Skip to main content

View Diary: Abbreviated pundit round-up: A few real scandals to mix with the fake ones (76 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  The AP scandal is not the same (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    peregrine kate, Meteor Blades

    as the ginned-up furor over the IRS and Benghazi emails and the President's choice of vocabulary.

    The AP scandal is a real scandal.

    If we talk about all three issues as one issue, it will be impossible to address each issue fairly. Real wrongdoing by the Obama administration will be lost in a welter of idiotic Republican propaganda on other issues. I'd like to think that the Democratic party doesn't need to hide behind a froth of Republican perfidy and unreason to justify its actions.

    I encourage everybody to address each issue on its own merits, look into the facts, and come to your own conclusions, rather than responding to three separate events as if they were one indistinguishable mass.

    "When people spin this in partisan terms to obfuscate the truth, it does a real disservice to normal people not in the big club in DC. Many of them will be hurting...That is why I write."--priceman

    by SouthernLiberalinMD on Mon May 20, 2013 at 05:31:12 AM PDT

    •  If it is a real scandal (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Outraged Mom

      then it is George Bush's scandal because all of it is legal under the Patriot Act.  

      Everyone! Arms akimbo!

      by tobendaro on Mon May 20, 2013 at 05:33:42 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Since when did Democrats get in the business (0+ / 0-)

        of endorsing George Bush's Patriot Act?

        If it's George Bush's scandal, let the President cast off such crappy unconstitutional practices posthaste.

        "When people spin this in partisan terms to obfuscate the truth, it does a real disservice to normal people not in the big club in DC. Many of them will be hurting...That is why I write."--priceman

        by SouthernLiberalinMD on Mon May 20, 2013 at 05:58:44 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Since it passed the House and Senate (0+ / 0-)

          in 2001 and in all the renewals since then.

          “We are not a nation that says ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’ We are a nation that says ‘out of many, we are one.’” -Barack Obama

          by skohayes on Mon May 20, 2013 at 06:31:16 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Really? We were endorsing the Patriot Act (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            wonmug

            in 2001?

            As I recall, this site when founded was anything but in support of the Patriot Act. Certainly nobody said:  well, George W Bush managed to ram this through Congress therefore we should support it.

            So now we're in the habit of accepting anything that has been made legal, no matter how it was made legal or by whom, and no matter whether the law is constitutional or not, and no matter what the effects are on our democracy?

            In other words, we support George Bush's policies because George Bush succeeded in getting those policies established as the law of the land. In other words, any President that does wrong can rest assured in the knowledge his wrongs will never be corrected.  Any Congress, too.

            It's a good thing people didn't take this attitude toward slavery.

            "When people spin this in partisan terms to obfuscate the truth, it does a real disservice to normal people not in the big club in DC. Many of them will be hurting...That is why I write."--priceman

            by SouthernLiberalinMD on Mon May 20, 2013 at 06:40:58 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  No one is claiming we support George Bush's (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              tobendaro, offgrid

              policies.  But to be called a scandal, an action needs to be illegal.  And as long as congress keeps endorsing the Patriot Act, whether "we" like it or not, there was nothing illegal in the DOJ's actions taken against the AP -  Bad judgment maybe, but not illegality.

              If the Republicans and Democrats in congress are so outraged about the DOJ's actions, they have it within their power to repeal the Patriot Act, but I haven't heard any of them even suggest such a brave position.  Outrage makes better television.

              "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H. L. Mencken

              by SueDe on Mon May 20, 2013 at 07:22:29 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  In the first place, it is not yet clear whether (0+ / 0-)

                it is illegal.

                And in the second place, something can be merely immoral and be a scandal. For instance, there is nothing that says that sending dirty pictures over the internet is illegal, yet it caused a scandal that brought down a Congressman.

                Legal actions can certainly result in scandal.

                "When people spin this in partisan terms to obfuscate the truth, it does a real disservice to normal people not in the big club in DC. Many of them will be hurting...That is why I write."--priceman

                by SouthernLiberalinMD on Mon May 20, 2013 at 09:46:20 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  No, not here, of course (0+ / 0-)

              I thought when you said Democrats, you meant elected Democrats. My bad.
              But it should be noted that the subpoenas had nothing to do with the Patriot Act.

              “We are not a nation that says ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’ We are a nation that says ‘out of many, we are one.’” -Barack Obama

              by skohayes on Mon May 20, 2013 at 07:32:33 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  A scandal in what way? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      skohayes, I love OCD, Outraged Mom

      From all appearances nothing illegal or improper was done. The AP was pissed when they found out about it, but that doesn't make it a scandal

      •  So we are now endorsing a fishing expedition (0+ / 0-)

        through the monitoring of journalists' phone calls over an extended period, and our justification for this, in contradiction of both DOJ's own stated policies and the constitutional demand for a free and unfettered press, is that a law passed by George Bush makes it legal?

        We're now using George Bush's laws to justify our actions?

        I thought the idea of beating George Bush was that we were going to behave differently than he did.

        "When people spin this in partisan terms to obfuscate the truth, it does a real disservice to normal people not in the big club in DC. Many of them will be hurting...That is why I write."--priceman

        by SouthernLiberalinMD on Mon May 20, 2013 at 06:02:03 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  No one monitored the AP's phone calls (0+ / 0-)

          Phone records were subpoenaed by the Justice Department in an attempt to find the leaker from the administration to the AP about a foiled terrorist attack.

          “We are not a nation that says ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’ We are a nation that says ‘out of many, we are one.’” -Barack Obama

          by skohayes on Mon May 20, 2013 at 06:33:42 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  If they actually subpoenaed the AP, they (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            wonmug

            were required to inform the AP of said subpoena, in which case it wasn't legal.

            If it was an administrative subpoena, which involves no judge (aka a "National Security Letter") then they are not required to inform the targets. But is that something we want to support?

            While Bush was doing it, we were close to unilaterally opposed.

            "When people spin this in partisan terms to obfuscate the truth, it does a real disservice to normal people not in the big club in DC. Many of them will be hurting...That is why I write."--priceman

            by SouthernLiberalinMD on Mon May 20, 2013 at 06:46:06 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  nuance is our friend. It's just possible that (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              gfv6800

              there are some genuine national security issues that are real, and serious.  As it's possible that police in large cities need training to deal with terrorism, that cutting government spending might be wise in certain instances, that regulation isn't invariably good or bad, it depends on individual circumstances.  The cuts Obama made to Medicare gave me better coverage for less out of pocket and cut into profiteers the Republicans created.  We would do well to be less hyper-reactive to certain words and phrases.  If Obama succeeds is raising the base SS benefit to something significantly above the poverty level then chains CPI to slow annual growth of the program how is that a bad thing?  No senior should live below the poverty line when SS is all they have.  No disabled person should either.  If I started out being out of the hole I could survive nicely on smaller COLAs.  Nuance, details, intent, effect.  It all matters.

              I'm not looking for a love that will lift me up and carry me away. A love that will stroll alongside and make a few amusing comments will suffice.

              by I love OCD on Mon May 20, 2013 at 07:02:56 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Legal according to law established in 1979 (0+ / 0-)
              U.S. law allows the government to engage in this type of surveillance—on media organizations or anyone else—without meaningful judicial oversight.
              The key here is a legal principle known as the “third party doctrine,” which says that users don’t have Fourth Amendment rights protecting information they voluntarily turn over to someone else. Courts have said that when you dial a phone number, you are voluntarily providing information to your phone company, which is then free to share it with the government.
              Also noted in this article is that journalists get special treatment:
              Journalists get a bit of a special deal here. The government has established special policies to guard against inappropriate surveillance of reporters. Before an FBI agent can seek a journalist’s call records, they must get special approval from the attorney general. But that’s merely a Justice Department policy, not a constitutional requirement. The policy could be changed in the future, and the lack of independent oversight makes abuses more likely.
              The rest of the country doesn’t get even the modest procedural protection the government affords to journalists. The FBI likely didn’t need a warrant to obtain e-mail records that led to the identification of Paula Broadwell as the mistress of Gen. David Petraeus last year.
              http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

              “We are not a nation that says ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’ We are a nation that says ‘out of many, we are one.’” -Barack Obama

              by skohayes on Mon May 20, 2013 at 07:19:51 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  For the last time, we are not "supporting" it. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              skohayes

              What we are supporting is the idea that what the DOJ did is not and should not be referred to as a scandal because what the agency did was not illegal.  If congress thinks what happened is a scandal, they should repeal the portion of the Patriot Act that gives the cover of legality to what the DOJ did.

              "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H. L. Mencken

              by SueDe on Mon May 20, 2013 at 07:25:54 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  If it was a real subpoena, actually DOJ (0+ / 0-)

                was doing something illegal. If it was an NSL, then DOJ was not.

                "When people spin this in partisan terms to obfuscate the truth, it does a real disservice to normal people not in the big club in DC. Many of them will be hurting...That is why I write."--priceman

                by SouthernLiberalinMD on Mon May 20, 2013 at 09:48:11 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (148)
  • Community (64)
  • Elections (43)
  • Civil Rights (37)
  • Culture (32)
  • 2016 (32)
  • Baltimore (28)
  • Texas (27)
  • Economy (27)
  • Law (27)
  • Environment (26)
  • Bernie Sanders (26)
  • Hillary Clinton (24)
  • Labor (23)
  • Rescued (21)
  • Health Care (20)
  • Barack Obama (20)
  • Republicans (18)
  • International (17)
  • Freddie Gray (17)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site