Ass Rocket On RelIable Sources

Watch John "Hindrocket" Hinderaker defend the Bush administration's warrantless wiretapping and secret prisons. The obvious question is would Hinderaker defend the same legal rights of a Democratic administration? Not fucking likely. Keep in mind, Hinderaker is a lawyer.

ISIKOFF: A couple of examples -- and maybe Mr. Hinderaker would like to address these.

If reporters were told prior to the war in Iraq that the National Intelligence Estimate that had been presented to the public as showing clearly that there was weapons of mass destruction was, in fact, rife with dissent from intelligence agencies, saying that we're not so sure about this nuclear program, we're not sure about these UAVs, that some of the key sources being used to justify the war, such as curveball, for instance, had never been questioned by the CIA or, in other cases, had flunked CIA polygraph tests, would he think that reporters who published information that was so central to one of the main arguments and justifications for the war shouldn't be published and should be criminally prosecuted?

KURTZ: Let's give him a chance to respond.

HINDERAKER: Yes, they should be criminally prosecuted. You are wrong, by the way, in the way you characterized the 2002 consensus estimate. And I agree, though, that there sometimes is overclassification, but not here.

Hinderaker doesn't believe the public does not the right to know if the reasoning for war is accurate. He truly wants to give Bush the same protections as a monarchy. That is exactly what the Founding Fathers wanted to avoid with the executive branch.