But allies of the administration called the decision legally questionable and politically motivated.

“It is an appallingly bad opinion, bad from both a philosophical and technical perspective, manifesting strong bias,” said David B. Rivkin, an official in the administrations of President Ronald Reagan and the first President Bush. “It is guaranteed to be overturned.”

Oh really? How about going beyond the sound byte and explaining WHY. Having read the opinion, it seems to have a sound basis in both precedent and interpretation. What makes this guy think it will be tossed other than King George and the Attorney Jester disagree?

Mr. Gonzales would not say whether the program played any role in foiling a plot last week to set off bombs in airliners bound for the United States from Britain. But Speaker J. Dennis Hastert, Republican of Illinois, suggested that it did play a role in the investigation.

In a written statement criticizing Judge Taylor’s ruling, Mr. Hastert defended the wiretapping operation and said that “our terrorist surveillance programs are critical to fighting the war on terror and saved the day by foiling the London terror plot.”

From everything that has since come out about the "London plot" the Brits are having a hard time even charging those guys with anything, much less making it stick. It seems we pressured them to make a move and now they've got bupkis, and what did any of that have to do the wiretaps other than Denny Hastert, who isn't on ANY of the committees that are required to be briefed about them, saying it did, but not giving any information about it?

I would ask them to give this side of their face a rest and start lying out the other side, but that side has been busy lying too.