Some of Bush's facts don't tell whole story

WASHINGTON — President Bush received a roaring ovation Tuesday night for his prime-time defense of domestic surveillance without warrants. But Bush's explanation relied on assumptions that have been widely questioned.

Defending the surveillance program as crucial to national security in a time of war, Bush said "previous presidents have used the same constitutional authority" that he did. "And," he added, "federal courts have approved the use of that authority."

Bush apparently was reiterating an argument offered this month by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, who invoked Presidents Lincoln, Wilson and Roosevelt for their use of executive authority.

Warrantless surveillance within the United States for national-security purposes was struck down by the Supreme Court in 1972 — long after Lincoln, Wilson and Roosevelt were issuing orders. That led to enactment of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which Bush essentially bypassed in authorizing the current program after the Sept. 11 attacks.

Since that law was enacted in 1978, "the Supreme Court has not touched this issue in the area of national security," said William Banks, a national-security expert at Syracuse Law School.

"He might be speaking in the broadest possible sense about the president exercising his authority as commander-in-chief to conduct a war, which of course federal courts have upheld since the beginning of the nation," Banks said. "If he was talking more particularly about the use of warrantless surveillance, then he is wrong."

Bush's reference on domestic spying was only one of several points in which he backed up assertions with selective uses of fact, or seemed to place a positive spin on his interpretation.

On his pledge to decrease U.S. reliance on Middle East oil by 75 percent over 20 years, Bush's words seemed to suggest a new program to reduce dependence on foreign oil.

But experts note that the U.S. receives a fraction of its oil imports from the Middle East. In fact, the majority comes from Canada and Mexico — and Bush said nothing about them.

On Iraq, Bush argued that "our coalition has been relentless in shutting off terrorist infiltration." But he may have left the wrong impression about how far U.S.-led forces have gotten in closing off the huge border areas, especially the 375-mile Syria-Iraq frontier.

Administration officials have complained often that Syria has not done enough to close the border; they also have said it may not be possible to shut off the border, given its size.

Bush made several claims for his economic stewardship that were technically accurate — but told only a part of the story.

"In the last 2 ½ years, America has created 4.6 million new jobs," Bush asserted. While essentially true, he did not say that the United States lost 2.6 million jobs in the first 2 ½ years of his presidency.

"In the last five years," Bush went on, "the tax relief you passed has left $880 billion in the hands of American workers, investors, small businesses and families, and they have used it to help produce more than four years of uninterrupted economic growth."

To many economists, however, the cause-and-effect relationship is not so stark; they credit tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 with helping to turn around a stagnant economy, but they now worry that the resulting deficits may retard it.

Los Angeles Times reporters Richard B. Schmitt, Janet Hook, Joel Havemann and researcher Robin Cochran contributed to this report.