Rep. Sestak On FISA: ‘We Should Have Stood Up And Said No’
Rep. Sestak On FISA: ‘We Should Have Stood Up And Said No’
In an interview with ThinkProgress yesterday, Rep. Joe Sestak (D-PA) expressed his disappointment with the recent revisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Over the weekend, Congress capitulated to White House demands, and passed a FISA bill that unnecessarily expands the power of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Sestak, who was one of 183 representatives to vote against the bill, told us:
How could we have not have stood up for rights of civil liberties while ensuring the proper ability to go and listen, and just stayed during the recess if necessary. And I understand that our leadership in the caucus has to worry about how the public will perceive it, but I also know this, that ultimately, we have to, as Benjamin Franklin said, be concerned that those who give up…liberty in the name security, deserve neither liberty or security. This is a time that I strongly believe, we should have stood up and said no. Attorney General Gonzales, we’re not going to let you decide the guidelines upon which you’ll listen in on Americans.
Sestak noted that the administration had rejected a compromise bill worked out between Congressional leaders and Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell. “We made the three major changes that [McConnell] wanted,” said Sestak. “The issue here is they just don’t want to come to the FISA court. That’s enough to tell me we need them to.”
“We had voted for a bill the evening before that had actually brought together a proper balance of the civil liberties of our citizens,” said Sestak. “We should have brought that bill up Saturday, instead of the Senate bill…we could have gotten it the next morning under majority votes. And that would have meant probably that we had to stay in session this week, and that would have forced the Senate to come back and deal with it.” Watch it:
Referencing his 31-year career in the military, Sestak said he witnessed the need for surveillance when he headed the Navy’s anti-terrorism unit after 9/11. “But you know,” he said, “I also learned that [intelligence officers will] press a little extra to get that information they need. And at times, constitutionally, they’ll go over the edge. That’s what Congress is to make sure, they don’t go over the edge.”
UPDATE: FireDogLake has more.
Transcript:
REP. JOE SESTAK: “I’m disappointed, frankly. We had voted for a bill the evening before that had actually brought together a proper balance of the civil liberties of our citizens and ensuring that we were able to go after terrorists and listen in appropriately. The FISA system works and this struck the right balance by correcting things, such as, if some individual in Germany is talking to another individual in Spain, and the call is routed through the United States, that they could listen to that. But it mandated that they’d have to come back to FISA to make sure that if they were listening to an American here at home and protect those over seas, that that would be done. And FISA permits the President, in an emergency, to listen in, and even come to FISA 72 hours later if it’s an emergency. The sufficient protections. We should have brought that bill up Saturday, instead of the Senate bill. It has abrogated our responsibility, I believe, to protect, what I believe we are most here to protect, our Constitution. I think that, because it didn’t get the two-thirds votes — necessary to suspension rules. And we could have gotten it the next morning under majority votes. And that would have meant probably that we had to stay in session this week, and that would have forced the Senate to come back and deal with it.”[…]
How could we have not stood up for rights of civil liberties while ensuring the proper ability to go and listen, and just stayed during the recess if necessary. And I understand that our leadership in the caucus has to worry about how the public will perceive it, but I also know this, that ultimately, we have to, as Benjamin Franklin said, be concerned that “those who give up security,” excuse me, “liberty in the name security, deserve neither liberty or security.” This is a time that I strongly believe, we should have stood up and said no. Attorney General Gonzales, we’re not going to let you decide the guidelines upon which you’ll listen in on Americans. We are going to do that because we have been sent as the House of Representatives to ensure the right balance is done between those two — civil liberties and fighting terrorism. I know, I headed the Navy’s anti-terrorism unit. When I went into Afghanistan that time, I wanted all the…and when I worked for President Clinton, I learned that there is a value of the proper eavesdropping to do data mining. And I saw that as I headed the Navy’s anti-terrorism unit after 9/11. But you know, I also learned that there are no one armed intelligence officers, or very few because they are always saying on the one hand, but on the other hand. So therefore in a war, they’ll press a little extra to get that information they need. And at times, constitutionally, they’ll go over the edge. That’s what Congress is to make sure, they don’t go over the edge. This constitution and its ideals are what is most important to our future, with the right amount of security being ensured. That bill we had, voted on Friday night, would have done that. We should have brought it back. We should have stayed here, in Washington, not go for recess.
[…]
That is correct. Vice Admiral McConnell had come, in accordance to our leadership, to an agreement, that he had felt that the bill we had constructed and voted on Friday evening, actually protected the security of Americans. And then, there was a later statement saying he could not agree to it. And the belief was that the White House said that they could not agree to it. Now they are always in charge, the President is. But you have to wonder after he had said to Nancy, to Speaker Pelosi in a meeting, that Admiral McConnell is my man on this issue. Then why couldn’t he stand by his agreement. The issue here is that after and before 9/11 all the president only had to do was come to the FISA court and say “I’m about to do this, does it meet the constitutional responsibilities” or do it, and 72 hours later, if it’s an emergency, come to the FISA court. He always had all the tools he needed. FISA’s not broken except for some minor changes, like as I mentioned, two individuals out there across the ocean, foreigners, not U.S, listening to one another, and because of today’s technologies it gets routed through a server or something here in the United States. We made those changes. We made the three major changes that he wanted. The issue here is they just don’t want to come to the FISA court. That’s enough to tell me we need them to. I spent 31 years of my military career protecting the Constitution. Do I believe in security? Every moment, I wouldn’t have stayed those 31 years. But what I learned during that period of time is that while we’re respected for the power of our military, we’re respected for the power of our economy. We’re admired for the power of our ideals. There’s the right balance ensuring the protections of those ideals and the protection of our day to day lifes of our citizens. We struck that with the point man of the administration. We should have stayed with that and fought hard to do that because ultimately it is the Constitution we protect and to ensure the furtherance of the type of society we want while protecting our overall security.”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
Shoulda’, coulda’, woulda’.
Disgusting display of weakness.
Next time - if there is a next time - stand your ground, man. You don’t need anyone else to help you do it, either. Be. A. Man.
August 8th, 2007 at 10:55 amStupid asses, I WARNED YOU BEFORE BUSH WAS ELECTED(SELECTED) BACK IN 99!……
August 8th, 2007 at 10:56 am#1, MA
August 8th, 2007 at 10:56 amyou said it.
> That’s what Congress is to make sure, they don’t go over the edge.â€
Appreciate your intelligent thoughts Rep. Joe Sestak (D-PA) but the Bush/Cheney admin has already put the USA ( except for the super rich ) into one helluva toxic cesspool of an abyss that will take at least a decade to cleanup.
August 8th, 2007 at 10:57 amamerica gos to HELL!
August 8th, 2007 at 10:57 am“Comment by Marcus Aurelius — August 8, 2007 @ 10:55 am”
He did…. “Sestak, who was one of 183 representatives to vote against the bill”
He can’t ensure what other people do…… He did his job, yell at those pricks that voted for it not the ones that did not.
August 8th, 2007 at 10:57 amwhen somebody is a KNOWN liar and criminal and asks for something, the correct response is to give them NOTHING.
August 8th, 2007 at 10:58 amCongress, GO F*CK YOURSELVES.
August 8th, 2007 at 10:59 amBUT YOU DIDN’T…. Why? Because the spineless, wimpy, talk a big game Democrats know better than to mess with Bush over terror. They’ll lose in the end. See 2004 for that.
August 8th, 2007 at 10:59 amI’ll be years living down the shame of this.
I’m revoking my party Democracy Bond now, right after this. I told them to do it Saturday but I’ve haven’t heard a damn word yet.
They don’t get my money. It has nothing to do with anything but the sheer chutzpah that they would dare to consider taking it. What kind of soul do they think I possess? Whatever that answer may be, ultimately they judge it worthy to be shit upon, and I won’t stand for it.
I’ll have more on this Saturday. For once I am starting a work today, and publishing this week will not be the stone cold first draft as it has always been before.
They judged me to be powerless too. We shall see what my words can do, Miz Pelosi. We shall see.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:00 amMarcus says it all.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:00 amWell, apparently, he didn’t put any spine into it. Otherwise, he wouldn’t have said, “We Should Have Stood Up And Said No”.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:00 amI’m sick and tired of Congress allowing King Bush II and Richelieu Cheney to erode our rights, then turning around and saying how they made a mistake. It’s too damn late now! If congressional Democrats want to know why their poll numbers are so low… all they have to do is look in the mirror at their spineless images. We need more leaders, Democrat or Republican, like Rep. Sestak who’ll stand up to these people and stop what’s happening to our nation.
I WANT MY DAMNED COUNTRY BACK!!!
August 8th, 2007 at 11:01 am“See 2004 for that.
Comment by Democrats are LIARS — August 8, 2007 @ 10:59 am”
You mean the STOLEN elections as another example of how HONEST this president is????
3 MILLION votes challenged and 1 MILLION not allowed!!!!
All because of those CAGING lists, which are ILLEGAL!!!!
August 8th, 2007 at 11:01 amPsssst…You’ve got some spinach or something stuck in your teeth.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:02 amDemocrats need to put their act to gether and learn from Republicans.
Republicans always united when it comes to voting, that does not mean that they are always right,but Democrats cannot have this now and expect people’s respect. Democrats leadrship is weak. Nancy Pelosi all talk and no action.
Rep. Sestak at least is showing anger , concern and unhappiness over this,but other Democrats think differently , they just voted quickly and left for their ’summer vacation’…
August 8th, 2007 at 11:03 amBUT YOU DIDN’T…. Why? Because the spineless, wimpy, talk a big game Democrats know better than to mess with Bush over terror. They’ll lose in the end. See 2004 for that.
Comment by Democrats are LIARS — August 8, 2007 @ 10:59 am
You are 100% correct, Bush is the BIGGEST terrorist in the world. It’s a sad state of affairs when the Russian President is more trusted by our allies than our own Dumbya!!
August 8th, 2007 at 11:03 amOne more thing: any time you see a voter say “blue dogs did this” or “yell at the guys who voted for it” know with utter certainty that person is in total, textbook, classic denial.
Your rationalizations are blatantly transparent. Our party looked at us and knifed us in plain sight. They think nothing of us.
There is no other answer, and your rationalizations are pathetically lame and sad.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:04 amBUT YOU DIDN’T…. Why? Because the spineless, wimpy, talk a big game Democrats know better than to mess with Bush over terror. They’ll lose in the end. See 2004 for that.
Comment by Democrats are LIARS — August 8, 2007 @ 10:59 am
Factually speaking, 181 Dems voted against it. 41 voted for it.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:04 am“Well, apparently, he didn’t put any spine into it. Otherwise, he wouldn’t have said, “We Should Have Stood Up And Said Noâ€.
Comment by Marcus Aurelius — August 8, 2007 @ 11:00 am”
So now your gonna jump down the throats of those that do stand up for our rights?????
I watched several house members stand up on that podium and state that this was WRONG!
I don’t know if he was one of them, as there were many, but he did not vote for the bill.
I understand the anger, but I am not mad at him! I am mad at those Dems that voted for it.
Take your anger out on the appropriate people, not those that are voting correctly.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:04 amComment by Democrats are LIARS
A better screenname would be:
“Neocon Bootlickers Local #105″
or
“Partison Hack/Hater”
both fit you like a glove!!!
August 8th, 2007 at 11:04 amI am so goddamn sick of These Thugs posing as an American Presidency.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:05 amPsssst…You’ve got some spinach or something stuck in your teeth.
Comment by Marcus Aurelius — August 8, 2007 @ 11:02 am
It may be sod from the surf and turf.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:07 amBecause the spineless, wimpy, talk a big game Democrats know better than to mess with Bush over terror. They’ll lose in the end. See 2004 for that.
Comment by Democrats are LIARS — August 8, 2007 @ 10:59 am
Democrats are not LIARS/Ihateliberals/I heart Alito, etc.,
August 8th, 2007 at 11:07 amYou seem to have forgotten that there was another election since 2004. Remember what happened in 2006, or has your petty, hate-filled mind blocked all that out?
__________
Should Have.
Could Have.
Would Have.
As much as I’m disappointed in President Bush; I’m even more disappointed in the Democrats/Progressives for failing.
More evidence that Republicans & Dems/Progressives are controlled by the same puppet masters and we the people (serfs) are meaningless to them.
I enjoyed the Republic but it’s time for something else.
Too much corruption and too many feminized weak spineless manginas cowering and afraid to stand up and fight.
With women or the female mindset imparted through feminization on the vast majority of society, it will be very easy to control/weaken the men.
Men, opt-out & go your own way.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:09 am__________
“or “yell at the guys who voted for it†know with utter certainty that person is in total, textbook, classic denial.
Your rationalizations are blatantly transparent. Our party looked at us and knifed us in plain sight. They think nothing of us.
There is no other answer, and your rationalizations are pathetically lame and sad.
Comment by paradox — August 8, 2007 @ 11:04 am”
OK….. So when a kid comes to his dad and asks if he can go ride his motorcycle and his dad says no, but the kid goes to his mother and she says yes we should yell and cuss at both parents for allowing the kid to ride the motorcycle which was used in a bank robbery?????
PLEASE!!!! I understand the anger, as I am pissed as well…… But that is like saying that Russ Fiengold is just as criminal in the act over the last several years as well……. He has been trying to do what he can, so you cut him down in the streets as well because a FEW are capitulating in this criminal act??
August 8th, 2007 at 11:09 amTake your anger out on the appropriate people, not those that are voting correctly.
Comment by RemoveBush — August 8, 2007 @ 11:04 am
I agree with you, RB.
Although I would have liked to hear these things from Sestak last week, in the proper context of course.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:09 amI agree with Sestak. They should have said no. And I also think he is point on in his observation that they don’t want to have to go the court. They don’t want any oversight. They want it to be just their own little sandbox. I think the Democrats are just too afraid that if there is a terrorist attack the Republicans will be able to point at them and blame them for it if they don’t roll over for every single claim, no matter how specious, that it is a “tool” needed to protect America.
This bill will do nothing to prevent a terrorist attack. But then that is not what it’s for.
We waited too long, people. Congress is useless. They have, in the end, abdicated.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:10 am“Although I would have liked to hear these things from Sestak last week, in the proper context of course.
Comment by Zooey — August 8, 2007 @ 11:09 am”
Zooey….. I don’t know that he did not!
There were MANY Congressmen/women standing up on the podium speaking about how WRONG this bill was……. I only watched a few, and did not see the entire debate so I don’t know what he had to say, if anything.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:13 amIf the President asserts his right to go beyond the strictures of the law and the Constitution, he should be impeached, Sir. Fine, you voted against this legislation. Now, sign on to impeach.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:13 amMen, opt-out & go your own way.
__________
Comment by tonka — August 8, 2007 @ 11:09 am
Me’thinks this is coolmoedee under a different name.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:14 am“Sir. Fine, you voted against this legislation. Now, sign on to impeach.
Comment by Peter C — August 8, 2007 @ 11:13 am”
Now that is the right way to approach this!!!!!
August 8th, 2007 at 11:14 amRep. Sestak On FISA: ‘We Should Have Stood Up And Said No’
No sh!t you think. Stop pandering to the boy king, impeach him, and the rest of the criminals, get us out of Iraq, and start defending this country, not corporate interest.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:15 amEven though this sunsets in six months, it is going to haunt the Dem leadership that once again completely caved in, bent over, and took it whimpering from the Bushits.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:17 amLet them call you soft on terror, just don’t be soft on the Goddamn Constitution!
Jello Biafra once said, “I am tired of a owe party state, pretending to be a two party state” This was back in the early 90’s. I think he may have been on to something.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:18 amScrew Sestak. He’s admitted that there were illegal factors to this bill; and has disclosed problems with the debate. This is ont the end of this. Congress keeps doing this: Defyign its oath.
Let’s prosecute Sestak for violating this oath. He doens’t appear to be able to coherently do what he thinks should be done.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:18 amThe passage of the FISA bill nullified the influence of the Netroots. The Netroots was shown how much they matter. Z E R O
There were some big Netroots canidates who voted for this bill.
Now you have all the Netroots websites scrambling to keep their users and virtual ATM machines for future Netroots canidates alive, so you start to hear bullshit like “blue dog Dems”
I will only be played as a fool once. If there was one single issue we all stood by, it was spying on Americans. The Netroots have failed.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:21 amThis statement indicates he doesn’t understand the oath: It is a requirement on all:
No, you’re there to preserve, protect, and defend it from domestic enmies without any mental reservation. Pelosin and the DNC, after the bill was passed, documented their resrvations. That is evidence of 5 uSC 3331 vioaltions. Let’s get the prosecutions going againt this Congress. Their oath is meaningless to them. The Constitution requires an oath to be enforced, not given lip service or explained away.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:21 amKristol likes Hillary? There can be only one conclusion. Run away! Billy K wants more of the same. It’s time, however, for real change, like Obama. Hillary was pro the war. She then showed bad judgment again by trying to downplay it and by not admitting she was wrong. Guess who is owned by, ooops I mean taking contributions from lobbyists and who isn’t?
FDR was right: the only thing we have to fear is fear itself. Change is needed. Let’s be courageous.
Back in the real world, Bartlett’s compatriot Matthew Iglesias, sees this as being less about political gamesmanship than ideology: “One can try to speculate that Kristol is playing some odd angles here, but I think the record indicates that he’s genuinely more committed to war — criticized Republican critics of the Kosovo War, criticized Bill Clinton for not killing enough people during the Kosovo War, backed John McCain in the 2000 primaries — and based on the evidence thinks Clinton will be more sympathetic to his agenda than the alternatives.â€
Further to the left, however, the approval of the Weekly Standard isn’t considered a mark of distinction. Arthur Silber at Once Upon a Time feels a Democrat will be considered “responsible†only “if you think the United States should still have troops in Iraq at the end of your second term as president, which is to say, at least through the end of 2016 — which is, of course, the view of the entrenched foreign policy establishment that believes in a foreign policy of aggressive, neverending global interventionism maintained by an empire of military bases around the world, all to guarantee American hegemony.â€>
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/?hp
August 8th, 2007 at 11:24 amwith all due respect to the both of you, let’s not coddle the freekin’ Reps who voted correctly. They did the wrong thing for the wrong reasons. They showed no courage and no leadership.
While the Dems only control one-sixth of the Federal government, they can certainly tie the hands of the other five-sixths. How? No bills, no resolutions, no funding of any kind, for any thing (better to kill this country ourselves than to let them enslave it). No recess, no vacation, no adjournment. Do they consider this light work? Do they consider it a part-time job. Do they not get the seriousness of the situation?
Message to the Republicans: You ad better come to the table ready to bargain, because we’re deadly serious about protecting the Constitution.
As I said: a Disgusting display of weakness.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:24 amBlubbering and weeping. Weeping and blubbering. Up, you–and be a man!
August 8th, 2007 at 11:25 amExpat: No, this Congress failed.
Netroots didn’t take an oath to the Constitution — this Congress did. Stop blaming the disorganized for the recklessness of this US Government. Also, just because the Congress ignores the Constitution, doesn’t mean the Consttution has gone away. The opposite: This bill becomes evidence of their illegal activity.
The public still has a role in defending this Constitution from the domestic enmies in Congress. Grand juries and prrosecutors have a duty: Prosecuting these members of Congress.
If you want to give up — like the Democrats and GOP have — fine. Enjoy being irrelevant. YOu have a choice: Stand to defend the Constitution using all lawful options; or being irrelevant yourself. You’re talking about yourself: Whether you want to be relevant or not. Your choice.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:26 amSome law firm appears to have coordinated on this Act with the WH and DOJ. Time to find out which telecoms and law firms were involved with drafting of ths act; and find out their legal interests in dissuading enforcement of the Constitution. Legal counsel have an oath to the Constitution. This act shows they’ve drafted a bill that defies their oath.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:27 amYou guys think this is a sh$tstorm?
Wait till it comes out that they’re recording ALL calls in the US.
Wait till it comes out, that everytime you pick up your phone, everyword you say is recorded.
Wait till that comes out.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:28 amBartlebee,
Great. the issue isnt’ surevillance. All calls — if there is a warrant issued by a court — can be monitored. The issue is different: Whether the Congress can or cannot be trusted to defend the Constittution. It cannot.
Stop talking about what might happen, especialy when you have no plan; and start focusing on what can be done: Prosecuting these Members of Congress. Stay forused on solving this problem. Thank you.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:30 amIt’s easy to see why, they were messing with congress’s vacation.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:30 am“with all due respect to the both of you, let’s not coddle the freekin’ Reps who voted correctly. They did the wrong thing for the wrong reasons. They showed no courage and no leadership.
While the Dems only control one-sixth of the Federal government, they can certainly tie the hands of the other five-sixths. How? No bills, no resolutions, no funding of any kind, for any thing (better to kill this country ourselves than to let them enslave it). No recess, no vacation, no adjournment. Do they consider this light work? Do they consider it a part-time job. Do they not get the seriousness of the situation?
Message to the Republicans: You ad better come to the table ready to bargain, because we’re deadly serious about protecting the Constitution.
As I said: a Disgusting display of weakness.
Comment by Marcus Aurelius — August 8, 2007 @ 11:24 am”
MA, you expect a person who has no power to refuse to put bills up on the floor???? You expect this one person to hold the Congress in session???
PLEASE!!!!!
That falls on the LEADERSHIP of the Congress to do that!!!! I understand being pissed at them, but to start SHREDDING the lower people who can’t do anything but voice their oppions and make their votes is INSANE!
Next your gonna start saying that we should blame all police officers for what the Police Chief tells them to do?????
STOP!!!! Take a deep breath and THINK!!!!
You can’t go blaming EVERYONE for something that they don’t have any power to control.
Yes the LEADERSHIP is to blame, but not the ENTIRE bunch!!!!!
August 8th, 2007 at 11:30 am“…instead, we bent over and said ‘yes’.”
August 8th, 2007 at 11:30 amThis is truly sickening. What a craven individual. A day late and a pound short.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:31 amThe Most Trusted Name (to pander to the Bush Killing Machine) in News:
MSP: Cranes ready at bridge as divers search
August 8th, 2007 at 11:31 amSuspect may be ID’d in schoolyard deaths 5 min
Dead NYU coed’s boyfriend slits wrists 34 min
Family fights off armed home invaders
Mine boss: We’re back at square one
NYC storm creates commuter nightmare
SI: Bonds is baseball’s new home run king
Your e-mails: Thoughts on Bonds
Coalition forces battle Mehdi Army 20 min
Endeavour fueled for launch | LIVE
Clerk grabs robber’s gun, turns it on him
Ticker: Mrs. Edwards: ‘Can’t make John black’
Buffalo rush to aid baby seized by lion
Extreme road rage closes ‘blood alley’
WLWT: Police: Woman killed man over quarters
CNN Wire: Latest updates on top stories
Considering there is no real outcry from the general public over this bill, and the closer we get to election time, the closer Hillary will feel to the White House (and she’s going to want this kind of power), how much you wanna’ bet congress renews it pretty much as is?
August 8th, 2007 at 11:31 amRemoveBush,
It could ahve been done: :”You expect this one person to hold the Congress in session???”
All Senators have the optoin to anonymously stopped this bill. You’re not making a case or providing a credible defense or excuse. It was possible. This Congress has approved illegally an unlawful change to the Constitution. This isn’t about surveillance; this is about their oath and whether they can be trusted to defend this document. They cannot. They are doemstic enemies. They need to be prosecuted.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:33 amDemocrats don’t have any balls.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:33 am“Considering there is no real outcry from the general public over this bill, and the closer we get to election time”
Bush’s approval rating is going up. The Democrats, down.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:34 am#42
Admitting that a movement to get this Congress into power to stop exactly went down last weekend failed is tough to stomach, but that is the case. All the liberal blogs were nullified with this vote.
Netroots? All it has become is a virtual ATM. The Netroots were bilked for millions and then were stabbed in the back while most of the community was getting sloshed at a hotel in Chicago.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:35 amI agree, Congress will most likely renew it as it is — despite the outcry. But I reject your assertion that there has been no outcry:
The lack of asserted action by the public is not the same as the lack of leadership of the Congress or their refusal to assert their oath. the oath is there to compel action; not require constant monitoring by the public. The oath exists to bind action whent it is difficult — as was now: “No, we cannot pass this bill. Let the President violate the law. But we cannot join him in this illegal acdtivity.”
Congress chose to assent to what is illegal. That is impermissible.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:35 amif there is a warrant issued by a court — can be monitored.
Comment by Anon — August 8, 2007 @ 11:30 am
Yea?
Maybe in Red China.
Monitoring ALL calls in the US would constitute an immediate and total violation of the Constitution, and something FISA could NEVER authorize.
If you’re fine with that then join the right wing now dumbass.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:35 amThere were MANY Congressmen/women standing up on the podium speaking about how WRONG this bill was……. I only watched a few, and did not see the entire debate so I don’t know what he had to say, if anything.
Comment by RemoveBush — August 8, 2007 @ 11:13 am
Ok, so we don’t know that he didn’t say these things on the House floor already.
It is rather ridiculous to be going after Sestak harder than we’re going after the 41 Dems and ALL of the Republicans who voted for this horrendous FISA Act.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:35 am“All Senators have the optoin to anonymously stopped this bill. You’re not making a case or providing a credible defense or excuse. It was possible. This Congress has approved illegally an unlawful change to the Constitution. This isn’t about surveillance; this is about their oath and whether they can be trusted to defend this document. They cannot. They are doemstic enemies. They need to be prosecuted.
Comment by Anon — August 8, 2007 @ 11:33 am”
Yes, but it is only a TEMPRORARY stop!
I’m not saying that more should not have been done!!!!! I’m saying that SHREDDING a person for voting against it is just not an American way!
If you want to blame someone, blame those that voted for it…. It could have been stopped just as EASILY by voting NO!!!!
Next you’ll be saying that the bank teller should be tried for the Bank robbery because she did not try to stop the bank robber!!!!!
August 8th, 2007 at 11:36 amComment by RemoveBush — August 8, 2007 @ 11:30 am
183 representatives can easily find a way, even proceedurally, to hold up legislation. Any legislation. If the man says, “we should have”, the implication is that they “could have”.
As for the 41 (?) turncoats, some call them “Blue dog democrats”. Other names for the same thing include “Dixiecrats” and “Neocons”. Kick their asses out of the party and let them answer to their constituents.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:37 am#55: The “movement” is Congress: They are there to defend the Constitution. A government that has to regulated by something else is no longer legitimate, soverign, or competent.
If the blogs were “nullfied” why are you bothing to comment? The only reasonable conclusion: Either you believe you want to contrbitue to what is nullified; or you do not believe what you are saying: The blogs are relevant. You’re arguign against yourself. What of the blogs that challenge Congress and organize the public, but do not require funds to sustain them? You make no allowance for that.
Again, the issue isn’t the netroots or the public: But the Congress illegal rebellion against the rule of law. They can be lawfully prosecuted.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:37 am59: You’re making excuses.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:38 am“It is rather ridiculous to be going after Sestak harder than we’re going after the 41 Dems and ALL of the Republicans who voted for this horrendous FISA Act.
Comment by Zooey — August 8, 2007 @ 11:35 am”
That is EXACTLY what I am saying…….
It’s fine to be mad at him if there is thought that he could have done more…… However, to attack a man that did not vote for it but say NOTHING about those that did is not American!
August 8th, 2007 at 11:38 amComment by Marcus Aurelius — August 8, 2007 @ 11:24 am
I see more shit being heaped on Sestak HERE than I’ve seen being heaped on any BlueDog or Republican.
Just sayin’
August 8th, 2007 at 11:39 amStop talking about what might happen, especialy when you have no plan; and start focusing on what can be done: Prosecuting these Members of Congress. Stay forused on solving this problem. Thank you.
Comment by Anon — August 8, 2007 @ 11:30 am
A. Don’t tell me what to talk about.
B. If you could read, you’d see I said this is ALREADY happening. Not something that “might” happen.
C. I do have a plan slim. And the plan is to TALK about it.
Once the confused folks like you stop sweeping it under the rug, or acting like it could be legal, and the people actually start “TALKING” about it, then it will come to an end. Once people, educated people, like Judges, Lawyers etc, realize that every call in the US is being recorded, then people will do something about it.
UNTIL we ALL start talking about it, openly, then nothing will be done.
Which is just what Bush wants.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:40 am“I’m saying that SHREDDING a person for voting against it is just not an American way!”
he had the hoption to resign; she had the option to — on the floor –charge her peers with rebellio;n and she had the power to imepach; and he had the power to bring charges in ethics committees.
We haven’ t seen this.
If anyone is serous about this “wrong” then Congress — by refusing to impeach, prsoecute, indict, and start an ethics investigation against their peers — has no foundation.
Can’t do this in the media: Congress needs to start this oversight per the House and Sneate rules. if they fail, they are not relevant. This is a problem with Congress and the President: Illegal activity, no accountabiity, and refusla to use all lawful options. Whining about it in the medai doesn’t help: We need to see some ethics investigations. Not maybe, not perhaps, not tomorrow, not next year, not after the election: But now.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:41 am65. Then start implementing you plan. Start giving some directions. Start getting some peole to do what you’re talking about. Stop talking.
Start getting “your plan” — whatever it is, other than talking — going.
Action: Prosecutions, indictements, accountabilty. Other than that, more talk is what the DNC promised us, and gave us: And they ignore the Constitution. Plans have action, not talk.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:42 amThat is EXACTLY what I am saying…….
It’s fine to be mad at him if there is thought that he could have done more…… However, to attack a man that did not vote for it but say NOTHING about those that did is not American!
Comment by RemoveBush — August 8, 2007 @ 11:38 am
Trashing Sestak like this makes us weaker, not stronger. The trolls, and wingnuts with actual power, love to see us trash our own like this.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:42 am“You’re making excuses.
Comment by Anon — August 8, 2007 @ 11:38 am”
No!
I’m being REALISTIC!!!!
As I said…. “Next you’ll be saying that the bank teller should be tried for the Bank robbery because she did not try to stop the bank robber!!!!!”
Sure the teller could have jumped the bank robber, and maybe this would have been successful but unless MORE people stood up too she would not have been as effective and could have been killed.
Since when did America start turning on those that at least vote PROPERLY????
Since when did America say that one person should take the blame for a passage of a bill?????
This is NOT America!!!!!
As a Vet I am pissed at Congress more than the average American, but I am not blaming ONE MAN for this and SHREDDING him for his NO vote!
August 8th, 2007 at 11:43 amApply a small amount of shampoo - available at pet stores - to the top of the head. (Do not use dish soap, as it can dry and irritate a sasquatch’s skin.) Be extremely careful to keep it away from the eyes. Lather down to the tail, including the neck and underside fur. If using a flea shampoo, leave the lather on for the recommended time. Rinse and repeat.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:43 am“Once people, educated people, like Judges, Lawyers etc, realize that every call in the US is being recorded, then people will do something about it.”\
Baloney: We’ve already had lawyers phones tapped. This happened befoer this bill. What did Congress do? They voted for it.
Mobilizing lawyers? Who do you think supported the illegal activity. Lawyers. They dont’ care about the tapping; they care about the lack of oversight so they can avoid accountability.
Too alte to start askign the alwyers and judges to be given deference: They’ve been shut out — by their agreement in this bill — and have agreed to make themselves irrelevant. Courts aren’t ivnolved with this anymore: The AG can do what he wants, just like the lawyers and Members of Congress want.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:44 amanon,
August 8th, 2007 at 11:45 amTALK IS CHEAP!
SHARE YOU WEALTH OR SHUTUP!
ACTION FROM BUSH HAS SO FAR BEEN ZERO!
THE ONLY ACTION BUSH HAS TAKEN IS WAR!
ALOT OF PEOPLE HAVE SUFFERED AND OR DIED UNDER BUSHES,CHRISTIANS,RETHUGLIGAN PARTIE!
65. Then start implementing you plan. Start giving some directions. Start getting some peole to do what you’re talking about. Stop talking.
Comment by Anun — August 8, 2007 @ 11:42 am
What are you a freaking moron? Can’t read or just can’t comprehend what you read.
One more time dimwit.
The “Plan” IS to TALK.
Get it stupid?
Once people START talking about it, and the word gets out, THEN people “with ACTUAL POWER” will do something about it.
UNTIL people TALK about it, then NOTHING will be done.
Idiot.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:45 amANON, YOU ARE NOTHING BUT HOT AIR, AND CHEAP TALK!
August 8th, 2007 at 11:46 amIMPEACH BUSH, THEN PUT HIS ASS ON TRIAL!!!!
August 8th, 2007 at 11:47 amHey, Z: I don’t expect much from a bunch of relabeled neocons. I do, however, expect the Opposition Party to fight tooth and nail for every inch, every measure, every amendment that they can. The best of the weak is simply not good enough. We need leaders.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:48 amIf we “eat our own”, the neocons have more power. WE are supposed to be more than the absolutist, “with or against us”, goose-stepping neocons so we should not be beating down Sestak or others who are fighting the good fight.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:49 amBaloney: We’ve already had lawyers phones tapped. This happened befoer this bill. What did Congress do? They voted for it.
Comment by Moron — August 8, 2007 @ 11:44 am
Idiot.
NO ONE IS TALKING ABOUT IT YET!!!
Do you get it pinhead???
NO ONE IS TALKING ABOUT IT!!!!!
Once people START talking about it, THEN something might get done. People are talking about recording “SOME” calls.
When the word gets out, that they’re recording ALL calls, THEN things might start to change.
Unless everyones as stupid as you and thinks a Warrant can be legally issued to spy on everyone in the country.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:49 amI remember how dishelved Chimpy looked last Friday when he trotted out Cheney, Gonzales and McConnell to sell more illegal dismantling of the Constitution.
He looked like “his handlers” just woke him up from a booze bender.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:49 amOh, the Alcoholic Chimp. So proud of our prez.
Well, the Democrats are not a monolith. Indeed, because of America’s peculiar Two Party System, no party is unified in thought and deed. The Democrats have always had a small far right wing. It plagued FDR in the 1930s; it betrayed the Dems during Nixon years. But it is pointless to attack the Dems as a whole because of a conservative rump. The key is to challenge those that voted for this expansion of power –the actual members.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:49 am** click*click** Thank you for for participating in the GW Bush Spy-on-America program, sponsored by your local congressman, senator and the your nations phone companies. **click*click** This call may be monitored or recorded to insure the highest quality of your patriotism **
August 8th, 2007 at 11:50 amThen get your plan going. let’s get COngress prosecuted. Wakeup: The lawyers are doign this — drafting their language, and Congress is rubber stamping it.
Then uyou miss the point: The Constitution hasn’t been shredded. It’s still there. This action by Congress isn’t aproblem: It’s evidence. The Act isn’t enforceable. Remind your friends that they follow this bill to their own perit: Their actions are admissable.
All Members of Congress have a duty — even one — to refuse to let the bill go through. The lawful options included making a floor statement charging their peers with crimes if this act was implemented. That was not done.
Voting properly means voting to impeach, voting to indict, and voting to start ethics investigations.
Members of Congress have the power — when there is illegal activity — to request action to trump all business: That of impeachment. A charge of impeachment would have shut down this bill. They refused to do that. It would be privileged, and that trumps all business.
It doesn’t matter if you’re upset. THe issue is whether the Members of Congress — in that moment of choice — can be trusted to assert all lawful options. This guy didn’t do that. It’s too late to complain in the media bout things he could have done on the floor. Did he use all his lawful options? No. He’s part of the problem: Whining, and not putting the Constitution first. Impeachment would have trumped this bill. Where’s the impeachment? Not o nthe table.
All 535 of them: On the table for indictment over oath of office violations. When the Congress is in rebellion, the Members of Congress have to decide whether they’re going to contain this rebellion; or whine about not stopping it. Not impressed: Not all lawful optiosn were used.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:50 amspelling :
I remember how DISHEVELED Chimpy looked last Friday when he trotted out Cheney, Gonzales and McConnell to sell more illegal dismantling of the Constitution.
He looked like “his handlers†just woke him up from a booze bender.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:51 amOh, the Alcoholic Chimp. So proud of our prez.
Let’s see the plan to prosecute these Members of Congress. Where’s the plan to contact the prosecutors around the country to get 5 USC 3331 indictments on the table before Grand Juries?
That’s not talk. That’s action.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:53 amHey, Z: I don’t expect much from a bunch of relabeled neocons. I do, however, expect the Opposition Party to fight tooth and nail for every inch, every measure, every amendment that they can. The best of the weak is simply not good enough. We need leaders.
Comment by Marcus Aurelius — August 8, 2007 @ 11:48 am
Do you KNOW he didn’t say these very things on the floor of the House last week? Do you KNOW that he didn’t do everything he could have done?
August 8th, 2007 at 11:53 amHarry Reid and Nancy P. should step down, they are too timid.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:53 amwe’ve gone from the “do nothing congress”
to the “woulda coulda shoulda congress”
August 8th, 2007 at 11:55 amWe’ve been bullied godamn it. As a nation, as a Congress we’ve been had by a bunch of Crooks posing as an American Presidency!
August 8th, 2007 at 11:56 amAnon: he had the hoption to resign
WHAT!! He should play the “if I can’t win, I’m going home” play ground strategy? Worse, then we lose him in Congress when we most need his voice and vote.
Outrage must be tempered by reason or we cannot hope to sustain our democracy.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:56 amRinse and repeat.
Comment by Marcus Aurelius — August 8, 2007 @ 11:43 am
I never know when to stop.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:57 am85. We know one thing: there’s an illegal bill; and no impeachment which would have stopped this bill.
Doesn’t matter who did or didn’t do what they thought about; they’ve all not ensured this illegal activity has ended.
Again, nobody is sayign that surveillanc eshoud not occur. The answer means focusing on th elegal counsel who drafted this bill; and the Members of Congress who have refused to assert all lawful options to defend thsi Constitution. This hasn’t happened.
This isn’t a problem of the netroots; It’s one this Preident, his reckless legal team, and the complicity Members of Congress — all of them — have jointly done: Not done all thigns to ensure the Constitution is defended.
Talkinga bout it later, as this one is doign, is meaningless. Again, if he was serious about his concerns, then he could have used the option of impeachment to shut this bill down. he didn’t do that. All of them are in trouble.
The wy forward is to focuse on prosecutions of these Members of Congress for oath of office vioaltoins. The Constitution is not away, nor shreded: It is the SUpreme Law. The President, his legal counsel, and Membesr of Congress have been complicity with this unlawful rebelloin against the Rule of law.
Again, not talking about “no surveillance”; only that the Congress ensure the judicial power and warrant process remains; and not dleegate judicila power to the Exeuctive — as this bill has illegally done. This bill is not enforceable.
As a plan going fowrad, continue in your e-mails to freinds overseas to include messages to the NSA, GCHQ, and Candian Security services a request that they forward all war crimes evidence to the EU: and remind their commanders that this bill — as passed — is illegal, and cannot be enforced. Stop tryign to chat up the boards; start directing your messages to the NSA personnel who are going to be reviewing your e-mail. They have to choose: Between following illegal orders and hiding war crimes evidence; or forwarding that evidence of war crimes, as they have a job to do.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:58 am1999 Was the FALL of America,, Courtesy of FREEDUMB!
August 8th, 2007 at 11:59 am“All 535 of them: On the table for indictment over oath of office violations. When the Congress is in rebellion, the Members of Congress have to decide whether they’re going to contain this rebellion; or whine about not stopping it. Not impressed: Not all lawful optiosn were used.
Comment by Anon — August 8, 2007 @ 11:50 am”
The more I read your posts the more I believe you are only 18 and have no idea what the hell you are talking about!!!!
Dude/Dudet, you simply are naive and just lacking the experience to speak logically!
You can “speak” in “theoretical” terms all day long, but that does not make it REALITY!
The fact is that we have Congressional leadership that is preventing members in Congress from standing up. We have Congressional leadership that has allowed this to happen. This is NOTHING we can control!!!!! We do not vote for the LEADERSHIP, the Congress does!!!!!
Stop and think for 2 minutes before you go ranting about something that is totally UNREALISTIC.
You SHREDDING a man that voted properly!
Have you been in the streets the last 6 years yelling at the REPUBLICANS for giving all these powers to Bush??????
If not, you need to sit back and take a breath and THINK about what you are saying because YOU are coming off as a kid who just lost his blankie!
August 8th, 2007 at 11:59 am89. That was an option. if he’s so “unhappy” with things, why is he staying? He could have used impeachment to shut down this bill. Didn’t do that. What’s the plan to get this bill before the FISA court; and have them strike down this bill as illegal. Focus on that.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:59 amDo you KNOW he didn’t say these very things on the floor of the House last week? Do you KNOW that he didn’t do everything he could have done?
Comment by Zooey
Oh, Zoo, so much passion there… Keep on. :D
August 8th, 2007 at 12:01 pmA thought/question: Are the e-mails and phone calls from our troops in foreign countries to back home here in the US subject to wiretapping? Will/have any personnel had repercussions for voicing views in opposition to the occupation of Iraq?
August 8th, 2007 at 12:02 pmOh, Zoo, so much passion there… Keep on. :D
Comment by Juan C — August 8, 2007 @ 12:01 pm
Heh.
Good morning, Juan. :)
August 8th, 2007 at 12:03 pmGood morning, Juan. :)
Comment by Zooey
Good morning to you, lady. Going for coffee.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:05 pmA thought/question: Are the e-mails and phone calls from our troops in foreign countries to back home here in the US subject to wiretapping? Will/have any personnel had repercussions for voicing views in opposition to the occupation of Iraq?
Comment by PatrioticLiberalChristian(PLC) — August 8, 2007 @ 12:02 pm
PLC, I’d be surprised if the troops haven’t been watched since Day One.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:05 pm“85. We know one thing: there’s an illegal bill; and no impeachment which would have stopped this bill.
Doesn’t matter who did or didn’t do what they thought about; they’ve all not ensured this illegal activity has ended.
Comment by Anon — August 8, 2007 @ 11:58 am”
I think you a day late and a dollar short!!!!!!
There are more crimes than this committed and yet your rambling about this one thing on this one Congressman, who voted CORRECTLY!!!!!
Kid, you need to take a nap!!!!!
This Constitution is currently gone, and the only thing that can save it is Impeachment. But as we ALL know, the leadership has REFUSSED to implement that!
So now we should go attacking EVERY other Congressman because the LEADERSHIP refuses to Impeach?????
GROW UP!!!!!
I have given you several examples that fit this situation, yet you still ramble on!!!
Currently, Pelosi and Reid are th problems….. But since WE don’t vote them to be leaders of the Congress the only thing we can do is vote them out and apply pressure on other members of Congress to keep bringing this up.
Take a freaking chill pill and read a few history books to learn how this government thing works, will you?
August 8th, 2007 at 12:06 pm89. That was an option. if he’s so “unhappy†with things, why is he staying? He could have used impeachment to shut down this bill. Didn’t do that. What’s the plan to get this bill before the FISA court; and have them strike down this bill as illegal. Focus on that.
Comment by Anon
_________________________________
“Picking his nose” is an option also - and about as idiotic. Sestak, all by his lonesome, could not have “used impeachment” which can be a lengthy process to “shut down this bill”. You are sounding more and more like a neocon trying to sound progressive initially so you can stir up trouble. So, see this longest finger? Focus on that.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:07 pmA thought/question: Are the e-mails and phone calls from our troops in foreign countries to back home here in the US subject to wiretapping? Will/have any personnel had repercussions for voicing views in opposition to the occupation of Iraq?
Comment by PatrioticLiberalChristian(PLC)
As the law is written, anyone is subject to being tapped. It is as badly written as the Military Commisions Act ( John Warner act), ripe for abuse.
** This call may be monitored or recorded to insure the highest quality of your patriotism **
August 8th, 2007 at 12:09 pmPLC, I’d be surprised if the troops haven’t been watched since Day One.
Comment by Zooey
_____________________
True. Actually, I hoped this question might shift Anon’s attention. No such luck, though.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:09 pmWell for some reason TP is deleting my comments.
Which is getting pretty old.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:10 pm** This call may be monitored or recorded to insure the highest quality of your patriotism **
Comment by Wayne — August 8, 2007 @ 12:09 pm
**snort**
Busy day, better get the heck outta here. Later!
August 8th, 2007 at 12:12 pmWell for some reason TP is deleting my comments.
Which is getting pretty old.
Comment by BARTLEBEE
I am copying anything long before I hit post, because the same thing happening here. Think something weird is up with their filter.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:14 pmThis ANON character is clearly just a right wing troll.
If you think I’m wrong, ask yourself, why he’s in a blog, telling everyone to “stop talking”.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:14 pmwhy do our tics continue to think they can make it up as they go?
August 8th, 2007 at 12:17 pmI watched it on C-SPAN. I do know that Congress is no longer in session, and that the FISA Bill was passed with some Dems now saying that they didn’t know what was in it. Glenn Greenwald said it best.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:18 pmI am copying anything long before I hit post, because the same thing happening here. Think something weird is up with their filter.
Comment by Wayne — August 8, 2007 @ 12:14 pm
Really? Thanks Wayne. I didn’t think I was being overly pugnastic in my posts.
Just my usual charming self.
:D
August 8th, 2007 at 12:21 pmThis is my opinion, and remember I like anarchists ideas (far, far, far left):
After thousands of civilians killed, soldiers killed for whatever reason they come up with this week, stripping rights out of citizens Congressmen opposing the current admin´s actions should beat the hell out of the people endorsing these activities, with fists and clubs. Yes, like japanese use to do. That will teach to NOT F*CK with people´s will.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:24 pm“Picking his nose†is an option also - and about as idiotic. Sestak, all by his lonesome, could not have “used impeachment†which can be a lengthy process to “shut down this billâ€. You are sounding more and more like a neocon trying to sound progressive initially so you can stir up trouble. So, see this longest finger? Focus on that.
Comment by PatrioticLiberalChristian(PLC) — August 8, 2007 @ 12:07 pm
lol. He’s a right wing hack PLC, “in-cog-neato”.
His plan is a little reverse psychology, to try to get us to shout down any late whistleblowers message, and obscure the crimes of Bush by trying to silence discussion of them.
We all know by now, that the blogs do play a role in the elections and the political process. Why? Because at the end of the day, its not a blog, its just ANOTHER medium for the voice of the people, which influences candidates and their positions.
Anon is simply trying to deflate that effect by trying to sweep things under the rug. He’s a troll. Nothing more.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:26 pm“I watched it on C-SPAN. I do know that Congress is no longer in session, and that the FISA Bill was passed with some Dems now saying that they didn’t know what was in it. Glenn Greenwald said it best.
Comment by Marcus Aurelius — August 8, 2007 @ 12:18 pm”
Really????
So how many stood up and spoke out against this bill????
August 8th, 2007 at 12:26 pmNotice he’s in here telling everyone to shut up, yet he’s posted more and longer comments than anyone here.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:28 pmSo how many stood up and spoke out against this bill????
Comment by RemoveBush — August 8, 2007 @ 12:26 pm
181 of them.
Only 41 of them actually voted for it, but that was enough to toss it over the rim.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:29 pmToo Late. Trying to revise it after returning from their recess is like trying to shut the barn door after the horse is 5 miles down the road. It’s obviously better to say no at first than to try to fix it up later, especially when Bush & his Congressional lap dogs will obstruct any and all efforts in the House and Senate.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:30 pm“181 of them.
Only 41 of them actually voted for it, but that was enough to toss it over the rim.
Comment by BARTLEBEE — August 8, 2007 @ 12:29 pm”
Not what I was asking Anon!!!
I know how many voted AGAINST it.
Since he said he watched the debate, I wanted him to tell me how many spoke out against this bill on the floor.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:30 pmSorry.
Too Late. Trying to revise it after returning from their recess is like trying to shut the barn door after the horse is 5 miles down the road. It’s obviously better to say no at first than to try to fix it up later, especially when Bush & his Congressional lap dogs will obstruct any and all efforts in the House and Senate.
Comment by Uncle Ho — August 8, 2007 @ 12:30 pm
Not to mention the fact that since they did authorize it, Bush’s lawyers can now argue that “if it was so illegal, then why’d they reauthorize it, AFTER the question of its legality came up”.
It was a stupid move by Congress. A stupid, stupid move.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:33 pmWith their shocking surrender over President Bush’s draconian new FISA law this weekend, Congressional Democrats snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. They not only had the votes to safeguard American civil liberties and prevent the legalization of past Bush White House criminality. On FISA as we knew it before August 5, 2007, Democrats had the law - and public opinion - on their side.
For the details, see:
August 8th, 2007 at 12:34 pm“Democrats Snatch Defeat from Jaws of Victory on FISA.”
“the only thing that can save it is Impeachment.
What options have you rejected?
August 8th, 2007 at 12:41 pm“This Constitution is currently gone”
You’ll need to convince me. A document that exists cannot be “gone.” The issue is the conduct: that is evidence.
One document exists; the violations of the Constitution does not mean the Constitution is “gone”; the violations are something else: Evidence.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:42 pmThe war on the constitution is over. The constitution lost. Might as well vote Republican next year. Don’t want to get tossed in Gitmo for being a Dem.
Cowards. Every last one of ‘em who voted for this bill. Cowards and criminals.
I’m so disgusted with this country. If I could find a job in Canada…
August 8th, 2007 at 12:42 pm“the only thing we can do is vote them out and apply pressure on other members of Congress to keep bringing this up.”
This suggests we only have “one” option. How do you explain that?
Consider: 10th Amendment reserves all powers to We the People which have not been delegated to the US government or reserved to the states. Contrary to your assertion, there is not “one” optoin; but many options.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:44 pm“could not have “used impeachment†which can be a lengthy process to “shut down this billâ€.
No, starting a charge of impeachment, is not a “lengthy” process: It is a single act. It is privileged. That trumps all business.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:45 pmI live in Minneapolis, and despite my US Representative Ellison and the Representative from St. Paul both voting NO to Bush’s demands (and the throngs of others), Senator Klobuchar (D-MN) voted YES to Bush’s demands.
We’ve changed our lexicon up here in Minnesota to reflect this.
We don’t go take a dump anymore, we go take a Klobuchar.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:45 pmPlease write/phone/email your representative and confirm their vote, let them know your opposition to renewing ANYTHING that looks like this in six months.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:45 pmThat is something you can do. Put them on notice that you’ll be watching for thier speech on the Floor of the House next time this comes around.
I’m exercising the option of ignoring anonymous troll droppings.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:46 pmargue that “if it was so illegal, then why’d they reauthorize it, AFTER the question of its legality came upâ€.
This assumes they’ll “argue” anything. A court would not recognize this bill as lawful. Where do you prompse OLC “argue” this?
They’re not responding to subpoenas.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:47 pmThis is silly: “The constitution lost. Might as well vote Republican next year.”
You have no idea what you’re suggesting: People might take you seriously. If it’s “lost” why are you still posting? I think its because you believe the opposite: there is hope. Other wise you wouldn’ve given up.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:49 pm“Put them on notice that you’ll be watching for thier speech on the Floor of the House next time this comes around.”
Remind them of 5 USC 3331, oath of office: they can be prosecuted for bills like this. The Grand Jury can, as the President has done, ignore precedent.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:50 pmWhatever hope I had in this Dem controlled Congress has not completely evaporated.
These people suck!
I hope everyone enjoyed their freedom while they had it. Freedom, democracy, and the entire republic has vanished under the Toy Emperor. And the Dems enabled it!!!
I never thought I’d see the day. I felt our country had more stability than this.
It’s a terrible thing to see the USA willfully and arrogantly flushed down the toilet.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:52 pm#131 - Mistype. Should have read: Whatever hope I had in this Dem controlled Congress has now completely evaporated.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:53 pm“I hope everyone enjoyed their freedom while they had it.”
If we had “no” freedoms, then we wouldn’t be able to post here. Please, it’s not over. We can fix this. Who still has hope that something can be done? There are many options. I can’t make you keep going; you have to want to continue.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:54 pmJohn F. Kennedy wrote a book titled ‘Profiles in Courage’ in which people took a courageous stand for something. If JFK were alive today, he would write another book, about Congressional Democrats, titled ‘ Profiles in Cowardice’.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:55 pm“Whatever hope I had in this Dem controlled Congress has now completely evaporated.”
Then perhaps — today, and before the 2008 election — a plan could be implemented: What to do to encourage the GOP and DNC Members of Congress — all of them — to leave their parties, and create a new third party within Congress. Then the DNC and GOP leadership will be irrelevant.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:55 pm“You’ll need to convince me. A document that exists cannot be “gone.†The issue is the conduct: that is evidence.
One document exists; the violations of the Constitution does not mean the Constitution is “goneâ€; the violations are something else: Evidence.
Comment by Anon — August 8, 2007 @ 12:42 pm”
You make a REDICULOUS assertion!
Because a document exists means it is not gone, is about the most rediculous thing you have said so far.
Here are most of the “document” that does not exist anymore…..
SINCE TP IS DELETEING ALL MY POSTS THAT HAVE FACTS, HERE ARE THE AMENDMENTS THAT ARE “GONE”.
Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791. Amendment 4 - Search and Seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791.Amendment 6 - Right to Speedy Trial, Confrontation of Witnesses. Ratified 12/15/1791.
Amendment 8 - Cruel and Unusual Punishment. Ratified 12/15/1791.
Now one can argue that they are not completley gone, but if they are enve abused a little I then say they are gone since they are not uheld! Since you seem to believe that a “document” is not gone because it exists, then tell me why it is that these Amendments are no longer relevant under all the current laws prodcued??????
So if a large portion of the Constitu