Bullypulpit
Senior Member
A case seeking to challenge the Bush administration's domestic wiretapping program was dismissed yesterday as the plaintiff's "...could not show injury direct and concrete enough to allow them to have standing to sue...". Why couldn't they demonstrate this? Simple, actually...The list of those surveilled remains "classified".
And this is the crux of the situation. The Bush administration can hide its illegal activities behind the veil of "national security" thus denying any possibility of judicial review or the ability of Americans to challenge the legality of the surveillance of phone calls and e-mails.
To violate the law and hide that violation behind a wall of secrecy, then declare that wall unbreachable by the the the Judicial or Legislative branches...If this doesn't fall into the category of "High crimes and misdemeanors", what does?
For the full story, go <a href=http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/07/washington/07nsa.html?_r=1&th=&oref=slogin&emc=th&pagewanted=print>HERE</a>.
And this is the crux of the situation. The Bush administration can hide its illegal activities behind the veil of "national security" thus denying any possibility of judicial review or the ability of Americans to challenge the legality of the surveillance of phone calls and e-mails.
To violate the law and hide that violation behind a wall of secrecy, then declare that wall unbreachable by the the the Judicial or Legislative branches...If this doesn't fall into the category of "High crimes and misdemeanors", what does?
For the full story, go <a href=http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/07/washington/07nsa.html?_r=1&th=&oref=slogin&emc=th&pagewanted=print>HERE</a>.
