The NSA’s activities under this authorization are thoroughly reviewed by the Justice Department and NSA’s top legal officials, including NSA’s general counsel and inspector general. Leaders in Congress have been briefed more than a dozen times on this authorization and the activities conducted under it. Thus, "leaders in Congress" can be charged as co-conspirators.
shockingly enough, writing a legal memo about the illegal activities that one is undertaking does not render them legal, even if the justice department writes the memo.
What does Bush's quote about talking to the NSA and his own justice department have to do with the fact that he didn't once seek court approval? He bipassed part of the checks and balances. Talking to his own appointees in the Justice department is not part of the checks and balances set forth in the constitution. I can't believe you are even suggesting such a thing.
In regards to the "Come Hell, high water, or the blatant raping of the Constitution, he's my President, right or wrong," crowd, here's a paraphrase of Clark Gable at the end of Gone With the Wind... "Frankly, my dear, they don't give a damn if it's illegal." Keep D&D Civil.
To the Constitution?? ...or the Lakers! Roxran, after I read this post: ...it made me wonder how you could support a President who is busy, right now, tearing the Bill of Rights into shreads. How do you feel about Bush spying on Americans without a warrant from a judge that is available 24/7 for just this kind of thing, when getting that warrant wouldn't impede at all the spying that might have been contemplated. Not only that, but they can do surveillance (spying) and wiretaps, if they feel time is of the essence, for 24 hours before asking for the warrant. Those warrants are almost never refused. I know of only one instance when that happened, although I don't have that info handy. Roxran, what if the Feds decided to spy on you because you happened to have a large gun collection? What makes you think that it couldn't happen? Nixon... uh, I mean Bush, should be impeached. He has crossed the line. Our Constitution and our rights under it are the very foundation of this country. They are truly what makes a war that is worthy to fight, 10 times out of 10. Bush is destroying our rights under our Constitution. Keep D&D Civil.
common sense would dictate that anyone who supports Bush in this shouldn't be allowed to give 'feel good' speeches about granting Iraqis freedom, and seeing a constitutional democracy there.
Bingo! So true. As Bush said it would be easier if he were just a dictator. Next best thing is just having torture boy-yes man Alberto just declare the law is what Bush wants it to be.
I'm actually surprised there isn't more talk of impeachment. General incompetence aside, Bush has now had a couple of abuse-of-power issues, with this spy whopper as the latest. I wouldn't be surprised to see him get away with crimes committed in broad daylight, but to do so without anyone even seriously considering calling him on it? I thought our democracy was worth a little more than that.
That's the reason conventional wisdom says impeachment hearings hinge on the unlikely scenario of Dems retaking Congress in 06. Congressional Dems have been pushing to get Bush in to testify under oath (on 9/11 and WMD's at least, I think) and Republicans have been blocking it. This latest scandal may turn the worm though. There's been considerably more outcry from Republican congressmen on this than on previous scandals.
The Republicans and Independents I know are livid. This forum is one of the only places I've run across, personally, that has people actually defending the impeachable acts the President has committed. Nice to see you in here, JV. Keep D&D Civil.
