THE MAJESTIC MONARCH WINGNUT

Remember those nature filmstrips they used to show us back in elementary school? You know, the ones we saw in the weekly hour devoted to science learning. I remember watching as a little caterpiller trundled along a knotty branch, chugging body slinky-ing along. Then we'd see a little chrysalis hanging from a leaf. I think it was the pupa, or...uh...larva...or maybe the...uh...Santa Maria? I don't know. But, anyway. then the cocoon would burst open, and a butterfly would spread its flattened wings and flit away.

All of which is my way of preparing you for the incredible transformation of the conservative wingnut. First. know that a wingnut can't actually begin his transformation until he has been exposed to a talking point. These usually come through the media. You've seen these dishonest arguments on Fox News, heard them from pill-popping hypocrite Rush Limbaugh, or sometimes read them as articles in conservative papers. Once a wingnut has his talking point, he begins his journey. In this case, RichardCranial found an article making a false claim about the FISA court, and came running to Paltalk to smear it around.

RC has read an article by a guy named John Schmidt in the Chicago Tribune. Schmidt selectively quotes the FISA review court to make it sound as though the FISA court said it was OK for Bush to engage in warrantless wiretaps. However, what Schmidt leaves out is that the case was about facts that happened in 1978, BEFORE FISA, so the court explicitly states in their opinion that FISA would govern cases after 1978. A thorough debunk can be found here.

RichardCranial: the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, composed of three federal appellate court judges, said in 2002 that "All the ... courts to have decided the issue held that the president did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence ... We take for granted that the president does have that authority."
Jesus Claus: rc, you are a little late
RichardCranial: never late jc
Jesus Claus: Bush isn't arguing he followed FISA
RichardCranial: The Truong court [United States v. Truong Dinh Hung, 4th Cir. 1980], as did all the other courts to have decided the issue, held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information
RichardCranial: niether am i
Jesus Claus: his argument is that he is allowed to ignore laws he doesn't like
Jesus Claus: no, Truong is from before FISA, rc
Jesus Claus: your citation is wrong
Jesus Claus: Truong is a pre FISA case
RichardCranial: doesn't matter jc cause it is aconsitutional thing
RichardCranial: the review of the truong was in 2002 which is post fisa
Jesus Claus: no, it actually isn't
Jesus Claus: yes, but it covers law PRE 1978
Jesus Claus: so it isn't relevant
Jesus Claus: the actions in Truong predated FISA
Jesus Claus: FISA superceded presidential authority
RichardCranial: November 2002 decision of the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, in Sealed Case No. 02-001, where the court said: *** We take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President's constitutional power."
Jesus Claus: rc, what is your source, please
RichardCranial: United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review
Jesus Claus: where are you pasting from, rc?
RichardCranial: John Schmidt, associate attorney general of the United States in the Clinton administration
RichardCranial: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-0512210142dec21,0,3553632.story?coll=chi-newsopinioncommentary-hed
RichardCranial: the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, composed of three federal appellate court judges, said in 2002 that "All the ... courts to have decided the issue held that the president did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence
Jesus Claus: rc, that is SEARCHES
Jesus Claus: not wiretaps
MrArchieBunker: Claus will no proceed to tell us the Chicago Tribune is a 'Scaife paper'
MrArchieBunker: now*
Jesus Claus: sorry, rc
Jesus Claus: the Truong case predates FISA
RichardCranial: but the review of the troung case by the fisa court does not
RichardCranial: A panel of former Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court judges told members of the Senate Judiciary Committee that President Bush did not act illegally when he created by executive order a wiretapping program conducted by the National Security Agency (NSA).
Jesus Claus: that is false, rc
Jesus Claus: the FISA judges told the committee that they wanted the NSA program to be under their authority
Jesus Claus: they did not say it was legal
RichardCranial: but the said it was not illegal
RichardCranial: they said it was not illegal
RichardCranial: A panel of former Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court judges told members of the Senate Judiciary Committee that President Bush did not act illegally when he created by executive order a wiretapping program conducted by the National Security Agency (NSA).
RichardCranial: notice the words did not act illegally
RichardCranial: if the dnc couldn't beat nagin how do they expect to win the house in 06?
RichardCranial: only reason carter won was watergate
Jesus Claus: The FISA appeals court acknowledges the cases it mentions were decided before FISA and didn’t consider the statute (”We reiterate that Truong dealt with a pre-FISA surveillance…it had no occasion to consider the application of the statute…”)
Jesus Claus: The FISA appeals court explicitly says it’s not addressing the issue (”It was incumbent upon the [Truong] court, therefore, to determine the boundaries of that constitutional authority [to conduct warrantless searches]…The question before us is the reverse…”)
RichardCranial: but it was a good thing carter won cause without the fuck up job carter did reagan might not got elected
Jesus Claus: Actually, the quote doesn’t begin with the word “all”; it begins “The Truong court, as did all the other courts…” The Truong case was decided in 1978 — the same year FISA was passed — and did not deal with the FISA law
Jesus Claus: rc, your source was an article by John Schmidt, right?
Jesus Claus: As the court noted right before the excerpt, “Truong dealt with a pre-FISA surveillance… it had no occasion to consider the application of the statute…” The Truong case dealt with the President’s power in the absence of a congressional statute.
Jesus Claus: sorry, rc
RichardCranial: whatever jc, but the fact is that the review of it was in 2002 not pre fisa
Jesus Claus: in the Truong appeal, the FISC appeals court made clear they were deciding in the ABSENCE of FISA
Jesus Claus: because Truong happened before FISA
Jesus Claus: capisce?
RichardCranial: "The Truong court [United States v. Truong Dinh Hung, 4th Cir. 1980], as did all the other courts to have decided the issue, held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information
Jesus Claus: rc, that is decided IN THE ABSENCE of FISA
RichardCranial: but the review of it still was in 2002 and it still stood the test of time
Jesus Claus: rc, you're pasting from a John Schmidt article, right?
Jesus Claus: no, the 2002 opinion was an appeal
Jesus Claus: oif the FACTS of the 1978 case
RichardCranial: November 2002 decision of the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, in Sealed Case No. 02-001, where the court said: We take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President's constitutional power
RichardCranial: it was an review
Jesus Claus: no no no
RichardCranial: the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, composed of three federal appellate court judges, said in 2002 that "All the ... courts to have decided the issue held that the president did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence
Jesus Claus: it was an appeal, but court cvases are decided based on the LAW AT THE TIME
Jesus Claus: don't you know that?
RichardCranial: in 200 and fucking 2
Jesus Claus: rc, get a clue
Jesus Claus: the case was from 197 fucking 8
Jesus Claus: BEFORE FISA!
Jesus Claus: BEFORE!
Jesus Claus: holy shit, are you fucking brain damaged?
RichardCranial: but the review was in 2002 and it was still good
Jesus Claus: NO
Jesus Claus: that isn't how appeals work!

So, once I show RC that he is peddling long debunked lies, he transforms into the true form of the wingnut: the Whiny Ass Titty Baby (h/t Atrios). Indeed, take a look at how RC acts like a taunting 3rd grader when things don't go his way. I half expected him to start bawling and wailing for his mommy.

RichardCranial: sorry jc you are all wet cause you know what bush is still doing it and he said bring it on !!!!
Jesus Claus: appeals are still based on the LAW AT THE TIME!
Jesus Claus: rc, you lost this one, ok?
Jesus Claus: just settle
RichardCranial: bush said yeah i am doing it whatcha gonna to do about it---lol
Jesus Claus: you're right, rc
Jesus Claus: that is what he said
Jesus Claus: now you're getting it
RichardCranial: wrong jc because my man is still wirertapping without warrents
Jesus Claus: yes, he is
Jesus Claus: and worse
Jesus Claus: and you don't care
RichardCranial: and the libs can't stop him
Jesus Claus: sure we can
Jesus Claus: when we take the House in November, investigations begin
RichardCranial: i hope he keep on doing it
Jesus Claus: i get that
RichardCranial: what have you done about it?
Jesus Claus: you don't care about privacy or freedom
RichardCranial: hold a couple of hearing?
RichardCranial: i care more about capturing terrorist than their right to priavicy
Jesus Claus: and rc, that Drudge story has been debunked
RichardCranial: what drudge report?
Jesus Claus: the story about the DNC not backing Nagin
Jesus Claus: it was fake
Jesus Claus: made up
Jesus Claus: a lie
RichardCranial: who debunk it dean?
Jesus Claus: go back and look
RichardCranial: of course dean would say iut wasn't true after nagin won
RichardCranial: did drudge say it wasn't true?
Jesus Claus: yes, he did
RichardCranial: we'll see
RichardCranial: i
RichardCranial: i'll take drudge at his word taking dean at their word, but it still doesn't change anything, cause if it was true (and I still think it is) it doesn't bode too well for the dems in 06
RichardCranial: it really doesn't matter jc cause bush is still doing it and you can't stop him
RichardCranial: ytou can't
RichardCranial: nov is nov
RichardCranial: where are the people who says it is illegal?
RichardCranial: i don't hear the libs crying about it?
RichardCranial: we will let november take care of november

Oh, yes, we will let November sweep the corrupt, lying Republicans out of office. Maybe by then, RC will have grown up. I'm not holding my breath, though. And after November, you'll have a whole lot to cry about, loser.

JC