It sets up some interesting ways that one could “frame” an innocent person.

“Although the Bush administration calls it a vital weapon against terrorism, its domestic wiretapping effort could become a devastating tool for terrorists if hacked or penetrated from inside, according to a new article by a group of America’s top computer security experts.”

Thanks for staying focused on FISA when it’s so easy to be distracted by the elections etc. I’m still bumming about Edwards dropping out.

Would it be naive to think that Cheney might just go ahead and “lose” our emails like he lost his own? /s

haha rhetorical question.

Yeah, you say that now, but I’m an equal opportunity basher. LOL.

Thanks for pointing out that Greenwald found the summary useful, albeit “technical.”

It’s not a lot, but it’s the best we have at the moment, and thus I keep on FAXing…

i don’t the gop caved – i think dems, for the most, part did. i see no reason for agreeing to a 60 vote requirement for passage on any of the bills. hard to see what they got in return for that, other than a potential end to the conflict and passage of another bad bill.

this is in no way is meant to say our lobbying efforts won’t be successful – just that i don’t think they were when it comes to this UC.

Thanks for that fine service to the community.

I just want to reiterate or emphasize the procedural aspect – not only is a UC objection highly unlikely, a UC objection is outside the rules.

Sometimes UC agreements are modified by a further UC, but usually to change the time of taking a vote or some other non-substantive point.

It takes UC to undo a UC. Simple objection to a UC is without force.