Comrades, do you know who is responsible for this? Do you know the enemy who has come in the night and overthrown our windmill? SNOWBALL! (The pig Napoleon in Orwell’s Animal Farm)
Newsweek’s Jonathan Alter is a pig. But not just any pig. Alter is the perfect representation of Napoleon, George Orwell’s Stalinesque pig character in Animal Farm whose rhetorical obfuscation and hyperbole helps him manipulate the other animals on the farm:
As Napoleon was deceiving the neighboring farmers he was also tricking his own animals. The scapegoat was again Snowball. “Whenever anything went wrong it became usual to attribute it to Snowball.” In fact many of the claims begin to sound ridiculous to the objective mind. Of course, Squealer’s mission is to keep everything subjective in the minds of the animals.
“If a window was broken or a drain was blocked up, someone was certain to say that Snowball had come in the night and done it, and when the key of the store-shed was lost, the whole farm was convinced that Snowball had thrown it down the well. Curiously enough, they went on believing this even after the mislaid key was found under a sack of meal.”
Here’s Alter in Newsweek on the actions of the President of the United States following 9/11:
Finally we have a Washington scandal that goes beyond sex, corruption and political intrigue to big issues like security versus liberty and the reasonable bounds of presidential power. President Bush came out swinging on Snoopgate—he made it seem as if those who didn’t agree with him wanted to leave us vulnerable to Al Qaeda—but it will not work. We’re seeing clearly now that Bush thought 9/11 gave him license to act like a dictator, or in his own mind, no doubt, like Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War.
In one paragraph, Alter manages to accuse the President of “clearly” acting like a dictator and ascribing delusions of grandeur to the President for thinking himself “like Abraham Lincoln.”
Of course, there is absolutely nothing “clear” about this wiretapping story except in the fevered imagination of Alter and the left. And what evidence does Mr. Alter have that Mr. Bush thought of himself as Lincoln?
Zero. Zip. Nada. It is an hysterical fantasy. And like poor Snowball, Alter has targeted the President and accused him of doing everything except perhaps losing the keys to the storage shed:
No, Bush was desperate to keep the Times from running this important story—which the paper had already inexplicably held for a year—because he knew that it would reveal him as a law-breaker. He insists he had “legal authority derived from the Constitution and congressional resolution authorizing force.†But the Constitution explicitly requires the president to obey the law. And the post 9/11 congressional resolution authorizing “all necessary force†in fighting terrorism was made in clear reference to military intervention. It did not scrap the Constitution and allow the president to do whatever he pleased in any area in the name of fighting terrorism.
The President as “lawbreaker?” I’m sorry, but the absolute worst that can be said of the President’s actions in this case is that his legal standing on the issue of intercepting communications is open to debate. Alter implies that there is no argument. It is apparent he doesn’t read much because the debate currently raging on both the right and the left among some of the best legal minds in the country is far from having a “clear” resolution. The idea that the President authorized willy nilly the blanket use of the technical abilities of the NSA to spy on American citizens is an outrageous lie and Alter knows it. And as for the President’s legal standing regarding the Congressional resolution authorizing “all necessary force” in fighting terrorism where in God’s name has the President “scrapped the Constitution” in carrying out this limited intelligence program. It is rhetorical excess. It is hyperbole of the worst sort. It simply is not true.
Bush claimed that “the fact that we are discussing this program is helping the enemy.†But there is simply no evidence, or even reasonable presumption, that this is so. And rather than the leaking being a “shameful act,†it was the work of a patriot inside the government who was trying to stop a presidential power grab.
Of course there is a “reasonable presumption” that by discussing any NSA operation we are helping the enemy. What kind of a nitwit is Alter anyway? Why does he think that the NSA has such extraordinarily strict rules against leaking? Letting the enemy know how we are keeping track of him is not “a reasonable presumption” that plastering this program all over the front pages of an international newspaper isn’t damaging national security?
And I somehow have the feeling that the leaker of this program will not be looked on by anyone except Mr. Alter and his defeatist friends on the left as a patriot. He will certainly not be looked at as a patriot by the law which will send them away for a very long time to contemplate the damage done to our ability to spy on terrorists.
This will all play out eventually in congressional committees and in the United States Supreme Court. If the Democrats regain control of Congress, there may even be articles of impeachment introduced. Similar abuse of power was part of the impeachment charge brought against Richard Nixon in 1974.
Yep. Snowball did it. And while we’re at it, let’s raise poor Dick Nixon from the grave and trot out his rotting corpse one more time before everyone forgets what Nixon’s crimes really were all about. One reason historians 100 years from now will cut Mr. Nixon a little more slack than his contemporaries is that liberals always forget to mention that at the time of the domestic wiretapping scandals, there were literally tens of thousands of Americans in the streets waving the flag of an enemy that was shooting down American soldiers in Southeast Asia and calling for the violent overthrow of the United States government. What’s more, as we know now, the government was aware that much of this activity was funded and directed by a foreign power sworn to destroy us – the Soviet Union.
Nixon was in fact fighting a domestic insurrection which would seem to give the lie to Alter’s contention that there was anything at all “similar” between what Bush was doing and Nixon’s questionable use of wiretapping against both his political enemies and the internal enemies of the United States. The fact that Alter sees a similarity brands him as a certifiable loon.
Of course, the program launched by this Administration did not specifically target Americans unless they were working with a group that had just launched the deadliest attack on American soil in a couple of generations. But Alter and his hysterical comrades on the left just don’t think that this was any reason to get all bent out of shape and take extraordinary measures to protect ourselves. After all, what’s the big deal about a few thousand Americans being incinerated as a result of a terrorist operation planned overseas but carried out using established cells here in the United States?
Does Alter expect the NSA to intercept only one side of the conversation? That’s a ludicrous notion, of course, but since Alter is having a cow over any use of our technical abilities to stop the next terrorist attack if those capabilities would be used in any way to target Americans on American soil one must come to that inescapable conclusion.
Newsweek may be the first major news organ to give life to the accusation that the President of the United States has been acting like a dictator, a charge that previously saw the light only in the darkened corners of the left side of the blogosphere. It puts Mr. Alter and Newsweek in the same boat as people who have accused the government of carrying out 9/11 in order to establish a fascist state. I can’t believe that Alter is not aware of this. His deliberate use of the “D” word is the opening salvo by the left in the 2006 election battle. They are setting the stage for a possible Democratic takeover of one and possibly both Houses of Congress and have put both the President and his supporters on notice that they intend to impeach George Bush if given half a chance.
I hope the President has noticed this. The next 11 months he will be fighting for his political life and, in no small way, the life of this Republic. To allow this bunch of power mad hysterics to have their hands on the levers of government would be a disaster of the first magnitude.
UPDATE
Welcome Hugh Hewitt readers!
While you’re here, why not take a look at the newest edition of Carnival of the Clueless for some hilarious takes on the people who make blogging so much fun – the truly and completely clueless of both the right and the left.
Also, check out John McIntyre’s classic takedown of Alter’s lunacy. John has similar thoughts about the difference between Nixon’s criminal activity and Bush’s legitimate security concerns. (HT: Michelle Malkin)
UPDATE 12/21
First, I am more than a little amused that 3 different lefty bloggers saw the above headline and assumed I was calling Mr. Alter a pig. I was doing no such thing of course, except in a literary sense.
Secondly, Alter appeared on the Hugh Hewitt Show yesterday. The transcript is here. Mr. Alter is just a little out of his league in arguing the finer points of Constitutional law with Professor Hewitt. Also, read Mr. Hewitt’s further thoughts on the controversy here.
7:34 am
I read this NW article a little while ago and looked to see if anyone else had blogged about it…You’re the first that I see…and this is totally out of line.
I will fight this, so will many millions who see the actions of this President as being not only necessary and vital, but appropriate for the times.
What is baffling to me is this:
Doesn’t ANYONE see how some media outlets are USING their own status to change and alter history? THIS is far more dangerous than anything Bush has done. As far as I’m concerned, the NYT needs to be investigated.
7:37 am
[...] o protect the American people. This Newsweek article goes too far. Rick Moran says this: Newsweek may be the first major news organ to give life to the accusati [...]
8:01 am
Mr. Alter’s screed shows that whatever they may say to the contrary, liberals, progressives, leftists, etc., don’t really care about protecting this country from Islamofascist terrorism. They’re much more itrerested, it would see, in the (nonexistant) civil rights of our enemies. Somehow I doubt that writs, warrants, Miranda warnings & etc. will do much to prevent the next terrorist attack from slaughtering thousands of innocent Americans.
I’m not exactly sure what to call Jonathan Alter. I know what he isn’t, though: a patriot. Thank God we don’t have to rely on people like him for the defense of our nation.
9:18 am
War is protecting your life, not your civil libeties. Sp many liberals have forgot.
9:37 am
Can we start questioning Alter’s patriotism now? What a dangerous tool—his will be among the first heads to roll when his Islamofascist friends arrive.
10:31 am
[...] DIT WHAT ATTITUDE PROBLEM? WIDE AWAKES WIZBANG WUZZADEM
CARNIVAL OF THE CLUELESS #26JONATHAN ALT [...]
10:32 am
Thanks Rick for posting on this. I just wrote a short paragraph about it on my blog and linked to you.
Of all things Alter admits that his basis for alledging that Bush tried to stop the article to prevent embarrassment because he could not find any evidence that this knowledge was helping terrorists 3 days after the times story.
Even worse is looking at all the trackback links on Newsweak and you’ll see scores of lefty bloggers following this uninformed journalist hack like lemmings.
Do these people on the left ever engage in critical thinking or do they just wait for the Times, Post and Newsweak to supply them with some false outrage?
11:31 am
The only civil liberty I care about is my gun.
With that, I can get all the other ones back.
11:57 am
Alter-Reality
I generally have a rule in my daily reading. Both involve not paying any attention to partisan hacks with bad hair and who’s web picture looks like they haven’t take a crap in a month.
11:58 am
Mesmerized Bush idolizers wearing GOP issued brown pajamas. What happened to you? Before your power was absolute you fought against excessive government, are you now willing to abandon the underpinnings of your democracy for a chance to touch his magnificence?
The fourth Amendment states: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.â€
Bush said he got authorization when congress approved the use of force in the days after the Sept. 11, 2001, Attorney General Gonzales acknowledged that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act requires a court order for such domestic spying. Pressed on why he did not follow the surveillance act and get court approval, Bush said that would be too slow, even though such approval can be granted retroactively.
What is he trying to hide?
12:01 pm
We’re getting a lecture on a strict interpretation of the Constitution from a liberal?
THAT’S HYSTERICAL!
12:02 pm
Not a liberal, a patriot.
12:27 pm
Jason M:
You may have read the 4th Amendment, yet you did not comprehend it. Unless of course you find it UNREASONABLE to eavesdrop on the phone calls of foreign terrorists calling into and out of the United States.
Protip: it’s the NSA’s job to eavesdrop on electronic communications. Oddly enough the Clinton administration setup Echelon and utilized it much in the same way that the Bush administration has.
12:45 pm
Gabriel:
Foreign terrorists are not citizens. Again the FISA allows a warrant to be granted retroactively so time is not a factor. What Mr. Bush is doing is bypassing any oversight of his actions.
1:59 pm
Time is always a factor. One need only look at the time issues involved with the pre-9/11 work of Coleen Rowley to see this. FISA allows for 72 hour retroactive warrants if memory serves me right. Regardless, FISA may not apply here, given that such things as email and cellular phones were not around in 1978. FISA deals almost exclusively with wired transmissions (ie phones, fax).
Still as the facts have not yet been released we do not know if those involved were US Citizens or not.
Given that the prior administrations record on warantless wiretaps, etc was far more expansive than this instance, I can’t recall any front page NYTimes articles about Clinton needing to be impeached for performing warrantless searches.
Still its debatable whether Bush had the authority to circumvent FISA entirely. The bipartisan resolution authorizing the use of force against al Qaeda in mine and others view is tantamount to a formal declaration of war. This gives the President the war time powers that allow him to circumvent certain FISA requirements and thus the whole issue ends up being just another media tactic to smear the President and or sell books.
2:34 pm
FISA is an old tool that needs to be reworked to be relevant and workable for todays fight, not the fight of the 70’s. Nothing in a beauracracy is efficent.
I would add further from NRO today:
the April 14, 2004 meeting of the September 11 Commission, in which a commission staffer read some the panel’s preliminary findings. Among those findings was the conclusion that, even after the reforms of the Patriot Act, the FISA application process was “long and slow”:
Many agents in the field told us that although there is now less hesitancy in seeking approval for electronic surveillance under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, the application process nonetheless continues to be long and slow. Requests for such approvals are overwhelming the ability of the system to process them and to conduct the surveillance. The Department of Justice and FBI are attempting to address bottlenecks in the process
3:45 pm
If the process was slow Bush could request changes or increased power as he has done before,but he did not Instead he circumvented established rules and laws as he saw fit. Presidential power is not absolute, checks and balances exist to prevent unbridled power. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
3:45 pm
Jonathan Alter is NOT a loon. This is an insult to beautiful loons everywhere. He is just a simple fool. I love this stuff. It comforts me to know the dems are digging their own political graves when they continue throwing these wild haymakers. This hysterical foaming only makes them caricatures (?sp) in the eyes of reasonable Americans.
Now let’s release the Barrett Report and get on to the business of putting the real crooks in jail – Hill & Bill.
3:53 pm
If giving away vital secret technology so that your country’s enemies can copy or evade it, this would certainly qualify as patriotism of the highest order.
Do you think that this patriot is the same fellow who sent Mr Valerie Plame on his phony yellowcake fact finding trip?
4:01 pm
One might harken back to Executive Order 12333, issued by Ronald Reagan in 1981, and used by Clinton in 1994 as his basis for warrantless searches; to find the Presidential authority for GWB’s actions. In addition, lest we forget, The United States of America is presently at war – the Administration is not simply searching around for disgruntled protestors; rather, it is attempting to “connect the dots.”
4:24 pm
Executive Order 12333 still has congressional oversight as stated:
Part 3.1:Congressional Oversight. The duties and responsibilities of the Director of Central Intelligence and the heads of other departments, agencies, and entities engaged in intelligence activities to cooperate with the Congress in the conduct of its responsibilities for oversight of intelligence activities…
Without following set procedures and oversight, Mr. Bush has the ability to do surveillance on any citizen for any purpose. Our government is not intended to operate as a “trust me†institution.
4:38 pm
I don’t think Bush should have to follow this law. I wouldn’t want Clinton doing this though. I trust Bush. Can we do away with term limits?
4:47 pm
Apparently he’s “connecting the dots” by spying on lesbians, vegans and environmentalists. What’s he trying to prevent, exactly? Another Woodstock?
I think there may be a limit to the extent a Bush supporter can shove his head up his own ass. But y’all keep outdoing yourselves. Long live the empire.
****
Rich Donohue Says:
December 20th, 2005 at 4:01 pm
One might harken back to Executive Order 12333, issued by Ronald Reagan in 1981, and used by Clinton in 1994 as his basis for warrantless searches; to find the Presidential authority for GWB’s actions. In addition, lest we forget, The United States of America is presently at war – the Administration is not simply searching around for disgruntled protestors; rather, it is attempting to “connect the dots.â€
4:52 pm
Conservatives will trot out the 1994 thing about “Clinton did the same thing.” That seems to be a conservative rationale for a lot of stuff Bush is doing. That’s funny, I thought you guys didn’t like Clinton, and yet you point to his doing stuff as some kind of proof that it must be okay. Confusing.
Oh, and if you care about the truth, that 1994 canard won’t hold water. From Think Progress:
The Gorelick Myth
In the National Review, Byron York has an article called “Clinton Claimed Authority to Order No-Warrant Searches.†In it, he cites then-Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick’s July 14, 1994 testimony where she argues “the President has inherent authority to conduct warrantless physical searches for foreign intelligence purposes.†(This afternoon, Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) quoted her testimony on the Senate floor.)
Here is what York obscures: at the time of Gorelick’s testimony, physical searches weren’t covered under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). It’s not surprising that, in 1994, Gorelick argued that physical searches weren’t covered by FISA. They weren’t. With Clinton’s backing, the law was amended in 1995 to include physical searches.
York claims that, after the law was amended, “the Clinton administration did not back down from its contention that the president had the authority to act when necessary.†That’s false. Neither Gorelick or the Clinton administration ever argued that president’s inherent “authority†allowed him to ignore FISA. (We’ve posted the full text of Gorelick’s testimony here).
4:55 pm
The other small problem with your defense is that Bush himself said the 180-degree opposite about warrantless searches at the same time he was doing it. Suck on it, losers.
President Bush—April 19, 2004:
For years, law enforcement used so-called roving wire taps to investigate organized crime. You see, what that meant is if you got a wire tap by court order—and, by the way, everything you hear about requires court order, requires there to be permission from a FISA court, for example.
President Bush—April 20, 2004:
Secondly, there are such things as roving wiretaps. Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires—a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we’re talking about chasing down terrorists, we’re talking about getting a court order before we do so. It’s important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution.
President Bush—June 9, 2005:
One tool that has been especially important to law enforcement is called a roving wiretap. Roving wiretaps allow investigators to follow suspects who frequently change their means of communications. These wiretaps must be approved by a judge, and they have been used for years to catch drug dealers and other criminals. Yet, before the Patriot Act, agents investigating terrorists had to get a separate authorization for each phone they wanted to tap. That means terrorists could elude law enforcement by simply purchasing a new cell phone. The Patriot Act fixed the problem by allowing terrorism investigators to use the same wiretaps that were already being using against drug kingpins and mob bosses.
White House fact sheet – June 9, 2005:
The Patriot Act extended the use of roving wiretaps, which were already permitted against drug kingpins and mob bosses, to international terrorism investigations. They must be approved by a judge. Without roving wiretaps, terrorists could elude law enforcement by simply purchasing a new cell phone.
President Bush—July 20, 2005:
The Patriot Act helps us defeat our enemies while safeguarding civil liberties for all Americans. The judicial branch has a strong oversight role in the application of the Patriot Act. Law enforcement officers need a federal judge’s permission to wiretap a foreign terrorist’s phone, or to track his calls, or to search his property. Officers must meet strict standards to use any of the tools we’re talking about. And they are fully consistent with the Constitution of the United States.
White House fact sheet—July 20, 2005:
The judicial branch has a strong oversight role in the application of the Patriot Act. Law enforcement officers must seek a federal judge’s permission to wiretap a foreign terrorist’s phone, track his calls, or search his property. These strict standards are fully consistent with the Constitution. Congress also oversees the application of the Patriot Act, and in more than three years there has not been a single verified abuse.
President Bush—December 10, 2005:
The Patriot Act is helping America defeat our enemies while safeguarding civil liberties for all our people. The judicial branch has a strong oversight role in the application of the Patriot Act. Under the act, law enforcement officers need a federal judge’s permission to wiretap a foreign terrorist’s phone or search his property. Congress also oversees our use of the Patriot Act. Attorney General Gonzales delivers regular reports on the Patriot Act to the House and the Senate.
5:07 pm
Jason, are you not aware that Congress was briefed on this several times, that would make it consistent with EO 12333, thanks for making our point.
The True King Carlos
The leader of The Not So Stupid Mexican Clan
5:09 pm
I blogged on this outrageous piece of subversive garbage first thing this morning [check blogsite above] and just want to know how the Democratic left is ever going to shake the accusation that the Party of the Donkey cares much more about procedural niceties than real world national security threats.
William Kristol has a good piece in today’s WaPo that makes Alter look like a silly sophomoric bombthrower.
5:10 pm
It’s not just phone calls…it’s email, it’s Yahoo groups and similar places. It’s Instant Messengers too.
I fully support these actions as I have nothing to hide. I would MUCH rather give up my civil “right” to a phone call being between me and whoever, vs. seeing thousands of people get killed because the LIBERALS freaked out over silly semantics of these laws and rules and whatever. They are making a mountain out of much needed anthole. Talk about being progressive?? The Democrats are anything BUT. They have a habit of living in the 90’s still. (And some chose to live in the 60’s as well). This is a new war, a new enemy. We need news ways to fight this. Get with the modern times and see the threat for what it is.
5:20 pm
The Supreme Court has ruled several times against warrant-less spying. That supersedes any agreement between the President and the few congressional leaders he met with.
Also: “We have long since made clear that a state of war is not a blank check for the president when it comes to the rights of the nation’s citizens,” Justice Sandra Day O’Connor said in the case of Hamdi vs. Rumsfeld. The Constitution “most assuredly envisions a role for all three branches [of government] when individual liberties are at stake,” she said.
5:36 pm
Dave in Boca:
What a weak point to make:
“Among his possessions are a couple of cell phones—phones that contain several American phone numbers. In the wake of Sept. 11, 2001, what’s a president to do?â€
-William Kristol
Well let’s see. Under the current FISA Bush could tap the lines now and get a warrant retroactively. And since the inception of FISA, it rejected only five of the 14,000 warrant applications it received before 2001.
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
7:35 pm
Jason M Says:
December 20th, 2005 at 4:24 pm
Executive Order 12333 still has congressional oversight as stated:
Part 3.1:Congressional Oversight. The duties and responsibilities of the Director of Central Intelligence and the heads of other departments, agencies, and entities engaged in intelligence activities to cooperate with the Congress in the conduct of its responsibilities for oversight of intelligence activities…
Without following set procedures and oversight, Mr. Bush has the ability to do surveillance on any citizen for any purpose. Our government is not intended to operate as a “trust me†institution.
_____________________________________
Jason,
It is at least arguable that Bush had the authority under the Constitution to do what he did – that he was exercising the authority granted to him by the Constitution to protect the country from foreign enemies, if not states.
You suggest that he abused his authoriy by [ordering]”surveillance on any citizen for any purpose.”
There will likely be Congressional Hearings on whether the President abused his power. I am confident he did not and that every decision was made with the intention of protecting the country and not for some ulterior purpose. I suggest this is consistent with everything I know about this good man.
Rather than presuming the guilt of the President why don’t you hold your fire until we know more about what he did?
Or do you only believe in the presumption of innocence only for some- and certainly not for your political opponents. Be honest about this.
7:52 pm
jesus christ, hasn’t it ever dawned on you folks that every state leader that ever broke the law was convinced he had a good reason to do so? if only thinking it made it so …
those who presume the guilt of the president do so because he’s been lying to us—badly—for 5 years now. we’ve seen more than enough.
8:11 pm
When the next attack on the US occurs, the NYT will still be congratulating itself on the story they revealed. Midway followed Pearl Harbor but the old version of the NSA provided a warning. Another memory from WWII: “Loose lips sink ships.â€
8:31 pm
Your comments about recording only one side of a converstaion has a parallel with the current Plame leak investigation. Some of the reporters have written that their agreement with Fitzgerald was that he would only ask qustions about one side of the conversation. Another ridiculous investigative technique.
9:07 pm
Ho-hum, when the Left runs out of logic, there’s always “Bush lied.”
What’s funny about this whole business is that it’s such a political loser for the Bushitler mob. Not one American in 100 cares that the (nonexistant) civil rights of this country’s deadly enemies are being disregarded. The enemies of our country have no rights. Having openly proclaimed their desire to wipe us off the face of the earth, they have no reasonable grounds for complaint if we pre-empt them. And that most certainly includes listening in when they phone back to Trashcanistan—even if they do claim the citizenship of the nation they’re so eager to destroy.
As for the so-called progressives who are running around squealing that Bush is a fascist & etc.—their infantile behavior is beneath contempt.
9:21 pm
juvenal Says:
December 20th, 2005 at 7:52 pm
jesus christ
juvenile,
This is how you respond to adult coversation? Please correct the spelling of your name.
9:56 pm
juvenal was a roman satirist, terry.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juvenal
Decimus Iunius Iuvenalis, Anglicized as Juvenal, was a Roman satiric poet of the late 1st century and early 2nd century AD. He is known for coining the phrase “panem et circenses” (“bread and circuses”) to describe the primary pursuits of the Roman populace. The rhetorical question “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?”, “Who shall guard the guardians?” comes from his satire On Women, and arises in a discussion concerning the usefulness of having eunuchs guard your women. This phrase was famously used by Alan Moore as the inspiration for the title of his acclaimed graphic novel Watchmen, in which the phrase is translated “Who will watch the watchmen?”
10:07 pm
“those who presume the guilt of the president do so because he’s been lying to us—badly—for 5 years now. we’ve seen more than enough.”
You ain’t seen nothin’ yet Juvie! And when Congress and the Senate unruffles their skirts, has their hearings, and find that Uh-Oh, the President has been well within his Constitutional powers all along, will you have finally ‘seen enough’? And, by the way, until such a determination has been made, watch the President continue doing what he should be doing – everything in his power tp prevent another 9/11.
10:13 pm
Oh, and by the way, on behalf of all the pigs in the world I respectfully take exception to referring to John Alter as a Pig! This is a slander to the pigs of the world because they would not lower themselves to his level. Some other description may be more appropriate for Mr. Alter – “Scum Sucking Bottom Feeder” or “Slack Jawed Slobbering Pedophile” or even, dare I say it “Lawyer”.
10:15 pm
If only we could all be so trusting. Or incoherent.
10:16 pm
I’m just waiting for the Barrett Report to be released. Proving that the Clintons used the IRS to attack their enemies. Talk about abuse of power and overreaching!
Can you retroactively impeach President Clinton?! Let’s go.
11:35 pm
juvenal was a roman satirist, terry.—————————————————-
And your point is? Stop abusing his good name. What you produce is sad ire.
1:31 am
.
1:34 am
The liberals worked so hard to discredit Bush with their 9/11 hearings, said he did not do enough… Now it is revealed (don’t get me started on the treasonous profiteering actions of the NYT) he was on point, this is comforting to me and the rest of middle America. To NOT spy on the enemy would be criminal in the first degree, that liberals such as Alt want to rant about the rights of terrorists is beyond my ability to understand. I think this frames the argument perfectly that the DMC led by Dr. Dean has lost its’ mind. You will be hard pressed to find any reasonable person living in the USA that objects to snooping on terrorists. My guess is another year of this DNC lunacy and the republicans will have at least 65 votes to work with.
5:28 am
“There is a concern that the Internet could be used to commit crimes and that advanced encryption could disguise such activity. However, we do not provide the government with phone jacks outside our homes for unlimited wiretaps. Why, then, should we grant government the Orwellian capability to listen at will and in real time to our communications across the Web?
The protections of the Fourth Amendment are clear. The right to protection from unlawful searches is an indivisible American value. Two hundred years of court decisions have stood in defense of this fundamental right. The state’s interest in effective crime-fighting should never vitiate the citizens’ Bill of Rights.”- John Ashcroft
12:09 pm
The Failure of the Elite 535
It is time for Fitzgerald to investigate the leaks of national intelligence. Let the chips fall where they may. Maybe the words “expulsion†and “criminal prosecution†will get the Elite 535 to actually do the nation’s work. I can dream canâ€...
2:18 pm
Sorry, there, Jason. According to the dictionary, the definition of a “patriot” is “one who loves his or her country and supports its authority and interests.” You’ve missed that boat by the length of a conjunctive.
3:05 pm
hmmn… a few points:
1. FISA gives Bush 72 hours to wiretap freely while he gets a wiretap. FISA isn’t exactly strict. Of the 15000 times it has been used since it was started, it was denied about 300 times. Do you really think that bush would have had ANY problem getting a warrant to spy on an ACTUAL terrorist?
2. Why would Bush need to circumvent FISA unless he was spying on the 1 in 500 person who would be almost impossible to be or have any link to a threat to the states?
3. this leaves 3 options. The first and most unlikely that the FISA judge is a terrerist luvin ACLU sonabitch who refuses to let george spy on threats to the US, the second, somewhat unlikely, is that Bush is spying on his political enemies, and the third, is that Bush and his admin are too damn lazy and incompetent to get the paperwork done, even if it involves americans civil rights
4. Even if it was being used to safeguard US, (which it probly aint) then who sez it would stop another 9/11 in an admin as incompetent as this one? the words BIN LADEN DETERMINED TO ATTACK INSIDE UNITED STATES spring to mind.
1:22 am
[...] A brilliant post by Rick Moran at Right Wing Nut House on Jonathan Alter’s latest lunacy. (courtesy of Hugh Hewitt) I will never forget Alter’s behavior on the night of the presidential election in 2000. He was so furious that Bush was beating Gore that he was sputtering. And he seemed to be crying. (or was it just snowflakes?) [...]