![]() |
![]() |
||
|
Err ... About that Specter-Bush Eavesdropping Deal…Posted on Jul 13, 2006Looks like we were a little too hasty on this one. We had blogged that Sen. Arlen Specter had introduced a bill that would require Bush to get court approval for his NSA wiretapping programs. Turns out that’s not the case. Specter’s bill would merely give Bush the option of bringing his program before a court—which Bush should have done in the first place. Think Progress and AMERICAblog have the details.
1. So Specter’s “landmark” legislation will give Bush the ability to do what he can already do under current law - go to the FISA court so that they can decide whether Bush’s domestic spying is legal. So that “breakthrough” is irrelevant. 2. And just as important, the legislation will not force Bush to submit his domestic spying to the courts, as the article leads you to think, it only give Bush the option of going to court, if he wants. And why in heaven’s name would Bush “want” to do that? That’s a bit like repealing the murder statutes and replacing them with legislation that makes murder legal unless the murderers choose to turn themselves in.
Advertisement Previous item: Marc Jacobs Releases Al Gore Fashion T-Shirts Next item: Ralph Reed Allegedly Mulled 'Mortgaging Black People' CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig. Add Your Comment |
We just got faster!
Our site is growing, and we’ve upgraded our servers to bring you a better, faster Truthdig experience.
We’re thrilled with our improvement — but it’s added a lot to our costs. Please help us to keep things snappy and make sure you have instant access to thousands of in-depth Truthdig articles, interviews, videos and cartoons.
Please chip in today with a gift to keep us moving forward. Then check out the site for yourself!
By felicity smith, July 14, 2006 at 5:03 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Typical Specter. The guy’s all smoke and mirrors. His performance chairing a Senate committee recently revealed the real Specter, slime and all. Attorney General Gonzales was before the committee to answer questions about government spying and as is usually case someone in that position is sworn in first. Specter did a Rumplestilskin act, said no, and that was the end of it. One would think that an officer of the court and the biggest muckamuck lawyer in the country would be sworn in as a matter of course. The result? The Gonzales testimony was a sham - or is that scam.
Report this