Now you and Sowell are conflating having legitimate government files on elected members of the congress with illegal spying on private citizens. It just isn't the same thing.
And if, as Sowell erroneously asserts, the NSA was only spying on known terrorists they would have had no troiuble getting an NSA warrant even three days after the fact.
What this really is is an all out errort to profect the fourth ammendment to the Constitutioin amd the legal statutes of the United States of America at all costs.

The White House personnel file controversy of June, 1996 arose because of a White House security official failing to follow the rules of access to FBI security-clearance documents. Craig Livingstone, head of White House Security requested, and received from the FBI, all White House personnel files in their custody without asking permission of the personnel first. The incident caused concern because in pulling all White House personnel files, the files covered White House employees from not just the Clinton administration but previous administrations as well.

In March 2000, Independent Counsel Robert Ray determined that there was absolutley no evidence of criminal activity associated with the files so contrary to Pam's statement, the files were not used to get dirt on poltitical opponents. Ray's report stated "there was no substantial and credible evidence that any senior White House official, or first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton, was involved" in seeking the files. It was simply an administrative snafu that involved the FBI as much as it did White House Security. It was improper for security to have been given any of the files without proper authorization.

Now let me get this latest lie straight. These party hacks want to convince us that trying to make the President obey the FISA laws make the threat to use military force less credible. What makes the threat of Military force not credible is that we have our troops and other resources bogged down in the middle of a civil war that we can't get out of. Lets not even pretend that Korea or Iran thinks that the POTUS is weak because the oppossition party is damaging him. He is weak because he makes bad decisions and continues to make bad decisions. His Presidency is damaged to be sure but most of that damage is self inflicted along with the damage that he doing to the Constitution.

the well-organized republican response to the issue is always the same two points: you did it, too, neener, neener. And, we have to spy to protect ourselves -- always ignoring the point that the controversy is not over spying per se, but over whether it's legally grounded.

And once again I have no doubt that if the very same scenario had been played out exactly as Bushco has done it, but it had been a democrat, the outrage from the right would be earth-shattering.

Politicians, pretty much by definition, operate on double standards. But the defense from the right of everything Bush, when what they are defending is either counter to true conservatism, or is evidence of overt incompetence, is beyond anything seen before. You name it: Bush has either mischaracterized it, screwed it up, over-spent it, over-promised it, miscalculated it. Ignoring the law is only the most obvious; and the part that a true conservative ought to be screaming about the loudest.

These aren't conservatives. They're just Bush groupies.
And there is no controversy over whether the spying was illegal except in the mouths of a few high placed Bush applolgists. And even they don't believe it.

These aren't conservatives. They're just Bush groupies.

Yeah, just ask Andrew Sullivan. (Oh, and Kos.)

He had some great points, but I didn't see where he mentioned when a Dem Senator that started talking about the contents of a judiccial nominee's FBI files.

And what about the 30 hours it took the clinton's to turn over vince foster's suicide note?????????/