Top 12 media myths and falsehoods on the Bush administration's spying scandal

"Summary: Media Matters presents the top 12 myths and falsehoods promoted by the media on President Bush's spying scandal stemming from the recent revelation in The New York Times that he authorized the National Security Agency (NSA) to eavesdrop on domestic communications without the required approval of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance court."

1: Timeliness necessitated bypassing the FISA court

2: Congress was adequately informed of -- and approved -- the administration's actions

3: Warrantless searches of Americans are legal under the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act

4: Clinton, Carter also authorized warrantless searches of U.S. citizens

5: Only Democrats are concerned about the Bush administration's secret surveillance

6: Debate is between those supporting civil liberties and those seeking to prevent terrorism

7: Bin Laden phone leak demonstrates how leak of spy operation could damage national security

8: Gorelick testimony proved Clinton asserted "the same authority" as Bush

9: Aldrich Ames investigation is example of Clinton administration bypassing FISA regulations

10: Clinton administration conducted domestic spying

11: Moussaoui case proved that FISA probable-cause standard impedes terrorism probes

12: A 2002 FISA review court opinion makes clear that Bush acted legally

If you've been following the news at all lately, no doubt you've heard at least one of these lies being put out in the media, or created by the media. If this were just a list, it really wouldn't be worth posting, but this site lists and refutes them all. You'll see that there's been a concerted effort to whitewash this spying scandal to save the Imperial Presidency from what is clearly an illegal act.

Oh, and one more thing, don't give the New York Times too much credit for exposing this story, as they only did so now because they were about to lose the scoop. There's no telling how long they would've aided the administration in keeping this a secret, if it were not for a new book about to be published by a Times reporter that would itself expose the whole story.

From another article intitled
How the Media "Authorize" the Abuse of Government Power:

"You might be thinking, "How is that possible? Didn't the New York Times print the story exposing the surveillance program, and doesn't that show the media challenges power?"

"Well, not really, when you consider that the Times actually held the story for a year. As the Washington Post reports, the Times' essentially held the story because of exactly what I said: deference to power, and its own bottom line. First, deference: the Times editors now tell us they held the story because the White House told them to. Then, profit: we learn that what changed between now and a year ago was that a Times reporter, James Risen, is about to publish a book about the entire affair and thus publishing the story now will mean maximum pre-sale buzz in January when the book is released - a key for any big book sales."

As you can see, even when the media appears to be on the side of truth and justice, it's only when forced to do so by self-interest.