George W. Bush: Difference between revisions

Following the terrorist attacks of September 11, Bush issued an executive order that authorized the [[President's Surveillance Program]]. The new directive allowed the [[National Security Agency]] to monitor communications between suspected terrorists outside the U.S. and parties within the U.S. without obtaining a warrant, which previously had been required by the [[Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act]].<ref>{{cite press release |title=Press Briefing by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and General Michael Hayden |date=December 19, 2005 |url=https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2005/12/20051219-1.html |access-date=September 1, 2008 |archive-date=August 18, 2006 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060818114650/http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2005/12/20051219-1.html |via=[[NARA|National Archives]] |publisher=[[White House]] }}</ref> {{as of|2009}}, the other provisions of the program remained highly classified.<ref name="IG">{{cite report |url=https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/Newsroom/Reports%20and%20Pubs/report_071309.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160928163435/https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/Newsroom/Reports%20and%20Pubs/report_071309.pdf |archive-date=September 28, 2016 |title=Unclassified Report on the President's Surveillance Program |author=Inspectors General of the DoD DOJ CIA NSA and ODN |date=July 10, 2009 |access-date=July 11, 2009 |quote=The specific intelligence activities that were permitted by the Presidential Authorizations remain highly classified, except that beginning in December 2005 the President and other Administration officials acknowledged that these activities included the interception without a court order of certain international communications where there is 'a reasonable basis to conclude that one party to the communication is a member of al-Qa'ida, affiliated with al-Qa'ida, or a member of an organization affiliated with al-Qa'ida'. }}</ref> Once the [[United States Department of Justice|Department of Justice]] [[Office of Legal Counsel]] questioned its original legal opinion that FISA did not apply in a time of war, the program was subsequently re-authorized by the President on the basis that the warrant requirements of FISA were implicitly superseded by the subsequent passage of the [[Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists]].<ref>U.S. Department of Justice White Paper on NSA Legal Authorities. {{cite web |url=http://fl1.findlaw.com/news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/nsa/dojnsa11906wp.pdf |title=Legal Authorities Supporting the Activities of the National Security Agency Described by the President |date=January 19, 2006 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130113171414/http://fl1.findlaw.com/news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/nsa/dojnsa11906wp.pdf |archive-date=January 13, 2013 }}</ref> The program proved to be [[NSA warrantless surveillance (2001–07)|controversial]]; critics of the administration and organizations such as the [[American Bar Association]] argued that it was illegal.<ref>{{cite news |title=Gonzales defends wiretaps amid protest |publisher=CNN |access-date=September 2, 2007 |url=http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/24/nsa.strategy/index.html |date=January 26, 2006 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060902055948/http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/24/nsa.strategy/index.html |archive-date=September 2, 2006 }}; {{cite news |title=Lawyers Group Criticizes Surveillance Program |newspaper=The Washington Post |date=February 14, 2006 |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/13/AR2006021302006.html |access-date=September 1, 2008 |archive-date=December 3, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171203142901/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/13/AR2006021302006.html |url-status=live }}</ref> In August 2006, a U.S. district court judge ruled that the [[NSA electronic surveillance program]] was unconstitutional,<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/01/AR2006090101410.html |title=Judge Asked to Suspend Ruling Against Wiretaps |access-date=September 1, 2008 |date=February 9, 2006 |newspaper=The Washington Post |archive-date=August 29, 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080829170504/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/01/AR2006090101410.html |url-status=live }}</ref> but on July 6, 2007, that ruling was [[vacated]] by the [[United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit]] on the grounds that the plaintiffs lacked [[standing (law)|standing]].<ref>{{cite news |first=Andrea |last=Hopkins |title=Court dismisses lawsuit on spying program |work=Reuters |date=July 6, 2007 |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN0642400020070706 |access-date=September 1, 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060818114650/https://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN0642400020070706 |archive-date=August 18, 2006 }}</ref> On January 17, 2007, Attorney General [[Alberto Gonzales]] informed U.S. Senate leaders that the program would not be reauthorized by the President, but would be subjected to judicial oversight.<ref>{{Cite wikisource|title=AG letter to Senate leaders regarding FISC decision and conclusion of Terrorist Surveillance Program|date=January 17, 2007|first=Alberto|last=Gonzales|location=Washington, D.C.|scan=Index:AG letter to Senate leaders regarding FISC decision and conclusion of Terrorist Surveillance Program.djvu}}</ref> Later in 2007, the NSA launched a replacement for the program, referred to as [[PRISM]], which was subject to the oversight of the [[United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court]].<ref name="WaPo1">{{cite news |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/us-intelligence-mining-data-from-nine-us-internet-companies-in-broad-secret-program/2013/06/06/3a0c0da8-cebf-11e2-8845-d970ccb04497_story.html |title=U.S. intelligence mining data from nine U.S. Internet companies in broad secret program |newspaper=The Washington Post |date=June 6, 2013 |access-date=June 6, 2013 |first1=Barton |last1=Gellman |first2=Laura |last2=Poitras |archive-date=June 23, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130623010047/http://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/us-intelligence-mining-data-from-nine-us-internet-companies-in-broad-secret-program/2013/06/06/3a0c0da8-cebf-11e2-8845-d970ccb04497_story.html |url-status=live }}</ref> This program was not publicly revealed until reports by ''[[The Washington Post]]''<ref name="WaPo1" /> and ''[[The Guardian]]''<ref name="Greenwald1">{{cite news |last=Greenwald |first=Glenn |title=NSA taps in to internet giants' systems to mine user data, secret files reveal |work=The Guardian |date=June 6, 2013 |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants-nsa-data |access-date=June 6, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060818114650/http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants-nsa-data |archive-date=August 18, 2006 |location=London }}</ref> emerged in June 2013.<ref name="WaPo1" />

Bush's legacy continues to develop today, as time passing allows the development of a more nuanced historical perspective. Supporters credit his counterterrorism policies with preventing another major terrorist attack from occurring in the U.S. after the September 11 attacks and also praise individual policies such as the [[Medicare (United States)|Medicare]] prescription drug benefit and the AIDS relief program known as [[PEPFAR]]. Critics often point to his handling of the [[Iraq War]], specifically the failure to find [[Iraq and weapons of mass destruction|weapons of mass destruction]] after claiming they were in Iraq, as well as Bush's handling of [[Taxation in the United States|tax policy]], [[Hurricane Katrina]], [[climate change]] and the [[2008 financial crisis]], as proof that he was unfit to be president.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://blog.sfgate.com/nov05election/2013/04/23/george-w-bushs-top-five-successes-and-failures/#11199101=0 |title=George W. Bush's top five successes – and failures |work=[[San Francisco Chronicle]] |date=April 23, 2013 |access-date=April 30, 2013 |archive-date=April 30, 2013 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130430004057/http://blog.sfgate.com/nov05election/2013/04/23/george-w-bushs-top-five-successes-and-failures/ }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.nbcnews.com/video/nightly-news/51652088#51652088 |title=Debate continues over George W. Bush's legacy |publisher=NBC News |date=April 24, 2013 |access-date=March 2, 2014 |archive-date=April 28, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130428095457/http://www.nbcnews.com/video/nightly-news/51652088 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>Chait, Jonathan. [https://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/04/donald-trump-is-just-george-w-bush-but-racist.html "Donald Trump Is Just George W. Bush But Racist"]. ''New York''. April 14, 2017.</ref> [[Ben Ferencz]], former chief prosecutor for the United States Army at the [[Nuremberg Trials]], has stated that Bush likely committed [[war crime]]s in relation to the Iraq War.<ref>{{cite web |last=Eggers |first=Dave |date=March 11, 2017 |title='These are dangerous times': the man who sued George W Bush and the Iraq war |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/11/man-who-sued-george-bush-and-the-iraq-war-dave-eggers |access-date=May 1, 2022 |newspaper=[[The Guardian]]}}</ref><ref>Glantz, A.: "[http://us.oneworld.net/article/view/138319/1/ Bush and Saddam Should Both Stand Trial, Says Nuremberg Prosecutor] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130401072801/http://us.oneworld.net/article/view/138319/1/|date=April 1, 2013}}", OneWorld U.S., August 25, 2006. URL last accessed December 12, 2006.</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Haas |first=Michael |title=George W. Bush, War Criminal?: The Bush Administration's Liability for 269 War Crimes |publisher=Greenwood Publishing Group |year=2008 |isbn=978-0-313-36499-0 |author-link=Michael Haas (political scientist)}}</ref>