« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Dems Vent Opposition To Surveillance In Today's FISA Debate
The House is now voting on changes to the new federal surveillance law.
There were plenty of Democrats speaking out against it during the hour-long debate.
"This bill scares me to death and I urge a no-vote," said Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA), co-chair of the House's Progressive Caucus.
She compared the bill to the era of former FBI head J. Edgar Hoover. "We already remember how Dr. [Martin Luther] King and his family were the victims of the government's most shameless wiretapping. We must never go down this road again."
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), gave the bill a lukewarm endorsement, saying the bill many supported was "not an option."
She said the real decision was between this "compromise" bill and the one the Senate has passed, which offered even broader surveillance powers and more protection for telecom companies. "That is the comparison, the contrast, that we have to make today."
"I'm not asking anybody to vote for this bill. I just wanted you to know why I was," Pelosi told the House. "Difficult decisions for all of us. ... I respect every point that was expressed on this floor today. ... The knowledge, the sincerity, the passion and intelligence of those who supported and who don't support this bill have been very valuable in making this bill better."
Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) pointed to a constitutional concern.
"The grant of retro-active immunity is inconsistent with our basic principles. We are breaking with a very proud tradition and intervening in a pending court decision in an effort to reach a preordained legal outcome. This is a bad precedent," he said.
Republicans without exception spoke in favor of the bill, often citing the dangers of terrorism.
"This bill will prove that we have the ability to monitor the conversations of al Qaeda overseas," said Rep. Dan Lungren (R-CA) "It's not the Mona Lisa, but it's not a bad paint job."
Rep. Dennis Kucinch (D-OH) spoke briefly. "These blanket wiretaps make it impossible to know whose calls are being intercepted by the National Security Agency."
Josh
Zachary
That's it, I'm donating to whatever Dem runs against Peloser.
June 20, 2008 12:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Too late this cycle. She won her primary (unopposed, I think) a few weeks ago.
Cindy Sheehan is running against her in the general, but on a third-party ticket. She doesn't stand a chance here in CA-8.
June 20, 2008 12:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
jzap, is there really no way to elect Cindy?
With this vote plus "impeachment is off the table" are there not enough San Franciscans who see Pelosi for the (insert invective here) that she is to get them to wake up?
I'm curious cause I have money that would have gone to the DNC that now needs a new home and I'd be happy to send it to Cindy's campaign if it would make difference.
June 20, 2008 3:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
"I'm not asking anybody to vote for this bill. I just wanted you to know why I was." Said these words by Speaker Nancy Pelosi to the House.
"Difficult decisions for all of us. I respect every point that was expressed on this floor today. ... The knowledge, the sincerity, the passion and intelligence of those who supported and who don't support this bill have been very valuable in making this bill better," she concluded.
Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) pointed to a constitutional concern.
"The grant of retro-active immunity is inconsistent with our basic principles. We are breaking with a very proud tradition and intervening in a pending court decision in an effort to reach a preordained legal outcome. This is a bad precedent," he said.
Conyers is correct and Pelosi is wrong and she has to be fired, now... I say remove her from office. She has disgraced the office, her office and the constitution. Retroactive immunity means they broke the law, but now we let them off the hook. It's as bad as, or maybe the same as, "ex post facto," and that is forbidden by the constitution, period.
June 20, 2008 12:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sad day for our civil rights and I do promise to work against ANY member of congress who votes for it! I am so tired of Washington insiders voting away our rights and expecting us to feel good about it. May they all have a ticket out of Washington when the chance comes to to put them out! Lets check their sources of campaign contributions and report on who got telecom money!
June 20, 2008 12:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
and what if a presidential candidate no-shows or votes 'present'? why let voting 'for' it be the determining factor? seems to me failing to vote against it is also unacceptable.
June 21, 2008 12:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Susan B. Anthony is ashamed of Nancy Pelosi today.
June 20, 2008 12:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nancy just peed on our heads and told us its raining.
Truly, the BS of folks like her and Hoyer and the Blue Dogs is astounding. They are trying to convince THEMSELVES they are doing a good thing.
This is how a democracy eats its own freedoms. This is how a Republic begins to kill its own future. This is how dictatorships start.
So, Nancy, answer me this. If we DO get attacked again, and all this bullshit legislation does nothing to prevent it (which it won't), what are you gonna do? Pass a law where citizens have to be monitored as to location and proximity to other citizens 24/7? Where does it effing end?
June 20, 2008 12:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am (a D) running for House seat in NY (23rd CD) against a 7-term incumbent (a R) who: (1) supports this bill, (2) voted for CIA 'enhanced interrogation' and BTW I am a retired Marine (two infantry tours in VN) and in my last 8 years of service, I was an interrogator (Russian and Korean languages), and he says 'waterboarding' is a gray or vague area.
Visit My Homepageand if you think I'm worthy, I could use some support to work and clean him out of office, and then set a leadership example with those like Peolosi, et al, if I win this seat.
Thanks. ~ dmf
June 20, 2008 12:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
My Homepage That link was spoiled above - corrected here.
June 20, 2008 12:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'll try this one more time and if it doesn't work then just go to http://www.danfrancis.com - thanks.
“My Homepage”
June 20, 2008 1:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
“My Homepage”
Ooops http://www.danfrancis2008.com
Old stiff fingers...
June 20, 2008 1:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hello, again, Dan.
Remember me from the Times?
Hope you've been well.
June 20, 2008 1:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Surely five Supreme Court justices who reinstated Habeas Corpus for us would reinstate the Fourth Amendment. Can't the plaintiffs suing the telecoms appeal, on behalf of all of us?
June 20, 2008 1:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, we all end up together (again) don't we? Did you post there under the same moniker? Anyway, you remember me, so thanks for that.
I'm madder than a wet hen over this FISA retroactive immunity, and I don't care how Pelosi and others try to paint it over, or rewrite the law to make it "legal," it simply is not.
It's the same as John Yoo's two secret memos making "waterboarding (torture)" which has always been illegal, legal by merely writing a memo saying it's legal.
Government has the awesome power to do that - take the illegal and make it legal for political pandering or worse: political posturing (in this heated election year).
The DEMS are running scared since the GOPers will use this as "weak on terrorism" against them and that is not the issue at all.
I'm sickened by the vote and every one should visit the House.gov page and see who supported it and work to remove them from office.
The House site for that vote review is FISA Vote Page
June 20, 2008 1:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
FISA Vote Page
I can't seem to get this right...
June 20, 2008 1:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
FISA Vote Page
June 20, 2008 1:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
I GAVE CONYERS A CHANCE TO USE TESTIMONY, DOCUMENTS AND LEGITIMATE CRIM INVEST LEADS TO PUT SD US ATTY MICHELLE TAPKEN on the stand under oath to corroborate the following:
----WIRETAPPING IS USED TO FACILITATE MURDERS IN SOUTH DAKOTA OF WITNESSES AND KNOWN ASSOCIATES TIED TO ME AND MY 47 PAGE US DOJ OIG/FBI OPR COMPLAINT.
----MY WRITING OF THE DASCHLE CAMPAIGN MEMO tipping Dems to "CALEA WIRETAP" archived on main frame of marin terminal at Qwest Comm, servicing the Daschle campaign;
----CALEA used to NSA 902nd COUNTERINTEL GROUP to seize SIGINT sent to Austin lawyer WHITTINGTON (the cutout) who sent to NSA TSP who were seen outside CHRISTINA MOORE'S HOME ON THE MORNING THAT THIS WITNESS TO ENRON/CHENEY'S SECRET ENERGY TASK FORCE..........was murdered.
CONYERS HAD THIS.
I CONTACTED HIS OFFICE.
TOLD HIM TO PUT MESSAGE ON MY BLOG.
TOLD HIM TO EITHER SUBPOENA ME, OR SEEK MY TESTIMONY.
NOTHING FROM LEAHY, CONYERS, WAXMAN, PELOSI, DASCHLE, BIDEN, REID.
WHO HAD IT ALL..........and did not move towards the goal line.
All this.....would have stopped PATRIOT ACT RENEWAL, WAR COMMISSIONS ACT, AND FISA SELLOUT.
June 20, 2008 2:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't get some of the Democrats in this congress. They promised to stand firm on this. They have the majority in both houses and the country is firmly behind them, yet they still cower like a beaten dog when the naked emperor pounds the podium.
WTF?
June 20, 2008 2:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
These 2 votes - both for the war and against the 4th Amendment - represent the worst kind of sell-out on behalf of those who CLAIM to be Democrats! I am more disgusted today than I have been in I do not know when. My Congressman, Jim Cooper, D-TN, is one of those self-righteous Blue Dogs who keeps backing everything that George Bush and the White House want. If anyone knows someone who can and will run for his seat (5th District, Tennessee) who is not a sell-out hypocrite and who will not promise one thing and do another, please post it here. I will work as hard as I can to get someone we can count on to fill that seat!
June 20, 2008 2:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Received 6/19/2008 11:05 AM
Dear Parent55,
Thank you for contacting Obama for America about the proposed legislation to give phone companies legal immunity for past wiretapping. Senator Obama holds strong opposition to this special interest provision is frustrated that the President and his supporters in Congress continue to push it. This fight is just one more example of why things in Washington must change.
Senator Obama has consistently opposed this Administration's efforts to use debates about our national security to expand its own power, whether that was in regard to the conduct of the Iraq war or its restrictions on our civil liberties through domestic surveillance programs or suspension of habeas corpus. It is time to restore oversight and accountability in the FISA program, and rejecting this unprecedented grant of retroactive immunity is a good place to start.
Giving retroactive immunity to telecom companies is simply wrong. Thankfully, the most recent effort to pass this legislation at the end of the legislative year failed. Senator Obama unequivocally opposes granting immunity. Senator Obama cosponsored Senator Dodd's proposal in order to remove it from the current FISA bill.
This Administration has put forward a false choice between the liberties we cherish and the security we demand. When Senator Obama is president, there will be no more illegal wire-tapping of American citizens; no more national security letters to spy on citizens who are not suspected of a crime; no more tracking citizens who do nothing more than protest a misguided war. Our Constitution works, and so does the FISA court. By working with Congress and respecting our courts, Senator Obama will provide our intelligence and law enforcement agencies with the tools they need to track and take out the terrorists without undermining our Constitution and our freedom.
Thank you again for contacting Obama for America.
Sincerely,
Barack Obama
June 20, 2008 3:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually Susan B. Anthony, Alice Paul, Clarence Darrow and tons of other progressive heroes - female and male - have been spinning in their graves since Nancy announced impeachment was off the table.
PS Once we start doing Cheney's dream - bomb Iran - the government will use this to crack down on those of us who oppose such insane actions.
June 20, 2008 4:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
The above was supposed to be in reply to aka clio.
June 20, 2008 4:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dems have a majority but 105 of them vote with Repubs, knowing that to do so gives Bush a walk on his crimes. That really hisses me off.
June 20, 2008 6:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
To Nancy Pelosi:
TIME to leave your position in disgrace - YOU are a disgrace to your office and your gender. You were the FIRST to break that glass ceiling and you have become a joke. Your standard to ANYTHING that is morally correct or ethically right is to take it "off the table" or make it "not an option".
The BILL YOU put through today is ONE MORE NAIL in the COFFIN of the Constitution...One more death rail of the dying country.
Your buddy Steny has proven to be just another Renfield for the Vampiristic cabal in the white House.
You have both broken your oath to your office...That oath to PROTECT and DEFEND the CONSTITUTION from all enemies foreign and domestic.
Now who will protect that holiest of holies, the basis from our country, from you?
June 20, 2008 9:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Could this oh so obviously unconstitutional law be a ploy by the Dems to let the Rethugs / Telecos think they have cover until next year when it can be struck down by the courts?
This "law" violates both Article I, section 9, Ex post facto provisions and the Fourth Amendment.
Opinions though the years have narrowed the Ex Post Facto definition to only include laws making things illegal that were once not and limiting the scope to criminal violations. However, the broad definition of this term is: 'An ex post facto law is a law passed after the occurrence of an event or action which retrospectively changes the legal consequences of the event or action.' Leave it to the lawyers to screw up such a succinct definition.
The Fourth Amendment CLEARLY states: 'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.' WARRANTS WITH PROBABLE CAUSE AND SPECIFIC DESCRIPTION OF THINGS TO BE SEIZED! No fishing expeditions, no casting of broad nets and my communications are my EFFECTS!
The original 1978 FISA law technically violated the Fourth Amendment by allowing the Executive to begin surveillance and then petition for a warrant. At the time this was thought to be a reasonable compromise. However, we can now see that even that minor infraction on our civil rights was not enough to satisfy our craven leaders. See what compromise of basic principals brings? Give em an inch and they want the world.
If this is some kind of stunt by the Dems, it is a dangerous gambit. By even passing this law they have exposed the possibility of some court upholding it.
The Constitution has provided Congress with all the tools they need to control an excessive Executive. It is called impeachment! Even if they have no hope of conviction, an Executive under impeachment proceedings limits the Executive's ability to pardon his co-conspirators, thus maintaining the ability to pressure them to sing in order to save their own asses.
I really don't think this is the case. Few in Washington seem to understand the Constitution enough to come up with this idea. To them it is just another one of those "quaint" pieces of paper from antiquity.
June 21, 2008 10:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm spending my weekend sending this message to every senator:
I'm pleading with you to come to your senses. Don't trash the Constitution! Don't scrap the 4th amendment!
You people need to open this Pandora's box and let the chips fall where they may. This is bigger than all of you - stop covering your butts and stand up for the liberties our soldiers have fought and died for. This has to happen. You have all now shown yourselves to have colluded to rob the citizens' of their privacy rights. We are horrified and disgusted.
You need to help to stop this travesty now!
June 22, 2008 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink