Return of the 'I-Word'

"From shielding energy policy deliberations to setting up military tribunals without court involvement, Bush, with Cheney's encouragement, has taken what scholars call a more expansive view of his role than any commander in chief in decades. With few exceptions, Congress and the courts have largely stayed out of the way, deferential to the argument that a president needs free rein, especially in wartime."

But, Baker and VandeHei write: "Scholars such as Andrew Rudalevige, author of 'The New Imperial Presidency,' say the presidency had recovered long before Cheney returned to the White House in 2001. The War Powers Act, the legislative veto, the independent counsel statute and other legacies of the 1970s had all been discarded in one form or another."

Monday's Press Conference

Here's the text of Bush's hastily-called press conference Monday morning.

Washington Post reporter Peter Baker's question was the only one that really appeared to rattle the president:

"Q Thank you, Mr. President. I wonder if you can tell us today, sir, what, if any, limits you believe there are or should be on the powers of a President during a war, at wartime? And if the global war on terror is going to last for decades, as has been forecast, does that mean that we're going to see, therefore, a more or less permanent expansion of the unchecked power of the executive in American society?

"THE PRESIDENT: First of all, I disagree with your assertion of "unchecked power."

"Q Well --

"THE PRESIDENT: Hold on a second, please. There is the check of people being sworn to uphold the law, for starters. There is oversight. We're talking to Congress all the time, and on this program, to suggest there's unchecked power is not listening to what I'm telling you. I'm telling you, we have briefed the United States Congress on this program a dozen times.

"This is an awesome responsibility to make decisions on behalf of the American people, and I understand that, Peter. And we'll continue to work with the Congress, as well as people within our own administration, to constantly monitor programs such as the one I described to you, to make sure that we're protecting the civil liberties of the United States. To say 'unchecked power' basically is ascribing some kind of dictatorial position to the President, which I strongly reject.

"Q What limits do you --

"THE PRESIDENT: I just described limits on this particular program, Peter. And that's what's important for the American people to understand. I am doing what you expect me to do, and at the same time, safeguarding the civil liberties of the country."

Then Bush called on someone else.

Baker and Charles Babington wrote in Tuesday's Washington Post: "Bush's remarks left many critics unassuaged and many questions unanswered. The president offered no details about how many people are under surveillance, what standard must be met to intercept communications or what terrorist plots have been disrupted as a result of the program.

"Nor did he explain why the current system is not quick enough to meet the needs of the fight against terrorism. Under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the NSA in urgent situations can already eavesdrop on international telephone calls for 72 hours without a warrant, as long as it goes to a secret intelligence court by the end of that period for retroactive permission. Since the law was passed in 1978 after intelligence scandals, the court has rejected just five of 18,748 requests for wiretaps and search warrants, according to the government. . . .

"In asserting the legality of the program, Bush cited his power under Article II of the Constitution as well as the resolution authorizing force passed by Congress after the Sept. 11 attacks. The resolution never mentions such surveillance, but Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales said it is implicit. . . .

" 'This is not a backdoor approach,' Gonzales said at the White House. 'We believe Congress has authorized this kind of surveillance.' He acknowledged that the administration discussed introducing legislation explicitly permitting such domestic spying but decided against it because it 'would be difficult, if not impossible' to pass."

Bad Analogy

Daniel Benjamin writes in Slate about problems with the analogy Bush used -- twice -- to show just how damaging the leak about his secret order could be.

The leak to the Washington Times that resulted in Osama bin Laden abandoning his satellite phone "was a classic case of 'sources and methods' being compromised," Benjamin writes.

Not so the NSA leak. "This is not about novel sources and methods -- the same collection would have occurred if the administration obtained warrants -- it is a matter of legality and legitimacy. There appears to be no way in which loose lips about these intercepts will sink ships. They may, however, put a large hole in the administration's hull."

Bad Example

Josh Meyer writes in the Los Angeles Times: "In his radio address Saturday, Bush said two of the hijackers who helped fly a jet into the Pentagon -- Nawaf Alhazmi and Khalid Almihdhar -- had communicated with suspected Al Qaeda members overseas while they were living in the U.S.

" 'But we didn't know they were here until it was too late,' Bush said. 'The authorization I gave the National Security Agency after Sept. 11 helped address that problem in a way that is fully consistent with my constitutional responsibilities and authorities.'

"But some current and former high-ranking U.S. counter-terrorism officials say that the still-classified details of the case undermine the president's rationale for the recently disclosed domestic spying program."

Contradiction Watch

On CNN yesterday afternoon:

"[Suzanne] MALVEAUX: In April of 2004, in a speech addressing the Patriot Act, the president tried to reassure Americans their civil liberties were being protected, but he failed to mention the secret wiretapping program.

"GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Anytime you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so.

"MALVEAUX: Asked whether the president was being forthcoming by not mentioning there had been exceptions, his press secretary said. . . .

"SCOTT MCCLELLAN, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: I reject that suggestion. . . .

"MALVEAUX: Now, I just got off the phone with Scott McClellan who has since clarified this and explained this a little bit further. He said there are two separate things that are happening here. There's the Patriot Act that the president specifically was talking about in that speech. And then of course, there's the NSA, the National Security Agency and the specific program that has become such a point of controversy here.

So Wolf, what Scott McClellan is saying is the president did not mean and did not mislead the public by omitting that, but certainly this is not something that most Americans would know this kind of distinction. . . .

"BLITZER: Well, as you know, his critics are already jumping on that statement that the president made in Buffalo saying either he forgot, either he didn't know, or either -- or perhaps he was trying to mislead the American public. I suspect there's going to be a lot more commotion over that clip from Buffalo."

Agence France Presse has more examples of Bush repeatedly arguing that the Patriot Act safeguards civil liberties because authorities still need a warrant to tap telephones in the United States.

Briefing Follies

Here's the transcript of yesterday's briefing. The highlight: A reporter's attempt to get McClellan to explain in what way Congress had oversight over the surveillance program.

" Q But as you know, members of Congress who were briefed said that they were informed -- yes, briefed, but given absolutely no recourse to formally object, to push back and say, this is not acceptable.

" MR. McCLELLAN: They're an independent branch of government. . . .

" Q Were they given oversight?

" MR. McCLELLAN: Yes, they have oversight roles to play.

" Q So they have oversight. So, in what way could they have acted on that oversight?

" MR. McCLELLAN: You should ask members of Congress that question."

Powell on the Cabal

The BBC reports on former Secretary of State Colin Powell's interview with Sir David Frost. Here's the video .

Frost asked Powell if he agrees with his former chief of staff Lawrence Wilkerson's conclusion that a secret cabal led by Cheney and Secretary of State Donald Rumsfeld was running the White House. (See my October 20 column .)

Powell's response: "I wouldn't characterize it the way Larry has, calling it a cabal. There were people in this administration with strong views on every issue that came before us.. . . .

"And Secretary Rumsfeld and Vice President Cheney and I occasionally would have strong differing views on matters. And when that was the case we argued them out, we fought them out, in bureaucratic ways.

"Now what Larry is suggesting in his comments is that very often maybe Mr Rumsfeld and Vice-President Cheney would take decisions into the president that the rest of us weren't aware of. That did happen, on a number of occasions."

How Cheney Flies

Nedra Pickler writes for the Associated Press with more tidbits from Cheney's recent trip. I mentioned on Monday that for the flight into Baghdad, the Air Force loaded an Airstream trailer into the belly of a C-17 cargo plane for Cheney and his top aides.

Pickler has more on that and on how during the flight home last night on his traditional 757, most of the electric outlets went on the fritz.

"Working passengers began lining up their laptops to share the power from a couple of working outlets - particularly the reporters who urgently needed to prepare their articles to transmit during a quick refueling stop in England.

"But when Cheney said his iPod needed to be recharged, it took precedence above all else and dominated one precious outlet for several hours. The vice president's press staff intervened so a reporter could use the outlet for 15 minutes to charge a dead laptop, but then the digital music device was plugged back in."

Bush's Advice to Sharon

Reuters reports: "U.S. President George W. Bush advised Israel's hefty Prime Minister Ariel Sharon on Tuesday to watch what he eats and get more exercise after wishing him speedy recovery from a mild stroke, Sharon's office said.

" 'I need you to be healthy,' Bush told Sharon in a telephone call after the 77-year-old Israeli leader was released from two days in hospital, Sharon's office said in a statement that translated Bush's remarks into Hebrew.

" 'Watch what you eat, and start getting some exercise and cutting down on the number of work hours,' Bush urged the ex-general, known for his considerable girth and long days on the job. Bush is known for getting early nights.

"Bush said he had grown weary just listening to Sharon once recount the amount of work he did in a day, and that he hoped to see results of a weight loss program when the two leaders next meet -- possibly in February."