Below is a transcript of Glenn's opening monologue from Monday's TV show
I want to tell you about the dog-and-pony show that is continuing now in Washington DC as the progressives, make no mistake, progressives in both parties, are fighting to make sure they can continue to collect as much of your own personal data as possible all in the name of security, of course, the Republicans, John McCain, a progressive himself, fighting for extensions of the sections in the Patriot Act that expired last night.
Three sections are done for, temporarily anyway: Section 215, the lone wolf provision, and the roving wiretap provision. Each part is important, but section 215 is the most critical because it is what the government has used to justify the bulk data collection on millions of innocent citizens.
The wording in that section is vague. It gives the government power to use all relevant information to stop terrorist attacks, and the government has interpreted relevant to mean anything and everything on anybody. Rand Paul has set himself apart from the progressive Republicans giving voice to the cause of liberty on this. He is receiving the usual flak for it. I asked him about it on radio earlier today, and here’s what he said:
Glenn: Do you actually believe they’ve actually stopped collecting information today?
Sen. Paul: You’ve got to be careful how they parse their words. They might have stopped one program, but they’ve probably got ten others doing the same thing. They have an executive order called 12333. Under that executive order, we really don’t know everything they’re doing, but they’re doing bulk collection under that. They may well be doing more bulk collection of data under that then they are doing under the phone collection program.
They also told us and informed us that in the previous Patriot Act there’s a provision in there saying that they can continue any investigation that was already ongoing. So, my guess is that since the bulk collection investigation, so-called investigation, was collecting everyone’s records, they could simply say well, we started doing that before, so that’s an ongoing investigation.
So, are they stopping it? I don’t know. I mean, that’s the whole problem with trust here on this. The president’s number one man over there, Clapper, lied to us and told us the program didn’t even exist, and now we’re supposed to accept that they’re telling us the world will end and the sky will fall if it ends. We’re doing it now. We’re shutting it down. I don’t know. There’s a certain lack of trust I have for this administration.
I have a lack of trust for any administration. The establishment Republicans who first claimed they had nothing to do with the Patriot Act are now clamoring to defend it, and they’re defending it to the teeth and warning that we are going to open ourselves up to attack if we don’t pass this. Mitch McConnell accused Senator Paul of demagoguery and disinformation.
Sen. McConnell: We shouldn’t be disarming unilaterally as our enemies grow more sophisticated and aggressive. And we certainly should not be doing so based on a campaign of demagoguery and disinformation launched in the wake of the unlawful actions of Edward Snowden, who was last seen in Russia.
Oh my goodness. Now, McCain told reporters that Senator Paul places “a higher priority on his fundraising and his ambitions than on the security of the nation.” But does the fight even matter? The Second Court of Appeals recently ruled that the vaguely worded section 215 doesn’t authorize the government to unleash mass data collection in the first place. But they’re doing it.
So, here’s Congress arguing for a new bill. This one’s called the USA Freedom Act. Now, the passage may or may not be directed at the NSA bulk collection, the data collection, but may I first start with the names of the ultra-PC bills, the Patriot Act, the USA Freedom Act? I personally think we should give names to these bills ourselves that probably have more accurate names, like the Trading Freedom for Despotism Act or Take Your Freedom and Shove it up Your Act Act.
Despite some opposition, it is expected to pass in a day or two. Proponents will claim it will end bulk data collection but keep other key security provisions in place. But remember, section 215 led to the NSA’s bulk collection thanks to a few vaguely worded sentences and dirtbags in Washington.
Does anybody believe that a bill that keeps almost every government data collection tool in place is going to change anything? They’ve just built a massive million-square-foot facility in Utah solely dedicated for mass data collection. The government will not give up this much power easily. This is going to be a long, drawn-out battle over probably several sessions of Congress and the next president.
But DC politics has reduced this to a ridiculous fight about security. Of course they want to make it about your security because if you’re afraid of an imminent terrorist attack or something happening in your security, all the dummies around you will hand their freedom much more readily. History has proven this time and time again.
When America entered World War I, Woodrow Wilson immediately labeled German-Americans enemy aliens, and the progressives rounded them all up. FDR did the same thing with the Japanese-Americans. The progressives rounded them all up in World War II. One month after 9/11, with a nation still reeling, the Patriot Act was rushed into being. No politician would dare stand against something called the Patriot Act just a couple of weeks after 9/11.
By the way, does anybody know where the Patriot Act—how did they have such an amazing bill, huge bill, all ready to go just a couple of weeks after 9/11? They must’ve been very sleepy. No, the Patriot Act was written prior to 9/11. It was on the shelf waiting to be dusted off. That is what led to the hyper-surveillance state that we’re now living under, not 9/11, politicians writing it in advance. We cannot afford to make the same mistakes because gee, what else do you think they have just waiting on the shelf? It’s not an elf, I bet.
We cannot afford to keep electing the same spineless politicians who trade bits of freedoms in the name of our perceived comforts.
Sen. McConnell: We’re left with option two, the House-passed bill. It’s certainly not ideal, but along with votes on some modest amendments that attempt to ensure the program can actually work as promised, it’s now the only realistic way forward.
Which pretty much puts me against it. This is a premise we cannot accept blindly. The only realistic way forward is to go back to our principles. We had this debate over 200 years ago. Everybody knows the phrase taxation without representation is tyranny, but do you know where that came from?
Do you know the man behind the phrase? His name is James Otis, Jr. He was born in Massachusetts, a colonial. He went to Harvard. He became a lawyer, and at the time, the colonists, our Founding Fathers, were subject to the whims of what the king called writs of assistance. What writs of assistance, they were kind of like our warrants, except anybody could write them.
Basically the British authorities had power to go into anybody’s house at any time for any reason. There wasn’t such a thing as probable cause. For nearly five hours, Otis argued against these writs in court on behalf of dozens of colonists who were baselessly accused of smuggling. They would have their homes searched and ravaged, and even if nothing was found, the government wasn’t responsible for any of the damage.
Otis lost the case, but his challenge to authority inspired some young men, including a guy named John Adams. Adams later said of Otis’s speech, “The child independence was then and there born.” Otis ignited what eventually became the American Revolution. It was his battle against these writs, these warrantless searches, that laid the foundation not only for the Fourth Amendment which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures, but arguably for the entire revolution.
Our right of privacy is a cornerstone of the American foundation. Why on earth would a people so easily give this up? For security? Mitch McConnell said that if the Patriot Act lapsed even one day, we’ll be in danger from ISIS and other terrors. I for one am really tired of this argument because I know if the John McCains and the Mitch McConnells of the world, if they actually believed that we were in danger from terrorists and they believed it was their job to stop it, they would’ve done simple things like secured our borders first.
This is nothing more than a shameless grab of power. Yes, we are in danger, but they are only orchestrating more power for themselves. My question for Washington is if the Patriot Act makes us so secure, why did the Boston bombing happen? We should have been able to hear those phone calls. Hey, why do we worry about what Hillary Clinton did in her 501(c)(3)? Why do we care? She erased her hard drive. Don’t we have all of that data collection?
Why did Benghazi happen? Why don’t we know about the phone calls and the emails that happened the day after? Shouldn’t those have been stopped? How am I supposed to feel safe when the very government claiming they’re using all of the necessary tools to keep us safe will not look into a single radical mosque but will monitor Aunt Judy’s phone call discussing important deviled egg recipes?
How am I supposed to feel safe when the director of the National Intelligence Agency says the Muslim Brotherhood is largely secular—Muslim Brotherhood? How could I trust our CIA Director, John Brennan, who says ISIS is not Islamic when Islamic is the first “I” in ISIS?
What is comforting in any way about our administration running guns through Benghazi to Syrian rebels or how our own government, John McCain included, met and posed for pictures with the free Syrian Army who we later found out was working with the radical groups called ISIS? And the same people that told us yesterday that we can’t live a day without this were exactly the same people who lied to us just a couple of years ago and said this technology doesn’t exist, and it’s outrageous that you would even ask us if we would use technology like that. Of course, we don’t use that.
Our government is incompetent. Our government is corrupt. Our government, on a charitable day, is misguided. By the way, a story we reported on radio today, the government just ran an internal investigation to see if they could get weapons onto airplanes now. You know, they’re frisking everybody. We’ve used all of this great technology. We’ve got the best people on the job, so they tried to smuggle 70 knives, fake bombs, and items like that on board. They only managed to get through 67 out of 70 times.
So thanks, federal government, for your offer to have me trade my freedom for some of your yummy security, but I think we’ll pass. No thanks.