GONZALES ARGUES WE HAVE A DICTATORSHIP

[kpete]

Gonzales: Congress Gave President The Authority To Spy On Americans
by georgia10
Mon Dec 19, 2005 at 07:06:49 AM PDT

In this morning's interview with Katie Couric on the Today show, Couric asked Attorney General Alberto Gonzales what authorized the President to conduct warrantless spying on Americans. Gonzales trotted out the "inherent authority" excuse, one that has been effectively shattered by Armando here and here. But then he also said that the President also was authorized by Congress to commit this act. Specifically, he said that Bush was granted this power under the authorization for war. I presume he was talking about the Authorization for War passed on September 14, 2001.

Having scoured the authorization (read it here) I can't find anything that would grant the President the power to skirt the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Was Gonzales referring to the fact Congress gave the President the authority to use "all necessary and appropriate force" to combat terrorism? But the word "force" there is invoked with respect to the use of military force. And even if in GonzalesWorldTM "force" includes spying just like "torture" excludes almost everything short of death, Congress added the phrase "necessary and appropriate" precisely because it intended to restrict the President to the confines of the law.


Let's step back into GonzalesWorldTM for a second and assume that his argument is operative; he says this clause recognized that the President has unfettered power under the Constitution to skirt the law and order warrantless spying. But the Constitution mandates that the President preserve and defend the Constitution--which includes the Fourth Amendment and its protection against warrantless searches and seizures.

The more this administration trys to defend Bush's actions, the more ludicrous they sound. Take Dick Cheney, for instance. He claimed yesterday that had these wiretaps been in place earlier, 9-11 could have been prevented. Of course! Illegal wiretaps would have prevented 9-11, not acting on a certain memo entitled "Bin Laden Determined To Attack In US."

More at:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/12/19/9649/0429
http://atrios.blogspot.com/

[HereSince1628]

1. THIS is how it happens here. If Bush gets away with this one

he is likely to simply go for broke on installing the dictatorship and demand an ENABLING ACT from his faithful red congressional cohort. Thus he could invoke emergency measures to prevent the Congress from threatening the power of the executive.

[global1]

2. This Is *Co's Bizzaro World - All That Is Illegal Is Legal and All...

that is legal is illegal. Get used to it. We have three more years to endure unless we do something about it in '06.

[Fridays Child]

3. If Congress intended to restrict the President to the confines of the law

...why didn't they use the word "legal" instead of the words "necessary" and "appropriate." If Congressional Democrats want to argue that they exercised due diligence in their "checks and balances" role, they need to do better than that.

[InaneAnanity]

4. I'm almost expecting...

...for him to extend term limits because "it's a time of war, and a change at the top would be a sign of weakness" or some such b.s.

[Evergreen Emerald]

5. They are both unsustainable arguments

I am surprised at the meager attempt at justification. It is as if they are giving lip-service to those pesky detractors and have no real need to justify their actions, after all he IS the President.

Even I know that the president has no "inherent" power. I saw Gonzales on CNN this morning when he said that the authorization to go to war WAS authorization for surveillance. Their justifications are, even to those with the most rudimentary understanding of the laws, feeble at best.

If they use 9/11 one more time as an excuse to circumvent the Constitution, I think I will scream. Notice that key in their arguments is the premise that they are eavesdropping only on those connected to terrorist activites. We are required to trust their word on that--and assume that Bush would not use his power for anything but to protect you and me.

1. If indeed they were connections ("direct links") to known terrorists--a warrant would be granted immediately.
2. I don't believe one thing out of any of their mouths. And Bush has been using his power for his own agenda since he was "elected."

[Jacobin]

6. "L'etat, c'est moi" Napoleon Bonaparte

Roughly, "I am the state", what Bonaparte famously said to someone questioning his authority when he literally declared himself emperor.

This is Cheney's idea of a royal presidency and his slip is now showing

[trogdor]

7. Actually, Louis XIV said that.