Administration critics, political and media, charge that by ordering surveillance on communications of suspected al Qaeda agents in the United States, the president clearly violated the law... It takes a superior mix of partisanship, animus and ignorance to say that.

George Washington University law professor Orin Kerr finds "pretty decent arguments" on both sides, but his own conclusion is that Bush's actions were "probably constitutional."

!?@$#$!!??? Orin Kerr's exact words were "it seems that the program was probably constitutional but probably violated the federal law known as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act." What mix of partisanship, animus, and ignorance does it take to deliberately misrepresent that in an oped peice? Of course Krauthammer goes on to discuss FISA, but his position is that the law doesn't have force and Presidents obey it at their whim. He seems to think this conclusions is obvious and you'd have to be crazy to disagree, in spite of the extremely tenuous ground Kerr put that arguement on in the legal analysis Krauthammer references!

Impeachment Nonsense