Finding all sorts of gems tonight! This one comes via the Heretik via Slate:

Now it all makes sense. Dahlia Lithwick explains George Bush’s logic as recently expressed by another of his minions regarding Hamdan v Rumsfeld.

Clement’s arguments are frequently drawn from the well of “because the president says so,” or “because the president is the president,” or “because it’s wartime.” They start to sound like Alberto Gonzales’ testimony before Congress or the president’s signing statements: legal analysis by assertion and justification by double standard. This war is like every other war except to the extent that it differs from those other wars. We follow the laws of war except to the extent that they do not apply to us. These prisoners have all the rights to which they are entitled by law, except to the extent that we have changed the law to limit their rights.

In other words, there is almost no question for which the government cannot find a circular answer.

This was nicely put and bears repeating: this Administration relies on “legal analysis by assertion and justification by double standard.”

Sometimes I am just boggled by the arguments coming out of the White House. It’s frustrating to hear the same convoluted crap come out of news anchors who try to report on this stuff. Obviously, they have to report what the Administration says but the lack of contextual analysis that is presented is astounding. For example, that whether Bush broke the FISA law is up for debate doesn’t make sense. Just because Bush’s minions claim that the argument “the law we broke did not apply because Bush is the President” holds water doesn’t change the fact that the key clause is actually “the law we broke.” The same is true with the justifications for the Iraq War. Just because the Administration deflects questions about WMDs by talking about democracy doesn’t change the fact that WMDs are the issue that took us to war.

So, yeah, to add to the quote, this Administration relies on “legal analysis by assertion,” “justification by double standard,” explanation by obfuscation. Bah.