The Law-less NY Times

In an editorial yesterday, the NY Times attempts to present a formidable legal argument against warrantless wiretapping by the NSA. The only problem is, ahem, that they actually decline to deal with any of the relevant cases on the subject.

Powerlines discusses here; Hugh Hewitt has a theory that explains The Times' glaring omissions here.

How ironic that, in its opening paragraphs, the Times editorial characterizes the Administration explanations as a combination of "political spin, clumsy historical misinformation . . . and a couple of big, dangerous lies." Familiar with the term "projection"?