Wiretapping without warrants

With all the respect I owe my mother... I have to wonder what is going on, I expected agreement that it's a good thing to have the rule of law, to have someone, a judge, willing to sign off on use of governmental power against a citizen.

"We have to act quickly" --- the way this is done is the warrants are gotten after the fact, if speed is really important... and then you know you'll have to make that argument that it was that important... eventually.

"Every President has done this since FISA" --- but the point of FISA was that it was already made easy enough... all that's asked is a responsibility trail.

I'll admit there are still going to be paper trails, there is a vague hint of accountability, but when the warrant is left out what you have done is removed a stoppage point where responsibility was taken, where a committment to have thought out the legality was done, without that, who in a warrantless system has the responsibility to have thought that through? No one.

Why on earth didn't he just use FISA?

It's not OK and I'm tired of being told Clinton did it, or Carter did it, one, when there is no evidence of that, and two, who cares? Why do people assume, even you my mother, that I have to support something someone did that's wrong? What happened to principle, I'm loyal to principles. I despise corruption, violation of principles, on "my side" even more than on the other... because I intend to be moral and ethical, and if I had "a side" I would expect the same from it (you can imagine how often that's the case for the sides assigned to me).

For Republicans: Please, just think... ask yourself, "What if it was President Hillary Clinton caught doing XYZ?" and take the answer really seriously, please? It's never too late to stop the civil war.