, can we at least agree that Stacy screwed up BIG TIME?