[extropy-chat] Impeachment of President Bush What odds am I offered?

[David Lubkin]

Brent wrote:

> >Read this please.
>
> >http://www.nationalreview.com/pdf/12%2022%2005%20NSA%20letter.pdf
>
>Read this please. It carries about as much weight as the letter you reference.
>
>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/22/AR2005122202119.html

That's like claiming that an article in Newsweek carries as much 
weight as a paper in Lancet.

The document that National Review made available on their web site is 
essentially a legal brief, in letter form. As one often sees in 
pleadings, it makes several independent arguments, each of which, if 
valid, would demonstrate the legality of the NSA interceptions.

I haven't done the research to give my opinion on the merits of DOJ's 
arguments, but they appear on par with what one sees in Supreme Court 
pleadings. In other words, there may be convincing counter-arguments, 
but they will have to be rigorously reasoned and grounded in case law.

Important facets that the Supreme Court recently reminded us of are 
that we have three co-equal branches of government, that there are 
responsibilities placed on the executive branch that are not shared 
by the other branches, and that there are areas in which the Supreme 
Court either cannot weigh in or must give maximum possible deference 
to the executive or legislative branch.

I suspect, as Spike said, that the courts will uphold the legality of 
the NSA intercepts. Whether they are legal, of course, is distinct 
from the questions of whether they are wise or whether I approve of them.


-- David.