Drudge.com
Posted By: Democrat on 2006-08-06
In Reply to: I only found one story on this. sm - MT
It was on drudge yesterday. The article had a link inside (see below) that showed US involvement in securing the rally.
LINK/URL: Hezbollah
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Drudge
Drudge is usually not accepted as a reliable source by the mainstream. I have heard Chris Matthews, Tim Russert, Bob Schiffer, even Tyler Carlson say, now this is paraphrasing but just the same, we don't quote Drudge on this program because of the extreme bias. This would be like me asking you to accept Al Franken's take on something or even, drum roll.....horror of horrors...gather up your children....duct tape your house....YIKES, EGAD...Michael Moore !!!!!! This liberal skips over anything that uses Drudge as its source. There are many on the right who are credible; don't need this Drudge hack.
Oh, please, Drudge is as stupid
Fact Check: Clinton/Carter Executive Orders Did Not Authorize Warrantless Searches of Americans
The top of the Drudge Report claims “CLINTON EXECUTIVE ORDER: SECRET SEARCH ON AMERICANS WITHOUT COURT ORDER…” It’s not true. Here’s the breakdown –
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.
Drudge is as reliable as any of the MSM
He routinely/daily posts articles leaning both ways, but when someone doesn't tout the liberal mantra verbatim then you write them off. You don't want anything to do with fair and balanced reporting do you?
|
