Greenwald: NSA hearing cancelled

[ProSense]

Greenwald: NSA hearing cancelled

By DYLAN BYERS

This week's informal congressional hearing on the National Security Agency's surveillance program has been cancelled, according to The Guardian's Glenn Greenwald, who was expected to testify via satellite.

Democratic congressman Alan Grayson and a bipartisan group of congressman were expected to hear from Greenwald and other critics of the NSA's surveillance practices on Wednesday, according to a Guardian report from last week. The meeting was not meant to be a formal committee hearing, but would take place on the Hill before a dozen members of Congress from both parties.

But Greenwald now tells POLITICO that the hearing has been cancelled due to Obama's decision to meet with House Democrats.

"Obama developed a sudden and newfound interest in House Democrats and scheduled a meeting with them for that same time," he wrote in an email, adding that the committee was trying to re-schedule the meeting to take place before congress goes on recess.

- more -

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2013/07/greenwald-nsa-surveillance-hearing-cancelled-169526.html

That's hilarious. He's blaming Obama. LOL!

Glenn Greenwald To Testify Before Congress
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023347636

[MineralMan]

1. Lo Siento Mucho, Glenn. Pobrecito.

[last1standing]

2. Despite your need to Greenwald-bash, this is a good thing.

Regardless of Obama's timing, it's good that he's finally going to sit down with House Dems to talk about these problems. Let's just hope needed changes occur after the session.

[grasswire]

3. do we know what he wants to talk about?

How do we know his topic is NSA?

[last1standing]

9. I doubt they give him a choice in the matter.

These House members want answers.

[grasswire]

23. wait.

Congress postponed its hearing on NSA because Obama asked for a meeting.

We don't know the topic(s) Obama wants to discuss.

Someone has assumed it's about NSA.

But we do not have that information from the OP or the article.

Obama may want to talk about Japanese beetle infestation, or Wall Street.

Who knows?

[last1standing]

26. He may, but I have every confidence NSA abuses will be brought up.

By Grayson if no one else.

[ProSense]

5. Yes, it's a "good thing," but

"Regardless of Obama's timing, it's good that he's finally going to sit down with House Dems to talk about these problems. Let's just hope needed changes occur after the session."

...Greenwald is whining. The President meets with House Democrats frequently.

Obama Dinner With House Democrats Fails To Produce Strategic Breakthrough
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/09/obama-dinner-house-democrats_n_3245844.html

[last1standing]

7. Pass the smelling salts! Someone whined!

The need to find any excuse to bash Greenwald is rather petty and demeaning for your opinions. Obama is meeting with the House on a serious matter that needs to be discussed. That's a good thing.

[ProSense]

11. So you admit he "whined," but you're upset he's being criticized for it?

"The need to find any excuse to bash Greenwald is rather petty and demeaning for your opinions. Obama is meeting with the House on a serious matter that needs to be discussed. That's a good thing."

I'm criticizing him for silly whining. I didn't have to "find" it. He offered it up. Deal with that and stop trying to protect Greenwald from criticism simply because you don't like it.

[ProSense]

17. You're claiming I "whined" because you're upset I'm criticizing Greenwald for whining?

[last1standing]

20. Nope. I'm claiming you've posted a whine because you've posted a whine.

I know that is a difficult concept for some but my comment was about your post and your post alone. You're the one who can't seem to get over an obsession with Greenwald, not me.

[ProSense]

22. OK, Greenwald is whining and I criticized him. We agree!

[ProSense]

27. Don't accuse me of lying. It's shows desperation on your part, and

I think your cheap tactic is lame and a failure.

Your responses are disingenuous, and earn a big FAIL.

[ProSense]

35. No, and your denial is a FAIL. "I'm not calling you a liar"

Yes, you are, and you should stand by your disingenuous claims.

"Why do you post lies? Who's agenda do the lies you post serve?"

Your lack of dignity is showing.

[last1standing]

37. I said you posted lies, I do not define you by a single type of action.

I think there are far better ways to describe you. Posting lies is merely a small part of the entirety that makes up who you are.

By the way, when speaking of dignity, it's probably best to not do so directly after being exposed as a person who posts lies.

[ProSense]

38. And I said your claim is disingenuous and shows desperation on your part.

"By the way, when speaking of dignity, it's probably best to not do so directly after being exposed as a person who posts lies."

FAIL!

[Cha]

82. You think you "exposed" her? You did nothing but

spew insulting personal attacks.

[Life Long Dem]

32. Stop your whining!

[last1standing]

34. LOL!

I will if he will! So nah-nah-nah!

[Vinnie From Indy]

13. That article is from two months ago.

Cheers!

[tridim]

31. 7/30/13 is two month ago?

[great white snark]

43. Yes, in wag the dog years.

Everything's a conspiracy I tells ya!

[Bobbie Jo]

86. lol

[FSogol]

103. DUzy!

[deurbano]

58. This one:

<<The President meets with House Democrats frequently.

Obama Dinner With House Democrats Fails To Produce Strategic Breakthrough
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/09/obama-dinner-house-democrats_n_3245844.html >>

[ProSense]

60. Yes,

<<The President meets with House Democrats frequently.

...he meets with them as frequently as a President can. February:

Obama to promote his agenda to House Democrats
http://news.yahoo.com/obama-promote-agenda-house-democrats-080437438--politics.html

There are leadership meetings, caucus meetings and group meetings.

Greenwald's bogus claim is simply to justify his whining.

[deurbano]

64. Depends on what you mean by frequently.

<<BY ANITA KUMAR AND DAVID LIGHTMAN
MCCLATCHY WASHINGTON BUREAU
WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama will make a rare trek to Capitol Hill this week to huddle behind closed doors with lawmakers as they debate how to pay the government’s bills, rewrite the nation’s immigration laws and adjust the government’s surveillance programs...

Obama is scheduled to meet with House of Representatives and Senate Democrats for an hour each Wednesday morning. White House officials did not respond to questions about whether Obama will schedule similar meetings with Republicans or why he was not meeting with them this week.>>



Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/07/29/3529884/obama-heads-to-congress-but-will.html#storylink=cpy

[ProSense]

71. Right,

"Depends on what you mean by frequently."

...frequently means as often as a President can.

Obama to Democrats: Chill out
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/03/third-time-the-charm-for-obama-on-hill-88874.html

Often times the meetings are at the WH, sometimes he sends the VP.

House Democrats Meet with VP Biden
http://www.c-span.org/Events/House-Democrats-Meet-with-VP-Biden/10737436943/

Sometimes they're at other locations:

Remarks by the President at the House Democrats Issues Conference
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/01/27/remarks-president-house-democrats-issues-conference

[GeorgeGist]

120. Not really.

House Democrats Finally Have Their Dinner

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/09/house-democrats-finally-have-their-dinner/?_r=0

[ProSense]

121. Well, if dinner is the criteria, you got me. Forget the other meetings. n/t

[Cali_Democrat]

4. Fucking Obama. He is behind this I tell ya!!!

[Enrique]

6. so they'll reschedule

no one's going to turn into a pumpkin if they don't do it tomorrow.

[Scurrilous]

8. LOL Blame Obama!!1!

Well, he certainly knows how to play to his fan club.

[CakeGrrl]

10. Thanks, Obama!

How dare you usurp Teh Greenwald!

[Vinnie From Indy]

12. Well I guess that completely destroys your repeated contention that Greenwald and Snowden are

unimportant and that the Prez and the NSA are not worried about further revelations. It seems quite obvious that Pres. Obama wants to put the strong arm on these Representatives prior to Greenwald's testimony.

[Rex]

16. Now now, I am sure it was just a mere coinkeedink that

the POTUS wants to talk to them FIRST. Before GG gets his chance to. Probably just remembered a few thing he wanted to say to Dems in Congress.

[ProSense]

19. Huh?

"It seems quite obvious that Pres. Obama wants to put the strong arm on these Representatives prior to Greenwald's testimony. "

[Vinnie From Indy]

21. That statement seems pretty unambiguous and self-explanatory, but let me know if you

need me to remove the big words.

[ProSense]

25. I know, mean Obama strikes again.

He's weak. He's not a fighter, but damn he's mean. All he has to do is stare and Congressional Democrats cave to his every wish.

[Vinnie From Indy]

30. Well, the thing is that Pres. Obama is a consumate politician

and as such, he makes decisions almost entirely from that perspective. He probably abandoned doing things out of spite after leaving high school. No, Pres. Obama does things for political reasons and I highly doubt he is doing this to be mean. He has other reasons I am sure.

Cheers!

[ProSense]

39. LOL! Shrewd Obama.

[randome]

54. Yes, it's not like Greenwald knows how to use a phone or anything.

Last edited Tue Jul 30, 2013, 07:51 PM - Edit history (1)

Crap! I forgot! The NSA is tapping all our phones and watching our thoughts form as we type.

Maybe Greenwald can try carrier pigeons?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[Cali_Democrat]

67. Greenwald is a legend in his own mind

He actually thinks the President did this so he couldn't testify. He thinks he's THAT important.

[kentuck]

15. I think the reason Obama found a "sudden and newfound interest" in them...

...is because they are doing their best to contain this story. They do not want Greenwald giving information to these Congressmen that they may find embarrassing, at the least. More than likely, the White House requested they cancel the meeting. And the Democrats have agreed to postpone it. These congressmen need to be sufficiently briefed. It is not enough to have the hatchet men working on Greenwald and Snowden 24/7...

[great white snark]

40. Man, you are just putty in Greenwald's hand.

Couldn't be because of the major speech he just made-you go with Greenwald's "newfound interest" whine. Of course.

[Mojorabbit]

42. I agree. nt

[Skip Intro]

73. I agree too. What pisses me off is that they're supposed to

be doing the business of the people. The people they supposedly serve. That is supposed to be the focus. What is best for the nation, for the people. Being focused on protecting political careers instead, and misusing our bedrock institutions in the process is just not acceptable. Not a fan of much I am seeing from either side for some time now.

[railsback]

83. Yeah, its not like Obama meets with Congressional Democrats all the time

Pftt! Greenwald is also responsible for making Obama play golf.

[BenzoDia]

18. Thanks, Obama.

[JI7]

28. more blackmail from Obama

i think he might have threatened to strike the hearing with a drone.

just look at what happened to michael hastings..........

[arely staircase]

68. or all those OWS protestors killed in houston. nt

[mrdmk]

99. Do you as a person, think it is proper for people who are peacefully protesting

to get the crap kicked out of them, no matter which nation it might be?

[arely staircase]

110. no and that isnt what i am referring to

But rather the crazy batshittery posted here several times and receiving many recs that FBI snipers planned to assasinate protestors in Houston or at least turn a blind eye to others doing it.

[think]

33. Please invite Tice, Binney, Drake, Edmonds, & Wiebe when rescheduled.....

[randome]

53. Put them all under oath and I'm fine with that. Including Greenwald.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[think]

56. Tice was ready in 2006 but was told congress didn't have clearance

to hear his testimony.

And by congress I specifically mean the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence:

In a letter dated January 10, 2006, Renee Seymour, Director of the NSA Special Access Programs Central Office, warned Tice that members of neither the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, nor of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence had clearance to receive the classified information about the SAP's that Tice was prepared to provide....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russ_Tice

[randome]

57. Tice last worked for the NSA in 2005.

And he makes new allegations periodically so I'm a little suspicious of any testimony he might give.

But hey, nothing wrong with changing things now and putting them all under oath. But it doesn't seem like Congress is all that interested. It's 'the less I know, the less trouble I can get into' type of attitude.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[think]

59. Who could he tell if he couldn't even tell congress's intelligence committees?

A priest?

I find the fact that the NSA can tell Tice that congress intelligence committee members are below the pay grade necessary to be trusted with secret information much more suspect than the delay in Tice's statements.

In fact I find it utterly ludicrous that such an event EVER occurred...

[randome]

74. I confess I don't understand that, either.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[Tarheel_Dem]

36. He's blaming Obama? What's new?

[great white snark]

41. And his disciples are following suit.

Fuck off Glenn. No matter your innermost desires, Washington doesn't revolve around you.

[Tarheel_Dem]

49. Well of course they are. And everybody else is an agent of NSA, BOA, or the Chamber of Commerce.

[Whisp]

44. Thanks, Obama!

zip that little cretin up. zip zip zip.com.

you have the Powers!

[dkf]

45. Posting to pooh pooh I see...

Anyone ever tell you that a joke is only half a lie? Unfortunately for us what you think is a joke is the entire truth.

Trying to coverup his bad behavior won't work. It only makes people more determined to learn the truth.

[ProSense]

46. The fact that Greenwald is whining is both "the truth" and a "joke."

[dkf]

50. You aren't doing Obama any favors.

It only makes people more upset.

[ProSense]

55. If that's your goal, you aren't. It's not mine.

"It only makes people more upset."

I'm criticizing Greenwald, and I don't care who it upsets.

[questionseverything]

79. i have wondered for a while now if pro

was not actively working against the current admin...the way they post a paragraph and take out one little phrase and scream it over and over,when the rest shows pro is full of beans

or the general mean spirit pro uses against other dems

or the way they thrash the Constitution

when i started recently reading DU regularly i thought i was a FIRM dem but honestly if people like pro and random represent standard bearers of the party...maybe it is not for me

[Octafish]

47. That news shouldn't make anyone who cares about the Bill of Rights happy...

...in particular those who value freedom of speech and the press.

[ProSense]

48. Funny, I care about the Bill of Rights and Greenwald's whine is still hilarious. n/t

[Octafish]

61. Really? Wouldn't know it from reading your posts.

You have devoted a large amount of energy on DU to denigrate a very important journalist.

If Greenwald was all that funny, he never would've been invited to testify before Congress.

[ProSense]

72. Please,

"You have devoted a large amount of energy on DU to denigrate a very important journalist. "

...don't assume a self-righteous posture regarding the Bill of Rights because you believe Greenwald is a "very important journalist."

In 2005, Greenwald defended Tancredo against those calling him out for his racist views.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023369993

"If Greenwald was all that funny, he never would've been invited to testify before Congress."

All sorts of people testify before Congress, and they do it in formal hearings.

[Octafish]

85. If that disqualifies him in your mind as a journalist, you may really not understand.

Either way, try this:

"...Greenwald’s role in the Snowden NSA story has been that of a journalist, part of a long tradition of reporters who uncover information by talking to those who have it, then analyzing and presenting what they’ve found out to the public. Attempts by big media journalists like (David) Gregory to establish who is worthy of the constitutional protection afforded to the press lie on the edge of a slippery slope." -- John Light

http://billmoyers.com/2013/06/26/david-gregory-glenn-greenwald-and-the-first-amendment/

That's coming from a guy who knows what journalism's all about. And he's not talking about Karl Rove's dance partner.

[ProSense]

91. Oh

If that disqualifies him in your mind as a journalist, you may really not understand.

Either way, try this:

"...Greenwald’s role in the Snowden NSA story has been that of a journalist, part of a long tradition of reporters who uncover information by talking to those who have it, then analyzing and presenting what they’ve found out to the public. Attempts by big media journalists like (David) Gregory to establish who is worthy of the constitutional protection afforded to the press lie on the edge of a slippery slope." -- Bill Moyers

http://billmoyers.com/2013/06/26/david-gregory-glenn-greenwald-and-the-first-amendment/

That's coming from a guy who knows what journalism's all about. And he's not talking about Karl Rove's dance partner.

...I "understand," and I'm not impressed.

Glenn Greenwald's 'Epic Botch'?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023012813

Greenwald tries to do damage control
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023244823

Carl Bernstein: Greenwald 'out of line' (updated)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023261520

Greenwald's evidence for his latest claim is a 2008 report.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023361622

[Octafish]

93. I'm sorry. You really don't understand.

"No healthy democracy can endure when the most consequential acts of those in power remain secret and unaccountable." -- Glenn Greenwald

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jun/07/whistleblowers-and-leak-investigations/print

[ProSense]

94. More than

I'm sorry. You really don't understand.

"No healthy democracy can endure when the most consequential acts of those in power remain secret and unaccountable." -- Glenn Greenwald

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jun/07/whistleblowers-and-leak-investigations/print

...Greenwald, and his platitudes don't impress me.

Greenwald:

(2) Whether domestic assassinations are imminent is irrelevant to the debate

The primary means of mocking Paul's concerns was to deride the notion that Obama is about to unleash drone attacks and death squads on US soil aimed at Americans. But nobody, including Paul, suggested that was the case. To focus on that attack is an absurd strawman, a deliberate distraction from the real issues, a total irrelevancy...First, the reason this question matters so much - can the President target US citizens for assassination without due process on US soil? - is because it demonstrates just how radical the Obama administration's theories of executive power are. Once you embrace the premises of everything they do in this area - we are a Nation at War; the entire globe is the battlefield; the president is vested with the unchecked power to use force against anyone he accuses of involvement with Terrorism - then there is no cogent, coherent way to say that the president lacks the power to assassinate even US citizens on US soil. That conclusion is the necessary, logical outcome of the premises that have been embraced. That's why it is so vital to ask that.

<...>

Um, bullshit!

The President is advocating a drone strike program in America. All we have to compare it with is the drone strike program overseas.

http://twitter.com/SenRandPaul/status/309465276863365120

Glenn Greenwald defend Rand Paul against "Democratic myths"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022485711

[Octafish]

97. So you're intentionally missing the point. That's different.

We wouldn't know as much about how the United States government was torturing its own enlisted man:

The inhumane conditions of Bradley Manning’s detention

The private -- accused of leaking to WikiLeaks -- endures conditions many would call cruel, and possibly torture

BY GLENN GREENWALD
Salon.com, WEDNESDAY, DEC 15, 2010

Bradley Manning, the 22-year-old U.S. Army Private accused of leaking classified documents to WikiLeaks, has never been convicted of that crime, nor of any other crime. Despite that, he has been detained at the U.S. Marine brig in Quantico, Virginia for five months — and for two months before that in a military jail in Kuwait — under conditions that constitute cruel and inhumane treatment and, by the standards of many nations, even torture. Interviews with several people directly familiar with the conditions of Manning’s detention, ultimately including a Quantico brig official (Lt. Brian Villiard) who confirmed much of what they conveyed, establishes that the accused leaker is subjected to detention conditions likely to create long-term psychological injuries.

Since his arrest in May, Manning has been a model detainee, without any episodes of violence or disciplinary problems. He nonetheless was declared from the start to be a “Maximum Custody Detainee,” the highest and most repressive level of military detention, which then became the basis for the series of inhumane measures imposed on him.

From the beginning of his detention, Manning has been held in intensive solitary confinement. For 23 out of 24 hours every day — for seven straight months and counting — he sits completely alone in his cell. Even inside his cell, his activities are heavily restricted; he’s barred even from exercising and is under constant surveillance to enforce those restrictions. For reasons that appear completely punitive, he’s being denied many of the most basic attributes of civilized imprisonment, including even a pillow or sheets for his bed (he is not and never has been on suicide watch). For the one hour per day when he is freed from this isolation, he is barred from accessing any news or current events programs. Lt. Villiard protested that the conditions are not “like jail movies where someone gets thrown into the hole,” but confirmed that he is in solitary confinement, entirely alone in his cell except for the one hour per day he is taken out.

In sum, Manning has been subjected for many months without pause to inhumane, personality-erasing, soul-destroying, insanity-inducing conditions of isolation similar to those perfected at America’s Supermax prison in Florence, Colorado: all without so much as having been convicted of anything. And as is true of many prisoners subjected to warped treatment of this sort, the brig’s medical personnel now administer regular doses of anti-depressants to Manning to prevent his brain from snapping from the effects of this isolation.

CONTINUED...

http://www.salon.com/2010/12/15/manning_3/

How much of that was mentioned in your local newspaper? Did you see the story on your television screen? Did you hear people talk about it at work? I didn't at all, until Greenwald wrote that article.

[ProSense]

102. Here's the deal: You believe in Greenwald. I do not. Period. n/t

[Octafish]

105. No. I believe in Greenwald and the RIGHT of all journalists to state what they think.

You are doing a lot of work on DU to denigrate Greenwald so what he reports and thinks gets lost.

That's an even bigger difference than believing or not believing in Greenwald.

[ProSense]

106. Greenwald is not a journalist. He writes flawed commentaries.

You are upset because not everyone agrees with you about Greenwald.

His whining in the OP piece is pathetic.

[railsback]

84. If you don't believe Greenwald, you automatically hate the Bill of Rights

..so I've been told. Glad there's so many here telling me who I am and what I think.

[Octafish]

88. No. That's a propaganda technique...

...state something that wasn't said and then make it into something to argue.

My contention is that Greenwald should be heard by Congress because he is a journalist. Those who think that is worth ridiculing don't fully understand the First Amendment, in my opinion.

[phleshdef]

51. LOL Greenwald is such a self important little fuck isn't he?

He actually thinks the President gives 2 shits about his testifying that he is plotting meetings with the House to prevent it? As if they couldn't just reschedule it another time?

I'm sick of this guy. He worships his own damn feces. The fact of the matter is, the President has way more important shit to worry about than poor little Glen Greenwald.

[ljm2002]

75. That's low, even for you. n/t

[railsback]

80. What's low is Grayson thinking he could get away with showboating on the taxpayer's dime

He caught himself.

[ljm2002]

89. No, what's low...

...is you posting that picture implying he's cashing in somehow.

And also, targeting one of the few progressive Democrats who knows how to fight for us.

I will say, though, that I am not surprised at the way you chimed in here. Not at all.

[Luminous Animal]

92. Google search turns up two instances of "Grayson" + "fleece"

Free Republic and The Conservative Cave.

Interesting.

[Whisp]

62. I'd like to know which meeting was scheduled first.

I wouldn't put it past the Green&Gray to deliberately schedule for a known House meeting just so they could whine that Obama is trying to shut them up and mess with them.

[flamingdem]

69. Agree! We know there was something up the Green sleeve

on this one.

[ljm2002]

76. So now it's a conspiracy...

...between Greenwald and Grayson.

[Whisp]

77. how is the conspiratorial, it's politics!

Similar happens all the time. Try to trip up your opposition. Make hay, then insert gloats.

[ljm2002]

78. Horse pucky.

I do find it interesting, though, that you are promoting a theory that Grayson cooked up a plan with Greenwald to discredit Obama -- oh, excuse me, to "trip up your opposition". I did not know that Grayson considered Obama his "opposition".

Frankly this sounds like paranoid ravings.

[Whisp]

81. I'm disappointed in Grayson for jumping on the Glennwagon so soon.

He was hair on firing right out of the gate when the story was barely day old bread and he couldn't keep up with new information (or didni't want to) - he just used the Greenwald Screed as his Bible of Truth in the The Matter.

[ljm2002]

90. He "couldn't keep up with new information"...

...and you know this how?

You really want to claim that Alan Grayson knows less than you do about this?

No surprise here. It seems that bashing good, solid, progressive Democrats has become a sport here at DU by a few vocal posters. Damned shame.

[Whisp]

96. bashing good solid progressive President Obama has been a sport here for years.

why is Grayson not open to criticism when Obama gets character assassinated here daily?

I don't think Grayson knows less than us on this matter, but he is playing a different kind of game it seems. I don't what why he is doing what he is and connecting himself to such a character as Greenwald.

Reaching for any spotlight he can find, I suppose.

[ljm2002]

98. It is truly entertaining...

...to watch the meltdowns over the very mention of Greenwald here.

Entertaining, and also very weird.

There do seem to be some "different kind of games" going on all right. I don't know why either.

[Whisp]

104. No meltdown here. It's just a matter of time before Greenwald does himself in.

Time is ticking.

The only thing he has going is it is now acceptable to Lie like a Rug, thanks to the Baggers that set that tone. But that won't last too much longer.

[ljm2002]

107. Oh, it's a meltdown all right...

...the very minute Grayson included Greenwald on the roster of people who were going to testify, all of the sudden Grayson gets thrown under the bus. Like clockwork, and like I said, entertaining -- in a dark sort of way.

[Whisp]

109. Grayson showed really bad judgement by associating with GG.

That didn't make me melt down, that made me think of him quite differently. I wasn't ever a fangirl tho.

[ljm2002]

112. Not surprising...

...that the meltdownee does not recognize the meltdown.

O wad some Power the giftie gie us
To see oursels as ithers see us!

[Whisp]

113. I see your Hair is Ablaze. n/t

[ljm2002]

114. And your Door is A Jar. n/t

[Whisp]

116. Knock Knock. No One's There. n/t

[ljm2002]

117. Indeed. n/t

[Cha]

111. I'm not "disappointed" because I didn't expect anything

better comiing from grayson. I've seen him and his disingenous grandstanding on DU designed to rake in the big bucks.

[tritsofme]

63. LOL. Someone certainly has an ego. I'm sorry he doesn't get to have his pretend "hearing"

He could still do a webchat with Jason Amash and his other Republican buddies!

[Andy823]

70. I agree

From what I understood this was not a "hearing" they were just asking people to talk to them, not real "testimony", not swearing under oath, and Greenwald was doing by phone, not even showing up in person. I do believe this whole thing was much to do about nothing really!

[arely staircase]

65. greenwald now taking credit forbthe presidents schedule nt

[railsback]

66. Next, he'll be taking credit for making Obama eat salad.

[Cha]

87. Of course, GGreenwald is blaming the President..

GG can't take a shit without blaming it on Obama.

Wasn't greenwald just claiming there's no difference between Dems and repubs? Anyone who can absorb facts knew that was a lie.

[Bobbie Jo]

95. Thanks, Obama

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

[Cha]

100. You're Welcome

[BumRushDaShow]

101. So Greenwald has manufactured yet another news cycle. nt

[deurbano]

108. Rescheduled

(WASHINGTON, D.C.) – Congressman Alan Grayson (FL-09) has announced that tomorrow’s Bipartisan Ad Hoc Hearing on Domestic Surveillance will be postponed until early September. The ad hoc hearing was initially set to take place tomorrow at 9:30 a.m. Planned witnesses included Glenn Greenwald of The Guardian (via satellite); Julian Sanchez, Research Fellow at the Cato Institute; Michelle Richardson, Legislative Counsel at the ACLU; Yochai Benkler, Berkman Professor of Entrepreneurial Legal Studies at Harvard; and J. Kirk Wiebe, a former NSA senior analyst.

“Tomorrow’s ad hoc hearing would have conflicted with the President’s recently-announced meeting with the House Democratic Caucus,” Grayson explained. “As a result, we are reluctantly postponing it until Congress reconvenes in September. The American people want Congress to explore the legality, constitutionality, drawbacks, and supposed benefits of domestic surveillance – and we will ensure that these issues are evaluated at our ad hoc hearing in September.”


grayson.house.gov

[kentuck]

115. It's a bummer the August recess is more important than the information...

we may get from an ad hoc committee with questions for Glenn Greenwald.

[deurbano]

119. We need to keep the momentum going, in spite of the delay.

[Major Hogwash]

118. Doesn't matter anyway.

Greenwald was just going to tell his version of the story, which has changed 3 times in the last month.