Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ed Meese Takes Chris Matthews Head On 1/12/2006 (Cleans Matthews' Clock)
www.freerepublic.com | January 13, 2006

Posted on 01/13/2006 9:08:20 AM PST by Howlin

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-171 next last
To: Howlin

Can we require everyone in the United States to read this exchange?

BTW, thanks for posting this.


51 posted on 01/13/2006 10:06:09 AM PST by Samwise (I freep; therefore, I am.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

I have literally not watched Chris Matthews in at least 2 years. But last night, after hearing that Ed Meese was going to be a guest, I watched.

Meese was fantastic and I'm so very glad you posted this transcript today.

We have so many of the constantly constipated even on this forum telling us just how illegal the NSA spy program is that it was good to hear yet another Attorney General confirm what most of us know!


52 posted on 01/13/2006 10:07:02 AM PST by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Fantistic. Meese got him good, but Matthews is too brain dead to understand he had his butt whipped.
53 posted on 01/13/2006 10:09:52 AM PST by Logical me (Oh, well!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: texasbluebell
Chrissie's mind, such as it is, must be going by now. He's just now getting over a 3rd bout with malaria, after yet another family trip to Africa over Christmas. Why he keeps exposing himself to such a disease is beyond me.

. . . Because his problem is not Malaria?
54 posted on 01/13/2006 10:09:58 AM PST by i_dont_chat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat
YOU again! What's with you picking at this 'wiretapping' issue until Bush is equated with Clinton?

Do you have a special need here to debase Bush?

55 posted on 01/13/2006 10:34:09 AM PST by doberville
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
There is no legal term that automatically "covers" all such communication. because it cannot anticipate all invention.

Just one law covers "oral communication ... signs, signals, writing, images, sounds, data, or intelligence of any nature" over "wire, radio, electromagnetic, photooptical or photoelectronic" means. It is worded broadly enough to cover everything.

As I said, what "is" is. And you're defending these modern Clintonites.

56 posted on 01/13/2006 10:34:45 AM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

bump.


57 posted on 01/13/2006 10:34:45 AM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: doberville
What's with you picking at this 'wiretapping' issue until Bush is equated with Clinton?

Bush will never be equated with Clinton, he can't sink that low. But he and his supporters are following the Clinton playbook, and people need to recognize that and call them on it.

Do you have a special need here to debase Bush?

I have a special need to debase politicans who are acting or speaking dishonestly. Bush and his supporters fit that bill sometimes.

Do you have a loyalty to Bush that requires you to defend him when he or his supporters are wrong or dishonest? Do you believe he is more important than this country?

58 posted on 01/13/2006 10:39:53 AM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

I am quite frankly shocked Matthews allowed Meese on his show. As it pertains to Plame and "Wiretapping" Chrissy's lil ratingless show has been no more than a leftist echo chamber.


59 posted on 01/13/2006 10:40:03 AM PST by FlipWilson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Great explanation of this "wire tapping", so-called!! I have been trying to post this for the past month - it is not wire tapping. IT is digital data stream interception - no human being is listening to a conversation or reading an e-mail on the first pass.
60 posted on 01/13/2006 10:46:55 AM PST by p23185 (Why isn't attempting to take down a sitting Pres & his Admin considered Sedition?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat
You could intercept the same calls with a scanner that is readily available at Radio Shack. Remember the Dem operative from Florida who intercepted a Newt Gingrich call and gave it to the media? Same technology.

The big difference is the limited range of such scanners, their inability to monitor all channels simultaneously, the absence of software to "hear" and understand keywords and then isolate and sort them. Regardless, the technology is similar and the legal issue is the same.

This is not Clintonesque parsing.

61 posted on 01/13/2006 10:47:24 AM PST by Mind-numbed Robot (Not all that needs to be done needs to be done by the government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Howlin; potlatch; ntnychik
=     You can take him!










62 posted on 01/13/2006 10:48:00 AM PST by devolve (<-- (-in a manner reminiscent of Senator Gasbag F. Kohnman-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

They call it a b*tch slap for a reason. And the B*tch got slapped good.

I have a sneaking suspicion Mr. Meese won't be returning to that program any time soon. Heheh


63 posted on 01/13/2006 10:48:17 AM PST by Dr.Zoidberg (Mohammedism - Bringing you only the best of the 6th century for fourteen hundred years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

These libs are blowing up like Iraqi suicide bombers. First, Letterman last week admitting to O'Reilly he didn't know what he was talking about, after first proving it, and now Matthews being devoured by Meese.
Meese must have felt like Mark McGwire at a home-run derby:
"C'mon, throw me another one!"


64 posted on 01/13/2006 10:50:44 AM PST by jjmcgo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mind-numbed Robot
You could intercept the same calls with a scanner that is readily available at Radio Shack. Remember the Dem operative from Florida who intercepted a Newt Gingrich call and gave it to the media? Same technology.

And completely covered under the wiretapping laws. Technology has changed, but we still call it tapping.

This is not Clintonesque parsing.

It absolutely is. "We're not tapping, we're spying, see, we're not putting a tap on a specific phone line, so it's not tapping." Clintonesque BS. They intercepted phone conversations. That's tapping.

65 posted on 01/13/2006 10:53:27 AM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: OldFriend


"Do you doubt for a moment that Matthews knew full well that he was lying thru his teeth every time he spoke?" MarkeyD
Precisely!

“MATTHEWS: OK. Well, Scooter Libby is facing 30 years in jail for a mountain out of a mole hill. That‘s a serious matter.
MEESE: It has nothing to do—he wasn‘t even charged with that crime.”



What Matthews is doing here is not spin, it is not bias, it is not being disingenuous, it is not flacking for the Democrats, It is lying plane and simple. There is absolutely no doubt that he knows that as Meese says “he wasn’t even charged with that crime”.

He is trying to get his audience to believe something which he knows to be false , i.e.he is lying.


I just wonder how the management at NBC justifies to GE and its stockholders, the idea that mouthing DNC talking points is more important, than attracting viewers or advertising bucks. I believe if they replaced either Chris or Keith with randomly selected, non-syndicated conservative radio talk show host, with zero name recognition, their viewer ship would increase dramatically.


66 posted on 01/13/2006 10:55:31 AM PST by Jonah Johansen ("Comming soon to a neighborhood near you")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Matthews didn't want to hear meeses answers because it pointed out how false all the accusations against Bush are. He kept cutting Meese off and would ask the same thing over and over even tho the answer was given.
I don't think the liberals want the truth, it seems they just want to go on believing whatever they want to.
67 posted on 01/13/2006 10:56:07 AM PST by RedBloodedAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
MATTHEWS: OK. Well, Scooter Libby is facing 30 years in jail for a mountain out of a mole hill. That‘s a serious matter.

This one sentence proves that Matthews is a dolt, has no idea what he is talking about and is unable to even read a simple newspaper story.

68 posted on 01/13/2006 10:56:58 AM PST by Bloody Sam Roberts (Crime cannot be tolerated. Criminals thrive on the indulgences of society's understanding.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MarkeyD
...if Matthews is a moron, or is intentionally misrepresenting what Scooter Libby was indicted for

Yes!!!



69 posted on 01/13/2006 10:58:15 AM PST by RetiredSWO
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat
It absolutely is. "We're not tapping, we're spying, see, we're not putting a tap on a specific phone line, so it's not tapping." Clintonesque BS. They intercepted phone conversations. That's tapping.

Is your objection to the fact of it or the words used to defend it?

70 posted on 01/13/2006 11:03:43 AM PST by Mind-numbed Robot (Not all that needs to be done needs to be done by the government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat

Wiretapping is tapping your wire. It is what it is. All calls are taped or monitored. This is called wire tapping.

If you monitor/record some calls to some people to some places it's more properly called surveillance. Like you watch a streetcorner or a bar. You watch the connection between al Queda and Mohammed in Boston.

One is wiretapping, the other surveillance.

The distinction is important because there is an important difference. It's not a subterfuge, it's using the correct word.


71 posted on 01/13/2006 11:06:08 AM PST by D-fendr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat; Howlin
Wire tapping has its own definition based on how it works and who is the subject, and what the NSA is doing is NOT wiretapping. Maybe you missed the dozens of threads explaining this on FR or maybe you missed the White House press briefing a few weeks ago where President Bush explained it. But the United States Intel community is NOT "spying on Americans" or "wiretapping" or even "eavesdropping", okay? The leftist media is refusing to listen to the facts. Don't be like them, please.
72 posted on 01/13/2006 11:08:33 AM PST by RedBloodedAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat
They intercepted phone conversations. That's tapping.

Here's a test: You have the choice between me tapping your phone or intercepting your calls to al Queda in Iraq.

Which would you prefer? Either, since there's no difference, right?

73 posted on 01/13/2006 11:08:59 AM PST by D-fendr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: D-fendr

Yes, and the correct word has it's own definition and coordinating set of circumstances!


74 posted on 01/13/2006 11:09:43 AM PST by RedBloodedAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
MATTHEWS: What checks his power then, the president‘s to do it? How does—is there somebody there saying Mr. President, you cannot bug that person, you cannot intercept that person‘s phone messages.

When was the last time somebody said "THE VOTERS ARE THE ULTIMATE CHECK AND BALANCE." He is accountable to US! Sheesh. If we are upset, we will vote the guy out. What is so hard about that to understand? /Rant

75 posted on 01/13/2006 11:13:33 AM PST by pollyannaish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: p23185
Great explanation of this "wire tapping", so-called!! I have been trying to post this for the past month - it is not wire tapping. IT is digital data stream interception - no human being is listening to a conversation or reading an e-mail on the first pass.

Doesn't matter. It's the interception itself by any means, including electronic devices, that matters. That is what is covered by the wiretapping laws, and what is generally referred to as wiretapping.

Go ahead, plug a computer into your neighbor's VOIP phone line and start recording everything he says. Don't listen, just record. Then turn yourself in and see whether you get prosecuted under the federal wiretapping laws.

All this Clintonesque word-weasling on the Republican side is getting sickening.

76 posted on 01/13/2006 11:15:17 AM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Just another example that media talking heads -- be it Sean Hannity or Chrissy Matthews -- are at a huge disadvantage when they try to debate people who are much smarter and better-informed than they are.

Matthews has an emotional opinion on the matter, fed by animosities that have nothing to do with the issues at hand here. He clearly never thought this stuff through beyond the bare minimum needed to feed his pre-existing animosities.

Meese, OTOH, is a very much brighter fellow to begin with, and he has a deep working knowledge of the real factors that underly these issues.

With that sort of difference between the participants in the debate, it's no wonder that this was such an unfair fight.

Plus which, of course, Meese has the advantage of being on the right side of an issue that is easily understood if by anybody who's able to look past their personal issues....

77 posted on 01/13/2006 11:17:14 AM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Samwise

wasn't this swell?


78 posted on 01/13/2006 11:17:25 AM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat
All this Clintonesque word-weasling on the Republican side is getting sickening.

So I guess this means we should put you down on the side of "don't try to figure out what the bad guys are trying to do to you."

79 posted on 01/13/2006 11:18:52 AM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: pollyannaish
If we are upset, we will vote the guy out. What is so hard about that to understand?

Perfectly applicable for the first term, meaningless for the second.

80 posted on 01/13/2006 11:19:34 AM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: jjmcgo

lol


81 posted on 01/13/2006 11:19:41 AM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
"MATTHEWS: Yes, we just had Russ Tice on here, a staffer from the NSA itself, and I asked him—maybe he‘s wrong, you tell me—people who were being targeted by the NSA surveillance, know it. Now, we know it. The average American knows it. Why is that shameful, or why is that a betrayal of American trust for “The Times” to report that we now know what‘s going on? MEESE: Because this was a legitimate, lawful act by the president. MATTHEWS: Then why keep it secret? MEESE: Because you don‘t want the enemy to know that you‘re intercepting and surveilling these kinds of conversation." Chris, Chris, Chris...( hangs and shakes head slowly and sadly)
82 posted on 01/13/2006 11:20:44 AM PST by pillut48 (CJ in TX)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
So I guess this means we should put you down on the side of "don't try to figure out what the bad guys are trying to do to you."

No, I'm on the side of "If you're tapping, friggin' admit it instead of redefining 'is'."

83 posted on 01/13/2006 11:22:19 AM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat

```It's the interception itself by any means, including electronic devices, that matters. That is what is covered by the wiretapping laws````

Utter rubbish.


84 posted on 01/13/2006 11:22:31 AM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat
No it's not. If we want change, we elect the candidate who pledges to change it. Usually, although not always, that breaks down by party.

It is about more than a specific man. It is about an idea. If there is a groundswell against this, we will see the lines break down within the next year as the 2008 race gets underway.
85 posted on 01/13/2006 11:23:06 AM PST by pollyannaish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat

once your voice on the wire leaves united states soil, its fair game.


86 posted on 01/13/2006 11:24:31 AM PST by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Mind-numbed Robot
Is your objection to the fact of it or the words used to defend it?

For this, my problem is seeing the re-emergence of Clinton word-play in defense of a position.

87 posted on 01/13/2006 11:24:35 AM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat

I think it is a necessary linguistic dance with the Democrats and the media to do what is necessary to protect our country while staying within the confines of the law. Do you think the administration is akin to the Clinton administration, or that they are drifting in that direction? If so, I disagree.


88 posted on 01/13/2006 11:30:58 AM PST by Mind-numbed Robot (Not all that needs to be done needs to be done by the government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: MarkeyD
You have to wonder if Matthews is a moron, or is intentionally misrepresenting what Scooter Libby was indicted for.

I'd say both.

89 posted on 01/13/2006 11:37:37 AM PST by Ditto ( No trees were killed in sending this message, but billions of electrons were inconvenienced.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

It's apparent that Fitzmas was a big disappointment for Chrissy.


90 posted on 01/13/2006 11:38:32 AM PST by TC Rider (The United States Constitution 1791. All Rights Reserved.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

Great! Thanks for posting this. Matthews starts out by saying that Meese is the expert. Then Meese blows Matthews out of the water. Still, after Matthews hears the expert, he sticks to his original opinion. Typical liberal irrational behavior.


91 posted on 01/13/2006 11:48:07 AM PST by Rocky (Air America: Robbing the poor to feed the Left)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: D-fendr
Wiretapping is tapping your wire. It is what it is.

This is a case of an increasingly archaic term that is still being used to describe newer technologies. The spirit of the word remains -- intercepting communications -- no matter what the means are. For example, the wiretapping law explicitly covers wireless communications. Sorry, "It's not a tap because there was no wire" doesn't fly, and neither do other weasel words.

The distinction is important because there is an important difference.

Funny thing, the definitions of "wiretapping" and "electronic surveillance" are about the same for our purpose. Each involves the interception of communications through electronic means. The definition of "surveillance" under FISA law uses the words "acquisition of" instead of "intercept" as the wiretap statute does. But so you can't go Clinton on me, I'd like to point out that the wiretapping law defines "intercept" as "the acquisition of" anyway. Same thing.

Meese tried to take the conversation on a tangent by fussing over the definition of what the government is doing.

92 posted on 01/13/2006 11:48:57 AM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Mind-numbed Robot
Do you think the administration is akin to the Clinton administration, or that they are drifting in that direction?

It's what I said, I've started to see too many instances of Clinton weaseling recently, and it bothers me. I can't say this is a slide, maybe just a few isolated incidents, but it's still scary. Even a whiff of Clinton scares me.

93 posted on 01/13/2006 11:51:39 AM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: oceanview
once your voice on the wire leaves united states soil, its fair game.

Now you're talking the legality of it, which is not my subject. If it's legal, own up to it. No need to do a weasel-dance to cover it up.

94 posted on 01/13/2006 11:56:06 AM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

Meese nailed some of the MSM's popular mischaracterizations of all the areas of the NSA and Plame cases.


95 posted on 01/13/2006 11:59:31 AM PST by wildbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pollyannaish
If we want change, we elect the candidate who pledges to change it. Usually, although not always, that breaks down by party.

Look at my screen name. I don't see the parties as all that different in most important areas anyway. Right now I don't trust either party to be looking out for our rights.

But you're right, it could hurt Bush's possible Republican successor, thus it is somewhat motivation, quite a bit if he is enough of a slave to the party masters.

96 posted on 01/13/2006 11:59:44 AM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

Hagel? Go wash your mouth out with soap!!
Geez, no wonder I can't stand MSNBC!!


97 posted on 01/13/2006 12:04:21 PM PST by griswold3 (Ken Blackwell, Ohio Governor in 2006)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: MarkeyD
You have to wonder if Matthews is a moron, or is intentionally misrepresenting what Scooter Libby was indicted for.

A ^ B -> T

98 posted on 01/13/2006 12:04:45 PM PST by demlosers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat
It could hurt Bush's successor. But I think it could help more based on what I see around me.

I do not necessarily trust parties as such. But I continue to fail to see the advantages of a third party.

FWIW, I'm with the President on this. So the anti-Bush message doesn't score points with me. But you are certainly entitled to you frustration and distrust. I understand it even. I just approach things differently.
99 posted on 01/13/2006 12:04:55 PM PST by pollyannaish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: griswold3

can you believe that ?


100 posted on 01/13/2006 12:04:56 PM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-171 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson