Skip to main content

View Diary: Spying and Lying, the Constitution and Conservatism (118 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Attack already underway (none)
    I posted this on the Open Thread, but here:

    I know it's Drudge, but often he is the canary in the coal mine. Claiming that the NY Times reporter on the spying story has a book coming out and did not disclose it.  In my view, if this is the best they can do, they're screwed.  Specter said it was unacceptable, they would look into it.


    Newspaper fails to inform readers "news break" is tied to book publication

    On the front page of today's NEW YORK TIMES, national security reporter James Risen claims that "months after the September 11 attacks, President Bush secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States... without the court approved warrants ordinarily required for domestic spying, according to government officials."

    Risen claims the White House asked the paper not to publish the article, saying that it could jeopardize continuing investigations and alert would-be terrorists that they might be under scrutiny.

    Risen claims the TIMES delayed publication of the article for a year to conduct additional reporting.

    But now comes word James Risen's article is only one of many "explosive newsbreaking" stories that can be found -- in his upcoming book!

    The paper failed to reveal the urgent story was tied to a book release and sale.

    "STATE OF WAR: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration" is to be published by FREE PRESS in the coming weeks, sources tell the DRUDGE REPORT.

    Carisa Hays, VP, Director of Publicity FREE PRESS, confirms the book is being published.

    The book editor of Bush critic Richard Clarke [AGAINST ALL ENEMIES] signed Risen to FREE PRESS.

    Republicans to Americans: "Are there no prisons?...And the Union workhouses?...Are they still in operation?"

    by adigal on Fri Dec 16, 2005 at 09:50:53 AM PST

    •  Why did the NY Times wait until today to publish? (none)
      Senate Blocks Extension of Patriot Act !

      I wonder if the furor in D.C. over the 'breaking' Bush spying on Americans story influenced the Senators?

      By JESSE J. HOLLAND, Associated Press Writer 1 minute ago

      The Senate on Friday rejected attempts to reauthorize several provisions of the USA Patriot Act as infringing too much on Americans' privacy, dealing a major defeat to President Bush and Republican leaders.

      In a crucial vote Friday morning as Congress raced toward adjournment, the bill's Senate supporters were not able to garner the 60 votes necessary to overcome a threatened filibuster by Sens. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., and Larry Craig, R-Idaho, and their allies. The final vote was 52-47.


      by ccnwon on Fri Dec 16, 2005 at 09:57:00 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  The furor in D.C. is incredible (none)
        Senators have reacted angrily to a report - so far not denied  - that President Bush allowed spying on Americans without court approval.

        Breaking BBC Story:
        Last Updated: Friday, 16 December 2005, 17:48 GMT  

        Bush spying claim causes US storm  

        One of Bush's top aides says he did not break the law
        Allegations that President George Bush authorised security agents to eavesdrop on people inside the US have caused a storm of protest, even from his allies.


        by ccnwon on Fri Dec 16, 2005 at 10:01:08 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Is spying on your own citizens unconstitutional? (none)
          If so, could we impeach Bush over it? This was a presidential order, which he signed(!), so he would have signed an order that was contrary to the constitution, and one of his primary job duties is to uphold it... didn't he swear on the Bible saying he would do so?
          •  This is a criminal matter (none)
            "Bush secret order to spy on Americans may amount to authorizing criminal activity"


            "Kate Martin, director of the Center for National Security Studies at George Washington University, said the secret order may amount to the president authorizing criminal activity."

            From the Wash Post today:




            by ccnwon on Fri Dec 16, 2005 at 12:08:08 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  society of friends (none)
            I am one of the South Florida people who is probably on the DOD list.  All I did was attend my meeting house for services.  Is the ACLU going to go after these people?  Isn't this like the lists that Hitler had before he started the gas chambers, or more like the lists McCarthy had before he started getting people blacklisted.  These people are really taking us back to the fifties.  the bad part.  McCarthy, segregation, lynching.
          •  EO 12333 (4.00)
            Strictly speaking, it is prohibited under Executive Order 12333 for DoD entities to conduct intelligence opeations against "US Persons"Strictly speaking, it is prohibited under Executive Order 12333 for DoD entities to conduct intelligence operations against "US Persons."  Google EO 12333 for the LONG definition of a "US Person."

            The key here is that it is an "Executive (as in President) Order" and as such it can be modified or even eliminated by the same pen that wrote it.  Every President since Carter has modified it in some way so there is nothing to stop this President from doing so.  NO ONE at NSA would have done anything close to domestic collection without a SPECIFIC 12333 waiver and ONLY the President can authorize that.  There is a LONG paper trail and it can ONLY end in the Oval Office.  This is one of those written things - you wait and do nothing until you have the paper that says "get out of jail" because that is EXACTLY where you go for violations of 12333.  Not a phone call, not an email, not a fax, you get an ORIGINAL with ink.

            It is well that war is so terrible -- lest we should grow too fond of it. Robert E. Lee

            by ksuwildkat on Fri Dec 16, 2005 at 12:44:43 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  No Financial Incentive for the Times (none)
        One big flaw in this theory is that The Free Press is an imprint of Simon & Schuster, which is the publishing operation of Viacom Inc. It has no ties to the New York Times (although it does publish Wall Street Journal Books). So there's nothin' in it financially for the New York Times. Ergo, no compelling reason for the Times to push the book, which isn't mentioned in the story, anyway.
        •  Incorrect (none)
          What we have here is a rather pathetic attempt to regain some credibility lost by publishing the Miller lies for so long. There may be another reason as well.

          This lack of credibilty has lost the Times signficant readership. This adds up to big dollars.

          Voila, the financial incentive.


          by ccnwon on Fri Dec 16, 2005 at 12:19:50 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  "spying and lying" is excellent! (4.00)
      Republicans are about spying and lying. That's a great counter-strike to the "retreat and defeat" bumper sticker from the GOP's ad agencies. I like it!

      The Moe Sizlak Experience, featuring Homer Simpson.

      by lepermessiah on Fri Dec 16, 2005 at 10:18:00 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site