Video: Olbermann to Bush, 'You're a fascist'

Watch it:



Read the transcript.

In part:

As recently ago as 2006, we spoke words like these with trepidation.

The idea that even the most cynical and untrustworthy of politicians in our history, George W. Bush, would use the literal form of terrorism against his own people was dangerous territory. It seemed to tempt fate, to heighten fear.

We will not fear any longer. We will not fear the international terrorists, and we will thwart them. We will not fear the recognition of the manipulation of our yearning for safety, and we will call it what it is: terrorism. We will not fear identifying the vulgar hypocrites in our government, and we will name them. And we will not fear George W. Bush. Nor will we fear because George W. Bush wants us to fear.

FISA: More of What the Democrats Have Wrought

It was bad enough that the Dems caved on the FISA bill, but now more details of exactly what that bill entailed are coming out and they show just how much power Bush was really given by that rush to avoid looking like cowards.

Via the NYT:

WASHINGTON, Aug. 18 — Broad new surveillance powers approved by Congress this month could allow the Bush administration to conduct spy operations that go well beyond wiretapping to include — without court approval — certain types of physical searches on American soil and the collection of Americans’ business records, Democratic Congressional officials and other experts said.

So, how did that happen, you ask? Simple: if the Democrats had actually read and analyzed the bill before they decided to please almighty Bush by dealing with it before they left for their summer vacations, they would have discovered (and some did, obviously) just how many more rights they were giving away on behalf of their constituents.

The new legislation is set to expire in less than six months; two weeks after it was signed into law, there is still heated debate over how much power Congress gave to the president.

“This may give the administration even more authority than people thought,” said David Kris, a former senior Justice Department lawyer in the Bush and Clinton administrations and a co-author of “National Security Investigation and Prosecutions,” a new book on surveillance law.

Several legal experts said that by redefining the meaning of “electronic surveillance,” the new law narrows the types of communications covered in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, known as FISA, by indirectly giving the government the power to use intelligence collection methods far beyond wiretapping that previously required court approval if conducted inside the United States.

And this cannot just be blamed on the so-called Blue Dogs. Dealing with this bill could have been deferred by Pelosi and Reid until the "heated debates" about what they were offering for approval were exhausted. Instead, after the bill was passed, Democratic leaders just told their angry cheerleaders to just wait six months, they'd fix it all then.

Well, now that word has gotten out about just how much they've royally screwed up, it's wait until September while Bush spokespuppets pretend they had no idea (gosh, darn, golly) that this bill would give the boy king even more power.

Bruce Fein, who has been pushing for impeachment spoke to the NYT about the possible ramifications of this bill:

At the meeting, Bruce Fein, a Justice Department lawyer in the Reagan administration, along with other critics of the legislation, pressed Justice Department officials repeatedly for an assurance that the administration considered itself bound by the restrictions imposed by Congress. The Justice Department, led by Ken Wainstein, the assistant attorney general for national security, refused to do so, according to three participants in the meeting. That stance angered Mr. Fein and others. It sent the message, Mr. Fein said in an interview, that the new legislation, though it is already broadly worded, “is just advisory. The president can still do whatever he wants to do. They have not changed their position that the president’s Article II powers trump any ability by Congress to regulate the collection of foreign intelligence.”

And this quote certainly describes the bottom line here:

That limitation sets a high bar to set off any court intervention, argued Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, who also attended the Justice Department meeting.

“You’ve turned the court into a spectator,” Mr. Rotenberg said.

I really have to wonder (and since I've almost run out of pejorative adjectives to describe the willfully ignorant congressional Democrats and their cheerleading, lapdog supporters, I won't turn this into an overly long screed) why - after these Dems have refused to impeach, refused to do everything possible to end the Iraq war, refused to stand up to this dictatorial "president" and refused to act like they work for the American people - why anyone continues to support them. Just how many second, third, fourth and fifth chances do they get to prove themselves to be the protectors of human and civil rights they claim to be?

They have failed. Continually. And the only thing they can offer is "wait".

For what??

If someone has an answer to that question, I'd sure like to hear it. And before you even think about saying that Election '08 will change everything if a Dem president is elected - think again. That's what they said about the Dems winning back congressional power in '06. Oh but this is all Joe Lieberman's fault, right? No. It isn't. When you willingly support and elect conservative Democrats who are willing to kiss Bush's ring, that's exactly what you get. Pushovers who will assure that Bush has just as much power as he wants. And when your congressional leaders play the waiting game with peoples' constitutional rights, they impact all Americans directly. Just how much of that new power do you honestly think a possible future Democratic president might be willing to roll back? Honestly.

All right. I promised this wouldn't be a long screed and I'll keep my word, but think about this: I'm a Canadian citizen. And, while only some of what your boy king does actually affects my rights (and we're feeling it here, believe me), I think it's safe to say that I'm probably more outraged about all of this than a lot of Americans who actually should be are. And I find that deeply disturbing.

h/t lyger and infowarrior.org's mailing list
 

'LSD: Lame, Spineless, Democrats'

Flashback, 2002: The Perils of LSD: Lame, Spineless, Democrats, Tom Stephens

A plague has seized the Nation. It emanates from Washington, D.C., and is spreading wherever People try to come to grips with the abuse of power there by the most dangerous government corporate money can buy. Symptoms (particularly among People committed to real democracy, social justice, and non-violence in our relations with others) include barely controllable rage, enormous frustration, organization of third parties, and ultimately a sense of total scorn for mainstream electoral politics as anything other than a personal career. The name of this malady is Lame, Spineless Democrats (LSD). Friends don't let friends enter the hallucinatory, pseudo-powerful world of LSD and its pushers in the Democratic Leadership [sic] Council without strong mutual support.

Thanks to leading Democrats who misplaced their spines, their passion, their intelligence, and their guts, the Republican Party seized total power over all three branches of the United States Government in the 2002 mid-term elections. With Republican control of the Senate we face federal courts packed with ultra-right wing ideologue judges (enjoying lifetime appointments) for at least a generation. It has been said that for evil to triumph it is only necessary that good People do nothing. The national leaders of the Democratic Party, the Tom Daschles, Dick Gepharts and Joe Liebermans who have been trying to win elections for 20 years now by beating the Fat Cat Republicans at their own corporate bribery game, let America and the world down. These uncertain trumpeters failed to grasp one very simple and fundamental fact about the type of electoral "democracy" that prevails today in America. If you let your political opponents define the key issues and control the timing of which issues will dominate the agenda, while you avoid providing any clear answers to their inflammatory and flagrantly misleading rhetoric about "freedom," "security," and "evil," you will get your ass kicked. Duh.

Some of the names have changed - today it's the Harry Reids, the Nancy Pelosis and, still, the Joe Liebermans - but the results are the same: lame, spineless Democrats caving to Bush's agenda just as they've done again this weekend.

LSD, circa 2007:

The Senate bowed to White House pressure last night and passed a Republican plan for overhauling the federal government's terrorist surveillance laws, approving changes that would temporarily give U.S. spy agencies expanded power to eavesdrop on foreign suspects without a court order.

The 60 to 28 vote, which was quickly denounced by civil rights and privacy advocates, came after Democrats in the House failed to win support for more modest changes that would have required closer court supervision of government surveillance. Earlier in the day, President Bush threatened to hold Congress in session into its scheduled summer recess if it did not approve the changes he wanted.

The boy king had a tantrum and the Democrats let him have his new toy. It's only a 6 month temporary measure, they said, as they gave more power to the most corrupt AG in US history - Alberto Gonzales.

The poor house Democrats can't stand the pressure either, but it's the politics of the situation - not the civil rights - that they're concerned about.

With time running out before a scheduled monthlong break and the Senate already in recess, House Democrats confronted the choice of accepting the administration’s bill or letting it die. If it died, that would leave Democratic lawmakers, who have long been anxious about appearing weak on national security issues, facing an August fending off charges from Mr. Bush and Republicans that they left Americans exposed to terror threats.

They look weak on security because they keep buying into Republican talking points that portray them as being just that. If they had any actual courage, they would have told Bush to screw himself and would have all gone home.

There was no indication that lawmakers were responding to new intelligence warnings. Rather, Democrats were responding to administration pleas that a recent secret court ruling had created a legal obstacle in monitoring foreign communications relayed over the Internet. They also appeared worried about the political repercussions of being perceived as interfering with intelligence gathering. But the disputes were significant enough that they were likely to resurface before the end of the year.

Democrats have expressed concerns that the administration is reaching for powers that go well beyond solving what officials have depicted as narrow technical issues in the current law.

“They have got us in a vise,” Representative Louise M. Slaughter, Democrat of New York and chairwoman of the Rules Committee, said as she left a Saturday afternoon meeting where senior Democrats were debating how to handle the issue in the final hours before recess.

No, Louise - you put yourselves in that vise. And make no mistake, you've given the Bush administration carte blanche again to illegally spy on your countrymen - a crime Bush had previously admitted to that should have spurred his impeachment (along with the many other criminal activities he and his administration have been up to) but your party has conveniently, for this war criminal president, taken impeachment off the table. Honestly, what the hell is wrong with you?

Just what does the Bush administration have on these Democrats? Some of us out here would seriously like to know because there just isn't any other way to reconcile this continual pandering to a megalomaniac of a president who would would prefer to be a dictator - which you are enabling him to be.

Democratic lawmakers have been deeply suspicious that the Bush administration was seeking a broader and more controversial expansion of surveillance authority by making changes that were vague on important issues. Representative Silvestre Reyes, Democrat of Texas and chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said Friday that the administration-supported bill would allow wiretapping without warrants as long as it was “concerning a person abroad.” As a result, he said, the law could be construed as allowing any search inside the United States as long as the government claimed it “concerned” Al Qaeda.

Are you an American thinking of e-mailing me, a Canadian? Well all Gonzales has to do is claim your e-mail somehow "concerns" al Qaeda and bingo - your communications will be under surveillance - as will mine. Think that's far-fetched? Just look at what they did to Maher Arar. You can't trust these Republican bastards with any power.

Just what will it take for the Democrats to realize that? An illegal war? No. Torture? No. Bush burning that "god damned piece of paper" (as he refers to the constitution)? No.

And just when will the majority of Democratic party fans - too many of whom believe that "winning" actually solves anything - actually wake the fuck up and realize that their party is nothing but Republican-Lite?

Have they even seen the latest poll numbers outside of the little orange bubble that they live in as they all hail their Democratic leadership at their YearlyKos convention this weekend? (It's true: willfully ignorant partisanship kills brain cells.) Democrats OUT: Apply directly to the forehead.

You really might need to read this twice to believe it if you're once of those brainwashed partisan hacks:

Oh this is hilarious. I thought Bush’s approval at 34%, Democratic Congress 14% was funny, but the new numbers from the Zogby poll are ridiculously low.

Nelson Muntz said it best.

The survey said:

Survey shows just 3% of Americans approve of how Congress is handling the war in Iraq; 24% say the same for the President

Bush’s Iraq policy has 8 times the support the anti-Bush policy of Pelosi-Murtha-Clyburn-Reid-Byrd.

And it gets worse: 94% of Democrats polled absolutely detest, loathe and hate how the Democratic-led Congress is handling the war in Iraq.

Yet the Democrats think the way they can increase their poll numbers is to roll over and play dead whenever Bush puts pressure on them?

3%??

Does it get any more insane than this?

With these Democrats, you can count on it.

Related: ACLU Condemns Senate for Passing Spy Law Changes

“We are deeply disappointed that the president’s tactics of fearmongering have once again forced Congress into submission,” said Anthony Romero, executive director of the ACLU. “That a Democratically-controlled Senate would be strong-armed by the Bush administration is astonishing. This Congress may prove to be as spineless in standing up to the Bush Administration as the one that enacted the Patriot Act or the Military Commissions Act.”

The legislation that passed would allow for the intelligence agencies to intercept – without a court order – the calls and emails of Americans who are communicating with people abroad, and puts authority for doing so in the hands of the attorney general. No protections exist for Americans whose calls or emails are vacuumed up, leaving it to the executive branch to collect, sort, and use this information as it sees fit.

“It seems that political cover is more important to our senators than the rights and privacy of those they represent,” added Caroline Fredrickson, director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office. “The administration is on the verge of reviving a warrantless wiretapping program even broader than the illegal one it conducted before.

Random News & Views Roundup

- So much for Obama's hawkish foreign policy:

ISLAMABAD (AFP) - Pakistan accused Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama of "sheer ignorance" for threatening to launch US military strikes against Al-Qaeda on Pakistani soil.

- So the White House thumbed its nose at having Karl Rove testifying before the senate committee investigating the US attorneys scandal and his aide, Scott Jennings, showed up and refused to answer "at least a dozen questions". Like getting blood from a stone.

Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Illinois, asked Jennings, "Where is Karl Rove? Why is he hiding? Why does he throw a young staffer like you into the line of fire while he hides behind the White House curtains?"

Because he's an arrogant asshole, Dick. Next question?

- I'd sure like to know where the Bush administration finds these clueless people who apparently all live on Fantasy Island:

WASHINGTON, Aug. 2 — Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said Thursday that he was discouraged by the resignation of the Sunnis from Iraq’s cabinet and that the Bush administration might have misjudged the difficulty of achieving reconciliation between Iraq’s sectarian factions.

In one of his bluntest assessments of the progress of the administration’s Iraq strategy, Mr. Gates said, “I think the developments on the political side are somewhat discouraging at the national level.” He said that despite the Sunni withdrawal, “my hope is that it can all be patched back together.”

I guess democracy's a quilt now.

He acknowledged that when the Bush administration decided to send the additional troops, “We probably all underestimated the depth of the mistrust and how difficult it would be for these guys to come together on legislation, which, let’s face it, is not some kind of secondary issue.”

"might have"? "probably"?? Sheesh.

- Proof that Republicans are partisan idiots:

WASHINGTON -- Congress struggled Thursday over giving the government more power to eavesdrop on suspected terrorists, bogged down by concerns about the man who would oversee the plan _ Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.
[...]
Gonzales "is clearly one of the concerns that has been expressed by the Democratic leaders," House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio told reporters.

"But at the end of the day, there has to be a way for our intelligence and counterintelligence agencies to collect data from known terrorists," Boehner said. "And we shouldn't let personalities get in the way of protecting the American people."

One of the most corrupt and torture-loving AGs ever and Boehner thinks it's a personality issue? That's exactly why America is so bloody screwed up.
 

Yes Virginia, Spying Really is Good for You

National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell, who used to by quite gainfully employed by Booz Allen Hamilton,'a "huge" supplier of intelligence contracting' that had multi-million dollar Pentagon contracts, is thinking now would be a great time to expand the government's spying powers - because the Bush administration and its 14+ intel agencies obviously haven't quite yet been able to legally install cameras in your bathroom to find out what kind of toothpaste you use. That may just help them win the so-called "war on terrorism", you know.

National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell has circulated a draft bill that would expand the government's powers under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, liberalizing how that law can be used.

The word "liberalizing" used in that instance is not a Good Thing™.

The changes McConnell is seeking mostly affect a cloak-and-dagger category of warrants used to investigate suspected spies, terrorists and other national security threats. The court-approved surveillance could include planting listening devices and hidden cameras, searching luggage and breaking into homes to make copies of computer hard drives.

See? I told you they'd be checking out your toothpaste soon.

They can copy my hard drive if they want to. I have several to-die-for pics of Brad Pitt that would keep them entertained for a while.

And here are a few of the other things McConnell wants to do. (He really doesn't like foreigners much...)

_Give the NSA the power to monitor foreigners without seeking FISA court approval, even if the surveillance is conducted by tapping phones and e-mail accounts in the United States.

"Determinations about whether a court order is required should be based on considerations about the target of the surveillance, rather than the particular means of communication or the location from which the surveillance is being conducted," NSA Director Keith Alexander told the Senate last year.

_Clarify the standards the FBI and NSA must use to get court orders for basic information about calls and e-mails — such as the number dialed, e-mail address, or time and date of the communications. Civil liberties advocates contend the change will make it too easy for the government to access this information.

_Triple the life span of a FISA warrant for a non-U.S. citizen from 120 days to one year, allowing the government to monitor much longer without checking back in with a judge.

_Give telecommunications companies immunity from civil liability for their cooperation with Bush's terrorist surveillance program. Pending lawsuits against companies including Verizon and AT&T allege they violated privacy laws by giving phone records to the NSA for the program.

_Extend from 72 hours to one week the amount of time the government can conduct surveillance without a court order in emergencies.

Nothing to see here. Move along folks. Sure some "foreigners" might disappear, telecom companies might walk away scott-free and the US government will have way too much information about you but, hey, as long as Osama's still on the run I'm sure nobody will mind. Osama who, you ask? You know - that bearded guy who might just be hiding in that old suitcase of yours in the closet and who pops out when you're not home to use your computer to e-mail his al Qaeda buddies oversees. Yeah. That guy. So really, who cares if government agents break into your house? I'm sure they'll take their shoes off.

Related: Via PogoWasRight

Apr. 11th 2:30 pm: Senate Committee on Judiciary Constitution Subcommittee hearings to examine the Inspector General's findings of improper use of National Security Letters by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Apr. 12th 10:00 am: Senate Committee on Judiciary hearings to examine S. 236, to require reports to Congress on Federal agency use of data mining, H.R. 740, to amend title 18, United States Code, to prevent caller ID spoofing, and other bills and matters.