Late Edition: Senator Jack Reed Dispels GOP FISA Lies
By Logan Murphy Saturday Feb 16, 2008 1:00pm
Download | play 
Download | play
Democratic Senator and member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Jack Reed, appeared on Late Edition and did a great job of debunking the lies and spin being floated by President Bush and the GOP on FISA. As Juan Williams did earlier on Fox News Sunday, Reed makes it clear that allowing the flawed FISA legislation passed last August to lapse does not mean the U.S. can't do surveillance on suspected terrorists.
Host Wolf Blitzer floated out the exact same argument William Kristol did on Fox, which is this notion that Director of National Intelligence, Mike McConnell, is some sort of apolitical figure and somehow that makes him more believable. Reed shot that down, reminding Blitzer that the previous FISA laws are still in place and that U.S. intelligence can still go after suspects for several days before requesting a warrant.
Login or Register to post comments.
There's so much noise around this debate that is difficult to filter out. The bottom line is that we can't sacrifice our liberties in the name of safety.
RHM's blog
You could have multiple angle shots of the GOP robbing banks and they'd still deny it was them, and that they did it to make us safer anyway, and that the Dems were putting the rest of the country at risk by continually blocking votes allow the Thugs to repeatedly rob banks, even though they're not doing that, and they're only doinig it for THE SAFETY OF THE AMERIcANZ PEEPUL.
Why does Blitzkrieg think it's his job to regurgitate Bush's talking points? If Bush says the sky is green, is Wolfie going to give him the benefit of the doubt or get off his ass and see for himself?
Blitzer said we can't accuse Mike McConnell of being a political hack. Rubbish, he wouldn't have his position in the Bush regime if he wasn't.
GOP to Americans: Wolf! Wolf! Wolf!
I never watch Wolf Blitzer, so I don't know if he's always such a right wing tool, but he was nothing but a White House mouthpiece in this interview.
Saturday February 16, 2008
Air America Radio Host Richard Green replays statements by Keith Obermann, Robert Wexler and John Conyers regarding the Bush administration's attempt to gain immunity via legislation for the telecoms who have illegally listened to our phone calls and read our emails.
http://www.alexjonesfan58.com
Well, of course Blitzer did. He's a goddam tool, and he's tooling away like hell here.
Again, didn't McConnell get caught lying already? I'm looking that one up...
The entire/whole "game" of most all Repugs is scare tactics and fear...totally ignoring
the civil liberties issue. This is getting more than just tiring..it's BS.
Mike McConnell is paid to echo Bush's words. He was appointed by Bush so he must do his master's bidding.
Wolf Blitzer is creepy. CNN really needs to retire this guy. Let Jack Cafferty take his place.
"Sometime in the mid 1970s, Blitzer also worked for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee as the editor of their monthly in house publication, the "Near East Report.[4][5] While at AIPAC, Blitzer's journalism focused on Middle East affairs as it relates to United States foreign policy. Contrary to popular speculation, Blitzer has never lobbied on behalf of AIPAC."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolf_Blitzer
(I don't equate the actions of the country Israel with the religion Judiasm)
Don @ 11:
I can think of a good place to send Wolfie....to Iran...and he can then bunker down
and wait for the U.S. to do some more "shock and awe" in that country.
Wolf will probably be retired from CNN after the White House changes hands. We have had enough of the "Bush worship" by media. The Bushites are like a "cult", always regurgitating the words of their god, George W Bush.
Ah, yes, here it is. McConnell's previous, shameless lying:
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/12864.html
And recently just making up crap, although here CNN's John Roberts deserves still more blame:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/02/14/cnn_mcconnell/index.html
Yeah, he's not partisan, nosirree. Maybe after this Wolf Blitzer can dishonestly criticize raising taxes on the rich again (as he did in the last Dem debate he moderated).
This whole notion that if retroactive immunity isn't given the telecoms, then they won't help in the future is a lot of horse dung. The government mandated the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) which required telecom to make their networks wiretap friendly, and the government could make future mandates requiring telecom cooperation within the law..
The real issue is operating outside the law. I guess telecom won't be willing to operate outside the law if Congress doesn't immunize them from past occurrences of operating outside the law. So the debate really needs to be framed as follows: "Do we want wiretapping to be conducted in a lawful manner?".
The Republicans have been successful in framing particular issues, but on this one, they're weak. We need to take over framing the issue.
miss_kitty @ 2:
Yea miss kitty, Like you, I feel so much safer since chump change chimpy began protecting us. Did you like his little speech the other morning, it starts, "good morning, there are terrorists that want to harm us(rough paraphrase)" not good morning , how are you today, nothing but f69king fear.....................rolling eyes like Lewis Black, I am all farklempt and filled with rear...not.
Have a laugh today, and everyday, it helps mitigate the manure pile of insanity and double speak, and be glad that somewhere like where I sit there is someone like you.........we are not alone and isolated. Grab whatever shovel at hand and help shovel this shit into the sewer where it belongs, and grab a flashlight, they are afraid of light, it exposes truth, and they can't have that.
OT, but because there's an ABC helicopter buzzing overhead--I quit counting after 10 circles--I'm assuming that Obama's in the hood.
Almost glad that Edwards dropped out.
Oh shit....do we here in Austin have to put up w/Wolfie when Hillary and Obama debate?
And just when is Kurtz going to take on Blitzer's blatant steno-work at Reliable Sources?
Maybe it'll take Olbermann to give CNN/Blitzer a WPITW?
NoBuddy @ 16:
Do you think that maybe this is really about f69kface covering his own sorry ass at the expense of "justa a piece of paper", that someone wrote too long ago to be important-message george-they risked their lives to pen those words while you, oh so cavalierly risk other peoples lives for the personal gain of the few-you are disgusting and a coward, beyond description.
"Do you think that maybe this is really about f69kface covering his own sorry ass at the expense of “justa a piece of paper”,..."
No, I don't. I think that Bush and the neocons are actively trying to destroy the bill of rights. This is just another manifestation. We have the "unitary executive" doctrine where the President, our "decider", is exempt from the constitution in times of "war", which is conveniently proclaimed to last another generation, even as no war has actually been declared by Congress. And we have this signing statement fiasco, where the President has made more signing statements than all previous Presidents combined, basically stating he is going to ignore the law.
What we're seeing here is a power grab by the executive branch, helped along by a weak-knee Congress. I think "unitary executive" should be equated with "dictator".
But, but, but...
Mitch McConnell has told America that the administration's primary concern about the FISA bill is the provision that would give the telecoms immunity -- they aren't worried about unConstitutionally surveilling Americans:
Bush Administration Admits FISA Bill All About Protecting Big Money
Listen for yourself (Click "Listen Now"). In an interview on National Public Radio on February 15, Bush Administration Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell has admitted that the effort to pass FISA Amendments Act isn’t really about the ability to continue national intelligence. “That’s not the real issue,” he says.
“The issue is liability protection for the private sector.”
Roll that around on your tongue.
The Bush administration and its authoritarian allies in the Republican and Democratic parties have been striving to gut the Constitution in order to provide liability protection for the private sector.
Funny, how the corporate media and gop are still scaremongering on this loss.
Sniviling dishonest cowards.
Once again Wolf is carrying the water for the Administration and the right wing keeps calling CNN "The Liberal Press". The truth is not liberal.......it's just the truth and evidently the Right and the Mainstream Media would rather walk around with their heads up their asses.
Sorry, that was Mike McConnell
The script was written years ago, there is no mechanism for derivation.
Wolfy can be a hard one to figure sometimes. To me he's mostly another talking head who sounds like he should be working for FOX noise instead of CNN sometimes. Anymore there are very few commentators you can trust anymore in what they say as all the networks are controlled by the Bush Administration in some way. Just the fact that he worked for AIPAC for twenty years is enough for me not to trust what he says. I'd hate to play poker with him. He's probably an excellent bluffer.
RHM @ 1:
Exactly. This is the bottom line. No threat, be it real or imaginary, external or internal is so great to give up our liberties for. The reason: Once our liberties are gone they are very difficult to get back from the Government that took them. History is full of examples. Those that willingly support Bush's FISA push are the same ones that would never have stood up to King George of England during the 1700s.
Why didn't congress (the senate) just go ahead and renew the original FISA when the wimpy ass republicans walked out.
From Article 1 Section 9, US Constitution
The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.
No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
Just as the Military Commissions Act unconstitutionally suspends the Writ of Habeas Corpus and the bill of attainder provisions regarding enemy combatants and suspected terrorists, this so called Protect America Act, with its retroactive immunity provisions, is a clear violation of the ex post facto provision of Article 1. I guess the Constitution they are sworn to uphold doesn't mean a damn thing to anyone in government anymore.
JerryO @ 28:
And they all work for:
The True Story of the Bilderberg Group
"Delving into a world once shrouded in complete mystery and impenetrable security, this investigative report provides a fascinating account of the annual meetings of the world’s most powerful people—the Bilderberg Group. Since its inception in 1954 at the Bilderberg Hotel in the small Dutch town of Oosterbeek, the Bilderberg Group has been comprised of European prime ministers, American presidents, and the wealthiest CEOs of the world, all coming together to discuss the economic and political future of humanity. The press has never been allowed to attend, nor have statements ever been released on the attendees' conclusions or discussions, which have ramifications on the citizens of the world. Using methods that resemble the spy tactics of the Cold War—and in several instances putting his own life on the line—the author did what no one else has managed to achieve: he learned what was being said behind the closed doors of the opulent hotels and has made it available to the public for the first time."
Wolf is such a hack.
"Those that willingly support Bush’s FISA push are the same ones that would never have stood up to King George of England during the 1700s" Thank you Jay O @29. A truer statement can't be found. They not really Patriots, they are chickens. Too afraid of ending up with their heads on the Repug chopping block. Or as in "Rockerfellow" and his contingent of Dems, too afraid of losing their Lobby support.
Marge @ 30:
My G*d. The number of errors in the above is really shocking. Do you see, Mr. Amato, why accurate headlines are important? Even the people who take the time to read your blog are completely lost.
The Gang that can't shoot straight can't wait to bomb an American city, then they can declare martial law and shoot all people who know the truth about the diabolical plans to exterminate 80% of pop. Once thier evil plan is complete they will never again have to worry about losing power, because they will elevate themselves to God status.
Why does Wolf have to make the WH's talking points, vouching for the supposed political neutrality of the intelligence leaders, identifying all the people who disagree with Reed-as though they're more important or credible than him? Showing clips of Monkey Boy throwing his tantrum? Why can't these big media pundits just ask questions and then, when they receive the answers, consider what their next question is......but no, everything is obviously already pre-ordained.
If your senator or congressman or woman voted for immunity among other egregious laws, there is a way to call them what they are, traitors, and do it with a style and diplomacy that coats disgust with honey, they are indeed traitors to the document they swore an oath to upholed and protect and they have willingly subverted that oath, and they, more than any terrorist have put our country in danger, risked it's very freedom, in obeisance to party speak and a thouroughly incompetent president.
35
JTM Says
Sadly yes he says..I need more lewis Black my humor quotient is being depleted at an alarming rate .
The telecoms are allegedly blackmailing America: "If you dare attempt to enforce the law against us, we will refuse to provide the US government with data that will help defend America." It's time to call the telecoms on their bluff:
Got that? Even if the telecoms refuse to help defend America, the US government can order them. Their threat to "not do their job" is not something they can credibly do. Whether the telecoms do or do not get granted immunity-amnesty is irrelevant. They have no choice but to respond. Said another way: If the telecoms are going to threaten American citizens with blackmail, it's time Congress held some hearings.
Confronting Telecom General Counsels
The General Counsels for the telecoms have some explaining to do to the Boards of Directors, Auditors, Shareholders and public. Some of the GCs were formerly assigned DOJ staff, well familiar with the FISA requirements, and have no excuse for bypassing the clearly promulgated legal requirements. The State Disciplinary Boards need to be notified of which telecom GCs are in their states, and put those GC under investigation for alleged breach of their oath of office to the US Constitution and the clearly promulgated warrant requirement. These GC's can also be revoked of their license to practice law if they refuse to cooperate with Congressional subpoenas compelling their appearance.
Alleged Breach of Contract
The telecom General Counsel's need to be subpoenaed to appear before Congress to share with the public who induced them to breach their contracts with the US government. The contracts with the US government are very clear: They provide funds to the telecoms for ongoing intelligence activity. Also, are the NSA acquisition programs which can be recompeted, and assigned to more responsive contractors. This is consistent with the Federal Acquisition Regulations. Potential Termination Liabilities (PTL) need to be reviewed by the NSA procurement offices, with orders of magnitude provided to the HASC and SASC COB Tuesday, 19 Feb 2008.
Impeaching the Telecom Boards of Directors: Denial of Pardons
The House has exclusive power to impeach. Normally, the House confines its impeachment investigation to US government officials. Indeed, when one impeachment case started in the Senate against a former US government official, the Senate declined to prosecute. However, Senate decisions are not binding on the House. Once the House starts impeachment hearings against the telecoms, the telcoms are stripped of any chance to get a pardon.
The DOJ AG has explicitly stated he will not enforce US laws. Whether the DOJ OLC says something is or isn't legal has no bearing on what the FISA statute expressly prohibits: Warrantless surveillance of US citizens. The intent of impeachment is to give the Congress a tool to prosecute when the President refuses.
The AG's decision satisfies the intent of the Framers for the House to Act: Bring impeachment proceedings against the telecom Boards of Directors, and enforce the law where the US government refuses to enforce the law. Impeachment proceedings against the telecoms, CEOs, GCs, and Boards of Directors would deny them any chance of a pardon. They have liability insurance to defend themselves. They have plenty of money.
Unless the House impeaches the telecoms, the President could without notice grand pardons to the telecoms. He would be rewarding those who helped him bypass that law. The Congress should not grant any immunity or amnesty until there have been impeachment hearings against the telecoms. If the Senate decides there is no evidence warranting conviction, there is no reason to grant immunity or amnesty.
Seizing Telecom Assets
The telecoms have also blackmailed Americans saying, unless we ignore their illegal activity, they're not going to defend America. That's not service. That's an alleged threat to refuse to come to the common defense. The US government at Youngstown set the precedent that the US President can seize assets to compel their service for national defense. Let the President explain why he is not willing to exercise his "unitary" theory of Presidential power to seize the telecom assets. Truman did it. Is this President not willing to assert the same?
Nationalization of Telecoms
Some of the boards of directors apparently believe that they are private entities. They are not immune to having the corporate assets taken over. if those telecoms refuse to cooperate, those assets within the telecom's buildings may be seized, and transported to other corporations that are willing to respond to lawful government orders. If the telecoms do not cooperate with the lawful surveillance, then those firms can be shut down, and the State Militias may lawfully prohibit any ongoing illegal activity to continue at those telecoms. Also, the existing contract requirements can be reassigned to contractors who do respond to the US national security objectives, and are not inclined to make threats of extortion, blackmail, or illegal denial of contacted services.
Increasing Telecom Audit Scope
The boards of directors are subject to increased audit scope when their firms are alleged to be complicit with illegal activity. The Congress needs to examine the AICPA-affiliated auditor working papers to ensure audit scope has increased. SAS 99 is the authority to require there be a fully discussion by the telecom boards of directors whether they have or have not cooperated with the internal auditors on SAS 99 audit scope increase.
Declaration of Illegal Telecom Rebellion
The constitution confers onto the Congress to declare an illegal rebellion. The telecom's alleged threat to not defend America could be broadly construed as a plan to support a rebellion. Not only is the telecom leadership expressly stating they demand immunity from accountability, they are compelling this immunity upon threat of denial of lawfully contracted services. The Congress needs to openly discuss declaring the telecoms, the CEOs, and boards of directors in rebellion and discuss denying them writ of habeas while the DOJ AG refuses to enforce the law. The Congress has the power to detain the telecom CEOs under inherent contempt proceedings, and conduct a trial of the telecom CEOs for their alleged rebellion.
Review
American citizens will not be blackmailed. The telecom's problem is their failure to craft contract language that would expressly immunize them. They refused to obtain warrants that would have provided this immunity. Their alleged reckless planning is not legal basis for their GCs and Boards of Directors to allegedly threaten American citizens. Americans shall never asent to a threat of "We will be immune, or we will not respect your security." That smacks of a repeat of the 1776 abuses which compelled the warrant requirement.
The public has a reasonable basis to have no confidence in the telecom boards of directors. Shareholders have a reasonable basis to demand to see the internal auditors' working papers. Congress needs to compel the telecom CEOs and Boards of Directors to appear and explain their alleged threats, blackmailing, and alleged refusal to continue doing what will safeguard America. If the telecoms refuse to cooperate with lawful inquiry, those leaders need to be fired, and the NSA contracting requirements need to be assigned to more responsive contractors.
The telecoms shall end their alleged threats to not provide for the common defense. Whether they are or are not granted immunity has no bearing on their obligations to provide for the common defense. No American should be swayed by their threats. Rather, all Americans should realize their are empowered to demand oversight of the telecoms with the following:
- When will Congress declare the telcoms, CEOs, GCs, and Boards of Directors in alleged rebellion, and direct an impeachment investigation so that they are individually denied any chance of a Presidential Pardon?
- What is the plan of the State Attorney Generals to enforce the law against the telecoms, and do what the DOJ AG refuses to do: Fully enforce the Supreme Law against all Americans?
- What is the plan of Congress to subpoena the telecom CEO's and Boards to explain their alleged threat?
- When will the current workload of NSA contracts be assigned to NSA contractors who will not allegedly threaten American citizens with blackmail?
- Who inside the NSA procurement offices is working with DOJ and DOD to find more responsive contractors?
- If the President does not receive suitable responses from the NSA contractors, what is his plan to seize the NSA assets the contractors are using, and put them under US military control, and ensure only responsive NSA contractors have access to these assets?
- Why are NSA contractors who have allegedly made this threat to "not provide for the common defense" still allowed to have access to classified information, material, resources, or other things; when will these assets be put under control of more responsive, responsible contractors?
- When will the telecom auditors, general counsels, and boards of directors be challenged per their industry standards for their alleged breach of their fiduciary duty to enforce the law, comply with lawful warrants, and respond to contract obligations with the United States government during wartime?
- Where are the State Boards of Accountancy and the State Corporate Governance Boards in revoking the licenses of the telecoms alleged to be complicit with this plan to not honor future NSA contract obligations going forward?
- What is the plan to reassign all work from the alleged rebels within the NSA contracting community to those who have an interest in defending America without making alleged threats to not perform on their contract obligations?
- When are the State-level grand juries going to review telecom alleged threats against US citizens for purposes of prosecuting telecoms, CEOs, GC, and Boards of Directors for alleged breach of their loan covenants barring involvement with alleged rebellion, illegal conspiracies, and policies contrary to the national defense of the United States?
Proud American Libera @ 5:
Where Wolf?
.
I saw the segment this morning and Blitzer didn't just characterize it as "floated", he said "they have made the case", which means proved, not merely suggested.
Maybe Wolfie needs to spend more time curled up with a thesaurus.
.
draftedin68 @ 41:
I hope its carniveurous
carniverous
Anonymous @ 39:
The intent of this comment was to address your question: What options the C&L readers had to press for accountability:
The key points are:
- State level options are available
- While the Congress and President waste time, there are options which they cannot block
- Non-federal options include financial accounting, boards of directors, and the legal services standards of conduct: To revoke licenses, and prohibit the entity from doing business
- Creating new, responsive companies that will capture the worlkload from the Existing NSA contractors who are making these threats: This will deprive the lawbreakers of contractors and market share, and possibly drive down their stock price. If the boards don't wake up, the VP's could be given walking papers.
Just because the President, his lawyers, and NSA contractors have attempted to ignore the law without getting caught, it does't mean that new corporate leadership in to-be-created corporations cannot position themselves based on higher certifications, better compliance, and a more transparent civilian oversight process.
One of the problems has been the US government's false assertion that all issues about the NSA have to remain secret. No, the corporate governance issues can be publicly discussed, and subjected to market-price adjustments. It's the job of the GOP to explain why they supposedly support "free markets" but are not willing to permit the alleged failed NSA contractors from having direct competition by new firms who show better respect for the US Constitution.
if these firms publicly discussed their compliance procedures, without discussing the classified information, the public might be more inclined to support these firms and corporate boards. First thing on the table is for these leaders to say: "We'll accept massive pay cuts, and position ourselves as ethical companies the public can trust without question. The moment we cannot certify that, we will resign."
The NSA contractors are not immune to market forces or competition from entities who can attract people who can think, call it like it is, and refuse to bend on the COnstitution. Those people exist. They've been abused by this President and NSA contractors. Why are the NSA contractors' boards afraid of union rules which would fully enforce the Constitution against domestic enemies in the NSA contracting community?
Let the NSA contractors "refuse to compete" for contracts. Other entities can be created that will attract the talent, operate lawfully, and not abuse employees by compelling them to be silent about abuse, misconduct, illegal activity, or reckless legal counsel defiance of the law.
Firing Key Personnel Working For NSA Contractors
The public needs to find out -- by name -- who was behind this illegal activity, and those names need to be placed on "closer oversight"-guidance, or, if needed, on the "do not hire"-lists.
The NSA contractors do not realize what a mess they've created for themselves, individually as persons seeking a means to earn a living. The public is not required to fund contracts with their names on them; and the public can find new leadership:
- Firing the NSA contractors' boards of directors;
- Hiring malpractice legal counsel to go after NSA corporate counsel;
- Demanding auditor working papers to address the pervasive internal control problems as evidnced by the massive FISA violations;
- Forcing the State AG's to increase staffing for prosecutions of auditors who did not, as required, increase audit scope when there were indicators of illegal activity.
Forever Ban Wrongdoers From NSA-Related Contracts
It's premature to talk about amnesty. Some of those alleged to be involved with this illgeal activity cannot be trusted. Ever. They need to be banned from these types of contracts.
The United States has new people entering business everyday. New lawyers. If needed, the younger, less seasoned can be hired to gather the evidence, and support the prosecution of the NSA General Counsels.
New Corporate VPs can be hired to better lead the audit committees, implement fully the auditing standards, and create a public reporting system that will timely notify the public and stockholders when they are being directed to engage in illegal activity on behalf of the US government.
Civilian Oversight Boards of Legal Services
The legal community has lost its claim to be independent or self-regulating. They've failed. Rather, non-lawyers need to oversee the lawyers; and not be subject to attorney-client shields. Noisy withdrawals, and public information on the illegal US government activity. Any agreement to keep illegal activity "classified" is not enforceable nor a bonafide state secret. It's an excuse to agree to do something that is contrary to public policy.
SEC Review of Conflicts: Legal Services, Auditing, Consulting
It also appears law firms working for the NSA contractors chose to make excuses to ignore violations of FISA knowing they would be able to provide valuable financial services to that same NSA-related contractor.
Law firms, as was done in the auditing-consulting business, need to decide whether they are going to audit, provide legal services, or do something else. They cannot be permitted to compromise standards in one sector to get contracts from NSA contractors in another sector.
Time for the Securities and Exchange COmmission to look at who was doing the legal services/consulting for the rendition-related contractors, and find out their connection with the White House:
- What kind of cross flow of personnel have there been; and are the legal services entities compromised?
- Did they remain silent on illegal activity in the hopes of getting valuable legal services contracts? It appears so.
There is one possible way to implement quickly the "increased oversight of lawyers"-option: The public can state to all ABA-affiliated counsel: "Until you agree to subject yourselves to civilian, non-lawyer, independent oversight, you will not be hired."
Also, the public can refuse to hire counsel; saying, "We will not agree to bring these specific products, patents, and useful things" to the US market until the legal services industry is reformed."
Cut them off. Go elsewhere. To a place with people that better respect the rule of law. Not this crew. They're on probation.
If the lawyers want our business as clients, they need to show they've woken up to the public's requirements that the lawyers mend their ways. Not "when they feel like it," but now.
We're not required to hire a specific lawyer; we're only required to put our interests as clients before the lawyers. They work for us. They are not our boss. The slower they move, the more money they'll lose. Not our problem.
We have options. They have loans to repay. We have the money; and they want it. We can go to the open markets and find capital using investment banks which fully support the above policies.
Their days are numbered. They dared to annoy the wrong civilian population.
Anney @ 23: You're absolutely right that they're after telecom amnesty, but the even bigger issue is why. The Bushies have refused to share what they're been doing. Don't you think it'd be nice to know who Dick Cheney's been spying on? The Bushies sure don't want Congress or the American people to know!
It'a amazing how conservatives just don't seem to care about their 'rights' being spirited away like this if this sort of legislation is passed. what is their problem. i guess, those are rights they never used or cared about anyway. and the constitution to them is a trifling little piece of paper they have little use for. Bill Kristol calls this election a 'natl security' election. sorry, joker face, its not. if youd bothered to see those exit polls in many states people were saying the economy, billo, was overwhelmingly the issue, not the war in Iraq or the war against that terror tactic. silly neocon. youre wrong, and wrong again.
Wolf Blitzer and Bill Kristol make a cute couple.
Your Corporate News Network at work. Thanks Corporate News!
Very good job by Senator Reed. I am actually glad that Blitzer was not throwing up nerf balls. What I would really like to see is a an aggressive democratic attack strategy on this subject. As most know, you sell something by repeating it over, again and again. That is what the republicans do. That is what they are doing with this. And, right on cue, the msm is there to help. However, with all the facts on the table, they have the low-ground, the weaker position. It is like when the right tried to discredit Noam Chomsky. They kept sending their 'top guns' to challenge and confront him. And, in each case, they came away shell shocked, bloodied and ready for counseling. Bush is in an indefensible position on this. He is trying to win the propaganda war (it has been working well so far). He is the true villain. Attack him, day after day.
Darth Grabass @ 6:
In this case he seems to be playing a very dispassionate devil's advocate.
I lost all respect (what little I had for him) when he interviewed Cheney a few years ago, I believe it was during the '04 campaign. The issue of his gay daughter had been a subject in the campaign because of the gay marriage issue. Blitzer asked Cheney about her, and he punked Blitzer. Blitzer coward like a little bitch. I couln't believe it.
Wow thanks for the wonderful reality disconnect Wolfie. Glad to see you can think for yourself. So the "Admiral" doesn't have a horse in this race? I suppose he's been granted "partisan immunity" just like Blitzer. Wolf Blitzer is a sock puppet. Wolf Blitzer also has ties to AIPAC.
To quote George W Bush - "fool me once shame on me...er you...ah me...fool me twice...ah....er...fool...eh...er....won't get fooled again!" "Hehehehhehehehehehe............"
As far as I can tell, there is no more evidence that allowing warrantless wiretapping has prevented another terrorist attack than it has prevented a major earthquake. Neither has occured since we started the warrantless wiretapping.
And of course former Atty Gen Alberto Gonzales was Apolitical as well.
Loretta Doan, Monica Goodling, and the lovable Sarah Taylor that told Henry Waxman that she could not tell any truths because of the OATH she took to defend the President.
You know Duke Cunningham (who in his heart was really an independent dressed as a Republican) is only in jail because of the liberal attack machine, right.!
FOX in their reporting displayed on the screen under the pictures of Larry Craig, Mark Foley, and even John McCain. As the "D" as in (D) Senator John McCain.
Its those liberal commies I tell you. They want us all to die.
Don @ 11:
Careful what you wish for. Much more likely to be Glenn Dreck.
Secure? Yeah, I guess you can call a maximum security prison or a graveyard secure.
Thanks, CNN, but I'd rather take my chances with the so-called "terrorists".
What I'm curious about is the premise of this entire exercise: that FISA needs "updating" in the first place. Says who? This is nothing more than but another power grab designed to undermoine the Constitution and destroy liberties, freedoms Human Rights and and the Constitutional provisions which protect those things. Nothing more.
If CNN were a legitimate jounalistic news instrument, instead of the manipulative propaganda organ that it is - an organization that exists only to serve an agenda towards totalitarian fascism; if Wolfe Blitzer were a legitimate journalist, instead of the transparent, political operative that he is, the most obvious investigative questions to ask as journalists would be, "Why is this current move to "update" FISA being taken up by Congress? What's really going on , here?".
Insteadand from all quarters, the entire coverage of this pending FISA legislation is fixated upon issues, however important they may actually be, which are irrelevant to the core question: "Why is this happening at all?". The MSM is once again performing a nice bit of co-ordinated distraction, manipulation and direction of the national dialog.
I find this quite amusing. Qwest is the only company with wisdom and respect for the law to tell the law to start walking when they come asking for an eavesdrop, and now that every other idiot telecom company has come to realize they have a looming class action civil suit that would tickle Bill Gates or Big Tobacco, they think that law might be a good idea to observe, except, once again, where it suits them.
Ex Post Facto laws are unconstitutional, specifically prohibited in Article I Section 9. Get on the phone and politely inform your respective legislator of that, please.
Did somebody say Bush is lying? I'm shocked! Stunned!
What's next? Bombing innocent countries and starting unprovoked wars?
Login or Register to post comments.