I've taken a low-pro on this issue so far. I'm not a constitutional lawyer and cannot speculate with authority on its legality. However, as an average citizen it seems intuitive that a president should have such powers, even involving US citizens, with such a dynamic threat involving possible WMDs.
But their point is valid--why not just do it, then get permission 72 hours later from the FISA court? So much less mess to clean up later, as we're seeing now.
I'll take the liberty of speculating here. I see three possible reasons:
1. Bush is incompetent, as are his advisors.
2. Bush is a budding dictator, and this is what dictators do
3. Bush was targeting specific entities but had a need to keep the circle of knowledge as small as possible
Number one is implausible due to the blevy of lawyers and strategists surrounding the administration. They would likely have advised heavily against doing something risky if there was a sure-fire way to do it within existing law.
Two is there for humor, just in case you were wondering. Heil Bushitler!
Three is the only plausible choice I see. Consider Bush's unusual behavior after the story leaked, not to mention the fact he'd literally begged the NY Times to not print it, which we were told was unusual. Something was definitely afoot, but was it just political damage control? If that's all it was, then Bush deserves the heat he's getting and more.
But, if not damage control, incompetence or budding fascism it means Bush had other requirements to keep the circle tight, to the point of circumventing the court. Intelligence about another al-Qaeda attack that might be triggered by phone or email? Probably, that's the most likely reason. But perhaps we should not arbitrarily dismiss the picture below...
No comments:
Post a Comment