Sigh … the more that comes to light about past presidents and their ‘eavesdropping’ the more this so-called ‘scandal’ – which has been reported to the extent you’d think it was worse than Watergate – becomes much ado about *nothing*, outside of a President trying to do his job by doing his level best to prevent another terrorist attack on our soil via using established precedent in extraordinary times.
Drudge has posted two links that show prior presidential use of searches as they relate to foreign communications done on domestic soil being conducted without a court order.
Jimmy Carter’s Executive Order can be read here.
Bill Clinton’s can be read here.
Now, considering that what the current President approved of in the aftermath of the worst terrorist attack on US soil in history, and contrasting that with what Presidents Clinton and Carter authorized under their tenures, can anyone explain why this time around it is suddenly explosive news in the media?
Embarass the President.
More: As always, Jeff Goldstein is on the case with a great post and lots of interesting links to check out.
Others blogging about this: Blogs For Bush
In the meantime, John Kerry provides a reminder of why it’s a good thing he didn’t get elected president.
Update: Patterico does some digging and finds deep within this LA Times article statements by legal experts who actually think what the President authorized after 9-11 was and is legal. Where was this tidbit of info hidden? Page A32 of the LAT.
Related Toldjah So posts:
- Bill Clinton and the NSA
- WSJ: “Thank you for wiretapping”
- The Prez fires back
- Prez essentially says â€˜let me do my job’
- The terrorists must be smiling
- The politics of the torture agreement
- “If 1941 Were 2005”
- The media’s war
- Winning in spite of defeatist attitudes
- W’s approval rating rises
- The undermining of this war