George W. Bush-as the New Richard M. Nixon-By JOHN W. DEAN

[kpete]

----
George W. Bush as the New Richard M. Nixon: Both Wiretapped Illegally, and Impeachably;
Both Claimed That a President May Violate Congress' Laws to Protect National Security
By JOHN W. DEAN

Friday, Dec. 30, 2005

On Friday, December 16, the New York Times published a major scoop by James Risen and Eric Lichtblau: They reported that Bush authorized the National Security Agency (NSA) to spy on Americans without warrants, ignoring the procedures of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).



Initially, Bush and the White House stonewalled, neither confirming nor denying the president had ignored the law. Bush refused to discuss it in his interview with Jim Lehrer.

Then, on Saturday, December 17, in his radio broadcast, Bush admitted that the New York Times was correct - and thus conceded he had committed an impeachable offense.



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.

read the whole article at:http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20051230.html

[bryant69]

1. Yep

The return of the imperial presidency; the President should be able to do whatever he wants, whenever he wants.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Spazito]

2. Excellent, as usual!

Dean has laid it out well, imo. His last sentence is very chilling and needs to be answered by Congress:

"Now that he has turned the truly awesome powers of the NSA on Americans, what asserted powers will Bush use next? And when - if ever - will we - and Congress -- discover that he is using them?"

Recommended.

[chefgirl]

3. Excellent article

Something has me a bit worried, though:

<<Nixon took the same stance when he responded to interrogatories proffered by the Senate Select Committee on Government Operations To Study Intelligence Operations (best know as the "Church Committee," after its chairman Senator Frank Church). In particular, he told the committee, "In 1969, during my Administration, warrantless wiretapping, even by the government, was unlawful, but if undertaken because of a presidential determination that it was in the interest of national security was lawful.
Support for the legality of such action is found, for example, in the concurring opinion of Justice White in Katz v. United States." (Katz is the opinion that established that a wiretap constitutes a "search and seizure" under the Fourth Amendment, just as surely as a search of one's living room does - and thus that the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirements apply to wiretapping.)>>

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20051230.html


If I read this correctly, it seems to say that the Fourth Amendment is the real impediment to illegal wiretapping, as it "constitutes search and seizure".
Am I wrong here, or wasn't the Fourth Amendment basically nullified by the Patriot Act?? If the little idiot really has the right to 'search and seize' under the Patriot Act, could that be why he's so arrogantly claiming that he has the right to do what he did??

-chef-

(edited to add link)