k wrote:
[ Whatever. Cringley has never impressed me overmuch, and he hasn't changed my mind with this. He equivocates on the legality issue by arguing that these warrantless taps would have been disapproved by the FISA process, so Bush did it anyway.

I'm as fond of life as the next guy and I don't want it vaporized by a terrorist, but I'm completely unwilling to accept that this permanent war we've gotten ourselves into gives the Executive free reign to do whatever occurs to him. -k]

I make no guess as to why Bush decided that FISA was unnecessary.

Cringley's position that Bush believed that the wiretaps would not have been approved is interesting to me in that its one of the more probable theories for his actions I heard. However I didn't walk away from this article with the impression that Cringley believes "the Executive free reign to do whatever occurs to him."

I don't think equivocating is wrong either. I'm trying to find the article now (stupid Memestreams search engine...) and it has been a month or so but as I remember the legality of this boils down to things in the meaning of words in FICA like "nation" and "foreign power" and the 4th Ammendment vs. Article II. While lawyers I've talked with both right and left differ on their personal opinion, all have agreed it will be an interesting case. In those waters I have no problem with someone not deciding legality of Bush's actions.

RE: Cringley on phone tapping