Snowden isn't the story - despite the fact that he's made himself the story from day one.

Rachel is under Big Brother's watch too, since she works for GE. Really sad and troubling. Thanks for sharing.

Haven't you anything better to do on a Monday?

What happened to this place?

Nice. Bye.

...Rachel quickly shuts down any mention of "conspiracy" -- usually by mockery.

Tonight she and Andrea Mitchell were like two hens clucking about Snowden's escape.

Times like this, you find out exactly where the boundaries are, and who's on which side of them.

Was surprised to see Jonathan Capehart on the "other" side of the boundary just now on Hardball.

Sheesh. Seriously?

Sheesh. Seriously. We are being directed to HATE HATE HATE someone on behalf of the State. Sheesh. Seriously. Sheesh. Seriously.

they really are not interested in catching him.

Big war contractor with an agenda.

GE Sold their final stakes in March

TV 'news' is creeping me out.

Which is why Snowden is the biggest traitor since Benedict Pollard.

nt

I read it on DU, it must be true.

link please?

he didn't reveal anything, right?

A bullet train for the rabbit hole would really save a lot of time and energy.

No snark intended but

And Snowden is a traitor and this is the worst security breach since Benedict Arnold or maybe Julius Rosenberg.

I find DU endlessly amusing, some of the posters here can twist themselves into the most entertaining shapes.

The sad part is that comparatively speaking DU is the reality based community.

so we all know who's in and who's out on a daily basis.

Probably later, though, as many are now approaching the triple down territory.

...crimes against the American people? Talk about anti-American!

The "wrong side" is always the side that wants to repress, oppress and punish. Always. World without end, amen.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font]
[hr]

especially when he's shining all that sunlight.

keep laughing it up.

Obama's been there for months, Hillary Clinton's been there for a while for some unknown reason, Biden's there now just because he hasn't addressed the NSA controversy, Ed Schultz is there because he listens to the President, now apparently Rachel Maddow is there too just because she realizes there are holes in this guy's story. Rewind to 7 months ago and those people accounted for probably 90% of DU love.

The only ones I can think of who AREN'T under the bus are:
Elizabeth Warren
Alan Grayson
Bernie Sanders
Sherrod Brown (HAVE we thrown him under the bus? I haven't even seen his name lately.)

...until it's time to switch to chained cpi or drones.

*our republicans

Hoo-Boy, the jingoism is thick in here.

on privatization of government functions. Nope. Disappointing.

But of course we have talked about this already in the last day or two.

At least he apologized at the end for not covering the Intelligence Empire and focusing on the speculation regarding Snowden's travels.

I must say that Joy Reid revealed a side I hadn't seen before. And Richard Wolfe was mostly careful about his comments.

I also found Lawrence's apology disingenuous. He said something along the lines of we can't cover that because we spent all of our time on questions about Snowden (his motives, intelligence, etc.) and there's no time left. Well, who controls the time and what is discussed? O'Donnell controlled the entire discussion and led it very competently. He set the tone.

I got the impression that all three of them were very mindful of the ties and power of their employer.

I was disappointed in Goldie Taylor on Chris Hayes show spouting outright lies regarding the content of Glenn Greenwald's initial articles.

And I really like Joy Reid, too.

nt

It's getting awfully crowded under there.

There are no facts, no evidence, to support Snowden's wild claims about the NSA having 'direct access' to the world's Internet providers or that the NSA can watch our thoughts form as we type or that the NSA is downloading the Internet on a daily basis.

The only 'evidence' of late is that Snowden is on the run and giving away national security secrets.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font]
[hr]

She was a speculator. As was Andrea Mitchell who could only talk of hearing speculation from her sources as to whether the WH is really ticked with the Chinese and Putin.

he definitely passed accurate info to the Chinese and maybe the Russians, also too.

IOW he's full of shit and must be locked up.

But he needs to stop giving away national security documents to other countries.

The man has a screw loose if he thought he could convince us of 24/7 spying without furnishing evidence of it. So maybe he needs a therapist, too.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font]
[hr]

the stuff that's been published is wild & crazy and indicative of a need for therapy?

The evidence that there is a legal warrant for phone metadata? We already knew that.
The evidence that we spy on other countries? We knew that, too.

But where is the evidence that the NSA has 'direct access' to the world's Internet providers? Roundly refuted by all the companies involved.

Where is the evidence that the NSA can watch our thoughts form as we type?

Where is the evidence that the NSA is downloading the Internet on a daily basis?

I will not take Snowden's word for anything.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font]
[hr]

one - but still an apparatchik - that is simply her job and where she coming from.

She took Rand Paul apart like a 3-dollar watch during her interview last year!

He is scared to face her again!!!

If you don't talk of Snowden you might have to talk of the Fourth.

It's Snowden's fault. The cloak and dagger international travel is far more interesting, the media and audience will naturally focus on it.

I stopped compiling this list when it became clear that I listed some duplicates. Probably just massive cut-and-paste crossposting.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023083768

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023073847

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023077695

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023073906

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023090261

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023079419

http://election.democraticunderground.com/10023073906

http://sync.democraticunderground.com/10023083231

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023069890

You sure have a lot of links there, pal.

It's the kind of thing people get interested in. thus one's thread with cites of the law of Fourth Amendment national security aspects will sink while all wonder where Eddie is.

The entire network a neatly packaged commercial that targets different audiences.

It's also known as propaganda.

and BINGO was his name-O.

As the last remaining superpower it IS kinda wild to see us scramble to stop a nobody mostly for symbolic reasons.

I mean,...imagine if a SOMEBODY decides to talk?

...but not surprised. It's all corrupted, tainted and smells to high heaven.

- And few who come in contact with it can remain unscathed.....

Policy and real issues take a backseat for her.

Her show has become the news equivalent of the Jerry Springer show.

I'm even at a loss for snark.

Shiny objects attract.

Friday she talked at great length and about the great Texas abortion protest, which is important, but not like NSA government spying.

Perhaps one day her corporate masters will allow her to bring up Frank Church and the last time Congress reigned in the "intelligence" community.

It's a rechargeable solar disk. It's the only way he can function now.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font]
[hr]

is throwing her under the bus? LOL hyperbole much? I love Rachel. The show was entertaining.

OTOH, these comments might be considered a bit undercarriage contemplative:


"Rachel is under Big Brother's watch too, since she works for GE."

"she is a loyal Party apparatchik"

"never could understand the rachel-fanboys/girls"

"They are all catapulting the shit"

"Her show has become the news equivalent of the Jerry Springer show."


There are also the various Huzzahs in response.

Other than that, the posters here just love them some Rachel.

And people on both sides of the issue happily post thread after thread high fiving people who agree with their point of view (they must need validation) and denigrating people who don't. I just think it's pretty funny.

I love my husband. I sure as shit don't agree with him all of the time but when I disagree I don't run around the house screaming and whining about betrayal and call him names. Nor when we agree do I look at other people and use him as proof positive that I am right about something.

When I see people I respect weighing in on an issue agree or disagree it makes me think. I respect Rachel and enjoy listening to what she has to say.