An Untrustworthy Administration Undermines Even Legitimate National Security Measures


In writing about the Verizon story that is spilling out now, Andrew McCarthy makes a very important point.

Now, we begin to see the wages of having an administration that abuses its awesome powers, then, as night follows day, stonewalls and misleads Congress and the public. Crucial national security measures, which operate on the forgiving assumption that government officials will conduct themselves honorably, are put at risk…

This is why it’s so critical to have a trustworthy president and administration – including an attorney general Congress can trust to provide truthful, accurate and complete information. It is not unreasonable to conclude that the Obama administration – with its serial lawlessness, authoritarian abuses of power to harass dissenters, and pattern of misleading and stonewalling Congress – has so grossly violated the public trust that it is unfit to exercise the executive’s awesome investigative authorities.

While the majority of McCarthy’s piece is dedicated to his explanation of what happened based on his time as a Federal Prosecutor, the point that I have excerpted from his opening and conclusion is more important in a way.

An untrustworthy administration undermines national security, just as an abusive police force undermines law enforcement, by creating mistrust.

National security only works when people trust those in charge. Partisan politics began the fragmentation of national security after JFK and LBJ. Liberals gave in to the left and disowned their part in things like the Vietnam War and embraced an anti-war identity. That led them to political defeats and eventually a belated success with the Carter Administration which was one of the worst things to happen to national security until today.

That pattern repeated with the Iraq War and Obama. Like Carter, Obama has tried to have it both ways on national security and that is an unsustainable policy. Worse still, Obama’s record of domestic abuses isn’t in line with Carter, it’s not even in line with Clinton. It’s becoming downright Kennedyesque.

We’ve had this debate with drones. Even though there is no serious expectation of drones being used domestically, people don’t trust Obama with them. That doesn’t mean that there’s anything wrong with using drones to kill terrorists. There isn’t. But mistrust of an unethical government extends into all areas, even legitimate ones.

A government that breaks faith in several areas will have mistrust spill into every area. Once you have abused a number of powers, then you will rightly be considered suspect in all of them.

  • Andrew

    Oh, I get it.

    The problem isn’t the sweeping unjustifiable surveillance of the American people, it’s that the Obama administration is making the NSA look bad by doing it.



  • Nabuquduriuzhur

    Not all of us have bad memories. I get tired of one side being dishonest and then trying to blame everyone when they get caught.

    This was my blog entry

    “We now actually have pundits with bad memories trying to claim that Bush
    did this or did that.

    It’s like the little kid who tries to mollify an adult by claiming
    everyone does something.

    When they DON’T.

    I wrote of the Democrat hypocrisy in wiretaps National Wave of
    Foolishness, page 359:


    “Our culture, one that is now predominantly Liberal, is replete with
    double standards. It would take more than one book to list them all.
    Here are a tiny number of examples out of the Ceres-sized Liberal
    pile of hypocrisy:

    When President Clinton allegedly used various government agencies to
    pursue illegal taps on phone calls of political enemies and also
    allegedly to find those who didn’t agree with his policies and
    allegedly used the government to place cookies and other illegal
    software on ISPs and personal computers— this was apparently OK
    with people on the Left as they didn’t complain about it.

    The liberal media was fine with it— or they would have complained.
    However, when President G.W. Bush signed the Patriot Act— an Act
    that required a warrant to start tapping the phones of terror suspects— it was somehow horrible and awful to the Left that the government was tapping the
    phones of known terrorists in Iraq who were calling terror suspects
    in this country.

    The media screamed, Democrats complained and the Democrat Congress fought it. The sheer volume of dishonest “complaints” I heard from
    liberals and read in the news services could fill lake basins with
    bad-smelling horse-derived plant food.

    What is wrong with requiring a judge to issue a warrant before a wiretap??
    It is in the 4th Amendment, isn’t it? (It’s like the Left took what Clinton
    was allegedly doing and transferred it to Bush.) Matthew 23:13-36
    applies to the actions of Democrats of the last 20 years, doesn’t it?

    Hypocrisy. It’s either OK to illegally wiretap/surveille or it’s not. Party
    shouldn’t enter into it, should it? The Constitution should be the
    law, should it not?”


    Now we have a judge illegally issuing orders for MILLIIONS of
    customers’ information. Not quite the same thing as a court order for
    a specific person calling a known terrorist in Iraq as the Bush
    wiretaps were?

    It’s not permitted by the Patriot Act, either. How do you get from a court
    order required for a wiretap for one person, to millions? There’s nothing in the Constitution to allow such an iniquity.

    The Fourth Amendment requires a warrant. It’s always been understood that
    a person or business entity can have a warrant written against them.

    Not the population at large.

    But because it makes the Democrats feel better to try to claim everyone
    is a crook, as usual, they try to shift blame.

  • objectivefactsmatter

    “A government that breaks faith in several areas will have mistrust spill into every area. Once you have abused a number of powers, then you will rightly be considered suspect in all of them.”

    The most significant factor to all of this is that this is the POTUS that wants to extent big government and its power without any apologies. He brags about these big government (socialist-communist) values and objectives. He wants the federal government huge and overwhelming while our military forces are neutralized. He wants to fold us in to the theoretical authority of the UN (with UN as ultimate global sovereign) and he dreams about leading this sharia-compliant UN soon after.

    • blair152


  • Michael Shreve

    The untrustworthiness of the current administration is not the ONLY way they are undermining national security. Funding and ARMING Jihadist, destroying the economy and creating an INSURMOUNTABLE nation debt play a major part as well.

  • Beth Janelle

    We are no longer a Constitutional Republic. Why doesn’t the POTUS stand in front of the people and tell the truth. (stupid question I know) however, the grave nature he has put this nation in, so profound and diabolical, nothing short of his resignation is in order. Meanwhile, hunker down for a category 5 disaster! His actions are deliberate and his intent is clear. Protect yourself and your family. And may God Bless you all during these tumultuous times.