WaPo: Assess The Legality Of Warrantless Surveillance

[JABBS]

Regarding the ongoing debate over President Bush's warrantless surveillance program, the Washington Post writes today this editorial:

"Two key inquiries ought to guide any new legislation: how FISA is working and what precisely the administration is doing outside of its strictures. The administration has said that the surveillance law is too cumbersome for certain essential national security surveillance. If this is true, the law needs to be updated. But Congress cannot reasonably authorize or limit the NSA's program without knowing what sort of surveillance it encompasses and how it works. ... These questions may sound esoteric, but they are essential to assessing the legality of what the administration has done and how and whether the law should be updated. Much of this inquiry cannot be conducted in public. But it can and must happen -- and briefing members fully is the place to start."

I agree with the above, but the Post errs when it writes: "It would be tragic and dangerous if it became a political football now -- either as a campaign issue for President Bush or a club with which Democrats can pound him."

While bipartisanship would be a wonderful thing in Washington -- too rare during the Bush years -- Congress should not overlook the obvious. President Bush authorized illegal warrantless surveillance for more than four years, and that's activity unbecoming of a president.

The White House wants it both ways -- it wants people to accept its claim that warrantless surveillance as legal, and to pass legislation to make it legal. That may sound illogical, but neither the White House nor Congressional Republicans seem to care. The White House supports legislation from Sen. Mike DeWine (R-OH), who said, "We don’t want to have any kind of debate about whether it’s constitutional or not constitutional."

Democrats should pound the president with this issue. But so should any American who respects the idea that the president must follow the law.

***

This item first appeared at JABBS.

[JABBS]

1. bump

why isn't this more important to democratic underground? This should be the top issue.

A president has broken the law, and through subsquent actions, admitted as much.

[radio4progressives]

2. I've been asking this question for weeks...

and i wish people would reference the term Domestic Spying when discussing "warrantless taps" or "warrantless surveilance"..

"warrantless" diminishes the significance that go to the heart of what is at issue.

oh, the Bushie's Orwellian term for this is "terrorist surveilance" ..

NOT!

[JABBS]

5. terminology

I call it "warrantless surveillance" because I don't want to have a debate about terminology. I want to have a debate about legality.

[radio4progressives]

3. thanks for posting this by the way ..

:kick: :thumbsup:

[JABBS]

4. feingold

The Democrat to most vocally stand up on this issue is Russ Feingold of Wisconsin. He said on Feb. 7:

This program is breaking the law, and this President is breaking the law. Not only that, he is misleading the American people in his efforts to justify this program.

How is that worthy of applause? Since when do we celebrate our commander in chief for violating our most basic freedoms, and misleading the American people in the process? When did we start to stand up and cheer for breaking the law? In that moment at the State of the Union, I felt ashamed.

Congress has lost its way if we don’t hold this President accountable for his actions.