Keith Olbermann, Glenn Greenwald Feud Over FISA

A war of words has broken out between two of the progressive blogosphere's most beloved figures: MSNBC's Keith Olbermann and blogger/author Glenn Greenwald of Salon.com.

In a post yesterday, Greenwald charged that Olbermann's "blind devotion to Barack Obama" had let him to excuse and defend Obama's support of the FISA 'compromise' legislation. Greenwald noted that Olbermann has previously condemned the idea of giving immunity to telecom companies that spied on Americans, calling it a "shameless, breathless, literally textbook example of Fascism" and comparing it to the actions of the Third Reich.

"But," Greenwald wrote, "[n]ow that Barack Obama supports a law that does the same thing -- and now that Obama justifies that support by claiming that this bill is necessary to keep us Safe from the Terrorists -- everything has changed."

Last night, Olbermann invited Newsweek's Jonathan Alter onto his show to discuss Obama's support for the FISA and telecom amnesty bill (video of the segment is here). There wasn't a syllable uttered about "immunizing corporate criminals" or "textbook examples of Fascism" or the Third Reich. There wasn't a word of rational criticism of the bill either. Instead, the two media stars jointly hailed Obama's bravery and strength -- as evidenced by his "standing up to the left" in order to support this important centrist FISA compromise. [...]

Grave warning on Olbermann's show that telecom amnesty and FISA revisions were hallmarks of Bush Fascism instantaneously transformed into a celebration that Obama, by supporting the same things, was leading a courageous, centrist crusade in defense of our Constitution.

There's much more -- you can read Greenwald's full post here. And Olbermann responded with a post last night on Daily Kos.

He explained his segment by citing former Nixon aide (and frequent Countdown guest) John Dean's argument that the FISA compromise "clearly did not preclude future criminal prosecution of the telecoms - it only stopped civil suits." (He added, "I think John Dean is worth 25 Glenn Greenwalds (maybe 26 Keith Olbermanns)."

More Olbermann:

Thus, as I phrased it on the air tonight, obviously Obama kicked the left in the teeth by supporting the bill. But anybody who got as hot about this as I did would prefer to see a President Obama prosecuting the telecoms criminally, instead of seeing a Senator Obama engender more "soft on terror" crap by casting a token vote in favor of civil litigation that isn't going to pass since so many other Democrats caved anyway.

When Markos was on (Monday? Again, blurs) he made the simple but essential point that if this is Obama's rationale for this, maybe he should explain it. I think it can be argued that if he's caught the same hole in the bill that Dean has, his best course is actually to shut up and take the criticism and hope the Republicans don't see the loophole.

I don't know much about Mr. Greenwald and I didn't read his full piece, but I do know that the snippet he's taken out of the transcript of my conversation with Jon Alter last night makes it sound like I was saying defying the left was a good thing. I was actually contrasting it to not cowering to the Republicans, simply as a different thing.

I do think Mr. Greenwald's suggestion of some kind of betrayal on my part is simplistic and childish. I'll take the Dean interpretation of this. If it isn't the Senator's game plan, he'll catch hell from me about it later.

Quick Poll

Who's right?

Glenn Greenwald

Keith Olbermann

Comments

[Gina322]

Leave KO alone!

[purplefishies]

I have to say that when this started out, i was 99.999% in Glen's camp, but now I have to say that I am about 50-50. Keith raises a good point about keeping big loopholes in the bill. Sometimes it pays to just out smart these incredibly dimwitted Republicans and take the issue of security off of the table for McCain.

However, the more I read about Obama jumping ship on key issues (like the death penalty issue ) the more angered I get. I gave him lots of money during the primary and now I am annoyed to the point where he won't get any during the general unless things change.

[fvscvte]

yah, he's too busy dreaming of BHO and his "change and Hope" LOL

[4wehttam]

Ok, I think republican trolls are taking advantage of this situation and voting for Greenwald because they dislike KO more because he keeps B*tchslapping their idol O-LIE-ly.

[janedarcy]

B-slapping???? No...no women hating in the Democratic Party!!!!!!!

[clsmithj]

Show a Youtube video or it didn't happen.

[jdenham]

I am a big fan of Keith but I agree with Glenn we need to hold Obama's feet to the fire on Telecom Immunity. I understand this is a loser on both sides for Obama. If Obama fights on the issue the Republicans paint him as weak on terror and for Progressives this is a core issue on the Constitution and privacy. Keith has a blind spot for Obama which Glenn is right about. The real fault lies with the Democratic leadership in the House and Senate, but Obama is now part of that leadership now.
Keith's arguement that they can be held criminally responsible when Obama is President is valid, but Bill Clinton had the same option when he first took over and failed to act. Compitulation seems to be the only thing this Democratic Congress is consistant on.
As a fan, Keith we need to hold the Democrats and Senator Obama responsible for this. We must stand on our core issues, just winning the Presidency is not the only issue.

[Mekarri]

That where you are wrong and short sighted. Winning the Presidency is the only issue, because until he does nothing he say matters. What part of that is hard to understand. So keep speaking up but don't loose sight of the big picture. If mccan become president, we will have a draft. So, think about your children and grandchildren.

[noamjunior]

SO can anyone explain to me why Obama should throw away the presidency chasing windmills on this issue?
It's not like his one vote would matter one way or the other.
Am I totally missing the point, or does it seem like Greenwald would rather be allowed to sue the telecoms than have Obama as president ?

[johnnynyc]

So, Olbermann's hoping that Obama's "game plan" is to go after the telco's in criminal court.

The same US government that solicited the telco's help, the same government that told the telco's they weren't breaking any laws is going to do a 180 when Obama's elected.

Is there any evidence of this "game plan" at all aside from Olbermann's rather fertile imagination.

"Trust him" just doesn't cut it here.

I'm getting the feeling that progressives are to Democrats what evangelicals are to the Republicans and Olbermann is to the Obama campaign what Fox News is to the Republican party.

[DonDavis]

Keith Olbermann and Glenn Greenwald Exchange Accusations of Wiretapping Each Other
http://satiricalpolitical.com/?p=1963

[garrettkenyon]

To whoever is moderating these comments - I have posted twice now - both of them rather long and arduous - why haven't either of them been posted yet? They were both within the word limit, used no curse words, and were not in any way disrespectful. What gives?
[e-mail]

As an extremely faithful, daily reader of Huffpost - I would love to know so I can stop wasting my time writing well-though out posts that never see the light of day.

[fvscvte]

anything that is against Obama is not permitted on this site! You should know by now! This is Obama- who can do no wrong -Central! Pathetic!

[new logic]

"I do think Mr. Greenwald's suggestion of some kind of betrayal on my part is simplistic and childish. I'll take the Dean interpretation of this. If it isn't the Senator's game plan, he'll catch hell from me about it later."

I agree with KO....get our man into office....­then hold his feet to the fire

[Redrover666]

If you aren't willing or able to hold the feet of those you have already sent to the congress, to the fire and you aren't willing to hold your presidential candidate's feet to the fire, before he's even in office, then what exactly do you or he stand for?

What sort of man is Obama and what sort of party are the democrats, that they rant about the ethics of the Republicans but your own scruples are on a sliding scale and entirely reversible depending on the situation.

If the whole point is nothing more than to "get our man into office", then why should any American expect anything more from Obama and the Democrats than business as usual.

Your comment is emblematic of how low and partisan politics and politicians in this country have sunk.

Change, indeed. What a joke.

[Mekarri]

Then vote for mccain if you are such a spoil child. Can Obama one vote wrap this thing up and make it all better, if so, then I guess you are correct if not then get over it. This is the reason bush was able to steal the election. Keep your eyes on the prize, people.

[timothe]

I noticed a distinct lack of "Keith Olbermann only tells the truth" posts in this thread like I see in all other threads here about KO.

Could it be that your hero of truth is nothing more than a shill for Obama? Hmmmm

[evgolightly]

You have be able to think like a Republican to beat a Republican.

Obama is being painted as "weak on terror" ... he had to support this bill - for now.

Let's not dangle so far left that we lose this one too.

I'm with Keith on this, all the way.

PRESIDENT Obama will tackle this issue. Senator Obama should not.

[notthistime]

agreed

[LeftCoaster64]

Agreed, but why not fillibuster? Dodd & others have agreed to. BHO can stay mute on the issue and let the issue roll over to his administration. Then when the expected landslide and fillibuster-proof majorities are achieved in both houses, he can do what he believes in. Just wondering.

[alan2a]

Olberman is both dim witted and a blowhard!! As a hero of the progressive left he is a sad, sad joke. His attacks on Clinton(s) and his sexism and adulation of Chris Mathews, should be enough in and of itself to make him an object of derision by anybody to the left of Mathews and crew. He has become a caricature of what's bad on the left, Mr. Olberman.

[walk0nwalls]

Hm, interesting we're clocking in even and even on the "stand by your morals" crowd and the "we need to win come anything" crowd

[repearwo]

I think it is interesting that there are two choices and less than 100%?

[garrettkenyon]

Sorry, I got carried away - but my point is that while some of us might have helped to get Obama nominated, I still don't believe that he "owes" us anything. You elect a man based on his principles beliefs. We knew (or should have) that his opinions would not be identical to ours. Not only is it unproductive to complain (or worse, jump ship) when he occasionally disagrees with us - it is childish. FISA is a big deal. We all know that. But can any of us really say, beyond the shadow of doubt, that if we were a telecom CEO and were approached by the department of Homeland Security and asked to divulge our records "to stop another 9/11" (as I'm certain the request would have been framed and given what we know of the vindictive nature of this administration) that we would put our careers at risk to uphold our principles? Can we even be sure we would have the wherewithal to know that what we were being asked to do ("because the President of the United States of America said so" being a pretty strong argument) was illegal? I'm just saying.
I understand the disappointment, but the righteous indignation confuses me. Is getting revenge on these telecoms worth dooming our country to another 4 years of failed neo-con buffoonery? Can we really blame a guy for not fighting a lost cause with so much at stake? Can't we give Obama a break?

[LeftCoaster64]

I will agree that if we can't expect elected representatives to take a principled stance on an issue, we sure as heck will be waiting for a cold day in hell before a telecom CEO does! GWB just bum rushed the willing on this one, with the fig-leaf of DOJ approval waived in their faces.

[sa]

look, this illegal spying thing can all be changed retroactively -
what i mean is, that we can do something illegal, and then
pass legislation that gives everyone immunity. it's like this:
we can commit crimes and never be held accountable - i did it in iraq,
and with torture, american phone companies are easy game.

it's like this - i'm president, and i can pardon every criminal in my administration,
and i can pardon myself, or hand it off to someone who can pardon me.

look, this is america - it's not about justice, it's about a feeding frenzy of capitalism
with the government's graces.

money rocks!! god bless everyone. we're all in hell!