More on the NSA, Warrantless Searches and Congress

A number of developments have occurred since the initial New York Times article appeared.

First, it turns out that President Clinton was exercising the same authority in purely domestic matters. Of course the democrat response (from Senator Leahy) was, Well it's the same but different.

Second, There is a huge fight going on in congress about what actually happened as far as the briefing the intelligence committees as required for oversight. It appears that Jay Rockefeller may be a big fat liar with his pants constantly on fire. He claims that he has been opposed to the program since the very beginning, others claim he actively supported it. I am especially intrigued by these handwritten letters released by Mr. Rockefeller and Nancy Pelosi. Why are the handwritten? Is it because it was so important that the personal touch was required, or was it because if they were created on the computer on lets say Friday of last week, there would be a tag indicating that? Just some food for thought.

Third, Everyone who has ever been involved with these affairs from both the Carter and Clinton administrations have stated that this program is legal.

All in all this is looking pretty good for the President. Then along comes George Will.

Michelle Malkin writes this morning that Mr. Will has gone over to the dark side.

Earlier this week George Will argued that President Bush should have asked Congress for permission to carry out warrantless eavesdropping of Americans. He is confident that Congress would have changed FISA to approve the program:

Congress, if asked, almost certainly would have made such modifications of law as the president's plans required.

Just one teensy weensy problem: the NSA program was (and still is) classified. Is Will suggesting that Bush could have requested the authority he needed without revealing the existence of the NSA program? Or does he think Bush should have trusted 535 members of Congress and their staffers to keep the program secret?

On those key questions, Will is silent.

Her counter argument refers back to a National Review editorial, and the difficulties in keeping the program secret. She misses an important factor though. In an interview earlier this week Alberto Gonzales stated that the President, through the Attorney General approached Congress about having FISA revised to specifically address situations such as this and Congress refused. (source Kirby Wilbur interview with a member of the House Intelligence Subcommittee KVI 570am).

So the President is being vilified for legal actions taken after attempting to be even more considerate of civil rights and congressional authority than required and being slapped down.

John at Powerline has an interesting exchange going with the New York Times on this subject also.

Current Affairs
CIA Watch
Politics
New York Times