Congress Legalizes Warrantless Wiretapping

Filed under: Politics — one August 8, 2007 @ 9:04 am

Hurrah!  Bush is off the hook!  For months it has been public knowledge that our President decided to go ahead with a warrantless wiretapping program to spy on Americans without having to even pretend terrorism was somehow involved.  The indisputable truth is that President Bush ordered the NSA to proceed with the program despite being told multiple times by the Justice Department that it was illegal.  We've known that our President knowingly broke the law in order to spy on American Citizens who have nothing to do with terrorism and that Congress has absolutely no intention of doing anything about it.

But now, hallelujah! Congress has gone one step further from complete inaction.  Our "last best hope" actually legalized the President's program. That's right, given the choice between impeaching the President for indisputably breaking federal laws, doing nothing, or making the President's illegal program officially legal, our Congress decided to do the latter and show their support for the president they were supposedly elected to office in order to challenge.

Those seeking to find appeasement will cling to the fact that this new law is set to expire in 6 months, but that should be of no comfort.  After all, the PATRIOT act expired and was renewed despite it's original rushed signing-to-law and the subsequent uproar over certain provisions hidden away within it.  Are we supposed to believe that Congress temporarily agrees with giving our government the right to spy on us at the drop of a hat?  Or is it more comforting to think they really wanted get their vacations started and figured it would be a good way to stop the administration from whining in the meantime?

Some will cling to the "fact" that this bill only applies to people who are outside the U.S. and happen to be using U.S. telecommunications system.  The unfortunate truth is that the bill itself makes it clear that the government need supply no proof of compliance with this caveat and is expected to act of it's own accord and use "reasonable" judgment. Anyone feel better knowing that?

The Democrats have proven themselves to be useless, ineffective, and even lapdogs.  Sure, only 14 Senators from the Democratic Party voted for this law, but a better number would have been 0.  The Republicans, despite putting on airs of revolt, are still towing the party line and voting largely together.  Apparently the Democrats can't even accomplish that much.

- one 

Share and Enjoy


Justice Department Won’t Prosecute Harriet Miers & Josh Bolten

Filed under: Politics — one August 1, 2007 @ 2:33 pm

In a truly expected, yet utterly sad turn of events the Justice Department has stated that they will not prosecute Harriet Miers & Josh Bolten, both cited by the House with Contempt of Congress for refusing to testify regarding the firings of U.S. Justice Department Attorneys and Alberto Gonzalez's role in the process.

Not coincidentally, Karl Rove and J. Scott Jennings are also not expected to testify despite being subpoenaed because, according to White House Counsel Fred Fielding, all current and former Presidential Aides are immune from subpoenas due to "Executive Privilege". 

For those unfamiliar with "Executive Privilege" it is the assumed right of the Executive Branch of government to resist certain encroachments by other branches of government.  The first claim of executive privilege can be traced to President George Washington and its first successful challenge can be traced to Thomas Jefferson.  Nixon was famous for blatantly misusing it in obvious and extensive ways to attempt to cover his political misdeeds and crimes.

Bush Jr. is famous for using it in what is suspected to be the same way, but with the Justice Department in his pocket he has been far more successful.  Another advantage he has is that Congress is seemingly incapable of taking any real action of authority (such as impeachment) due to the administration's terrorism/time-of-war fearmongering, the Republican minority's partisan voting and the Democratic party's tendency to showboat without actually producing results.

I voted for Bush in 2000 and laughed at the people who threatened to leave the country if he was declared the winner of the election.  If I only knew then what I know now…

- one 

Share and Enjoy