Congressional idiots pass blatantly Un-Constitutional bill

It seems the time of the Cowardly Democrat will never end:

The ACLU announced today that it will challenge this bill in court as soon as it is passed on the ground that its warrantless eavesdropping provisions violate the Fourth Amendment:

In advance of the president's signature, the ACLU announced its plan to challenge the new law in court.

"This fight is not over. We intend to challenge this bill as soon as President Bush signs it into law," said Jameel Jaffer, Director of the ACLU National Security Project. "The bill allows the warrantless and dragnet surveillance of Americans' international telephone and email communications. It plainly violates the Fourth Amendment."

Can't we get Mike Merrifield in congress to kick someone's ass?

Happy Fourth to our Gutless and Powerless Congress

Joe Galloway, has the perfect July 4 column, condemning what he calls "a gutting of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution" that is "yet another stain on the gutless and seemingly powerless Democratic majority in both houses of Congress." He
adds:

"That a majority on both sides of the aisle -- not least of them the presumptive nominees for president of both political parties -- intend to vote for such a violation of Americans' right to privacy and of the sanctity of their personal communications is a stunning surrender to those who want us to live in fear forever."

If criticizing one's country out of honor and pride is not patriotic enough for you, please go see this flag pin...

Two good questions from Galloway's column:

How can even one senator on either side of the aisle in good conscience vote in favor of this law that does nothing to enhance our security and everything to diminish our rights as a free people?

How can both men who seek to become our next president cast such a vote when both should be standing shoulder-to-shoulder declaring that they would govern by our consent and with our approval, not by wielding the coercive and corrosive and corrupt powers that King George III and his latter-day namesake from Texas thought are theirs by divine right?

(h/t Glenzilla)

Pelosi to Bush: "Liar"

Ha!

Bush and Republican lawmakers have shown no desire to move further toward the House Democratic leaders' position, and the Democrats are showing no sign of buckling under the mounting political pressure.

Since the Sept. 11 attacks, such showdowns have followed a predictable path: After some protest, Democrats have given in to White House demands, fearing the political fallout as Bush hammered them for allegedly jeopardizing American lives. . . .

Bush appeared on the White House's South Lawn yesterday to demand House passage of the Senate legislation, warning lawmakers that "voting for this bill would make our country less safe. . . . The American people understand the stakes in this struggle. They want their children to be safe from terror" . . . .

Then the House went off script. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) responded to Bush's appeal, all but calling the president a liar.

'bout time. I might give to the DCCC after all..............

demagoguery

Rush Holt (NJ-12), the Chair of the House Select Intelligence Oversight Panel had this to say about George Bush's latest fearmongering on the need to pass the Protect AT&T Act:

What the President really wants is a permanent blank check to conduct indiscriminate collection and fishing expeditions without any judicial oversight. This does not lead to better intelligence.

QOTD

The Protect AT&T Act

Further rebuttal to Allard staffer Sean Conway's lies

Sean Conway, some kind of staffer to Wayne Allard, took to the airwaves last week as part of the Republicans' latest attempt to promote the fear of terror (nice how that works) and the idea that Democrats want Osama bin Laden to marry Britney Spears on live TV.

Conway said: 1) Dems want to allow terrorists to sue phone companies (Now we know why he works for America's stupidest senator); and 2) Dems better hope we don't get attacked because it will be all our fault - Sean's second lie conveniently omitted the fact that the president is........The President.

Sean's play didn't work and the White House had to walk back their own specific FISA lies within hours. And now we have 4 more long-respected intelligence experts who are questioning what the hell DNI McConnell is doing with these phony threats?

Dear Director McConnell,

....snip....

The sunset of the Protect America Act (PAA) does not put
America at greater risk. Despite claims that have been made, surveillance currently occurring under the PAA is authorized for up to a year. New surveillance requests can be filed through current FISA law. As you have stated, "Unlike last summer, there is no backlog of cases to slow down getting surveillance approvals from the FISA court. We're caught up to all of it now." As court orders are received, telecom companies are required to comply. Also, existing NSA authority allows surveillance to be conducted abroad on any known or suspected terrorist without a warrant. It is unclear to us that the immunity debate will affect our surveillance capabilities.

You stated on Fox News Sunday February 17 "the entire issue here is liability protection for the carriers" and that with the expiration of the Protect America Act, the telecom companies "are less inclined to help us." As mentioned above, the authorizations of surveillance under the sunset PAA still run for a year and they provide clear legal protection to any cooperating communications carrier.....

The intelligence community currently has the tools it needs to acquire surveillance of new targets and methods of communication. As in the past, applications for new targets that are not already authorized by the broad orders already in place under the PAA can be filed through the FISA courts, including the ability to seek warrants up to 72 hours retroactively. Despite this fact, the President claimed on February 16 that as a result of PAA not being extended by Congress "the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence will be stripped of their power to authorize new surveillance against terrorist threats abroad." It remains unclear-in light of the law-how the President believes surveillance capabilities have changed.

etc..........

Sincerely,


RAND BEERS
RICHARD A. CLARKE
DON KERRICK
SUZANNE SPAULDING

Can't be much more clear than that. When will Sean Conway join us in the reality based world where terrorism is not the greatest threat America has ever faced?

White House lied about FISA intelligence "losses"

The White House lied once again on FISA and the phony-baloney telecomm stuff:

Hours after chiding Congress for not finishing a wiretapping bill and leaving the nation 'vulnerable to terrorist attack,' officials acknowledge all requested information is being received.

Need I say it again? The sky is not falling!!!!!!!!!!!

"This is serious backpedaling by the DNI," the Democratic official said of McConnell. "He's been saying for the last week that the sky is falling, and the sky is not falling."

In his Saturday radio address, Bush called on Congress to quickly pass the wiretapping legislation when it returns Monday from a recess, saying telecommunications companies need the law to help the government monitor foreign terrorists and to protect them from class-action lawsuits.

"The House's refusal to act is undermining our ability to get cooperation from private companies, and that undermines our effort to protect us from terrorist attacks," Bush said in his second radio address in two weeks on the same issue.

The comments by Mukasey, McConnell and Bush were criticized by civil rights and privacy advocates, including Caroline Fredrickson, director of the Washington legislative office of the American Civil Liberties Union.

"In an attempt to get sweeping powers to wiretap without warrants, Republicans are playing politics with domestic surveillance legislation," Fredrickson said.

It was the White House that ensured Protect America Act (via FISA) expiration

The White House did it:

McConnell acknowledged last week that the White House's refusal to extend the wiretapping law was meant to pressure Congress to pass the Senate bill.

Shocking, I know, the President Bush would play politics with our national security.

Color me shocked...Salazar votes with us on FISA debate

Salazar just voted no on cloture, which would have cut off debate on FISA and been the next step in giving President Bush everything he wanted, including immunity for the telecoms who spied on us.

This is only a baby step is the fight to maintain our Constitution.

I thank you, Ken.

Anytime you hear anyone one talking about a wiretap....

President Bush, lying:

"And by the way, anytime you hear the United States government talking about "wiretap", it requires, a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so."

Senator Ken Salazar: Bipartisan, silent, obedient

On FISA:

That's typically the way Washington works -- the most significant laws are seamlessly enacted with little real debate or attention, driven by corporations and lobbyists working in secret with Senators, cheered on by the Serious media pundits, with bipartisan pools of lawmakers silently and obediently on board. And once those forces line up behind any measure, it is normally almost impossible to stop it -- not just stop it, but even disrupt it at all. That's the insulated Beltway parlor, virtually impervious to outside influences, least of all the opinions of the citizen-rabble.

* * * * *

All of those standard Beltway forces are squarely lined up behind telecom immunity and new eavesdropping powers, and yet, things are not proceeding smoothly for them at all. Back in December, Harry Reid, Jay Rockefeller and Mitch McConnell scheduled just a couple of days for the FISA debate because they assumed that was all that would be needed to deliver quickly and quietly to the President everything he demanded.

UPDATE: Dodd commends Qwest for following the law

"They knew the law and they violated it."

And Ken Salazar is ready to ratify the violations of law and Constitution by all the other telecoms as these laws are debated in the senate today.

UPDATE: Well, the Constitution won - today. This bill is still in the queue, and I believe the administration will show no hesitation in doing whatever they can think of to get their boss - and the telecoms - off the hook. Until then, give Chris Dodd money, or give to Ken Salazar so he can buy a clue on this issue....