« Alleged Crack Dealer Uses Business Cards | Main | And you may ask yourself--well, how did I get here? »
January 26, 2006
Bush Inc. v. Bush Inc.
The LA Times' David Savage writes in today's edition that the White House's Words, Deeds on Spying Differed.
Four years ago, top Bush administration lawyers told Congress they opposed lowering the legal standard for intercepting the phone calls of foreigners who were in the United States, even while the administration had secretly adopted a lower standard on its own.
Now they are claiming that the probably cause requirement is too onerous.
When in 2002 Sen. Dewine proposed changing the probable cause portion of the FISA Act to reasonable suspicion the Administration opposed Dewine's legislation on the basis that it wasn't needed and they also questioned it's constitutionality. Mind you, this was after the Administration had already started the NSA spying program AND after they had already stopped using the probable cause criteria AND after they'd already stopped even attempting to get a warrant, even retroactively.
In short, they knowingly and deliberately lied. They lied to Congress and they lied to the American people.
Now the Administration is claiming that they opposed Dewine's amendment because they were afraid that debating it publically might expose this NSA program and that that might help terrorists.
So the only real defense they can offer is that they lied to protect us... AKA the ends justify the means.
Let's say that you are okay with that. Here's the next question, though. What else might they be lying about? I mean think about it. Bush has claimed that American's civil rights are being protected and that only international calls involving a suspected member of al Queda are even subject to this warrant-less spying. But that too might be a lie. This could be Watergate all over again. Remember, Nixon justified that crime as necessary to protect national security too.
Where does the lying stop and the truth begin?
Posted by Kevin at January 26, 2006 11:56 AM