Accidental post

[solarbird]

...but since I posted it, it may as well stay up...

More on the Federal energy bill, or what might be left of it, if that's anything.

US Federal Judge Richard Posner calls for ending traditional safeguards of liberty and law and instituting secret trials in the US. I don't suppose anyone will want to impeach him, either. One of Sullivan's readers comments here.

Gordon Brown reveals "Fortress Britain" plan. Jesus.

Retroactive amnesty for telecom lawbreaking is moving forward in the Senate; Senator Feinstein will probably get the bill out of committee today. Democrats in California are trying to get the state party to censure her over this, but the state party is moving to crush that effort.

Oooooooh, this is neat: maybe securities owners can't foreclose. That should slow down a lot of foreclosure processes - at least until people can get the last several years' of completely absent paperwork back together. Tho' uncredited by the NYT, bloggers say this particular analysis actually originated here. (Actual court ruling is here.)

Comments

[technoshaman.livejournal.com]

FEINSTEIN? You'd think she'd be fighting this tooth and nail...

Where's the bucks in this? Somebody's got to be jerking people around, and the way that's done in the other Washington is with large amounts of dead presidents. There's gotta be a trail.

[solarbird]

FEINSTEIN? You'd think she'd be fighting this tooth and nail...
I see you missed earlier ranting on my part about this.

Where's the bucks in this?
Feinstein's campaign fund, amoungst other places. No, seriously, it's all very out in the open. And legal.

[dustin-00.livejournal.com]

You find all the scary web pages.

[solarbird]

Hey, it's Your Daily Dose of Down, I say so right in the profile! It's not my fault the world's gone all pear-shaped.

[angharads-house.livejournal.com]

Aaargh, and I want to come down there this weekend when it turns out there's a perfectly good Daiso in Richmond?

(gives head a shake)

[solarbird]

Well, since you're there already. I think the Westlake one is larger than most in North America. Not as large as the ones I saw in Tokyo and Kyoto, but, you know, large.

[angharads-house.livejournal.com]

Finally flashed on the name of the Japanese hypermarket in New York (well, really Englewood Cliffs, but with a private shuttle bus from 42nd Street) --

Mitsuwa Marketplace. Very nice.

And I am so looking forward to getting some more Suntory Vitamin C beverage -- I love that stuff, and miss getting it in the City.

[solarbird]

BTW, they don't have food. Well, okay, a little, but not really. So it's not an Uwajimaya substitute.

Also, the Seattle Uwajimaya also has a Kinokuniya.

[angharads-house.livejournal.com]

No, no ME MELTING NOW aieeeee................. sploosh.
(Oh, it's raining like a barstid here now. Harrumph. So much for hopes of better weather.)

[dustin-00.livejournal.com]

Also from the link to telecom amnesty:

"Sen. Feingold is introducing an amendment to strip the bill of the telecom amnesty gift which Jay Rockefeller ensured was put into the bill to protect his campaign contributors from liability."

So she is trying to kill Rockefeller's stunt.

[solarbird]

Senator FeinSTEIN is not Senator FeinGOLD. Senator FeinGOLD doesn't want telecom amnesty and is working against it; Senator FeinSTEIN is working hard with the Republicans to make it happen.

(Yes, the name similarity confused me earlier too.)

[dustin-00.livejournal.com]

UG! Ick -- reading for comprehension: fail!

Just a fineCOLLISION in naming confusion.

[llachglin.livejournal.com]

I just got e-mail from Chris Dodd's campaign and according to him the committee approved a version of the bill WITHOUT retroactive immunity. However, it will likely be brought back as an amendment. The relevant text:

1. Within the last hour, the Senate Judiciary Committee just reported out a FISA bill that DOES NOT include retroactive immunity for the telecom companies that helped the Bush Administration spy on Americans.
2. This means the Judiciary bill moves to the full Senate WITHOUT the dangerous language included.
3. Retroactive immunity will, however, surely be introduced as an amendment to the FISA bill.
4. If needed Senator Dodd will filibuster any amendment seeking to add retroactive immunity to the underlying bill. By filibustering, he will force the opposition to find 60 votes to pass the provision.

It will be a lot more difficult for those who would enable the erosion of our Constitution to find the 60 votes necessary to stop immunity on its own than it would be for us to find the 40 needed to sustain a filibuster of the bill as a whole if it included immunity.

[solarbird]

That's very surprising. It looks like they voted not to do anything regarding it, but specifically to send it to a floor fight, with two conflicting versions of the bill from two different committees. Neat. Senator Feinstein's backers must be incensed not to have this as a slam-dunk. Good, that's one step forward. Here's Greenwald's last comment (as of now):

UPDATE XI: Having just spoken with several people involved in today's morass, I have a lot more clarity about what happened. What I described in the prior update is accurate. Now, the next step will be focused on Sen. Reid. He has virtually unlimited discretion to decide what version of the bill to introduce to the full Senate. He could introduce the Intelligence Committee version (with amnesty), the Judiciary Committee version (without amnesty), the House version, or he could just introduce something entirely new altogether, something that gets negotiated between Rockefeller and Reid.

Regardless of what he moves forward, though, it'll be a question of a filibuster fight - a real one.

[llachglin.livejournal.com]

This seems to be a lot more confusing than I thought. Some relevant links:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/11/15/amnesty_fisa/index.html

and

http://chrisdodd.com/blog/no-immunity%21

Basically, immunity was not addressed either way. It's not in the bill, but it's not explicitly forbidden either. So it's a last-minute half-victory. Explicit immunity would require an amendment with 60-vote support, which is unlikely. On the other hand, explicitly forbidding immunity also requires an amendment. So this punts the controversy down the road. It's a good parliamentary maneuver from the good guys when they couldn't get the whole thing. Thanks to Feingold, Dodd, and Leahy.

Still, it seems like without explicit immunity that lawsuits could go forward, unless the White House is planning some kind of novel theory whereby it can grant legal immunity in civil cases to corporations. That wouldn't seem to be covered by the presidential pardon power, but I'm hardly a lawyer, and I'm sure there's some unitary executive rationale that will be invoked when necessary.

[llachglin.livejournal.com]

Oh, and apparently Harry Reid can choose which version to send to the full Senate, so by himself could bring back immunity. Still, this is a better outcome than expected, and there's still a good chance that immunity will require 60 votes. I think that's a winnable battle. Having to get 60 to override a filibuster by the other side was not winnable.

[rmd.livejournal.com]

have some indignation: http://www.idahostatesman.com/politics/story/205994.html

[rmd.livejournal.com]

hee. fritz found the link and posted it to That Damned List.

[solarbird]

eeegh That List.

So, don't tell me who, but how many people there are in the pro-torture camp these days?

[llachglin.livejournal.com]

you should ask Fritz if he's the same guy who's posting to the Orcinus blog in favor of Ron Paul's candidacy. There's a poster by the name of "Fritz" who writes a lot like him.