NYT Sat. edition- Legal scholars still question Bush spy program

[stop the bleeding]

this is via Rawstory not actual NYT article but still LBN

Although the Bush Administration's strategy to aggressively defend Bush's NSA wiretapping program appears to be working, many legal analysts still question its constitutionality, according to an article in Saturday's New York Times, RAW STORY has learned.

Many scholars also believe that the post-September 11 authorization by Congress which gave President Bush the power to use force has little bearing on the program.

Excerpted from the forthcoming story written by Eric Lichtblau, Adam Liptak and James Risen:


Despite the administration's aggressive defense, many legal scholars, including some conservatives, say they remain skeptical that President Bush's assertion that the Constitution and a September 2001 authorization to use military force provided legal justification for the program. But if nothing else, legal and political analysts say, White House officials appear to have succeeded in framing the legal debate on their own terms and daring their critics on the issue to prove them wrong.


Legal scholars still question Bush spy program-Rawstory.com

[Avalux]

1. Well that's good - because nothing's changed.

I'd hope legal scholars wouldn't fall for the propoganda extravaganza. He broke the law. Period.

[ananda]

2. I agree that Bush broke the law..

.. and should be impeached, prosecuted, convicted, and sentenced to serious jail time.

So, the question is, why is his defense of illegal wiretapping working?

One word: corporofascism. The USA has turned into Animal Farm. The people are
mostly sheep.

Sue

[firefox]

3. We are calling for a trial to prove him wrong

But if nothing else, legal and political analysts say, White House officials appear to have succeeded in framing the legal debate on their own terms and daring their critics on the issue to prove them wrong.

The only reason we are stuck on scholars saying he has violated the law is because we cannot get prosecutors to say so. Give Bush the trial he deserves and that will answer the framing that now defends a criminal and his illegal acts.

[stepnw1f]

4. What Do They Mean by "Still"

Nothing has changed assmunch!

[choie]

7. and what do they mean that

their defense of the wiretapping program "appears to be working"?????

[stepnw1f]

9. No It Doesn't Even though Someone Suggest it Does

Being suggestive is a little over-used these days.... notice how bad sales have been.

[tanyev]

5. Why do legal scholars hate America?????

:cry:

[kainah]

6. still???

oh, that's right. I forgot. The NSA domestic spying story is so last week. :sarcasm:

[webtrainer]

8. what, they didn't take the A.G. and the * at their word?

if the experts keep looking at the Constitution and the facts, nobody can "help" them.

Doors of hope fly open when doors of promise shut. -Thomas D'Arcy McGee