Greenwald watches CNN and writes:
When our news media interview high government officials, especially ones like [Michael] McConnell with shiny military medals, they are now so Pravda-like they not only invite government claims to be voiced with no critical scrutiny whatsoever ("why the urgent need for retroactive immunity for these telecommunications companies?," with no challenge whatsoever to the "cooperation" claim), but the reporters now actually try to top the government officials in adding on new reasons why their demanded policies are so crucial ("But is it also important from your perspective to keep the prying eyes of attorneys who are launching these lawsuits away from uncovering information about the program").The guy doing the interviewing was CNN's John Roberts. I do not think it was the shiny medals that distracted him. I think that what distracted him was that he is an employee of CNN, which is a division of the Turner Broadcasting System, which is a brand subsidiary of Time Warner, Inc., which is the world's largest (or second largest) media, entertainment, and telecommunications firm (as well as Jay Rockefeller's 5th largest political patron!), currently immanatizing its immunitological eschaton. So, you know, not to get all Network on y'all, but I'm pretty sure that Mr. Jensen got Mr. Roberts up to the board room and there gave him the gospel to read. "Why me?" Because you're on television, dummy.
I don't think I ever even heard a Bush official or any Bush follower make the argument that telecom amnesty was necessary to keep the "prying eyes of attorneys" away from Super-Secret Information about "The Program." The first person I ever heard advocate that line was CNN's Roberts in this interview, and McConnell, of course, quickly accepted the help.
9 comments:
Probably more subtle. "Remember Stone Phillips? What's he doing these days? The weather in Poughkeepsie? And Van Earl Ray -- I think he's painting houses in Fort Lauderdale. Sometimes you gotta go along to get along..."
I have seen the face of God.
Very unfair! Yes, John Roberts (or his voice, only) is exceptionally unctuous, but his question was central to the issue.
Bush claims that these "private companies" will not cooperate with the government unless they are "immunized" against all liability. But, of course, that's silly -- as the Chairman of the FCC could readily tell him. So, what's Bush up to?
Roberts has it right! Bush, Cheney, and their minions are properly worried about what the attorneys for these plaintiffs will discover about their illegal actions and equally importantly, just how much they knew at the time in respect of how illegal their actions were.
Stopping these suits and plaintiffs' attorneys' discovery is crucial to keeping Bush and others out of jail. And he has only 11 months to accomplish the goal.
Allow me to add another thought.
You all do understand that the telecoms' defense to these suits will be that they didn't break the law, because the law had been superceded and was then, in abeyance by virtue of the orders of the President of the United States (or perhaps, the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States of America). That's the issue which will be decided.
Attorneys for both sides will likely be given broad latitude to investigate -- not the secret methods of surveillance -- but rather what, if anything, would cause a "reasonable man" to believe that the President had the power to unilaterally abrogate the law. Defendants will testify as to what Bush and others told them, and we'll have the opportunity to learn whether Bush and Cheney based their "request" on lies.
And doubtless, Cheney's Unitary Executive Theory will have to be briefed and argued. Americans may finally learn -- in their guts -- what adoption of that theory bodes.
Keeping these suits alive is critical to keeping such liberty as we may currently enjoy.
John Roberts, even better with a mullet.
Like I have any idea what this is all about. I kept thinking he was talking about the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. "Cool, he used to be a Canadian VJ?"
Ellen, I don't mean to be a downer, but if you really believe that "Stopping these suits and plaintiffs' attorneys' discovery is crucial to keeping Bush and others out of jail," then I have got one fine ARM with a low-low introductory rate to offer you. "Cheney's Unified Executive Theory." More like Truman's. Honestly. Do you really think that a President of the United States is worried about jail time? He could wrap a puppy in the skin he just removed from a little girl and rape it on national television, and they'd still build him a library.
As my old (she really was old) sixth grade teacher used to say, you're a kitchen cynic, IOZ.
Never underestimate the power of slowly grinding legal procedure in the hands of your enemies. And you can bet Bush and Cheney haven't forgotten Whitewater (I know Hillary hasn't).
P.S. And in any case wouldn't you like to know the deep, dark secrets of this administration? Because that's what these cases offer us the opportunity to find out -- and especially, if adjudicated by a liberal, anti-Bush Federal District Judge from San Francisco.
lol, like there's any secret shit we don't already know about. We know they're criminals, Ellen, you're just never going to get anyone in this country to put down their fuckin pizza and turn off American Idol long enough to give a shit about it.
He could wrap a puppy in the skin he just removed from a little girl and rape it on national television, and they'd still build him a library.
This is why I love this site. Thanks.
Post a Comment