Zed

Ding!

Man, what happened to his tan?

GordonM @ 3

Man, what happened to his tan?

Man Tan.

I think Bush had a signing statement something like “when a Republican does something illegal, that means that it is not illegal”.

Single digits! PW! Good stuff happenin’ today!

Good lord. Doesn’t it resonate with people at all that no one gets most of the summer off of work?

It really is a testament to how spoiled this nation must be to not be in DC right now with pitchforks,torches and maybe some tar and feathers.

TPM is reporting that talks between Congress and the Whiner-in-Chief have collapsed (maybe they told him what to do with his threats of ‘I’ll take your ball and go home’). Maybe it will give us enough time to talk Congress into some sanity.

Oh,and WTF is the deal with all these conservative “news”people meeting in private off the record with Bush the other day?

Please let me know zip codes from red areas that I can use when i call these pantloads.

Apparently there will be a Saturday session

I think that John Boehner used to date Lindsey Graham. Or they went to the same hair salon.

you question anything the pukes do? Executive privelege is the answer you’ll get. But they had nothing to do with any disaster, no, but that’s all they’ll say, as they point to the nearest dem.

Here’s an ACLU site Firepups can use to tell the Democrats in Congress that sticking around is not only the right thing to do, it helps them and really hurts the GOP. More phone numbers are here:

personally I not only think it’s the right thing to do I think they have no choice

this country cannot afford a single recess appointment from the despot in office

james @ 10

Please let me know zip codes from red areas that I can use when i call these pantloads.

Apparently there will be a Saturday session

Now this I can help with. Very red state suburban Atlanta,30155,30152,30144.

Astonishing.
Somebody stuff a cigarette in there and shut him up.

Ya’ll have probably heard that catastrophuck, Tancredo, spouting off about bombing Mecca and Medina…but if not, check this out.

So I am really confused about the substance of the FISA changes. Do we agree with them or not? (That was a joke; I know everyone here makes up her/his own mind.) I listened to part of the House debate & Ds seemed to be arguing that they had done what DNI had requested, and the Rs seemed to be objecting because they hadn’t seen the bill.

Is Boehner’s leak accurate? Did a judge really rule part of the program illegal?

GordonM @ 3

Man, what happened to his tan?

The girl that does his airbrush tan is vacationing in the Hamptons this month.
;)

epu’ed from previous thread:

TPMmuckraker has the text of the fisa bill and and update on negotiations (they’ve broken down with the WH and the dems in the senate are divided).

James @ 10
Don’t forget 30328 and 30327 in Atlanta. Buckhead and Sandy Springs are as red as it gets.

anangryoldbroad @ 9

Oh,and WTF is the deal with all these conservative “news”people meeting in private off the record with Bush the other day?

Someon at YK2 (maybe Hunter), had a long impassioned speech about how W was prez to only his half of the country, only spoke to it, and no other prez, including Ronnie, had ever done that. Once they becameprez, they spoke to all the people.

The Congress should respond by commanding his nibs GWB to stay ‘in session’ and away from his ‘ranch’.

Good ones T. The ones I gave are in Cobb County(perhaps southern Cherokee too)which has been called Colorado Springs II,because of all the megachurches.

drinkof @ 21

The Congress should respond by commanding his nibs GWB to stay ‘in session’ and away from his ‘ranch’.

Don’t agree. Think the country’s better off when he’s clearing brush.

You’re completely right that it’s a distraction. They’ve had this legislation in the pipeline for months and now it’s intregal to national security?

Spy Chief Seeks to Expand Power
By Ryan Singel April 10, 2007 | 12:30:00

The new director of national intelligence is seeking to expand the government’s ability to conduct black bag searches, allow the National Security Agency to spy on foreigners inside the United States without a warrant, kill off lawsuits against telecoms for helping the government spy on American’s phone calls, and make it easier for the government to get phone and email records, even as the FBI remains mired in a scandal over its illegal and widespread use of a Patriot Act power, according to the Associated Press.

The draft bill being circulated by spy chief Mitch Mike McConnell would, according to the AP:

Check the date.

It’s imperative that this passes in rush? Yea, right, and I’ve got a bridge to sell you too

just posted - very important analysis on fisa legislation from marty lederman at balkinization.

Maybe we can organize a little fundraising campaign for the Dems that stay in DC this month…to show our support and put a little icing on the cake…

The GOP is basically refusing to let a bill go forward unless it’s their version. So even though they lost the election, the people of America are supposed to be held hostage to them because if they can’t dictate what the laws should be they won’t let any legislation go forward.

The rush to get this bill out there and voted on is that Bush is now acting with no legal grounding and everything he’s doing is illegal, not like what he was doing before was any better.

This is just more of the same from the GOP and Bush…give us what we want or we’ll do nothing allowing the country to be endangered as long as we get our own way.

Next, when the vote to adjourn is denied, Sessions will go to the mike and threaten to hold his breath until he turns blue or gets what he wants.

bit of marty’s analysis:

This morning, the Democrats on the Intelligence Committees and the Democratic leadership agreed to legislation that would satisfy McConnell’s requirements. Here is the bill. I very roughly describe its principal components below. It is strongly opposed by the communications privacy community (DCT, CNSS, ACLU, etc.) as being too conciliatory, and as going well beyond authorization to exclude purely foreign-to-foreign communications from FISA, i.e., far beyond what is necessary to address the problem that the Administration has described.

DNI McConnell took the negotiated legislation back to the White House . . . and the White House rejected it as insufficient.

So the Republicans are not on board.

The Democratic leadership is trying to pass the bill today. Its prospects in the House are uncertain, because it will be opposed from both the left and (mainly) the right.

James @ 27
Thanks very much. That was clear.

Now, what is it that the GOP wants that the Ds won’t go for? Is it the provision about putting AGAG in charge?

Is Boehner’s leak accurate? Did a judge really rule part of the program illegal?

I’m hoping it was Judge Walton.

solai @ 30

Is Boehner’s leak accurate? Did a judge really rule part of the program illegal?

I’m hoping it was Judge Walton.

That would be justice.

solai @ 30

Is Boehner’s leak accurate? Did a judge really rule part of the program illegal?

I’m hoping it was Judge Walton.

I saw this somewhere this morning….I’m looking

The bill is not being opposed from the right for any other reason other than that the Democrats have moved it forward.

The Democrats, OTOH, are moving forward a bill that is anathema to rights organizations, civil libertarians, most people who understand the Fourth Amendment and the concept of separation of powers, etc.

So the GOP is upset because they can’t win and the Democrats are bending over backwards going against their own constituencies to be accommodating.

Something is very, very wrong here.

As of this minute, I hope they adjourn without moving this bill forward and when the GOP returns with a new, more draconian bill Pelosi and the leadership should just suck it up, withdraw their agreement on this bill, force everyone to read what they are to vote on, and shove the fucking beast right down the GOP’s throats.

This billl as it stands does not protect my interersts, indeed, it advances a further destruction of my privacy rights at the bidding of the White House.

Screw this…let the bill die…keep congress in session…let the American people see what’s really in this mostrosity.

@ 32

solai @ 30

I’m hoping it was Judge Walton.

I saw this somewhere this morning….I’m looking

IIRC, the Judge’s name is confidential.

So,if the judge ruled this illegal,and Bush went ahead and did it anyway,wouldn’t that be a CRIME???

eCAHNomics @ 28

James @ 27
Thanks very much. That was clear.

Now, what is it that the GOP wants that the Ds won’t go for? Is it the provision about putting AGAG in charge?

We don’t know. The Dems agreed to one thing and then the GOP from the WH is demanding a totally new thing.

Just another case of give these people what they wat and they demand more…bipartisanship=weakness with these people

A few of my thoughts,

I seriously do not understand the present FISA controversy and let me explain why. If I an American am in Germany and call a friend also an American in Japan, there is a high likelihood that my call will be swept up by the NSA whether it is routed through the USA or not. The NSA when it vacuums up all foreign communications (or at least as many as it can) has no way of knowing which involve Americans at one or both ends.

If my call from Germany goes through the US, it will carry routing information (as I understand it) that shows its end destination is not in the US but in Japan. Historically, FISA has not entered into these types of communications. It was designed for communications where one end is foreign and the other domestic. If law enforcement had reason to suspect the foreign end, it could begin a wiretap and go to the FISC for a validating warrant.

If related domestic to domestic surveillance was needed, law enforcement could go to a judge as they have for decades.

The illegal NSA program apparently involved scooping up all or a great number of foreign-domestic communications, some of which were targeted to specific individuals but others resulted from datamining of the communication streams.

Now the NSA wants changes to FISA to allow foreign-foreign communications which are routed through the US. I find this request bogus because neither end of the communication is domestic and the NSA can use routing information to verify that the communications are indeed foreign-foreign.

So what exactly is the NSA doing? My guess is they want to vacuum up not only foreign-foreign communications but foreign-domestic ones as well. And what should be noted, these could include domestic-domestic communications that are in part routed abroad (like the Blackberries that could begin with one individual in Washington, be routed to Canada, and returned to another user in Washington)

Otherwise I don’t see why NSA is making a fuss over massive foreign communications monitoring (sometimes involving US citizens) that they have been doing for decades.

Heather Wilson up.

Has there ever been a woman more inaptly named? Heather?

Market down 280.

(Sorry for the repost, EPU’d)

Not sure what Pelosi and Reid know that we don’t, but to all appearances they’re doing an excellent job of avoiding both (a) Recess appointments which would likely include but not necessarily be limited to Gonzo; (b) Premature approval of any dangerously bad FISA change; and (c) The Article II, Section 3 nightmare scenario I’ve been secretly dreading lo these many months (”[The President] may, on extraordinary occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in case of disagreement between them, with respect to the time of adjournment, he may adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper;”).

To spell it out: Assume Congress recesses. Assume Preznit calls them to convene under Art II Sec 3, ostensibly for the FISA issue. Now assume that even just one R-Senator blocks agreement on the adjournment. Then Preznit says “How ’bout December 15, 2008?” and according to Art II Sec 3, they have to accept it. Game over.

Whereas if Congress doesn’t adjourn for August Recess, there’s no window of vulnerability to this Art II Sec 3 scenario.

So here’s how I read today’s tea leaves: For both reasons (a) and (b) and (c), and despite recent public statements, Congressional Dems know it’s no summer vacation this year (Schumer: “We’re going to be here for a while.”). And BushCheneyCo know they know it. The terrist threat chatter specifically threatening the Capitol can be seen as a pressure tactic to get Congress out of the building, but clearly the Dems aren’t buying. So no recess. So now BushCheneyCo and the Dems are each engaging in public Kabuki to make it appear that staying in session is their own idea, that the other side isn’t the one calling the shots.

So looks to me like sort of a balance of power, holding off some Seriously Bad Stuff.

(Guess Congress could convene somewhere other than the Capitol if it turns out to be genuinely too risky there.)

(BTW House R’s now trying awful hard to get adjournment!)

Hmmm.

anangryoldbroad @ 35

So,if the judge ruled this illegal,and Bush went ahead and did it anyway,wouldn’t that be a CRIME???

That’s right. In the old days they used to call it a “high crime.” You could look it up (article II, section 4).

Awwwwright all y’all Oklahoma patriots step right up and show how much more patriotic you are than your neighbors and buy your super-uber-alles-patriot War on Tearra (TM) license plates [/snark]

Why is the President allowed to break the law?

Wilson, R-NM: Now going to say how bad the bill is that the Dems are asking for.

This bill will worsen our security…this legislation will continue to need a warrant for foreign persons in foreign countries…what’s wrong with that?

Saying that we should go back to what original FISA leg originally said, which is fine except that Bush hasn’t been following those rules either.

The problem was known about for some time…was it known about when the GOP was in charge??? Of course it was but they wouldn’t care then because they were doing what they wanted to anyway.

They are going to kill us by usiong our own technology.

Just another case of give these people what they wat and they demand more…bipartisanship=weakness with these people

Yep, date rape, as Grover Norquist called it.

T- @ 19

James @ 10
Don’t forget 30328 and 30327 in Atlanta. Buckhead and Sandy Springs are as red as it gets.

Roswell home of Tom Price 30075

Just got back - now how come the WH is trotting out that old saw about, “agents can’t be sitting around waiting for a warrant in this age of instant communications”?

Harman is getting it right - they don’t need to wait… this is BS!

Hmmm. @ 40

…The Article II, Section 3 nightmare scenario I’ve been secretly dreading lo these many months (”[The President] may, on extraordinary occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in case of disagreement between them, with respect to the time of adjournment, he may adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper;”).

To spell it out: Assume Congress recesses. Assume Preznit calls them to convene under Art II Sec 3, ostensibly for the FISA issue. Now assume that even just one R-Senator blocks agreement on the adjournment. Then Preznit says “How ’bout December 15, 2008?” and according to Art II Sec 3, they have to accept it. Game over.

Then he doesn’t get any appropriations. Game over.

Hastings: we all served on that committee and I think she knows that we know that there is no fix that she has suggested here.

Harman D-CA: This bill hr3356 on p2 sec 105A: court order not needed for acquisition of any court order for conversations not gathered w/i US. Foreign to foreign commo will be exempt

The real issue is whether or not we will have a court approve the parametetrs of the entire progrm or if we leave it to the AG or perhaps the AG working with the DNi. Some of us know the details and it’s valuable and has many ddfft parts, I thought it was being regulated under FIOSA until I knew admin chose not to follow FISA

GordonM @ 48

Hmmm. @ 40

…The Article II, Section 3 nightmare scenario I’ve been secretly dreading lo these many months (”[The President] may, on extraordinary occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in case of disagreement between them, with respect to the time of adjournment, he may adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper;”).

To spell it out: Assume Congress recesses. Assume Preznit calls them to convene under Art II Sec 3, ostensibly for the FISA issue. Now assume that even just one R-Senator blocks agreement on the adjournment. Then Preznit says “How ’bout December 15, 2008?” and according to Art II Sec 3, they have to accept it. Game over.

Then he doesn’t get any appropriations. Game over.

Why does he need appropriations? The Treasury Dept (IRS & debt issuing) is part of the Executive. W’s broken every other law. He’d just keep spendingwhatever he felt like without any appropriations bills.

why do the pugs keep invoking “our troops” and “their enemy”?

I’m totally with Russ Feingold on this:

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003849.php

“I don’t feel the need to get out of here. I would much rather stay here than have us make a terrible mistake,” said Feingold, who has made a name for himself as a champion on civil liberties in the Senate. “This is not the kind of thing that should be done on the fly, and I am prepared to stay here as long as it takes to fix it. Or, if they need force this through, I’m not going to make it easy, if they don’t make it better.”

As I wrote to my congresscritters this a.m.,

“If an amendment must be passed, the least Congress should do is take the time to parse every word of it. Better yet, hold it in Committee until the White House stops stonewalling on the many subpoenas it has received. It’s time to play hardball. “

So I don’t get it. It is ruled secretly that the expanding surveillance program was illegal, but kept secret, and remained secret. Why did it remain secret for so long?

From the Post article:

A federal intelligence court judge earlier this year secretly declared a key element of the Bush administration’s wiretapping efforts illegal, according to a lawmaker and government sources, providing a previously unstated rationale for fevered efforts by congressional lawmakers this week to expand the president’s spying powers.

AND just so we understand what part was illegal:

The judge, whose name could not be learned, concluded early this year that the government had overstepped its authority in attempting to broadly surveil communications between two locations overseas that are passed through routing stations in the United States, according to two other government sources familiar with the decision.

my own emphasis

GordonM @ 48:

Then he doesn’t get any appropriations. Game over.

If emergency powers are asserted, so what?

Hmmm.

Hugh @ 37 -

i don’t know what the real issues are here either. but mary has made a good guess over at tnh.

Hoekstra: are we going to involve the courts in reviewing our intel progrms? This becomes a errorist protection act if we do. Do we want to court reviewing our tactics as they relate to foreigners

PROTECTING THE HOMELAND MEIN FUHRER, that is what this is about

instead of taking action soldiers will have to call in the lawyers
Here comes the supporting the troops meme

Does it make sense for our intel folk to have to go to court when they get a lead?

(The first thing under FISA IIRC is to do what you need to do nd then 72 hours later you come back for the warrants. How does this hamper those efforts?)

Thew barriers will be put up keeping us from fighting terror.

Now using McConnell’s time with Clinton as an excuse that he’s good and the House proposal is unacceptable and would not allow me to cary out my responsibility and I want congress to support what I put forth last night

all of a sudden, serving Clinton is a good thing??

shorter Hoekstra, “Dems are a bunch of traitors and don’t want Americans to be safe!”

eCAHNomics @ 50

GordonM @ 48

Then he doesn’t get any appropriations. Game over.

Why does he need appropriations? The Treasury Dept (IRS & debt issuing) is part of the Executive. W’s broken every other law. He’d just keep spendingwhatever he felt like without any appropriations bills.

now that would be fun. grounds for impeachment, no doubt about it. October 1, he’s sunk without a bill from Congress to continue government spending. unless, of course, he declares martial law. which could also be grounds for impeachment.

The only thing I want to hear Nancy say is, “Bring it, bee-otch.” Let’s see who has to go pee-pee first, Publicans.

Tell Bush that the U.S. Congress will spend August in session if he is successful in ordering the Iraqi parliament to stay in session.

Spiffarino @ 60

The only thing I want to hear Nancy say is, “Bring it, bee-otch.” Let’s see who has to go pee-pee first, Publicans.

Absolutely!

Plame/CIA lawsuit

Judge sides with CIA in suit over Plame memoir
By Edith Honan

NEW YORK (Reuters) - The ex-spy whose unmasking led to the conviction of Vice President Dick Cheney’s top aide cannot disclose the dates she worked for the CIA because the details were never declassified, a federal judge has ruled.

The decision, made public on Friday by U.S. District Judge Barbara Jones, was a victory for the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, which sought to block former agent Valerie Plame Wilson from including the dates in her upcoming memoir, “Fair Game.”

Plame, along with publisher Simon & Schuster, filed a lawsuit in May against Mike McConnell, the U.S. director of national intelligence, and CIA Director Michael Hayden, seeking to stop the CIA from interfering with publication of her book.

…

eCAHNomics @ 20

anangryoldbroad @ 9

Oh,and WTF is the deal with all these conservative “news”people meeting in private off the record with Bush the other day?

Someon at YK2 (maybe Hunter), had a long impassioned speech about how W was prez to only his half of the country, only spoke to it, and no other prez, including Ronnie, had ever done that. Once they becameprez, they spoke to all the people.

Well, ya know….
If he’s only president to his half of the country, let’s appoint a president to OUR half of the country since it has no representation! Taxation without representation - has a familiar ring to it. Anyone for tea?

selise, Thanks for these links.

TiredFed @ 59:

now that would be fun. grounds for impeachment, no doubt about it. October 1, he’s sunk without a bill from Congress to continue government spending. unless, of course, he declares martial law. which could also be grounds for impeachment.

But Congress would not be in session, so who would impeach?

Hmmm.

Hastings: Astounded that the GOP would have us believe something sdifft than what the proposal says.

The GOP wants the AG to be allowed to do this.

Reyes: wants to correct McConnell does not have 30 years in intel he has 40 years. We have been trying to work together in bipartisan way on this bill. McC asked us to do three things:
expand from terrorism to foreign intel
how FISA would eliminate warrant reqts from warrants
how warrants would be approved

After geting on the phoine with the WH and the GOP leadership he said, Oh there are a few other things I need/

This is serious business, We need to decide if we want to give the DNI the three things he said he needed in our bill while we work on a biger fix.

If u vote against you are not giving him the toools he need but u want it as a political tool.

DNI said yesterday that this bill signifciantly enhances America’s security. Wilson says we didn’t show it to DNI? His lawyers dissected it, Hoekstra was in the room while that was happening.

Do what;s right for our country

eCAHNomics @ 50

GordonM @ 48

Then he doesn’t get any appropriations. Game over.

Why does he need appropriations? The Treasury Dept (IRS & debt issuing) is part of the Executive. W’s broken every other law. He’d just keep spendingwhatever he felt like without any appropriations bills.

Debt limit will be reached in Sept. Not sure China and Japan would be happy to see their debtor behaving this way. Nor OPEC. Or Wall St. Which means Daddy wouldn’t like it either, and Babs might get upset.

Hugh @ 37

A few of my thoughts,

I seriously do not understand the present FISA controversy and let me explain why. If I an American am in Germany and call a friend also an American in Japan, there is a high likelihood that my call will be swept up by the NSA whether it is routed through the USA or not. The NSA when it vacuums up all foreign communications (or at least as many as it can) has no way of knowing which involve Americans at one or both ends.

If my call from Germany goes through the US, it will carry routing information (as I understand it) that shows its end destination is not in the US but in Japan. Historically, FISA has not entered into these types of communications. It was designed for communications where one end is foreign and the other domestic. If law enforcement had reason to suspect the foreign end, it could begin a wiretap and go to the FISC for a validating warrant.

If related domestic to domestic surveillance was needed, law enforcement could go to a judge as they have for decades.

The illegal NSA program apparently involved scooping up all or a great number of foreign-domestic communications, some of which were targeted to specific individuals but others resulted from datamining of the communication streams.

Now the NSA wants changes to FISA to allow foreign-foreign communications which are routed through the US. I find this request bogus because neither end of the communication is domestic and the NSA can use routing information to verify that the communications are indeed foreign-foreign.

So what exactly is the NSA doing? My guess is they want to vacuum up not only foreign-foreign communications but foreign-domestic ones as well. And what should be noted, these could include domestic-domestic communications that are in part routed abroad (like the Blackberries that could begin with one individual in Washington, be routed to Canada, and returned to another user in Washington)

Otherwise I don’t see why NSA is making a fuss over massive foreign communications monitoring (sometimes involving US citizens) that they have been doing for decades.

Yes.

Wash, rinse, repeat and repeat and repeat and repeat and …

It is about doing the right thing. I have a statement:

I have reviewed the proposal and it is unacceptable. Would not allow me to provide my responsibility to carry out my duties.

What appears to be happening here is that McConnell is changing the events and since the Democrats did not have anyone taking notes there is no record of what happened

Hastings: Republican logic allows that what was acceptable yesterday is not acceptable today. I do not yield.

I have an amendment to the rule; three a bill to authorize emergency repsairs to the I-35 bridge

Hmmm. @ 66

TiredFed @ 59:

now that would be fun. grounds for impeachment, no doubt about it. October 1, he’s sunk without a bill from Congress to continue government spending. unless, of course, he declares martial law. which could also be grounds for impeachment.

But Congress would not be in session, so who would impeach?

Hmmm.

the greater question would be;

“grounds for impeachemt?, so what, we have dozens already”

Hmmm. @ 66

TiredFed @ 59:

now that would be fun. grounds for impeachment, no doubt about it. October 1, he’s sunk without a bill from Congress to continue government spending. unless, of course, he declares martial law. which could also be grounds for impeachment.

But Congress would not be in session, so who would impeach?

Hmmm.

definitely makes you want to go hmmmm. assuming no doomsday scenario (martial law, etc.), Congress is back in session on September 4th.

go get ‘em Alcee!

Hastings: would add a third susopension measure a bill to provide relief.

Would allow the House to consider the reconstruction funds.

While the minority has been engaging in manuftd obstructionism the house has enaced legislation to withdraw our tropps from harms way

The house hasn’t been able to act on emergency assistance to our citzens. zmanufactured obstructionism is what they are doing and it isn’t good for the people of America

Alcee is sticking his thumb in the eye of the pugs for obstruction….

Hastings: “manufactured obstructionism” - great phrasing & accurate.

TiredFed:

assuming no doomsday scenario (martial law, etc.), Congress is back in session on September 4th.

Depends on which date takes precedece, the ones each House set upon their voluntary adjournment, vs. the “Dec 15 2008″ date the Preznit sets under Art II Sec 3. I don’t know the answer to that, does anyone else here? I would note that under the scenario, the Preznit’s date would be the one most recently decided.

This is what I saw this morning, via the Washington Post:
First paragraph:

A federal intelligence court judge earlier this year secretly declared a key element of the Bush administration’s wiretapping efforts illegal, according to a lawmaker and government sources, providing a previously unstated rationale for fevered efforts by congressional lawmakers this week to expand the president’s spying powers.

I read the first paragraph, then got called away ‘cuz I am at work!

But this did catch my attention later - besides the obviousness about Boehner…

The judge, whose name could not be learned, concluded early this year that the government had overstepped its authority in attempting to broadly surveil communications between two locations overseas that are passed through routing stations in the United States, according to two other government sources familiar with the decision.

And this was a laugh-out-loud line:

The decision was both a political and practical blow to the administration,

What’s the larger R picture here? They’re making a big fuss about FISA because they think that they still have a lead on the terrorism issue?

just because the Rs are against this bill, does make it a good bill.

i’m not happy that the dems are voting for it. WTF?

perris @ 71

Hmmm. @ 66

TiredFed @ 59:

But Congress would not be in session, so who would impeach?

Hmmm.

the greater question would be;

“grounds for impeachemt?, so what, we have dozens already”

what is Hugh’s list up to now? yeah, I know there are hundreds, but spending money without appropriations from Congress is prima facia evidence all by itself of an impeachable offense. No investigation/evidence needed. One day after ordering Treasury to print Federal paychecks (including military paychecks), he could be impeached by the House. violating a straightforward Constitutional restriction would be too much even for Republicans (well, maybe not all of them, but at least 17 of them).

eCAHNomics @ 79

What’s the larger R picture here? There making a big fuss about FISA because they think that they still have a lead on the terrorism issue?

I think they are trying to regain the upper hand on the terror issue.

one bourbon, one scotch, one Boehneer….

Adopting the resolution: Sessions wants the yeas and nays.

And now electornic recoirding

OK what is happening here: This is a good example of what will always happen when you don’t have a stenographer in the room when there are GOP and DEm people making bipartisan decisions.
It will always be he said, she said and that’s why Bush and Co want off the record interviews…so they can obfucate later on and then produce some paper from one of the participants, a partisan participant i Might add, who will support their side of the story.

This is where we are, it is where we will continue to be, the GOP is more concerned with winning points and obstructing than the Democrats are with defending the constitution and our system of government.

Hastings got it completely right and even though I don’t support this bill, I think the provision that a FISA judge review the wrrants and issue them is heads and shoulders above letting little Alberto Gonzales do the job. He is a serial perjurer and cannot be trusted. On that the Dems are corect and I think that is the language the GOP is trying to get inserted.

eCAHNomics @ 79

What’s the larger R picture here? There making a big fuss about FISA because they think that they still have a lead on the terrorism issue?

guesses:

1) cya for administration law breaking.
2) trying to wedge issue the dems from their base
3) ???

James @ 10

TX 79072 (Plainview)
TX 79041 (Hale Center, same county)
19th Congressional district - Randy Neugebauer.

Pete Laney used to be the state leg for this area. Good guy, Democrat (Texas style). The GOoPers tried hard to run him out, starting in 1994, and couldn’t do it.

so - are they now voting on the FISA? which version?

eCAHNomics @ 79

What’s the larger R picture here? There making a big fuss about FISA because they think that they still have a lead on the terrorism issue?

Since they were for it yesterday but not today; it means that Rove pulled out the folders that he’s keeping on the Repubs.

OldCoastie @ 87

so - are they now voting on the FISA? which version?

I think that they are voting on whether or not they can attach other bills to the FISA one.

Hmmm. @ 77

TiredFed:

assuming no doomsday scenario (martial law, etc.), Congress is back in session on September 4th.

Depends on which date takes precedece, the ones each House set upon their voluntary adjournment, vs. the “Dec 15 2008″ date the Preznit sets under Art II Sec 3. I don’t know the answer to that, does anyone else here? I would note that under the scenario, the Preznit’s date would be the one most recently decided.

well, if they are in session, they can impeach. if he Adjourns them, they can simply come back into session on their own based on what was in place before he called them into special session. they can even investigate impeachment issues in committee while in recess.

JPL @ 89

OldCoastie @ 87

so - are they now voting on the FISA? which version?

I think that they are voting on whether or not they can attach other bills to the FISA one.

thanks - there are always so many hoops to jump through!

JPL @ 88

eCAHNomics @ 79

What’s the larger R picture here? There making a big fuss about FISA because they think that they still have a lead on the terrorism issue?

Since they were for it yesterday but not today; it means that Rove pulled out the folders that he’s keeping on the Repubs.

the more they submit to this adminsitration the smaller their chances of re election and they know it too

this is scary to me since in my mind the only way they can go along with the president is if they knew elections weren’t going to matter and they would stay in office regardless

selise @80

I’m with you!

TiredFed @ 90

Hmmm. @ 77

TiredFed:

Depends on which date takes precedece, the ones each House set upon their voluntary adjournment, vs. the “Dec 15 2008″ date the Preznit sets under Art II Sec 3. I don’t know the answer to that, does anyone else here? I would note that under the scenario, the Preznit’s date would be the one most recently decided.

well, if they are in session, they can impeach. if he Adjourns them, they can simply come back into session on their own based on what was in place before he called them into special session. they can even investigate impeachment issues in committee while in recess.

That would work well, because the Dems have said they haven’t had the time to investigate impeachment, since it takes away from other legislation.

eCAHNomics @ 78

What’s the larger R picture here? There making a big fuss about FISA because they think that they still have a lead on the terrorism issue?

The larger picture is the want to exclude judges from the process entirely thereby allowing the AG, any AG, to be the final arbiter when it comes to approving warrants. I wouldn’t put it past them to forge warrants for illegal acts they’ve done in the past (see wordsmithatwork@77) letting AGAG backdate warrants for the period during which Bush has been breaking the law.

This is all about allowing the AG to decide who gets surveilled without any oversight from any other branch of government. At least now there’s a semblance of oversight with the FISA court.

And this whole thing of immedicay is a crock of shit also. The FISA act allows wiretaps immediately. The only restriction is that you report the tap within 72 hours of its inception. No problem there unless u are wiretapping o many fucking people that you can’t churn out the notifications fast enough to comply with the time limits OR you are surveilling people you aren’t supposed to.

Also using switching stations here in the states to tap foreign conversations raises the possibilities that other conversations will be swept up. Do u trust these people to ignore them or do u thing they’ll go into Poindexter’s TIA data-mining operation?

Perhaps if we paid Congress time and a half overtime for staying in August, they might do it.