The FISA ball is back in the air

[solarbird]

I've been hearing rumours for a while that the Democrats have been working to get retroactive immunity for lawbreaking by telecommunications companies past the House of Representatives, as per Chief Executive Bush's desire. It would also greatly expand warrantless wiretapping powers, as repeatedly discussed here and other places.

Digby today reprints part of a National Journal article stating, amoungst other things:

The House Intelligence Committee's top Democrat disclosed late Tuesday that he is ready to accept a Republican-brokered deal to rewrite [FISA]... House Intelligence Chairman Silvestre Reyes told CongressDaily that he is "fine" with language offered by Senate Intelligence ranking member Christopher (Kit) Bond and other Republicans to overhaul the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

There's also some talk of letting a different Federal court make the grant, but that's not the language being discussed right now. Under the new capitulation - if working out the exact details of the plan you and your negotiating partners both want can be called that - the FISA court would grant the telecoms retroactive immunity, rather than Congress directly.

If this report is real, and if this law passes, I will vote for no national Democrats this fall. The only reason I'm considering voting for Democrats at all is in fact because of this one, single, hold out so far against Chief Executive Bush's agenda of unlimited and unilateral executive power. This last shred of stand for Constitution and law and this last and only functioning path of investigation into some of the crimes of the Bush administration these last eight years is the only remaining piece of hope I have in reversing this authoritarian lawlessness.

If the Democrats hand that over, if they let these investigative lawsuits be mooted, if they shut down the last and only functional past of investigation, then I will not help them pretend they are somehow different, because they won't be. I've said before that FISA is my last stand. I meant it.

Comments

[technoshaman.livejournal.com]

What of Obama's vow to go over all this bovine scatology? Has he got a statement on the issue? If he voted nay and comes out with a statement saying Yes, That Too, then I'm willing to vote for him. Ditto any congresscritter that actually voted nay on the thing. But, yes, the rank and file leadership (Hillary Clinton) is quite corrupt and needs tossing under the bus, that much is quite clear. *sigh* Assuming we get a decent result in November, I can't *wait* for January... OTOH, best to hedge our bets and enjoy such as we have before then, because if Diebold wins the Election of 2008, it'll be time to fly...

[solarbird]

He showed up to vote "no" in the Senate (unlike Senator Clinton) and issued a statement against it, but did not actively work against it on the floor.

[technoshaman.livejournal.com]

I'll take best two out of three, especially when the only other choice with a snowball's chance is Thousand Year Torture Boy...

[solarbird]

That's fine. I'm not lobbying others in this case; I'm just outlining what I can and cannot stomach.

[mojave-wolf.livejournal.com]

I already sent a missive to Hillary telling her that she and all the lead democratic candidates made a mistake in in only passively backing Dodd on this issue last winter, and whatever her reasons were back then, the principle is clear and (cliches on way) as long as her back is against the wall, she might as well start swinging, and better to be swinging on important issues.

To clarify slight offness, she did co-sponsor the Dodd amendment or bill or whatever it was, I forget, and supported the filibuster; she only didn't show up on the final vote (stupid as that decision was, which was also in my e-mail)(she had been there and voted correctly previously) when even Dodd had agreed to drop the filibuster and the votes clearly weren't there.

Personally, I never understood why none of the top three jumped on this; it was either horrible strategy on all of their parts or all of them wanted to look like they were on the right side while actually not being. I dunno why Dodd dropped the filibuster, either; were you one of the people also wondering if the whole thing was a shadow play at the time?

[firni.livejournal.com]

I'm so fed up that I figure we're screwed no matter who wins the election.

Unless it's a rabid squirrel. I could go for that.

[angharads-house.livejournal.com]

okay, so you're perhaps not voting for the Dems. question is, what other choices do you have?

presume that 'not vote' is a dysfunctional, and therefore deprecated, option.

[solarbird]

I'll mix-and-match Libertarian and Green. It'll depend upon who is on the ballot, I suppose. The point being: saying you're better doesn't make you better. Branding is not content, and I will not play my part in that lie.

[angharads-house.livejournal.com]

Well, I have multiple horses in that horse-race, insofar as some definable fraction of my family and close folk live within the country whose presidency is in play. We're fairly evenly split Dem/Lib, leaning more towards Lib. The old Dem machine does produce local and state results in New England, but nationally it seems, now, to be quite corrupt -- this FISA business is most disappointing.

The greater part of what concerns us, though, is local politics, since it's upon municipal and county/regional-district land-use matters that the value of our land-based assets swings. Fortunately enough, it is at the local level that our participation can have the most immediate impact -- the possibility holds true on both sides of the S&W Line -- so if nowt else, at least we are putting resources of time and some cash into local politics.

You'll find it amusing that I got tapped up yet once again to run for council (up here -- I certainly retain my Canadian domicile); of course declined, for lots of grokkably good and present reasons. Have my hands full with my immediately subsequent appointment to chair our village's APC [1], where at least I suspect I can make a beneficial contribution on land-use and zoning matters [2], while staying out of the limelight. This, in general, is optimal.

[1] wherein our mayor has his sweet revenge on yours truly -- that's another evening a week tied up, instead of writing or sewing or other fun things. Mind'ee, I did agree to the appointment. And it's an infill position, runs until November, at which point mayor and council can ratify or replace as they see fit

[2] I was up-front about challenging the invidious dual presumptions of population and areal growth -- the developers have had some glorious suburban wet-dream fantasies about 20,000 to 30,000 new dwelling units, which I rather suspect will fade as the ICI finance markets become increasing sluggish.

[denelian.livejournal.com]

i really don't know what to do on these things...

i vote Dem because i have a uterus, and it is *MINE*.

this is when i REALLYREALLYREALLY wish we had a parlimentary system... i want another choice. or 3. or really, anything beyond *right* and *furtherright*

[king-chiron.livejournal.com]

I doubt that many Democrats were making a principled stand against retroactive immunity, they simply saw it as a way to play politics. They're probably thinking ahead to when they're in the WH and how nice it would be not to have to worry about pesky legalities.