There. I believe I have set the absolute stupidity nadir for this discussion. Perhaps we can only go up from here?

This has probably already been said, but it seems to me that Froomkin became sort of a de facto ombudsman, something for which the Post and most other newspapers have shown little appetite.

Dr. Meryl Nass at "http://anthraxvaccine.blogspot.com/" has kept up with this issue closely, if I missed a previous post on this, forgive my poor attention span.

Why can the FBI offer someone millions of dollars for their 'testimony' against another?

As I recall many of our 'guests' in Guantanamo are there for similar offers of 'testimony'.

Seems to me that some/many journalists are happy to falsely do something akin to this for far less.

Might Duley accept a lower offer than Ivin's children were offered?

Perhaps testimoney is more appropriate.

"Let me not be understood as saying that there are no bad laws, nor that grievances may not arise for the redress of which no legal provisions have been made. I mean to say no such thing. But I do mean to say that although bad laws, if they exist, should be repealed as soon as possible, still, while they continue in force, for the sake of example they should be religiously observed." Abraham Lincoln

No man is above the law and no man is below it; nor do we ask any man's permission when we ask him to obey it. Obedience to the law is demanded as a right; not asked as a favor.

Theodore Roosevelt

A state is better governed which has few laws, and those laws strictly observed.

Rene Descartes

Let every man remember that to violate the law is to trample on the blood of his father, and to tear that charter of his own and his children's liberty.

Abraham Lincoln

Punishment is now unfashionable... because it creates moral distinctions among men, which, to the democratic mind, are odious. We prefer a meaningless collective guilt to a meaningful individual responsibility. ~Thomas Szasz

Laws are like cobwebs, which may catch small flies, but let wasps and hornets break through. ~Jonathan Swift, A Critical Essay upon the Faculties of the Mind, 1707

Our government... teaches the whole people by its example. If the government becomes the lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. ~Louis Dembitz Brandeis

The vices of the rich and great are mistaken for error; and those of the poor and lowly, for crimes. ~Lady Marguerite Blessington

Law is nothing unless close behind it stands a warm living public opinion. ~Wendell Phillips

"As [a citizen] is a "law-maker," he should not be a "law-breaker," for he ought to be conscious that every departure from the established ordinances of society is an infraction of his rights. His power can only be maintained by the supremacy of the laws, as in monarchies, the authority of the king is asserted by obedience to his orders. The citizen in lending a cheerful assistance to the ministers of the law, on all occasions, is merely helping to maintain his own power. This feature in particular, distinguishes the citizen from the subject."

- James Fenimore Cooper, The American Democrat 83 (1956) (1838)

"Power always thinks it has a great soul and vast views beyond the comprehension of the weak; and that it is doing God's service when it is violating all his laws." John Quincy Adams

"I often wonder whether we do not rest our hopes too much upon constitutions, upon laws and upon courts. These are false hopes; believe me, these are false hopes. Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it..." Learned Hand

While this sucks...

I look forward to the first FISA enabling Democrat going down in a hail of BLUEAMERICAPAC fire.

How sweet it will be!

P.S. go ACLU, EFF. Thanks Glenn and all who fought.

GG, were you White House Counsel in 25 administrations that were impeached that we don't know about?

You sly dog.

I think this is exceedlingly wise but you left one equally important branch out. The SCOTUS, and that obviously means the presidency is important. I think there would be not so subtle differences in SCOTUS appointments, not to mention other executive choices, between a Bob Barr and an Obama.

Surely too young to be wise.

I agree that SCOTUS appointments are key, but continue to suggest that congress(senate in this case) is a higher priority, given they hold the power to confirm.

I would suggest that the Senate as currently assembled would be rather somewhat of a hindrance to Ginsberg type appointments. I don't see blue dog types helping the liberalish appointment cause much at all. I hope I am wrong on this, otherwise my Rahm Emanuel kewpie doll is going to take a beating.

Those of us that argue that the presidency is a weak entity under our Constitution, should try to remember that when discussing the upcoming election. If it was not for a weak, complacent congress the current president would have had real checks rather than free reign.

I think Glenn rightly points us towards changing congress. Most reasonable people agree that this is supposed to be the strong entity, given it is the people's body. A strong congress also provides a check on supreme court appointments.

Everything else seems like distraction.

No, I'm not arguing that the FISA bill is unimportant.

Thanks for the linky. The name Paul Kiel was immediately familiar, he wrote in the past for TPM Muckraker. Seems like a very interesting new source of real news.