Congressman Conyers:Washington Post Misses the Point on NSA Ruling

[cal04]

As you probably have heard, yesterday was a landmark in the effort to protect our civil liberties from the Administration’s ever increasing power. A federal judge in Detroit ruled that the warrantless eavesdropping conducting by the NSA was unconstitutional, a conclusion shared by the vast majority of legal scholars outside of the Bush Administration.

However, I am concerned about how some of the press is reporting on the decision. Compare the New York Times with the Washington Post. The President has been struck down again for overreaching in the so-called war on terror without a legal basis, yet the Washington Post editorial board dismisses this monumental moment to complain about style over substance.

In fact, they acuse Judge Diggs of being "long on throat clearing sound bites." They go on to cite only two sentences. Yes, two sentences out of 44 pages. As a lawyer myself, and ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, I can assure the editorial board that most judges use rhetoric and it has nothing to do with the strength of their legal reasoning.

I am also surprised that after clearly denouncing the program as illegal as early as January of this year, and noting how tenuous the Administration's arguments were, that they are now surprised to hear a judge agree. Suddenly, the fight over illegal wiretaps is no longer "frivolous."

Of course the government "vigorously disputes" the ruling. That is the definition of litigation and does not confer merit to their argument.

And they could vigorously dispute that the sky is blue. It doesn't mean that the Washington Post has to report on it or give it so much merit just for trying to appear fair and balanced.

http://www.conyersblog.us/

Ruling for the Law
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/18/opinion/18fri1.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
A Judicial Misfire
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/17/AR2006081701540_pf.html
The President's End Run
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/22/AR2006012200779.html

[Benhurst]

1. Thank God for John Conyers! NT

[spooky3]

2. NPR (WAMU in DC) disappointed me

The first time I heard their reporting on this, they described the decision briefly, then let us hear from two administration officials about how awful the decision was--of course, no one from the "winning" side was interviewed or heard from.

[Baselinereality]

3. Well, No One Except the Administration Has "Won" Yet...

The program continues unabated by this ruling.

It seems like every time we turn around, another judge is telling George Bush that he's not a king, he's a president, but he keeps on doing whatever he wants to do.

The fact that yet another judge in Detroit thinks that he's crossed the line is not yet a reason to celebrate.

I, for one, think it's appropriate that NPR provided two administration responses to this attempted injunction. Because maybe, the more Americans hear Bush protest about having to implement basic American civil liberties, they'll start to really, really notice how megalomaniacal and dangerous he is.

Please don't express disappointment in NPR simply because they didn't offer up the news EXACTLY as you would have liked it to be written. That's a complaint best left to those that get all of there news from FOX and who think that "damn" is a vile curse word.

Sometimes, the facts speak for themselves. Sometimes the American people have to figure things out for themselves.

[spooky3]

14. Please go to MediaMatters.org to gain a better understanding

of why it is important to pay attention to media coverage, including NPR's, and to speak up when it is inaccurate, when representatives of only one side are asked for comments, and other problems occur. MediaMatters.org has frequently documented where mainstream outlets (including NPR) have had disproportionate representation by conservative/Rethug/etc. speakers on their shows. Please see their comprehensive studies of the NBC/ABC/CBS Sunday morning talk shows for evidence, as just one example. The instances where Dem/liberal/progressive viewpoints are overrepresented are far fewer. If there were one incident in isolation, this would not be a problem, but it isn't isolated.

http://mediamatters.org/

My comment has nothing to do with demanding EXACTLY what I would have liked. It has nothing to do with celebration. It has to do with the facts, which are as I posted earlier.

The appropriate thing for NPR and any other media outlet to do is:

1) accurately report the outcome of the trial
2) stop there OR
3) ask for a comment from a member representing the side who won at this level and a comment from a member representing the other side (or if more than 1, ask for equal numbers from both sides).

Here are examples of problematic items appearing on NPR:

http://mediamatters.org/issues_topics/search_results?qstring=npr

[MissWaverly]

15. Spooky3 you have NAILED it

I don't like how the media has given details of the judges background and the fact that she
was a Carter appointee; that does not matter. The law should not be based on politics.

[Baselinereality]

17. Well, I'm Not a Journalism Major, So I'm Merely Speaking as a Person, But

I fail to see how hearing two reactions from the administration is "inaccurate."

Whether we like it or not, capitalism is built, supported and established mostly by powerful, conservative Republicans. It's the society that you're living in. Things in America slant to the right. They have ever since the rise of Reagan.

I understand completely that there is no liberal bias, there is no such thing as a liberal media, etc.

I was simply trying to point out that, in this instance, I don't think that NPR did anything egregiously wrong by reporting administration responses. After all, the administration responds so rarely to anything these days. It was probably a boon that they had a response to report.

I don't like the state of the world and I don't like the fact that the Republican, conservative, evangelical mindset is so predominant in politics today. But, I do not see how criticizing NPR, one of the view balanced news outlets we have in this country, (neither too right nor too left), is going to help the situation.

That's all I was trying to say.

Instead, it sounds like I picked a fight with you, which is depressing, because all I was trying to do was ask you to give NPR some slack.

We Americans are a bitter, angry people. How on earth did we get to be in charge of the planet?

[Roland99]

4. Permalink for Conyers article

http://www.conyersblog.us/archives/00000531.htm

[texpatriot2004]

5. Thank you Congressman Conyers nm

[me b zola]

6. k&r

:kick:

[Senator]

7. k&r

[formercia]

8. What the M$M reports

is what the 'boys' want you to hear.

Phone taps shmone taps, it's about the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. There are some, like the Federalists, who would demean the Bill of Rights.

[Richard Steele]

9. If only EVERY elected Dem had half the spine Conyers does...

He's a true American patriot.

[malaise]

10. Spot on Conyers

I am surprised that more Dems don't call the media on their bullshit coverage of this matter. When MSMachine was discussing polls showing that more Americans know about the three stooges than the three branches of goverment, I had a good laugh because MSMachine does more to confuse on the roles of the three branches than anything else. Dems should be emailing MSM non-stop about their spin re activist judges and should demand that they focus on 'the fugging law'. Bush is breaking the fugging law -IMPEACH.

[ThomWV]

11. Remember - Conyers Will Impeach Bush In January If Dem's Win The House

Chair of the House Judiciary Committee, where impeachments begin.

[CollegeDUer]

16. Pelosi and Reid won't let him

I read a news article where Reid said conyers was ridiculous and told Pelosi to call him into her office and deal with him

[badgerpup]

12. OK...am I oversimplyfing here?

But we are mostly agreed that no matter how you slice it, Bush's wiretaps are illegal because he did not get warrants before or after the fact, right?
Not the actual wiretapping, but the failure to obtain warrants do to so.
OK...I'm down with that.


So the question now is: How are we going to put the bell on the cat?

[Joe Bacon]

13. What do you expect from Pravda on the Potomac?

It's amazing to see the WHORESHINGTON POST kiss Bush ass 24/7