Countdown Special Comment: On FISA and Telecom Immunity
Keith Olbermann's Special Comment tonight on Countdown was yet another scathing rebuke of President Bush and his lies about the pending FISA legislation and fear tactics during his final State of the Union address earlier this week. Bush has said repeatedly he would veto any FISA legislation that did not include immunity for the telecommunications companies who broke the law and betrayed the American people. However, as Keith points out, if the president were to veto the legislation and there was another terrorist attack inside the U.S., he, and he alone would be responsible for it -- all in the name of protecting huge corporations over the American people he was charged with protecting.
Download | play 
Download | play
Sorry, Mr. Bush. The eavesdropping provisions of FISA have obviously had no impact on counter-terrorism, and there is no current or perceived terrorist threat, the thwarting of which could hinge on an e-mail or a phone call going through room 641-A at AT&T in San Francisco next week or next month.
Because if there were, Mr. Bush, and you were to, by your own hand, veto an extension of this eavesdropping, and some terrorist attack were to follow, you would not merely be guilty of siding with the terrorists, you would not merely be guilty of prioritizing the telecoms over the people, you would not merely be guilty of stupidity, you would not merely be guilty of treason... but you would be personally, and eternally, responsible.
Transcript below the fold
And finally, as promised, a Special Comment -- of FISA and the telecoms.
In a presidency of hypocrisy -- an administration of exploitation -- a labyrinth of leadership -- in which every vital fact is a puzzle inside a riddle wrapped in an enigma hidden under a claim of executive privilege supervised by an idiot -- this one... is surprisingly easy.
President Bush has put protecting the telecom giants from the laws... ahead of protecting you from the terrorists.
He has demanded an extension of the FISA law -- the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act -- but only an extension that includes retroactive immunity for the telecoms who helped him spy on you.
Congress has given him, and he has today signed a fifteen-day extension which simply kicks the time bomb down the field, and has changed nothing of his insipid rhetoric, in which he portrays the Democrats as 'soft on terror' and getting in the way of his superhuman efforts to protect the nation... when, in fact, and with bitter irony, if anybody is 'soft on terror' here... it is Mr. Bush.
In the State of the Union Address, sir, you told Congress, "if you do not act by Friday, our ability to track terrorist threats would be weakened and our citizens will be in greater danger."
Yet you are willing to weaken that ability!
You will subject us, your citizens, to that greater danger.
This, Mr. Bush, is simple enough even for you to understand: If Congress approves a new FISA act without telecom immunity and sends it to your desk and you veto it -- you, by your own terms and your own definitions, you will have just sided with the terrorists.
Ya gotta have this law, or we're all gonna die. But you might veto this law!
It's bad enough, sir, that you are demanding an ex post facto law which would clear the phone giants from responsibility for their systematic, aggressive, and blatant collaboration with your illegal and unjustified spying on Americans, under the flimsy guise of looking for any terrorists stupid enough to make a collect call or send a mass e-mail.
But when you then demanded again, during the State of the Union address, that Congress retroactively clear the Verizons and the AT&T's, you wouldn't even confirm that they actually did anything for which they deserved to be cleared!
"The Congress must pass liability protection for companies believed to have assisted in the efforts to defend America."
Believed?
Don't you know?
Does the endless hair-splitting of your presidential fine print, extend even here?
If you, sir, are asking Congress, and us, to join you in this shameless, breathless, literal, textbook example of fascism -- the merged efforts of government and corporations who answer to no government -- you still don't have the guts to even say the telecom companies did assist you, in your efforts?
Will you and the equivocators who surround you like a cocoon never go on the record about anything?
Even the stuff you claim to believe in?
Silly me.
Of course Mr. Bush is going to say "believed."
Yes, it sounds dumber than if he had referred to himself as "the alleged president," or had said today was "reportedly Thursday," or had claimed "Mission Accomplished" in Iraq.
But the moment he says anything else, any doubt that the telecoms knowingly broke the law, is out the window, and with it, any chance that even the Republicans who are fighting this like they were trying to fend off terrorists using nothing but broken beer bottles and swear words couldn't consent to retroactively immunize corporate criminals.
Which is why the Vice President probably shouldn't have phoned in to the Rush Limbaugh Propaganda-Festival yesterday.
Sixth sentence out of Mr. Cheney's mouth: The FISA bill is about, quote, "retroactive liability protection for the companies that have worked with us and helped us prevent further attacks against the United States."
Oops.
Mr. Cheney is something of a loose cannon, of course.
But he kind of let the wrong cat out of the bag there.
Because Mr. Bush -- and the corporations he values more than people -- didn't want anybody to verify what Mark Klein says.
Mark Klein is the AT&T whistleblower who appeared on this newscast last November, who explained, in the placid, dull terms of your local neighborhood I-T desk, how he personally attached all of AT&T's circuits -- everything carrying every phone call, every e-mail, every bit of web browsing -- into a secure room...
...Room Number 641-A, at the Folsom Street facility in San Francisco -- where it was all copied so the government could look at it.
Not some of it; not just the international part of it; certainly not just the stuff some truly patriotic and telepathic spy might be able to divine had been sent or spoken by or to a terrorist.
Everything.
Every time you looked at a naked picture, every time you bid on eBay, every time you phoned-in a donation to a Democrat.
"My thought was 'George Orwell's 1984,'" Mr. Klein told me, reflecting back, "and here I am, being forced to... connect the Big Brother machine."
You know, Mr. Bush, if Mr. Klein's "Big Brother Machine" -- the one the Vice President conveniently just confirmed for us -- if it was of any damn use at all at actually finding anything, you could probably program it to find out who started that slanderous e-mail about Barack Obama.
Use Room 641-A to identify that E--assassin, sir, and I'll stand up and applaud you.
Yeah, I'm holding my breath on that one, too.
But of course, sir, this isn't about finding that kind of needle in a haystack. This isn't even about finding a haystack. This is about scooping up every piece of hay there ever was, and laying the groundwork for the next little job which you have to outsource to AT&T and Verizon.
It was your Director of National Intelligence, Mr. McConnell, letting this one out of the same bag.
The need for Homeland Security to stave off cyber-attacks against the government's computer networks.
And how do they do that, sir?
By constantly monitoring the internet -- the whole internet.
And who actually, physically, does that, Mr. Bush?
Right. The same telecom giants for whom you want immunity -- Quickly. So quickly, you wouldn't believe it.
Because this previous domestic spying, and this upcoming policing of the internet -- they may be completely evil, indiscriminate, unlawful. So you have to dress it up, as something just the opposite.
It isn't evil... it's "to protect America."
It isn't indiscriminate... it's "the ability to monitor terrorist communications."
It isn't unlawful... it's just the kind of perfectly legal thing, for which you happen to need immunity!
There's yet another level to this, and here we move from Big Brother... to Sleazy Son.
Mr. Bush's new Attorney General, Mr. Mukasey, the one who has already taken four different positions on water-boarding, and who may yet tie that record on this subject of telecom immunity -- he has a very personal stake in this.
There happens to be a partner in the law firm of Bracewell and Giuliani, named Marc Mukasey. And Bracewell and Giuliani and the Attorney General's son Marc, just happen to represent... Verizon.
You know, Verizon - Telecom Giant.
And all of a sudden this is no longer just a farce in which "protecting the telecoms" is dressed up for us as, 'protecting us from terrorist conference calls.'
Now it begins to look like the bureaucrats of the Third Reich trying to protect the Krupp Family industrial giants by literally re-writing the laws for their benefit.
And we know how that turned out: Alfried Krupp and eleven of his directors were convicted of War Crimes at Nuremburg.
Nevertheless.
For those of us watching a President demanding this very specific law (the one the Germans had was called the "Lex Krupp") there is one surprising bit of comfort in all this:
Clearly, Mr. Bush is at his hyperbolic worst here.
Consider how his former chief of staff Andy Card came on and scolded Chris Matthews and me after the State of the Union address.
"The President's address tonight was very important," Card said, "because it really was a sobering call to reality for us.
"And the reality is, we have an enemy who wants to hurt us. The primary job of the president to protect us.
"He talked about protecting us. He talked about the needs to have the tools to protect us."
Indeed, Mr. Bush.
The primary job of any president is to protect us.
Not just those of us who own Internet and Telephone companies -- All of us.
And even you, sir, with your intermittent grasp of reality... even with your ego greater than a 100-percent approval rating... even with your messianic petulance -- even you could not truly choose to protect the corporations instead of the people.
I am not talking about ethics here. I am talking about blame.
Even if it's you throwing out the baby with the bathwater, Mr. Bush, it still means we can safely conclude... there is no baby!
This is not a choice of protecting the telecoms from prosecution, or protecting the people from terrorists, sir.
It is a choice of protecting the telecoms from prosecution, or pretending to protect the people from terrorists.
Sorry, Mr. Bush. The eavesdropping provisions of FISA have obviously had no impact on counter-terrorism, and there is no current or perceived terrorist threat, the thwarting of which could hinge on an e-mail or a phone call going through room 641-A at AT&T in San Francisco next week or next month.
Because if there were, Mr. Bush, and you were to, by your own hand, veto an extension of this eavesdropping, and some terrorist attack were to follow, you would not merely be guilty of siding with the terrorists, you would not merely be guilty of prioritizing the telecoms over the people, you would not merely be guilty of stupidity, you would not merely be guilty of treason... but you would be personally, and eternally, responsible.
And if there is one thing we know about you, Mr. Bush, one thing that you have proved time and time again under any and all circumstances, it is that you are never responsible.
First rate journalist, Kieth!
I rule
Crap! I gotta remember the rules. I before E except after K, I think.
Keith!
Good stuff!
As usual, he gets right to the heart of the matter, pulls no punches, and means what he says.
IMHO this wasn't one of Olbermann's better SP's.
Wish I could watch it but the links seem to be broken. Probably bandwidth issues. Maybe if I wait a couple of hours.
Signed, Sealed, Delivered!!!
I hope Harry Reid and the Dems take notice...someone has to
put some sense into their heads....
well that's just nitpicking isn't it
I love Keith! He makes my night!
WOW!!! Did I mention WOW!!! Enuf said.
So shockingly with all these "intelligence" tools they still can't find Osama or find out who sent out those anthrax loaded envelopes? Wither they aren't using it the way they are supposed to (looking for real terrorists) or they are completely incompetent. Either way these guys need to go NOW.
Bravo Keith Olbermann! Yes there is a direct correlation between between Bush's Fascist agenda and Hitlers Fascist agenda.
"fas·cism
–noun
1. a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism."
insightful, explicit, and plain truth.
He is the reincarnation of Edward R. M.
a job well done !
where would the country be without KO.....he says what needs to be said...
Touche, Keith! Thanks for covering telecom immunity. As usual, one of the few sources of real journalism out there. Unless you count hair-cut analysis as journalism.
I believe that is what they call a good old fashioned ass-whoopin.
I wish I had a few million dollars to buy five minutes of commercial time and run the thing in prime time on all channels.
And of course all of the spies in the telecoms are fluent in Arabic, right? Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight..... I wish Keith asked that simple, but very valid question.....
hit_escape @ 18:
No kidding. Too bad rich people are too damned greedy to care about the country and try to rid it of corruption.
This is an important issue. Too bad this comment was delivered when the democrat debate was on and I'm guessing a lot of KO's viewers were tuned to CNN.
This was so eloquently stated, with such intensity and anger, that it took my breath away. I still believe that Keith is an incredibly brave person, and he inspires me deeply. Bravo.
I think they are making up his room at Gitmo as we speak. It's ok to jack that asshole bush up, but when you mess with shooter dick, well watch out for the black van...
will obama or clinton pursue criminal prosecution against bushco? i say make them state their intentions before voting for either.
If past is prologue, the Dems will fold on this issue.
When they do, I will drop the Democratic party. This is the last straw for me.
I do not want my government colluding with giant corporations to violate my privacy.
I want those who broke the law to be held accountable.
The Bush budget. More of our tax dollars for their wars for Halliburton and big oil. Less of our tax dollars for our needs. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080201/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_budget
Hell Yeah! Harry Reid and the other Rep-lite Dems should be required to watch this. Who is gonna stand up with Feingold and Dodd to really make this an issue! Hillary? Obama? Doubt it.
Heads up, John Amato will be appearing on Countdown in just a few minutes.
could i get my own show where i report on the outrageous behavior of sociopaths? i'm ready for the trials to start.
Logan Murphy @ 28:
Most excellent! I'm watching Countdown right now.
We have to take a page out of the Republican's page book and take charge of framing the issue.
Now, if we assume that Bush is correct that the extension of FISA is necessary to prevent "greater danger" to the public, then Bush is applying blackmail by threatening the security of U.S. citizens if retroactive liability immunity is not given to his criminal co-conspirators.
The word "Blackmail" needs to be brought front and center into this debate, absent a showing by Bush that retroactive immunity is necessary for the FISA legislation to work going forward. Now, why a President who utilizes blackmail to protect criminal wrongdoing isn't impeached is beyond me, but is a clear symptom of how far removed our government is from the control by the citizenry.
Anyway, let's start framing the President's position.
Thanks for this--it's very important. Keith mentioned something in his comment I had never heard before: Mukasey's son is a lawyer in the Giuliano law firm which represents Verizon--one of the telecoms subject to litigation (or immunity) depending on the new FISA bill. This would seem to be a really scummy conflict of interest. Did no one on the Judiciary Committee know this? They did no research on this candidate and his connections to current cases?? Oh, I forgot, most of these people can't fight their way out of a paper bag (with the exception of Feingold and Whitehouse), let alone interview a job applicant. And half of the Dems seem determined to trust this administration to nominate honest candidates. Again and again and again.
Good to hear the word Treason in a Special Comment by Keith. Right on the money with that term.
Wow...that was absolutely brilliant this deserves to be widely seen by all. BRA FING O
hit_escape @ 18:
We could organize and raise the cash. That is probably not the issue. But, would the networks run it? Those 'in the know' will be lurking here, knowing C&L would be linking the video. I wonder if the uninformed would really appreciate what Keith is saying. Many have no clue as to what the legislation is, let alone appreciate the finer details. I think the American public is generally against being spied on. For many, you would have to lay the foundation, so they understand that this is not a question of national security, which is what the WH is trying to sell. When this is in the msm, then Keith's commentary could be a very powerful weapon.
Putting it another way, we have a President who is extorting immunity for the telecoms by subjecting citizens to an increased chance of being murdered if immunity provisions for criminal conduct aren't also included.
A propensity for extortion doesn't sound like a laudable characteristic of any President, I don't think.
Another KO, by KO....he's saying what all of us have been wanting to say to the chimp!
"HI John,watching you right now on MSNBC".
and they get to read all your comments, and they are attached to your IP address. You are being watched. And read. by a machine.
Good work John. Way to represent the blog. Now let's make some more noise and get back on the news again.
You go John..! Nice to see reality on TV again.
enough @ 32:
Same thought here. I was completely floored when Keith said that. How in the name of all that's good and holy did everyone miss that? Anyone know who revealed that bit of info first or is it actual a... I dunno, Countdown Exclusive?
Great job, John. You are transitioning into the t.v. world well. The confidence will only increase from here on out.
RayCeeYa @ 12:
We know that the wiretapping program was OPERATIONAL well before 9-11. So the PLANNING for this operation was underway well before that.
With this in mind, I have always believed that the Bush administration never intended the program to be used for spying on terror suspects, but for spying on their political opposition, and as a means of obtaining insider information in business.
Information has always been the most valuable currency, and when you think about the motives of this administration, whose goals were always economic in nature, it makes perfect sense.
The Dems did not cave on this :
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/1/31/21584/9083/171/447319
I know, it shocked me too.
Eh, he trashes Bush all the time. It does nothing. It's really nice to hear though. These aren't the days of Edward Murrow...
I'm glad he mentioned VP Heart Attack Man calling Limpballs show to catapult the propoganda
And yet impeachment is off the table Nancy? Still?
Frank Dufek @ 45:
If you repeat something often enough, it will sink in.
Get Thee to YouTube!!!
John:
You did great on the Post Debate Show- we as Bloggers are proud of you and really grateful that Bloggers as a Voice and a Community are heard and represented by you and Ariana and Josh....thank you so much......Excellent !!
Er.. my post seems to have been deleted. What I said was, I love hearing what Olbermann has to say-- but is it really inspiring any change? These just aren't the days of Edward Murrow.
Frank Dufek @ 51:
45
Frank Dufek @ 51:
Nevermind, I'm going mental.
Otay @ 48:
Yeah, that's what Bush has been doing to us all for the past 7 years lol. I'd say he has the significant lead over Olbermann.
Frank Dufek @ 54:
That's like giving a retarded person the answer to the first quiz question to handicap the straight-A student. In the long run, it will settle out.
CalGeorge @ 25:
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
John F. Kennedy
I love Keith, but I am getting tired of these diatribes.
Face it you are not Murrow and you are becoming a one trick pony.
Just my opinion
CalGeorge @ 25:
It's so predictable, at this point, these proud defections.
The 25 loyal Dems in the Senate, and the entire House Dem leadership (which passed its FISA RESTORE act of last November with no offer of immunity in it at any time) are still good reasons to be Democrats.
But if you blow your ass off with a firecracker, call the evening news cause that's something I've got to see.
Ken @ 57:
Exactly.
Talcott @ 56:
Love to hear it. When will you be manning the ramparts?
Or does it just make you hot to think all of our problems can be reversed with some violence?
You might want to check out the French Revolution, see how that goes.
(Here's a hint: If you LOVE military dictators, then violent revolt is your ticket to Heaven)
Otay @ 55:
Not really, Bush has a lot of power behind his rhetoric and lies. As much as people may dislike him, he's still in power and lying away. It's amazing how many people feel that being quiet and not assuming the worst of an obvious tyrant is patriotic. I'd love to see Olbermann erase the brainwashing Bush did to nearly everyone, I really would. But I don't think I will.
Ken @ 57:
Murrow was not Murrow, by that measure.
Do you have any idea how many people were screaming at their tvs that Murrow should just shut up? Wow, what noble company to find yourself in.
trez @ 47:
For the same reason as last year, and the same reason as this thread.
However, there is still the chance of getting the Cheney impeachment to the floor (if Kucinich doesn't fk it up by filing on Bush, which will end the whole affair). But that takes political work.
SO much easier to scapegoat.
Bush has only as much power as people give him. Granted, the Dem congress is terrified of him and his message of fear, and has chosen to give him everything he asks for. That is why he has power. Nothing more.
Paul in LA @ 60:
Keep on extrapolating in your own deluded ego confined way.
Otay @ 64:
Well, we have certainly given him a lot of power then, haven't we?
enough @ 32:
Both Mukaseys are top-drawer Federalist society conspirators. This is not news. They were both in Ted Olson's group, which supposedly advised 9iu11iani on foreign (domestic conspiracy to make war and crash the Constitution) policy.
The reason why he was approved was because it's better to have even a bad AG you can berate and hound and and maybe get the occasional slip-up or inadvertently-released paperwork, rather than the alternative, which was NO AG for the rest of Bushco's "term" -- nothing but an assistant to the assistant, which would make it impossible for the Senate to interact with the JD.
Otay @ 64:
That's hilarious. And you only die if you believe in death.
Talcott @ 65:
Frank Dufek @ 66:
Congress has more power than they think, if they would go public with a strong message against our wannabe emperor. But they are pansies. Or at least half of them and their leaders are. Or they have no inherent principles. I'm not sure which it is.
Paul in LA @ 69:
is there a reason the windows version has no sound? weird
Paul in LA @ 68:
Do you ever wonder why people ignore you? Perhaps taking quotes out of context, coming up with conspiracy theories, and playing worshipful fanboy to politicians helps.
trying to hear the comment but the windows version is silent. What is up with that?
Hello all,
I tried sending this to the admins but I couldn't get their addresses to come up, aaarrrrrg. THIS IS DEFINITELY BLOG WORTHY. Supposedly the Ron Paul camp is launching a class action law suit (via Clarence Douglas Malcolm, a private criminal investigator, working with retired FBI Division Chief, Ted L. Gunderson) against ALL of the big media, and even the CFR. They say that enough info has been gathered for censorship and even acts of treason! I have to work fairly early tomorrow; if I can't get it out in time, someone please forward this through, thanks.
http://libertytax08.com/ (Announcement 3)
http://tekgnosis.typepad.com/tekgnosis/2008/01/ron-paul-200-11.html
Otay @ 73:
Otay @ 70:
It's so easy to sit back and call them pansies, but I think we all need to begin wondering why seemingly an entire party is scared into submission by the Bush regime. There has to be more to the story.
RayCeeYa @ 6:
It is not "bandwidth" issues, its the fact that the monitoring still goes on unabated! Think of all those digital files going through the gate and you get bogged down.
Frank Dufek @ 77:
KO is just the most fearless, honest wall of beautiful man who just delivered the most searing indictment regarding this whole FISA/PAA Bush BS....
I believe the teevee would have burned my hand if I would have touched it after KO's words drop like bombs on this whole warrant less wire-tapping, retro-active immunity farce....
Frank Dufek @ 77:
Yeah, like that's not true. But it helps the scapegoating if you can say they are afraid.
The House passed FISA RESTORE without any offer of telecom immunity in the bill at any time. All of the House leadership (Prog., and DLC) opposed any offer of immunity. Did they do that because they were afraid? No, they oppose any grant of immunity on a program the details of which have never been briefed to the Congress, and which appears to be flatout illegal.
Two hundred and twenty seven votes to 189 is how that bill passed the House. The entire Dem caucus is 232 votes -- 222 voted Yea on the bill (five voted Nay, five didn't vote).
On this issue, 227 'cowards' voted not to offer any immunity for an illegal program, by your count.
I know Bush probably doesn't watch these comments, but man I wish he did.
ShaBANG!
now ~ THAT ~ was how you give a speech,
Mister Peewee Talker/Decider Dipshit in Chief!
okaaaay?
that rocked my world.
Obama/Olbermann '08 ya heard?
Wow, Huffington has had some serious plastic surgery recently. Hillary has too.
I wish Women didn't have to have surgery to be viable, but apparently they (Hillary and Arianna) think they have to.) Do they?
If Hillary showed all her wrinkles would she still be in the race?
The close of a letter to my children:
"If, in the not-so-distant future, you hesitate to call or email your elected representative, if you can't discern how a larger competitive company (whose CEO made huge contributions to the President's campaign) keeps making end-runs around your business strategy, if you wonder why IRS auditors show up at your door shortly after you make a donation to a political party or candidate, remember this time and what you could have done. Everyone has something to hide. And most times, that 'something' is perfectly legal."
One can only hope that the 10 Democrats who did not vote for FISA RESTORE cast their vote because they were opposed to ANY FISA bill, rather than wanting to give the telecoms a pass.
And, why is it that every single Republican decided that the corporations are more important than the people? I maintain that is because the Republicans are artificial people, just like their corporate masters, and have no conscience.
Next question: Why have Nancy Harry and the wimpy wonders of the Democratic party not begun impeachment of both Bush and Cheney? We're all waiiting
Hey Keith,
Quit calling the President "Sir". The piece of crap doesn't deserve it.
Hey, I thought the Krupp family were a bunch of American liberal fascists who killed all those POWs at Malmedy.
mo_dems @ 84:
it can't hurt. she's working long hours and travelling all over. without a little help anyone could have a worn out look and candidates can't be seen looking worn out. she seems to be holding it together ok.
Paul in LA @ 62:
It is noble company, and thank goodness at least we have someone emulating Murrow. However, Murrow did have an economy of words that Olbermann lacks on occasion.
However, I'll never use Murrow to disparage Olbermann. Murrow had his sharp dissertations, and Obermann has his fierce verbal pummeling. There's much to be admired in both.
The television industry and the world have changed mightily since Murrow took the tap of the pen as his cue.
There Keith goes, candy-coating it again...
Twelve Democrats broke with their party and joined Republicans by voting against the Senate Judiciary version of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act legislation on Thursday, January 24. The bill would have stripped out the retroactive immunity for telecoms.
Five of the 12 Democratic senators who voted to kill the Judiciary bill are recognized by Third Way as "Honorary Senate Chairs". They are Sens. Evan Bayh (D-Indiana), Tom Carper (D-Delaware), Mark Pryor (D-Arkansas), Ken Salazar (D-Colorado) and Claire McCaskill (D-Missouri).
Out of a total of six "Honorary Senate Chairs" of Third Way, only Sen. Blanch Lincoln (D-Arkansas) voted with the majority of Democrats on the Judiciary bill.
Who is 'Third Way'? http://www.thirdway.org/
Above from http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/013108J.shtml
It's wonderful to have Olbermann speak out and so plainly but it's not just the Bush Administration or Republican's that wnat to pass ex post facto laws in violation of the Constitution.
And nobody has pinned down Reid regarding why he just didn't table the Intelligence committee bill to begin with. But if you really want to get scared, take a look at who are the Senate members of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs:
http://hsgac.senate.gov/index.cfm?Fuseaction=Home.Home
Although I agree in principle that this is all very important, in practice Bush will continue doing what he wants to whether this is an extension of FISA or not. Congress must not give immunity because it sets the seal of approval on illegal acts, but Bush has flouted the law for seven years and he isn't going to stop doing whatever he wants to just because of a little inconvenience like the law.
I want to have Keith's baby.
One learns a few things when one spends a couple of days or more in Jail. Not the lessons they wanted to teach you, but an education nonetheless.
One is that prisoners don't get paid. So in order to make money for cigarettes and coffee and snacks and such, some resort to Selling a Hog
Also called "extortion" by technical legal beagles.
Since you would get in trouble with the man by actually telling somebody that if he pays you his commissary money you yourself won't beat, rape, rob or kill him...
You would have one of your accomplices in this crime "put on the Gorilla Mask" and frighten him with vague threats.
You would also make up a threat posed against him by party or parties unknown. Somebody you "don't want to mention who they are, just trust me man" is out to get him and you can protect him, but of course, jailhouse protocol is, you have to be paid for everything.
If he falls for that, you know you have a real live weakling and you then can make him do anything, including provide sex for other inmates in order to get more money to give you. He is officially "punked" at that point.
Messieurs Bush and Cheney (may they one day learn this in jail themselves) are doing exactly that, they are selling a big ol' stinky hog to the Nation.
fear rules, dude...
the congress should be made to listen if they refuse to serve the people....... im not living my life as someone who takes the beating of thieves and destroyers of good mens lives. This shouldnt even be a debate.... why is there a process to decide whether people who steal away our privacy should go free? its open and shut? tear it down.......... brick by brick words are worthless now.
Maybe GWB is setting up congress to be charged with treason. PDD51 is already in the book, so Geedubbahya can do anything he darn well pleases. All for our protection of course, against all those bad evil terrorists. Like the ones at Gitmo... people that lived on mountains and in caves who were of course responsible for pulling off dozens of well planned precision strikes against the largest and most financed and advanced military/intelligence nation in the world. Yup. It was those guys. What would we do if our presiden didn't protect us from them? Anything you say boss! We truss ya, cuz weez 2 dum an yu nose bess!
cwcrosby42 @ 86 "One can only hope that the 10 Democrats who did not vote for FISA RESTORE cast their vote because they were opposed to ANY FISA bill, rather than wanting to give the telecoms a pass."
Kucinich did not vote for that reason.
"And, why is it that every single Republican decided that the corporations are more important than the people?"
They are conspiring with the coup. It's not surprising you would forget that, since it appears to never enter into leftist conception.
"Next question: Why have Nancy Harry and the wimpy wonders of the Democratic party not begun impeachment of both Bush and Cheney? We're all waiiting"
Yes, and we hate to wait. Blacks waited 87 years for another civil rights bill, but if you can't stop a coup in 7 years using the same body, what's wrong with you? And so what the FBI doesn't 'do' felonies any more.
Let's suppose they all belong to same club... let's call it CFR... or Brookings Institute... or any number of other countless 'think tanks' corporately funded and still financing every candidate (except poor little ol' Ron Paul who is ignored by the major media). Do you think that might be counter-productive to enforcing The Constitution? Hmmmm....
bruce @ 92 "Twelve Democrats broke with their party and joined Republicans"
As they do on all Bushco issues. Actually, there are twenty five such DINOs, who represent HALF the caucus.
Your spin, though, is backward. Though you would hope to condemn the Party for those Senators, the fact is that they are the product of the States. Those same Senators are also why impeachment is off the table. With 25 of 67 votes being loyal to the Constitution in the old-fashioned way, the current Senate is a broken body.
"They are Sens. Evan Bayh (D-Indiana), Tom Carper (D-Delaware), Mark Pryor (D-Arkansas), Ken Salazar (D-Colorado) and Claire McCaskill (D-Missouri)."
Yep. And look at their votes on ANY Bushco issue -- they vote with the other side. And that has been the case now for several Congresses, so it's not some new analysis.
"And nobody has pinned down Reid regarding why he just didn't table the Intelligence committee bill to begin with."
How is he supposed to do that? Rockefeller is the head of that wing of Senators DINOS, and the majority leader is in place because he is not free to ignore half of his Senators, or one of the most powerful committees on the Hill.
Awesome as usual, giving voice to what so many are feeling. At least the ones paying attention.
The "WAR on TERROR" is merely a facade that allowed the expansion of power of the Commander in Chief.
The "WAR on TERROR" is too broad and a non-specific target; open to BUSHites discretion. It is like calling a WAR ON CRIME....or....a WAR ON DISEASE....or a WAR ON RELIGION. It is a rediculous policy that will not be WON (it is too broad). Only an idiot would actually believe that this would be attainable goal and defeated in Bushites life-time. If he wants to see terror, he should look no further than at himself in the mirror
If he was truly waging a war on terror; then he should have appropriated fund in our domestic efforts to curb the terrorist in our STREETS. His "war on terror" is clearly a war to occupy IRAQ and take control of their OIL. The taxpayers money is being squandered for the business of controlling the OIL interest in the middle-east.
Should WE be SO surprise at:
"President Bush and his lies about the pending FISA legislation and fear tactics during his final State of the Union address earlier this week. Bush has said repeatedly he would veto any FISA legislation that did not include immunity for the telecommunications companies who broke the law and betrayed the American people."
OF Course NOT.
He is so low....he is digging himself to the ground deep enough to bury him and still have more than enough room for all his cohorts to join him, when ALL are exposed, said, and done. That will be his regime's legacy (Repugs/Dems/MSM/and all his supporters alike).
tr @ 24:
AGREED
The AG Mukasey / Senator Schumer / Rudy Giuliani connection is particularly interesting. I hope someone with access to detailed info investigates this. Was it campaign contributions from telecom companies that "helped" former good guy Chuck Schumer forget himself and promote the wrong side? Or the law firm that Michael Mukasey's son works for that got its hands dirty helping its clients which may be a conflict of interest?
steambomb @ 103:
Absolutely!
It has to be a Prerequisite.
Commander in Thief and his VP must be go down in history for what they are.
History must underscore the damageS they have done in the name of AMERICA like Hitler did to GERMANY.
So that future government officials will never forget why the U.S. Constitution was written in BOLD letters.
flex @ 13:
It's about time this word is being defined ... and on CNN! This is progress. Nice going Keith. Way to go, Mr. Amato.
Even with the entire country aware of the criminal acts chimpy and stinky have committed, the congress refuses to perform their constitutional duty and ACT. There hasn't been ONE special prosecutor to look into anything these traitors have done over the last 7 years.
Don't forget, the Preznit and Vice Lord can't take over this country themselves, they have done it with at least the complicity if not the support of the House and Senate.
antidote for: A coup d'état government (a sudden and decisive change of government illegally or by force).
IS to excercise YOUR RIGHTS to DEMONSTRATE/PROTEST. If the Congress can not use the POWER of the PURSE.
Then CITIZENS must demonstrate it to CONGRESS the power of the people to withhold paying taxes to protest a government that does not obey the U.S. Constitution.
What BETTER TIME TO DO THAT BY WITHHOLDING PAYING YOUR INCOME TAX LIABILITY until government UPHOLD the U.S. CONSTITUTION.
which means:
NO LESS THAN holding an IMPEACHMENT hearing and holding corrupt officials accountable for their crimes and complicity.
IMMEDIATE end to this illegal WAR and bring our troops home.
I've just decided who I am going to vote for by write-in in Novenmebr, since it's a sure bet I won't be voting for any of the current crop of candidates.
bush likes a stacked. the dems get cheated by him for the last 7 years. keith blows the whistle and the audience loves it. the dems need to embrace the political will of countdown's keith and impeach, fine, and imprison cheney and bush for cheating the u.s. constitution. this a great movie script.
bush likes stacked deck.
So I had to turn to Keith Olbermann, driven away from the canned, packaged, insincere, say nothing and obviously will do nothing democratic candidates usual drivel. One half hour later I was wondering why it is that the great majority of American voters are simply not paying attention?
The truth is certainly out there, if this were the early seventies there would be hundreds of thousands in the streets on a regular basis yet , no matter the outrage, no matter the numbers of our and Iraqi children dying daily, the subversion of our constitution, the theft of our treasury the dumbing down of our children to make them fit, no doubt, for fast food careers, the disclosures, the unfit appointments to important offices ( Mukasey is really Gonzales in drag), the giggling of Cheney on his way to the bank , we all do nothing.
I am certainly not recommending breaking into the White House and dragging Bush all the way back to Crawford ( not publically, not really), because, in all fairness, we'd have to do the same with a majority of the Legislature as well and that would be really tiring after all. All Id wish for as an American citizen is a little wisdom in the voting booth for us all. Oh and some non-corporatist candidate for whom to vote.
P.S.
Sorry for th edouble but, for those interested in hearing a real Presidential debate:
http://www.gp.org/2008-elections/president/sf_debate.php
Bush doesn't give a damn about the communications giants except insofar as they provide each other mutual protection from criminal prosecution. If the Democrats haven't already suffered permanent intimidation and emasculation at the thought of challenging this rogue Administration and their complicit allies in Congress, and not caving in as is their habit, they will have served the public and Constitiution well.
I don't want protection.....I want liberty! I don't want saftey ... I want freedom!
I don't want GOP...I want unity!
KO I salute you.
"The truth is the truth, even if you're a minority of one." Mahatma Gandhi
KO....nails it again!
Those of you who locked into having cable & can't get a satellite service....I'd consider moving...that natural monopoly will never allow MSNBC on their base package...they'll make you pay extra for a news show that's worth watching...
clone this man!!!!
And the dems will do nothing. Even if the final bill contains no immunity for telecomms, they will not prosecute one person over this. Just watch and see....
Giving telecom companies immunity from prosecution for illegal eavesdropping is like handing a burglar the keys to your house. People for the American Way has ways you can make an impact to keep telecoms from skating on their crimes:
Please use this form to send an e-mail to your senators -- People for the American Way (PAW) will also use this action like a petition in their lobbying efforts, bringing to senators a record of the numerous action-takers in their states.
http://www.pfaw.org/go/NoTelecomImmunity
If you have a video camera or a webcam, send them a short video (preferably under a minute), by the end of the week, telling members of Congress in your own words why they should say NO to telecom immunity.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers may hold a telecom immunity hearing as early as next week and our hope is to get Rep. Conyers activist video testimonials that may be useful in the hearing.
In addition to making the videos available to Rep. Conyers, they'll compile and deliver them to the Hill prior to the Senate vote.
Video Guidelines
Please submit videos that are less than 60 seconds long (or not much longer) and don't exceed 100MB. Make sure you identify yourself and where you are from in your video (and also in the e-mail message you send).
How to Submit
Once you've shot your video and have saved it as a file on your computer, send it to PAW in one of the following ways:
1) E-mail PAW the file at fisa@pfaw.org. (Please include at minimum your name, city and state in the e-mail message.)
2) Use the file-sending site YouSendIt to upload your video to the web -- no registration required. YouSendIt will then send your video to us. To use YouSendIt:
i. Go to www.YouSendIt.com.
ii. In the "To" field, enter fisa@pfaw.org.
iii. In the "From" field, enter your e-mail address.
iv. In the "Select a file" section, hit "Browse," and find your video file on your computer.
v. Your video will then upload, and you'll be presented with a screen saying your upload was successful.
vi. Make sure you provide your information (name, city, state) in the "message" field and then simply hit "Send." (There is no need to click any of the other options that are offered.)
Please note that by submitting a video you are releasing ownership of it (see terms below), but they won't use it in a way to which you object. They'd like to post some of the videos on YouTube and Facebook, as well as pfaw.org, to get the word out, so please let them know in your e-mail or in the message area provided by YouSendIt if you'd prefer they not share your video with anyone other than members of Congress.
Thank you for your activism!
BRAVO! BRAVO! Keep 'em coming Keith. You rock!
That this entire program was underway months prior to 9/11 is EVIDENCE that it was relied upon to shut down Able Danger and eavesdrop on all who could possibly interfere with the Adminstration's plan to implement 9/11.
Remember Chandra Levy?
She worked for (and slept with) Gary Condit, one of the top intelligence Committee individuals - and apparently came across "something really big" that she couldn't wait to tell them in person - as she described it to her parents BY PHONE just days prior to her murder. How convenient then that her boyfriend, Gary Condit, was in a meeting with none other than 9/11 kingpin Dick Cheney at the precise moment of Levy's disappearance.
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/07/21/missing.intern/index.html
Sexpionage in the McGreevey, Condit and Clinton Affairs
http://www.aztlan.net/israeli_sexpionage.htm
http://www.the7thfire.com/new_world_order/zionism/mossad/israeli_sexpion...
http://www.iamthewitness.com/by_MichaelCollinsPiper3.htm
She was going to expose the plan, and Cheney had her taken out.
As usual, Keith nails it. Brilliant!
Verizon's colors are red and black, like the old Reich.
Todd Candon @ 122:
I guess Todd doesn't understand what "a nation of laws" means. I guess he is OK with some unknown federal clowns (he'll never know who they are, as they supposedly destroyed the torture tapes to protect the torturers, likewise the eavesdroppers)reading his email and listening into his most intimate conversations, as well as possibly stealing his company's customer lists and trade secrets (INSLAW should be the ultimate and final lesson about "trusting" the government with your company's products). Todd, your general and broad statement has no credibility.
Todd, who is paying you to troll this site?
I think KO is very brave for actually speaking truth to power with his Special Comments, and I hope he has very good security people.
I've copied the transcript and emailed it to my Senators (Casey & Specter) asking them if they can provide me some reasons why Cheney/Bush should not be impeached, not just for this FISA thing, but for all the crimes they've committed.
A) I'm sure they'll never get and/or read it; and, B) they'd do nothing about it even if they did.
As I've said many time before here on C&L, we the people are screwed. We've got criminals running this country (both in and out of the administration) and they've been working hard for a long time (way before B. Clinton) to get us to just such a place. Most all of the folks in Congress are as much a part of the problem as Cheney/Bush - (they are all supported by corporations/lobbyists, many are members or attend groups like the CFR, Trilateral Comm, or Bilderberg, and/or they're being coerced through blackmail or bribes, etc.) as they've clearly demonstrated over the past 7 years, as well as before during the 90's and going back a few decades.
They've instigated laws for and/or stood by while our jobs were sent overseas, while the borders were opened to allow a flood of essentially "slave labor" to enter the country, they've reduced our educational and healthcare systems to rubble, they've allowed the infrastructure of the country to crumble, as well as our manufacturing base, and they've systematically destroyed our economic and financial futures. They've sent our sons and daughters to die in faraway places so they can stuff their pockets with gold, and they've caused untold death and suffering to millions of innocent people in many parts of the world. And, they've done all of this Our Name, with our hard-earned money. They are just tools.
9/11 was clearly perpetrated by elements of our gov't (PNAC neo-con zionists), the anthrax was a nice follow-up just to ensure we'd stay afraid, and the tapes of Osama "the dead" miraculously appear every time it looks like we're starting to stand up for ourselves. I've got a gut feeling that there will be some sort of "terror attack" here just before the conventions or election - to make sure we don't forget the message to be afraid, or so Cheney/Bush can declare martial law and cancel the elections - I mean they wouldn't want let some new President have all the fun of enacting all the crap in the presidential directives and executive orders Dubya has signed into "law" during his tenure???!!
I was hopeful that maybe, just maybe, enough Americans were fed up and had become aware so that this election cycle would really be a time we could change some things to try and perclude the slide in to fascism. Now I see that the candidate slates for the two major parties has been whittled down to more of the same - Clinton or Obama or McCain or Romney = nothing new. I keep hoping that some savior will emerge from out of the blue (no, not Bloomberg) to show us the way and help us save our Constitution, our nation and, in fact, the world. Somewhere there must be a real leader. Now's the time to step up. That's all folks........
jesus f***ing christ olbermann! i love you!!! and i'm a straight guy. we need about 20 more truthtellers like you.
balls of steel man!... you got balls of freakin' steel! give 'em hell brother.
Olbermann’s fisa rant was proof that liberals are governed by their emotions not logic, fact, or reason. Olbermann has opposed the fisa law in the past, yet now he says that if Bush veto’s it the result will be: “You will subject us, your citizens, to that greater danger.”
Of course there is a logical problem with his argument anyway. Bush says he will veto the fisa act if the telecoms are not protected from bs lawsuits from treasonous liberals. Therefore if Congress does no add the protection provision, the logically it is Congress who is placing the country at greater danger.
Only a blithering idiot could actually make the asinine arguments Olbermann makes, and only blithering idiots would think it was meaningful.
fwacbar @ 119:
The Congress does NOT have the power of prosecution.
Scott Henderson @ 129:
That's hilarious. Thanks for stopping by.
When Bush failed to protect the country on Nine-eleven, he became the worst president in history. And there he stays.
Paul in LA @ 60:
Funny, it worked for 200 years after we did it the first time......
(Setting aside that the use of the term "treasonous liberals" is an emotional ad hominem attack right off the bat.)
Call me illogical, but I am one of those TLs who believe in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Somebody who thinks giant corporations should not conspire with a government to spy on me outside the Rule of Law. If that be treasonous to THIS government administration, so be it!
Tell me Mr. Henderson, as a Super Patriot (read: Loyal Supporter of All Things Bush), do you CC www.cia.gov on all your email? That way you save your particular service provider any possibly legal problems.
Only a blithering idiot would blind themselves to the fact that a government without law is a bigger threat to personal liberty and safety than any terrorist in existence.
Perhaps you need it spelled out for you: If unfettered wiretapping was and is as vital to our security as Mr. Bush claims it is, why would protecting telecoms from lawsuits trump keeping it the law? Couldn't be because big business is the Most-Favored-Constituency of the Repugnicans, could it? Or that the warrant-less access to phone and emails produced no usable information so Bush is comfortable vetoing it?
You can't have it both ways - unless you want to be illogical and unreasonable, that is.
Scott Henderson @ 129:
Um, no. Never understood a hypothetical argument? Too many syllabels for you? IF they needed the new FISA legislation as it was written when it was passed (which is what Bush said) then they still need it WHETHER OR NOT IT HAS TELECOM IMMUNITY IN IT. Get that, dunce boy? If you don't get that the telecom companies have lawyers that could have told them that the things that the things that they were doing was illegal, you're a fool. If you don't get that they're real liability is because they broke the law and knew that they were doing it, then you're a fool. If you don't understand that passing the FISA extension doesn't say that the current spying is illegal (that's the original FISA bill, still active and pertinent, as no new law countermands it) and needn't be vetoed, you're an idiot. Three times an idiot, the ump says, you're out of here!
Scott, you fucking dumbass,
Only complete fuckwits like you could spin shit like that.
Corporate immunity from the law = protection from bullshit lawsuits? Citizens expecting and demanding privacy = treasonous liberals?
There are traitors to this country. Cowards like you who so happily give up their freedoms out of fear for their safety.
If somebody's going to blow me up or cut my head off because my rights were preserved, then SO BE IT.
GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH.
If you have not been able to watch Keiths latest Special Comment, use this link
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22956555/
More Special Comments
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16270176/
Ken @ 57:
how much did the rethugs pay you to diss KO, troll???
Seems to me both Demflowers and Rethuglicans ought to re-read the Constitution.
The Presidential oath doesn't say anything about protecting the people directly. He is sworn to preserve, protect and defend THE CONSTITUTION from all enemies foreign and domestic. All their BS to the contrary, it is not the first job of the President to keep us all alive. That's our responsibility.
If he'll keep the government off our back, we'll take care of the bad guys. We can handle it. We've done it before and yah, there will be casualties. We can take that also. It only makes us more determined.
What are the Neocons/Rethuglicans so afraid of?
Why do they hate the Constitution?
Why do they hate America
just askin'
NO TELECOM IMMUNITY
MacDaKnife @ 35:
The networks would not run it. The networks will not report on this Keith Olbermann segment. The networks will frame the story with minimal if any criticism of Bush or the Republicans. The networks will place any stories of this nature in the least conspicuous slot in their programming if they cover it at all.
Not intending to be Captain bringdown but my observance of coverage of this as it has been unfolding tells me that they are overtly burying it.
Olbermann's comentary is great. One must ask what Bush/Cheney and have on Nancy and Harry to compromise them so. The public in primaries has shown that the Democrats are drawing voters in great numbers in comparison to the Repubs. Bush/Cheney public ratings are down in the sewer. So if they will not stand up to Bush now, what did they do to so compromise their ablility to act?
What the hell is Olbermann's point? FISA protects telcos from being sued for cooperating with the government in wire taps. That is all. There are flooring companies that were sued, and went bankrupt (and are now owned by lawyers) who made asbestos flooring only for the government. This is nothing new. And for the last time, Fascism means privately owned, but controlled by the government. Olbermann is just a mook. He has exactly accused Bush of the opposite of Fascism. There is reason 'o plenty to criticize President Bush, but this is not one of them. Olbermann and his ilk don't want the war, (which I agree) don't want to question terrorist, and don't want to look for them. In short, they seek not a surrender to terrorism and radicalism, but something far more onerous, they want us to just ignore the problem. If your plane gets hijacked and couple of buildings go down, hey more people will die on the highways of New York this year, why worry about it? If These lackluster "reporters" would bother to read a few books, they wouldn't make such absolute fools of themselves in front of intelligent people. But man how the tinfoils eat it up.
Go back to sportcenter Obiwan you fucking communist fuck you... Man, why can't this douchebag live in my town and visit my favorite watering hole... every time I see this homo rant I just wonna crush his face with my fist...
ebob @ 141:
ebob,
I assume you consider yourself one of the "intelligent people" you refer to, you may want to master "thinking" first before you aspire to that lofty position.
You must then consider reason before you can think effectively, there are books on that too.
Can you even FIND Washington D.C. on a map?
Yeah, thought so - run along now.
hylas
"Man, why can’t this douchebag live in my town and visit my favorite watering hole… every time I see this homo rant I just wonna crush his face with my fist…"
Where's this "watering hole" so I can visit or find a friend to check you out? I've been known to kick back a shot and a beer after work, the little children who are drunk or stupid enough to get physical usually get going over a broad or money and inevitably get kicked to the curb by the staff and a few helpful regulars (and obliged not to return).
If you guys fight about friggin Bush's veto pen, it must be a pretty frilly bar. Is this the normal call to arms: "OK, who says Bush isn't just the biggest strongest terrorist fighting he-man in the country, huh? If your an old white collar liberal reporter- I'll kick your ass, if you're a couple of pipefitters and a steel worker, well let's just agree to disagree OK fellas? I'll buy you a beer, barkeep bring these guys a beer when you refresh my martini will you?
Comments are closed on this entry