You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Congressman Conyers:Washington Post Misses the Point on NSA Ruling [View All]

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 (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
cal04 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-18-06 10:11 PM
Original message
Congressman Conyers:Washington Post Misses the Point on NSA Ruling
Advertisements [?]


As you probably have heard, yesterday was a landmark in the effort to protect our civil liberties from the Administration’s ever increasing power. A federal judge in Detroit ruled that the warrantless eavesdropping conducting by the NSA was unconstitutional, a conclusion shared by the vast majority of legal scholars outside of the Bush Administration.

However, I am concerned about how some of the press is reporting on the decision. Compare the New York Times with the Washington Post. The President has been struck down again for overreaching in the so-called war on terror without a legal basis, yet the Washington Post editorial board dismisses this monumental moment to complain about style over substance.

In fact, they acuse Judge Diggs of being "long on throat clearing sound bites." They go on to cite only two sentences. Yes, two sentences out of 44 pages. As a lawyer myself, and ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, I can assure the editorial board that most judges use rhetoric and it has nothing to do with the strength of their legal reasoning.

I am also surprised that after clearly denouncing the program as illegal as early as January of this year, and noting how tenuous the Administration's arguments were, that they are now surprised to hear a judge agree. Suddenly, the fight over illegal wiretaps is no longer "frivolous."

Of course the government "vigorously disputes" the ruling. That is the definition of litigation and does not confer merit to their argument.

And they could vigorously dispute that the sky is blue. It doesn't mean that the Washington Post has to report on it or give it so much merit just for trying to appear fair and balanced.

http://www.conyersblog.us/

Ruling for the Law
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/18/opinion/18fri1.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
A Judicial Misfire
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/17/AR2006081701540_pf.html
The President's End Run
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/22/AR2006012200779.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) 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