John Dean Blasts Warrantless Eavesdropping
Nixon White House counselor John Dean, testifying in favor of a Democratic resolution to censure President Bush, asserted Friday that Bush's conduct in connection with domestic spying exceeds the wrongdoing that toppled his former boss from power.
Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, fired back by telling Democrats: "Quit trying to score political points."
The Senate, Dean said, should censure or officially scold Bush as proposed by Sen. Russell Feingold's resolution. But if that action carries too much political baggage, some senatorial warning is in order, Dean said.
"The resolution should be amended, not defeated, because the president needs to be reminded that separation of powers does not mean an isolation of powers," Dean said in prepared remarks. "He needs to be told he cannot simply ignore a law with no consequences."
The Rebuplicans pulled out their tired old excuses with Hatch announcing,"Wartime is not a time to weaken the commander-in-chief."
I notice that one of the advantages of engaging in the "wartime" argument is it avoids having to discuss whether or not the Presidents behaviour was, in fact, illegal. That becomes a mute point. Indeed, even considering the charge could be seen, in these terms, as an attempt to "weaken the commander-in-chief".
You really do have to admire the sheer balls of these republicans. They are shameless at what they do.
The Democrats, on the other hand, have deserted Feingold like rats leaving a sinking ship, and - they too - seem to want to watch and wait. For what?
The president himself has admitted that he did not approach FISA for authority before he wiretapped US citizens. The law says that's illegal. The law states that FISA is the "exclusive" means of obtaining authority to wiretap.
Am I missing something here? What's to be discussed? As George Tenet would say, "It's a slam dunk".
For a masterclass in why Bush's programme is illegal read Glenn Greenwald's destruction of the various republican arguments here.
A taster:
Everything the administration has done for the past four and a half years indicates that it does NOT have a good faith belief in its own legal arguments. If Bush administration officials had any confidence whatsoever in their legal theories, they could at any point seek judicial blessing of the NSA program. All they would have to do is try to introduce evidence obtained via warrantless surveillance in court, either in a criminal prosecution or in an application for a FISA warrant. Either move would force the court to address the legality of the NSA program. In the latter context, the administration would have the benefit of being able to present its case ex parte and in secret. But they are unwilling to do this, and for one simple reason: they are pretty certain they will lose. This paragraph from a U.S. News & World Report story last week is particularly revealing:Well worth spending an hour or so reading all Glenn has to say. He's obviously put weeks of work into compiling something this methodical.
White House lawyers, in particular, Vice President Cheney's counsel David Addington (who is now Cheney's chief of staff), pressed Mueller to use information from the NSA program in court cases, without disclosing the origin of the information, and told Mueller to be prepared to drop prosecutions if judges demanded to know the sourcing, according to several government officials.
Click title for John Dean story.
Tags:
No comments:
Post a Comment