Ritter Debates Hitchens

Yellow Dog gives us a seat at a debate between former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter and the inimitable administration apologist Christopher Hitchens. It's clear whose corner YD is in but that doesn't make Ritter's arguments any less impressive. Sample: "Stop evaluating Iraq from the perspective of a security threat to the U.S. or you'll make yourself crazy – because it didn't exist," said Ritter. "This had nothing whatsoever to do with the security of the United States and it had everything to do with correcting a political embarrassment to the U.S. and that was Saddam Hussein remaining in power."

Congress Rejected Domestic Power Bid

The administration's primary legal justification for the NSA spying revealed by the NYT always leads back to the resolution passed shortly after 9/11. They contend the following words gave them the appropriate authority: "all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations or persons the president] determines planned, authorized, committed or aided" Now the Washington Post reports they sought to explicitly write domestic leeway into the wording of the resolution and were rejected by Congress. According to Tom Daschle, they wanted the phrase to read: "all necessary and appropriate force in the United States and against those nations, organizations or persons [the president] determines planned, authorized, committed or aided" Several house members have indicated they did not believe the resolution spoke to domestic surveillance. Now it's known that the attempt to include it was specifically rebuffed.

Santorum Cuts Ties With ID Group

Senator Santorum in 2002: If the Education Board of Ohio does not include intelligent design in the new teaching standards, many students will be denied a first-rate science education. (Source: Washington Times) Now he has broken ties with the Thomas More Law Center, the people who backed the disastrous challenge to evolution in Pennsylvania. Robert P. Casey, the Democrat challenger for his senate seat immediately jumped on it. It would have been smarter for Sen. Santorum to keep his head down. If, as he says, he never believed it was the right case for an evolution test he should have done this before the decision. His belated desertion of the shipwreck looks bad to both ID proponents and those who prefer science instead—a lose/lose move.

Christmas War Update

Jingle-Bell Warrior John Gibson calls plain spoken Rob Boston a 'goon' for having the temerity to come on Gibson's program and fact-check the mythical War on Christmas. The Carpetbagger Report has a behind the scenes follow-up of the interview complete with a cameo comment by Mr. Boston himself. Second-hand quote from Gibson to Boston: "Don't come in where I drink… Don't come visit a bar when I'm in there." A seminal moment in the contrived holiday controversy: for the first time the War on Christmas may actually be spilling off the Fox News set.

Deutschland Uber Ailes

A Fox News affiliate's report has attempted to legitimize the agenda of a white supremacist website. Reporter Tami Birckner goes out of her way to make the Stormfront organization appear mainstream: apparently there's no room for dissenting voices in the piece. ThinkProgress has the video here and an astonishing follow-up here. Among other things, Birckner actually posts at the site and told TP: she did the story exactly as she was told to and that officials at the network were very pleased with her coverage

Diebold Fails Test

From Wired News. A test found the machines ridiculously easy to hack. $Q: The hack Thompson and Hursti performed involves a memory card that's inserted in the Diebold machines to record votes as officials scan ballots. According to Thompson, data on the cards isn't encrypted or secured with passwords. Anyone with programming skills and access to the cards -- such as a county elections technical administrator, a savvy poll worker or a voting company employee -- can alter the data using a laptop and card reader. In addition, other electronic voting machines may be suspect according to Thompson, a computer science professor. In other news, Election 2006 is rapidly approaching...

John Gibson Loses Control

A shell-shocked John Gibson exploded at Rob Boston for exposing the flimsy foundations of his contrived War on Christmas. The host had invited fellow Jingle-Bell warrior Gary McCaleb to help defend him, but after the reticent guest disobeyed orders Gibson seized the point and led the charge against Boston on his own. It ended of course, with Gibson cutting Boston's camera off. Crooks and Liars has the video, destined to become a classic.

ANWR Blocked by Senate

Alaska's Senator Stevens should be ashamed of himself: defense funding and Katrina relief should never have been used as leverage for the controversial drilling proposal in the first place. Senator Lieberman was exactly right, saying: ...even though the bill provides vital defense funding, he was joining the filibuster on principle to prevent attachments such as the drilling provision. "If we yield to this tactic on ANWR," he said, "next year it will be someone else's pet project attached to the defense spending bill."

'Shift Supervisors' Approved Surveillance

From The Washington Post: According to Hayden [former NSA Director], most warrantless surveillance conducted under Bush's authorization lasts just days or weeks, and requires only the approval of a shift supervisor. Hayden said getting retroactive court approval is inefficient because it "involves marshaling arguments" and "looping paperwork around." The failure to retroactively certify the surveillance under FISA rules wasn't a matter of national security then, it was a matter of convenience. More... He acknowledged that the administration discussed introducing legislation explicitly permitting such domestic spying but decided against it because it "would be difficult, if not impossible" to pass. Hayden establishes the mens rea for the alleged crime here. Congress cannot be trusted to give the executive what it needs ergo there's no point in even asking. The legislative branch is irrelevant on the matter and as such its law can be broken as the executive sees fit. Reporters had better hurry—it's unlikely General Hayden will be allowed to spontaneously leak candor for very much longer.

FISA Judge Resigns

MSNBC has the story. It's important to note Judge Robertson did not officially say his resignation was a protest over the NSA program, but the article does maintain close associates of his believe this to be the case. $Q: Robertson indicated privately to colleagues in recent conversations that he was concerned that information gained from warrantless NSA surveillance could have then been used to obtain FISA warrants. FISA court Presiding Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, who had been briefed on the spying program by the administration, raised the same concern in 2004, and insisted that the Justice Department certify in writing that it was not occurring. It's an interesting possibility for the question of motive, one that apparently hasn't been floated yet. The administration could have cast a wide net, then gone to the Federal Intelligence Security Court to get warrants for surveillance that turned up certifiable information. Under that scenario, the Court would have been giving legal credibility to an illegal program--any warrants issued would have been tainted as 'fruit from the poisoned tree'. It's no wonder the judges are concerned.

Helen vs McClellan

Things got a little heated at today's White House press briefing when Helen Thomas asked a series of pointed questions: Q The President has publicly acknowledged that we went to war under false information, mistaken information. Why does he insist on staying there if we were there falsely, and continue to kill Iraqis? MR. McCLELLAN: Well, maybe you missed some of his recent speeches and his remarks, but the President said it was the right decision to remove Saddam Hussein and his regime from power -- Q And a right decision to move in and to tell the people, the American people, that it was all a mistake, and stay there? MR. McCLELLAN: I don't think he said that. He said that Saddam Hussein was a destabilizing force in a dangerous region of the world -- Q That isn't true. We had a choke-hold on him. MR. McCLELLAN: It is true. He was a threat. And the threat has been removed. Q We had sanctions, we had satellites, we were bombing. MR. McCLELLAN: Let's talk about why it's so important, what we're working to accomplish in Iraq -- Q I want to know why we're still there killing people, when we went in by mistake. MR. McCLELLAN: We are liberating people and freeing people to live in a democracy. And why we're still there -- Q Do you think we're spreading democracy when you spy and put out disinformation and do all the things that -- secret prisons, and torture? MR. McCLELLAN: I reject your characterizations wholly. I reject your characterizations wholly. The United States is helping to advance freedom in a dangerous region of the world. Q -- recognize this kind of -- MR. McCLELLAN: For too long we thought we had stability by ignoring freedom in the Middle East. Well, we showed -- we saw on September 11th -- Q -- 30,000 plus? MR. McCLELLAN: Well, Helen, we can have a debate, or you can let me respond to your questions. I think this is an important subject for the American people to talk about. By advancing freedom and democracy in the Middle East we're helping to protect our own security. It's a dangerous region -- Q By killing people in their own country? MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I reject that. We're liberating and freeing people and we're targeting the enemy. We're killing the terrorists and we're going after the Saddam loyalists. Q The President said 30,000, more or less. MR. McCLELLAN: And you know who is responsible for most of that? It's the terrorists and the Saddam loyalists who want to turn back to the past. Q We didn't kill anybody there? MR. McCLELLAN: Our military goes out of the way to minimize civilian casualties. They target the enemy -- Q You admit they kill? MR. McCLELLAN: Well, we've got a lot of technology that we can use to target the enemy without going after -- without collateral damage of civilians. And that's what our military does. Q Are you kidding? MR. McCLELLAN: Oh, I'm going to stand up for our military. Our military goes out of the way to protect civilians. In fact -- Q Fallujah, we didn't kill any civilians? MR. McCLELLAN: We freed some 25 million people in Iraq that were living under a brutal regime

House Report Available

Raw Story has it. It's huge, and reads like a history. Of particular interest is Chapter Four, which gives chapter and verse of laws the administration may have broken with their reckless pursuit of war and evasion of congressional oversight.

Censure Motion Introduced

Raw Story reports Democrat John Conyers has introduced a motion censuring the President and Vice President for providing misleading information to Congress. There are three resolutions: One to censure George W. Bush One to censure Richard Cheney One to create a body to determine if impeachable offenses were committed

Feds Shoot Down Intelligent Design

A federal court rejected arguments that Intelligent Design belonged in a biology classroom in Pennsylvania. The court found the obvious: ID is creationism in disguise and has no place in science class. $Q from the judge: "It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID Policy."

Bush Personally Tried to Kill Story

According to Newsweek, the President summoned the Times brass to the Oval Office early in December in a futile bid to get them to kill the NSA story. It's unbelievable they knew this was coming for so long and the best the Secretary of State could do was say "I'm not a lawyer".

NSA Story Heating Up

From Raw Story: Senator Boxer has mentioned the "I" word: In a release issued this evening, Boxer said she's asked "four presidential scholars" for their opinion on impeachment after former White Housel counsel John Dean --made famous by his role in revealing the Watergate tapes -- asserted that President Bush had 'admitted' to an 'impeachable offense.' Also breaking from Raw: the New York Times is publishing a story about surveillance of protesters tomorrow.

The Case for Spying

Crooks and Liars has tape of the Attorney General on the Today show further explaining his legal justification for the NSA surveillance revealed by the New York Times. The administration is apparently going to bank on the joint resolution passed three days after 9/11: Section 2. Authorization for Use of United States Armed Forces (a) That the president is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on Sept. 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons. They're likely to lean on 'necessary', and ignore 'appropriate' here. Who determines what appropriate means? Take the word out and Gonzales might have a case; left in their position is weak. Question the administration should have to answer: When did breaking the law become 'appropriate' in the United States?

Gonzales Speaks

The Attorney General came out with his justification of the NSA domestic spying program today. $Q: "Our position is that the authorization to use military force which was passed by the Congress shortly after Sept. 11 constitutes that authority," said Gonzales. It will be interesting to see if he can get more specific. The resolution was not a Declaration of War, and there's nothing in it that gives the Commander in Chief the power to break domestic law as he sees fit. More ... Gonzales defended Bush's decision not to seek warrants from the secretive Federal Intelligence Surveillance Court, saying that "we don't have the speed and the agility that we need in all circumstances to deal with this new kind of enemy." FISC was created specifically to address this urgency—its mandate requires at least one of its judges to be based in D.C. for this very reason. The administration is going to have to put some more substance into their defense if they expect to stem the growing chorus of criticism over the NSA affair.

The Constitution in Crisis

Raw Story reports the House Judiciary Committee Democrats are set to level a blistering attack against the administration's conduct. The subtitle: "The Downing Street Minutes and Deception, Manipulation, Torture, Retribution and Coverups in the Iraq War". "Constitution in Crisis" is scheduled for public release on Tuesday and appears sure to set off a firestorm of partisan wrangling and recrimination.

Hewitt's Defense of Bush

Hugh Hewitt cites US v. US DISTRICT COURT, 407 U.S. 297 (1972) as a defense for the President's constitutional authority on the NSA affair. He fails to mention the decision went against the Government across the board when that authority was measured against the Fourth Amendment. The court found the surveillance was illegal. The Government.. " urged that the requirement of prior judicial review would obstruct the President in the discharge of his constitutional duty to protect domestic security. We are told further that these surveillances are directed primarily to the collecting and maintaining of intelligence with [407 U.S. 297, 319] respect to subversive forces, and are not an attempt to gather evidence for specific criminal prosecutions... The Court said... "But we do not think a case has been made for the requested departure from Fourth Amendment standards. The circumstances described do not justify complete exemption of domestic security surveillance from prior judicial scrutiny... "We cannot accept the Government's argument that internal security matters are too subtle and complex for judicial evaluation.. "Nor do we believe prior judicial approval will fracture the secrecy essential to official intelligence gathering...

Cheney in Baghdad

The Vice President made a surprise visit to Iraq today. The great liberator was obviously eager to meet thankful Iraqis in person: Cheney flew around the Baghdad area in a pack of eight fast-moving Blackhawk helicopters with guns mounted on the sides.

Condi On Meet The Press

Tim Russert asks her repeatedly to cite the specific legal justification for the NSA domestic surveillance revealed by the New York Times. Rice: "I'm not a lawyer" You can bet there's an army af administration lawyers working in the background trying to gin up a defense of the illegal program. Had there been a clear answer to the question, the President and Secretary of State could have easily reached into the files and come up with the relevant cite by now. The fact that they haven't indicates the legal framework is being rigged after the fact. She also allowed that there will be questions about her role as National Security Adviser. Under FISA rules, she would not have been permitted to make certifications in warrant applications: None of the above officials, nor anyone officially acting in that capacity, may exercise the authority to make the above certifications, unless that official has been appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate. The NSA is not confirmed by the Senate. Any initiatives coming out of her office would have been forced to follow a more circuitous route to be approved. Did the administration break the law to get around this provision?

Sen. Byrd Shames White House

From truthout, a powerful and important statement delivered by Robert Byrd on the floor of the Senate this Friday. Sample: Our nation is the most powerful nation in the world because we were founded on a principle of liberty. Benjamin Franklin said that "those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Our founding fathers, intent on addressing the abuses they have suffered at the hands of an over zealous government, established a system of checks and balances, ensuring that there is a separation of powers within government, so that no one body may run amok with its agenda. These checks are what safeguard freedom, and the American people are looking to us now to restore and protect that freedom.