Top 12 media myths on the Bush admin Spy Scandal (from MediaMatters)

[LynneSin]

Since this is such a long read I'm going to post what the 12 myths are and you can check out MediaMatters to find out what the truth really is!

http://mediamatters.org/items/200512240002

Top 12 media myths and falsehoods on the Bush administration's spying scandal

1. Timeliness necessitated bypassing the FISA court
   
2. Congress was adequately informed of -- and approved -- the administration's actions
   
3. Warrantless searches of Americans are legal under the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act
   
4. Clinton, Carter also authorized warrantless searches of U.S. citizens
   
5. Only Democrats are concerned about the Bush administration's secret surveillance
   
6. Debate is between those supporting civil liberties and those seeking to prevent terrorism
   
7. Bin Laden phone leak demonstrates how leak of spy operation could damage national security
   
8. Gorelick testimony proved Clinton asserted "the same authority" as Bush
   
9. Aldrich Ames investigation is example of Clinton administration bypassing FISA regulations
   
10. Clinton administration conducted domestic spying
    
11. Moussaoui case proved that FISA probable-cause standard impedes terrorism probes
    
12. A 2002 FISA review court opinion makes clear that Bush acted legally
    

Please take time to read this great article and learn the truth about these 12 myths. I'm going to read this before I head to visit my family because I know some republicans will be there and try to use some of these myths in order to gain support for warrentless spying

Happy holidays!

[Cooley Hurd]

1. K&R - I'm going to print this out and give it to every repug relative...

...I see today and tomorrow!:thumbsup:

[disndat]

17. Here is something else

you could take to your Repug relatives, a picture of the Chimp wearing his wireless magnetic induction hearing device, his famous, debate 'back bulge' at last week's press conference: www.democrats.com.

[The Doctor.]

24. No, it may be something else entirely...

http://66.246.199.83/politics/2004/10/bush_bulge_is_potus_hiding_a_s.html

It may actually be a wearable defibrillator.

Besides, it was never a 'scandal' in the first place. Just speculation that Bush needed some help answering questions and making points. Even if he was wired with a receiver, it sure didn't help.

The issue of whether or not he needs a life vest is interesting, but it is a piffle in comparison to the massive infarctions, er... infractions he has committed.

[sduncang]

2. Worthwhile read

Thanks.

[rpannier]

3. Quality Post

Thanks

[Rhiannon12866]

4. Excellent! Thank you! K&R. :-) n/t

[mahatmakanejeeves]

5. Just in time for those family dinners.

Make sure to get your presents first; then anger your relatives.

[FormerDittoHead]

10. You're RIGHT! I'm going to print the article out and take it with me!

I'm sure there will be those who will be parroting the LIES...

[The Backlash Cometh]

6. Wow! We're being very pro-active about countering their talking points.

We've got him by the short-hairs, don't we? Bush and the Repubs are going down.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

18. It'll be the Fourth of July

and Christmas, all on the same day.

[DemReadingDU]

7. Thank you!

printing this article now

[Eugene]

8. kick and recommend

:kick:

[FormerDittoHead]

9. Please debunk another talking point I just heard...

According to the local Clearchannel station, the NYT "had" this story for a year and "sat" on it wanting to find the right time to "spring" it on the public to nullify the speeches that B* has been making.

Considering that everything ELSE he said was practically a transcript of the "top 12" listed above, I'm wondering if someone following this story closer (like, we need THIS to impeach him? I stopped at the lies over WMDs) could shoot what I'm sure is another lie.

...editing for spelling

[Junkdrawer]

11. Only Rush could take a NYT editor's spike of a Bush scandal pre-election..

and turn it into a left wing conspiracy.

[Cults4Bush]

13. The base of that meme is "liberal media" NYT does not = Liberal.

Point out Judy the Super Shill. Friedman also is a super shill. Point out their incredibly biased prewar reporting and during as well. So bad they had to issue an apology.

Then go for the blatantly obvious why wouldn't they use it in the elections when it could have shaved 4 points off Bush handing Kerry a victory?

Go for the throat after that and call this talking point a right wing extremist conspiracy.

[ClintonTyree]

16. Really, if the NYT wanted to use it for political purposes........

they would have come out with it right before the '04 election, which they COULD have and SHOULD have, but didn't. No, they sat on it for a year and released it now. For what purpose? :shrug: Whatever it is it's certainly NOT political. They could have crucified bush with this last year.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

22. Well I think it turned out that the NYT had the article BEFORE

the Election. I'll see if I can track it down. If true, it would have done alot more damage back then. why wait till now?

edit to add
found it

The New York Times first debated publishing a story about secret eavesdropping on Americans as early as last fall, before the 2004 presidential election.

But the newspaper held the story for more than a year and only revealed the secret wiretaps last Friday, when it became apparent a book by one of its reporters was about to break the news, according to journalists familiar with the paper's internal discussions.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-media20dec20,1,3657594.story?coll=la-headlines-nation&ctrack=1&cset=true

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

25. If the Times had this before the election

(which I've heard they had) and they were partisan in favor of the Dems, they would have released this around the end of October before the election.

[wryter2000]

12. Thanks for pointing this out

I imagine we're all going to need it in the months ahead. All the way to next November...

[Joe Chi Minh]

14. They're not myths, are they?

They're lies. The Bushcos' "ever present help in time of trouble...".

[ClintonTyree]

15. Bookmarked........

thanks. I intend to read this when I can study it properly. Perhaps I'll make a copy to carry around with me to put the Con bastards I'm constantly coming in contact with in their places. ;)

[PurpleChez]

19. Invaluable resource. Thanks!

[scarabus]

20. Two wrongs never make a right

Look—

Even if the "Carter did it," "Clinton did it" bullshit were correct—which it isn't!!!—that wouldn't make Bush's crimes right. Ethically, morally, legally, constitutionally, partisanship is irrelevant. If it's right, it's right; if it's wrong, it's wrong; if it's legal, it's legal; if it isn't legal, then it isn't—doesn't matter squat which party does it. The law is no respecter of persons or of parties. Furthermore, even Realpolitic practically, the finger-pointing argument is stupid. These "maroons" are arguing as if their own partisan extremists will be in power forwever. They won't. The authoritarian powers you endorse for use against your domestic enemies will, at the next election, be handed over to those enemies for use against you. The Golden Rule applies, with a slight twist: Use against others only those measures which you would be willing to have others use against you.

Doesn't matter how high you're riding at any particular moment, bozos. What goes up, goes down. What goes around, comes around. The fascist, dictatorial powers you grant to your Fuehrer, will be passed along to his democratic successor. To put it brutally, what you do to those who believe in democratic freedom will in turn be done to you who believe in fascist dictatorship. What goes around, comes around. The Golden Rule really does have continuing relevance.

[politicaholic]

31. Very good point...

Republicans like to say "Clinton, Clinton, Clinton..." like a car alarm in the middle of the night whenever there's a scandal. Well, Clinton is no longer president and there is already a precident set here...by their beloved Nixon, suckers.

Just wait until the news on how the Bush administration is currently paying Pakistani and Jordanian based terrorist organizations NOT to attack US targets by diverting funds earmarked for Iraq breaks. Worse than Iran-Contra? You bet your ass.

Welcome to DU!!!
:hi:

[The Doctor.]

21. After you shoot down the 'Republican's' BS...

Be sure to tell us all about it!

[JohnnyCougar]

23. Media Matters is such a valuable resource.

I love that site!

[sweetm2475]

26. Media Matters Rocks!

:yourock:

[Higans]

27. 'With Eastasia. Good. And Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia?

[Old Vet]

28. These are the posts I enjoy,Thanks.........Must read,

[Bushies gotta go]

29. Thank you Lynne

I was just able to debunk a neo con post on another forum by using this. He started off with "Clinton and Carter" and quoted the Drudge crap. Probably won't make a diff, since he'll be too stupid to understand it all.

[Maestro]

30. Great stuff!

I used in responding to my freeper Uncle.

[Evergreen Emerald]

32. Good post.

I also enjoyed the comments after the article. Lots of people attempting to justify *'s actions. It makes me wonder if they would have been as quick to jump to the defense of a democratic administration or is this just our side against your side with no boundaries (not even constitutional boundaries).