And forget "international courts". So called "international law" has the odd quality that the entities which are supposed to be regulated under it can opt out at any time (it's not an act of war or criminality to leave the United Nations, for example). Not so with national laws.
However, Bush is in real trouble on this wire-tapping business. He flatly ignored the statute and asserted extraordinary powers. Sending a little note to a few Senators (who shamefully, shamefully ignored their duties) is no substitute for following the law and the President could find himself in court on this - and impeached if he's found guilty or tries to derail that process.
Mark Shields had a good line on this tonight. He asked why it the Bush administration was even upset that the Patriot Act had been delayed. Under the Attorney General's theory, Bush doesn't need the law at all. His war authorization lets him do what he wants anyway.
boddi
On 12/20/05, Max B. Sawicky <sawicky at bellatlantic.net> wrote:
> We may think -- correctly -- that the USG routinely ignores the law, but
> out in the country thanks to the mainstream media a lot of people are
> just deciding that is true in re: the wiretap/FISA fandango. Hence I
> conclude it behooves us to consider impeachment seriously as a rallying
> point in general and for the '06 midterm elections in particular.
>
> mbs
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>