Here

Christy!

LS beats me to my second zed in a row… (That’s OK though.)

Yo, Christy!!

why is a markup of the FISA bill scheduled at all given the current climate? Can’t the Dems just take a page from Reagan’s playbook and just say no. Let the old FISA law come back into existence. W’s already said he’s not going to abide by that one. Why waste time dithering away on something that won’t be followed anyway.

I’m gonna be calling the republicans, when talking about fisa I am going to say straight our;

“I don’t want any official to be able to steal from me under cover of the
law.

I want there to be someone to make absolutely certain the information they are looking for is for national concern not for their own personal profit”

I want to hit the republicans right in the face with that

po at 5 — The schedule isn’t set in stone — what I’m hearing is that it could come as early as the 8th. Which means making contact NOW is essential. Doesn’t mean it’s absolutely going to happen then, but it does mean that we need to make our voices heard.

po @ 5

why is a markup of the FISA bill scheduled at all given the current climate? Can’t the Dems just take a page from Reagan’s playbook and just say no. Let the old FISA law come back into existence. W’s already said he’s not going to abide by that one. Why waste time dithering away on something that won’t be followed anyway.

I second that

let the president admit he is going to break our law

Oh, my favorite subject! The constitution!

We’re only at war cuz bushie says we are. and even if we are, the constitution remains the same.

NO BLANK CHECKS FOR BUSH!!!

great post, chs.

We continue to be sold out by the First amendment protectors of “Good Government.”

Fourteen White House reporters were given a rare hour of access to President Bush on Monday, but the issues they discussed won’t be making any headlines — the session was all off-the-record.
(snip)
An additional nine reporters were invited to the Oval Office on Thursday to “preview” President Bush’s speech to the Heritage Foundation, in which he defended attorney general pick, Michael Mukasey, and characterized “some in Washington” as listening more to MoveOn.org and the anti-war group Code Pink than to “warnings of terrorists like Osama Bin Laden.”

RAW

Christy Hardin Smith @ 7

po at 5 — The schedule isn’t set in stone — what I’m hearing is that it could come as early as the 8th. Which means making contact NOW is essential. Doesn’t mean it’s absolutely going to happen then, but it does mean that we need to make our voices heard.

it’s on the schedule for the nov. 8 business meeting:

S.2248, Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 Amendments Act of 2007

but schedules are changed all the time (makes me grumpy when i’m trying to keep a weekly list of congressional hearings for folks to use)

I happened to notice an article last week that said 875,000 names are on the travel watch list now. The extra scrutiny is “focused” on 875,000??? This is absurd.

There is no way the TSA (aka: Thousands Standing Around) can do anything meaningful with 875,000 and growing on a list.

How do 875K people get on this list? From unscrupulous spying and imaginary terra, terra, terra.

perris @ 6

I’m gonna be calling the republicans, when talking about fisa I am going to say straight our;

“I don’t want any official to be able to steal from me under cover of the
law.

I want there to be someone to make absolutely certain the information they are looking for is for national concern not for their own personal profit”

I want to hit the republicans right in the face with that

my talking points when i call the republicans are:

1) president bush only has a little over a year left – i don’t want a president clinton to have the power to secretly spy on all of us.

2) i remember when the republican party was the party that protected our rights…. i’m hoping it will be again soon.

both have the added benefit of being completely true.

I love the idea of using research libraries as honey traps for al-Qaeda operatives, as Bond claims they would be if granted an explicit exemption. All you would need to do is put a net at all the exits, and you’d have them all in one swell foop.

VJB @ 14

I love the idea of using research libraries as honey traps for al-Qaeda operatives, as Bond claims they would be if granted an explicit exemption. All you would need to do is put a net at all the exits, and you’d have them all in one swell foop.

I guess we need a TSA for libraries.

This comment is dedicated to The Peanut (who dressed as Belle for Halloween, too cute!) and her rights to privacy in any and all US libraries. And to Gaston Senator Bond.

Beauty and the Beast

Gaston: It’s not right for a woman to read. Soon she starts getting ideas, and thinking…

Belle: Gaston, you are positively primeval.

Gaston: Why thank you Belle!

bg @ 12

I happened to notice an article last week that said 875,000 names are on the travel watch list now. The extra scrutiny is “focused” on 875,000??? This is absurd.

There is no way the TSA (aka: Thousands Standing Around) can do anything meaningful with 875,000 and growing on a list.

How do 875K people get on this list? From unscrupulous spying and imaginary terra, terra, terra.

and, i think, an additional 20,000 added each month. (did i hear that in a congressional committee hearing?)

OT..Great Tom Allen video at Americablog:

here

The government, he said, would seek to monitor only “suspected terrorists.”

We’ve heard that one before!
What Bond means is “We’ll listen to everyone, we’ll decide who’s a terrorist, and you’ll only find out when you can’t get on an airplane any more.”

Steve-AR @ 10

We continue to be sold out by the First amendment protectors of “Good Government.”

Fourteen White House reporters were given a rare hour of access to President Bush on Monday, but the issues they discussed won’t be making any headlines — the session was all off-the-record.
(snip)
An additional nine reporters were invited to the Oval Office on Thursday to “preview” President Bush’s speech to the Heritage Foundation, in which he defended attorney general pick, Michael Mukasey, and characterized “some in Washington” as listening more to MoveOn.org and the anti-war group Code Pink than to “warnings of terrorists like Osama Bin Laden.”

RAW

This is so effing bogus. What a perversion of free press if I ever saw it. off the record delivery of talking points to friendly stenographers. Geeeeeezzzzzzzzzz!

selise @ 17

bg @ 12

I happened to notice an article last week that said 875,000 names are on the travel watch list now. The extra scrutiny is “focused” on 875,000??? This is absurd.

There is no way the TSA (aka: Thousands Standing Around) can do anything meaningful with 875,000 and growing on a list.

How do 875K people get on this list? From unscrupulous spying and imaginary terra, terra, terra.

and, i think, an additional 20,000 added each month. (did i hear that in a congressional committee hearing?)

It was a hearing. They tried to say that something like 90% of the 875,000 are people overseas, and they also said that there are many duplicate names and aliases which is why the figures are so high….

and while i’m linking to sjc hearings for next week… here the one for mukasey’s nomination on nov. 6.

Thank you, Christy, for going over and over and over the same territory. Simply to state what should be evident from the Constitution. Why, oh, why must we be dragged through the mud again and again by these turkeys who want to shackle and gag us all – for the sake of “security?”

I support the confirmation of Mukasey as Attorney General — I also support the Democratic Senators who oppose his nomination on principle.

But the question is — will we have an Attorney General who cares about the rule of law, or will we have David Addington continued tenure as de facto AG, with it’s attendant destruction of the Department of Justice?

This is a simple issue of making the Perfect the enemy of the less than Perfect — which serves the interests of the horrible.

I support the confirmation of Mukasey. The choice is between a possible restoration of the rule of law, or a guaranteed further destruction of the Department of Justice.

I tried sending a fax to Specter for 2 and a half days. Either got busy or no answer. I finally called and got another fax number and sent it. He’s my senator now, god help me.
Shot off a fax to Schumer this morning. It went through on the first try.

Dear Sen Schumer,
Though I am not a resident oF New York, because of your position on the Judiciary Committee I consider myself one of your constituents.
I recognize that your role in forwarding the nomination of Judge Mukasey has put you in a difficult position. I understand that you thought the Judge had a respectable judicial temperament and would be a consensus candidate. It seems that you were fooled along with the rest of us.
I URGE you and I cannot say it strongly enough to vote no on letting his nomination go forward. You said:

“From this administration, we will never get somebody who agrees with us on issues like torture and wiretapping,” Schumer said at one point, suggesting an argument in favor of Mukasey, who faces a Senate Judiciary Committee vote on Tuesday. “The best thing we can hope for is someone who will depoliticize the Justice Department and put rule of law first.”

However your last phrase in that statement, “put the rule of law first” is not what the Judge intends to do which has become apparent that he will allow the law breaking in this administration to continue—he could not do otherwise given his answers to the questions that have been asked of him.
If you truly value the rule of law as you say you do, you have an opportunity to show the nation by stopping this nominee from going forward. A great man can admit mistakes. You were misled. Please don’t let the rule of law suffer for your betrayed confidence in this man.
PLEASE VOTE NO on Judge Mukasey.

Oh, so only 787K are terrorists or have links to terrorists and are abroad? That makes me confident about security all right.

selise @ 17

bg @ 12

I happened to notice an article last week that said 875,000 names are on the travel watch list now. The extra scrutiny is “focused” on 875,000??? This is absurd.

There is no way the TSA (aka: Thousands Standing Around) can do anything meaningful with 875,000 and growing on a list.

How do 875K people get on this list? From unscrupulous spying and imaginary terra, terra, terra.

and, i think, an additional 20,000 added each month. (did i hear that in a congressional committee hearing?)

“Since September 11, 2001, the United States has experienced a 17 percent decline in overseas travel, costing America 94 billion dollars in lost visitor spending, nearly 200,000 jobs and 16 billion dollars in lost tax revenue,” the Discover America advocacy campaign said in a statement.

link

OT

My former boss is going to jail unless Justice Stevens can be convinced to bring his case before the high court. I don’t think that will happen. Illinois politics…what a hoot! /s

http://www.sj-r.com/news/stories/19239.asp

I called Schumer, grassley(my rubber stamper)
Leahy,Feinstein, Whitehouse, and Reid.

No to basket warrants and telecom immunity
No to McCaskey the torture nominee(Rule of Law vs. rule by george)
No to any more enabling! (God, it feels good to do something to stop this train wreck)

We can make a difference!

-ck- @ 24

I support the confirmation of Mukasey as Attorney General — I also support the Democratic Senators who oppose his nomination on principle.

But the question is — will we have an Attorney General who cares about the rule of law, or will we have David Addington continued tenure as de facto AG, with it’s attendant destruction of the Department of Justice?

This is a simple issue of making the Perfect the enemy of the less than Perfect — which serves the interests of the horrible.

I support the confirmation of Mukasey. The choice is between a possible restoration of the rule of law, or a guaranteed further destruction of the Department of Justice.

If Muaksey is unwilling to flat out say that the president is not above the law—and so far he has been unwilling to say that—then it doesn’t matter whether it is him or Addington visibly pulling the strings, it will still be Addington. If the senate approves of Muaksey, they are knowingly abetting the crimes that the admin. is committing. If they won’t stand up for this, then they won’t stand up for anything. Which well may happen.

More than sad.

-ck- @ 24

I support the confirmation of Mukasey as Attorney General — I also support the Democratic Senators who oppose his nomination on principle.

But the question is — will we have an Attorney General who cares about the rule of law, or will we have David Addington continued tenure as de facto AG, with it’s attendant destruction of the Department of Justice?

This is a simple issue of making the Perfect the enemy of the less than Perfect — which serves the interests of the horrible.

I support the confirmation of Mukasey. The choice is between a possible restoration of the rule of law, or a guaranteed further destruction of the Department of Justice.

why do you think confirming mukasey would lead to the “possible restoration of the rule of law?” asking seriously… ‘cuz everything i’ve seen leads me to the opposite conclusion.

bush has created a procrustean bed, which any nominee must lie in. Thus, any nominee is tainted by that. Gagged. Except to say what’s authorized.

You can’t have an AG that’s agreed to a gag!

OT..Howie has more on foreign tourism;

DWT

This is rich. From the RAW story linked above.

White House Press Secretary Dana Perino told the paper that the meetings were part of “a desire to be creative to try to provide some access to the president…It was just a new tool we’d like to have in our toolbox.”

Obviously a divide and conquer move. There are tools in that toolbox all right.

I do not like this at all. The President of our country should be available to the press at press conferences. that’s all the access that’s needed. duh.

If Addington and Fielding are advising the Administration to not follow the Constitution and the Rule of Law in general, they are advising the President and Vice President to violate their oaths of office and causing them to commit illegal acts, based on that advice.

Why isn’t there some way to either get them disbarred, impeached, or some form of curtailment?

LS @ 35

If Addington and Fielding are advising the Administration to not follow the Constitution and the Rule of Law in general, they are advising the President and Vice President to violate their oaths of office and causing them to commit illegal acts, based on that advice.

Why isn’t there some way to either get them disbarred, impeached, or some form of curtailment?

there is. but speaker pelosi has taken it off the table.

RevDeb @ 30

-ck- @ 24

I support the confirmation of Mukasey as Attorney General — I also support the Democratic Senators who oppose his nomination on principle.

But the question is — will we have an Attorney General who cares about the rule of law, or will we have David Addington continued tenure as de facto AG, with it’s attendant destruction of the Department of Justice?

This is a simple issue of making the Perfect the enemy of the less than Perfect — which serves the interests of the horrible.

I support the confirmation of Mukasey. The choice is between a possible restoration of the rule of law, or a guaranteed further destruction of the Department of Justice.

If Muaksey is unwilling to flat out say that the president is not above the law—and so far he has been unwilling to say that—then it doesn’t matter whether it is him or Addington visibly pulling the strings, it will still be Addington. If the senate approves of Muaksey, they are knowingly abetting the crimes that the admin. is committing. If they won’t stand up for this, then they won’t stand up for anything. Which well may happen.

More than sad.

I agree. Even as ck is trying to be practical, it cannot stand that the Senate confirms someone who will not denounce torture. (but it will)

btw, if folks are hearing back any specifics from Senators on these issues, please let us know what you are hearing in the comments. Thanks!

My goodness, am I the only one who hears a clarion call in the background when reading a CHS post? Christy, I don’t know what blend of coffee you drink, but, you really ought to consider applying for a patent on it. *g*

OT.. when I read this last night:

Democrat Barack Obama introduced a Senate resolution late Thursday that says President Bush does not have authority to use military force against Iran . . . Obama spokesman Bill Burton said the Illinois senator drafted the measure in an effort to “nullify the vote the Senate took to give the president the benefit of the doubt on Iran.”

This is what I thought about it..but BTD says it much better than I could.

Senator Obama refused to sign a letter circulated by Senator Jim Webb that made clear that:

“We wish to emphasize that no congressional authority exists for unilateral military action against Iran,” it says. That includes the Kyl-Lieberman amendment, the letter says.

Instead of agreeing with this inarguable statement, Obama chooses to try and make political hay, and says only legislation can undo, implicitly, the Congressional grant of authority to Bush to invade Iran. The truth is the Obama campaign is lying. On the issue of going to war with Iran. This is worse than any doubletalk. This is playing with the security of our nation for crass political gain. This is the lowest moment of the campaign for any Democrat. Shame on Obama.

talkleft

Dodd is the person who, once again, shows political maturity.

Why is it that the MSM does not question this Administration. They have zero credibility left.

Look what this administration did to bolster support for the invasion and occupation of Iraq:

“Although German intelligence officials warned the CIA that Curveball’s claims of mobile bioweapons labs were unreliable, and U.N. inspectors determined before the war began in 2003 that parts of his story were false, the Bush administration continued to promote the existence of such mobile labs for months after the invasion, until it was widely accepted that they could not be found.”

Link to full article

kunich is gonna start to make a move here, he will surely gain contributions and support, check this out from raw story;

Kucinich says he will force House vote on Cheney impeachmentNick Juliano
Published: Friday November 2, 2007

del.icio.us

Print This Email This

Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) announced he would move to force a vote next week on his resolution calling for the impeachment of Vice President Dick Cheney.

link

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/….._1102.html

Does Senator Schumer want to be renamed Senator Torture?

Because that is how he will be forever known if he votes for Mukasey.

The problem at its root is Bush Think. The idea that the world is about yes/no, right/wrong, or good/evil.

When you think in these black/white terms, it is easy to deny others habeas corpus, Fourth Amendment protections and subject them to torture. We are yes/right/good they are no/wrong/evil.

I was very disappointed to see so many on the Left buy into this Bush Think in terms of Hillary Clinton’s answer as to licensing illegal immigrants. Her “yes, but” answer was deemed by some to be unacceptable. It had to be “yes or no.” Why?

Understanding relativism has been one of the Left’s great assets.

Approving Mukasey only further deepens Democratic complicity in the Bush Crime Syndicate.

Those who vote for Mukasey are aiding and abetting future and past criminal activity.

Not that it matters a bit.

America is rotting like a fish in the sun.

-GSD

After Bush’s (more deranged everyday) speech, yesterday, a little reminder about the sociopath-in-chief:

George Bush And Torture

by tristero

link

Senator Torture (D-NY)

Is that what Schumer wants his legacy to be?

OT:
Bush has no problem giving the middle finger to Congress. Will Congress stand up and give him the middle finger back?

Bush Vetoes Water Spendig Bill

What a quack. Bush is now trying to portray himself as a fiscal conservative?

Exactly what will be accomplished by rejecting the Mukasey nomination?

If he comes out and says waterboarding is torture, his nomination will be withdrawn — and what I heard of him on the NewsHour this week was close enough for me.

I suggest that not confirming Mukasey gives Bush and Cheney and Addington a green light to completely destroy whatever is left of the Department of Justice.

We are at War — a War to save what ever is left of Constitutional Government in the US of A. Defeating Mukasey would at best be a Pyhrric victory, and at worst an exercise in false piety hypocrisy that effectively endorses the Bush Administration.

At this point in time, principled stands are worthless — the real test is the effect of your actions, not the principles on which you stand.

I hold my nose and support Mukasey.

911 changed everything.

We need to know the truth behind 911.

They have lied about everything.

We have been lied to about 911.

Today all roads lead to 911.

We need to know the truth.

This is a good time to remind people that switching your nickname around is a good way to get yourself banned. Consider this a friendly reminder…at the moment.

Christy Hardin Smith @ 38

btw, if folks are hearing back any specifics from Senators on these issues, please let us know what you are hearing in the comments. Thanks!

oh, shoot. i called earlier today and put a couple of things in prior threads.

mostly sounds like they are all still taking counts (asking for zip codes and no problem with taking calls from out of state).

the most interesting thing i though was that i again was told that when schumer recommended mukasey for ag he did not know of his position on torture. i had to ask to get this statement – but i think it may be important because it gives schumer a face saving out for voting “no” now after recommending the guy.

also – just over 2 hours to go before leahy makes his annoucement on whether he intends of vote for or against mukasey in committee.

Perhaps the pressure on the Senate makes Mukasey have to take a position. There are various outcomes here. We’ll soon see where Mukasey falls.

The economy added 166,000 jobs last month . . . sort of.

Adding to the uncertainty about the report, most of the job gain — 103,000 of the 166,000 net new jobs — came from an estimate that the Labor Department makes each month about how many jobs were added by new businesses. The Labor Department did not actually find evidence of these jobs; it assumed they were created based on historical patterns.

Also

Manufacturing and retail jobs dropped sharply in October, underscoring analysts’ expectations that consumer spending and business activity will slow in the fourth quarter as problems in the housing market affect the broader economy.

BTW Manufacturing jobs tend to have good wages and continue their death spiral. So ghost jobs, the continuing effects of the housing bubble, and an expectation for an economic slowdown. Feel better?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11…..ref=slogin

selise @ 52

the most interesting thing i though was that i again was told that when schumer recommended mukasey for ag he did not know of his position on torture. i had to ask to get this statement – but i think it may be important because it gives schumer a face saving out for voting “no” now after recommending the guy.

That’s why I wrote the letter the way I did. Was taking your cue.

I triple dog dare Bush to finish his term without an AG.
None would be better than the subservient enablers he has in mind.
First he blusters and threatens, then he cries like a bitch when he doesn’t get his way.
Take your fucking ball and go home.

More FISA stuff:

Why was the NSA trying to enlist the telecoms in a surveillance program before 9/11?

The National Journal’s Shane Harris digs deeper into what has emerged in recent days about Qwest’s role in that earlier NSA effort:

TPM

Christy,
The Madison quote is a fine one, but let me give you one from a more recent American, Justice Douglas.
“As nightfall does not come all at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there’s a twilight where everything remains seemingly unchanged, and it is in such twilight that we must be aware of the change in the air, however slight, lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness”
I have this quote on my wall, in front of me, so that I may look up and remind myself that it’s getting dark and that I must remember to resist and light a fire so that others may see and light their own fires as well.

IrishJim @ 48

OT:
Bush has no problem giving the middle finger to Congress. Will Congress stand up and give him the middle finger back?

Bush Vetoes Water Spendig Bill

What a quack. Bush is now trying to portray himself as a fiscal conservative?

Republicans only become fiscal conservatives when they no longer control the pork.

Shumer’s office said they are getting a lot of don’t pass Mukasey to the floor for a vote. They are hearing from the people. Good. Now perhaps he will drop his support.

I called Leahy and Schumer this AM and when I said I was from MA Schumer’s aid on the other end practically hung up on me. Leahy’s aid was very pleasant and didn’t even ask where I was calling from.

I have personal experience with the abuse of authority wielded by federal agents exercising police powers without a court order – as a result of the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement being ‘waived’ in favor of a presumptive “reasonable” standard that allows for the coerced search of U.S. citizens re-entering the United States at border crossings. I don’t wish that ongoing, and increasing abuse and invasion of privacy (see TSA) on anyone. [Strike that: many Members of Congress have earned and deserve just such an experience.] But that lesson is one we must heed, because it teaches us what fate awaits us all once such pseudo-Constitutional ‘waivers’ expand deeper into our daily lives, as the FISA legislation intended to capture our communications is designed to do.

A Golden Retriever wandering around and mildly wagging its tail was “reasonable” probable cause suspicion (because an agent wished it to be so – how does one challenge a dog’s “opinion”?) for a specious warrantless search and invasion of the personal privacy of wholly-innocent U.S. citizens on U.S. soil, Fourth Amendment be damned. It started with the “Drug War,” it’s expanded to the “War on Muslim Terror,” and it won’t stop there.

“Secure in our persons, houses, papers, and effects”? Hardly. Our airports are the harrowing new battleground of a Fourth Amendment-free zone serving “the state” at the expense of our individual liberty and privacy. The “nation” has trumped the individual. The “state” and its “secrets” is to be protected at the expense of the personal security and personal privacy of the individuals who comprise it. Will this battleground be extended to our avenues of electronic communication, via a single ‘program warrant’ [datamining software order] targeting categories of communications without probable cause or individual warrants, behind the utmost secrecy for the state at the expense of the individual? It will if Kit Bond and Jay Rockefeller and Dick Cheney get their way.

Our Fourth Amendment shield is as golden as it gets, though tattered around the edges from the steadily-increasing abuse of federal authorities; we must preserve and strengthen that shield, or we will reap the horrifying consequences, to our deep and lasting regret.

-ck- @ 49

Exactly what will be accomplished by rejecting the Mukasey nomination?

If he comes out and says waterboarding is torture, his nomination will be withdrawn — and what I heard of him on the NewsHour this week was close enough for me.

I suggest that not confirming Mukasey gives Bush and Cheney and Addington a green light to completely destroy whatever is left of the Department of Justice.

We are at War — a War to save what ever is left of Constitutional Government in the US of A. Defeating Mukasey would at best be a Pyhrric victory, and at worst an exercise in false piety hypocrisy that effectively endorses the Bush Administration.

At this point in time, principled stands are worthless — the real test is the effect of your actions, not the principles on which you stand.

I hold my nose and support Mukasey.

I disagree with the reasoning above, but do agree that bush continually presents Congress with a Whitman’s
Sampler of Hobson’s choices.

Just called Brownback’s office. He supports Mukasey unequivocally, but opposes waterboarding and says that Mukasey found it morally repugnant. I said, “but not illegal?” “Of course, it can’t be illegal because then we would have to arrest the armed service personnel that does it, even for training.”
Sigh. Not the brightest bulbs, but then the big money doesn’t want the bright bulbs in Congress, does it?

BTW when Kit Bond tells me not to worry, I worry.

-ck- @ 49

Exactly what will be accomplished by rejecting the Mukasey nomination?

If he comes out and says waterboarding is torture, his nomination will be withdrawn — and what I heard of him on the NewsHour this week was close enough for me.

I suggest that not confirming Mukasey gives Bush and Cheney and Addington a green light to completely destroy whatever is left of the Department of Justice.

We are at War — a War to save what ever is left of Constitutional Government in the US of A. Defeating Mukasey would at best be a Pyhrric victory, and at worst an exercise in false piety hypocrisy that effectively endorses the Bush Administration.

At this point in time, principled stands are worthless — the real test is the effect of your actions, not the principles on which you stand.

I hold my nose and support Mukasey.

thanks for the reply, but i still don’t get it. hope you will try to help me …

rejecting the mukasey nomination serves one important goal, imo…. that is to make clear that his answers on torture and the power of the president to be the law instead of following the law are unacceptable. if mukasey’s nomination is approved, the senators are saying those are acceptable positions.

i don’t see how that gives the bush administration more of a green light than they already have. would you elaborate on why you think that? thx!

RevDeb @ 55

selise @ 52

the most interesting thing i though was that i again was told that when schumer recommended mukasey for ag he did not know of his position on torture. i had to ask to get this statement – but i think it may be important because it gives schumer a face saving out for voting “no” now after recommending the guy.

That’s why I wrote the letter the way I did. Was taking your cue.

As Jeralyn pointed out, Murkasey has more issues other than being “cute” with torture.

talkleft

old gold @ 44

The problem at its root is Bush Think. The idea that the world is about yes/no, right/wrong, or good/evil.

When you think in these black/white terms, it is easy to deny others habeas corpus, Fourth Amendment protections and subject them to torture. We are yes/right/good they are no/wrong/evil.

I was very disappointed to see so many on the Left buy into this Bush Think in terms of Hillary Clinton’s answer as to licensing illegal immigrants. Her “yes, but” answer was deemed by some to be unacceptable. It had to be “yes or no.” Why?

Understanding relativism has been one of the Left’s ##############.

Yes. ITA. Instead of “win” the war or “lose” the war, how about “stop” the war? Besides how can you “win” a war that doesn’t have any bbjectives other than to exist? The war is but a prop to Bush’s “war” time “power”. Freak.

1,645 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND..

Citizen Hardin Smith and the Firepup Freedom Fighters:

Thanx for the post, readin’ and thinkin’ about Madison’s words is ALWAYS good in the mornin’ but I have a question that maybe relates ta “conservation of entropy” with regard to makin phone calls and maximizin’ the effectiveness of my limited energy resources. Which is more effective, to call our Senator and Leahy regardin’ BOTH the AG nomination and the FISA bill and ferget about talkin’ ta One Hung Harry’s office or ta call all three even if my Senator is Fiengold and I know I ken count on him?

I firmly believe that Reid is a lost cause (as is Pelosi in the House) and that I want to use whatever constituent clout I might have most effectively.

Thanx and keep up the good work, us geriatric folks out here are countin’ on ya…and please send the support of the Norske clan ta Sister Jane (we jest had another GYN cancer scare in our household this week).

KEEP THE FAITH AND TAKE CARE OF EACH OTHER!!

NZ Expat, now in KS @ 64

Just called Brownback’s office. He supports Mukasey unequivocally, but opposes waterboarding and says that Mukasey found it morally repugnant. I said, “but not illegal?” “Of course, it can’t be illegal because then we would have to arrest the armed service personnel that does it, even for training.”
Sigh. Not the brightest bulbs, but then the big money doesn’t want the bright bulbs in Congress, does it?

This quote needs more play. Anyone else gets quotes like this, FDL should line them up, quote by quote, and make the picture very clear…

NZ Expat, now in KS @ 64

Just called Brownback’s office. He supports Mukasey unequivocally, but opposes waterboarding and says that Mukasey found it morally repugnant. I said, “but not illegal?” “Of course, it can’t be illegal because then we would have to arrest the armed service personnel that does it, even for training.”
Sigh. Not the brightest bulbs, but then the big money doesn’t want the bright bulbs in Congress, does it?

Of course, that is the whole idea of illegal..so the people who authorized it and did it can be indicted, arrested, tried and if found guilty, sent to prison. It’s called the rule of law.

E-mailed DiFi with that wonderful quote from Bond, saying that ‘trust us’ is not something that I want to hear: every time this administration has used it, we’ve gotten the shaft (not those words; I was polite, even to her).
No retroactive immunity.
No warrantless surveillance.
No torture.
IMPEACH.

Steve-AR @ 67

RevDeb @ 55

That’s why I wrote the letter the way I did. Was taking your cue.

As Jeralyn pointed out, Murkasey has more issues other than being “cute” with torture.

talkleft

oh, yeah. and i’ll use whichever ones i think will be the most useful when i make the calls. suggestions welcome.

Steve-AR @ 67

RevDeb @ 55

That’s why I wrote the letter the way I did. Was taking your cue.

As Jeralyn pointed out, Murkasey has more issues other than being “cute” with torture.

talkleft

shumer can give himself an out and the prorgressives a great push by saying;

“I’ll confirm murkasey if he states for the record that the president is never above the law, that the president is bound by our consitution, that the president is bound by treaties this country are signatories and that waterboarding as he knows the term is torture, while he might not be familiar with the techniques used by the administration, if indeed they did condone or order practices that are accepted as torture then they will be prosecuted”

that gives him his out, it also presents the bar that must be passed for an ag to be confirmed

perris @ 74

Steve-AR @ 67

As Jeralyn pointed out, Murkasey has more issues other than being “cute” with torture.

talkleft

shumer can give himself an out and the prorgressives a great push by saying;

“I’ll confirm murkasey if he states for the record that the president is never above the law, that the president is bound by our consitution, that the president is bound by treaties this country are signatories and that waterboarding as he knows the term is torture, while he might not be familiar with the techniques used by the administration, if indeed they did condone or order practices that are accepted as torture then they will be prosecuted”

that gives him his out, it also presents the bar that must be passed for an ag to be confirmed

A well stated strategy…

Marcus @ 58

Christy,
The Madison quote is a fine one, but let me give you one from a more recent American, Justice Douglas.
“As nightfall does not come all at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there’s a twilight where everything remains seemingly unchanged, and it is in such twilight that we must be aware of the change in the air, however slight, lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness”
I have this quote on my wall, in front of me, so that I may look up and remind myself that it’s getting dark and that I must remember to resist and light a fire so that others may see and light their own fires as well.

The Douglas quote is a good one. But one of the issues we are continually facing is dealing with folks in this admin (and SCOTUS) who are just dead solid certain that they know the “original intent” of all the Founding Fathers. Much as I loved and respected Justice Douglas, the current batch can dismiss him as an “activist liberal out-of-the-mainstream.” They can’t do that with Madison.

“Of course, it can’t be illegal because then we would have to arrest the armed service personnel that does it, even for training.”

This has been the talking point of every Repug supporting Mukasey. It’s been/being bruited about for days on MSM.

pow wow @ 62

I have personal experience with the abuse of authority wielded by federal agents exercising police powers without a court order – as a result of the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement being ‘waived’ in favor of a presumptive “reasonable” standard that allows for the coerced search of U.S. citizens re-entering the United States at border crossings. I don’t wish that ongoing, and increasing abuse and invasion of privacy (see TSA) on anyone. [Strike that: many Members of Congress have earned and deserve just such an experience.] But that lesson is one we must heed, because it teaches us what fate awaits us all once such pseudo-Constitutional ‘waivers’ expand deeper into our daily lives, as the FISA legislation intended to capture our communications is designed to do.

A Golden Retriever wandering around and mildly wagging its tail was “reasonable” probable cause suspicion (because an agent wished it to be so – how does one challenge a dog’s “opinion”?) for a specious warrantless search and invasion of the personal privacy of wholly-innocent U.S. citizens on U.S. soil, Fourth Amendment be damned. It started with the “Drug War,” it’s expanded to the “War on Muslim Terror,” and it won’t stop there.

“Secure in our persons, houses, papers, and effects”? Hardly. Our airports are the harrowing new battleground of a Fourth Amendment-free zone serving “the state” at the expense of our individual liberty and privacy. The “nation” has trumped the individual. The “state” and its “secrets” is to be protected at the expense of the personal security and personal privacy of the individuals who comprise it. Will this battleground be extended to our avenues of electronic communication, via a single ‘program warrant’ [datamining software order] targeting categories of communications without probable cause or individual warrants, behind the utmost secrecy for the state at the expense of the individual? It will if Kit Bond and Jay Rockefeller and Dick Cheney get their way.

Our Fourth Amendment shield is as golden as it gets, though tattered around the edges from the steadily-increasing abuse of federal authorities; we must preserve and strengthen that shield, or we will reap the horrifying consequences, to our deep and lasting regret.

Think it’s bad now? Just wait until the Feds realize that driving is one of the few ways that a person can avoid showing ID when traveling. Why fly when one can just drive? Next step is stops at state borders and “Can I see your papers please”.

These boneheads are so obviously obstructing justice both in the case of the FISA Telco immunity and in the Waterboarding question, and all those in the know about what is/was really happening are scared; including W and Dick.

W just huffs and puffs and tries to sound all scary…ya know…he’s just a greedy, yellow-bellied, bully with a fork-ed tongue…

Truly they are tiresome.

Rant over.

I swear if Bush ever did the “right thing” as we see it, I’ll wonder what he’s up to…

Biodun at 77 — Which entirely misses the point that our service members are already prohibited from doing that sort of thing by the UCMJ, beyond capture-resistence training that Seals and others who may go on rescue missions and such have to undergo. The fact that we use waterboarding to train our elite forces on what to expect in terms of torture from other nations who don’t respect the Geneva Conventions is sort of a clue that it’s a no-no, isn’t it? Let alone the fact that when American military personnel have been caught doing it in the past, they’ve been court-marshalled out of the military for that reason. SteveAudio had something on that recently.

It’s times like that that I really miss Steve Gilliard. SIGH

CHS @ 81:

Yep. Dana Perino also said Mukasey can’t say it’s illegal before he’s nominated, but can say it is after he becomes AG. (She did say that. I hope I’m not dreaming that up.)

Biodun @ 77

“Of course, it can’t be illegal because then we would have to arrest the armed service personnel that does it, even for training.”

This has been the talking point of every Repug supporting Mukasey. It’s been/being bruited about for days on MSM.

Can we get a record of position from all on the SJC regarding waterboarding? The point blank question: is waterboarding torture?

It would give the vote a pressure point for sure…

As people make calls, stressing the concern for his conflict of interest in allowing himself to be nominated despite conflicts of interest, would also be effective. The conflict of interest issues need to be “sounded loud” over the next few days… His conflict of interest concerns and agreeing to move forward as a nominee make him an unsound candidate in terms of his legal judgement abilities.

Just updated the post above, but wanted to be sure folks had this available as a resource for calls:

The ACLU has a line by line analysis of the Senate FISA bill available for reading. They also have a one-page summary.

…and, just for fun, I’ve got a little Friday diversion up for everyone.

Biodun @ 77

“Of course, it can’t be illegal because then we would have to arrest the armed service personnel that does it, even for training.”

This has been the talking point of every Repug supporting Mukasey. It’s been/being bruited about for days on MSM.

Wow! So by the same logic they can’t make assault illegal either, right?

I’m wondering how Mukasey personally feels these days about his own “legacy” as a result of all of this, because he will be viewed as Gonzo II for cowtowing to the Administration, instead of standing up firmly for the law. Surely, at this point in his career he must realize that.

Maybe he’ll just withdraw himself…that would be the wisest move before the publicity gets even worse and ruins any reputation he already had.

I’ve been wondering for a while if any of the legal problems Qwest has had were related to their refusal to play ball with the NSA when I came across this.
Nacchio says feds punished Qwest

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — Former Qwest CEO Joseph Nacchio alleged in court documents that the federal government canceled a lucrative contract with the National Security Agency after the company refused to participate in a separate surveillance program that the telecom firm thought might be illegal, according to a news report Saturday.

So we want to give amnesty to those who break the law and punish those who uphold it.

Yes, indeed, this is the values administration isn’t it?

Steve Gilliard: God rest his soul.

Concerning the FISA legislation, I think a little historical research needs to be done. Anyone recall President Clinton’s Carnivore email program? Remember the wingnuts screaming about that? I would like to try and find some wingnut quotes about Carnivore and juxtapose those against the wingnuts current position on FISA Warrantless Spying. Anyone have thoughts on were I can find historical quotes from wingnuts?

This is the ACLU’s one-page summary of the Rockefeller/Bond Senate Intelligence Committee FISA bill, from Christy’s link above:

S. 2248, the Administration/Rockefeller bill is pretty much the same monster Congress passed in August, the so-called Protect America Act. The major difference is that it gives the Attorney General the sole discretion to provide retroactive and prospective immunity to any company that spies on its customers. Some of the highlights of S. 2248:

* Just like the Protect America Act, the Administration / Rockefeller bill allows the Attorney General and Director of National Intelligence to issue year long orders for surveillance without any prior court review, as long as one participant in the conversation is foreign. As a result, the courts would not operate as a check on governmental access to our information.

* S. 2248 allows surveillance orders that do not even specify who is going to be listened to or what facilities the government is going to tap into, authorizing dragnets that can sweep up Americans’ communications just as long as a specific, known US person isn’t the “target.”

* S. 2248 allows the government to keep, use and disseminate any US person’s information collected under this new warrantless dragnet. The Administration / Rockefeller bill does not contain any statutory limit on how Americans’ phone calls and emails can be used, nor does it require that the information ever be destroyed, permitting the government to datamine or otherwise abuse it.

* S. 2248 permits the Attorney General to single handedly kill all pending and future consumer protection cases brought in either state or federal court that seek to hold the telecoms accountable for illegally handing our information over to the government. This authority is unlimited and would even end states’ utility commission investigations or suits that only seek to stop the companies from spying on us in the future.

* S. 2248 is subject to a six year sunset, on December 31, 2013, putting the next mandatory review of this law past two future elections.

what?

selise @ 17

bg @ 12

I happened to notice an article last week that said 875,000 names are on the travel watch list now. The extra scrutiny is “focused” on 875,000??? This is absurd.

There is no way the TSA (aka: Thousands Standing Around) can do anything meaningful with 875,000 and growing on a list.

How do 875K people get on this list? From unscrupulous spying and imaginary terra, terra, terra.

and, i think, an additional 20,000 added each month. (did i hear that in a congressional committee hearing?)

Just for reference J. Edgar Hoover and Atty General A. Mitchell Palmer only had cards on 200,000 individuals during the 1917-1921 “Red Scare” after WWI.

NZ Expat, now in KS @ 64

Just called Brownback’s office. He supports Mukasey unequivocally, but opposes waterboarding and says that Mukasey found it morally repugnant. I said, “but not illegal?” “Of course, it can’t be illegal because then we would have to arrest the armed service personnel that does it, even for training.”
Sigh. Not the brightest bulbs, but then the big money doesn’t want the bright bulbs in Congress, does it?

Just following in the time honoured steps of “Sockless” J. Simpson, also from the great state of K…

He’s right on Mukasey, needless to say, but when did Greenwald become such a shrill, sanctimonious bore?