Bush Administration 'Defends' Spying Program (?)

I came across an AP article tonight entitled:
Bush Administration Defends Spying Program

Excited, I clicked on the link. 'Finally', I thought, 'a legal explanation for the President's behavior!'. Turns out... not so much.

Just more of the same "9/11!", "The President just wants to stop terrorists!", and "If Congress didn't want the President to conduct illegal surveillance on Americans, then why did they authorize him to invade Afghanistan?!" nonsense we've gotten already.

Let's take a look at the article's key passages-

#1

The Bush administration formally defended its domestic spying program in a letter to Congress late Thursday saying the nation's security outweighs privacy concerns of individuals who are monitored.

Privacy schmivacy, that's what I always say! Of course, the Administration once again ignores (on purpose, natch) that the spying itself has, amazingly enough, only become the secondary aspect of the scandal. While we must have discussions on how to protect civil liberties (you know the freedoms we're fighting for), most Americans do respect the need for the government to protect the nation. However, there is a system, and laws, set up for them to do that. The main issue here is that the President deemed those laws too bothersome for a monarch like him to obey. No explanation they have given as to why they did this has held any water.

#2

[Assistant Attorney General William E.] Moschella maintained that Bush acted legally when he authorized the National Security Agency to go around the court to conduct electronic surveillance of international communications into and out of the United States by suspects tied to al-Qaida or its affiliates.

So he acted legally when he broke the law? Ohh okay!

#3

Moschella relied on a Sept. 18, 2001, congressional resolution, known as the Authorization to Use Military Force, as primary legal justification for Bush's creation of a domestic spying program

So the President was using military force when he broke the law and bypassed the FISA system to conduct illegal surveillance? Well with logic like that, who can argue? I mean 2001 was so long ago, it's hard to remember, but did the President mention to Congress that Fall that by authorizing him to invade Afghanistan to capture Osama bin Laden (did we ever do that, btw?) and battle terrorists that they were giving unlimited and unchecked power to do whatever he wanted even if it violated the law? Just wondering.

In fact, Tom Daschle makes clear he tried and they said no (Daschle: Congress Denied Bush War Powers in U.S.).

#4

Moschella said the president's constitutional authority also includes power to order warrantless foreign intelligence surveillance inside the United States. He said that power has been affirmed by federal courts, including the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court.

Really? FISA affirmed the President's right to deem them unnecessary? It doesn't look that way to me.

#5

Moschella said Bush's action was legal because the foreign intelligence law provides a "broad" exception if the spying is authorized by another statute. In this case, he said, Congress' authorization provided such authority.

No, it did not. In fact, Congress was quite clear about that when the resolution was authorized.

#6

Moschella also maintained the NSA program is "consistent" with the Fourth Amendment — which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures — and civil liberties.

Oh good, the AP saved me the trouble of putting 'consistent' in quotes. It all depends on what the definition of is is.

#7

"Intercepting communications into and out of the United States of persons linked to al-Qaida in order to detect and prevent a catastrophic attack is clearly reasonable."

So is getting the legally required warrant to do so.

These talking points bore me... Got anything new, guys?



"Hey Karl, get me TalkingPoints McGee, I'm in trouble!"