FOX Propaganda Channel: Allegedly Unbiased
By SilentPatriot Friday Aug 24, 2007 11:01am
In a "Beat the Press" segment on MSNBC, Dan Abrams pinpoints exactly why the FISA debate is so distorted and misunderstood.
Download | play 
Download | play
HUME: The Senate Judiciary Committee's latest deadline for the WH to comply with it's subpoena for documents relating to warrantless...allegedly warrantless...wiretaps has come and gone...
ABRAMS: Allegedly! Allegedly! President Bush admitted to authorizing warrantless wiretaps back in 2005.
This ties in perfectly with an article Glenn just wrote about FISA and DNI chief Mike McConnell's demand for retroactive immunity for the private sector companies who assisted in the illegal surveillance:
So much of this is due to the profound failure of the media and our various "experts" simply to state the basic facts here -- that it is a felony to eavesdrop on Americans without warrants and yet that is what the Bush administration did. Instead, we have self-proclaimed "experts" like the Brookings Institutions' Benjamin Wittes trying to show how smart and thoughtful and knowledgeable he is (and explicitly describing himself this way) by writing in The New Republic claiming that these matters are far too complicated for even the most thoughtful experts (like him) to understand, let alone the hordes of simpletons acting as though they know Bush did anything wrong here by breaking the law. Read more...
With no help from the national press, the NSA warrantless wiretapping scandal is as clear-cut as can be: The 1978 FISA law makes it a felony to engage in surveillance of Americans without a warrant.The administration's laughable legal "defense" notwithstanding, the President has been ordering the NSA to commit felonies for over five years...and has recently successfully pressured the feckless Democrats into legalizing it. As Glenn says: "It is not hyperbole to say that government lawbreaking has become formally legitimized."
Login or Register to post comments.
Faux unbiased? lol lol lol lol lol, oh Christ thats rich....lol lol lol
nice to see another news anchor criticizing Fixed News...besides KO...if that doesn't make Hume look stupid ...nothing will.But we've known this for a long time...And to think that people still watch that crap...and Believe it!..Those are the same people who REALLY HATE the DEMOCRATS...no matter who they are.
The story isn't about Fox - it's about an out-of-control Executive branch. Prosecution for blatant criminality is given a holiday. Let's hold the door while they steal the furniture. Good idea.
They are pimping Rudy and bashing Fred.
Guess who will win the gop?
whats this "beat the press" thing? i've never heard of it before, but i love it. its like the daily show almost. that clip where they kept removing the graphic was priceless.
Hello from Russia
The sun allegedly rose in the East. Water allegedly flows downhill. Fire allegedly burns.
I think I'm allegedly getting the hang of this.
Damn, I was hoping to see the graphic they kept removing at the end of the clip, but alas no!
Common, anyone who was in high school in the 80's (like me) knows you can't wiretap without a warrant. Yah, too complicated my ass. "Uhh, Hello, Alice (in wonderland)? Just wanted to know how many PIZZA'S you wanted me to order, four? Okay, and that would be like a dime a bag okay? I mean ten dollars a pizza, okay?" Yeah I'll DELIVER YOUR PIZZA"S to the 7/11 on Jones Street, in about four hours okay? Yeah, I got to pick up some twinkies and milk anyway, so I'll see you then."
Well, I guess we can expect some ramifications here that are completely unknowable at this point. We already have slow DSL compared to other nations, so what the hell is the perceived invasion of privacy going to do to communications. I suspect they may slow down drastically, for private security reaosns, more than any sense of invasion. As personal information is repeatedly at risk of wiretapping, hacking and mining, what would a total breakdown of privacy in communications look like?
I suspect the information that regular people want to "hide" is going to cost a pretty penny. Bank accounts, stock trades, company secrets, patent pending information, unpublished data and papers, social security numbers, pin numbers, (look at anyone's front-line data, such as name address, phone numbers, kids names, ect, and you probably have all their pin numbers). What about adoption information? Voting records? DNA paternity tests? My attorney/client information over the phone pending my civil litigation? The lab your kids school uses to test students for drug use? How much of any of this will be safe. I can think of a hundred things I have to 'HIDE".
"...government lawbreaking has become formally legitimized.”
How true! I wonder if a H. Clinton or Obama WH will correct these trends, or continue them.
Brit Hume is a piece of work. I bet he drinks his Kool-aid from a wine glass.
Didn't Rumsfeld say something like "You can't prove an allegation."
My God, I used to think that Fox was the National Enquirer of news organizations...but after that clip, I think it's more like the World Weekly News.
Anchors should always say "allegedly" when reporting anything about the Bush Admin. Bush is allegedly fighting terrorism. He's allegedly The Decider. He allegedly listens to the commanders on the ground. He allegedly read a book once. He allegedly gives a sh*t when a mine (or bridge or levee) collapses.
A little consistency please, Mr. Hume.
If anybody at Fox Noise is unbiased it is NOT Hume. I think we and the bloggers should stop referring to Hume as a journalist, but call him what he really is -- a (neoconservative) propagandist.
Please add CNN and MSNBC to the shitlist.
Strawberry @ 12:
Please! Have some respect for the departed!
Frybread @ 14:
I never called humm a journalist. he's on faux for chrisssake.
The Fox Alleged News Channel works fer me!
Hume, allegedly a journalist, is nothing more than a fascist pig . . . just like Cheneybush and other war whores like Bill Kristol. Come the revolution and we'll all descend on them with pitchforks and torches.
Please don't call them whores.
Whores actually provide a service.
True. It's not fair to the other whores. OK, I'll leave it at "fascist pigs." Though, this crowd puts even some of them to shame!
Hitler's blushing.
Feckless. Yup, that about describes the Dems. There must be a lot of skeletons in their closets to give away our rights so easily. I just don't understand it.
Once again tabloid Dan shows that any resemblance to actual journalism on his show is purely accidental. When it comes to MSNBC, the only show worth watching is Keith.....and then you even have to change the station during the last five minutes of the celebrity crap.
Congress CAN NOT legalise something prohibited by the Constution! They SWORE to uphold the Constution! They are as criminal as the Executive branch in even trying.
Jo @ 23:
no skeletons, IMHO, no spine, either; just lobbyists and handlers and advisors and isolation and priveledge.
Outfuckinrageous!!! How many times does the Chimp in Charge have to say he's breaking the law before someone believes him and arrests his sorry ass?! Enough already... ARREST BU$H AND CHENEY for starters!
Kathy @ 25:
EXACTLY! Thanks for saying this out loud, Kathy...
Brit Droop is always ready to serve up the flop to the LGF hogs. Their vision of America is a Xerox copy of Franco's Spain and Mussolini's Italy
[...] Another case of Fox's main news program lying to help the WH Crooks and Liars
Hume's face is a xerox of cheese melting in a microwave.
if bush and the "government" we elected feel and act above the law, then why should
any American citizen feel or act obligated to follow any of the laws of the land.
bush/cheney/rove/rice/gonzales have demonstrated that the government is above the
law, so i say we ALL ARE ABOVE THE LAW and therefore, there are no longer any
obligations of any citizen to comply.
"has recently successfully pressured the feckless Democrats into legalizing it."
Again with this LIE.
Five-sixths of the House and 2/3 of the Senate Dems voted NAY on that bill.
ALL of the leadership voted Nay.
So 'pressure' did not pass that interim, non-retroactive, six-month, to be completely revamped in September, bill.
VOTES DID.
I know that's a hard concept. Votes, the kind of votes that have greenlighted most of what Bush has done -- and NOT our votes. Your Glenn Greenwald 'feckless' meme is COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE, and is doing good work for relecting REPUBLICANS in 2008. Congratulations.
dadams @ 32:
Get yourself a good lawyer, or a better satirist.
right on! @ 28:
You are missing the Constitutional element in your logic. Quite obviously, IT IS THE COURTS THAT DEFINE WHAT IS CONSTITUTIONAL, not the Congress. And as for 'criminal', read #32. The Dems didn't vote for that bill, and are therefore not the criminals this argument seems to hold them out to be.
Here's Pelosi's bill, which didn't pass, but which will be presented in September:
http://www.speaker.gov/legislation?id=0080
THAT'S what House Dems voted for, and not for this other bill. So please don't throw around this word 'criminal' in relationship to OUR HOUSE DEMS. 1/6 of them are DINOs, and that's NOT Pelosi's or Hoyer's fault.
Yes, folks, and never forget who is really to blame for all of these rights that are slowly being taken away: The Republican Party. they were in power for most of Bushs terms and didnt do one thing to stop him from getting what he wanted, warrantless wiretaps et al. they are the ones to blame for our liberties being limited and disappearing also. their fault. yes.
These f0ckers should all go to jail for duping all of us.
breakspear @ 36:
I've heard of them. Anthrax-proof, apparently.
They're having a few bugs ironing out the democracy-proof part.
And we all know who has the courts.....
So why do they put the "hordes of simpletons" on juries?
If being a simpleton would keep me off juries, I'll be glad to show to the voir dire in a NASCAR cap.
David @ 37:
I wasn't duped, just outvoted (by Diebold)
The 50 states have not ratified any changes to the constitution that I am aware of. Even the FISA court is unconstitutional. The wording of the constitution states that any warrants must be applied for in writing outlining cause and need, and then they must be approved by a judge of the courts. the constitution says nothing about a judge of a secret court. All our politicions are now felons and they must be arrested, indicted, convicted, and exicuted for treason.
911 changed everything. It gave reich wingers the excuse they needed to turn America into a fascist state. Which is why BushCo allowed bin Laden to bring down the twin towers.
What is the difference between 'warrantless' and 'unwarranted'?
In respone to Freakonomics author Steven Levitt’s NYT article, the way to mount a successful terrorist attack on the USA is to keep sets of giant mammary glands on every channel. The men will be home watching TV 27/7, and thinking even less than usual. Faux knows this.
BennyP @ 44:
Warrantless is in violation of the law (without a warrant), unwarranted is similar to unprecedented, or unwanted, but not necessarily illegal.
Ruthless People @ 43:
Was it bin Laden, or is that what we've been told?
ysbaddaden @ 40:
Being "too bright" or "too educated" or "too charismatic" will keep you off a jury. Generally, neither defence nor prosecution wants to allow someone on the jury who is likely to be able to swing the jury to their opinion.
Hume was once allegedly a journalist.
BIGS @ 42:
The FISA court is not illegal -- you apparently don't understand that the COURTS, not the paper of the Constitution, determine what is constitutional.
Read up on Madison vs. Marbury. While you're at it, you might look up Arver v. United States, 245 U.S. 366 (1918), which established the legality of the draft, even though the Constitution says nothing about it (the SC argued that Congress' right to declare wars implied the right to conscript citizens). There was no amendment to that effect -- certainly a far weightier issue than FISA.
FISA was passed to reign in Cointelpro, an FBI program spying on and harassing protesters and others (such as KKK). The act of Congress barring such misuse of intelligence was certainly legal. Providing a FISC (court) was a legal method of overcoming the fourth amendment issues of legal US wiretapping. The whole issue will be readdressed in September, with a lengthy FISA rewrite. Unless the Supreme Court rules FISA-type solutions illegal (it will not), they will be legal as soon as Congress passes them.
(and they are signed by the Preznit, though how the signature of a criminal mass-murderer traitor makes something legal is quite mysterious).
To me the biggest scandal is that congress has failed to impeach both bush and cheney, when given clear evidence and proof of multiple felonies.
The Dems don't Impeach, continue to 'extend' deadlines, vote for war funding, knuckle under on every point......
Yup, the Dems are complicit in everything the Bushies do, that's why I, a life long Dem will no longer vote for on them. Not sure for whom I will vote, but not for any of those worthless fools.......
Paul @ 52:
That would be a scandal only if you didn't realize that there weren't sixty-seven free votes in the Senate to convict.
And, btw, that is a scandal that is directly related to WHY Bushco policies have gone forward -- namely complicity of one of the major parties in every one of their crimes.
fwacbar @ 53:
Nonsense. The Speaker of the House rose to minority leader status via leading sixty percent of House Dems to vote NAY on the Iraq Resolution.
YOUR complicity in spreading lies is what troubles me.
Login or Register to post comments.