These are the undisputed facts: In 1978, the federal government passed the "Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act" (FISA), which requires the President to get a warrant to authorize electronic surveillance of American citizens. Beginning in 2001, President Bush authorized surveillance of American citizens without court order. In 2005, the US Justice department opened an inquiry into how knowledge of the afore mentioned surveillance was leaked to the New York Times.

To better understand the significance of these facts better, one should first look deeper into each. The key FISA provision is as follows:

Notwithstanding any other law, the President, through the Attorney General, may authorize electronic surveillance without a court order under this subchapter to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year if the Attorney General certifies in writing under oath that— (A) the electronic surveillance is solely directed at— (i) the acquisition of the contents of communications transmitted by means of communications used exclusively between or among foreign powers, as defined in section 1801 ...

It goes on to detail the procedures under which a temporary warrant may be gained, how often its use must be reported, and the penalties for breaking the law. It is a very specific statute, passed on the heals of intelligence abuses by the Army and Nixon administration.

After the 2001 terrorist attacks, the President began to authorize wiretapping that was plainly not in accordance with this statute. His administration makes no attempt to claim that it was, but roots their arguments in the necessity of their actions to protect the country in a time of war. The administration also contends that, although court orders were not obtained, several key members of congress were briefed on the program. The President has made it clear there is no plan to stop the eavesdropping although the program is reviewed every 45 days.

And finally, the recent news concerning the Justice Department Investigation into the leaks concerning the wiretapping. The primary focus of the investigation is to determine who leaked the information to the Times. White House spokesman Trent Duffy said Justice undertook the action on its own, and Bush was informed of it Friday. The leaking of classified information is a serious issue," Mr. Duffy said. "The fact is that Al Qaeda's playbook is not printed on Page One, and when America's is, it has serious ramifications."

When I first became aware of these facts, I was surprised that the President would authorize these wiretaps without warrants, given the provision that allow the administration to apply to the FISA court for a search warrant up to 72 hours after the government begins monitoring suspects' phone conversations. Given how few warrant requests have been denied (4 out of 4000 in the last 3 years) in the past, it would seem this was the path of least resistance, if only to avoid the nattering of meddlesome civil-libertarians.

I still am.

There's aren't too many reasons why the President would ignore the uncontroversial path for the one of questionable legality. One would be that he didn't wish to be bothered and figured that it would never get out, or didn't really matter if it did. The other would be that he was pretty sure that his requests would be reviewed and rejected, or even condemned. I'm not sure which is worse.

It's hard to look at facts like the ones above and not put something together that ascribes the worst of motives to our Chief Executive. His past record on respect for civil liberties has been spotty at best. His arguments for avoiding court oversite seem incredibly flimsy. And now, the Justice Department, reporting directly to the President, is taking steps to punish the whistle blower, but not at the President's behest. Perish the thought.

I'll tell you how this looks to me.

The President found himself inconvenienced by FISA's requirements. Maybe he was trying to protect the country from domestic terrorists. Maybe he was fishing blindly for a lead. For whatever reason, he knew he wouldn't be able to get the warrants he wanted, so he didn't even try.

Then someone, maybe several “someones”, got a little squeamish about the whole total-disregard-for-the-law thing. Who do you report the president to? His only boss is “The People”, and so they went to the press.

Then the President decided that leaks like this are bad for the administration, and that's bad for America. Or maybe it was the Attorney General, or some other cabinet member. It's not like they don't agree on general policy. So the hunt for the leak begins and it wont let up until someone has been nailed to the wall, and this sort of loose-lipped behavior is forever discouraged.

Of course, that's all conjecture, and from an individual admittedly not enamored of the current administration. Still, I challenge you to propose your own series of events and motives to more closely match the facts at hand. Please. Mine are scary.

The worst thing about this situation is not that the President refused to admit error when he so plainly has erred. He's been pretty resistant to remorse all along. It's not the lack of respect for civil liberties and rule of law demonstrated by his administration. At least we all know about it, now. Rather, it is the chilling effect this investigation, so close on the heals of the Valerie Plame case, will have on future whistle blowers. Don't think for a moment that it will not be successful. The Times will be thoroughly debriefed, and they will cough up their sources, and those sources will be punished.

And then who will be suicidal enough to report the next dirty deed?

c0c0c0