Can Bush Negotiate?

Michael J. Sniffen writes for the Associated Press: "Citing FBI abuses and the attorney general's troubles, senators peppered top Justice and intelligence officials Tuesday with skeptical questions about their proposal to revise the rules for spying on Americans.

"Senate Intelligence Committee members said the Bush administration must provide more information about its earlier domestic spying before it can hope to gain additional powers for the future."

Sniffen quotes Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.): "We look through the lens of the past to judge how much we can trust you."

And here's Bill Nelson, (D-Fla.): "We want to go after the bad guys, but we want to prevent the creation of a dictator who takes the law in his own hands."

This Senate Web page has links to the text of the administration's proposed bill, prepared statements and views of outside groups.

The New York Times editorial board writes this morning that the administration "has submitted a bill that would enact enormous, and enormously dangerous, changes to the 1978 law on eavesdropping. It would undermine the fundamental constitutional principle -- over which there can be no negotiation or compromise -- that the government must seek an individual warrant before spying on an American or someone living here legally. . . .

"The measure would not update FISA; it would gut it. It would allow the government to collect vast amounts of data at will from American citizens' e-mail and phone calls. The Center for National Security Studies said it might even be read to permit video surveillance without a warrant.

"This is a dishonest measure, dishonestly presented, and Congress should reject it. Before making any new laws, Congress has to get to the truth about Mr. Bush's spying program."

Cheney Again

And whose idea was the NSA spying program anyway?

Siobhan Gorman writes in the Baltimore Sun: "In the most detailed accounting to date of the origins of the National Security Agency's warrantless surveillance program, former CIA Director George J. Tenet says the effort was started at the urging of Vice President Dick Cheney. . . .

"Cheney's role at the inception of the NSA program had been hinted at previously in news reports that quoted anonymous sources, but Tenet's description [in his new book] is the first time it has been detailed on the record.

"In October 2001, Cheney asked Tenet if the NSA could do more to monitor al-Qaida, and Tenet called Gen. Michael V. Hayden, then the NSA's director, to relay the message, Tenet says.

"Hayden 'made it clear we could do no more with existing authorities,' and he and Tenet met with Cheney, Tenet wrote. 'Mike laid out what could be done that would be feasible, prudent and effective.'

"Within a week, Tenet says, the NSA was authorized to pursue what President Bush has called the 'Terrorist Surveillance Program.' That program, as administration officials have described it, monitors conversations into and out of the United States of suspected al-Qaida operatives and their allies."

Impeaching Cheney

Richard Cohen writes in his Washington Post opinion column that Ohio congressman and Democratic presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich's case to impeach Vice President Cheney "is persuasive, although his remedy may be too radical...

"[N]o one who reads Kucinich's case against Cheney can fail to conclude that this is a rational, serious accusation. It's possible that each individual charge can be rebutted, but the essence of it is shockingly apparent: We were being manipulated."

Kucinich, Cohen writes, "is on to something here. It is easy enough to ad hominize him to the margins -- ya know, the skinny guy among the 'real' presidential candidates -- but at a given moment, and this is one, he's the only one on that stage who articulates a genuine sense of betrayal. He is not out merely to win the nomination but to hold the Bush administration -- particularly Cheney -- accountable. In this he will fail. What Cheney has done is not impeachable. It is merely unforgivable."

Idol Chatter

TV critic Lisa de Moraes writes in The Washington Post: "President Bush and first lady Laura Bush appeared as Giant Talking Heads on 'American Idol' last night to thank the American people for helping raise more than $70 million last week to donate to, among others, children who have suffered in New Orleans since Hurricane Katrina hit and the Judges and Stewards Commissioner for the International Arabian Horse Association whom Bush had put in charge of FEMA thoroughly botched the relief efforts.

"POTUS: We thank all the 'American Idol' viewers who have shown the good heart of America. We thank all the celebrities who participated, including Bono, and all the contestants who sang their hearts out for these children. Say, Laura, you think I ought to sing something?

"FL: I don't know, darling -- they've already seen you dance."

Bush's State of Mind

There is much discussion in the liberal blogosphere of an item in the influential, subscription-only Nelson Report earlier this week.

Think Progress has an excerpt: "[S]ome big money players up from Texas recently paid a visit to their friend in the White House. The story goes that they got out exactly one question, and the rest of the meeting consisted of The President in an extended whine, a rant, actually, about no one understands him, the critics are all messed up, if only people would see what he's doing things would be OK . . . etc., etc. This is called a 'bunker mentality' and it's not attractive when a friend does it. When the friend is the President of the United States, it can be downright dangerous. Apparently the Texas friends were suitably appalled, hence the story now in circulation."

Dinner Watch

Michael Calderone writes in the New York Observer with details of the New York Times decision to boycott the White House Correspondents Dinner -- and other such events -- from this point forward.

"The Times' final snuggle with the Bush administration was a memorable one. [Washington bureau chief Dean] Baquet, sat at Table 92 in the Washington Hilton ballroom, along with Maureen Dowd, Jim Rutenberg, Adam Nagourney, David Sanger, Douglas Jehl, Kate Phillips -- and Karl Rove, the President's bare-knuckled chief advisor and strategist.

"The Times' guest had been invited a few months earlier by Mr. Rutenberg, prior to the time that Mr. Baquet took over the bureau.

"Mr. Rove's presence led celebrity guests Sheryl Crow (a guest of Bloomberg News) and Laurie David (a guest of CNN) to confront him over environmental policy. Angry words ensued. Though the spat occurred at The Times' table, it was The Washington Post-- not The Times -- that broke the story the following day. . . .

"Mr. Baquet said that the decision to stop participating in the dinners 'has nothing to do with the Rove dustup.'

"Nevertheless, Mr. Baquet . . . said that he felt 'uncomfortable' with the entire night. . . .

"'I don't think there's any reportorial loss from not attending the dinners,' said Mr. Sanger. 'I think the imagery of these on television creates a false impression that we regularly sit around with members of the administration, laughing at each other's bad jokes. That's not what life in Washington is like, so it's probably just as well not to attend.' . . .

"'I'd say our distaste for these events has been cumulative,' wrote executive editor Bill Keller in an e-mail to The Observer. 'There was no one thing. Or maybe everybody has his or her own cringe-making moment. For me personally, the tipping point may have been watching Karl Rove on YouTube, doing a rap routine with reporters at the TV correspondents' dinner.' . . .

"'It's great as a spectacle,' said Peter Baker, the White House correspondent for The Washington Post. 'Go, don't go -- who cares? I have more of a problem with government institutions holding briefings with 40 reporters on background. That's what we should take a stand on. I don't think anybody is compromised by having a drink with a source and listening to bad comedy. All the Sturm und Drang over the dinners is a waste of time.'"