Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

WaPo editorial: Warrantless Surrender

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 (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-05-07 11:59 PM
Original message
WaPo editorial: Warrantless Surrender
Edited on Mon Aug-06-07 12:05 AM by ProSense

Warrantless Surrender

Congress is stampeded into another compromise of Americans' rights.

Monday, August 6, 2007; Page A16

THE DEMOCRATIC-led Congress, more concerned with protecting its political backside than with safeguarding the privacy of American citizens, left town early yesterday after caving in to administration demands that it allow warrantless surveillance of the phone calls and e-mails of American citizens, with scant judicial supervision and no reporting to Congress about how many communications are being intercepted. To call this legislation ill-considered is to give it too much credit: It was scarcely considered at all. Instead, it was strong-armed through both chambers by an administration that seized the opportunity to write its warrantless wiretapping program into law -- or, more precisely, to write it out from under any real legal restrictions.

Administration officials, backed up by their Republican enablers in Congress, argued that they were being dangerously hamstrung in their ability to collect foreign-to-foreign communications by suspected terrorists that happen to transit through the United States. The problem is that while no serious person objects to intercepting foreign-to-foreign communications, what the administration sought -- and what it managed to obtain -- allows much more than foreign-to-foreign contacts. The government will now be free to intercept any communications believed to be from outside the United States (including from Americans overseas) that involve "foreign intelligence" -- not just terrorism. It will be able to monitor phone calls and e-mails of U.S. citizens or residents without warrants -- unless the subject is the "primary target" of the surveillance. Instead of having the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court ensure that surveillance is being done properly, with monitoring of Americans minimized, that job would be up to the attorney general and the director of national intelligence. The court's role is reduced to that of rubber stamp.

This is as reckless as it was unnecessary. Democrats had presented a compromise plan that would have permitted surveillance to proceed, but with court review and an audit by the Justice Department's inspector general, to be provided to Congress, about how many Americans had been surveilled. Democrats could have stuck to their guns and insisted on their version. Instead, nervous about being blamed for any terrorist attack and eager to get out of town, they accepted the unacceptable. Most Democrats opposed the measure, but enough (16 in the Senate, 41 in the House) went with Republicans to allow it to pass, and the leadership enabled that result.

There is one small saving grace here: These sweeping new powers expire after six months. Of course, having dropped the audit requirement, lawmakers won't have a good way of knowing how many Americans had their communications intercepted. The administration will no doubt again play the national security card. Democratic leaders say they want to move quickly to fix the damage. If only we could be more confident that they won't get rolled again.


So, by amending FISA, Congress has legalized that which was illegal, leaving us with no recourse at all.

Immunity for Bush!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 12:06 AM
Response to Original message
1. Kick! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AndyTiedye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 12:10 AM
Response to Original message
2. The Democratic Party Wouldn't Be so WEAK if the MSM Didn't Always Kick Us When We're Down
Edited on Mon Aug-06-07 12:10 AM by AndyTiedye
and the WASHINGTON POST is among the worst offenders.



Kicked and recommended anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tesha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 06:16 AM
Response to Reply #2
12. You know, after a while, this sort of argument pales.
After all, *WE ARE THE MOJORITY IN CONGRESS THESE DAYS*
and while it's tought to get a bill passed over Republican
filibusters, it's no problem at all to simply vote "NO"
on a piece of shitty legislation.

But we can't even do that, can we? And the WaPo had
no votes at all on the issue.

Tesha
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AndyTiedye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #12
17. Bush** Is Obviously Still Able to Conrol Congress
The threat of having every TV network anchor condemning you as "soft on terrorism" is very potent among Dems in reddish states.

They have also mounted coordinated attacks between Gonzales' DOJ, the NSA's wiretappers, and the media to destroy Democrats they wanted gone.
They got away with it. They will do more of this next year.

They also have other means at their disposal that require nothing from the MSM except its silence.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hydra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 12:10 AM
Response to Original message
3. God I hate reading Wapo normally
But this hits the nail on the head. Squarely.

If the dems were looking to score political points, they're going to be surprised at the storm brewing, I think.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberalmuse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 12:15 AM
Response to Original message
4. It's a Fucking Disgrace...
and I'm still in a foul mood about it. The truth is, we don't have a Democratic majority in Congress, thanks to Republocrats like Lieberman and the millstone that is the last vestiges of the "Southern Democrat". Why the hell can't we get more true FDR/JFK liberals in office?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rageneau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 12:21 AM
Response to Original message
5. Has the WaPo forgotten that they put Bush in office?
Sure, I'm glad they're finally speaking out for liberty, but I fear it may be too late.

Like the rest of the MSM, it's the WaPo's fault we're in the mess we're in. They functioned as professional liars in the guise of journalists -- and have done so ever since Clinton came to town.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 12:25 AM
Response to Original message
6. "nervous about being blamed for any terrorist attack"
So, Congress believes that a failure to give Smirk & Sneer what they demand will result in a terrorist attack.

I wonder how many are LIHOP and how many are MIHOP.

MOST are cowards ... and outlaws.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kagemusha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 12:45 AM
Response to Reply #6
9. I've come to disagree with your view, actually.
I don't see how they can believe that a failure to give Bush what he wants will result in a terrorist attack. Because why would Bush do a single thing different, legal or otherwise, here? It doesn't fit Bush's view of executive power, which amounts to his core principles.

All I see is that they're afraid of being BLAMED.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nutmegger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 12:30 AM
Response to Original message
7. I'm still bitter and disgusted.
And it doesn't matter that it lasts six months. It will be extended.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bleever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 12:40 AM
Response to Original message
8. Recommended, with some
sad reflection on how the gravity of the influence of the editorial influence of the long-established papers of record has been diminished.

And yet: every day is a new day.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 01:32 AM
Response to Original message
10. like the new york times the post finally realized
that bush is a monster? they demonetized everyone who opposed the president now that are upset because the democrats did`t stop him? why did`t the newspaper stop him years ago? i guess they were to busy cheering him on to victory..

in 6 months we will see what the post has to say and whether they will back the dems..i`m betting they won`t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rose Siding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 06:50 AM
Response to Reply #10
14. Hiatt would have beat up the dems either way
It's just chance that makes him right this time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
C_U_L8R Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 05:30 AM
Response to Original message
11. Unwarranted spinelessness
have these dems provided any reasonable or
contitutional rationale for passing this heinous act???

What possible explanation could there be ???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 06:24 AM
Response to Original message
13. I will always read WaPo with a jaundiced eye... When they seem
to agree, I suspect them of some rope-a-dope move...

(and that is my reaction to this piece)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 09:08 AM
Response to Original message
15. It's possible that the media would have blamed the Dems either way, but
whose fault is it that 57 Dems voted for this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lfairban Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #15
19. I love the title . . .
. . . of that thread: "How centrists could they possibly be when they are to the right of John Ashcroft?"

My prediction is that by the end of 2008, we will welcome the Arab Terrorists as liberators, because the Islamic Republic they will bring us will be preferable to the fascist state created by the Republican/Democratic triangulation, just like the did in Iraq when we came to bring them freedom and democracy.



:sarcasm:

(just in case)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tesha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 06:24 AM
Response to Reply #19
25. Not 2008. But eventually...
Edited on Tue Aug-07-07 06:26 AM by Tesha
Not 2008. But when you consider how closely alligned
are the overall authoritarian worldviews of Funda-
mentalist Christians, Islamic Fundamentalists, and
Jewish Fundamentalists,we really need to realize
that if they ever overcame their willingness to wage
war over holy books, they'd rapidly unify and attempt
to stomp all there rest of us out of existence, using
any means they deemed necessary, certainly
*INCLUDING* nuclear, biological, and chemical
weapons.

And much of America would ignorantly welcome it in
the name of "Law and Order".

This is why one of the most important books of our time
remains The Handmaid's Tale.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Handmaid%27s_Tale



Not in 2008. But 2020?

Tesha
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 09:14 AM
Response to Original message
16. Shame on our nation and shame on congress. Pitiful performance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrCoffee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 01:16 PM
Response to Original message
18. k&r!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 02:46 PM
Response to Original message
20. Depressed kick.
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earthside Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 06:08 PM
Response to Original message
21. Today's Democracy Now!
I cannot stress this enough ... Watch today's Democracy Now!

The entire hour (after headlines) with Glenn Greenwald and Marjorie Cohn on the FISA law change.

Democracy Now!

Or see a replay on FSTV or Link-TV this evening.

We have been so betrayed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
moondust Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 06:27 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. Agree!
Good coverage of this abomination.

I had suspected that Congress' stamp of approval on this garbage would make it impossible to prosecute Bushco officials previously involved in these ILLEGAL activites. These guests confirmed my suspicion.

:smoke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lfairban Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 08:33 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. Not exactly.
Don't you mean, "involved in these previously ILLEGAL activities"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexia Wheaton Donating Member (100 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 09:21 PM
Response to Original message
24. Will the Democrats ever stand up to George Bush?
I wouldn't bet my money on it. I'd go broke.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 06:26 AM
Response to Original message
26. Will they grow spines in 6 months? Maybe we should send
vitamins and food supplements to their offices.
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 May 02nd 2024, 11:23 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) 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