Feed Me Seymour, Feed Me

I finally found the perfect analogy for the Administration. Bush has morphed into Audrey Jr., Congress is Seymour and the White House is the Little Shop of Horrors. As he inked the monstrosity of the new FISA law, Defending the Framework, Bush demanded more, putting the pitiful Democrats on notice that supine surrender is not sufficient -- there is always more to come. I can hear the continual cries of "Feed me Seymour, feed me . . ."

Jack Balkin of Balkinization parses Bush's latest demands, in Bush to Democratic Congress: Your Complete Capitulation is Not Good Enough:

Note the key item on this wish list: legal immunity for having participated in the illegal NSA program.

I particularly love the phrase "alleged to have assisted our Nation." In his letter to Congress the other day Intelligence Director Michael McConnell spoke of "liability protection for those who are alleged to have helped the country stay safe after September 11, 2001." Apparently "allegedly helped us stay safe" is Bush Administration code for telecom companies and government officials who participated in a conspiracy to perform illegal surveillance. Because what they did is illegal, we do not admit that they actually did it, we only say that they are alleged to have done it. Or perhaps the Administration is suggesting that although such parties are alleged to have helped the country stay safe, there's no evidence that their repeated violations of federal law actually did much to promote our security. No, they couldn't mean that.

Oh yes they did. Commenting on the Balkin post, The Anomymous Liberal adds, Bush Demands Further Capitulation:

If Congress were to retroactively immunize these companies from liability, as President Bush is demanding, it would remove one of the few remaining points of leverage that still exists to try to pry the truth out of the administration about what happened over the last six years.

Via The Sideshow, Scott Horton writes in Harper's, The Boot is Descending:

Now President Bush’s signing statement, released this morning, tells us that the process is still ongoing. You see, whatever ground Congress gives, it’s never enough—there are always demands for more. And what’s at the top of the president’s list?

Immunity. Again. The Bush Administration’s internal analyses line up with those of outside scholars: what Bush and his team have been doing for five years roughly is definitely illegal. Felonious. But as long as Fredo runs the Justice Department, there’s no risk of prosecution. So what happens when he’s gone and a real law enforcement official takes over? The prospect of prosecution of administration actors is hanging heavy. How many pardons can Bush issue in his final days?

* * * *

So, the Bush Administration, once again recognizing the criminality that is its fundamental operating principle, is seeking to immunize itself. And conversely, true to the essential character of the police state, it is seeking to criminalize those who have blown the whistle on its criminal conduct.

Discussing the recent raid on the home of the suspected Justice Department whistleblower (which fittingly coincided with the new FISA law) and various Administration leaks, Horton warns:

A police state uses its secrecy laws as a tool for the persecution or repression of political adversaries, not as a means of preserving secrets or implementing serious policy surrounding national security, and that is exactly what is going on here. I don’t know who leaked the first word of the rise of the National Surveillance State to the New York Times and Washington Post. Whoever did it was most likely shocked at the brazen criminality of what was going on and hoped that by exposing it, an end would be put to it. Which is to say, the leaker’s motives were principled, patriotic, led by concern for the rule of law and about the proliferation of criminal dealings within the Government. Those are not criminal motives, and his or her act was not the act of a criminal, but rather a heroic act of quiet desperation.

The fact that even after these disclosures, the National Surveillance State has continued to feed and grow is alarming evidence of the decay of basic institutions. Today, our civil liberties state is withering away and the National Surveillance State surges without control. Retrenchment will be impossible. Resistance is essential, especially by those within.

* * * *

The boot is descending.

Feed me . . .

Tags: Civil Liberties, Law, FISA, Politics