Tuesday, December 27, 2005

A Question for the Left

Remember when Valerie Plame's name was bandied about in the press and such? The left wing of this country started screaming about Bush, Cheney and Rove leaking her name to "get even" with her husband Joe Wilson for his report about yellowcake from Niger and all sorts of nonsense. Never mind the fact that Joe Wilson's report SUPPORTED the Bush Administration's position of Iraq trying to buy uranium, Wilson was bragging for years about his "secret agent" wife, Wilson tells two different stories constantly (one to the new york times, one to Congress), that Plame herself wasn't an "undercover" agent, didn't have Non-Official Cover, was NEVER in any danger of being exposed, and nowadays, can't seem to resist posing for all sorts of pictures in Vanity Fair and other such liberal magazines.

The total outcome of this entire event? One reporter spends a few months in jail before breaking, then the reporter gets FIRED from the new york times (who until that point had been holding her up like a martyr to the cause) and one indictment. And the indictment isn't even for exposing an agent; it's for lying to a Grand Jury during the course of the investigation.

Wow.

So where is the outrage and screaming from the left now that TWO undercover operations with the potential to expose dozens, maybe hundreds of American agents to capture, torture or even death? We're talking about (1) the secret CIA prisons detaining at most 30 high value terrorist targets who have knowledge of numerous operations targeting American citizens across the world and (2) the NSA electronic intercepts of persons outside of the country communicating with others who might occasionally be based on American soil (which is legal, just ask Carter and Clinton who expanded these powers when in office).

A leak is a leak? Treason is treason, right? A felony is a felony any way you slice it, correct? We guess not if it has the potential to politically damage a Republican President. Then it's "All the News That's Fit to Print."

43 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Editors of Barrons Suggests Bush Committed Impeachable Offenses

The latest call for the possible impeachment of President Bush is coming from an unexpected quarter - the prominent business publication Barrons. The editors of Barrons have criticized Bush for authorizing the National Security Agency to spy on Americans without court warrants. The editors wrote "Putting the president above the Congress is an invitation to tyranny. The president has no powers except those specified in the Constitution and those enacted by law. ... Willful disregard of a law is potentially an impeachable offense. It is at least as impeachable as having a sexual escapade under the Oval Office desk and lying about it later."

12/27/2005 03:23:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

SEISER AND MUSENPAPA FROM 024 RUN IT!!

12/27/2005 03:42:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

RIGHT-WING MYTH/FALSEHOOD DEPT. (#4 of 12)
- Another Lame Defense of "our" Selected Imperial Lawbreaking Snooping Chimp:
-#4.) "Clinton, Carter also authorized warrantless searches of U.S. citizens..."

Another tactic conservatives have used to defend the Bush administration has been to claim that it is not unusual for a president to authorize secret surveillance of U.S. citizens without a court order, asserting that Democratic presidents have also done so. For example, on the December 21 edition of Fox News's Special Report, host Brit Hume claimed that former presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton issued executive orders "to perform wiretaps and searches of American citizens without a warrant."

But as the ThinkProgress weblog noted on December 20, executive orders on the topic by Clinton and Carter were merely explaining the rules established by FISA, which do not allow for warrantless searches on "United States persons." Subsequent reports by NBC chief foreign affairs correspondent Andrea Mitchell and The Washington Post also debunked the conservative talking point while noting that the claim was highlighted in the December 21 RNC press release.

From ThinkProgress, which documented how internet gossip Matt Drudge selectively cited from the Clinton and Carter executive orders to falsely suggest they authorized secret surveillance of U.S. citizens without court-obtained warrants:

What Drudge says:

Clinton, February 9, 1995: "The Attorney General is authorized to approve physical searches, without a court order"

What Clinton actually signed:

Section 1. Pursuant to section 302(a)(1) [50 U.S.C. 1822(a)] of the [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance] Act, the Attorney General is authorized to approve physical searches, without a court order, to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year, if the Attorney General makes the certifications required by that section.

That section requires the Attorney General to certify is the search will not involve "the premises, information, material, or property of a United States person." That means U.S. citizens or anyone inside of the United States.

The entire controversy about Bush's program is that, for the first time ever, allows warrantless surveillance of U.S. citizens and other people inside of the United States. Clinton's 1995 executive order did not authorize that.

Drudge pulls the same trick with Carter.

What Drudge says:

Jimmy Carter Signed Executive Order on May 23, 1979: "Attorney General is authorized to approve electronic surveillance to acquire foreign intelligence information without a court order."

What Carter's executive order actually says:

1-101. Pursuant to Section 102(a)(1) of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1802(a)), the Attorney General is authorized to approve electronic surveillance to acquire foreign intelligence information without a court order, but only if the Attorney General makes the certifications required by that Section.

What the Attorney General has to certify under that section is that the surveillance will not contain "the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party." So again, no U.S. persons are involved. (the rest of the 12 eye-openers are at MediaMatters.Org)

Pour another Neo-Conned Likud Party Blood Red KOOL-AID for our Industrious Moderator (`til he pukes!) He's swallowing Bush's Lies faster than they can sell them... Gunga Din, get this poor soul some untainted H2O- quick! It's time to FINALLY IMPEACH this Vacationing Chimperial Lying Lawbreaking Warmongering A.W.O.L. Deserting LEECH Put PRINCE GEORGE in the CAN where he BELONGS (Cheney too!) before we have to back attack Iran for/with Israels' Likud Party... that tail has wagged us for far too long!

12/27/2005 03:42:00 PM  
Blogger BATHROOM WALL ? said...

SCC continues the very weak "Clinton Blame Game" by making him responsible for the latest of Prince George's crimes: illegal domestic spying! He ties it to the Valerie Plame CIA Treasongate spy outing. What an imagination you have, S.C.C.! Double Right-Wing-Nut Jeopardy S.C.C... are you sleeping with Drudge, Malkin, Hannity, Limbaugh and Coulter simultaneously? (yuk!) Do Bush Jr. & Cheney need to personally poopy plunder you for you to wake up and smell the coffee S.C.C.? UNBELIEVABLE! Happy Festivus Nonethelessfrom"us"! ;-)

12/27/2005 04:18:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

TRU leaked her name. SOS covered it up, but 016 were the fall guys.

12/27/2005 04:57:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Will there be a Congressional investigation into who leaked the NSA secret spying story? Should there be? Isn't this story just as important as the Valerie Plame/CIA leak?

12/27/2005 05:13:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

LOOK UNDER YOUR BEDS YOU TOUGH COPS, THERE ARE BAD GUYS EVERYWHERE. USE YOUR GUN....

12/27/2005 05:49:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

SCC continues the very weak "Clinton Blame Game" by making him responsible for the latest of Prince George's crimes: illegal domestic spying

What the hell did he ever do to fight terrorism, lob 2 missles into a desert tent wounding a camel. Whos watch was 9-11 planned on, what payback for the USS Cole and our dead sailors. How about our embassy bombings, any payback there. How about Somalia, looked real comforting to our allies when the Vice Lords where dragging two dead soldiers bodies all around. Everybody thought the U.S didn't have the guts to fight, till the invasion. Notice how tou don't hear a lot of threats from North Korea. What did the peanut farmer, Carter do to get our hostages back from Iran. Probably just a coincidence when Reagan was elected the Ayatolla let em go. Ask Khadafy if Ronnie meant business.

12/27/2005 05:53:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

KEEP CHICAGO GUN FREE. NO PAPERS FOR RETIRED COPS. ILLINOIS IS A NO CARRY STATE. THATS THE WAY IT IS. YOU DON'T LIKE MOVE TO GUN LOVING STATE..

12/27/2005 05:58:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

TO: 5:58:19 P.M.

You Are a F@*%K Idiot !!!

12/27/2005 06:08:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
KEEP CHICAGO GUN FREE. NO PAPERS FOR RETIRED COPS. ILLINOIS IS A NO CARRY STATE. THATS THE WAY IT IS. YOU DON'T LIKE MOVE TO GUN LOVING STATE..

Tell me that when some mut rapes your loved one.

12/27/2005 06:33:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Id rather keep chicago yuppy liberal free.

12/27/2005 06:34:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

From what I have read, The definition for American citizen under the FISA law is very broad. It icludes everybody here within our borders.

The only wiretaps they were doing was when someone here was talking to a known terrorist in a foreign land.

12/27/2005 07:01:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Five days until SCC is revealed. You would think all your fascists would be all for this. I mean, you always complain about the anonymous left causing trouble. Time to reveal the anonymous SCC. SCC, you scared that you are going to be revealed?

12/27/2005 07:11:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

Five days until SCC is revealed. You would think all your fascists would be all for this. I mean, you always complain about the anonymous left causing trouble. Time to reveal the anonymous SCC. SCC, you scared that you are going to be revealed?

12/27/2005 07:11:11 PM


Reveal SCC, don't reveal SCC, I for one don't care either way. Personally, I think you're just a pathetic lonely asshole sitting at your keyboard trying to stir the pot. Do what you want, I don't care.

A Chicago Cop

P.S. Go fuck yourself!

12/27/2005 07:51:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

KEEP CHICAGO GUN FREE. NO PAPERS FOR RETIRED COPS. ILLINOIS IS A NO CARRY STATE. THATS THE WAY IT IS. YOU DON'T LIKE MOVE TO GUN LOVING STATE..

12/27/2005 05:58:19 PM

If you don't want to own a gun, then don't. I wonder though, would you be willing to put a sign in your window saying THERE ARE NO GUNS IN THIS HOUSE.

Regarding your ranting about no papers for retired cops: too late, the ball is in motion. And as you are aware, once a law is enacted it's difficult to retract it. So eat shit. I hate to disappoint you, but there won't be a rash of incidents involving retired coppers. You see, coppers get training in the handling of firearms. This encompasses not only the safety aspect of firearms, but the legality of when and if you should use it.

Happy New Year.

P.S. Don't forget to go fuck yourself too

12/27/2005 07:54:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

SCC IS A LIBERAL!!!!!

A real conservative (like myself) would just brush this under the rug like the corporate owned media has. SCC SHUT UP, YOU HIPPIE!!! Quit talking about this and the short attention span FOX watching serfs will forget alllll about it.

12/27/2005 08:15:00 PM  
Anonymous Westcide Dog said...

SCC outed? Hmmm let's assume the higher-ups on this job already know who he is. He pretty much outed himself when he posted his email address in his profile. When you have an email to a pay site, it holds your credit card information and billing address. The guys at SIU/Kiddy Porn can get that info in less than an hour. Think it hasn't been done already? If you're really good, post his credit card info here.

If it makes you feel better, come out of the closet and go fuck yourself.

12/27/2005 08:16:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

http://www.chicagotribune.com/
news/opinion/chi-0512190111dec19,0,6699370.
story?coll=chi-newsopinion-
hed

The Chicago Tribune, which also endorsed Bush in 2004, added on December 19:

This may also be a violation of American law, which requires that a special court issue warrants for wiretaps on communications originating in the United States. Some officials familiar with the program said it is illegal. But a Justice Department memo took the radical position that the congressional resolution authorizing the president to act against Al Qaeda enabled him to use methods that were previously forbidden.

Had the administration really believed it had congressional consent for spying on Americans at home, it could have asked for legislation to affirm that. It didn't, for the obvious reason that Congress would not have agreed.

12/27/2005 08:17:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

In an op-ed published by the right-wing Washington Times, conservative constitutional lawyer -- and former Reagan Justice Department official -- Bruce Fein argued forcefully that:

President Bush presents a clear and present danger to the rule of law. He cannot be trusted to conduct the war against global terrorism with a decent respect for civil liberties and checks against executive abuses. Congress should swiftly enact a code that would require Mr. Bush to obtain legislative consent for every counterterrorism measure that would materially impair individual freedoms.

[...]

The president maintained that, "As a result [of the NSA disclosure], our enemies have learned information they should not have, and the unauthorized disclosure of this effort damages our national security and puts our citizens at risk." But if secrecy were pivotal to the NSA's surveillance, why is the president continuing the eavesdropping? And why is he so carefree about risking the liberties of both the living and those yet to be born by flouting the Constitution's separation of powers and conflating constructive criticism with treason?

12/27/2005 08:18:00 PM  
Anonymous THE BLUE POET said...

The Feds can watch me anytime they want, but then I like that kind of stuff.....sorry im a bit of a kink eh?

This blog is getting boring lets start in on the firemen again.

Or each other !! yeah thats the ticket. These political views are really starting to suck.

al-Quida has found SSC yeah right.

Outing SCC would be a really fucked up thing to do.

SCC is like swimming in a mild acid solution. somewhat harsh, but yet soothing, surly so when it causes attacks on bosses and supervisors, has a Sgt. EVER bought you a drink??????

Why do so many Black people have Irish last names??

Does that make them Irish-African- Americans ?? I think so, begorraah, Sein matu deslies famhragh (SP)

12/27/2005 08:51:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

KEEP CHICAGO GUN FREE. NO PAPERS FOR RETIRED COPS. ILLINOIS IS A NO CARRY STATE. THATS THE WAY IT IS. YOU DON'T LIKE MOVE TO GUN LOVING STATE..

12/27/2005 05:58:19 PM

I know these liberal idiots like the moron that wrote the above crap drive everyone nuts, but we would be better served if we just ignored him. When we respond to beavis it just makes him go whack off more. If we show him we are willing to let him spout his retoric like we let the crazies do and don't respond to him he will go away because we won't be "fun" to him.

I mean think about the nutcase in every district (some have more than one), what happens when you ignore them? They go away. When you confront them they will force you to lock them up because they won't shut up. Think about it.

Have a happy and safe new year everyone.

12/27/2005 08:56:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

8:56, you forgot the coomon thing on this thread...tell him to "go fuck yourself!"

12/27/2005 09:14:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Who cares who runs this site. I bet the brass would like to shut it down. But then we could just start another.

12/27/2005 09:17:00 PM  
Anonymous Edward R. Murrow said...

Just think if Bill Clinton had circumvented the courts and started listening in on conversations without warrant or cause. Or if he used prisons in countries that allow torture for national security reasons. The Republican Congress impeached him for lying in regards to marital infidelity. Now we have a president that circumvented the Constitution by invading privacy without warrant, and hiring out countries that allow torture to assist the CIA in practices that are illegal in the civil world. What was done years ago in the name of national security in efforts to stem international communism is a pittance to what is happening now to fight terrorism. Finally, SCC, have you no shame?
Good Night and Good Luck.

12/27/2005 10:25:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You ever hear of ECHELON? It is a program tha tintercepts evcery, i mean every ceel phone call made in the country by everyone making them. This is then processed through computers looking for keys words , phrases etc... This was started by Clinton. This is totally legal. What Bush is doing is TOTALLY LEGAL. Hey liberals, your mother!!!!

12/27/2005 10:30:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

O......obnoxious
G......gay
R......retarded
A......anti-american
D......demented
y......yellow as in coward

12/27/2005 10:32:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Where's 1611 3rd watch..........oh yeah sleeping! Do nothing fucks!

12/27/2005 10:55:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

O-OUT OF HIS FUCKING MIND
G-GOOF
R-REVOLTING
A-ANTI NORMAL
D-DICKHEAD
Y-YUK

12/27/2005 11:03:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Where u at whitey? They be talking about u! U there? U can't be as bad as they are saying!

12/28/2005 12:00:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If you are not doing anything wrong....you don't have to worry about it....several members of the Democratic Party knew what was going on but chose to stir up shit when their pathetic views on Iraq were floundering....I'm just waiting for Howard Dean to screw things up as usual....LIBERALS SUCK!!!!!!!

12/28/2005 12:25:00 AM  
Blogger BATHROOM WALL ? said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

12/28/2005 04:46:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Doesn't this ass-bandit O'Grady ever work?

12/28/2005 11:02:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

NO

12/28/2005 11:34:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Does Clinton using the Oval Office for head jobs from Monica remind anybody of any Watch Commanders using their office for the same thing???

12/28/2005 03:50:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's now standard operating procedure per G.O. 05-69.

12/28/2005 06:00:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Let me get this straight. The US is attacked by Islamic terrorist's.
They kill 3,000 Americans. The president G. Bush asks for and receives from Congress authority to take whatever action the President see's fit in order to protect this country and Americans (Republicans, liberals, Democrats etc) from further attacks.
In essence the president want's to kill those that want to kill us. \
Now the Democrats declare war on the president for wanting to fight and kill those who want to kill us. Furthermore, the Democrat's want to impeach president Bush for protecting this country and our citizens. Over 65% of Americans said they have NO PROBLEM w/ GW using wiretaps to fight terrorist that are already here in our country. Over 51% of Democrats feel the same. To sum it up, Bush is fighting terrorist's and Democrats are fighting Bush. I can't wait untill some Democrat gets up a says they are going to impeach GW for fight the terrorist's both here and abroad. We are guarnteed a Republican in the White House for many many years to come. And we will keep Congress too.

12/28/2005 10:37:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

December 29, 2005 -- Prosecutors want a federal judge to reduce the prison sentence of the cop convicted of lying in the Abner Louima sodomy case.
Charles Schwarz is serving 60 months behind bars for denying he'd escorted the Haitian immigrant to the bathroom at Brooklyn's 70th Precinct station house on Aug. 9, 1997, just moments before fellow cop Justin Volpe shoved a broken broomstick into Louima's rectum.

As part of a deal worked out with the defense, prosecutors asked the federal Bureau of Prisons to release Schwarz after just 47 months, and his family agreed to stop proclaiming his innocence in public.

But officials from the Bureau of Prisons surprised both sides by refusing to go along with the deal, saying they've changed their policies and can release inmates early only if they're terminally ill.

So Schwarz — who has already been in the slammer three years and was expecting to be released in January — is now stuck behind bars until the spring of 2007.

Since the deal fell through, Schwarz's lawyers have asked Judge Reena Raggi to cancel her original sentence and re-sentence the former cop. On Friday, Brooklyn U.S. Attorney Roslynn Mauskopf filed papers asking the judge to consider calling the sentence a do-over.

"They're basically agreeing with us that there was a mutual mistake, with both sides believing the Bureau of Prisons could make this decision," said Schwarz's lawyer, Ron Fischetti.

12/29/2005 11:17:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And please tell me what is wrong with this former police officer doing his time for trying to cover up a heinous crime????????

12/30/2005 07:45:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And please tell me what is wrong with this former police officer doing his time for trying to cover up a heinous crime????????

I don't think he's covering up the heiny crime, I think he's saying he didn't assist in it, you don't think departments throw cops to the wolves

12/30/2005 09:52:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If a copper thinks it's OK for another copper to shove a broken broom handle up someone's ass (remember this was literally shoved up his ass, not figuratively) then he's lost his mind. Both those coppers got what they deserved.

Sometimes you may lose your cool and crack a guy. You're not supposed to do that, and if you get caught, you take your lumps. But shoving a broom handle up a guys ass? C'mon, that's sadistic.

12/31/2005 11:32:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sadistic! Daleys been sticking it in our asses since he's been da mayor.

1/02/2006 07:12:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

Sadistic! Daleys been sticking it in our asses since he's been da mayor.

1/02/2006 07:12:42 PM

Yeah, but FIGURATIVELY, NOT LITERALLY!! The dipshit in New York LITERALLY shoved a broomstick up someone's ass. If you don't think that's over the line, you're a fucking retard!

1/02/2006 10:12:00 PM  

<< Home

Newer Posts.......................... ..........................Older Posts