Login HereJohn Edwards:
In Washington today, telecom lobbyists have launched a full-court press to win retroactive immunity for their illegal eavesdropping on American citizens. Granting retroactive immunity will let corporate law-breakers off the hook and hamstring efforts to learn the truth about Bush's illegal spying program.
"It's time for Senate Democrats to show a little backbone and stand up to George W. Bush and the corporate lobbyists. They should do everything in their power -- including joining Senator Dodd's efforts to filibuster this legislation -- to stop retroactive immunity. The Constitution should not be for sale at any price."
Well...yes. And that includes candidates, you know, leaving the campaign trail to do their jobs. Which Obama and Clinton can -- and should -- do. South Carolina is an hour and a half plane ride away.
Get thee to DC and filibuster, Senators.
Spotlight
Support this site!
Keep
up with news
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
RSS/XML Feed
zzzzz
zzzzzz
zzzzzzz
Everyone is still asleep?
I think there is no stronger, more impressive form of leadership than a noncommittal statement, and I would expect nothing less from our future president, Barackhillary Obamaclinton.
What is more important? Their jobs or our country?
((((( Jane )))))
… hope you’re in the pink of health …
I missed the show, is Edwards going to DC to show support?
Nice.
I like Edwards.
Clinton and Obama might show up in Davos…but DC, come on.
Dang, a hat trick…! ;-)
I don’t know what to say. I am still stunned that Leahy has joined Reid in trying to hurry the FISA thing through.
Clinton and Obama are against immunity for the telecoms just as much as Harry Reid.
GnomeDP!
Well … look what the cat dragged in ! *g*
Compare Edwards and Dodd: to Obama and Bill and Hillary Clinton.
The hell you say …
Come on, would you choose your Constitutional duty over Swiss chocolate?
Yeah … sizzle sells over substance …
Heh! What’s good for the goose… eh? I’ve been net-less for the past week… 8-(
Hey back at you! I was thinking about you the other day, wondering if you’d found more good local history to study.
Great line.
What does the DLC have to say?
Leahy has really disabused me of any notions I had of him being a man of that stern Yankee cloth, a descendant of Ethan Allen’s Green Mountain Boys, etc, etc…
Only if it was super good dark chocolate.
Am I wrong, or could Reid have simply thrown up his hands and said, “Alas, I am helpless before the sacred power of Teh Hold. I’d really love to help you fellas out with destroying the concept of accountability before the law, but that mean ol’ Mr. Dodd won’t let me. I guess you’ll just have to grit your teeth and vote for the Judiciary version, because that’s the only one he’ll let through.”?
Has Leahy lost his spine? What’s been going on while I was away?
I had hoped Edwards would be stronger.
Glad to hear you’re alright though …
What caused your netlessness, CTuttle? We’ve missed you!
Dick Cheney controls Harry Reid!
Leahy lost me when he endorsed Obama.
No..he doesn’t have the votes but he doesn’t have to be so damned helpful.
The more I think about it, the more I think shooting Whittington (who is *also* named Harry, IIRC) in the face was not an accident; more of a message.
“That’s right, I’m one crazy mofo! If I’ll shoot my own friend in the face, just think what I might do to *you*.”
Most definitely… getting over the withdrawals, I was shaking pretty bad there for a spell… *g*
Digg this post!
Yeah, that’s what pisses me off. He’s not getting steamrolled; he’s actively *facilitating*.
Each day I awaken with the thought we are being led by Nancy and Reid. And soon maybe, the likes of Hillary or Obama. Or perhaps both. Depressing.
Computer probs…
That’s a pretty tepid statement from Edwards. It’s not just retroactive immunity, it’s also prospective immunity…and allowing warrantless surveillance by Executive fiat.
I was hoping he would also avoid the easy response that he would continue campaigning while Obama and Clinton were involved in supporting Dodd. He should have offered to suspend his campaigning in the time they were filibustering.
Clinton lost me when she voted with Bush to attack Iraq.
it seems he recieved our message but he was not nearly as persuasive as I imagined he would be
he is limiting the scope of the illegal spying to the bush administration but that is not the only place the scope of spying lands
these telcoms were able to participate, they were also able to gather the information that we need to protect, they were also allowed to gather our valuable information, data we have acquired over our entire lifetime, this administration and their corporate accplices have been allowed to aquire
information worth billions and billions of dollars, not to mention the giving these criminals the data they might use to blackmail our lawmakers
HEY…PELOSI…HAVE YOU BEEN BLACKMAILED?
why else would she allow these criminals to run free?
edwards was at best, heard on the issue
but that’s all
That’s my understanding. Reid had lots of options. He could have respected the hold. He could have put forward the SJC version as the base bill. He could force the Republicans to mount real filibusters. His power to affect the Senate’s agenda was evident in how he was able to pull the FISA bill at a moment’s notice in December.
And Obama lost me when he became a rock star.
He would have been heard a little more widely if he had actually said something about it when he was on TV tonight. Twice.
A lttle while ago, somebody mentioned that as a former senator, Edwards can, like, still go there and hang out. Shouldn’t he be doin’ that? Jeez. If a former Senator can show up, no reason why BO & HRC can’t. I mean, that’s why he’s in this thing - to keep pressure on them. Force them to do good stuff they wouldn’t otherwiswe dram of doin.’ Could he do that most effectively if he took a trip to DC himself?
I agreed with Dodd’s assertion that he wouldn’t be standing there if it had occurred only a short time after 911, but, enough is enough, already…
Yes. And if Hillary and Obama don’t show up, then they’ve shown that they don’t have the leadership qualities and courage we need in a president. And if they show up after/because Edwards shows up, then they’re followers.
If we are waiting for Mr. Reid and Ms. Pelosi to behave like Democrats, we’ll be waiting ’til the cows come home.
Yeah. My understanding too that Reid had options but doesn’t wanna do shit. Bum.
Why didn’t you include Clinton’s other head in this–Bill? Remember him?
Two Heads…
Has it occurred to anyone complaining about Senator Clinton and Obama not coming off the trail right before Feb. 5 that His Bully Pulpitness himself has been mum on FISA. Cats certainly don’t have his tongue though. He’s been bopping all over South Carolina trying to attack the press/Obama.
Bill Clinton has had as much to say on FISA as the mute Chelsea Clinton who trots around saying nothing.
I don’t see how leaving the campaign trail is going to get the docile democrats to help with the 60 vote dilemma except to add 2 more votes to the 60 margin needed.
60 votes to invoke cloture–they have them.
60 votes to add an amendment besides Feinstein’s absurd amendment having the FISA court decide what constitutes Comco and Telcom law breaking when we have a Court system in place in 94 federal districts to do just that is the work of someone who is bizarrely naive and not a lawyer–that’d be Senatuh Difi and her two cronies Carden and Nelson.
Feinstein’s Absurd Exclusivity Amendment Made in Senate today
The FISA Court, for the record has been the toothless overseer of warantless wiretapping since 1978–and it has denied five warants out of 18761 warrants which were granted through the end of 2004. The record is worse 3 years later, but we don’t know how bad.
The impression here is that Obama and Clinton have already shown a lack of leadership qualities.
I had high hopes for Edwards. I hope we have not heard the last from him on FISA.
Reid and Pelosi are shameful.
Hi, all
I’ve been away from the toobz this afternoon. When/where was this statement of Edwards’ made? I’m assuming it’s from today. Is there a link? Something?
Seems like the usual amount of “sourcing” would be appropriate here.
EPUd from downstairs: Look out world! Jane’s on the warpath! Still got the swear jar handy, Suzanne?
FunnyDiva
Harry Reid runs the Senate, it’s the Majority Leader’s playground. With two bills reported out of separate committees, he could have chosen either one. He chose the Immunity For Lawbreakers Bill that Jello Jay reported out. Then he ignored Dodd’s hold while respecting the holds of GOPs on other issues.
He is actively enabling the lawbreaking of the Bush Administration. What does Dick Cheney have on Harry Reid, his family, friends, associates, or loved ones? What?
But all the while, he keeps saying that no-one is more opposed to telecom immunity than he is, but he has to follow established procedure and do everything by the book.
I can sort of give him a pass on using the bad bill as a starting point, because as I understand it, that *is* the standard procedure (he does have the prerogative to deviate from that - the Republicans would scream bloody murder, but who cares, and they’d do it themselves in a heartbeat), but I can’t give him a pass on ignoring the hold and enforcing the filibuster, when he refused to do *either* when they were employed by Republicans.
Awful, just awful. I wish there was some way we could pick our own damn party leadership.
ooohhhh…tastey, yum
Ya think?
Forgiveness by repentance for Edwards? I think he really did change after 04-05..for some reason Russ Feingold isn’t buying it and I am not sure why.
There we disagree, OKK. I consider them shameless.
Dodd should be the Senate Majority Leader… I’m mixed on who should replace Ms. Pelosi… Waxman…? Heh, Maxine Waters…? ;-)
When did Leahy have a spine? He has held some hearings, asked a few good questions, shown some indignation, but seriously what has he done? If you go back to the Roberts nomination, he told Roberts that he didn’t know if Roberts would respect precedent as he said because he had been so dodgy on the issues and then said that he would vote for Roberts anywhere. By failing to oppose Roberts, Leahy set the stage for Alito’s confirmation.
My take on Leahy is that he is way too comfortable and insulated from the effects of his decisions. It’s why he gets on so well with Snarlin’ Arlen. They both are more comfortable talking than actually doing anything.
Second that, on Leahy.
pelosi is one of three things;
1) being blackmailed after been spyed on by the nsa
2) being threatened in some shape or form, for instance, the security of the our country might be in the ballance from one of these threats, sort of like;
“you know, I could create a catastrophy, declare martial law and end the impeachment and remain president for life”
or
3) in love with bush and doing a lewinsky
Oops, forgot the follow-up on the bad-bill-as-the-starting-point: *If* Reid promised to honor Dodd’s hold, then it would be Intelligence version or nothing, and that would give him the leverage to either get the good version passed, or just let the bad one expire.
But one of the requirements here is sufficient nerve and spine to stand firm while the Republicans shriek that the expiration of PAA will leave us wide open to terrorist attack, and that we can’t protect the country without telecom immunity. And Harry has less spine than an inchworm.
#4 She just has no integrity at all.
I’m not a good speller. ;0)
I’m not sure who it was last night that kept posting pictures (and possibly videos) of her and Dubya making goo-goo eyes at each other. It was *horrible*.
Lots of intimate shops in the Tenderloin.
According to a post by Tim Tagaris (Dodd’s former internet campaign chief) over at Open Left, Dodd’s potential filibuster is causing him major problems among his senate colleagues:
This might be a stronger statement from Edwards than it would first appear, given how the politics of the Senate Dem. caucus seems to be going against Dodd and Feingold.
Well, we do know that the SF branch of ATT was tapped… ;-)
Movie time with Lahoma.
Fight on good and dear people.
L and okk
me too.
It is why I have decided to refer to them as Republicans from here on out. They are archetypal DINOs. Calling them Republicans eliminates any mistaken idea they will act as Democrats.
Aloha, OKK and lahoma!
Others also voted with Bush on the Iraq AUF, I recall.
In other words, “We *want* a Majority Leader who won’t oppose the Republicans; we *don’t* want a Majority Leader who will.”
That’s certainly encouraging, I must say.
/Ed Grimley
And Harry has
lessno spinethan an inchworm. Or balls for that matter.They’ve got the Majority Leader they want. No question about that.
Alright Jane, I got your email. I just wrote John Edwards:
Speaking of AT&T, what are the chances that the NSA has all the missing emails from the White House?
There are some things that should not be spoken aloud.
I am sitting here with a copy of the Rules on filibusters and Cloture….With the Thugs and the Bush Dogs he doesn’t have the votes to stop it. What pisses me off is he could play chicken and make them spend weeks grinding it out hour by hour vote by vote. (BTW there really is no special thing called a “hold”) The Thug “holds” are “honored” because he doesn’t have the votes to bring the bill to the floor.
Like this:
http://www.dahothouse.com/media/friends.jpg
Bleurgh!
Poi-fect… pictures don’t lie…! ;-)
The other Democrats in question:
Edwards apologized for his vote some time ago. Clinton voted for the AUMF, supported the war until June 2006, and has steadfastly refused to apologize for her AUMF vote (or her long support of the war).
passing telecom immunity has nothing to do with democrats being spineless. it has EVERYTHING to do with democrats being corrupt - just like their republican brethren.
.
I think I preferred the Giuliani clown shoes image … *g*
You know! This off-the-cuff response to the FISA “Fix-It” temporary measure in August by Edwards was a lot more powerful than his remarks above.
Edwards on FISA Fix August 2007
His focus only on retroactive immunity rather than the provisions in the same bill about allowing the AG and Director of Intelligence to waive FISA scutiny, granting PROSPECTIVE immunity, or basket warrants…seems so lawyerly that it’s almost worrisome.
With a complicit Media, the netroots are really the only ones that are up to speed on this issue. See the way they have planned to get telco immunity thru for the lobbyists against the best interests of the country?
More telling than the Edwards apology was when Kerry talked about strong arming Edwards to vote against his own instincts, in favor of AUMF …
It should be pretty clear by now that other than Dodd, no one in the Senate really gives a crap about telecom immunity right now. They want a bill and they want to avoid a veto fight.
Hi folks…
I was thinking that if Obama/Clinton decide not to show up that Edwards could certainly use that fact to his advantage…
That would be an effective strategy for Edwards….
That is probably a much more accurate diagnosis; and probably applies to most other examples of apparent cowardice.
(Bit hard to explain the refusal to vote for contempt citations that way, tho)
Kerry told John that all the cool kids were going to vote for it.
We don’t know if they intentionally destroyed emails, and it’s hard to believe that they were so stupid with the IT personnel they had access to that they mistakenly destroyed emails and backups, and I suspect they have them but are simply hiding them and lying about them.
On the emails, you should definitely check out the EW tab for the last few days, because Marcy has done splendid work in analyzing this along with her commenters.
Reid has great discretion over what gets to the Senate floor, when it gets there, and how it is taken up. So what is happening to the Intel version of the FISA bill is all the result of what he wanted. This is another example of an engineered vote where most Democrats including Reid can vote against it while knowing that it will pass.
… there was a bit more to it than that …
It’s a kangaroo senate.
That is why it will be interesting to see were MSM vs WJC goes. He is starting to call bullshit on the media and they don’t like it. It is turning into a knife fight.
Fucking Red Sox going to put a corporate (EMC) logo on their uniform for pre-season and regular season games in Japan.
Glad they are playing in Japan and wish they would leave the sponsers off the uniforms.
Only a small percentage of voters in the netroots will understand how Reid f*cked us. Will we be enough to unseat him?
I’ve been keeping up with EW religiously. My question was more aimed at, even though the emails are missing from the servers, they may have been intercepted along the way courtesy of AT&T.
Perhaps ATT still has the emails in their possession it actually would be considerable collateral….
PR guy talking about how its a “historic moment”.
I consider it to be more like the Duma in the old USSR. Largely (completely?) ceremonial.
“Can someone explain to me how “bipartisan” ever means anything but giving the wingnuts what they want so they don’t pitch a bitch in the corner?”
LOL Jane. sad but true.
The Dems are afraid of getting ‘Bitch Slapped’ again. They would all benefit from a 12 step Repub-anon meeting or two. (or three, or 100. actually it’s a life long process.)
That’s what I don’t get. So what if Bush vetoes it? It just shows that Bush is more interested in protecting himself, lawbreaking telecoms, and his corrupt cronies. Bush is deeply unpopular. Most Americans disagree with him on the FISA bill. And he is the worst President in our history.
Democrats should be salivating over an opportunity to do the right thing and expose Bush for the corrupt hack he is. Instead they run away.
If AT&T has the smoking guns on other things the administration is hiding, that would be powerful persuasion for retroactive immunity.
The Senate will not stop retroactive immunity for the elecoms, no matter what we do. They will not give Sibel Edmonds a chance to testify fully about what she knows under oath, no matter what we do. The Democrats who come in in 2008 will not prosecute any Bushistas for their war crimes, no matter what we do.
Other than that, I feel fairly pessimistic today.
Bingo…
OMG! Of course, the telecoms have the goods on everyone. Bush, Cheney, Reid, Pelosi, etc.
Perhaps ATT still has the emails in their possession it actually would be considerable collateral….
—
More likely they exist but are “sealed” - but who knows (Congress, Party, People, Court, Committie, Presidential Library?) that they exist but are a secret secret. If they are sealed then it needs to be known and for how long. And now it appears who ensures total archiving?
The Boston Globe did a question survey of the candidates on Presidential Powers, etc:
Candidates on executive power: a full spectrum
They assess use of signing statements
By Charlie Savage December 22, 2007
http://www.boston.com/news/nat.....stionnaire
If AT&T has the smoking guns on other things the administration is hiding, that would be powerful persuasion for retroactive immunity.
—
Or have an Executive and Corporation head pleading the 5th.
Hey SteveAR
The Thug “holds” are “honored” because he doesn’t have the votes to bring the bill to the floor.
I don’t get that. Even if there weren’t these Repug holds, the bills wouldn’t go anywhere anyway?
Well this is by no means the first time Reid has done this so I think the message is spreading. Besides we don’t need to go into the details, just keep repeating: Reid sold out again.
He’s weak and he makes the Democrats look weak. I think most Americans have already picked up on that.
Yes. This is true. Bill has been calling them out. Bill says deficit spending (thet republicans said doesn’t matter) really does matter. I liked that.
One of the main tactics the Pukes use is volume,the instant they perceive something is not going their way they start shrieking like Banshees.
Newt Gingrich is real good at that.
Ever see a Dem do that, ever?
One of the reasons (of many) why the Dems are perceived (rightly so) of being timid and weak.
We need some people on our side to get up and start screeching like they have been stuck on every one of these bullshit fights and even out the noise to counter act the effect.
Well on the bright side we could be hit by a comet.
Right. No comet yet.
Hi. My name’s Harry…
Hi Harry!!!!
….. and I’m a spineless wuss.
That’s a pretty tepid statement from Edwards. It’s not just retroactive immunity, it’s also prospective immunity…and allowing warrantless surveillance by Executive fiat.
I was hoping he would also avoid the easy response that he would continue campaigning while Obama and Clinton were involved in supporting Dodd. He should have offered to suspend his campaigning in the time they were filibustering.
—
I don’t think his Prez run could sustain a hunger strike with a few days to SC primary - and all the congress waiting to scamble off to Davos for mortgage bond wrapped cigars and claps on the back.
Screamers.
“Why are Democrats so crazy/angry/full of hate?”
So true but what I was thinking was that who would have the easiest access to these emails or at least a copy of them on their servers…
& whose best interest would it serve?….
Good point, they do that. Give them the list.
Notice no one says that about Republicans.
(Palm to forehead)
How could I forget?
IOKIYAR
Torricelli? I remember him. Corrupt dipshit. So glad he’s gone. Even if he’s been replaced by someone who makes Fred Thompson look like the life of the party.
The mofos prolly have all our emails (and blog comments). All the better to disappear us. Us = registered Democrats.
Has anybody ever photographed Reid and Lieberman together? I think it’s one guy changing in the cloakroom.
I know what you mean. Sometimes it just feels hopeless. Other times, you just want to kick ass.
Democrats are angry. They are angry they might not get to go to Davos.
I think it’s clear long term that we won’t move the country towards progressive values until we primary their asses out of there.
Yeah, I used primary as a verb. I like it. :)
Well, the Repugs have def. already picked up on that. Reid isn’t being pushed in a corner by the Rs. He just stands in the corner, asking for them to pummel him
One of the main tactics the Pukes use is volume,the instant they perceive something is not going their way they start shrieking like Banshees.
—
This is correct, its easy to have freedom of speech when you can operate with a mega phone (or two - one for CBS and one for FOX) it does not matter if pips are squeeking on 100’s of tiny soap boxes. In fact its even tough to find a truthie-one you can believe since the drop off from the mega phones used to be very vast. But some small choices can be great ones, hope the Dems don’t keep burning all the stock market “shorts” people took out that the Constitution was nice. FDL should have more trials to follow by now.
The bad thing is that you are probably right…
The good thing (?) is that we’re not considered a threat….
Its very possible to tape one’s jowls back temporarily.
Come on now BFL, you’re from NJ, and you should know all the politcians here are as corrupt as any in the world.
This is a lot harder to do than it sounds with the toe tapping Larry Craig on the prowl.
I think that would be Bill and Hillary. Who else is?
Hey. Harry’s a fighter. He’s doin’ a rope-a-dope, doncha know?
Rope a dope? Well I agree with half of that.
Harry Reid is pulling the sorry old sad sack while he thrusts his hands out to the telecoms. I don’t think it fools anyone these days. And we can all thank DiFi for this wonderful moment. They all want the telecoms money, our democracy be damned. And most of all, they want to avoid the spotlight- the obvious sell-out for a few bucks. They know their buddies in the media will co-operate, and the only ones complaining are us lost souls on the internet. Thats why they are upset at Dodd- because he is bringing publicity to their obvious corruption.
Its all very pathetic. And who now have become the biggest recipients of telecom cash? It would make Tom Delay proud. One shakedown machine gets replaced by another. Thats why they wanted a majority.
Glenn Greenwald today:
prediction! the corporate DLC candidates for the (D) nomination will squirrelishly proclaim support for Dodd and his efforts, but not actually help in any meaningful way … easy call, right?
then, the Progressive, Left, Netroots or what have you will roll over and take this latest betrayal and demand total fealty to the (D) Party fer the most Important Election in our lifetimes, ever, in Nov 2008.
Once again proving that there is nothing a politician with a (D) after their name can do to alienate the (D) captured “left”.
It’s a lot like stockpiling dry powder.
I think the Democrats have accumulated enough dry powder to either blow up Iran or dust the bottoms of every baby on Earth seven times over.
Did you say Harry’s a dope-a-rope?….
And they get lots of attention for it too.
I really hate having to endorse acting like a fucking three year old to get attention but I see it works.
Too bad that.
Correct but since the Senate would grind to a halt without unanimous consents, the “hold” notifies the majority leader that a Senator will object…The majority leader then looks at the votes, sees a looser and “honors” the hold. If he didn’t honor the hold, he would ask for a motion to proceed, which is debatable and he doesn’t have the votes, etc.
No, you are right. I was looking at that and some other posts. It would make sense, but they would know that Bush would have to leave them with the bag unless they were so in on it and had FBI working for them which is not possible (since the emails would be investigated and even a good IT criminal would be caught; and any special forces hacker in the Executive system would be egregious). So is the argument that we can’t have the President order something of a person and then have that person (or “corporation”) stuck holding the bag, a total cover-up hiding things, or that if the person goes down for a crime so must the Executive who ordered it.
You know what? I don’t understand why everyone our team is pissed off about Reid and Pelosi acting like wimps, and at the same time bellyaching about Bill and Hillary standing up. What gives?
I never denied that Clinton supported the Iraq AUF, Hugh.
Kiddo said that Clinton lost him WHEN she voted for it. Edwards, who Kiddo supports, also voted for it. Edwards changed his position on the IAUF sometime in 2006, I recall. That was just as he was about to launch his Presidential campaign. He advocated that he and John Kerry not renege on their votes authorizing the war in the 2004 campaign (at a time when Kerry was, in fact, considering it). His logic was that they attack Bush-Cheney on the “conduct of the war”.
That was long after the fact that there were no WMD’s and that al Qaida had nothing to do with Iraq was already exposed.
The progressive community opposed this war from BEFORE it began, through the time when it was being whooped up as a great victory and proof of the “Rumsfeld strategy”. Edwards apologizes only well after the war begins to stink like an infected sore, and he blames the Bush Administration for deceiving him by offering false information when he served in the Intelligence Committee. Hillary Clinton has used the same excuse for her vote saying “If I had known that then, we wouldn’t be in Iraq now.”
BOTH Edwards and Clinton blame the Bush Administration for their votes, although both admit that they didn’t read the body of the NIE that qualified all the Intelligence statements that were made as assertions in the Summary. Both Edwards and Clinton trusted Bush, Cheney and their motley crew of official spokesmen. These are the lawyers who are gonna stand up to the military-industrial complex and A*P*C?
A sheet of tissue paper separate Clinton and Edwards on most issues when it comes down to reality and not rhetoric, but most people it seems can’t tell the facade from the superstructure; the surface from the sheen.
Are they standing up to Republicans or other Democrats?
144:
145:
Wow, what a one-two punch.
You know what? I don’t understand why everyone our team is pissed off about Reid and Pelosi acting like wimps, and at the same time bellyaching about Bill and Hillary standing up. What gives?
—
I do not get it, is there a standing-upGate now?
Well, I mean, I voted for the guy. But that was a neat stunt they pulled to replace him on the ballot even after it was too late to do it. Hee hee.
But yeah. Torch always rubbed me the wrong way, though. I think I had a bigger problem with him being a dipshit that being corrupt. Tom Kean is probably one of the cleaner people we’ve turned out. Maybe Pete Rodino. As long as Rodino was in Congress he remained a conummate ward-healing hack. But I don’t think corrupt. Other than those 2 — corrupt at every level. You can probbaly think of some. maybe Fenwick. Notice that most of these people are dead. I liked Bradley, too.
The specter this moves into, is what were the quid pro quos that the Telco/Comco industry had with the White House, along with Jello Jay, and Bond, Addington and his staff, and Cheney. This speculation is making the rounds of the media/blogs and I’m sure it will unfold. I wish I had the contacts to do a book on this.
One of the key tools for ferreting this information out, would be discovery in cases against these companies, which the Bush administration, DOJ, and DNI are derailing using the State Secrets argument and this pathetic Congress which is doing everything it can to grant complete immunity.
I’m sure everyone remembers that the House bill made sure to deny immunity–and we’re talking about two groups that should not get immunity here–the Administration, and the companies.
There will certainly be a Joint House-Senate conference committee to hash out this bill, but given the track record of past conference committees and Gangs of 14 type secret meetings, I’m not at all confident anything good will emerge at that point.
Bush is also determined to veto anything that is less than what he wants, which makes getting a 2/3 majority to overcome his veto all the more essential.
Reid threw a helluva road block in torpedoing the SJC’s version of the bill, and he did it deliberately. He and Pelosi are the worst possible person for their job, which is why of course, they have them.
What do you think all this bulldada is about? It’s not really about stopping the FISA Reform Act. It’s political theater unless Edwards actually backed it with substance…offered to suspend campaigning while the other two supported Dodd.
Not a hint in his statement that he offered to do so.
Um, it depends on what you’re standing up for.
Well, I frankly don’t recall seeing Bill Clinton standing up to George W. Bush.
I see him flying around the world with his father playing awe shucks to Poppy Bush.
Bill Clinton said he’d use Poppy as a goodwill ambassador.
It seems Bill is unwilling to stand up to the Bush family but doesn’t mind getting muddy with Democrats.
-G
So the argument is that the Kerry team leaked the blame for lossing on….John Edwards?
I doubt it.
LOL.
Are you saying that those of us who support Edwards are dumb?
Another simple answer… Why would Obama and/or Hill tear themselves away from SC, tomorrow…?
Agreed..There is a lot of “projection” of a person’s own views onto a candidate that aren’t supported by the facts. Russ Feingold called it right about Edwards pre-’06..I am not sure why Russ seems so pissed off at Edwards now..there must be a back story.
It might not be a bad idea, Mr. Edwards goes to Washington.
They plan on restocking Al Qa Qa.
-G
But in the case of Dodd/FISA, he isn’t “honoring” the hold because he doesn’t have to? Is that it? He has the votes he needs?
So one hand washes the other and…
Voila! Retroactive immunity—-
Very bad…
It is Obama and Clintons current record and spoken word that are closest together (on policy, not on attacks - those are where they do their opposites
Who is going to fix FISA? I mean who is going to really dig in and provide some transparency and accountability for what really happened? There was a major failure here.
I don’t think it’s the Clintons. Not after Bill is cashing in his Presidency for another cool $20 mil, again . . . as Hillary Clinton tries to move them back into the White House no less. They’ll be billionaires from our votes by the time they are done with us.
This is getting disgusting. Okay we know that the Clintons say Bill is just like any old spouse campaigning for their mate. And they are right of course, except that he was the President of the United States!
Now we learn that Clinton is raking in another $20 mil from a multi-billionaire friend for admittedly throwing around his Commander-in-Chief influence to benefit some investment fund. Of course Bill won’t disclose the details of his investment, just like he and Hillary won’t disclose the details of their $500 million dollar “charity” which employed some of their key campaign staffers and to which their campaign contributors have donated tens of millions of dollars. Just like Hillary won’t disclose the official records of her experience as First Lady which she says makes her more qualified than the other candidates. How can they stand for transparency when they obfuscate to mask their greed??
I am sick of this. It’s disgusting. The Clintons have cashed out the Presidency to the tune of Dick Cheney money. When is America going to call them on this?? This is not leadership. It’s greed. Pure and simple. And it’s part of a pattern of smarmy questionable gains - see them in Hillary’s bio on Wikipedia, including the amazing $100,000 she made in 10 months on a $1,000 investment, the $1 million blind trust when Bill took office in 1993 that the Clintons rapidly turned into a whopping $23 million.
If they were simply investors, I would have no problem with these gains. It’s capitalism baby. But that’s not what they ran on. That’s not what they told us. Surprise - another lie! Their platform was not to lead our Nation to get the big bucks. They did not run to not lead our Democratic Party - where have you been Bill for anyone but yourself over the past 7 years?? It’s to the point where even the Democratic Party elders have gone public to tell Bill to grow up.
It’s time to end this. It’s time to end the Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton cycle. I am a Democrat. A staunch Democrat. But I am for them because I think they are more moral and have better values. If it’s Hillary versus McCain I just don’t know. I was having doubts before Bill did the pile on Obama and cashed out his Presidency for this additional $20 mil, and now I really don’t know . . . This is the kind of stuff that turns my stomach.
Obama is worth just over a million. This Rezko stuff is a tiny droplet in the ocean compared to the massive Clinton greed and scandals. Obama has run a clean campaign. He’s been far ahead on POLICY - he was against the Iraq war from the start and he didn’t fall for the patently idiotic Bush bill to declare Iran’s military to be “terrorists” (Clinton lost my respect when she voted for that one, unbelievably, just last Fall). Clinton is playing catchup to Obama on policy, whether it’s her bailout plan or saying we should be more aggressive in going after bin Ladin. Clinton is a bonfire wherever she goes. She will never unify America - she can’t even unify her party. She will burn us up. And without unity there can be no real change, only another leg in the Bush-Clinton saga.
http://online.wsj.com/article/.....lenews_wsj
http://articles.moneycentral.m.....spx?page=1
I support Edwards. I’m dumb as dogshit. That’s why I dig Dana so much.
Um, it depends on what you’re standing up for.
–
So what is the issue they are standing up for. Media fairness?
I’m really talking about standing up to the press machine. As Bill did with Chris Matthews. Now it seems as if he’s being villified for standing up to the nonsense machine.
I want to kick ass. But I keep asking myself “Why are all these lefty blogs so fucking absorbed in the presidential contest, when we’re far more effective in helping get the US House to be TRULY progressive?”
I am not sure I understand the question but once the bills come out of committee they go onto the Senate calender. The majority leader has a lot of power about what comes up and when. Most of the senate business is worked out behind the scenes. I assume that Miss. McConnell told Reid that if he didn’t bring the bill to the floor, McConnell would introduce a motion to proceed.
Here’s an article about Edward’s reversal from his position in 2004.John Edwards’ Changing Tune
They don’t blame Edwards for losing the election, because the bulk of the public was still pro-invasion in 2004. It would have taken a lot of courage for Kerry to have made a “The war was wrong from the beginning” stance. I think Edwards advised Kerry to hedge their bets.
Didn’t Bill stand up to Fox Noise a couple of years ago. Poked his finger right at the interviewer.
This should be tattooed backwards on the forehead of every Democratic politician.
Kerry spoke about this in a Time Magazine interview … he pressured Edwards to vote Aye when John’s instinct was to vote Nay.
I’ve said this before. Know why I support Edwards. I started supporting him te very same day Kerry conceded. Wsan’t even a candidate then. Supported him for one reason. Because I thought he could win. I still think that. But having supported Edwards, nobody’s ever came along and convinced me he/she was better. That’s why I support Edwards. Also, I just always got the feeling that his apologizing for his Iraq vote was sincere. I believed it was part of clearing the deck for a WH run. But i still think he means it.
I don’t like John Kerry. He gives me the willies.
Actually I put up the list of Democrats who voted for the AUMF as a point of information.
John Edwards left the Senate in 2004. He apologized for his AUMF vote in an op-ed in the WaPo in the fall of 2005.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....00892.html
Basically Clinton continued to vote for the war in the Senate for a year and a half after Edwards was gone and Edwards much more forthrighly said he was wrong in his vote before Clinton’s much weaker statement. So yes, there is more than a little difference between their histories on Iraq.
Duck Soup
Respectfully disagree on two points
First - Nothing the Clintons have profited from matches the scal of BushCo.
Not only are they not playing the same field, it ain’t even the same league.
Obama, plays the same league, but needs a few years to catch up.
Hil’s futures flyer back in the day is roughly equivilent to the Rezco land deal.
One thing I like about Edwards is that, while I have some ambivilent feelings about ambulence chasers, he was a damn good one. And once he accumulated a pile (and twice that pile for his clients) he decided to do something worthwhile with the economic freedom. I can respect that path.
Clintons and Obama are all building their retirement plans during and after holding public office. No matter how you look at it there will be at least the sugggestion of impropriety.
Really … he has more than one Willy ?!! *g*
they don’t have to leave the campaign trail, they can strenuously and convincingly act like the issue matters, use their national platform to explain why it matters to the people, use it in context with all the other unconstitutional, criminal tendencies of the Bush cabal, it would be a win win, right?
but actually, they are not about ‘change’ at all, and stepping up to strongly on this might offend the wrong people, and so they will triangulate past it.
but my main point was, they could vote for immunity, and still Left Netrootsia or what have you will never abandon its reflexive support for the magickal (D) suffix.
Yes, that’s what I’m talking about.
I voted for Nader… ;-)
Apparently some people want to set up a situation where they can run to Jane and accuse me of insulting others on the site. I’m not going to fall for that. I’ll simply say that I really, really wish that people who support Edwards were a bit more critical of their candidates activities.
For one thing, if he were nominated those things would assuredly be raised against him. And indeed, the very fact that he hasn’t been a front-runner has led to these things not being examined by the MSM to any great extent.
re the ATT/NSA splitters -
IIRC they were forst exposed by a local ATT employee here in SF. (see sfgate for details). Thee ATT employee revealed (IIRC) the splitters basically mirrored ALL fiber-optic signals and sent the “copy stream” on to secure NSA facilities in the ATT switching hub (my term).
Wired took up the story in depth. IIRC the splitters are not unique to SF: they are installed throughout the US comm network.
All the signals from our digital comms (phone, email, net, fax, text) are copied off to NSA - that’s what the splitters are for.
While the tech details may be new (and the omnirecording) the concept is not.
The US/UK/Aussies have been spying on one another’s comm traffic for years that way each “security service” could technically obey national wiretap/spy laws - and just let their counterpart spy for them on their own citizens. So UK sppoks listen to US/Aus/NZ traffic, US spooks listen to UK/Aus/NZ traffic, Aussie spooks listen to US/UK/NZ traffic, NZ spooks listen to UK/Aus/Us traffic…
and each “service” hands over the collected data to their colleagues.
Kinda like the digital secret policemen’s ball on a global scale.
[note: all the blackberry trafic is effectively routed through Canada - the NSA can grab all transanational traffic - s the NSA already has all the WH Blackberry sigint.
or had it at one time…]
This program became popularly known as Echelon (useful search term still) though that may not be the the most accurate name in spook world.
The European Parliament STOA committee commissioned an extensive report (Appraisal of technologies of political control, IIRC) discussing surveillence, torture, chemical weapons, “non-lethal” weapons (taser, “rubber” bullets, etc) - definitely worth the read/download. Also available here. Summary here.
Here’s what the ATPC sez about the Echelon-era electronic surveillance networks:
Stockholm Syndrome? I don’t know.
I sure do see a lot of Dems repeating Rush talking points about the Clintons.
I really don’t think this FISA situation revolves exclusively around Edwards say so.
If Edwards puts forth more effort regarding protecting the rights of ordinary citizens by simply being a guest to the proceedings and stating his beliefs that it would help whole issue of Constitutionality regarding FISA Protect America Act bill S.2248 and the so-called “surveillance gap” in our favor.
By just doing the right thing it would also in effect assist him in his prez campaign too especially if Obama and Clinton decide not to attend the proceedings….
If I was a consultant I would have Edwards there front and center at this potential (fingers crossed) FISA filibuster….
Here’s an article about Edward’s reversal from his position in 2004.John Edwards’ Changing Tune
Anonymous sources, paraphrasing Edwards (which is always so accurate), in a Kerry hometown paper, not much of a reliable source of information.
I have no intention of complaining about you. You, of course, may say anything you like. I was just asking a question about what you “seemed” to be saying.
EXACTLY.
boing boing back one-and-a-half somersaults, tuck position
g’evening all
((((( Suz )))))
Yeeeeeeeee-HAW!
Right. Sorry to be so dense about this. But ya learn somethin’ every day. SWo i guess what I’m getting at is this stuff we hear about “holds” being honored. I think what you’re saying is bills are “held” because they they won’t go anywhwhere. And I asked if the reason FISA was not “held” because there are enough votes to proceed on it (i.e McConnell’s mtn to proceed would be approved)? Again, sorry if I’m putting words in your mouth. But there’s been some anger directed at Reid for not honoring Dodd’s hold. Now, I don’t like Reid, as you mioght have been able to tell. But it seems to me that criticism (about Dodd’s “hold”) is off the mark if there arer enough votes for a motion to proceed to carry.
If I’m wrong about this, fuck it. I won’t be asking again. Thanks for helping me with this.
who moved the forking towels?
Miss Suz!
Since Jon has no writers, we’re seeing what a succinct comedian he truly is …
*no left coast spoilers please*
Not me. I saw Margot do it.
The last time Edwards pushed Congress to take action (remember last May around Memorial Day and the push to have the Dems stand up to Bush on Iraq funding and withdrawal), he got more flak than praise. The two Senators who aren’t doing squat right now are Clinton and Obama.
They would both have one whole day of lost campaigning–Clinton’s not in South Carolina until later this week so that can’t be the excuse. Obama has 2 events in South Carolina tomorrow and one on Friday, and is way ahead in the polls so that can’t be the excuse.
New Thread upstairs—-
Aloha—-
I’ve known abuilance chasers and I don’t see Edwards as being one. far as I know, he handled heavy duty products liability cases and won or settled a bunch of them. I’ve always thought of ambulance chasers as lawyers who get cases into suit then settle them with insurance adjusters.
Hah ! … Margot’s gonna get it …
Moi? Certainly not!
I’m not gonna be critical. Why should I? He’s my guy. There’s plenty of people out there to be critical of the guy. that’s why they call us supporters and not critics. You can be critical all you want. I’ll definitely consider that opin ion like I do any here at FDL. But i’m not gonna criticize my guy.
When the House passed their bill on August 3-4, it was well known by the DNC and Harry Reid and the rest of the Senate, that there was a compressed Primary Schedule crafted by arrogant people in the House and the Senate who wanted their state “me first” before Super Tuesday. It was well known that several Democratic candidates were sitting Senators.
The bed that FISA lies in as far as participation by the remaining candidates was made months ago.
And Again, I see Bill Clinton, the other head, or as Modo calls them, the other part of the “beast with two backs” saying nothing on FISA, and doing nothing about it even though he has the strongest bully pulpit in the world. Bill Clinton is as mum on FISA as his near 30 year old daughter is mum on everything–she of the college history major to $150,000 Hedge Fund career trajectory.
The candidates are fair game. Can we leave the kids out of it?
As far as my understanding of the procedures, that is about right. Reid however is making it too easy.
Eli:
From Ronin (1998) after Gregor nearly shoots a young girl:
DAPPER GENT: Why did you do that?
GREGOR: To make a point. I don’t know her, and I was ready to splatter her brains all over the sidewalk. (giving the Gent a look) I don’t particularly like you, so imagine what I’ll do if you try anything…
Just sent Edwards $100.
After Iowa I was reading a blog and people who were supposedly Obama supporters attacked me, tried to get me kicked off the blog and called me a racist. Clean? I later heard some other people who said they too had been called racist. Clean? Really?
Obama’s policies are tepid DLC and not the powerful medicine John Edwards is offering.
Now we hear Edwards is against retroactive immunity for the telecoms who spied for Bush without a warrant. Where are Obama & Clinton on this issue? Following Edwards no doubt!
any guesses on the price of wiretapping amnesty?
I for one have agonized over these things. It is far from ideal to have to decide whether to support a candidate you feel might not be honest. I don’t look at these candidates and just randomly pick one. I expect you don’t either.
I fear the ‘trial lawyer’ label might be the end of Edwards campaign. But, even worse is the label ‘hypocrite’ senator Russ Feingold plastered on his back. To anyone who has been in politics or watched it closely that smacks me as ridiculous. Everyone knows politicians aren’t completely consistent, not even the best of them. I’d bet you could make Feingold look bad if you wanted to review his voting record.
The absolute worst though, is when people label Edwards a phony, but ignore or dismiss the same charge against Clinton or Obama. This seems to be a double standard.
I see enough dissembling from all of them so that I don’t feel like being fooled into believing one or two are truthful and one or two aren’t. Clearly none is completely clean.
However, once you dismiss that allegation you’re back to reviewing their campaign pledges, policies, speeches and so on. On that I see Edwards clearly ahead because his history of working for the poor and needy is consistent with his campaign and his campaign policies are more Progressive. And, who he has been all his life appeals to me more (for a president) than Hillary “Goldwater Girl” Clinton or Barack “I smoked weed and did inhale cocaine” Obama. YMMV.
I have heard it is not who you know it’s who you blow…who’s your friend.
The attempt to remove telecoms from lawbreaking in retroactive ways is illegal in and of itself. It should not stand in court.
In fact it could be immediately challenged.
Environmental groups, aka ‘eco-terra-ists’ might be able to prove standing just off the pervasiveness of that one phrase.
The existence of such famed eco-terror czars as Teddy Roosevelt hearken back to a day we didn’t spy on people who wanted to preserve national heritage and clean parks.
The fact they spend enough time now fighting invasive measures intended to hinder their own efforts at protecting watershed, woodlands, etc. is yet one side effect of the campaign of the smear game.
NGO should be taking this fight up before courts.
I remember Dean being ostracized for making the communications industry a concern. Consolidation and mergers now being enabled, we’re looking at the ability to remove liability from these same firms.
Saying something to the issue is a starting point, Edwards gains there, but it’s pretty clear the pundit class wants to frame other issues as central to the race. Who can blame them, a stake in the share of the spy money belongs to their bosses still.
We have yet to really see Lou Dobbs wage a campaign against the presumptive Democratic nominee to this point. Which of the big three has the chance of being least compromised in terms of their policy from Dobbs Poppa-populist?
Ideally, Dean can give voice against the immunity bill, and Congress takes it forward, it’s pretty clear the GOP only has ’securiteh’ to run on and the GOP wants to best wring this donor sponge dry once again. A funny side effect of Reid’s revolving review and vote process, but a necessary evil. More than likely some key Democrats like it that way as well…
The best talk-down points:
1)The used FISA before 9-11 and it appears to have been misused
2)The only warrant reviews to never pass happened under Bushco. and that should cause alarm as to what they do with such power to listen in.
3)We gave them record leeway for the item and Bush does not want to continue Reid’s offer at that threshold.
No. 3 is the easiest point to make, tell them we voted to give that authority and they want yet more. The reason why is so the GOP can play the blame card. They always ask for more than we give in hopes of being to blame us if they fumble their obligations.
No more free fumbles.
I don’t see John Edwards as historically working for the poor, he worked for himself, that’s what Americans aspire to. As he became a leader he recognized to take on greater responsibility and leadership is a matter of answering to the needs of others.
Recognizing those two viewpoints is important. You have to be motivated by a path to personal, actualized empowerment and obligated to doing the greater good for service.
It could be well said Barack is the best example of the first example, even more so a claim could be made in Hillary’s instance. Edwards has honored the background of his beginning as well, he had made the most evident embrace of that leadership calling to the greater good. Ask not what the American Presidency can do for you, ask what your Presidency can do for Americans.
(((DING DING DING)))
BRILLIANT
He should not offer, nor actually suspend campaigning for a nano. I don’t know who you are FOR ‘ape, but you don’t seem to find anything to be FOR. So, I’ll ask you straight up. What are you for? I hoping to find some common ground here is all. :-)
I honestly feel that Edwards is fighting for the Constitution. He’s willing to wage a battle and I’m willing to go with that. He, at least, can identify what we are fighting for. If hil and obama sound like him, well they have appropriated his words. Anyway, can go back and see his speeches and meetups with small audiences and large and you’ll find he’s the only one who came out fighting the fight early and consistently. It matters.
So, question asked in spirit of community…… really am looking for some common ground here. :-)
Good on you, Boo!!!!! :D
BINGO
reid and pelosi=quisling
Wouldn’t that be loverly… especially if it was progressive..otherwise businessas usual…skin the workers.
Regrets, cinnamonape, but I call “weasel” on this …
cinnamonape at 189
In response to Twain @ 163
Are you saying that those of us who support Edwards are dumb?
I’ve seen this pattern in your comments before — not exclusively anti-Edwards; just contrarian. Like a knee-jerk reflex. One of the mods slapped my wrists for noticing the cinnamonape comment trend before … so I await that.
Now, on to the issues rather the personalities behind them, what I really find absurd are your assumptions that (a) no one is beating up on Edwards “yet” (?? He’s the Curse of Corporate America. Haven’t you heard? And for that I support Edwards double-time; and (b) the Dark Side is just ignoring him right now; but, never fear, all that lobbyist payola he slurped up (See Clinton and Obama), all those child prostitution rings he set up (See Larry Craig, G.W. Bush, that male prositute from the fake WH Press Corps who did overnights in the White House, et. al), all the bad John Edwards stuff will come out. Any day now.
Don’t hold breath.
Me too to MeDaVinci.
Me loves John Edwards and what he stands for — jobs and health care for the middle-class and working-class and poor Americans. No to the corporate greed of the the drug and insurance and banking industries.
You notice that Edwards is out front of both Hillary and Obama on the message and they’re both stealing it by bits and pieces? Good for them, but better for the Democratic Party and America.
Just sent another 100 bucks to John Edwards to keep the fight alive.
Kirk this is a wonderful post and needs a digg. I use the 1984 term Big Brother to remind people that are rights are being challenged by law enforcement. The FISA court was to be the balance. By weakening it we weaken the US Constitution and the rights so hard won we enjoy under it.
People need to know that CALEA requires all telecoms to have equipment at their HUBs for NSA spy access. I like to think of it like a private spigot of off the water main that Big Brother can turn on whenever the court authorizes. Unfortunately they do what is referred to as data mining meaning as you point out EVERYTHIG is dumped into a memory bank and programs can run this. Who is watching Big Brother…the FISA court..no. That is why every candidate for president both Rs and Ds should support Senator Dodd.
We all owe you for the explanation. It should be reread and studied as it is a violation of our constitutional rights that under Article 6 each congress member and Executive swore to uphold AND defend. This is the line where we determine whether we are a constitutional democrecy or a corporate oligary with a unitary (independent Executive) with no congressional oversight to balance the powers of three branches of goverment envisioned by the framers of our democracy. Freedon or Fascism
to put it bluntly. The argument has been framed instead as “Homeland Securoty”.
Under the 1994 US Congress the CALEA bill was made law:
“The Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) is a United States wiretapping law passed in 1994 (Pub. L. No. 103-414, 108 Stat. 4279). In its own words, the purpose of CALEA is:
To amend title 18, United States Code, to make clear a telecommunications carrier’s duty to cooperate in the interception of communications for Law Enforcement purposes, and for other purposes.
CALEA was intended to preserve the ability of law enforcement agencies to conduct electronic surveillance by requiring that telecommunications carriers and manufacturers of telecommunications equipment modify and design their equipment, facilities, and services to ensure that they have the necessary surveillance capabilities. Common carriers, facilities-based broadband Internet access providers, and providers of interconnected Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) service – all three types of entities are defined to be “telecommunications carriers” for purposes of CALEA section 102. The driving force in adopting CALEA was the FBI’s worry that increasing use of digital telephone exchange switches would make tapping phones at the phone company’s central office harder and slower to execute, or in some cases impossible. Since the original requirement to add CALEA-compliant interfaces required phone companies to modify or replace hardware and software in their systems, U.S. Congress included funding for a limited time period to cover such network upgrades. CALEA was passed on October 25, 1994 and came into force on January 1, 1995.”
There is more at Wikipedia the source.
And that includes candidates, you know, leaving the campaign trail to do their jobs
What is more important? Their jobs or our country?
I would hardly call campaigning at this stage “our country” so yes, their jobs are more important right now, seeing as their jobs directly affect the state of our country
To those folks who are disappointed in Leahy:
I may be wrong here, though I feel very sure of my ground, but I think you are incorrect about what Leahy’s position is in this.
Here’s what happened. There were two bills passed. Leahy’s bill said NO immunity for telecoms. The other bill said yes to immunity for telecoms. It’s up to Harry Reid which bill get to come to the floor first, and Harry deliberately picked the one that had yes to telecom immunity, thereby weakening the bill that Leahy supports’ chance to pass.
So you see, it’s Pat Leahy who’s the one who is getting screwed here, and by no lesss than Harry Redi. So what’s the next step. The next step is that since both bills will be passed, it will go to conference committee, and the bill that will come out, is sure to have FISA immunity in it.
Leahy is not the enemy here. It’s Harry Reid. Friends on the hill say it’s only the fact that Leahy is fucking furious with Reid that is poasponing this thing from a vote for about a month. Maybe.
Just to clear things up.
Nonetheless, it’s seems that once again, it takes someone like John Edwards who is outside the rarefied air of the Washington cocktail weenie circuit to show some actual, you know, political type leadership on this issue.
Teddy one thing one needs to understand about Harry Reid is that he is a Nevada attorney and comes from a extremely corrupt legal system. He has had lots of experience at operating in a corrupt system. It is in his blood. It is like a dog who starts killing chickens…once they start they never quit.
>
None of these people including Edwards has ever leveled with the public the “real” reason they voted for this occupation. Any person with a half-brain knew before the invasison the reasons were fraudulent. So all votes were either for a corrupt, stupid, as a favor or forced but no vote could have been that anyone really believed Saddam was a threat.
Good for Edwards! I only wish there was something more he could do.