I think lying has officially taken over baseball as the national passtime. How is it possible that Bushco continues to insult our intelligence over and over? They can find a bullet (or 2 depending on which story you go by) for JFK and not one for him. I guess when your evil incarnate you can get away with anything.

Holy crap!!! There is absolutely *no* justification for having those wiretaps *before* 9/11!

Jeff: :angry: What the hell are you talking about? Maybe you should keep taking your medicine.

Bigfoot of San Diego

On NPR E. J. Dionne said the Republicans need another name for "Unitary Executive". There is one --- "Dictator", but the Republicans are using the Christian Right's "stealth candidate" tactic to hide their beliefs to get past the voters (remember the "compassionate Conservative" which George Bush appeared to be during his 2000 campaign(?)) and to weasel their way into power before the public becomes completely aware of how bad things are.

Now, with the revelation of pre-9/11 spying it becomes even harder for Bush & Co. to attempt to justify their criminality. But, at the same time they're likely to get Strip-Search-Sammie Alito onto the Supreme Court, so they'll be protected. It makes me wonder if the Bush family always managed to protect Junior (Dubya) during his youth by hiring the very best lawyers (similar to the brilliant John Roberts) and/or buying-off the very best judges (similar to the somewhat brilliant Sam Alito they're paying-off with a SCOTUS seat)?

Is America ready for George W. "Dubya" Bush as dictator? The way the mainstream media is covering this the public might never find out.

"[Bob] Barr [R-GA-7], an outspoken critic of the abuses of civil liberties contained in the USA Patriot Act critic who has devoted his post-Congressional years to defending the Bill of Rights, refers to the president's secret authorization of domestic wiretapping as 'an egregious violation of the electronic surveillance laws.'"

yes.

This is off this topic, but important. (Actualy all these topics are becoming more and more entangled!

Bob Ney is in talks to quit a key committee chairmanship

9-11 Changed EVERYTHING!!!

And THAT'S why we had to wiretap Americans on U.S. soil without warrants BEFORE 9-11. Er, um, fool me once, uh, can't get fooled again?

Bejammin075

Maybe it's because they knew 9-11 was going to happen and needed to see if it had been leaked out!

http://www.911truth.org/

#2

"Jeff: What the hell are you talking about? Maybe you should keep taking your medicine."

I'd like to know what the hell too? Maybe you can clarify where the issue is. I was trying to make a point that the more presidents that have made a huge positive impact on the country have been assassinated whereas the one's that abuse the power and bastardise the democratic process are free to walk.

As for the medecine remark, I took it this morning but you may want to lay off the crack. It seems to be affecting your ability to figure out who's on who's side.

OK, let's hear it, Ricky/Paul/MediumWrong: It was OK for Bush to break the law because we were at war. Now? What's your excuse? Expect no comment on this from them (conveniently).

All you rightwingers! Let's hear it from you, why it's OK for Bush to illegally wiretap BEFORE 9/11!!! Come on, all you hypocrites!!!

Go to a rightwing blog, where they unPatriotically give comfort and aid to the enemy, by condoning illegal wiretapping, breaking American law and the constitution! We don't give aid and comfort to the enemy here, we're the Patriots!

So, they were tapping before the reichstag fire?

I'll second the motion that they knew about the attacks

beforehand, they even watched them as they gambled

on the boats in Fl., and took the flying lessons,

probably paid for the plane fuel for their lessons to boot

nothing would surprise me anymore

Stay on THIS story! Don't let the Ney-story or anything else get you off the track. This, THIS, is the impeachment!

The BCFOL will lie until the truth is told and then they will spin. They believe that the combination of big money, big religion and big voting machines will keep them in power. Are there enough honest people (and prosecutors) to stop them? Are you listening, Arlen Specter?

COMMENT #1 [link]
...Jeff McTiernan fathers don't normally shot their sons!
where was ghb in 63...
on the grassy knoll...
maybe.

"Bush Authorized Domestic NSA Wiretaps PRIOR to 9/11"
sharon told him it would be ok and they would send some "art students" to paint what they witnessed and dick would cover his ass from the bunker.LOL

Maybe Bush bypassed the courts and FISA to use NSA spying and illegal wiretapping to determine the outcome of the presidential election? That's why he bypassed the courts, which approve 99.9% of wiretapping? Because the courts wouldn't allow his wiretap requests? Do we have a story here? Can you say, "Nixon"?

Gore to Address "Constitutional Crisis"
In a major address slated for delivery Monday in Washington, the former Vice President is expected to argue that the Bush administration has created a "Constitutional crisis" by acting without the authorization of the Congress and the courts to spy on Americans and otherwise abuse basic liberties.

Aides who are familiar with the preparations for the address say that Gore will frame his remarks in Constitutional language. The Democrat who beat Bush by more than 500,000 votes in the 2000 presidential election has agreed to deliver his remarks in a symbolically powerful location: the historic Constitution Hall of the Daughters of the American Revolution. But this will not be the sort of cautious, bureacratic speech for which Gore was frequently criticized during his years in the Senate and the White House.

So Cheney Says that 9-11 would not have happened if we had the capability to wiretap before. LYING LIARS every single one of them !

Hard to imagine how they'll talk their way out of this one. I'd expect Al Gore to revise his speech, once he's verified the information.

I totally agree with Jeff McT.
:crazy:
I have repeatedly demanded that my Representatives impeach Bush & Co. The excuse is that it won't work supposedly because of the number of votes each side can call up. I told them to just do it--more facts will come out of the woodwork once it is underway. Just bringing impeachment up will let loose a tidalwave.
The Dems are in bed with the Repubs. There IS no other explanation. Both parties are totally corrupt.
The Republicans impeached Clinton over a sexual fling.
Bush is light years worse. The a-wipe lies to start war, & admits he is snooping on us---defying the Constitution---& no matter WHAT we tell our mealy-mouthed, two-faced Representatives---they REFUSE to do what they're told & impeach him!.
They are supposed to be representing the will of the people!
If this continues, it will be time for true patriots to revolt, because the government is too corrupt to be trusted to carry out the Constitutional Rights of the People.
For real, people.

I've watched every bloody minute of the Alito confirmation, have gone from calm to glib to terrified to agog to Zen, and I can smell how he will be taken down. Lip zipped against trolls. Just buck up! It's gonna get good.

What time is Gore's speech on Monday? Are we pestering our local stations for coverage? Are we yelling our heads off out there? Damn! There's no way I could get to DC by Monday.

I need a wealthy husband! WHY didn't I listen to my mother!

Great point, Laura #18 - The Big Dick was most certainly caught in a blatant lie this time. He wasn't under oath, true, but what does it take for the MSM to be outraged? His feet should be held to the fire on this one! I'd love to hear him claim to have been "out of the loop."

Speaking of MSM, not much of any uptick of coverage in this story over the past 24 hours. Charitably, they may be working to verify things. Maybe not.

Another aspect of this is that they do not process the information in a coherent manner. In other words they are incompetent as well as criminal.

Pakistan is outraged at an act of war the neoCon Bush administration just committed, based on "intelligence" information.

So not only do they get vast amounts of information, once the get it they misplace the reality somehow, and bomb an innocent village in a country that "helped in the war on terror". (link here).

Everyone notice: No rightwinger comments about this from Paul, MediumWrong, or Ricky. They pick and choose which articles to comment on. They have no leg to stand on with this one.

It's people like them who need to realize that the Bush administration is screwing ALL Americans. It won't stop, unless people like Paul, MediumWrong, Ricky, and rightwing radio shows like LimBOOB, O'LIEly, and Hannity, say, "Enough is enough!".

Bush Could Seize Absolute Control Of U.S. Government

:confused: Didn't Cheney say that NSA spying before 9/11 would have prevented the attacks?!?!

Farmers have been the targets of spying from American spy satellites (link here).

Is there any area of the American citizenry that has not been spied upon?

Well, well, YET another Bush lie exposed. Why am I not surprised.

Good luck nuts! Another good one to impeach Bush.

Paul: I don't understand your point of view. Do you say that it's OK for Bush to illegally wiretap before 9/11? Yes or No.

Let me rephrase Paul's comment...

"It's OK for a president to illegally wiretap, even before 9/11, as long as it's a president from the party I side with, the Republicans. I put the Republican party before America."

Paul: "Clinton lying to congress about a blowjob was impeachable, even though it did not oppose my civil liberties, nor break the constitution. It was personal, casual sex, that did not affect me or anyone else. But, Clinton should've been impeached, because I am a Republican, and I put party ahead of America."

"I am a hypocrite, not to be taken seriously. Because when you really examine my arguements, they do not make sense, and are pure partisan nonsense."

Paul, or any other rightwinger

IMPEACHMENT - It's not just for blow jobs anymore!

did any of you read the report? it says twice the forth amendment would be observed. where is bush authorizing wiretaps in there?

ducky's got a point. That document, insofar as I was able to read it, which wasn't comprehensively, isn't authorization to wiretap, but a statement of the future direction they intended to pursue. They express the need to upgrade from the analog FISA check world to the digital age. They leave in language about reporting to congressional bodies, and staying within the 4th amendment, but this is NOT a memo telling the NSA to go ahead and wiretap without a warrant.

This is showing that the * administration wanted to embed itself into the digital web (mesh?) from Day One, but not that it was wiretapping without FISA before 9/11. There is an executive order mentioned a lot, but it was the one that set up the departments inside the NSA, not an order to wiretap illeaglly. We already know they WANTED to do it before they did it. They tried to get FISA approval for their thing, but kept getting turned down. So * just did it anyway. This document really just bolsters the case about him WANTING to upgrade the system to match their need to bend the 4th Amendment in the digital age.

King George doesn't have time to bother ramming through more of his unconstitutional legislation in times like these. If these guys were more competent and less arrogant, all this wiretapping would have been made "legal" inside a couple months of taking office, or CERTAINLY after 9/11, but this isn't evidence of pre-9/11 illegal wiretapping.

I should state that it could strengthen the suspicion that they were doing it already, trying to get authorization after-the-fact, and then resorting to the Big Excuse, but unless someone with younger eyes can go through and cite the specific place, it does not state that they were to wiretap in any illegal manner.

Okay. A lengthy search for cheaters strong enough to augment my contact lenses enabled me to read the whole thing again, and it is a report from the NSA to the incoming * administration that pretty much outlines what had been going on at the NSA, and what it wanted to go on at the NSA in the future. IT DOES NOT STATE THAT IT *DID* LIVE ON THE NETWORK, only that it wanted to, felt it must in order to be able to keep up with the evolving world of electronic threats AND to be effective in it --- defensive and offensive missions.

Last sentence, page 32: "But senior leadership must understand that today's and tomorrow's mission will demand a powerful, permanent presence on a global telecommunications network that will host the 'protected' communications of Americans as well as the targeted communications of adversaries." They're telling the new administration that they want this capability AND that it will require legislative accommodation.

Nowhere on the document, as it exists in the link provided in this post, is there any proof of, or even talk of, illegal wiretapping. It has ZERO implications of anyone in the administration, and only the vaguest sense that Wolfowitz had been revamping it for future capabilities... having been in a quasi-closed-for-renovations mode for a little while.

There may be whistleblowers giving good information, but this document won't hang anyone.

thank you agent99.

we appear to be on opposite ends of the political spectrum, but it warms my heart to see someone actually read the thing rather than take it at face value because someone else told them what it said.

thanks for that, and, for making me not feel stupid for not finding where the smoking gun was. i thought since brad said it was there, it must be there. maybe he can shed more light on this, or do more homework.

Well, from skimming the article (not the declassified document), the "whistleblower" is saying that Bush 'personally' encouraged records to be kept "in violation of the law", and people at the NSA did just that. The document, as pointed out (though I've not read it, so I'm presuming the readers are correct), says they wanted the "ability" to spy on [Constitutionaly] "protected" persons, but that they wouldn't "keep those records", or would redact the info that needed to be removed to keep those persons protected.

The telling bit is, AFTER 9/11 BushCo told the NSA to turn over "otherwise supposed to be protected information" to "other agencies".. but the lawyers at the NSA "destroyed the documents instead".. That is, Bush encouraged the NSA to keep illegal records, and they did.. it was when the shit hit the fan and those illegal records were going to be "made public" that the NSA backed out on Bush and destroyed (rightfully so) all those records.

I'd guess part of why Bush decided not to bother with the court was he was pissed that his "cover story" and "back up proof" for 9/11 was destroyed.. that is, they had patsies all set up and the NSA fucked them.. So they blamed 19 Arabs, 15 of which were from Saudi, 7 (or 9, depending on the source) of which were ALIVE AFTER THEY FLEW PLANES INTO THE TOWERS.. Hmm.. strange.. interesting..

Anyway, the "smoking gun" isn't in the declassified document.. the document simply shows that it was made policy -before- 9/11, with the aproval of BushCo, to illegally gather info on average citizens.. but the "premise" was, "we won't really use it, we'll just collect it".. Which begs the question.. if you aren't going to use it, why collect it? The smoking gun is the whistleblower who claims (and the smoking part is if he can prove any of his claims) Bush said "sure, go ahead and start those illegal gatherings..", then later said "hey.. know those illegal records you have? send them over to Fred at the FBI and Tommy at the CIA, would ya?".. The only thing saving Bush is that the NSA destroyed the docs instead. Get the people who did the destroying to testify under oath that the policy was to gather info illegally, and it's a done deal.

At least, that's what I get from a cursory reading of this issue.. We'd have to wait and see what the lawyers and judges come up with before we know more

sexwe opowiadania lesbijek ## sexwe orno