If you have "no place to go," come here!

AP repeats lie that Bush only sought warrantless wiretap powers after 9/11

Good that Obama released the documents. Now, if our famously free press would just get the facts straight. AP:

The Justice Department released nine legal opinions showing that, following the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the Bush administration determined that certain constitutional rights would not apply during the coming fight. Within two weeks, government lawyers were already discussing ways to wiretap U.S. conversations without warrants.

Even Pravda knows that's not true. Back on October 13, 2007:

Nacchio's account, which places the NSA proposal at a meeting on Feb. 27, 2001, suggests that the Bush administration was seeking to enlist telecommunications firms in programs without court oversight before the terrorist attacks on New York and the Pentagon. The Sept. 11 attacks have been cited by the government as the main impetus for its warrantless surveillance efforts.

The Village wanted warrantless surveillance, for reasons of its own, well before 9/11, although 9/11 was the shock that allowed the policy to be implemented. Too bad Obama didn't go against the Village with his vote to [cough] reform FISA. If he had, we might have confidence that all the relevant documents were just released. As it is, I don't see how we can. I mean, when you see this:

The new administration pledged on Monday to begin turning over documents related to the videos to a federal judge and to make as much information public as possible.

does it end the matter for you? Or does it make you want to hope -- but verify?

NOTE WaPo via Corrente.

No votes yet


pie's picture
Submitted by pie on

In a squeaker of a decision, the full Tenth Circuit earlier today upheld former Qwest CEO Joseph Nacchio insider trading conviction, offering another setback to the former telecom high flyer’s attempt to reverse a jury’s decision in 2007. The court also revoked his bail, so Nacchio is likely headed to prison in the near future.
Former U.S. Attorney Troy Eid, who oversaw the case but recently left to become partner at Greenberg Traurig, was ebullient about the decision. “It’s a tremendous day for the United States government,” he said. “I couldn’t be happier.”

I've read about a Greenberg lately and not in a good way. Where was that anyway?

Oh, I remember. Here.

No relation to the law firm though.