The non-partisan Congressional Research Service finds — again — that Dubya’s warrantless wiretapping was illegal. In this case, the Dubya White House violated the 1947 National Security Act, by neglecting to inform the entire House and Senate intelligence committees of their shenanigans. Put it in the impeachment file, Sen. Specter.
Category: Wiretaps
Photo Opportunities (and shots at redemption).
“The president of the United States has been breaking the law repeatedly and insistently…A president who breaks the law is a threat to the very structure of our government.” I’ve had my issues with the guy, but, y’know, when he’s right, he’s right. As the ACLU and Center for Constitutional Liberties plan lawsuits against the NSA wiretaps, a revived Al Gore calls out Dubya on Snoopgate (Transcript.) Interestingly enough, “Gore was supposed to have been introduced, using a video link, by former congressman Robert L. Barr Jr. (R-Ga.) — a bitter adversary of Gore and President Bill Clinton during the 1990s who now shares Gore’s concern over the surveillance program. That strange-bedfellows moment was thwarted by a technological breakdown.“
He has refused his assent to laws.
“It appears unlikely that a court would hold that Congress has expressly or impliedly authorized the NSA electronic surveillance operations here,’ the authors of the CRS report wrote. The administration’s legal justification ‘does not seem to be…well-grounded.'” A 44-page nonpartisan report by the Congressional Research Service finds Dubya’s dubious reliance on presidential prerogative to explain away the NSA wiretaps doesn’t hold up.
Repeated Injuries and Usurpations.
With most of their arguments already rendered false or nonsensical, “Big Time” Dick Cheney invokes an old standby to justify the illegal NSA wiretaps (which, it turns out, may have begun before White House authorization): 9/11, 9/11, 9/11. And, also in the King George department, Dubya in effect announces he’ll bypass the new torture ban whenever he feels like it. Says one legal expert: “The signing statement is saying ‘I will only comply with this law when I want to, and if something arises in the war on terrorism where I think it’s important to torture or engage in cruel, inhuman, and degrading conduct, I have the authority to do so and nothing in this law is going to stop me.’” (Media Matters link via Looka.) Update: The FISA court judges want answers, and a possible NSA whistleblower steps up.
The I-Word.
“‘The fact is, the federal law is perfectly clear,’ Turley says. ‘At the heart of this [NSA wiretap] operation was a federal crime. The president has already conceded that he personally ordered that crime and renewed that order at least 30 times. This would clearly satisfy the standard of high crimes and misdemeanors for the purpose of an impeachment.'” Salon‘s Michelle Goldberg assesses the current political temperature for Dubya’s impeachment. “‘For Republicans to suggest that this is not a legitimate question of federal crimes makes a mockery of their position during the Clinton period. For Republicans, this is the ultimate test of principle.‘” Update: Slate‘s Dahlia Lithwick also muses on Dubya’s distaste for the rule of law.
Judge of Conscience.
“What I’ve heard some of the judges say is they feel they’ve participated in a Potemkin court.” Allegedly in protest over Dubya’s illegal use of wiretaps, US District Judge James Robertson resigns from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (or FISA court.) Meanwhile, the NYT reports that, despite what the administration is saying, some purely domestic calls were overheard via Dubya’s warrantless wiretaps.
Dubya Unchecked.
Team Dubya spent the weekend on the offensive regarding the recent disclosure of illegal NSA wiretaps, with Bush saying over and over again that disclosing the wiretaps was “a shameful act” that “damage[d] our national security.” Sheah. That Dubya and his cronies would try to pass off these egregious violations of civil liberties and due process with more dissent is disloyalty garbage (and a frisson of 9/11, 9/11, 9/11) speaks once again to how corrupt and out-of-control this administration has become. Let the investigations commence. Update: Newsweek‘s Jonathan Alter weighs in: “Bush was desperate to keep the Times from running this important story — which the paper had already inexplicably held for a year — because he knew that it would reveal him as a law-breaker…If the Democrats regain control of Congress, there may even be articles of impeachment introduced.”
Patriotic Insurgency.
“I don’t want to hear again from the attorney general or anyone on this floor that this government has shown it can be trusted to use the power we give it with restraint and care.” Aided by today’s shocking revelation that the NSA has been monitoring thousands of international calls without a warrant since 2002, a group of Senators led by Russ Feingold — and including four Republicans (Craig, Hagel, Murkowski, and Sununu) — succeed in defeating an extension of the Patriot Act. At this point, I might as well put a Feingold 2008 banner over on the sidebar — Ever since the McCain-Feingold days, the Senator from Wisconsin has continued to rise in my esteem, and this once again proves his mettle as our most forthright and committed progressive standard-bearer. Bravo!
Patriotic Fervor.
Apparently the House and Senate have decided on a compromise over the Patriot Act, one that will theoretically reduce the disturbing number of FBI terrorism inquiries via fuller reporting. The bill is now being put on the fast track by the GOP, so as to give Dubya a much-needed boost on his terror credentials, which means the Patriot Act, warts and all, may be made permanent by Thanksgiving. Update: Feingold leads a bipartisan charge against the bill.
Ashcroft with a Smile.
Second verse, same as the first…New Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez outlined Justice Department priorities in his first policy speech yesterday, and it looks to be more of the same: extending the Patriot Act, strengthening anti-obscenity laws, deporting immigrants, and fixing the “broken system” whereby Senate Dems fulfill their constitutional obligations and vote up or down on Dubya’s freak-show judicial nominees. So, as we all feared, it’s Ashcroft all over again. But will Gonzalez at least undrape the Justice Department statuary?