Wednesday, January 04, 2006

Question for the Day

Lest you missed it, top Democrat on House Intelligence Committee, Jane Harmon, told the president that his ordering the NSA to conduct a domestic spy program, and withhold information from full congressional oversight, was illegal. You may remember that initially we were told that this electronic, and telephone, surveillance was "international." Truth is, many of the details as to the extent of NSA's operations are as murky, and secret as just about everything coming out of Washington in the past 5 years.

Between the inquiry into which members of Congress and staffers were on the take in the Abramoff debacle, and the inevitable hearings that must result from NSA, one thing we can bet on---Congress is going to be cooking in the next couple of months, and if the shit don't hit the fan, the turkey will.

Okay, so here's today's question: If the president's actions were believed to be even remotely illegal, what does it say about the actions, or non-actions, of those members of Congress who knew this president broke the law, and did nothing to stop him? What does it say about our elected officials now who know that this administration has crossed the line, yet still don't come forward, and speak out; do they become accessories to the crime, or accessories after the fact?