The Justice Department dives in to investigate who leaked Bush's secret NSA spy program to the New York Times. Too bad Gonzales and company aren't as concerned with possible lawbreaking from within the administration on the CIA leak, and for that matter, the NSA program itself...
Meanwhile, Michelle Malkin catches sudden leak outrage syndrome, while accusing those of us who were outraged at the leak of Valerie Plame's leak of being the ones with a double standard... So is Ms. Malkin ready to support Fitzgerald's probe of the Plame leak, now? Macsmind and other rightie bloggers have a bad case of the double standards, too...
Also via Malkin, Bush's state-run cable outlet apparently says Bush will comment on the new leak probe. I guess this one doesn't count as an "ongoing investigation..."
And the blogger at Strata-sphere gives us the shape of things to come: the Bush Justice Department is going to launch an aggressive, full-throated attack on the journalistic institutions the president was unable to bring to heel the old fashioned way (by asking nicely that they kill stories)... So Strata, I've noted your outrage at "those who would risk our lives" by leaking. Do you then support the Fitzgerald investigation into who leaked the covert identity of Valerie Plame, who worked on crucial WMD intel for the CIA? I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that you don't see the import of that particular investigation... Love this Strata quote, btw:
The left is planning to impail themselves on the question of whether or not we should be monitoring our enemies in order to stop their efforts to kill us. And they will use as the core of their argument their unbridled partisan hate to rationalize why we should not protect ourselves and take down Bush. Every 1oth grader knows FISA cannot trump the constitution, and decades of court precedence backing up the constitutional claims just seals the case.
Strata, I love the way you say "the Constitution" so smugly as if you've read it. And sadly I doubt that 2 in 10 Americna tenth graders has any idea what you're talking about. Kindly point out to me the passage in that document that gives the president the authority to override FISA and conduct domestic wiretaps, and recall that the then Senate Democratic leader, Tom Daschle, has said in no undertain terms that the Congress turned down the president's request to expand his war powers onto American soil. And don't try the old Article II gambit. It doesn't apply to domestic surveillance... and we have reason to believe that such surveillance was used on American citizens -- folks like Jose Padilla for instance -- and if it was, that, my friend, is illegal under Article II, FISA, the Fourth Amendment or whatever point of law you want to cite. The president is not above the law -- he is sworn to uphold it and the Constitution. Every tenth grader knows that... (here's your chance: show me the president's authority and where it is derived from Article II...)
Y'know, I hate to say it, but the right has sunk to the point where they have become more partisans than patriots. They care more about protecting George W. Bush -- even if he may have broken the law -- than about protecting the Constitution or the laws of the United States. Partisanship really is a poison to democracy.
That said, I think the J.D. should go right on ahead and investigate. We need a clarifying moment in this country on several fronts: we need to clarify what powers belong to which branches of government, what role a free press should play in society (the right apparently feels the role should sound something like Pravda, circa 1973) and what role whistleblowers can legitimately play in protecting citizens from abuses by their government (or by private entities like corporations). I'm ready to have that debate. I doubt the right is.
Okay, rant's over. Here's the ACLU's response the DOJ's protect-the-boss/punish his tormentors gambit:
"President Bush broke the law and lied to the American people when he unilaterally authorized secret wiretaps of U.S. citizens. But rather than focus on this constitutional crisis, Attorney General Gonzales is cracking down on critics of his friend and boss. Our nation is strengthened, not weakened, by those whistleblowers who are courageous enough to speak out on violations of the law."
"To avoid further charges of cronyism, Attorney General Gonzales should call off the investigation. Better yet, Mr. Gonzales ought to fulfill his own oath of office and appoint a special counsel to determine whether federal laws were violated."
And finally, here's a dose of sober, cold, hard fact from the invaluable John Dean, who knows something about wiretaps and presidential malfeasance:
There can be no serious question that warrantless wiretapping, in violation of the law, is impeachable. After all, Nixon was charged in Article II of his bill of impeachment with illegal wiretapping for what he, too, claimed were national security reasons.
These parallel violations underscore the continuing, disturbing parallels between this Administration and the Nixon Administration - parallels I also discussed in a prior column.
Indeed, here, Bush may have outdone Nixon: Nixon's illegal surveillance was limited; Bush's, it is developing, may be extraordinarily broad in scope. First reports indicated that NSA was only monitoring foreign calls, originating either in the USA or abroad, and that no more than 500 calls were being covered at any given time. But later reports have suggested that NSA is "data mining" literally millions of calls - and has been given access by the telecommunications companies to "switching" stations through which foreign communications traffic flows.
In sum, this is big-time, Big Brother electronic surveillance.
Given the national security implications of the story, the Times said they had been sitting on it for a year. And now that it has broken, Bush has ordered a criminal investigation into the source of the leak. He suggests that those who might have felt confidence they would not be spied on, now can have no such confidence, so they may find other methods of communicating. Other than encryption and code, it is difficult to envision how.
Such a criminal investigation is rather ironic - for the leak's effect was to reveal Bush's own offense. Having been ferreted out as a criminal, Bush now will try to ferret out the leakers who revealed him.
Well, Mr. Dean, it's just Bush giving the base the Dubya they want. Read the rest of the article. It's well worth it...
<%
dim done
done = request.form("done")
if done = "" then
done = "No"
%>
Tell a friend
<%
Else
if request.form("done") = "Yes" then
'sets variables
dim email, sendmail
email = request.form("email")
Set sendmail = Server.CreateObject("CDONTS.NewMail")
'put the webmaster address here
sendmail.From = "webmaster@aspbasics.com"
'The mail is sent to the address entered in the previous page.
sendmail.To = email
'Enter the subject of your mail here
sendmail.Subject = "Check out this website"
'send a specific page or send a site url
dim url
'url = Request.ServerVariables("HTTP_REFERER")
url = "http://www.aspbasics.net"
'This is the content of the message.
sendmail.Body = "Site recommendation from a friend!" & _
vbCrlf & vbCrlf & "A friend has sent you this email and thought you would should check out this site." & _
vbCrlf & url & vbCrlf
'this sets mail priority.... 0=low 1=normal 2=high
sendmail.Importance = 1
sendmail.Send 'Send the email!
response.redirect Request.ServerVariables("HTTP_REFERER")
'Response.write ("Sent to ") & email
End if
End if
%>
"[T]he practice of arbitrary imprisonments, have been, in all ages, the favorite and most formidable instruments of tyranny.' Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 84, August, 1788
