home

Bush Insists Gonzales, Not FISA Court, Review Surveillance Program

President Bush insists that it should be Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, not the FISA court, that should review the Administration's surveillance program.

And he will not sign a bill unless he gets his way. Bush makes the bizarre claim that having Gonzo, not the courts, review the program is necessary to keep us safe. Who in the heck believes that?:

The president threatened to veto any bill by the Democratic-led Congress that his intelligence director deemed unable "to prevent an attack on the country. . . McConnell and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales would oversee the eavesdropping process, according to the White House plan. That prompted howls of protest from Democrats who distrust the attorney general to protect privacy rights. "We need a legal framework around this program," Reid said. "No more blank check for this attorney general, no more blank checks for any attorney general."

If the President seriously thinks this change is necessary, then he would accept court review, not the review of the most incompetent and discredited Attorney General since John Mitchell.

The President's attitude betrays either unseriousness on the issue, or dishonesty in his claims, or both. Probably both. He is the worst President in the history of the nation.

< Poor, Poor DLC . . . | The Decider of All Things >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    The very idea (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by aj12754 on Fri Aug 03, 2007 at 05:08:38 PM EST
    of giving Alberto even a scintilla of additional power has a through-the-looking-glass quality to it.

    "Us" (5.00 / 3) (#4)
    by manys on Fri Aug 03, 2007 at 05:10:38 PM EST
    having Gonzo, not the courts, review the program is necessary to keep us safe.

    It depends on what the definition of "us" is.

    Heh! (none / 0) (#5)
    by Molly Bloom on Fri Aug 03, 2007 at 05:14:11 PM EST
    This is downright quixotic (none / 0) (#1)
    by Categorically Imperative on Fri Aug 03, 2007 at 04:26:56 PM EST
    Unless viewed as a game in which Bush wants to see how abjectly he can subjugate Congress.  On the heels of Gonzo's self-immolation in front of the Judiciary Committee, Bush's insistence here makes no sense otherwise.  For goodness' sake, the Senate is considering perjury charges and there's a resolution in the House calling for an impeachment inquiry.  And yet Bush is insisting that the target of those and other congressional investigations be given blanket authority over a highly controversial and arguably unconstitutional spying program?

    The mind truly boggles.

    I hope Congress has enough gumption to say no. (none / 0) (#2)
    by Molly Bloom on Fri Aug 03, 2007 at 05:02:59 PM EST
    On the bright side, if they are in session, Bush can't sneak any nominee through

    Maybe so ... (none / 0) (#6)
    by chemoelectric on Fri Aug 03, 2007 at 05:45:22 PM EST
    ... but don't forget that he is on a mission from 'God' to bring 'freedom' to everyone who is worthy, and to wipe 'Evil' from the face of the earth.

    I'm not kidding. That's what's so scary.

    I wish I had the Dem caucuses here so I could explain to them very carefully that they must let Bush veto every bill and have a genuine, first class temper tantrum in public. This is a get-worse-before-it-gets-better situation.

    The Dems truly have, so far, acted like the co-dependent family members of a drunk (wet or dry), constantly maneuvering to avoid the temper tantrum, and so wasting larger and larger percentages of their finite lives on miserable familial dysfunction.