Blank check

The Bush Administration continues to assert it has a right — as part of the war authorization — to perform warrentless wiretaps of anyone calling into or out of the US whom they think might be a terrorist or part of a terrorist organization.

In fact, that’s not all they assert they could do.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales suggested for the first time Thursday that a president might have the legal authority to order wiretapping without a warrant on communications between Americans that occur exclusively within the United States.

“I’m not going to rule it out,” Gonzales said when asked about that possibility at a House Judiciary Committee hearing.

The AG also declined to rule out labor camps, forced sterilization of suspected terorrists, and the strangling of baby kittens that look suspicious.

Well, no, he didn’t address those items specifically, and I don’t think they’re actually on the table. But based on the arguments put forward by the Administration — i.e., that Congress told them they could use whatever “force” they needed to in pursuit of the “war” — there’s nothing legally barring pretty much any action they wish to take. Which leaves only the pressure of oversight (which the Administration rejects) and public political pressure (which, uninformed by any sort of oversight, is difficult to muster in a rational fashion).

At the hearing, Gonzales inched closer toward acknowledging that intercepting purely domestic calls could be considered legally permissible in his view if the communications involved al Qaeda. “You would look at precedent,” he said. “What have previous commander in chiefs done?”

Answering his own question, he cited President Woodrow Wilson’s authorizing the interception of all cables to and from Europe during World War I “based upon the Constitution and his inherent role as commander in chief.” Gonzales said he would use that legal framework to decide whether intercepting purely domestic communications without a warrant is legally permissible. He would not say whether such wiretapping has been conducted.

Of course, nothing has — officially — happened yet.

“The attorney general’s comments today should not be interpreted to suggest the existence or nonexistence of a domestic program or whether any such program would be lawful under the existing legal analysis,” department spokeswoman Tasia Scolinos said.

We might be doing it — or we might not be — and we won’t even tell you, until we’re caught, whether we think we can legally get away with it. A nice deal, if you can get.