Judge's Doublespeak: It's Unconstitutional, but Lawful, for President to Order Wiretap without Warrant

oped: *eyeroll* I'm seriously thinking Judge Nap has been taking mini-vacations in Colorado...a lil on the Puff the Magic Dragon logic here...being that the US Constitution/Bill of Rights is the law of the land for the United States of America...sorry Judge Nap ya be a nice guy and all, however this was one oxymoron of a statement!


by:Tim Brown 
I'm not really surprised by what was said by Judge Andrew Napolitano on Fox and Friends on Tuesday.  He claims that a president can order a wiretap, like the one Barack Hussein Obama 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 said it was.
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."

"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.  How can this action be "lawful" and at the same time "immoral and profoundly unconstitutional and utterly wrong"?  Because Congress said so?  Pffft!  You must be joking!
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 immediate execution!  It's the same thing!

Judge Napolitano knows it's unconstitutional and 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?  The Fourth Amendment, which 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.  It is neither constitutional nor lawful for the president to engage in this behavior nor for Congress to write legislation that violates the Constitution.  It is criminal, period!
The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA) is unconstitutional.  Congress is not allowed to write law that undermines the Constitution.  They must have a constitutional amendment for that.
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.  They are failing to realize they are creating a beast and bowing down and serving that beast.  Any pretended law that does not comport with the law of God is to be utterly rejected and so are those "laws" Congress comes up with by usurping their constitutional authority that undermine the restraints the people place on them in the Constitution.

FISA was continued under Obama.  I previously reported 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, though, the Senate approved a five-year extension of the legislation on Friday. Just two days later, Pres. Obama signed his name to the act, opening up the inboxes and phone records of US citizens to the federal government until at least 2018.

FISA, like Obamacare, should be repealed or at minimum, ignored as being lawful since it is at odds with the law.