This morning, Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales claimed that President Bush was justified in authorizing domestic eavesdropping (by the National Security Agency), claiming that it:
...derived its legality from the congressional resolution permitting the use of force to fight terrorism in the wake of September 11, 2001 as well as from the "inherent powers" of the president as commander in chief.
Also this morning, President Bush defended the domestic spying and reiterated his intention to continue it, stating:
As president of the United States and commander in chief I have the constitutional responsibility and the constitutional authority to protect our country.
In contrast to Bush, Reuters reported that "[s]everal Republican and Democratic lawmakers have backed plans by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, to hold a hearing on the issue." Reuters added that "[m]any have questioned whether spying on Americans violates the U.S. Constitution."
At the minimum, Bush's spying program on us - the American people - does not appear to be AT ALL what Congress intended. Just this morning, on NBC's Today Show, Wisconsin Sen. Russell Feingold (D) said:
Nobody, nobody, thought when we passed a resolution to invade Afghanistan and to fight the war on terror, including myself who voted for it, thought that this was an authorization to allow a wiretapping against the law of the United States.
In addition, Sen. Specter, himself a leading constitutional expert, said with regard to the Bush Administration:
They talk about constitutional authority. There are limits as to what the president can do.
Finally, on the Diane Rehm Show this morning, a panel of Conservatives addressed Bush's domestic espionage program. One listener asked the quesiton, "Is spying on the American people as impeachable an offense as lying about having sex with an intern?" In response, Bruce Fein - former associate deputy attorney general and Republican counsel during the Iran-contra hearings, said:
...if President Bush is totally unapologetic and says 'I continue to maintain, as a wartime President, I can do anything I want, I don't need to consult any other branches,' that is an impeachable offense. It's more dangerous than Clinton's lying under oath because it jeopardizes our democratic dispensation and civil liberties for the ages. It would set a precedent that, as Robert Jackson said, would lie around like a loaded gun, able to be used indefinitely for any future occupant.
Norm Ornstein of the American Enterprise Institute added, ominously, that "this really is the kind of thing that Alexander Hamilton was referring to when impeachment was discussed."
So here's the bottom line. This is a President who believes he can do anythingg - authorize torture, order the NSA to spy on Americans in contradiction to the law, change the facts to suit his pre-conceived notions on issue after issue - simply because he's President, and we're "at war." Well, sorry Mr. President, but you must have been dozing off during civics class when they taught you about the rule of law, the separation of powers, and the basic workings of Democracy. Or, do Bush and Cheney simply want to be dictators, all in the name of "security?" Why is it that images from "Revenge of the Sith" keep coming to mind here? Specifically, I keep thinking of the scene where, as Richard Goldstein writes in The Nation:
...the villainous chancellor, Palpatine, wins sweeping new powers from the galactic senate in the name of security. Watching from her seat, the virtuous Padm? observes, "This is how democracy dies: to thunderous applause."
So, the question now for Americans is a disturbing one: is the Bush Administration jeopardizing and even destroying our democracy and civil liberties in the name of "security?" Is it abusing power? And, if so, should Bush and Cheney be impeached and removed from office for their dangerous, undemocratic, almost undoubtedly unconstitutional actions? Practically speaking, of course, this won't happen as long as Republicans control Congress, but after November 2006, all bets are off. This could get really ugly, unless President Bush changes his ways - and fast!