Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Holy Fuck Me Harder! [View all]ProSense
(116,464 posts)181. Maybe
"Way back in 2006...Hmmm, she held a different view then, one which I agreed with her. Now, not so much. "
...you shouldn't jump on the bandwagon of people who make stupid accusations because they have no idea what they're talking about (http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024353639#post151).
Here's a clue. I railed against Bush's illegal spying on Americans. Actual spying. This past comment
has been posted several times as an attempted "gotcha" to create the impression of a change in opinion, but it had nothing to do with metadata.
For example, this quote, "Spying on Americans was, is and will still be illegal," is about illegal warrantless wiretapping, and that was what Bush was accuse of.
The program was in fact a wide range of covert surveillance activities authorized by President Bush in the aftermath of 9/11. At that time, White House officials, led by Vice President Dick Cheney, had become convinced that FISA court procedures were too cumbersome and time-consuming to permit U.S. intelligence and law-enforcement agencies to quickly identify possible Qaeda terrorists inside the country. (Cheney's chief counsel, David Addington, referred to the FISA court in one meeting as that "obnoxious court," according to former assistant attorney general Jack Goldsmith.) Under a series of secret orders, Bush authorized the NSA for the first time to eavesdrop on phone calls and e-mails between the United States and a foreign country without any court review. The code name for the NSA collection activitiesunknown to all but a tiny number of officials at the White House and in the U.S. intelligence communitywas "Stellar Wind."
http://web.archive.org/web/20081216011008/http://www.newsweek.com/id/174601/output/print
http://web.archive.org/web/20081216011008/http://www.newsweek.com/id/174601/output/print
Note, this is inside the U.S. and involves bypassing the FISA court to actually "eavesdrop."
Republicans fought to make that legal, and succeeded in doing so before Democrats were able to force an expiration of the law.
From a post last year:
There have been a number of media reports using the same Obama quote to basically claim that he once called out Bush, but then embraced the policy. They are intentionally conflating a quote about the PAA with his position on the 2008 FISA amendments, which he voted for. They are not the same thing. The PAA was a Republican effort to absolve Bush.
While the article mentions that Obama voted against the Protect America Act (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00309), there is no mention of the fact that the Act expired in early 2008.
Senator Mitch McConnell introduced the act on August 1, 2007, during the 110th United States Congress. On August 3, it was passed in the Senate with an amendment, 6028 (record vote number 309).[12] On August 4, it passed the House of Representatives 227-183 (roll number 836).[12] On August 5, it was signed by President Bush, becoming Public Law No. 110-055. On February 17, 2008, it expired due to sunset provision.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protect_America_Act_of_2007#Legislative_history
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protect_America_Act_of_2007#Legislative_history
The amendments to FISA made by the Act expire 180 days after enactment, except that any order in effect on the date of enactment remains in effect until the date of expiration of such order and such orders can be reauthorized by the FISA Court.[38] The Act expired on February 17, 2008.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Act#Protect_America_Act_of_2007
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Act#Protect_America_Act_of_2007
Here's Bush's statement at the time: http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2008/02/20080214-4.html
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023026724
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
314 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Me too, Lost_Count, BTW, a belated but hearty welcome to DU. Right glad tameetcha!
Ecumenist
Feb 2014
#202
The talking point being distributed right now is "this isn't really illegal".
Democracyinkind
Feb 2014
#5
Yes, those talking points have become more than familiar with each illegal violation
sabrina 1
Feb 2014
#12
No its not....that would be YOU accusing people of being paid shills.....
VanillaRhapsody
Feb 2014
#101
apparently you do....You weren't in this conversation to add anything except to stalk
VanillaRhapsody
Feb 2014
#119
because I didn't call Romney Gov? Thats your big "Get"? Congratulating yourself for that?
VanillaRhapsody
Feb 2014
#127
I am not sure what the hell you have been talking abou from the start your ONLY
VanillaRhapsody
Feb 2014
#130
Yes, exactly. Anyone who joins in those attacks in my experience for over eight years now, has
sabrina 1
Feb 2014
#187
Good points re transparency. In the early Bush years on some Dem forums, maybe others, it was
sabrina 1
Feb 2014
#300
The what and the how is what journalists are SUPPOSED to tell us. I wish the MSM would do it
sabrina 1
Feb 2014
#250
The "why", without the particulars of "who" is covered pretty well by L. Fletcher Prouty's book...
rwsanders
Feb 2014
#45
Thanks "hoot" ...this is another piece of info from original article deserving separate
KoKo
Feb 2014
#6
... what you say conjures this image...I hate feeling like I'm living in the belly of the beast...
ancianita
Feb 2014
#75
American intelligence has been under the control of Wall Street since William Donovan at the OSS.
Scuba
Feb 2014
#9
So why was it not stopped before now? This is illegal and if it has been going on for
sabrina 1
Feb 2014
#14
They had a starring role in a book I mentioned above by L. Fletcher Prouty on the JFK assassination.
rwsanders
Feb 2014
#46
If this were to have come out under President Bush, I'm sure the reaction from
neverforget
Feb 2014
#27
Exactly. It it was wrong under a Republican then it's wrong under a Democrat.
neverforget
Feb 2014
#73
Not as silly as your post earlier today defending medicare payments to private insurers.
Cali_Democrat
Feb 2014
#30
You think this OP is baseless and worth mocking, but THIS evidence-free speculation:
Hissyspit
Feb 2014
#52
Pointing out the obvious fact that you follow me around DU is character assassination?
Cali_Democrat
Feb 2014
#78
Oh I see...I'm forcing you to stalk me because I post things you disagree with
Cali_Democrat
Feb 2014
#84
Once again I see you have nothing to add. Just here to attack posts. Why dont you stay in the BOG.
rhett o rick
Feb 2014
#88
Ah yes, the BOG signature ridicule emoticon. Does Sid give you extra points each time
rhett o rick
Feb 2014
#94
If someone is paying either of you, they arent getting much for their money.
rhett o rick
Feb 2014
#100
No links needed. I will take you at your word. It's possible that I misjudged you. If so, shame onme
rhett o rick
Feb 2014
#110
Why are you even dignifiying that person's comment? No one here owes him/her anything
Number23
Feb 2014
#147
"You really enjoy following me around DU, huh?" I know someone who does that...
cherokeeprogressive
Feb 2014
#139
You're goddamn right I was pissed off at Ambassador Stevens' murder. Looks like I was the only one.
cherokeeprogressive
Feb 2014
#184
I refuse to read this because he's a trayter and he lives in a forein country.
progressoid
Feb 2014
#13
Whoever orchestrates these campaign, and we have seen one of them exposed thoroughly
sabrina 1
Feb 2014
#176
I think it's just desperation. And as I said, they are not very imaginative people.
sabrina 1
Feb 2014
#191
I found it extremely informative, and missed the entertainment value. Could you
sabrina 1
Feb 2014
#105
THIS is what they are trying to hide. The REAL reason for the 'surveillance'
sabrina 1
Feb 2014
#118
If you haven't already, you really need to read "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man"
justiceischeap
Feb 2014
#24
Cass Sunstein thinks it's a wonderfully effective method of message control.
OnyxCollie
Feb 2014
#159
All markets are free, some markets are freer than others. Forget about it, Jake, its Chinatown,
marble falls
Feb 2014
#66
Related: How Covert Agents Infiltrate the Internet to Manipulate, Deceive, and Destroy Reputations
Purveyor
Feb 2014
#79
Fucking A. I strongly believe in government's ability to be a positive force in people's lives.
TheKentuckian
Feb 2014
#194
" I strongly believe in government's ability to be a positive force in people's lives."
woo me with science
Feb 2014
#243
How did this become rocket science? It didn't. I'm starting to wonder if all the screeching about
TheKentuckian
Feb 2014
#296
if you consider what might happen if anti-surveillance, pro-privacy and freedom voters coalesced
reddread
Feb 2014
#297
Seems they like the corporate dominance, fuck the environment, fuck the people aspects just fine.
TheKentuckian
Feb 2014
#298
Congratulations, fellow leftists. we are validated, and vindicated, in so many ways.
Zorra
Feb 2014
#135
Yep. Paranoia about infiltrators almost always does more damage than a potential infiltrator.
stevenleser
Feb 2014
#219
Another revelation from today: FBI claims Sonny Liston took a fall in his fight with Cassius Clay,
secondwind
Feb 2014
#229
No matter. It's always good for people to know that paid RW corporatists swarm the internet in order
Zorra
Feb 2014
#246
You've got to wonder why some posters object to this discussion, old news as it is...
Romulox
Feb 2014
#252
Exactly. It's a perfectly valid, and increasingly important, discussion on a progressive website. nt
Zorra
Feb 2014
#254
The idea that somethings is less true now--because it was true before--is bizarre on its face.
Romulox
Feb 2014
#255
There is no confirmation here, only yet another accusation. ALmost a nice try. nt
stevenleser
Feb 2014
#264
Some of the "Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation" have been used in this thread...
friendly_iconoclast
Feb 2014
#304
the irony is that the regulation and atmosphere needed to fix this shit is still
certainot
Feb 2014
#257
i remember reading about a connection between talk radio, ABC, and cia's william? casey and his
certainot
Feb 2014
#292
I know a retired Episcopal priest who was an SEC prosecutor before becoming a priest . . .
markpkessinger
Feb 2014
#285