Secret session doesn’t persuade Dems on FISA
Just in, via CNN, it looks like the rare secret session in the House didn’t persaude the Dems to support a permanent FISA fix that protects telecoms who cooperate w it the feds on counterterrorism:
The House of Representatives voted Friday to back the Democratic-sponsored revisions to federal surveillance laws.
After meeting in secret Thursday night, the House votes Friday on an update to the FISA bill.
The vote was 213 to 197 in favor of a revision of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) bill that was backed by the Democratic leadership.
One member voted present.
The vote came after a unique secret session Thursday night in the House. It was the first time the House has met in secret since 1983 .
The Democratic plan would allow telecommunications companies to be sued for their role in the administration’s much-disputed warrantless surveillance program — something that President Bush and GOP allies have railed against.
Bush has spent weeks pressuring the House to grant retroactive legal immunity to the phone companies that took part in the program, initiated after the September 11 attacks.
Bush argues that legal protection is needed for companies to continue cooperating with the government and has vowed to veto the House Democratic proposal, which would allow the lawsuits to move forward in federal courts.
The Senate already has voted to protect the phone companies from lawsuits filed by privacy advocates, who argue that the surveillance program was illegal.
The Democratic plan, however, will allow the companies to argue their cases and present classified evidence to a judge during a closed proceeding without the plaintiffs present.
On Friday, GOP members spoke out against the plan.
“They [Democrats] know, they know the risks they are taking on behalf of the American people and they don’t care … and that’s what bothers me most,” said Republican Rep. Heather Wilson of New Mexico on Friday.
A joint statement from the Department of Justice and the office of the director of national intelligence said that based on initial reports, “We are concerned that the proposal would not provide the intelligence community the critical tools needed to protect the country.”
We’re back to where we started, living in a 9/10 world.
GOP Whip Roy Blunt’s office e-mails:
House Republican Whip Roy Blunt (Mo.) issued the following statement today after all but 13 Democrats endorsed their leadership’s latest attempt to push through a surveillance bill the Senate will not pass, the president will not sign, and the U.S. intelligence community has deemed unacceptable:
“Even for a Congress with a proven record of over-reaching, the majority’s decision to play politics with critical terrorist surveillance legislation is deeply disappointing. And as they force through another ill-fated and poorly conceived FISA bill today, it’s worth wondering how many intelligence agents would have to testify that vital information is being lost before Democrats hear their message, and finally take up the bipartisan Senate-passed bill.
“Nearly a year has passed since the director of national intelligence identified the need to modernize our outdated surveillance laws, and asked Congress to work with him on finding a workable solution. The Senate has done its part, working with the administration to produce a bill that balances national security with protecting individual rights. But until the House decides to follow suit, our intelligence capabilities will continue to dim – until our agents reach the point where they find themselves completely in the dark.
“It’s my sincere hope the two-week Easter recess imparts in Democrats perspective on this issue they currently do not have. Maybe then they’ll decide to bring forth the bipartisan Senate bill for passage – legislation that arms our intelligence agents with the tools they need to keep us safe, while ensuring the firms that aided our country in the days following September 11th aren’t rewarded for their patriotism with a lawsuit.”
House GOP leader John Boehner’s office points out that the Dems admit their bill is gesture politics:
Lest anyone believe that today’s House vote on new Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) legislation is about anything other than politics, this morning’s CongressDaily AM makes the point crystal clear: even Democratic aides admit the bill – which is only being offered to give Democratic Members something to talk about in their districts – will never become law…
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: FISA
Legal Insurrection
» Will The Truth Be Hasan's Last Victim?
The Powers That Be
» US Intel Knew Hasan Was Trying to Contact Al QaedaYourish.com
» Tom Friedman urges Bush policy on IsraelHot Air
» Iran to Obama: Pound sandThe Other McCain
» Because Paul Krugman cares so much about the Republican PartyCommentary
» Bad Policy and Bad Politics Meet
All together now: But don’t question their patriotism.
Reason #745,931,258 for Term Limits.
Jerks!
the dems are spreading themselves thin. this disaster of a congress, on top of a bloody dem primary which has only shone light on how horribly run the DNC is, will all work against them. i agree with Bush in his prediction of a republican sweep this year.
I see my Blue-Dog Dem Representative voted the wrong way on this one — grrr! He’s usually pretty good, but this one deserves a nasty-gram!!
I’m starting to think that the south border of Mexico is where I will spend my days. The southern border of Mexico is 1000x more secure than our own.
National security is of no issue to Dems. Raising taxes (or getting rid of Bush’s tax cuts) means that my dollar is worth less. Looks to me like we are turniong into Mexico. Corruption at the highest levels. Taking hard earned dollars away from the middle class and upper class. If these Dems succeed next year I will move to another country.
Put a vote up to see if America should nuke itself and I bet the Democrats would vote for it.
Wait a minute, that’s what they just did.
Bingo John
Our resident trolls are awefully quiet today.
Troll take?
What am I thinking. They would only say something stoopid like:
“we should have been listening in”
After our next attack.
I hope you’re right, but don’t think you are. Congressional Republicans still can’t get their act together – e.g., losing the recent House election in what had been a safe Republican district, and not even bothering to come up with a candidate to oppose a one-term donkey Senator in a red state.
For their part, the donkeys are obviously emboldened enough to believe they can brass it out by putting trial lawyers over national defense and get away with it. They’re banking on another election campaigning against George Bush, drawing out their voters in droves for one last spasm of hatred. It’ll probably work, too.
It’s a dismaying prospect, but a very real one, that after presiding over a completely ineffectual congress for the last two years – and seeing congressional approval ratings plunge to and remain at historic lows – the donkeys are actually going to gain seats in both the House and Senate this year.
McCain may very well win the presidency, only to be faced with large donkey majorities in both houses of congress. In which case his situation will be about the same as that of Douglas MacArthur, surrounded on Corregidor Island in 1942, trying to make lemonade out of lemons by saying, “They may have the bottle, but I have the cork.”
- That’s assuming, of course, that the donks don’t acquire veto-proof majorities, something I’m not at all confident of.
My congressman, John Duncan, was against the war, which ticked me off, but now he is voting on the right side of this issue. He is also on Ron Paul’s Liberty Committee (which is libertarian). I have a screwed up congressman.
I suspect that nothing will happen between now and the election.
Adviser to Clinton Meets With President of Syria
Obama Adviser Leads Delegation to Damascus
Cool it nutjobs and Iraq and the rest is yours after we get in office … deal?
And BTW the lawyers will donate a fortune to us.
Pelosi and her cronies remind me of Bill Murray’s character in Groundhog Day. They just keep living 9/10 over and over again.
Like you corner the market there or something.
Barry,
Except Bill Murray finally got it right.
Democrats always worry about the things of no lasting consequence. Plenty of legal and judicial precedence exist to protect lawful citizens from abuse of government – unless you discount the IRS. They prefer to concern themselves, apparently, with an insect that might sting them rather than the bear that would rip their lungs out. Prioritization and risk assessment is not a strong suit with them, unless it involves their personal interests. Let’s prepare to prosecute them when 911 II happens. I would like to see collaborators twisting in the wind.
Pelousy is at it again. Talk about a failed Speaker – she takes the cake!
I’m glad you have that roll call MM – those people voting against FISA will have blood on their hands come the next attack on US soil. Of course they’ll all probably say they were for it before they were against it, or vice versa – whatever serves their current agenda best.
Here’s this troll’s take:
After 9/11, the totally unqualified and untested president was desperately seeking ways to prevent new attacks. He thought illegal search and torture would help (nevermind that qualified and tested people told him otherwise). He followed his own impulses rather than the law. Now there is secret evidence that Bush personally ordered illegal acts. If discovered, this information could get him impeached or into jail. Now he is desperately trying to keep those secrets.
He is willing to let FISA expire in order to protect himself.
As for the secret session — Democrats say they learned very little. I’m glad they are standing up for he rule of law.
lgm, what is the evidence. If you know about it, it is not secret so please come out of the closet with what you know.
HHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHHAAAAAHHAAAAAAA
OMG
Thanks for the best laugh for Friday!
Leave it to the math teacher to come up with:
BWWWAAAAAHHHAAAHAHAAAHHHHHAAAAAAAAA
Oh, stop. My sides hurt.
lgm also said
Which means they are still dumb as rocks. Is that what you meant, Mr. Big Secret?
After 9-11. There fixed it for you prof.
Why do you liberals hate America?
You think the donks are going to cut off their source of funds?
lgm,
I usually make it a rule not to respond to you or Rusty, but I have to agree with On-my-soap-box:
I had one heck of a laugh myself. It is so good for the digestion. Thanks!
The “blue dog” Democrats allegedly for protecting America (reportedly for the Senate’s version) bailed.
I sure am glad Bill Clinton wasn’t untried and untested and unqualified or anything else like BooooSH was, otherwise we might not have stopped the guys that perpetrated 9/11 before they got that far.
Oh, wait….Never Mind….
/sarc off
This has absolutely nothing to do with the rule of law, or protecting the rights of citizens.
As I have said in the past, this has everything to do with trial attorneys.
Trail attorneys do not want individuals rights. The only right trial attorneys want you to have is the right to hire an attorney to represent you.
This has been going on for 15 years now. It will continue as long as we keep sending millionaire attorneys to Washington DC. They do not represent the American People, they only represent attorneys and the business people who can keep them in power. Why do you think it takes 1,048 pages of double speak to basically state a veteran has a right to make a claim for disabilities in incurred during military service. To force a veteran to hire an attorney, why else.
Trial attorneys want the telecom cases to go to court so they can make millions and have the taxpayers foot the bill, as usual.
As for the rule of law, the President has the right, by the rule of law, to utilize whatever means necessary to protect the people of this country. His only boundaries are that he cannot compel a citizen to incriminate him/herself.
The only reason for the lawsuits is monetary. It has nothing to do with rights, the rule of law, etc.. else, it would be the Executive that would be on trial. Liberals call this justice. I call politically authorized theft of the peoples monies.
Can warrants still be obtained? And, doesn’t having warrants give the telecoms the protection needed going forward?
Past actions that were exigent where warrants were not obtained should be excused. Past actions where warrants should have been pursued and weren’t, should be dealt with according to law.
I like warrants. I like following the law. And, protecting the telecoms should not trump protecting the American people. Pres Bush please sign the bill and protect us.
Ron Rockstar said (#19):
Evidence? I don’t need no stinkin’ evidence! (but seriously, if y’all think Bush is a law abidin’ citizen, I got a bridge to sell ya.)
John Ansell said ($22):
For the same reason you beat your wife.
lgm, are you conceding you are a liar.
“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” – Benjamin Franklin
funny LGM, take domestic battery and make light of it. Was that your plan? You see, I don’t beat my wife and you would have no proof to make such a claim. I, on the other hand, have your posts as proof that you hate America.
Yeah this is the outcome we will see, but this little dog and pony show is working for the “Progressive Left” blogs.
Check any of the usual suspects in that group and you will see nothing but praise for the work done, with the exception of all their bad mouthing of the “Bush Dog Dems” (their term not mine) they seem to have issue with.
Again LGM I hope the next terrorist attack doesn’t include your city or neighborhood. I also hope they don’t release the Gitmo guys in your neighborhood either. Would you be willing how house them while they await for their departure? I know you probably are not a praying person so what is your hope that you can keep your city from an terrorist attack? I’d love to know.
Funny thing is, LGM teaches at NYU. Isn’t that in New York City?
Just a question, LGM, were you there in 2001? I would be curious if you might share your feelings about the terrorists you had that afternoon. (Not a trick question, I am genuinely curious, if you wish to tell us. No Troll food)
Just for the record: I fully support execution if they are found guilty. I don’t believe for a second we should worry about what the rest of the world thinks about that. No one is going to stop relations with us over it, and the ones that might need to anyway.
As for whether or not they would be martyrs or heros, if my Jihadists lore is correct, I think the only way they are considered heros is if they died carrying out their attacks. I know that’s the only path to their ‘reward’ of 72 Virgins. (ha ha). Being executed by us might be a dis-honor to them for all we know. (’course I could be wrong. They are nuts…)
Okay. Wrong thread. It’s late.
SHoward said (#35):
I work about two miles from the World Trade Center site. When I learned the buildings had collapsed (around 11am) I rushed to my kid’s school, which was a few blocks from the site. I didn’t find him, but they told me the kids were safe. Then I went to the site to volunteer, but police were turning people away. They already knew there would be few survivors. Of course I knew people who worked in the World Trade Towers and had no way to know who had escaped.
I was watching on our customer lounge TV where I worked as the second plane hit.
I’m glad you and your kids are safe.
“They [Democrats] know, they know the risks they are taking on behalf of the American people and they don’t care … and that’s what bothers me most,” said Republican Rep. Heather Wilson of New Mexico on Friday.
No. They don’t care. We already knew that!
lgm doesn’t care. I knew that.
For some folks, Freedom has always been Free.
Others have paid dearly for it. It is notional or academic for those that never went to Defend Freedom.
Glad you are safe LGM but you need to know they want to strike again. Are you willing to sacrifice your kids and city because of this?
What’s so great about a 1984 type of surveillance dictatorship? Islam might be more attractive.