It was GREENWALD who called out Bush and Cheney on ILLEGAL N.S.A. Spying back in 2007!

[Octafish]

If the rest of the press had carried half as much water as Greenwald, these two would have long ago been in front of a Grand Jury.



Here's what Greenwald wrote on the subject of NSA abuse by them, when the story broke in 2007. In his story, Greenwald raised questions about the Comey visit to Ashcroft that have still to be answered -- six long warmongering profiteering years later:

Comey’s testimony raises new and vital questions about the NSA scandal

The testimony yesterday, while dramatic, underscores how severe a threat to the rule of law this administration poses.

BY GLENN GREENWALD
WEDNESDAY, MAY 16, 2007 06:16 AM EDT

The testimony yesterday from James Comey re-focuses attention on one of the long unresolved mysteries of the NSA scandal. And the new information Comey revealed, though not answering that question decisively, suggests some deeply troubling answers. Most of all, yesterday’s hearing underscores how unresolved the entire NSA matter is — how little we know (but ought to know) about what actually happened and how little accountability there has been for some of the most severe and blatant acts of presidential lawbreaking in the country’s history.

SNIP...

The key questions still demanding investigation and answers

But the more important issue here, by far, is that we should not have to speculate in this way about how the illegal eavesdropping powers were used. We enacted a law 30 years ago making it a felony for the government to eavesdrop on us without warrants, precisely because that power had been so severely and continuously abused. The President deliberately violated that law by eavesdropping in secret. Why don’t we know — a-year-a-half after this lawbreaking was revealed — whether these eavesdropping powers were abused for improper purposes? Is anyone in Congress investigating that question? Why don’t we know the answers to that?

Back in September, the then-ranking member (and current Chairman) of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Jay Rockefeller, made clear how little even he knew about the answers to any of these questions in a letter he released:

For the past six months, I have been requesting without success specific details about the program, including: how many terrorists have been identified; how many arrested; how many convicted; and how many terrorists have been deported or killed as a direct result of information obtained through the warrantless wiretapping program.

[font size="6"][font color="red"]I can assure you, not one person in Congress has the answers to these and many other fundamental questions.[/font size][/font color]

CONTINUED...

http://www.salon.com/2007/05/16/nsa_comey/

Instead, six years and who-knows-how-many lives later, Bush and Cheney and the rest of their election thieving warmongering bankster oilmen posse continue merrily on their way, unpunished for lying America into war and making huge profits in the process.

Remember, it was Greenwald who stood up to Cheney and Bush. He covered the story and asked "Why?"

[leftstreet]

1. Back when Greenwald was a DU hero

DURec

[Octafish]

7. True. True even before then.

Here's one that the Party transition team must've missed:

How Should the Next President Deal with the Bush White House's Crimes?

By Amy Goodman, Democracy Now!
Posted on July 26, 2008, Printed on July 26, 2008

EXCERPT...

The criticism of Obama's stances has come as part of a larger debate over whether efforts to hold the Bush administration accountable would jeopardize an ostensibly higher goal of ensuring a Democratic win this November.

I'm joined right now, in addition to Glenn Greenwald, who blogs at Salon.com, the legal scholar by Cass Sunstein, who's an informal adviser to Barack Obama, professor at Harvard University and the University of Chicago Law School. He is co-author of the book Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness and is cited as one of the most-cited legal scholars in the country.

SNIP...

[font color="blue"]Glenn Greenwald:[/font color] You know, I think this mentality that we're hearing is really one of the principal reasons why our government has become so lawless and so distorted over the past thirty years. You know, if you go into any courtroom where there is a criminal on trial for any kind of a crime, they'll have lawyers there who stand up and offer all sorts of legal and factual justifications or defenses for what they did. You know, going back all the way to the pardon of Nixon, you know, you have members of the political elite and law professors standing up and saying, "Oh, there's good faith reasons not to impeach or to criminally prosecute." And then you go to the Iran-Contra scandal, where the members of the Beltway class stood up and said the same things Professor Sunstein is saying: we need to look to the future, it's important that we not criminalize policy debates. You know, you look at Lewis Libby being spared from prison.

And now you have an administration that -- we have a law in this country that says it is a felony offense, punishable by up to five years in prison and a $10,000 fine, to spy on Americans without the warrants required by law. We have a president who got caught doing that, who admits that he did that. And yet, you have people saying, "Well, there may be legal excuses as to why he did that." Or you have a president who admits ordering, in the White House, planning with his top aides, interrogation policies that the International Red Cross says are categorically torture, which are also felony offenses in the United States. And you have people saying, "Well, we can't criminalize policy disputes."

And what this has really done is it's created a two-tiered system of government, where government leaders know that they are free to break our laws, and they'll have members of the pundit class and the political class and law professors standing up and saying, "Well, these are important intellectual issues that we need to grapple with, and it's really not fair to put them inside of a courtroom or talk about prison." And so, we've incentivized lawlessness in this country. I mean, the laws are clear that it's criminal to do these things. The President has done them, and he -- there's no reason to treat him differently than any other citizen who breaks our laws.

CONTINUED...

http://www.alternet.org/story/92829/how_should_the_next_president_deal_with_the_bush_white_house%27s_crimes

I don't recall seeing too many of his current day critics on those threads of old standing up to Bush and Cheney.

Thank you for remembering, leftstreet! Thanks for being there...and here.

[truebluegreen]

12. + 100

[stevenleser]

2. As did I and thousands of other people

http://www.opednews.com/populum/pagem.php?f=opedne_steven_l_071028_republicans_turning_.htm

Tons of columnists were calling out warrant less wiretapping throughout the Bush administration

[Coyotl]

8. Precisely, and DU was in the thick of investigating this then

Unlike today, when DU seems more like a troll party in constant internal conflict.

Are ALL COMMUNICATIONS routed overseas to circumvent US law and the Constitution?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2245762

I was told years ago that ALL fiber optic communication traffic was routed overseas so that "everything" was moved outside the protections of the law and Constitution and ANYTHING could be monitored. ... I now see how easily exactly that, routing ALL COMMUNICATIONS overseas, was accomplished.

Is that Bush's and the Telecom's HUGE crime hidden and covered-up behind this story? ....

[stevenleser]

67. We were reporting on something illegal during Bush. My article demanded we go back to FISA.

That is exactly what Obama did.

Look, I have no problem with a national conversation over what should be the case, how much surveillance we really need versus the threat that exists, but what has instead gone on here at DU among some folks is ridiculous hyperbole and scandal mongering.

[Coyotl]

75. I agree. Regarding the hyperbole on DU, anyone can register an account

and hide their true agenda and political associations, including their employer if paid to post crap here.

Trolls are not a big secret!

[emulatorloo]

76. I suspect Karl Rove's Crossroads is on of DU's top contributors

[Octafish]

9. You're a good writer and a brave man, stevenleser!

Wish I'd seen that article, I'd have posted it on DU. The subject is very important.

Know your BFEE: The Secret Government

[sabrina 1]

39. And none did a better job than Greenwald. Which is why a contract was taken out on him

by the PTBs to launch a 'smear campaign' against. Thanks to Anonymous it was exposed before the bids went in. But clearly someone got that contract.

Because he was EFFECTIVE. A dedicated Civil Rights advocate passionate about the rights of the American people. That sincerity shone through which is why he grew from being an unknown blogger to one of the most read people on the internet.

Frankly I don't recall too many others fight back the attacks he was exposed to from Bush supporters, now he's, shamefully, fighting off Obama supporters who once upon a time called him a hero. The only people being exposed here are the flip floppers.

He was and remains one of the few who relentlessly and fearlessly, despite being a target of some pretty powerful and scary people, defends the rights of the American people 'against all enemies, both foreign and domestic'. Too bad many of our elected officials who took that oath don't show one tenth of the commitment to it, that he does.

And the more he is attacked, the more people will come to his defense and the more we realize that it is not just the 'right' at work trying to destroy our rights.

[stevenleser]

66. Tons of people did it better and much earlier than Greenwald. Here are just two examples of articles

that beat Greenwald by two years:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/23/AR2005122302050.html

Power Play
By Suzanne E. Spaulding
Sunday, December 25, 2005

At his news conference last week, President Bush objected when a reporter characterized his use of executive power to eavesdrop on Americans without any court order as "unchecked." The president's sensitivity is understandable. As he went on to explain, the charge of unchecked power implies that he is asserting a kind of dictatorial authority -- precisely what Americans fought, and continue to fight, against in Iraq. But what are the sources of checks and balances of a president's authority? They are the Congress, the courts and, ultimately, the American people. Based on the facts as reported so far, none of these appear to have operated as an effective check on this extraordinary exercise of presidential power.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/16/politics/16program.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Bush Lets U.S. Spy on Callers Without Courts
By JAMES RISEN and ERIC LICHTBLAU
Published: December 16, 2005

In 2002, President Bush toured the National Security Agency at Fort Meade, Md., with Lt. Gen. Michael V. Hayden, who was then the agency's director and is now a full general and the principal deputy director of national intelligence.

Forum: National Security
WASHINGTON, Dec. 15 - Months after the Sept. 11 attacks, President Bush secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States to search for evidence of terrorist activity without the court-approved warrants ordinarily required for domestic spying, according to government officials.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greenwald was very late to the game and never unearthed anything new. He had spent Bush's entire first term trusting Bush regarding the Iraq war, Patriot act and everything else.

[emulatorloo]

77. Appreciate the links, Steve. Remember reading both of those articles n/t

[struggle4progress]

3. "If someone testified before Congress when Glenn wasn't around, it didn't really happen!"

[Octafish]

16. Greenwald on N.S.A. crimes under Bush...

The testimony yesterday from James Comey re-focuses attention on one of the long unresolved mysteries of the NSA scandal. And the new information Comey revealed, though not answering that question decisively, suggests some deeply troubling answers. Most of all, yesterday’s hearing underscores how unresolved the entire NSA matter is — how little we know (but ought to know) about what actually happened and how little accountability there has been for some of the most severe and blatant acts of presidential lawbreaking in the country’s history.

http://www.salon.com/2007/05/16/nsa_comey/

That was 2007. Compare with Cass Sunstein, ca. 2008:

Prosecuting government officials risks a “cycle” of criminalizing public service, argued, and Democrats should avoid replicating retributive efforts like the impeachment of President Clinton — or even the “slight appearance” of it.

Details: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002797594

Which helps explain the present day.

[sabrina 1]

4. Yes, I remember his excellent journalism throughout the Bush era of high crimes and misdeamors.

And he was a big hero to some of the same people now attacking him. HE hasn't changed, but as we are discovering a few pro-surveillance state defenders have done a complete flip flop since then.

Greenwald has pointed out the flip flopping on the 'left' which is why they are trying so hard and failing of course due to HIS consistent record, to discredit him.

He will go down in history for his courage in these times when to speak out as we see with him, means being targeted by 'Security Corporations' such as HB Gary. Apparently as we learned from those exposures, there is much money to be made from conducting 'smear campaigns' to 'pressure people like Greenwald'.

But it's all bi-partisany now and a lot of people are confused.

[Octafish]

30. What will be done about James Comey's revelations?

What will be done about James Comey's revelations?

(update below)
Glenn Greenwald
Thursday May 17, 2007 08:42 EST

The Washington Post Editorial page has been one of the most establishment-defending organs over the last six years, repeatedly minimizing or dismissing criticisms of the Bush administration and reserving its vigor primarily for attacking Bush critics (and for supporting the Iraq war). That's what makes its Editorial this morning regarding James Comey's testimony -- entitled "The Gonzales Coverup" -- so striking, and potentially indicative of a compelled acknowledgement by the Beltway class of how serious the NSA scandal is and how serious it has been all along.

The Editorial begins with this question and answer:

Why is it only now that the disturbing story of the Bush administration's willingness to override the legal advice of its own Justice Department is emerging? The chief reason is that the administration, in the person of Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, stonewalled congressional inquiries and did its best to ensure that the shameful episode never came to light.

The Editorial is referring to the series of steps Gonzales took back in February of last year -- which I documented here -- whereby Gonzales, along with other DOJ officials, successfully blocked Ashcroft and Comey from testifying about the DOJ internal rebellion by falsely insisting they had nothing to add.

And that's all true enough. As has been the case repeatedly over the last six years, the administration issued false denials of wrongdoing and then expected/demanded we place blind faith in those assurances and thereby accept that there was no need to investigate further or compel disclosure of their conduct. After all, the administration itself has assured us that there was no wrongdoing here, that there were safeguards in place, etc. etc.

But the equally significant answer to Hiatt's question -- "why is it only now that the disturbing story of the Bush administration's willingness to override the legal advice of its own Justice Department is emerging?" -- is that the Beltway establishment, led by the likes of Hiatt, decided that the President's lawbreaking was really nothing to be too bothered by, that those who objected to it were shrill and hysterical, and they found justification, or at least sufficient mitigation, to look the other way and acquiesce to the notion that the Bush administration could break the law at will and that there ought to be no real consequences arising from that behavior.

For Hiatt to now act all bewildered and ask "why is it only now" that we are learning of this misconduct is disingenuous in the extreme, given that so much of the cause for that is found in the behavior of the Fred Hiatts of the world. Perhaps, though, the Comey revelations are so extreme that the Beltway establishment can no longer pretend that there is a normal state of affairs with regard to how our government is operating. Consider the uncharacteristically inflammatory rhetoric which Hiatt then proceeds to spout:

If you were Mr. Gonzales, you'd certainly want to make sure they stayed quiet. . . . Mr. Gonzales's lack of candor is no longer surprising. . . .

SNIP...

UPDATE: Behold the royal hubris from the President's press conference today. Bush categorically refuses to answer questions about whether he sent Card and Gonzales to obtain Ashcroft's authorization for his illegal eavesdropping while Ashcroft was in intensive care. The reason, of course, is because the Terrorists are out there and are scary and want to kill us. Therefore, Bush does not have to answer questions about what he did.

These are the type of facially absurd and democracy-subverting shenanigans to which we have been subjected for the last six years. They will continue unless and until the press, the Democrats in Congress and/or Americans generally decide that they will no longer tolerate it.

-- Glenn Greenwald

CONTINUED...

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/?last_story=/opinion/greenwald/2007/05/17/nsa_follow_up/

Thank you for grokking, sabrina 1. It is buy-partisan, as the very watchdogs are, for the best part, making a killing off war.

These NSA shenanigans aren't signs of a police state. They are signs of criminal activity. Yet, the media and the rest of the government don't do squat. Could it be... blackmail?

[sabrina 1]

37. Thank you Octafish, Greenwald is what a journalist ought to be. His specialty has always

been Civil Liberties and he was a shining light among what passes for journalism throughout those years when people like Comey and others, were desperately trying to stop the crimes their own side was committing.

It's good to see the outing of those who were never really on the side of what was right back then. They were acting out of extreme partisanship and we thought they were on our side in this fight. Now we know, and I prefer to know.

Now they jump on Greenwald while back then he was a hero to many of them. HE has not changed one iota, still hounding those who are doing wrong in this government. But there were pretenders in our midst and now they are out in the open as they support everything they claimed to oppose.

[sibelian]

5. OMG the TWISTEDNESS of the man's long term STRATEGY

AAAAALLLLL that time he was only pretending to oppose Bush's spying so that he could claim plausible deniability when the inevitable election of Obama happened and the retention of the programme would mean Obama was vulnerable to the same criticism ... JUST SO HE COULD TAKE DOWN A LEFTY.

WOW. Those republicans are SMART.

[HardTimes99]

25. Now that's some 13-dimensional chess! :sarcasm: - nt

[Octafish]

43. Not that they wouldn't, it's just that it's a dying art.

On occasion, the masters show their hand:

The Big Con at Dealey Plaza

Friday, January 4, 2008

EXCERPT...

In the introduction to his book "Intelligence Wars – American Secret History From Hitler to Al Qaeda," Thomas Powers relates an interesting conversation he had with General William Odom at a party hosted by former CIA intelligence officer Haviland Smith.

Powers asked General Odom how the CIA could have uncovered and infiltrated Al Qaeda before 9/11.

General Odom, the former Army Chief of Staff and director of the National Security Agency said simply - "Like the Sting."

SNIP...

It’s not even that surprising that General Odom would use the Sting as an example of how the crafts of intelligence works best, mainly because the best black artists in the CIA during the Cold War were trained by Professor Paul M. A. Linebarger (July 1913-1966), whose book on Psychological Warfare and Propaganda (Combat Forces Press, 1948; 1954) is the classic textbook on the subject.

Besides being professor of Asiatic Studies at John Hopkins, Paul Myron Anthony Linebarger was also a part time professor at the School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS), a transparent front for a CIA think tank. It wasn’t until after his death that Linebarger was exposed as being science fiction writer Cordwainer Smith, and that he had worked with E. Howard Hunt in Mexico City.

CONTINUED...

http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/2008/01/big-con-at-dealey-plaza.html

"The CIA is the Republican Party" is how one S&L crook explained things.

[baldguy]

6. Nope, no he didn't.

MAINWAY is the codename for a database maintained by the United States' National Security Agency (NSA) containing metadata for hundreds of billions of telephone calls made through the four largest telephone carriers in the United States: AT&T, SBC, BellSouth (all three now called AT&T), and Verizon.

The existence of this database and the NSA program that compiled it was unknown to the general public until USA Today broke the story on May 10, 2006. It is estimated that the database contains over 1.9 trillion call-detail records. According to Bloomberg News, the effort began approximately seven months before the September 11, 2001 attacks. As of June 2013, the database stores metadata for at least five years.

The records include detailed call information (caller, receiver, date/time of call, length of call, etc.) for use in traffic analysis and social network analysis, but do not include audio information or transcripts of the content of the phone calls.

The database's existence has prompted fierce objections. It is often viewed as an illegal warrantless search and a violation of the pen register provisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and (in some cases) the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution.

more:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAINWAY

That sounds real familiar, doesn't it? But, if this is true...what's the big deal about Snowden?

But of course he has Glenn Greenwald in his corner to promote him.

The byline says Leslie Cauley.
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm

[DisgustipatedinCA]

19. Oh look...there are more simple facts you refuse to acknowledge

You wouldn't know truth if it hit you like a ton of bricks, which it did, ,for the better part of the day. I suggest you look at the byline in the OP again. I know you don't care what it says--you've amply demonstrated that truth isn't exactly in your wheelhouse. But it does, in fact (that's FACT), have Glen Greenwald as the byline in the OP--you know, the thing we're talking about.

[uponit7771]

21. +1

[Tarheel_Dem]

10. The difference is right there in your title line. KEYWORD: "ILLEGAL".

You're welcome.

[truebluegreen]

13. Did I miss something?

When was the current program declared constitutional?

[MannyGoldstein]

11. See! He TOTALLY changed his point of view because he's a RACIST

Oh, wait...

In any case, Snowden sux!

[Octafish]

70. Wow! Maybe *that's* why Greenwald wasn't even a reporter in 2005.

Which explains his lack of journalism. For example, what his opinion on what's worse than a racist he wrote in the New York Times the other day really gets them really, really, really, really, REALLY, mad.

Nomination Ignores War Crimes

Glenn Greenwald is a columnist for The Guardian, a former constitutional lawyer and the author of four books, most recently "With Liberty and Justice for Some."

President Obama has expended extraordinary efforts to protect from accountability all Bush-era officials responsible for torture, rendition and warrantless eavesdropping, programs that numerous human rights groups have insisted constitute war crimes and violations of U.S. criminal law.

The result is that support for those war crimes no longer carries any real stigma. By blocking any form of criminal and civil accountability for these acts, President Obama has transformed what were once universally unspeakable and taboo beliefs into little more than respectable, garden-variety political disagreements.

The president's nomination on Monday of John O. Brennan, a Bush-era C.I.A. official, to head the C.I.A. illustrates how complete this disturbing process now is. In late 2008, when Brennan was rumored to be Obama's leading choice as C.I.A. director, a major controversy erupted because of Brennan's overt support for Bush's programs of rendition and torture.

Brennan's pro-torture-and-rendition views were clear and amply documented. In 2007, Jane Mayer of The New Yorker described Brennan as a supporter of the "C.I.A.’s interrogation and detention program.''

In a Dec. 5, 2005, "NewsHour with Jim Lehrer" appearance, Brennan admitted he was "intimately familiar now over the past decade with the cases of rendition" -- the practice used by the Bush administration to abduct terrorism suspects and send them to other countries to be tortured -- and praised rendition as "an absolutely vital tool." In a November 2007 interview with Harry Smith of CBS News, Brennan defended what he euphemistically called "enhanced interrogation tactics" (other than waterboarding, which he opposed) by claiming that "a lot of information has come out from these interrogation procedures that the agency has in fact used against the real hard-core terrorists. It has saved lives."

CONTINUED...

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2013/01/07/the-right-or-wrong-experience-for-the-job/by-nominating-john-brennan-obama-is-ignoring-war-crimes

So there. Now he's a Constitutional scholar, declaring war on everyone and everything that doesn't do exactly what he wants, when he says it. Oops. That's another Constitutional scholar. The one I'm supposed to agree with in a democracy.

[fascisthunter]

14. consistently courageous = credibility

[Octafish]

72. Verily. The guy went after Bush and Cheney when his critics were uniting behind the preznit.

Now that he's criticized the current president, it's open season from all sides.

As you know, we live in gangster times, fascisthunter. Tell me, please, since when do brave and good people need to "assassinate" anyone?

Obama moves to make the War on Terror permanent

Complete with a newly coined, creepy Orwellian euphemism – 'disposition matrix' – the administration institutionalizes the most extremist powers a government can claim

Glenn Greenwald
The Guardian 24 Oct 2013

A primary reason for opposing the acquisition of abusive powers and civil liberties erosions is that they virtually always become permanent, vested not only in current leaders one may love and trust but also future officials who seem more menacing and less benign.

The Washington Post has a crucial and disturbing story this morning by Greg Miller about the concerted efforts by the Obama administration to fully institutionalize – to make officially permanent – the most extremist powers it has exercised in the name of the war on terror.

SNIP...

UPDATE III

At Wired, Spencer Ackerman reacts to the Post article with an analysis entitled "President Romney Can Thank Obama for His Permanent Robotic Death List". Here is his concluding paragraph:

"Obama did not run for president to preside over the codification of a global war fought in secret. But that's his legacy. . . . Micah Zenko at the Council on Foreign Relations writes that Obama's predecessors in the Bush administration 'were actually much more conscious and thoughtful about the long-term implications of targeted killings', because they feared the political consequences that might come when the U.S. embraces something at least superficially similar to assassination. Whoever follows Obama in the Oval Office can thank him for proving those consequences don't meaningfully exist — as he or she reviews the backlog of names on the Disposition Matrix."

It's worth devoting a moment to letting that sink in.

CONTINUED...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/24/obama-terrorism-kill-list?newsfeed=true

My answer: Since when warmongers and traitors call the shots. Besides the war and deaths and Have-Mores and all, what really makes it obvious is the sinking of democracy.

[Coyotl]

15. Deja DU's

Feb-17-08 = LIVE Media Alert **** Greenwald **** Horton **** Protect American Act and Bush Spying
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2881288

Start TIME is NOW!

Media Alert = http://harpers.org/archive/2008/02/hbc-90002425
February 17, 2008

AUDIO: http://www.airamerica.com/aarplayer/gateway

Harper’s legal affairs contributor Scott Horton and Salon legal affairs contributor Glenn Greenwald will appear on today’s Seder on Sunday at 5:00 Eastern, 4:00 Central, 2:00 Pacific time, to discuss the expiration of the Protect American Act and the on-going controversy surrounding the Administration’s proposal for warrantless surveillance in an interview with Sam Seder. The program can be heard on streaming audio

======================
Jun-25-08 = Glenn Greenwald On Antiwar Radio = Illegal Surveillance and FISA
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x151424

======================
Feb-23-08 = Glenn Greenwald: McConnell/Mukasey: Eavesdropping outside of FISA is "illegal"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2912703

McConnell/Mukasey: Eavesdropping outside of FISA is "illegal"

The White House yesterday escalated its most brazen, Orwellian campaign of the last eight years -- shrilly accusing House Democrats of jeopardizing the nation's security by allowing the Protect America Act to expire even though it's the President and House Republicans who blocked any extensions of that law. .....

======================
Feb-16-08 = Glenn Greenwald: The Leader isn't protecting us and keeping us safe
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2876783

According to the President and his followers, we will be -- as of the stroke of midnight tonight -- no longer safe, no longer protected, no longer snug and secure in the strong and loving arms of our Federal Government. That's because the Protect America Act -- a law which has only existed for six months yet is now indispensable to America's ability to survive and avoid being slaughtered by the Terrorists -- expires tonight.

The President himself this morning dramatically intoned: "At the stroke of midnight tonight, a vital intelligence law that is helping protect our nation will expire." Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell gravely pointed out: "What will happen at midnight tonight is much more significant than stump speeches, steroids or superdelegates. On Sunday, the terrorist tracking program . . . no longer will be fully operational." National Review warrior and all-around tough guy Andy McCarthy fretted: "When the Clock Strikes Midnight, We Will Be Significantly Less Safe."

This is one of the most bizarre propaganda dramas ever, ......

======================
Dec-16-07 = Glenn Greenwald: The Lawless Surveillance State
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2477687

There are several vital points raised by the new revelations in The New York Times that "the N.S.A.'s reliance on telecommunications companies is broader and deeper than ever before" and includes both pre-9/11 efforts to tap without warrants into the nation's domestic communications network as well as the collection of vast telephone records of American citizens in the name of the War on Drugs. The Executive Branch and the largest telecommunications companies work in virtually complete secrecy -- with no oversight and no notion of legal limits -- to spy on Americans, on our own soil, at will.

More than anything else, what these revelations highlight -- yet again -- is that the U.S. has become precisely the kind of surveillance state that we were always told was the hallmark of tyrannical societies, with literally no limits on the government's ability or willingness to spy on its own citizens and to maintain vast dossiers on those activities ....

=======================
AND, another 100 similar threads!
https://www.google.com/search?q=greenwald+spying+site%3Ademocraticunderground.com
About 476,000 results

[Octafish]

88. Great term. Important phenomenon.

Deja DU is the term needed to peg the resource, the power of truth.

DU is one of the few resources standing in the way of the STASI.

http://www.stasimuseum.de/en/enindex.htm

The archive you've assembled, Coyotl, stops that reality cold.

[Coyotl]

89. Google tip = Combine any keyword with the following: "L. Coyote" site:democraticunderground.com

and you will save yourself months of research

[Hooray for Pepe]

17. What were David Gregory and Chuck Todd saying

back then?

[HiPointDem]

48. the professional punditry were giving bush blow jobs until well into his second term.

[Waiting For Everyman]

18. Thanks for the reality check, Octafish.

Not prosecuting the Bush crimes was the road to perdition, as many (I guess I can't even say 'most' anymore) of us knew. Greenwald has been speaking out about these serious government abuses for a long time. We need more like him. He should be getting encouragement for this from us, not a phoney witch hunt. It isn't as if he's taking no heat himself from the NSA for doing this. I'm sure his life could be more comfortable if he didn't.

[nineteen50]

20. Why is congress so afraid to use their oversight responsibility

is it blackmail from info gathered through spying?

[HardTimes99]

26. One of the NSA whistleblowers (think it may be Tice) alleges that

Obama himself was wiretapped starting in 2004. If true, that is really fucking sad. No longer scary, just sad and pathetic.

[nineteen50]

29. No! it is "f"ing scary.

Since 1978 I have watched the destruction of America and it hasn't been pretty. America has been drilled, drained, sold out and pissed on by both majority parties for the profits of a few. What comes next is scary as the power-elite do the same to the entire world.

[HardTimes99]

31. Sounds like we're in the same demographic roughly speaking. For me the long, slow descent began

in January, 1981. But I get your point. By 'sad and pathetic,' I meant that the American experiment with a democratic republic is pretty much over now, replaced by the hollow shell of an oligarchic empire. I'm sorry it ended this way and keep thinking if only the AFL-CIO had called a general strike - Taft-Hartley be damned - when Reagan busted PATCO, just maybe this might have been averted.

[nineteen50]

36. I thought at that time the

major unions were part of the same elite and sold out.

[HardTimes99]

38. My memories have grown a bit hazy with the passage of time and so

much backsliding since then. Lane Kirkland, then the head of the AFL-CIO, talked a good game criticizing Reagan loudly and publicly. But where the rubber met the road, Kirkland refused to call a general strike, the only action that might have stopped Reagan in his tracks. I've held a grudge against Kirkland ever since and I know there's an argument to make that Kirkland sold out. I'll leave it to the labor historians and organizers to debate that one.

[HiPointDem]

49. no, it's scary. tapping politicians is scary.

[truedelphi]

41. nineteen50 - follow the money.

Senator Di Feinstein is one of the Senators in charge of the Senate oversight committee on intelligence.

Here is how she has operated in the past - once carefully ensconsed inside the Senate, she re-wrote the Senate Ethics Code. It was framed by her and a handful of trusted associates to read so that anyone who voted for any item, and then went on to either personally make money from that vote, or else have their spouse or child or other loved one make money from that vote, could not be considered to have be involved in a "Conflict of Interest" as long as the vote had any other purpose outside of the money being made.

So she then went on to vote for the Iraq War resolution. Her husband, Richard Blum, made 27 millions of dollars almost immediately after the US Shock and Awe campaign, on various war contracts he assembled through prior knowledge and his wife's connections.

Do you think for one minute that she is not about to receive another windfall from Surveillance Contracts?

A great deal of the military's annual 1.2 trillion dollar budget is now being diverted to surveillance.

And of course, it is not only Sen Feinstein - it is a great many of the other people in Congress, who are feeding at the trough of the defense and surveillance companies.

[nineteen50]

42. I was aware of Di's bio.

Frustration is my cloak.

[HiPointDem]

50. feinstein. ugh.

[Overseas]

22. K&R. Thanks for reminding people why we have admired Greenwald.

My Democrats put their upcoming president in a terrible position by taking impeachment off the table for Bush and Cheney.

Set their own upcoming president up to take the fall for all the Bush Cheney trampling of our constitutional rights.

[HardTimes99]

28. Pelosi took impeachment off the table in 2006. And wouldn't you know it, back in 2002,

Gebhardt and Daschle took Iraq off the table before the 2002 mid-terms. And then in 2004 Kerry said he'd still have voted for war in Iraq even if he knew that Saddam had not WMDs. Presumably, Hillary felt the same way. Un-fucking-believable.

Before I'm called a 'Paulbot' a 'racist,' or whatever the current smear du jour is, I was one of a grand total of 31 Angelenos attending a solidarity rally for Wendy Davis last night at Los Angeles City Hall. WTF? I guess the LA County Democratic Party and LA City Dems just couldn't be bothered to get out to show their support and respect for Davis. (There were actually more anarchists and Occupy LA folk there than Dems from what I could ascertain.) Pretty depressing watching Los Angeles display its near total disregard for Davis' courage and sacrifice. Well, it was pretty hot temperature-wise. But I'm just a Democratc Socialist, so what right do I have to complain?

[bahrbearian]

32. Right On

[Overseas]

53. Glenn speaks up about our need to fight to protect and restore our rights.

He knows that stomping on whistleblowers is not the best way to support our president and our country.

Fighting with them to restore and advance our civil rights is the best way to support our democracy.

The President cannot do it alone. This is another area in which we need to "make me do it"-- fight for the restoration of habeas corpus and to protect our civil rights from the powerful interests who profit from the expansion of the national security state.

[Maedhros]

62. For many on this board, supporting the Party is the first priority.

They erroneously believe that doing so is, ipso facto, supporting our democracy.

Sadly, no.

[cantbeserious]

23. Kick And Recommend

eom

[Fire Walk With Me]

24. Well, isn't that incovenient for some DUers (who also forget it's all about Bush/Cheney). n/t

[rhett o rick]

55. I wonder what the Group will say when Pres Obama pardons Bush and Cheney. nm

[Fire Walk With Me]

64. I sadly imagine many here will praise Obama for his capacity for mercy. n/t

[rhett o rick]

73. Yes, It'd be good to put that mess behind us. nm

[Hissyspit]

27. Marcy Wheeler:

@emptywheel: So CIA lied about torture, NSA lies abt surveillance, and John Brennan used bad intel from torture to submit apps to NSA. Anything else?

[DeSwiss]

33. Yes, and I remember how most of DU rejoiced at his revelations.......

...against the bad ol' Bushies!!! Back then.

I'll say it again- it is so sad how far we have fallen:

- K&R

''It is easier to fight for principles than it is to live up to them.'' ~Adlai Stevenson, 1952

[HardTimes99]

34. Notice how the people who have been relentlessy taunting and attacking you are

staying notoriously silent in the face of this post?

I may disagree with you about whether this is fascism (different thread), but your OP here totally redeems you in my view. Thanks for rescuing these materials from the oh-so-convenient memory hole.

[johnnyreb]

40. +1 Their silence is louder than their applied hysteria.

[sibelian]

46. Considerably.

[sibelian]

45. There isn't a single one of the Snowden Sand Pit brigade, is there?

Wonderfully peaceful in here...

[RufusTFirefly]

35. Octafish! You're off message. Get with the program! n/t

[MisterP]

44. no! it was Lieberman and Harold Ford! they were the only ones resisting the lefty mobs'

demands for region-wide war and Patriot Act renewal

[ucrdem]

47. Greenwald isn't standing up to anyone. Jay Rockefeller is, and nine months earlier.

Not to be unduly snarky but apart from writing a fairy coherent op-ed that basically hops aboard a Congressional train that had been moving for years, what's the big deal here? This is basically a very good DU post.

[upi402]

51. Looking forward... nothing to see here

move along...
no investigation, no trial, no worries Alfred.

[Kurovski]

52. K&R. (nt)

[Douglas Carpenter]

54. knr

[Jakes Progress]

56. Hero Then. Horrible Person Now

And all for doing the same thing.

You can't expect hero-worship and moral consistency to coexist.

[ProSense]

57. Actually,

"It was GREENWALD who called out Bush and Cheney on ILLEGAL N.S.A. Spying back in 2007!"

..it was James Risen and the NYT back in 2005.

Remember whistleblower Thomas Tamm?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023032225

[ucrdem]

58. Ha. And blogging about it two years later

makes Glenn a cutting-edge investigative journalist who speaks truth to power.

p.s. Good catch.

[B Stieg]

63. Well said.

(and Go Highlanders!)

[Octafish]

60. So what? Poppy Bush lied America into war with Iraq in 1991.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=3853409&mesg_id=3887528

Lots of people missed the story. Where were you?

[WillyT]

59. K & R !!!

[meegbear]

61. Thank you!

Was posting his stuff from Salon on here for a while.

[Douglas Carpenter]

65. knr

[Quantess]

68. K & R

[Kurovski]

69. kick...no text

[railsback]

71. Geezus, MORE Greenwald worshipping

But yet, its not about the messenger.. unless...

[rhett o rick]

74. And you choose Republicans like Clapper, Mueller, and Bernanke. nm

[railsback]

81. Sorry, I didn't know I was being forced to choose anybody

Is this the STASI?

[rhett o rick]

82. Nice dodge. No one is forcing you to choose. It appears from your posts you side with Clapper,

Mueller, the REpublicans that you pretend to hate. Pres Obama surrounded himself with many Republicans. I dont trust Republicans, looks like you do.

[leveymg]

78. Here we are six years later, we still haven't gotten a solid answer to Sen. Rockefeller's question

For the past six months, I have been requesting without success specific details about the program, including: how many terrorists have been identified; how many arrested; how many convicted; and how many terrorists have been deported or killed as a direct result of information obtained through the warrantless wiretapping program.

Not one solid, proven case after more than a decade since The Program started and three-quarters of a trillion dollars spent on the bloody NSA.

[Octafish]

87. Mission Accomplished...

Objective: Peace Dividend

Plan: Loot and Plunder to Penure and Control

Result: Target Destroyed

[madrchsod]

79. i keep forgetting greenwald is an opinion writer

scattered among those opinions are assertions that may or not be true.

if i want information i'll go to the christian science monitor or al zazeera.

[Doctor_J]

80. Liberals and free thinkers tend to have principles that don't change

conservatives, authoritarians, and partisans have flexible standards

[Octafish]

86. Doctor_J, you have defined 'Character.'

Integrity is a word too seldom heard these days and even less understood.

[gulliver]

83. The last thing I want is a dirtbag like Greenwald...

...arguing for my side of things. He probably helped Bush and Cheney.

[blackspade]

84. +1000

Thanks for the reminder.

[Uncle Joe]

85. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, Octafish.