Done mine!

Hello, Christy!

Congrats, peanutbutter…

Please do call the more conservative Senators. How can they justify opposing habeas corpus?

Just go the direct dial numbers loaded into the speed dial of the new cell phone.

Still want to hear what Craig has to say, in light of his recent experiences.

I’ve only gotten a busy signal 3 out of 10 calls.
Redial is our friend.
Go Peanutbutter!

OT: Does anyone on here run a polling company? Here’s a poll I’d like to see:

How much do you care about moveon.org’s “General Betray Us” ad?

a) Less than one rat fart.
b) Exactly one rat fart.
c) More than one rat fart.

All of the Beltway bluster aside, I’m guessing that most people would answer a or b.

Again, for those who wish to fax:

Free fax online.

Frank Probst @ 7

OT: Does anyone on here run a polling company? Here’s a poll I’d like to see:

How much do you care about moveon.org’s “General Betray Us” ad?

a) Less than one rat fart.
b) Exactly one rat fart.
c) More than one rat fart.

All of the Beltway bluster aside, I’m guessing that most people would answer a or b.

I think most would say “what ad?”

Frank Probst @ 7

OT: Does anyone on here run a polling company? Here’s a poll I’d like to see:

How much do you care about moveon.org’s “General Betray Us” ad?

a) Less than one rat fart.
b) Exactly one rat fart.
c) More than one rat fart.

All of the Beltway bluster aside, I’m guessing that most people would answer a or b.

This is exactly the kind of nonsensical issue Republics will use to excite their base and change the subject of the MSM reporting for the next election.

“We support the troops! We support the troops! (There’s no way my children will ever serve.) We support the troops!”

Oooo, Code Pink being escorted out.
I was on the phone, so missed what precipatated their removal.

demi @ 6

Redial is our friend.

707!

Used the fax, myself.

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) 202-224-4041
Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) 202-224-6551
Sen. John Warner (R-VA) 202-224-2023
Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE) 202-224-4224
Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN) 202-224-4814
Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID) 202-224-2752
Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) 202-224-2523
Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME) 202-224-5344
Sen. Norm Coleman (R-MN) 202-224-5641
Sen. George Voinovich (R-OH) 202-224-3353
Sen. John Sununu (R-NH) 202-224-2841
Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) 202-224-5824
Sen. Gordon Smith (R-OR) 202-224-3753
Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) 202-224-4944
Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN) 202-224-5623
Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) 202-224-4843
Sen. Ken Salazar (D-CO) 202-224-5852
Sen. Mark Pryor (D-AR) 202-224-2353
Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) 202-224-4822

Conyers is being a gentleman with the Code Pink folks, asked one to “excuse yourself”. He points out that there is a very short timeline and that posters are “counterproductive”. Take note Skelton.

Jim Webb and Chuck Schumer: both still unclear?

WTF?

And Debbie Stabenow says yes…

He wore his dancin’ shoes

Is McConnell lying to Conyers about private citizens not being tapped without court orders? Conyers is pissed.

egregious @ 14

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) 202 224 4041
Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) 202 224 6551
Sen. John Warner (R-VA) 202 224 2023
Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE) 202 224 4224
Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN) 202 224 4814
Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID) 202 224 2752
Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) 202 224 2523
Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME) 202 224 5344
Sen. Norm Coleman (R-MN) 202 224 5641
Sen. George Voinovich (R-OH) 202 224 3353
Sen. John Sununu (R-NH) 202 224 2841
Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) 202 224 5824
Sen. Gordon Smith (R-OR) 202 224 3753
Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) 202 224 4944
Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN) 202 224 5623
Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) 202 224 4843
Sen. Ken Salazar (D-CO) 202 224 5852
Sen. Mark Pryor (D-AR) 202 224 2353
Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) 202 224 4822

you must have the fastest fingers on the number key pad in the west, Egregious. Hoowee!

Ooooo
John Conyers just shot McConnel Such An Incredulous Look.
You think I can’t notice that?
Regarding McConnel’s 180 degree change in what he said to the committee last time and then after he spoke with the WH.
John’s really pushing him.
Code Pink ticked him off and he’s going after McConnell.
I love it!

Harry Reid: unclear…

WTF?

Why aren’t our troops good enough to escort Generals and politicians in Iraq? Is it supporting the troops to use Blackwater Mercinaries instead of our troops?

Does Blackwater get better equipment than our troops? I’ll bet they do.

hackworth @ 22

Why aren’t our troops good enough to escort Generals and politicians in Iraq? Is it supporting the troops to use Blackwater Mercinaries instead of our troops?

Does Blackwater get better equipment than our troops? I’ll bet they do.

Of course they do – they buy their own. Our guys have to depend on the government..or their folks buying it and sending it to them.

Biodun @ 20

Harry Reid: unclear…

WTF?

I think the whip count site is either a bit slow, or a bit less than accurate.

I can see the site wanting folks to call the sponsors, so that the sponsors know that people are getting behind this . . . but it would be a bit less disingenuous if the site just came out and said that.

Gosh, that Lundgren’s being so tough on McConnell!!

Just got off the phone with a clueless staffer at Sen Burr’s (R-NC)office – hasn’t had any calls & didnt’ know how Burr planned to vote. Let’s get some calls going to 202-224-3154.

So how would the wiretapping of Franklin, Rosen, Weissman, (allegedly Perle) (citizens) in the A*P*C investigation fall under FISA. Were they taped under this law?

Is this streaming on the web? (and if so, might you have a linky?

Thanks!

demi @ 20

Ooooo
John Conyers just shot McConnel Such An Incredulous Look.
You think I can’t notice that?
Regarding McConnel’s 180 degree change in what he said to the committee last time and then after he spoke with the WH.
John’s really pushing him.
Code Pink ticked him off and he’s going after McConnell.
I love it!

hackworth @ 22

Why aren’t our troops good enough to escort Generals and politicians in Iraq? Is it supporting the troops to use Blackwater Mercinaries instead of our troops?

Does Blackwater get better equipment than our troops? I’ll bet they do.

Yep, they do. One thing they don’t get ( and believe me I’m not pro Blackwater) is the support of the company if they die or get mangled over there. Part of their waiver is in the Atlantic of Harper’s (I’ll look for it), and they got nuthin but what they make. Which is bookoo bucks.

hackworth @ 22

Why aren’t our troops good enough to escort Generals and politicians in Iraq? Is it supporting the troops to use Blackwater Mercinaries instead of our troops?

Does Blackwater get better equipment than our troops? I’ll bet they do.

Better equipment. Better training. Better rules of engagement. Better pay. Better tours. Few consequences.

demi @ 11

Oooo, Code Pink being escorted out.
I was on the phone, so missed what precipatated their removal.

Conyers made excellent points. Code Pinks actions “can” be counter productive.

You should change Lieberman’s political party to Democrat. See this story in the Stamford Times – and his wife’s to Unaffiliated. He sure isn’t a member of the Connecticut for Lieberman party.

Kirk
here
http://judiciary.house.gov/

hackworth @ 22

Why aren’t our troops good enough to escort Generals and politicians in Iraq? Is it supporting the troops to use Blackwater Mercinaries instead of our troops?

Does Blackwater get better equipment than our troops? I’ll bet they do.

(Hi!, Everybody at the lake again)

Considering how much funding these outfits get isn’t public knowledge, who knows?….

After reading a bit regarding this Blackwater being booted out in Iraq, I get the feeling that it is nothing but theater, to give the impression of punishing Blackwater by the Iraq government….

This whole incident in a month will be buried….

Good morning Christy and all firedog patriots. I just called Pryors office and they just steno/recorded my request.. onward to Lincolns office which was a recorded message.. So no real sense of where either senator may stand at this point in time. I also requested they support the Webb amendment as it comes back for vote soon.

I am not to sure why Blanche is on the special watch list (though every senator should be) because, iirc, she didn’t vote to remove Habeas Corpus to begin with.

A toast (with juice) to CHS and The Great Writ!

first line from leahy’s release. bolden is mine

http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200709/091707c.html

Last year, Congress committed an historic mistake by suspending the Great Writ of habeas corpus — not just for those confined at Guantanamo Bay but for millions of legal residents in the United States

let me repost what I pointed out downstairs

I want to remind everyone to make it more then “habeas corpus”

I think we need to point out what’s at stake, for instance;

“I don’t want some official to be able to invent crimes that never existed just so the can make believe they have some reason to keep me in jail”

and

“if someone makes up crap about me I want to be able to see that crap and prove it is crap”

things like that rather then “we must restore the constitution”

Peterr @ 24

Biodun @ 20

Harry Reid: unclear…

WTF?

I think the whip count site is either a bit slow, or a bit less than accurate.

I can see the site wanting folks to call the sponsors, so that the sponsors know that people are getting behind this . . . but it would be a bit less disingenuous if the site just came out and said that.

We did not pre-populate with the site — just the original cosponsors of the Habeas Corpus Restoration Act.

The tally will grow in detail and size as people report the results from their calls. So please, use the tool and report back so the centralized list is up to date and accurate, reflecting your hard efforts.

We want this to be citizen-generated and people powered.

I have a computer question which is pretty OT, but I need help. I have very little speaker power to listen to anything (radio, cspan, youtube), but can hear just fine with headphones. Could I have blown the speakers in my computer? Compaq Presario v2000. Is there any way to make the speakers louder? I have some hearing loss, but not this much!!

sorry for OT, thanks for input.

Sue @ 32

You should change Lieberman’s political party to Democrat. See this story in the Stamford Times – and his wife’s to Unaffiliated. He sure isn’t a member of the Connecticut for Lieberman party.

Yep. Interesting: Joe-Lie registers to vote as a Dem in Stamford, CT.

Kirk,
Or here.

zennurse @ 18

Is McConnell lying to Conyers about private citizens not being tapped without court orders? Conyers is pissed.

This gets into how tapping is defined. McConnell is playing on that definition. A tap is targeted to a foreign national outside the US. If a US citizen talks to that individual, then that individual is not being “targeted” because the foreign national outside the US is the target.

The real question here is about minimization. McConnell and the Republicans are acting like minimization is protective and highly restrictive. But the review of minimization under the new FISA law is under the supervision of IIRC McConnell and the AG. So there is no outside judicial review, and essentially the guys who are judging minimization are the same people who are doing the taps.

zennurse @ 38

I have a computer question which is pretty OT, but I need help. I have very little speaker power to listen to anything (radio, cspan, youtube), but can hear just fine with headphones. Could I have blown the speakers in my computer? Compaq Presario v2000. Is there any way to make the speakers louder? I have some hearing loss, but not this much!!

sorry for OT, thanks for input.

zen nurse, double click on the little speaker icon in the bottom right of your screen

in the window that pops up slide everything up and make sure nothing is muted

I hope that helps

Agents of a foreign power?
http://www.jewishsf.com/conten…..story.html

Dole’s office doesn’t know how she is planning to vote, ditto Schumer.

i haven’t gotten through to warner’s or alexander’s office (multiple busy signals)… but did get through to the all others on christy’s list.

now i’m going to listen to the HJC hearing on c-span3.

Diane @ 44

Dole’s office doesn’t know how she is planning to vote, ditto Schumer.

See me @ 16.

WTF is Chuck Schumer up to?

Hugh @ 41

zennurse @ 18

Is McConnell lying to Conyers about private citizens not being tapped without court orders? Conyers is pissed.

This gets into how tapping is defined. McConnell is playing on that definition. A tap is targeted to a foreign national outside the US. If a US citizen talks to that individual, then that individual is not being “targeted” because the foreign national outside the US is the target.

The real question here is about minimization. McConnell and the Republicans are acting like minimization is protective and highly restrictive. But the review of minimization under the new FISA law is under the supervision of IIRC McConnell and the AG. So there is no outside judicial review, and essentially the guys who are judging minimization are the same people who are doing the taps.

thank you Hugh, that minimization was starting to go up over my head

Hugh @ 41

zennurse @ 18

Is McConnell lying to Conyers about private citizens not being tapped without court orders? Conyers is pissed.

This gets into how tapping is defined. McConnell is playing on that definition. A tap is targeted to a foreign national outside the US. If a US citizen talks to that individual, then that individual is not being “targeted” because the foreign national outside the US is the target.

The real question here is about minimization. McConnell and the Republicans are acting like minimization is protective and highly restrictive. But the review of minimization under the new FISA law is under the supervision of IIRC McConnell and the AG. So there is no outside judicial review, and essentially the guys who are judging minimization are the same people who are doing the taps.

God, Hugh, could we just send your post to everyone and let them know that “targeted” is the operative word with no judicial oversight. The minders policing themselves!

Hugh @ 41

zennurse @ 18

Is McConnell lying to Conyers about private citizens not being tapped without court orders? Conyers is pissed.

This gets into how tapping is defined. McConnell is playing on that definition. A tap is targeted to a foreign national outside the US. If a US citizen talks to that individual, then that individual is not being “targeted” because the foreign national outside the US is the target.

The real question here is about minimization. McConnell and the Republicans are acting like minimization is protective and highly restrictive. But the review of minimization under the new FISA law is under the supervision of IIRC McConnell and the AG. So there is no outside judicial review, and essentially the guys who are judging minimization are the same people who are doing the taps.

minimal toe tapping is a stall tactic.

Biodun @ 39

Sue @ 32

You should change Lieberman’s political party to Democrat. See this story in the Stamford Times – and his wife’s to Unaffiliated. He sure isn’t a member of the Connecticut for Lieberman party.

Yep. Interesting: Joe-Lie registers to vote as a Dem in Stamford, CT.

Man, y’all in CT have got some serious house cleaning to do. How many more backdoor, behind the curtain tricks can LieberME! get away with?!? There are people in power stopping any investigations against him, and facilitating his games. All politics start at the local level…

If it is redetermined what an agent of a foreign power… is, there may be many groups and individuals in the US who become targets.

Jim Clausen @ 48

Hugh @ 41

This gets into how tapping is defined. McConnell is playing on that definition. A tap is targeted to a foreign national outside the US. If a US citizen talks to that individual, then that individual is not being “targeted” because the foreign national outside the US is the target.

The real question here is about minimization. McConnell and the Republicans are acting like minimization is protective and highly restrictive. But the review of minimization under the new FISA law is under the supervision of IIRC McConnell and the AG. So there is no outside judicial review, and essentially the guys who are judging minimization are the same people who are doing the taps.

God, Hugh, could we just send your post to everyone and let them know that “targeted” is the operative word with no judicial oversight. The minders policing themselves!

Or more simply: The fox guarding the henhouse.

Matt Browner Hamlin @ 37

Peterr @ 24

I think the whip count site is either a bit slow, or a bit less than accurate.

I can see the site wanting folks to call the sponsors, so that the sponsors know that people are getting behind this . . . but it would be a bit less disingenuous if the site just came out and said that.

We did not pre-populate with the site — just the original cosponsors of the Habeas Corpus Restoration Act.

The tally will grow in detail and size as people report the results from their calls. So please, use the tool and report back so the centralized list is up to date and accurate, reflecting your hard efforts.

We want this to be citizen-generated and people powered.

Thanks for the clarity.

I’m curious, though: what does it take to switch a Senator’s position on the chart? Does it simply record the last reported position? Does it compare the sum of the reports (8 yes reports beats 2 no reports?)

Biodun @ 46

Diane @ 44

Dole’s office doesn’t know how she is planning to vote, ditto Schumer.

See me @ 16.

WTF is Chuck Schumer up to?

Shumer is to the Dems what Specteramous is to the Reps (IMO FWIW)

punaise @ 49

Hugh @ 41

This gets into how tapping is defined. McConnell is playing on that definition. A tap is targeted to a foreign national outside the US. If a US citizen talks to that individual, then that individual is not being “targeted” because the foreign national outside the US is the target.

The real question here is about minimization. McConnell and the Republicans are acting like minimization is protective and highly restrictive. But the review of minimization under the new FISA law is under the supervision of IIRC McConnell and the AG. So there is no outside judicial review, and essentially the guys who are judging minimization are the same people who are doing the taps.

minimal toe tapping is a stall tactic.

so what if a U.S. Citizen is representing a foreign nation to the point where it is seriously undermining US National Security?

should they be able to be wiretapped under the FISA law? they need to have a warrant, anything wrong with this. I don’t think so.

Got alls through to all on both lists, except for Salazar, whose mailbox is full.
The aid for Sen. Alexander told me that they had received “a few calls” on S2202.
More please.
(I’m taking a short break now. Man, this is almost as tedious as a paying job! I’m kidding, of course. I enjoy speaking to the aides.)

perris @ 42

zennurse @ 38

~snipCould I have blown the speakers in my computer?
sorry for OT, thanks for input.

zen nurse, double click on the little speaker icon in the bottom right of your screen

in the window that pops up slide everything up and make sure nothing is muted

I hope that helps

Thanks Perris, no mutes are on and I’ve looked for problems in control panel, says my speakers work just fine. May have to bring to my programmer son in NM when I visit next month and just use headphones till then. But thanks.

Also, could this McConnell guy have ever smiled to have such a deep natural frown? Folks who have those just make me feel like tickling them.

Perris #36
“if someone makes up crap about me I want to be able to see that crap and prove it is crap”

I really like the way you have simplified the defining argument for habeas corpus…

Funnee….

punaise @ 49:

LOL. MSM has finally picked up the fact that men’s room at the airport (after you clear security heading for the flight gates) is now a huge tourist attraction, a big photo-op. Those of us in Minneapolis have known this for weeks. The woman at the Information Booth (before clearing security) said people constantly ask her for directions to the famous, er, men’s room.

Biodun @ 46 – staffer emphasized he just didn’t know how Schumer planned to vote. Pretty much the same answer from all the calls I’ve made. Can’t understand why a Senator would not inform his/her staff of their position on an impending vote.

Bobby’ shooting the bullets at the feet of McConnell, making him dance

McConnell doesn’t want to answer nothin’

Diane @ 60, maybe they are waiting for the check to clear?

Sorry, but I’m with you. I don’t understand not knowing the position.

Will try calling Craig again later. Still want to know if anyone has gotten any kind of response from him?

If you live in Washington State, please note that our Democratic senator Patty Murray is listed as “undecided” regarding Habeus Corpus. Please call her office if you are a constituent, and let her know what you think about that.

ticktock @ 58

Perris #36
“if someone makes up crap about me I want to be able to see that crap and prove it is crap”

I really like the way you have simplified the defining argument for habeas corpus…

Funnee….

Simplified And Funny, but, if you actuall use that language you run the risk of offending the person taking your call. Your concern may be taken more seriously without the c word. Just saying…

So under FISA laws would they have been able to wiretap Libby, Rove, Fleisher and all of the others who outed Plame? We know their actions undermined National Security? They should have been wiretapped?

leinie @ 62 – they are waiting for Craig to flush.

Kathleen @ 51

If it is redetermined what an agent of a foreign power… is, there may be many groups and individuals in the US who become targets.

What I am still curious about is exactly how do they define a suspect right now whose rights of habeas corpus been restricted?….

Detainees?

ticktock @ 58

Perris #36
“if someone makes up crap about me I want to be able to see that crap and prove it is crap”

I really like the way you have simplified the defining argument for habeas corpus…

Funnee….

Simplified And Funny, but, if you actuall use that language you run the risk of offending the person taking your call. Your concern may be taken more seriously without the c word. Just saying…

how about this?

“if someone wants to steal my bussiness or my wife I don’t want them to be able to put me in jail for no reason what so ever simply by claiming I am some kind of “enemy combatant” when I am clearly not”

hows that?

zennurse @ 57

perris @ 42

zen nurse, double click on the little speaker icon in the bottom right of your screen

in the window that pops up slide everything up and make sure nothing is muted

I hope that helps

Thanks Perris, no mutes are on and I’ve looked for problems in control panel, says my speakers work just fine. May have to bring to my programmer son in NM when I visit next month and just use headphones till then. But thanks.

Also, could this McConnell guy have ever smiled to have such a deep natural frown? Folks who have those just make me feel like tickling them.

zennurse,
I’ve been having a similar problem with my iBook. The mac genius at the local apple store looked and the first option is that the cable that connects the speakers to the processor may be disconnected or bad. Or a possible bad component on one of the processor boards (r-e-a-l oversimplification here).

We really need this to pass!

In the event of a national emergency, this legislation is our ’stay out of a black prison’ card.

ticktock @ 58

Perris #36
“if someone makes up crap about me I want to be able to see that crap and prove it is crap”

I really like the way you have simplified the defining argument for habeas corpus…

Funnee….

Makes sense! Crap shooting

Diane @ 66 – and will wait, if I remember the police report correctly!

I sent him an e-mail last night, told him that the party hadn’t supported him, no reason to remain in lockstep with them, and that maybe his recent experience had given him a new appreciation for that right.

perris @ 68

ticktock @ 58

Perris #36
“if someone makes up crap about me I want to be able to see that crap and prove it is crap”

I really like the way you have simplified the defining argument for habeas corpus…

Funnee….

how about this?

“if someone wants to steal my bussiness or my wife I don’t want them to be able to put me in jail for no reason what so ever simply by claiming I am some kind of “enemy combatant” when I am clearly not”

hows that?

Very respectful and insightful….

Still like the “crap” statement tho….

(Matter of preference…)

zennurse @ 57

Thanks Perris, no mutes are on and I’ve looked for problems in control panel, says my speakers work just fine. May have to bring to my programmer son in NM when I visit next month and just use headphones till then. But thanks.

You may have to disconnect your headphones to get the speakers to work…

BTW, I’ve been framing the Republican calls “if we dismantle our constitutional rights, then the terrorists have won” – R’s love to hear the word terrorist.

“in other words, it could be clearer” -Conyers

On behalf Of proud Iowans everywhere I apologize for steve king. Between king and rubberstamp grASSlly(my emphasis) we still have Braley and Harkin.

Joe-Lie and Chuck Schumer have now gone from unclear to maybe…

Interesting.

So if a US citizen has been proven to be a real a serious and dangerous threat to National Security. Cheney, Rove, Fleisher, Libby, Novak, Franklin, Rosen etc. what is the appropriate procedure for having them wiretapped?

oh you are gonna love this from think progress

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/…..hes-serve/

Bush Expresses Desire To Serve In Iraq, Except ‘I’m Too Old’ And Terrorists ‘Would Notice Me’
The Washington Post’s Dan Froomkin highlights comments made recently by President Bush to a group of military bloggers. Blogger “N.Z. Bear” reported that Bush told the group he wishes he could be serving in Iraq — except that he’s too old:

Responding to one of the bloggers in Iraq he expressed envy that they could be there, and said he’d like to be there but “One, I’m too old to be out there, and two, they would notice me.”

Froomkin undercuts Bush’s claim by noting just how few hours Bush has spent on the ground in his “surprise visits” to Iraq:

Maybe Bush was just making idle chit-chat. But this would not be the first time the president has appeared unaware of the hardships his war has caused hundreds of thousands of American troops — while expressing a misguided sense of bravado.

He certainly hasn’t ever put himself in harm’s way. The president who avoided serving in Vietnam as a young man has made only three visits to Iraq since declaring that major combat operations were over more than four years ago. All three of the visits were unannounced and featured extensive security. Bush’s total time in country? Less than 15 hours.

so the president “wishes he was a soldier in Iraq”

does he know just how much an idiot anyone would be to believe a word of it?

Help me somebody….

Where’s the linky to C-Span—-

Thanks….

dakine: r-e-a-l oversimplification here).

It always is, and it’s not a language I’m feeling the need to learn. In almost two years here at FDL, I’ve gained a great understanding of some legalese and government-speak, but I’ll stick with those medicalese and let my son do the geekspeak. ;-)

Kathleen @ 79

So if a US citizen has been proven to be a real a serious and dangerous threat to National Security. Cheney, Rove, Fleisher, Libby, Novak, Franklin, Rosen etc. what is the appropriate procedure for having them wiretapped?

You get a warrant, based on the proven threat, tap ‘em and arrest ‘em.

When I called Sen. Craig’s office earlier, I merely called to ask for his support of S2202. I just called back and spoke with an aide. He doesn’t know what the Senator’s position is. I asked him to ask around the office to see if anyone else knew. He said most of the staff was at lunch and asked if I would call back in a couple of hours. I asked him to please check that out in the mean time. He said he would, but that things were kind of up in the air around the office right now. I took that opportunity to point out that because of his recent run in with the law, that it might be something that had made him take a serious stand regarding the bill. Got the young man’s name and will be calling back.

Matt Browner Hamlin:

There is a bit of a glitch in the NM senators. If you click on either Bingaman or Domenici… you get Bingaman’s contact info.

I called Domenici (202-224-6621) and asked him to support this act… but reported it under Bingaman cus that was the only option.

The phone answerer said Dom. has not indicated how he would vote…. surprise!

In between classes, I called Pat Roberts and Sam Brownback. I tied my talking to the traditional values (all the way back to the Magna Carta….I told them that I walked the fields of Runnymeade in England to commemorate that, which is true).

Casey & Specter “unsure”

http://www.c-span.org/watch/cs…..p;Code=CS3

zennurse @ 82

dakine: r-e-a-l oversimplification here).

It always is, and it’s not a language I’m feeling the need to learn. In almost two years here at FDL, I’ve gained a great understanding of some legalese and government-speak, but I’ll stick with those medicalese and let my son do the geekspeak. ;-)

Yeah, I figured yo wouldn’t feel the need for me to overload on technical hardware. But my guess is that it’s a hardware failure most likely where they could fix by opening the machine and tinkering. If you want to spend the money. I didn’t so am just using the headphones when I need sound

Wonder if Micheal Ledeen has ever been wiretapped for communicating (and “allegedly” undermining National Security…Niger documents) with agents of foreign Agents?

How do you get warrants to wiretap internal enemies of US National Security?

peanutbutter @ 83

Kathleen @ 79

So if a US citizen has been proven to be a real a serious and dangerous threat to National Security. Cheney, Rove, Fleisher, Libby, Novak, Franklin, Rosen etc. what is the appropriate procedure for having them wiretapped?

You get a warrant, based on the proven threat, tap ‘em and arrest ‘em.

actually it’s even easier then that under fisa

they can conduct their tap even before they apply for the warrant, they can apply for the warrant after the tap is made

all they have to do is within a very easy time frame to follow, show that they aren’t stealing information for themselves

that the information they are looking for has a justification of national security or might prove to be valualble in the future…any justification will do

they are stealing if they don’t want anyone to check and make sure they aren’t stealing

peanutbutter @ 83

Kathleen @ 79

So if a US citizen has been proven to be a real a serious and dangerous threat to National Security. Cheney, Rove, Fleisher, Libby, Novak, Franklin, Rosen etc. what is the appropriate procedure for having them wiretapped?

You get a warrant, based on the proven threat, tap ‘em and arrest ‘em.

Plenty of proof for this..”tap em and arrest them” times a wastin. They are busy starting the next illegal war.

Re: crap and Craig and not-flushing:

Mike Crapo (R-ID): the first no…

perris @ 91

peanutbutter @ 83

You get a warrant, based on the proven threat, tap ‘em and arrest ‘em.

actually it’s even easier then that under fisa

they can conduct their tap even before they apply for the warrant, they can apply for the warrant after the tap is made

all they have to do is within a very easy time frame to follow, show that they aren’t stealing information for themselves

that the information they are looking for has a justification of national security or might prove to be valualble in the future…any justification will do

they are stealing if they don’t want anyone to check and make sure they aren’t stealing

Yup. I was pointing out that it’s still possible even if FISA’s not used. It’s good old fashioned investigative work. It’s remarkably effective when actually used.

So, no, we’re never up a shit creek if we need to tap people. We just need to honor that “pesky” “reasonable cause” issue to do so.

damn- late as usual! short and simple- LET THAT PIECE OF SHIT GRAHAM FILIBUSTER! LET HIM! let em all filibuster.

Diane @ 87

Casey & Specter “unsure”

when they say they are unsure we HAVE to ask them if they think there is ANY situation they would approve where an official should be able to make up whatever they want and the person they are making up those lies doesn’t get to show that the lies were made upa

Again it is important to remember that FISA is the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. It does not cover purely domestic cases.

1,602 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND..

Citizen Hardin Smith and the Firepup Patriots:

Why is this even an issue, why do we hafta beat up a fourth of the Democrats in the Senate in order to get ‘em ta vote for the Constitution??!! This is a reflection of the depth of the corruption of the Democratic Party by the Corporatists and we should be leveling the pressure on our solid and secure progressives (like my Senator Feingold) to organize around Chris Dodd to isolate Mrs. Clinton and MBNA Biden to make them both go out on the stump and defend their support of the Bush fascists on the war and the demolition of the Constitution. In addition to puttin’ pressure on the two corporate Democrats who could swing 60 votes by jest showin up…I would like to see a progressive coalition with Dodd, Feingold and Durbin to create a shadow leadership cadre for 2009.

I think we in the great unwashed blogosphere should not only concentrate our efforts in ANY issue on elected DEMOCRATS but more specifically we should put the heat on the progressives to challenge the existing leadership.

The battle that can win the war against fascism in our country is bein’ waged INSIDE the Democratic Party and we need to concentrate our firepower behind a new progressive leadership. We need to present the existing leadership with the choice of advancing an agenda against the fascists, regardless of the outcome of cloture votes or risk another 1968 Democratic Convention which will surely sweep the old guard outta power in ‘09.

KEEP THE FAITH AND RECOGNIZE THE ENEMY!!

Am I hearing Wainstein say “We’d be happy to look at it”, or is he saying,”we can look at it, but we won’t do a thing.”

I know I should know, but is he a total Bushie?

perris @ 80

oh you are gonna love this from think progress

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/…..hes-serve/

Bush Expresses Desire To Serve In Iraq, Except ‘I’m Too Old’ And Terrorists ‘Would Notice Me’
The Washington Post’s Dan Froomkin highlights comments made recently by President Bush to a group of military bloggers. Blogger “N.Z. Bear” reported that Bush told the group he wishes he could be serving in Iraq — except that he’s too old:

Responding to one of the bloggers in Iraq he expressed envy that they could be there, and said he’d like to be there but “One, I’m too old to be out there, and two, they would notice me.”

Froomkin undercuts Bush’s claim by noting just how few hours Bush has spent on the ground in his “surprise visits” to Iraq:

Maybe Bush was just making idle chit-chat. But this would not be the first time the president has appeared unaware of the hardships his war has caused hundreds of thousands of American troops — while expressing a misguided sense of bravado.

He certainly hasn’t ever put himself in harm’s way. The president who avoided serving in Vietnam as a young man has made only three visits to Iraq since declaring that major combat operations were over more than four years ago. All three of the visits were unannounced and featured extensive security. Bush’s total time in country? Less than 15 hours.

so the president “wishes he was a soldier in Iraq”

does he know just how much an idiot anyone would be to believe a word of it?

Is he megalomaniacal, paranoid or both? Nobody would recognize him in his codpiece suit and headgear.

So what does the new FISA law do that the pre-existing FISA laws did not do?

Sorry I am just not clear on this?

Kathleen @ 101

So what does the new FISA law do that the pre-existing FISA laws did not do?

Sorry I am just not clear on this?

the only thing I would accept as far as a revision of the old fisa law is an extension of the time frame they have to request a warrant

there is no reason on the planet they shouldn’t have to prove they aren’t stealing information…if they aren’t stealing they have to show it

Peterr @ 53

Matt Browner Hamlin @ 37

We did not pre-populate with the site — just the original cosponsors of the Habeas Corpus Restoration Act.

The tally will grow in detail and size as people report the results from their calls. So please, use the tool and report back so the centralized list is up to date and accurate, reflecting your hard efforts.

We want this to be citizen-generated and people powered.

Thanks for the clarity.

I’m curious, though: what does it take to switch a Senator’s position on the chart? Does it simply record the last reported position? Does it compare the sum of the reports (8 yes reports beats 2 no reports?)

Good question. Basically we’re looking for consistent response and common themes help. we hope the volume of calls will make senate offices respond more directly to people with statements, which will make that less of an art and more of a science. But, no, we don’t have a clear ratio set in and we have to be sure to not react on potentially “troll” information.

perris @ 91

all they have to do is within a very easy time frame to follow, show that they aren’t stealing information for themselves

KEY WORD

Maybe the minimization procedure is to give it to the NSF for “social movement analysis”…

Scientists Use the “Dark Web” to Snag Extremists and Terrorists Online

Dark Web’s capabilities are also being used to study the online presence of extremist groups and other social movement organizations. Chen sees applications for this Web mining approach for other academic fields.

My tax dollars used to catch… me!

zennurse @ 88

http://www.c-span.org/watch/cs…..p;Code=CS3

muchas gracias—-

Kathleen @ 101

So what does the new FISA law do that the pre-existing FISA laws did not do?

Sorry I am just not clear on
this?

this is just a part of it, HTH. Where is Hugh to distill perfectly?

perris @ 91

peanutbutter @ 83

You get a warrant, based on the proven threat, tap ‘em and arrest ‘em.

actually it’s even easier then that under fisa

they can conduct their tap even before they apply for the warrant, they can apply for the warrant after the tap is made

all they have to do is within a very easy time frame to follow, show that they aren’t stealing information for themselves

that the information they are looking for has a justification of national security or might prove to be valualble in the future…any justification will do

they are stealing if they don’t want anyone to check and make sure they aren’t stealing

But if the subject is a part of the “they” then it’s moot. Aint.Gonna.Happen.

Just left word with Grassley’s office. I really like the Citizen’s Whip site.

OT New Froomkin The AG Bush Needs.

demi @ 84

When I called Sen. Craig’s office earlier, I merely called to ask for his support of S2202. I just called back and spoke with an aide. He doesn’t know what the Senator’s position is. I asked him to ask around the office to see if anyone else knew. He said most of the staff was at lunch and asked if I would call back in a couple of hours. I asked him to please check that out in the mean time. He said he would, but that things were kind of up in the air around the office right now. I took that opportunity to point out that because of his recent run in with the law, that it might be something that had made him take a serious stand regarding the bill. Got the young man’s name and will be calling back.

Demi–you’re tops. You really are. ; )

Matt Browner Hamlin @ 103

Peterr @ 53

Thanks for the clarity.
~snip~

(8 yes reports beats 2 no reports?)

Good question. Basically we’re looking for consistent response and common themes help.

Matt et all at this effort, I applaud your energy and effort; I feel safer at >50 knowing you are on board for my future.
Thank you sincerely.

Christy’s upstairs…

well I called Senator Coleman’s office and said that he should support both the reinstatement of habius corpus and also support the Webb bill to support our troops. Called both his DC and local offices. I also called Amy Klobuchar’s office to let her know how I felt. When I called I gave my name, city and zip then made my statement. I don’t know if Klobuchar’s staff is still green, but when I finished the staffer asked for my zip code again like I’d never said it, and then couldn’t tell me what Klobuchar’s stand was. Hate to say it but Coleman’s staff is so much more together at phone etiquette. Hope that changes as Klobuchar gains experience and seniority…

Sue @ 32

You should change Lieberman’s political party to Democrat. See this story in the Stamford Times – and his wife’s to Unaffiliated. He sure isn’t a member of the Connecticut for Lieberman party.

He ran against the Democratic candidate for Senate, and was elected as an independent. He can re-register to change which primary he votes in, but that does not make him D-CT.

The four part series that Fox was pressured to take off their website reports about the data mining capability of the Israeli based communication companies Amdocs and Comverse Infosy to data mine almost all US phone calls. There has also been discussion as to whether that system had been compromised or infiltrated.

You can go to you tube to watch the four part series. Part three is where AmDocs and Comvers e Infosy is discussed.

Someone changed the title of Part 3 it used to called Part 3 (odd)

cc in nm @ 85

Matt Browner Hamlin:

There is a bit of a glitch in the NM senators. If you click on either Bingaman or Domenici… you get Bingaman’s contact info.

I called Domenici (202-224-6621) and asked him to support this act… but reported it under Bingaman cus that was the only option.

The phone answerer said Dom. has not indicated how he would vote…. surprise!

Contact info for both senators of a state appear on the same page — look below Bingaman’s and you’ll see Domenici’s…

Folks — I’m hearing that Ben Nelson of Nebraska will vote for cloture but ultimately against the bill. If there are some Nebraska readers who are out there who haven’t made calls yet, please do — both Nelson and Hagel are critical votes to pressure. Thanks!

EPU’d, but what the heck . . .

Matt BH @ 103 — Thanks for the reply. I’m just trying to figure out exactly what is being measured, and how accurate the measurment is.

And big, big thanks, to you and Senators Dodd and Leahy for putting that together.

1,602 dayz and the killin’ goez on and on and..

Citzen Hardin Smith and the Firepup Patriots:

Who the fuck is “redshift” and why is he followin’ us and takin’ up valuable FDL space??!!

KEEP THE FAITH AND REMEMBER EVEN FASCISTS HAVE FREE SPEECH BUT NOT IN YOUR LIVINGROOM, THANK YOU VERY MUCH!!

Norske — don’t let the name fool you — he’s our guy!

Shooting Stars
By: Jane Hamsher

DO NOT FORGET BLOBBY CASEY OR HARRY REID: NEITHER HAVE SIGNED ON TO THIS BILL.

Blobby’s office has been particularly evasive saying he’s “carefully considering” the bill. WTF? It’s a no-brainer.
202-224-6324.

late to the party, sigh.
finally got a chance to poke Sen. Voino. of OH
per below (I know. Too long. But I had to vent. Apologies ;->):
…….

Dear Senator Voinovich:

I urge you to

SUPPORT Sen. Amend. 2202 — the Restore Habeas Corpus Act.

I cannot believe ANY Senator is concerned about National Security, if he votes to withdraw basic rights for U.S. citizens, ignores Geneva Conventions protection for prisoners of war, and acts as if our own Constitution is just some inconvenient rag.

There is NO reasonable excuse for dismantling our ages-old system of human rights. Habeas Corpus dates back to before the Magna Carta.

The Bush/Cheney administration has dug such a deep hole already that even Pres. Bush admits he doesn’t know what to do to fix the damage. He seems only too willing to dump all the problems he has caused into the lap of the next administration. Do YOU feel that way?

If you, like Bush/Cheney, have given up on our country’s system of governance, perhaps you should resign right now, rather than running for re-election.

Otherwise, we expect you, as an elected Senator, to work FOR your country and its people.

Please SUPPORT SEN. AMENDMENT 2202.

BTW, for anyone else using e-mail:

You’ll find no topics provided at the senators’ websites that are particularly compatible with skewering them over Habeas Corpus.

However, lots of them have “National Security” and “Homeland Security” listed prominently, heh.

Works for me, anyway. Go Pups!!!

Maybe this is the thread I should post on:
SA 2022. Restore Habeas corpus.Calling to ask for Hojoe’s decision. As of 3:40, “The Senator has not made a decision yet. Er. . . He’s been supportive in the past.”
(Uh huh. Kinda like Social Security, right?)”Well you will tell him to vote yes for SA 2022, right?” “Of course.”
Sorry, I have very little faith in the “Senator.”

Oh mui. Good for you!

I would have been all tongue-tied at the 1st block in the road.

I am calling. Mostly no position, god what a frustrating thing it is to ask these people to do the right thing and have them tell you they have no position as yet.

Senator, Are you going to eat breakfast tomorrow,dunno I have no position on that as yet.

I am one of Sen. Graham’s constituents (lucky me), and I’ve been calling to no avail. I can leave a message in opposition, but I have my doubts that anyone will even hear it, much less note it. I keep trying his aide, Walt Kuhn, but he’s like not “available.”

Got a staffer in Sen Jim DeMint’s office. He was very polite, but he tried the “not Americans, only enemy combatants” argument. I wasn’t buying it. We talked for a long time, debating back and forth (I was vehement, but one must remain courteous), and by the end he said he would inform the Senator of my position. I work in the law business, and I can talk a blue streak. He sounded tired at the end. I thanked him, and now I’m going back to Sen. Graham’s office.

Perhaps someone should ask these Senators what the law is which allows the administration to label/identify ANYONE as an ‘enemy combatant’?

It certainly puts someone in limbo when the government labels you in such a way that you have no way to claim legal rights. But, where’s the check on the government’s claim that they can label someone that way?