Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Here is all the SMACKDOWN you need for RW'ers on the Bush spygate thing...

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Harper_is_Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 09:34 PM
Original message
Here is all the SMACKDOWN you need for RW'ers on the Bush spygate thing...
Edited on Thu Dec-22-05 09:52 PM by Harper_is_Bush
Of course, you're being faced with the "Clinton and Carter did it too" BS. How to respond??

Point them to the Hardball explanation of the difference:
http://www.canofun.com/blog/videos/mitchellclintoncarte...

But don't leave it there, because they'll just ignore it.

Explain it to them LIKE THEY'RE RETARDS!!!

Quote the portion of the Clinton and Carter executive orders
(found HERE and HERE respectively)
which constitutes the difference:

"if the Attorney General makes the certifications required by that Section."

and also quote the explanation of the "certifications required by that section":

"there is no substantial likelihood that the surveillance will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party;"


On top of this undeniable proof, mention the fact that Congress is making a big fuss over this in a bipartisan manner AND a federal judge has resigned over it. Do they really believe such things are going on simply because it's Bush??? :)


Don't worry about them not bending over and aquiescing, they won't. Don't worry about it, as they scurry away quietly they'll know they've been owned.

Impeachment is on it's way, no question.

:headbang:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DS1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 09:35 PM
Response to Original message
1. top it off with a solemn
"I used to feel safe"

:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Harper_is_Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 09:39 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. amen
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hwmnbn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 09:45 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. and then end with a classy......
yet insulting Shakespearean riff....

http://www.zianet.com/insightanalytical/insult.htm

Turn around with a flourish and walk triumphantly away. That'll drive them nuts!! :evilgrin:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hello_Kitty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 10:48 PM
Response to Reply #5
16. Thou fobbing, crook-pated, bum-bailey!!
I like it! :applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Amonester Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 09:41 PM
Response to Original message
3. Keep_this_post_kicked_up! Thanks. K & R - eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Harper_is_Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 09:49 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. Thank You! Hope it's useful. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rg302200 Donating Member (495 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 09:43 PM
Response to Original message
4. Kick n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Harper_is_Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 09:56 PM
Response to Original message
7. smackup the smackdown....... n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SkiGuy Donating Member (451 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 09:57 PM
Response to Original message
8. Thank you very much for posting this!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
napi21 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 09:59 PM
Response to Original message
9. I have gotten this excuse. I don't know how to respond.
All the 911 hijackers were in the US for quite a while. Some stayed with people who lived here. What if they had direct communication with Bin Laden about the 911 attacks and their plans and we could have listened into thos calle, even though they originated in the US? We could have stopped the attack!

Now I happen to think the best intl we have couldn't have found any of those conversations. If they had stumbled across one, they probably would have been squashed like several of the FBI info was, but how do I respond to something like that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Harper_is_Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 10:08 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. That one is simple....I should have put it in my post...
Edited on Thu Dec-22-05 10:09 PM by Harper_is_Bush
They can wiretap people in the USA (and could have wiretapped the 911 hijackers) by going to the FISA court and asking to do so.

And of course, the argument that they needed to act quick is also moot because they were allowed to begin wiretaps without going to the court so long as they went to the court sometime in the following 3 days (72 hours).

The court almost NEVER said now. I don't have the stats at my fingertips...it has been something like only 5 times out of 19,000 requests did they refuse.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
electropop Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 11:46 PM
Response to Reply #10
20. The only reason to bypass FISA is the list of targets.
Not terrorists, but Democrats, freedom-lovers, moral people, you know, all those pains-in-the-ass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
librechik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 10:16 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. the FBI can do that with a regular wiretap warrant
Edited on Thu Dec-22-05 10:20 PM by librechik
in fact they did.

They knew about the attack. One of their informants was LIVING with two of the highjackers in San Diego. They play dumb, but do you think they really didn't know?Given the way they treated Colleen Rowley's request for a FISA? ome on.

They were warned numerous times by people with more credibility than an anonymous voice on a cellphone. They were told who would do it and how and how soon. The heads of intelligence in at least 3 nations warned us specifically. That didn't help them stop it. Do you think "the" phone call would have been the magic trick?

We aren't a democracy anymore if something as trivial as a "war on terror" can allow the president to act like a dictator. When that happens they have won. We didn't do it in WWII, a real war, why would we do it now for these greedy fools?

Maybe they didn't want to stop it. Think about that. They have had their way in every way since then. Think that is a concidence?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 10:20 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. Just more for the Bushoilinis to ignore.
:shrug: ... along with FBI and PDB warnings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BelgianMadCow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 10:11 PM
Response to Original message
11. Some more goodies :
Edited on Thu Dec-22-05 10:11 PM by BelgianMadCow
WHAT could possibly justify NOT using a court which, in secret, retroactively allows you to get warrants and has almost never refused a warrant (4 out of 19000)?

Speed (as Bush said, faster, quicker) needed in the 9/11 changed world is no argument, given the 72 hours of free tapping.

The "war" powers of a president do NOT trump the amendements to the constitution.

We had quite a bit of fun with those & more in this thread :

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
napi21 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 10:30 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. Yea, and there was another story Victoria Toensing told today
on Hardball I think. She said these FISA requests were very cumbersome. They're 500 pages long!!!!

Now, I'm not an Attorney, and I sure don't know the requirements for a FISA warrant, but 500 pages wounds like BS to me!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Harper_is_Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 10:36 PM
Response to Original message
15. Can't edit anymore..... here's another critical one to share with them....
Don't forget to direct them to the previous comments about wiretaps uttered by thier beloved POS here:

http://canofun.com/blog/viddate.asp

Countdown rules!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Exit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 10:52 PM
Response to Original message
17. "Impeachment is on its way, no question"
I really, really, really hope you're right!

Here's the FIRST thing we'll hear from the puffed and polished TV whores: "Isn't America really still recovering from the last president's impeachment... wouldn't it weaken the country to do this again SO SOON??"

You'll know when the first TV asshole makes that comment, because you'll be able to hear my scream all the way from where I am, to wherever in the country you happen to be.

I DON'T CARE IF WE IMPEACH EVERY DAMN ONE OF THEM!!! IF THEY'RE AS BAD AS THIS, THEY NEED IT!!! AND WE NEED TO CONVICT THIS TIME!!! AND I WANT PRISON TIME!!! AND FOR TREASON, THE PENALTY SHOULD BE EXECUTION!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
garthranzz Donating Member (983 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 11:01 PM
Response to Original message
18. For those of us who have difficulty with the video links
Can you summarize the refutation? Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Harper_is_Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-23-05 07:33 AM
Response to Reply #18
24. The first link containing the refutation is summarized in the topic post.
The Executive Orders (which are also linked in the topic post and which you should have no problem getting to) of Clinton and Carter both had the same qualifier. I quoted it in the topic post.

This qualifier is what makes these PUBLIC executive orders completely different than Bushs SECRET and seemingly illegal orders. Again, read topic post.

The second video link I put in later is a compilation of Bush on many occasions since he began secret spying telling Americans that they don't wiretap without a court order.
Currently Melman and the rest of the rightwing BS'ers are claiming that the best known example of this which was highlighted on Hardball was the President talking ONLY about the patiot act. That is perhaps legally sellable in a "I didn't have sex with that woman" sort of way....but all these other occasions Hardball dug up are more broad and unspecific conversations and speeches and he continues to repeat the same claim.
Good luck with your video efforts, you're missing a lot if you can't watch canofun.com vids.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
garthranzz Donating Member (983 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 11:35 PM
Response to Original message
19. I saw it - wow! A reporter who actually reports, instead of parrots
She did what the authors of "All the President's Spin" prove journalists haven't done - separate fact from fiction, give stories a context, and do more than play parrot of he said/she said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Harper_is_Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-23-05 07:47 AM
Response to Reply #19
25. Yes, she did well with the facts.
Hardball gets a bad rap around here, but they've given us some of our best moments.

cheers to them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
texpatriot2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-23-05 12:28 AM
Response to Original message
21. Yes, impeachment is on the march now. n.t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hwmnbn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-23-05 02:49 AM
Response to Original message
22. kicked......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemonFighterLives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-23-05 03:11 AM
Response to Original message
23. Thanks Harper is*
I may need this.
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Harper_is_Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-23-05 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #23
27. ur welcome.
see even more info below.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Harper_is_Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-23-05 06:11 PM
Response to Original message
26. HERE IS THE ACTUAL LINK ON 50 U.S.C. 1802(a) defines "certifications"
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode50/usc_sec...

(a)
(1) Notwithstanding any other law, the President, through the Attorney General, may authorize electronic surveillance without a court order under this subchapter to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year if the Attorney General certifies in writing under oath that

<snip>

(B) there is no substantial likelihood that the surveillance will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party; and


DON'T LET THOSE PUKES DISTRACT YOU BY OBSESSING ON THE "WITHOUT A COURT ORDER" PORTION, THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHY THIS ACT IS NOT A PRECEDENT FOR BUSH.

IT'S BECAUSE HE SPIED ON AMERICANS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Harper_is_Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-24-05 03:45 PM
Response to Original message
28. Xmas eve bump!
And by shortening the word "Christmas" into "Xmas" please realize I mean no offence to those who would shorten the word "Christmas" into "Christ" and thereby attempt to take posession of this wholly secular and commercial holiday. You lost, Walmart won!!

Merry XMAS!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Aug 21st 2014, 09:31 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC