Letters

Washington Post readers respond to Charles Krauthammer's ridiculous article on domestic surveillance. They'd like to know why Krauthammer refused to acknowledge in his article what his own source told him... that it is clear the President knowingly violated Federal law and bypassed standard processes set forth by the provisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to conduct domestic spying activities on Americans. Also, a letter from Maryland Representative Chris Van Hollen:

After the story broke about President Bush's secret order to allow the wiretapping of U.S. citizens without any judicial review ["On Hill, Anger and Calls for Hearings Greet News of Stateside Surveillance," front page, Dec. 17], I asked myself why we in Congress, as part of the USA Patriot Act reauthorization, have been passionately debating the balance between civil liberties, on one hand, and the investigative and surveillance powers of the FBI and other executive branch agencies, on the other. The president's newly claimed authority renders significant portions of the Patriot Act debate -- especially as it relates to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court process -- meaningless.

What is the point of Congress drawing legal standards and developing procedures to protect our security and secure our civil liberties if the president secretly decides he has the authority to ignore much of what we do?

Mr. Bush's decision to unilaterally wiretap U.S. citizens raises serious questions about whether he acted outside the law and whether he did so deliberately.

The president has said that he has a responsibility to protect the safety of Americans, but he must exercise that responsibility in a manner consistent with his sworn duty to uphold the Constitution.

Congress must hold hearings to determine both the facts and the law in this matter of great consequence.

CHRIS VAN HOLLEN