Russia has been taking careful note of the American President's disdain for written law and agreements. She is an excellent student: Russia is doing the same as this President: Parsing the written word to justify asserting power.

The American leadership is not genuinely really "concerned" about
Russia doing what the President does. Although FISA and the Constitution still apply during wartime, Russia
enjoys knowing the American President and Congress scornfully view
written agreements.

The President and Rice are upset
Russia is getting away with selectively parsing written agreements; and NATO, under American "leadership"
has more Afghan egg on its face.

Parsing Geneva Over Iraq, POW, and Georgia

Usually, conflicts have an aggressor, especially when all peaceful
options have not been exhausted. That requirement when 'out the window'
when this President illegally invade Iraq.


The President and Rice are silent on who is responsible for this war of aggression in Georgia: Is it their proxy or their convenient enemy of the wee, Russia.

Curious how the President and Rice are silent on Geneva, only referring
to new agreements. They did the same with the telecom immunity and POW
abuse: Ignore the original standards, then pretend the new standards
were  also discretionary.

Parsing the Parsing

The American President selectively parsed the American Constitution and FISA, arriving at perverse legal conclusions, with the assistance of the war criminals inside the Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel.

The American President said he required Congress to agree with his interpretation of Executive power.  For years, Congress complied with this perversion:

Court: "Moreover, the Executive argues, the Committee cannot rest on an implied right to investigate derived from Article I because the underlying subject matter here -- removal of executive officials -- is an issue on which Congress has no authority to legislate and thus no corresponding right to investigate."

Similarly, when Russia agreed to a cease-fire, it meant it agreed to the Russian interpretation of security: Georgia is "secure" when Russia decides Georgia is secure:

NYT: Maj. Gen. Vyacheslav N. Borisov, a Russian officer who has called
himself the region’s “commandant,” briefly appeared at nightfall and
suggested that under one interpretation of the cease-fire agreements,
the area could be part of a peacekeeping zone.

You recall Bolton's comments about using the NSA to monitor American citizens. He openly admitted, long before the NYT reported the President's illegalities, the United States government monitors American citizen's private communications. Bolton read the transcripts.

It doesn't follow for Bolton to pretend America was surprised by the Russian invasion. This President illegally monitors Americans. He doesn't need a warrant or an excuse to use the NSA to monitor war preparations for Georgia:

Telegraph: "Having been caught unawares the administration didn't respond strongly
enough in the initial days and that gave the signal to the Russians
that they could pretty much do what they wanted," said John Bolton, a
former US ambassador to the United Nations.

The NSA surveillance started before 9-11. The American Congress has yet to have a real accounting of what information the NSA had, but the President and Congress refused to heed.

As with the Iraq WMD white wash, there is no prospect Congress will soon start a serious investigation of the NSA "failing" prior to the Russian invasion. Congress likes to pretend it is surprised, as a distraction from their collusion with this President's war crimes.

The President views the American constitution as discretionary. Addington views of an expansive view of Executive power set the stage for the Russian selective parsing of their agreements over Georgia. Addington in the Iran-Contra report selectively cut and paste from the Constitution, Supreme Court precedents, and Federalist Papers to arrive at perverse views of American power.

Rice's Crocodile Tears

It should not be a surprise to anyone, especially those complicit with this President's war crimes, why other nations take a selective view of written agreements:

LAT: Appearing on NBC's "Meet the Press" on Sunday, Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice expressed skepticism about the Russian promise to
withdraw. "I just know that the Russian president said several days ago Russian military operations would stop. They didn't."

It's almost possible to believe Rice, until we remember the President agreed to follow (and illegally ignored) FISA requirements during wartime. The President of the United States said he would, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution, something Congress and the President do not take seriously:

Article II: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the
office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my
ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United
States."

This President and Congress have painted themselves into a corner.
They've trained Congress and the American public to embrace two
standards on the law.

It's disingenuous for America's leadership to expect Americans to
enforce a standard against Russia this President and Congress have
ignored since 2001. Their real aim is to gum the Russian-Georgian
crisis, and dissuade accountability at home. There is no statute of
limitations for war crimes.

It's also disingenuous for the President, Rice, and Bolton to feign shock or surprise the Russians have or have not done something. The Russians have seen under this Administration a perverse view of written laws and agreements.

The perversion in Congress is their stupidity in thinking foreign powers and Americans wouldn't do something about it.