McDermott Ordered to Pay Boehner in Wiretap Case

Democratic Congressman Jim Mcdermott has been ordered to pay a settlement from his 1996 case when he released a wiretapped conversation by John Boehner.  The original amount of $60,000 has grown to $1.2 million over twelve years of interest, fines and penalties.  Gee, it's a good thing the IRS wasn't involved or we could be talking about real money.

The original case is interesting for several reasons.  Boehner was using his cell phone, which we all know isn't secure and can be intercepted by anyone with a scanner, to make a call regarding the ethical lapses of then Speaker Newt Gingrich.  The Florida couple who intercepted and taped the call gave it to McDermott who released it to the press.

Since it's common knowledge that cell phone calls are using public airwaves to transmit we all understand they aren't secure for confidential communications.  Boehner was a fool to use his for a sensitive conversation about the Republican's crooked Speaker.  Gingrich wound up being cited for serious ethical violations and we all understand how difficult it is for any Member of Congress to violate their weak ethics standards.

The larger issue here, though, is wiretapping.  Why is McDermott being cited and penalized for violating something George W. Bush is violating millions, perhaps, billions of times a day?  Why does this law apply to everyone else but not the president?  Are we a nation of laws or not?  Last I checked no one was above the law in this country, even George W. Bush.

Comments

[tyler]

John...I am so glad you posted this...it may just prove what i have been saying to you for lo these many months...

I SO remember this case when it first broke...

If you REALLY think the Martins (that kind couple who just happened to be former members of the Columbia County Democratic Executive Committee) just so happened to have the not only scanning devices BUT ALSO the recording device in their car...and hooked up...and they JUST happened to be in range of where Boenher was making the call from that waffle house...and they JUST happened to be out recording for their yet unborn grandchild (forgot that part, didn't ya?)..and they just happen to recognize the voices as being of Boehner and Newt et al...and then they decided record them for previously mentioned unborn grandchild for posterity...then they decided to turn the tapes over to McDermott (from Seattle)...who just happened to have buddies at the NYT (ok, that part doesnt surprise me) who made it front page news.

If you believe that, I have got some primo real estate in Newark NJ to sell you.

This was an NSA job. No ifs and or buts. And they needed some schmo to get the information to the NYT. And that schmo was...and still is...Mcdermott. And the Martins.

Illegally recording phone calls before before Sept 12, 2001? No!

but it was under a democrat...Mrs. Balboa...so I guess it makes it ok. I've given you links to Carnivore and Echelon, both wiretapping programs institituted well underway before President Bush took office...and you didnt care.

have a great day :)

[John Morgan]

If it was unconstitutional then it remains unconstitutional now. The Fourth Amendment wasn't amended after 9/11.

[tyler]

But you didnt care then. So again...
1) does it make it ok when its a dem doing it
2) do you really, in your heart of hearts, think it will stop February 2009?
3) and if it doesnt, are you going to be as vocal towards the potential democrat president as you are to this president?
4) and if you aren't, are you going to still blame this president for 'grandfathering' wiretapping in?
5) and if you are, are going to continue to ignore the fact that wiretapping and surveillance has been going on for decades?

again, dont get me wrong, I am totally against illegal wiretapping and am in favor of the 4th amendment, however, I am not naive enough to think that only members of the party starting with an R do it when there is plenty of evidence that the party that starts with a D is equally, if not moreso, skilled at it.

have a great day :)

[John Morgan]

1. No
2. February 2009???
3. Yes
4. Bush is responsible for establishing a national security state and infringing our civil liberties, nothing can change that
5. Never on this scale and scope tyler and that is the point you fail to comprehend.

[Truth]

2. Yes, February 2009. Yes, yes, the inauguration will be on January 20, 2009. Tyler's giving them 11-1/2 days to find their desks and the restrooms. After all, we're talking about a potential Democratic president who the last time Hillary was in the White House was a backbencher State Senator in Illinois simultaneously kissing the butts of Rev. Wright, a Weather Underground bomb-maker, and the remnants of the old Daley Chicago political machine.

Does he even have the oxidation worn off his Senate washroom key yet?

[tyler]

1) Good
2)Feb 2009 is when the new president swears in...well, technically its in January, but I dont recall the specific date...the 22nd? I so rounded up. :)
3) good, me too
4) Bush is doing it, but other have done it/others will do it long after he's gone. Doesnt make it right, it just makes it so.
5) The biggest scope of restricting the civil liberties of the American citizen (outside of the slave times) was during WWII when American citizens were rounded up and put into camps. What is going on now pales in comparison. Also, as mentioned, the FBI under the Kennedy/LBJ administration spied on everyone. Phone taps, survellience, the whole works. The reason cell phones werent tapped back then is because they didnt exist. Now that they do, the government is tap, tap, tapping away. When the next big communication method comes along, the administration in charge at the time will most certainly have their grubby fingers in the pie.
Its what they do.

have a great day :)

[tyler]

LOL...i'll give them 11 days for the shock to wear off once they realize that the outgoing administration DOESN'T steal the silverware and furniture :)

"You mean we DON'T have to order new keyboards, flatware, cutlery and couches? Holy cow, this is great!"