NYT: Bush Has Shredded Constitution Since 9/11
In a scathing editorial on Sunday, The New York Times accused President Bush of playing on the nation's post-9/11 fears in order to justify violating our civil liberties and protecting big telecom companies implicated in his wiretapping scheme. The Bush camp "use[d] the nation's tragedy to grab ever more power for its vision of an imperial presidency," the Times editorial board charged.
In a scathing editorial on Sunday, The New York Times accused President Bush of playing on the nation’s post-9/11 fears in order to justify violating civil liberties and protecting big telecom companies implicated in his wiretapping scheme. The Bush camp “use[d] the nation’s tragedy to grab ever more power for its vision of an imperial presidency,” the Times editorial board charged.
WAIT BEFORE YOU GO...The New York Times:
Mr. Bush says the law should give immunity to communications companies that gave data to the government over the last five years without a court order. He says they should not be punished for helping to protect America, but what Mr. Bush really wants is to avoid lawsuits that could uncover the extent of the illegal spying he authorized after 9/11.
It may be possible to shield these companies from liability, since the government lied to them about the legality of its requests. But the law should allow suits aimed at forcing disclosure of Mr. Bush’s actions. It should also require a full accounting to Congress of all surveillance conducted since 9/11. And it should have an expiration date, which the White House does not want.
Ever since 9/11, we have watched Republican lawmakers help Mr. Bush shred the Constitution in the name of fighting terrorism. We have seen Democrats acquiesce or retreat in fear. It is time for that to stop.
This year, the ground feels uncertain — facts are buried and those in power are working to keep them hidden. Now more than ever, independent journalism must go beneath the surface.
At Truthdig, we don’t just report what's happening — we investigate how and why. We follow the threads others leave behind and uncover the forces shaping our future.
Your tax-deductible donation fuels journalism that asks harder questions and digs where others won’t.
Don’t settle for surface-level coverage.
Unearth what matters. Help dig deeper.
Donate now.
Since April, at least 69 people have been appointed or transferred to political jobs within the administration with little or no fanfare. A ProPublica investigation reveals who some of them are.
The Obama administration has seen another key player out the door. This time, it's national security adviser James Jones, whom Obama thanked for his "sacrifices" in his announcement in the White House's Rose Garden on Friday. Who's next?
In alleged retaliation for Republican stonewalling, President Barack Obama will bypass the Senate and make recess appointments to 15 high-level administration jobs. For context, George W. Bush made more than 170 such appointments; Bill Clinton made nearly 140.
Could the current climate in Washington, D.C., be discouraging lobbyists from practicing their persuasive trade in and around the White House? Or does the downsizing of their ranks have more to do with the economy than the political zeitgeist on Capitol Hill?
The bad rap that "faith-based initiatives" got during the last administration hasn't kept the new management at the White House from treating its Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships seriously. It has fleshed out the lineup of advisers to a total of 25 with two new recruits.
Here are the five most-read stories of the last seven days, including Chris Hedges on America's moral meltdown and Robert Scheer on the economic incompetents who find easy employment in the Obama administration. Full list after the jump.
You need to be a supporter to comment.
There are currently no responses to this article.
Be the first to respond.