Interestingly Congressman Chaffetz is a Republican, good to see him stand up for the Bill of Rights rather than give lip service to it.
The sooner we stop thinking one party is looking out for us more than the other, the better off we _citizens_ will be.
There are still exemptions in the proposed bill...granted they are in the FISA court and related to perceived danger related to 'terrorism' or 'organized crime'.
Some Republicans will still sing this tune, some won't. There is a bit of a split at the moment.
Same as if something bad happens the headline will say "Republican Congressman" but leave out party affiliation the other way.
Bias in journalism mostly isn't a matter of just making things up (Dan Rather aside) or injecting blatant opinions into news (though that happens sometimes too), but a matter of which stories get pushed and how they get framed.
Their right-wing equivalents (WSJ/Breitbart/Daily Mail) do the same thing to Democrats.
Not so sure that's true; every article except this one that I can find on the Guardian with the tag "US Congress", positive or negative, and whether it involves Democrats, Republicans, or both, seems to mention the party affiliation of the members referenced.
While the Guardian is left-leaning, not mentioning Chaffetz's party seems to be an aberration for them, not part of a pattern.
Which isn't just sarcasm, the 2 party labels are less and less useful for understanding how a national candidate sees various issues and there are a lot of congressional districts where using one label or the other makes it a lot easier to get elected.