Secretary Gates Said We Would Know if the Surge Was Working Early On, Before All the Surge Troops Arrived in Iraq. “I want you to know that the timetable for the introduction of additional U.S. forces will provide ample opportunity early on, and before many of the additional U.S. troops arrive in Iraq, to evaluate the progress of this endeavor and whether the Iraqis are fulfilling their commitments to us.” [Testimony of Secretary Gates to the Senate Armed Services Committee, 1/12/07] http://democrats.senate.gov/journal/entry.cfm?id=282206

Gannon: This week, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi pronounced "The Surge" of troops into Iraq to secure Baghdad "a failure." The Washington Post reports that the last troops for the operation will be in place TODAY. http://www.jeffgannon.com/archives/2007/06/index.html

Baucus (D-MT), Bayh (D-IN), Carper (D-DE), Casey (D-PA), Conrad (D-ND), Inouye (D-HI), Johnson (D-SD), Kohl (D-WI), Landrieu (D-LA), Lincoln (D-AR), McCaskill (D-MO), Mikulski (D-MD), Nelson (D-FL), Nelson (D-NE), Pryor (D-AR), Rockefeller (D-WV), Salazar (D-CO), Webb (D-VA), Whitehouse (D-RI)

And last, but not least, Harry Reid (D-NV)

191-229 according to Reuters and Cspan.

in a hissy fit at the direction of Boehner. (Debate has been about the FISA bill and the contempt issues.)

Here's the Cspan link: http://www.cspan.org/watch/cs_cspan_wm.asp?Cat=TV&Code=CS

223-32

The came back after the contempt vote. They stayed out long enough to avoid that vote and to hold a press conference.

Mitch McConnell: Blue Dogs good. Everyone else wants us all to die a grisly death. Ugh.

http://www.cspan.org/watch/cs_cspan2_wm.asp?Cat=TV&Code=CS2

McConnell said no after he said we're all gonna die after it expires on Saturday.

If only we had some system in place whereby the existing rules that allow an impartial person or collection of persons versed in the law to hear arguments from both sides and make a reviewable determination could be altered -- perhaps even "adapted" -- to include secret evidence!

We do have that system. It's called the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA). That's why traitors want "retroactive immunity."

I think I see what you mean. There's this:

The State Secrets Protection Act, introduced by Sens. Edward Kennedy and Arlen Specter, would prohibit the dismissal of cases prior to discovery. The legislation would require courts to examine the actual classified evidence instead of dismissing suits on the sole basis of affidavits submitted by the perpetrators themselves. It also would allow courts to compel the government to produce unclassified substitutes for privileged evidence and, if the government refuses, to resolve the issue in favor of the plaintiff. http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-oe-wizner14feb14,0,3108119.story

The text of the bill is here: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s110-2533

And the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing about it on Wednesday: http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearing.cfm?id=3091

Has there been any rulings or any events of note in any of the pending legal actions that have taken place while this debate has been ongoing?

I've been trying to follow these as closely as possible, and the last activity I've seen was the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Al-Haramain v. Bush on November 16, 2007.

The 9th Circuit Appeals court ruled (.pdf) that the Top Secret document was protected by the so-called state secrets privilege that lets the government have lawsuits thrown out if they involve national secrets.

But the three-judge panel sent the matter back down to a lower court [District Court Judge Vaughn Walker], to see if a redress provision in the nation's spying laws trumps that privilege, which would re-allow the document to be used....

The case known as Al Haramain v. Bush centers on two American lawyers who were advising the Oregon branch of a Saudi-based Muslim charity. During the process of putting Al Haramain on the State Department's terrorist watch list in 2004, the government accidentally turned over a document they say showed that lawyers Wendell Belew and Asim Ghafoor were targets of illegal surveillance. http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/11/9th-circuit-dea.html

Judge Walker held a case management conference on Feb. 7 for this case and Hepting v. AT&T, but there's nothing on his calendar yet. I'd read previously somewhere that the courts were waiting to see what happens to the law re: the telecom cases (Al-Haramain is not a telecom case).

Unless they've made a change to the FISA amendment, the telecom immunity section says "(I) authorized by the President during the period beginning on September 11, 2001, and ending on January 17, 2007;"

Hmmmm.

Also, here's more about the State Secrets Protection Act introduced by Kennedy & Specter -

The text of the bill: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s110-2533

The Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing about it on Wednesday: http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearing.cfm?id=3091

I was in a hurry and didn't explain. Your post reminded me that the FISA amendment covers immunity for wiretapping that began on 9/11 - not wiretapping that began before that. So, maybe the ACLU and others have something else to work with.

I don't think this has been mentioned recently, but

Glenn Greenwald, 6/15/06: In sum, Specter's legislation amends the provision of FISA which provides for criminal penalties, and then, astonishingly, makes those revisions retroactive all the way back to 1978 (when FISA was enacted). http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/06/specter-falsely-denied-proposing_15.html

It didn't work nearly 2 years ago, but here we are again. We all know telecom immunity is about covering up the administration's own crimes. Conyers, Pelosi, Reyes & Hoyer need to be reminded of this.

(Bravo, DCLaw1! Please don't stop, I want to know how this rollicking adventure turns out.)

Glenn: I'd love to know how many National Review readers and Rush Limbaugh listeners spent today going to the store to stock up on window shutters and canned goods.

You forgot duct tape.