Friday, March 24, 2006

"Can You Hear Me NOW?"

Today, in the Boston Globe, Charlie Savage writes:
[...]
In the statement, Bush said that he did not consider himself bound to tell Congress how the Patriot Act powers were being used and that, despite the law's requirements, he could withhold the information if he decided that disclosure would ''impair foreign relations, national security, the deliberative process of the executive, or the performance of the executive's constitutional duties."

Bush wrote: ''The executive branch shall construe the provisions . . . that call for furnishing information to entities outside the executive branch . . . in a manner consistent with the president's constitutional authority to supervise the unitary executive branch and to withhold information . . . "

The statement represented the latest in a string of high-profile instances in which Bush has cited his constitutional authority to bypass a law.

After The New York Times disclosed in December that Bush had authorized the military to conduct electronic surveillance of Americans' international phone calls and e-mails without obtaining warrants, as required by law, Bush said his wartime powers gave him the right to ignore the warrant law.

And when Congress passed a law forbidding the torture of any detainee in US custody, Bush signed the bill but issued a signing statement declaring that he could bypass the law if he believed using harsh interrogation techniques was necessary to protect national security.
[...]

Meanwhile, Senator Feinstein says it's premature to censure the President until an investigation is conducted into whether the President is "bypassing" the law. You'll note: the Senator is getting right on that... (Any day now, she'll be calling for hearings. Or something. Does anyone want some apple pie? It's a little stale, but you'll enjoy it. Eat up, before it's all gone, you ungrateful, lying little terrorists.)

No comments: