TP’s headline reads “DNI McConnell: I Lied To The Senate”.

He said no such thing; ThinkProgress is lying…..again.

Comment by Ringo —

Another example or orwellian framing… Ringo seems to be saying that the headline is wrong, wrong, wrong, because McConnell did not actually admit to having performed an L. I. E.; insteady choosing to say the very same thing, but with a little dance around the “L” word. Kind of like when you want to make sure there’s a bidet in your hotel room (I know this has happened to everyone here), but don’t want to blurt out the “B” word for the whole bloody lobby to hear.

Civilized people in the above predicament say to the hotel clerk, “…and does it come with a, um…” and the clerk, who deals with it all the time, cuts in with, “Oh yes of course, sir, all the conveniences.”

Republicans, you see, are so civilized that even a lie is not a lie any longer; but just a truth that hasn’t yet been told, just as a promised resignation from the House wasn’t really such a promise at all, after we stretched the definition of “intend to resign” just a bit.

“We’ll get to the truth part when someone notices it’s missing, thank you very much; complete with a little reality revision that pretends we said it the last time, but you just didn’t notice, dumb squat that you are.”

Thank heaven some people (like the writer of the plain-as-Kansas headline above) can see past doubletalk bullsh*t to what’s happening.

I guarantee you, if I got pulled over doing 60 through a school zone, the judge would give me exactly one chance to get the story right. This administration is chockablok with people who think they can set reality straight, when it doesn’t live up to their spin. If they are caught fabricating, they just adjust the lie a bit for the next news cycle. Bush has figured out that huge blatent lies put people into shock, while they try to figure out what he meant, because surely he couldn’t have meant what it sounded like he said…

Then the press and punditry argue about what he said, and if it actually rises to the “lie” label, or if it was some other kind of dumbf*ckery. And before that argument can create any understanding, the next cycle of brand new spin is issued from the Oval Orifice and away we go again. Spun out to dry.

“Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn’t FISA only cover warrants for intelligence gathering inside the US?

“If that is that case, and no warrant is needed for intercepts made on communications outside the US, then in what way did FISA (new or old) play ANY role?

“Unless the German terrorists were communicating with people inside the US, who, if they existed would thus be terrorists themselves. If this happened, why haven’t those people been arrested?

“The whole thing doesn’t make sense regardless of whether you are talking old FISA or new FISA.”

indeed. however, the supposition behind the Protect America Act is that global communications links cross the united states proper and are trunked in the at&t facility in atlanta, georgia, to be routed to (mainly) south america, but other foreign destinations as well.

previously, nsa considered communications gear within the borders of conus to be off limits (har), hence the need for a warrant. with the passage of the PAA, they can legally monitor communications inside the at&t trunk facility, even though they themselves admit that they inadvertently pick up lots of american citizens’ crosstalk.

it’s obvious that being able to monitor international comms is very handy; the obvious constitutional factor is the physical location of the gear that they are tapping.

it’s actually a thorny legal question, deserving of careful consideration, but certainly not by this administration.

which raises the question: why on earth would any telephony company route intra-europe telephone calls through atlanta, georgia?

if in fact at&t doesn’t, then, well, the bushites are lying about that interception, too.

It’s our law, why not use it?

9-110.100 Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO)

On October 15, 1970, the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970 became law. Title IX of the Act is the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Statute (18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-1968), commonly referred to as the “RICO” statute. The purpose of the RICO statute is “the elimination of the infiltration of organized crime and racketeering into legitimate organizations operating in interstate commerce.” S.Rep. No. 617, 91st Cong., 1st Sess. 76 (1969). However, the statute is sufficiently broad to encompass illegal activities relating to any enterprise affecting interstate or foreign commerce.

Section 1961(10) of Title 18 provides that the Attorney General may designate any department or agency to conduct investigations authorized by the RICO statute and such department or agency may use the investigative provisions of the statute or the investigative power of such department or agency otherwise conferred by law. Absent a specific designation by the Attorney General, jurisdiction to conduct investigations for violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1962 lies with the agency having jurisdiction over the violations constituting the pattern of racketeering activity listed in 18 U.S.C. § 1961.

9-110.200 RICO Guidelines Preface

The decision to institute a federal criminal prosecution involves balancing society’s interest in effective law enforcement against the consequences for the accused. Utilization of the RICO statute, more so than most other federal criminal sanctions, requires particularly careful and reasoned application, because, among other things, RICO incorporates certain state crimes. One purpose of these guidelines is to reemphasize the principle that the primary responsibility for enforcing state laws rests with the state concerned. Despite the broad statutory language of RICO and the legislative intent that the statute “. . . shall be liberally construed to effectuate its remedial purpose,” it is the policy of the Criminal Division that RICO be selectively and uniformly used. It is the purpose of these guidelines to make it clear that not every proposed RICO charge that meets the technical requirements of a RICO violation will be approved. Further, the Criminal Division will not approve “imaginative” prosecutions under RICO which are far afield from the congressional purpose of the RICO statute. A RICO count which merely duplicates the elements of proof of traditional Hobbs Act, Travel Act, mail fraud, wire fraud, gambling or controlled substances cases, will not be approved unless it serves some special RICO purpose. Only in exceptional circumstances will approval be granted when RICO is sought merely to serve some evidentiary purpose.

These guidelines provide only internal Department of Justice guidance. They are not intended to, do not, and may not be relied upon to create any rights, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law by any party in any matter civil or criminal. Nor are any limitations hereby placed on otherwise lawful litigative prerogatives of the Department of Justice. LINK

It’s time to unseat these criminals before they finish destroying America!

(You did know that Adam Savage “borrowed” that one, right?)

MCCONNELL: we’re better prepared now to continue our mission; specifically Germany, significant contributions. It allowed us to see and understand all the connections with –

LIEBERMAN: The newly adopted law facilitated that during August?

MCCONNELL: Yes, sir, it did.

Obviously I wasn’t at the hearings, so I don’t know the whole context, but if you pay close attention to the wording here, McConnell isn’t necessarily saying that the expanded legislation led to the arrests, but simply that it made it possible to “see and understand all the connections” surrounding the plot. The way that he says it, such observation and understanding could well have taken place outside of the actual investigation, after the arrests had already been made, or even be entirely hypothetical concerning the investigative capacities enabled by the new legislation.

It’s incredibly ironic that this author attempts to cast doubt into the integrity and truthfulness of McConnell, when it’s so obvious that the author himself strives so hard to mislead. Both liberal blogging and conservative blogging have a place in our society, but when someone so deliberately attempts to mislead other readers, the whole blogging process breaks down and makes the information process a difficult course to navigate to arrive at any truth. The worst of the liberals and the worst of the conservatives, though, have no desire for the truth. They just want to cast doubt upon their opponents and to win, no matter what the cost to our society. McConnell may or may not be a liar, and simply another administration goon, but one thing is clear ….. this particular author is incredibly biased in his own right, deliberately attempts to mislead his readers, and is actually an ugly wart on any perfect ideals of free thought.

If everyone in the US cut back ten percent of their oil use, and elected only those who *swore while campaigning* to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution or resign immediately, we’d be in a much different position than we are now.

McConnell obviously DID lie, but that’s no excuse for Think Progress’ misleading headline.

It’s tabloid journalism, and as a former editor, I’d seriously discipline (if not fire) one of my reporters if they tried such a stunt.

I wonder if someone could obtain a copy the warrent that was supposedly used and required by the old FISA laws to obtain this info via the FOIA. If there is none, sadly you would be correct PFT but at least it would PROVE they were acting outside the law.

Comment by Dutch — September 12, 2007 @ 10:35 pm

As to your comment Dutch, unfortunately I believe the D.C. US Att. is another Bush “loyalist” and has already been instructed not to bring any charges against this Administration.

SAY IT ISN’T SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!

Comment by Ringo — September 12, 2007 @ 7:50 pm

Yeah, Gringo you’re missing something alright. I believe it’s a chromosome.