Durka-Durka-Muhammed-Jihad!!
I saw this over at Michelle Malkin's blog - a story about the White House authorizing what boils down to illegal wiretaps/phonetaps.
I thought to myself Uh-ohhh - the barking moonbats will be screaming about this for months. and then thought Have to wait and see what this is all about after the dust settles as there is always a 'jump to conclusions' when some big story like this breaks.
I then went over to Drudge Report to see if it had been updated and found this:
As I initially suspected, this 'story' isn't really anything earth-shattering - it's just a warm-up teaser for another 'tell-all' book.
Leave it to the NYT to shill for another author that will attempt to push another 'police state' theory-gone-true....yet another reason that:
Hmmm....maybe he's not feeling good today. At least he's big enough to fess up to the mistake/error and put the real reason(s) behind the initial story out for the public to see instead of pulling some sort of 'fake, but accurate' crap like CBS News did.
The "activities" were wiretaps. Wiretaps without warrants are illegal. He has the FISA court for
Read more in Red Herring Panic
The Other Mike S said:
It's legality and propriety are reviewed by people that work for him. That doesn't give me a gre
Read more in Red Herring Panic
Mad Mikey said:
Text from President Bush's radio speech today:
The activities I authorized are revi
Read more in Red Herring Panic
Mad Mikey said:
I myself am waiting for the dust to settle.
Initially, the story was about illegal eave
Read more in Red Herring Panic
The Other Mike S said:
You lost me: What part of Bush authorizing the surveillance of hundreds, if not thousands of peo
Read more in Red Herring Panic
Trackback Information for Red Herring Panic
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://blog2.mu.nu/cgi/trackback.cgi/139339Listed below are links to weblogs that reference 'Red Herring Panic'.
Comments on Red Herring Panic
You lost me: What part of Bush authorizing the surveillance of hundreds, if not thousands of people in America, WITHOUT WARRANTS, as required by the 4th Amendment, is not factual? I don't see how it's relevant that someone is publishing a book about it. It happened.
|| Posted by The Other Mike S, December 16, 2005 10:26 PM ||I myself am waiting for the dust to settle.
Initially, the story was about illegal eavesdropping 'authorized' by President Bush. The one aspect of this is that the story also told that members of Congress knew about it and that there was judicial oversight throughout the operation.
What I was getting at is that this is typical of MSM - they'll scream about one facet of a story without telling you about the other facets - the facets that are interlocked with the initial screaming.
And the sad part is that there are people that will look only at a headline and extrapolate an entire story from it.
Another F'ed up part of this is the timing. The NYT knew about it for a year and decided to publish about it on the same day that the sucess of the Iraqi elections should have been splashed all over the headlines.
|| Posted by Mad Mikey, December 17, 2005 10:48 AM ||Text from President Bush's radio speech today:
The activities I authorized are reviewed approximately every 45 days. Each review is based on a fresh intelligence assessment of terrorist threats to the continuity of our government and the threat of catastrophic damage to our homeland. During each assessment, previous activities under the authorization are reviewed. The review includes approval by our nation’s top legal officials, including the Attorney General and the Counsel to the President. I have reauthorized this program more than 30 times since the September the 11th attacks, and I intend to do so for as long as our nation faces a continuing threat from al Qaeda and related groups.
The NSA’s activities under this authorization are thoroughly reviewed by the Justice Department and NSA’s top legal officials, including NSA’s general counsel and inspector general. Leaders in Congress have been briefed more than a dozen times on this authorization and the activities conducted under it. Intelligence officials involved in this activity also receive extensive training to ensure they perform their duties consistent with the letter and intent of the authorization.
This isn't the 'Watergate' of the 21st century as much as the NYT would like it to be....
|| Posted by Mad Mikey, December 17, 2005 10:55 AM ||It's legality and propriety are reviewed by people that work for him. That doesn't give me a great deal of confidence. That's why we have the separation of powers doctrine.
|| Posted by The Other Mike S, December 17, 2005 03:15 PM ||The "activities" were wiretaps. Wiretaps without warrants are illegal. He has the FISA court for just this purpose. Gonzales approves any case going before the court, so that wouldn't be a problem, it'll get approved. In 2002 the FISC denied him something, and that's when he started these illegal taps. I don't know what it was that he was denied, being as its all very secretive, but I'll find it. He chose to ignore the legal channels. His legal counsel can tell him anything, it doesn't make it legal.
|| Posted by scroff, December 21, 2005 09:26 AM ||