I pity the fool who don't get it, T gets it.
The White House opened a weeklong media blitz Monday in defense of the National Security Agency's eavesdropping program, with President Bush saying he found it "amazing" to be accused of breaking the law by ordering a secret program to intercept international calls and e-mail messages.
Bush didn't break the law by intercepting calls in general, he broke the law by intercepting calls without obtaining a warrant, which is obtainable retroactively up to 72 hours.
As for the article, which is approximately 1,200 words long, the following is the only time given to the opposing argument, 120 words long.
Democrats and some Republicans have attacked the program as illegal and unconstitutional, and an analysis from the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service has strongly questioned its legal underpinnings and the limited briefings that Congressional leaders were given about it. Leading Democrats said Monday that they found the White House's latest line of defense to be unpersuasive, with Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Senate Democratic leader, saying Mr. Bush's speech reflected a refusal to "come clean" with the public.
"I am eager for the Bush administration to level with the American people and participate fully and openly in upcoming Congressional hearings," scheduled for Feb. 6 in the Senate, Mr. Reid said. "We can be strong and operate under the rule of law."
The entire piece is stenography of General Hayden's recent press conference, and quotes him thoroughly. If this piece was about Hayden's press conference, fine. If I want to read what he said I'll get a transcript. This isn't reporting, it's vomit. If this reporter actually cared about the issue at hand, all he has to do is google for "Bush" "NSA" and "Constitutional" and I'm sure he can find something. Instead, he's just regurgitating talking points. This is pathetic, but what I've come to expect from the NYT.
No comments:
Post a Comment