« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Today's Must Read
Later today, the House will vote on its surveillance bill, a bill that rejects retroactive immunity for the telecoms who cooperated with the administration's warrantless wiretapping program and provides a number of tougher civil liberty checks on the surveillance going forward.
The general expectation is that the bill will pass, but the vote might be quite close. As CQ reported last night, none of the 21 Blue Dog Dems seem prepared to say where they'll vote -- a number saying yesterday that they hadn't even read the bill yet.
It was a defiant move for the House Dem leadership to bring such a bill to a vote, and the administration clearly is not happy. This morning, President Bush just made umpteenth public statement on the surveillance bill, full of the usual canards about greedy trial lawyers exploiting the telecoms' patriotic participation in the program, "dangerous intelligence gaps," and the specter of the telecoms refusing to cooperate going forward because the lawsuits did not get wiped out. His message was clear: "voting for this bill would make our country less safe" and (just in case they weren't clear on this) Americans "want their children to be safe from terror." The House should not leave for its planned two-week Easter recess, he said, without passing the Senate's bill, which the White House supports.
Here's video of Bush this morning:
If the House were to pass the bill today, it would make its way over to the Senate, where it would be sure to undergo some significant modifications (including, most likely, reinserting retroactive immunity). Senate intelligence committee Chair Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) has said as much. That's a process that wouldn't get underway until April. But the White House is impatient and evidently hopes that moderate Dems will join with Republicans in voting down the leadership's bill, after which the administration would continue to exert pressure to pass the Senate bill. You can be sure that outside groups would continue to pound Dems with ads screaming that the country has been left defenseless.
Inconveniently enough for the administration, there's still plenty more to be learned about just how the administration's warrantless wiretapping program worked. For instance, just this morning, The New York Times reports that the FBI used so-called "blanket" letters -- letters that were a "one-step operation used to justify the collection of hundreds of phone and e-mail records at a time" -- at least 11 times in 2006. That and other abuses of national security letters by the FBI are illustrated in this report (pdf) by the Department of Justice's inspector general.
And as we learned only this Monday (thanks to The Wall Street Journal), the FBI's data feeds the NSA's massive driftnet, which in turn can result in wiretaps through the Terrorist Surveillance Program. But the administration, of course, wants the issue closed. Dems should "stop playing politics with the past," as Bush put it this morning -- it's time to succumb to the politics of the present.
Josh
Zachary
We've heard this one before. "They" want to KILL YOUR CHILDREN. (unless you give me everything I want)
Think of the children!
March 13, 2008 10:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
They want this issue over before the general election. They need the big telecom's money, and if they can't deliver immunity, then it will go to thhe Dems....
March 13, 2008 10:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
Glad you mentioned that. Now that I think about it, it's clear. NO, I don't want you spying on the children either!!
March 13, 2008 11:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
" the FBI used so-called "blanket" letters -- letters that were a "one-step operation used to justify the collection of hundreds of phone and e-mail records at a time"
Of course, if you or I were to illegally do this, we would be spending some time in jail...
thus it is when a democracy falls... different rules for those at the top compared to those at the bottom.
Remember, Impeachment is off the table. Musn't fallow through with ethical behavior when it might not get the results (perks, power, etc.) you as a representative of the common folks plan for.
BTW: According to Bush, the economy is also fine...
March 13, 2008 11:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Can we impeach him now?
March 13, 2008 11:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Who would Jesus wiretap?
Not that the Son of God would need to use electronic means to listen in. The still small voice of God is somewhat Big Brother like, however, He is the Creator.
Little Georgie has got to have him some telecom immunity to keep them from revealing just how criminal he is.
Today, THEY are threatening your children...
Tomorrow, THEY will threaten baby ducks!!!
March 13, 2008 11:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
But, is the children learning?
March 13, 2008 11:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
The really sad thing is that Bush is such an incredible asshole, liar and tyrant that even if he was telling the truth about this bill nobody would trust him or follow him. Nobody of course, other than the robot Republicans and the cowardly Democrats in the House and Senate who are willing to sell the rights of the people down the river in order to please their corporate masters. It's grotesque.
March 13, 2008 11:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Is it me or has the country turned the volume down on these folks? Seems like the old fear-mongering isn't having quite the same impact. Could bode well for the fall.
March 13, 2008 11:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
I have a teenager - If anyone's going to be spying on her emails ... its ME - not the government! ;~)
March 13, 2008 11:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
hey,i causually see a video of Bush about his funny and no-brain on a dating site named intimatemingle.com
March 13, 2008 11:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Has anybody else thought that Bush, his administration, the GOP and the media which are controlled by them have turned into surrogate spokespeople for Al-Qaeda?
Bin Laden hasn't released a tape in years, but these dopes all keep trying to think 'what would al-qaeda do? (WWAQD?) what would bin-laden do? (WWOBLD?)'
Saying that they are going to come kill your family because that's what you think they will do is still terror by proxy, IMHO.
March 13, 2008 11:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
Every word that comes out of his mouth was meant to protect his ass from illegally wire-tapping american citizens.
How many actual legitimate plots have been stopped through this illegal program? And if there are any, how many of those would have actually happened if they used the FISA process?
If the answer is none,....then we should Impeach.
If there are any plots that FISA can't stop, that should debated privately with Congress,....but unfortunately Bush is all Rhetoric and no substance.
He's the one, who's unpatriotic is all his deceiving nationalistic fear mongering tricks.
March 13, 2008 11:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
imo everyone's wasting a lot of energy ranting about the man Bill Maher called "President Shit-for-Brains." He reads what he's told to read by
Cheney/Addington.
Need I say more?
March 13, 2008 11:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
Bush is such a transparent joke.
March 13, 2008 11:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
Don't you fret about the children Mr. Bush. Hillary has got them under her wing, especially when she works the late shift.
March 13, 2008 12:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have to take exception with the following statement/assumption: "the White House is impatient and evidently hopes that moderate Dems will join with Republicans in voting down the leadership's bill"--I don't know who thinks the 'Blue Dogs' are 'moderate' Dems, with exception of themselves and the Admin. (when those Blue Dogs serve a useful purpose, that is). Most Dems consider the Blue Dogs right wing Dems, not moderate ones. Just my opinion.....fwiw
March 13, 2008 12:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah -- also known as DINOs. But the GOP cannot admit that there is any such thing as a conservative Democrat. "Moderate" would cover the bulk of Congressional Democrats; Congressional Democrats who are true liberals are very much an endangered species.
March 13, 2008 6:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Anytime you hear 'Big Business' and 'Patriotism' in the same sentence, you should be very afraid.
March 13, 2008 12:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
By the way ,what is The Chimp doing specifically to catch Bin Laden? Maybe someone should ask him.
March 13, 2008 12:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
I prefer the original FISA, the one that doesn't give the government leeway to stalk our kids.
Even as each passing day to the end of BushCo's reign makes me feel safer, I still have a nagging suspicion some dramatic terror-like stunt will be pulled by these guys in an attempt to scare us again.
If that should happen, I think it's time for Atticus to finally draw his shotgun on this rabid dog.
March 13, 2008 12:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
If we don't keep the children safe who will pay the tax bill George is sticking them with?
March 13, 2008 1:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Where the F3ck was Bush when he had the chance to extend the SCHIP bill? He cares about children as much as in any father would, that is his children. If we are able to spy on his activities the way that he is spying on ours and others, I am not sure he would use such rhetoric. Oh wait I forget he is President Sh*t for brains, who only believes what God, Cheney, Addington, and the neo-cons whisper in his ear at 3AM.
March 13, 2008 1:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes we must think of the children. Although I'm not sure exactly what he's saying we should be thinking "about" when we think about the children. I mean what should we be protecting our children from?
Should we be thinking about how education has be priced out of most children's reach? Should we be thinking about how many children lack adequate healthcare? Should we be thinking about how they can go into diabetic shock after eating two things they see advertised to them on TV during their Saturday morning cartoons? Or maybe we should be thinking about how once they turn 17 they can enlist and become fodder for an idiot-coward president's incomprehensible foreign policy blunders? Yes think of the children indeed.
The only "dangerous intelligence gaps" I see are located between the ears of our president and many of our nation's top leaders. I've seen primates problem solve better than these clowns.
March 13, 2008 2:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
If they truly wanted to "protect" the American people, they wouldn't be gutting the regulatory agencies designed to protect the American people.
"Stop playing politics with the past."
Hahahahahahahahahahahaha
March 13, 2008 2:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
2008 Presidential Election Weekly Poll
www.votenic.com
Results Now Posted Instantly!
Check out Our New Polls Posted Each Week!
March 13, 2008 2:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
This doesn't even require a moments deep thought. When a three-year-old acts out you tell them, "No." George Bush I tell you, "No." Congress, it's time for you to peel this three-year-old off of My Constitution. Now.
March 13, 2008 2:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Do intel agcys need court approval to tap "foreign terrorist's" phones? I thought they only needed it to tap American citizen's phones. As Rep J. Conyers pointed out, if the phone taps were lawful, why does Bush need to grant immunity?
March 13, 2008 5:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rockefeller is up for re-election this year. Too late for a primary challenge, I suppose, but is there still time to get an independent on the ballot?
I swear to God, I think I'd be willing to contribute to his opponent even if it mean giving money to a Republican. If he lost, that would at least get him off the Intelligence Committee.
March 13, 2008 6:22 PM | Reply | Permalink