While Rudy did a characteristically stellar job of drawing the contrast between GWB’s steadfastness and Kerry’s feet of clay on national security matters, one thing he didn’t address but is very much along the same lines is the Patriot Act. An all too brief primetime slot for that topic was left to Rob Khuzami — one of my partners on the Blind Sheik terrorism case (and formerly chief of the securities unit that polices Wall Street), and now a top exec at Deutsche Bank in NYC.

Senator Kerry (surprise!) voted for the Patriot Act and has trashed it since, claiming, for instance, that it had “done little to further intelligence sharing” (it has done tons), that it allows the FBI willy-nilly to seize library records (they need a court order under Patriot to get business records, and have been permitted for years to obtain them by subpoena in ordinary criminal cases), and that it permits a secret search to be permitted at a person’s home without the person ever being told about it (it actually permits delayed notification if the FBI gets permission from a court ahead of time by showing that prompt notification will hurt an investigation — something, again, that has been permitted in ordinary cases for eons).

In his 3 allotted minutes, Rob gave a concise explanation of why Patriot’s national security enhancements are so crucial. The President’s stalwart support of them, compared with Kerry’s waffling (at best), is another stark and important distinction in the upcoming election. Many of these crucial provisions will sunset at the end of 2005 unless they are extended. Patriot should be a much more significant issue than it has been to this point. Rob got the debate off on the right foot, and got a very engaged response from the Garden crowd. This is a winning issue for the President — expect to hear more about it in the weeks ahead.