Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
This Countdown interview with GW Law Prof. Jonathan Turley is not to be missed. In it he states unequivocally that Dems are eviscerating the 4th Amendment to protect themselves with this bill. Once the Dem leadership was exposed to having knowledge of all the Bush illegality they have been chomping at the bit to cover it up...
http://www.hotpotatomash.com/2008/06/democrats-collu.html
and pathetic. I made a second contribution. I am embarassed to be a Democrat.
I agree with you that Turley finally offered a clear explanation for why these slimy weasels (Pelosi, Hoyer, Reid et al) are selling us out. As usual, the answer is either CYA, money, or both.
Obama's really defined himself with his silence during the FISA fight. We're never going to bring about the change this country needs without a viable third (or even fourth) party.
I was reading Marty Lederman's take on the passage that grants the AG all he needs to wipe out the lawsuits:
http://balkin.blogspot.com/2008/06/well-thatll-show-em.html
A comment after his post caught my eye and made me think:
This is tantamount to granting the attorney general the authority to issue his own warrants-- albeit, retroactively.Are there any constitutional grounds for objecting to this mockery of justice?
Given what just occurred with the Boumediene case, and given the language that was used by Kennedy, is there a possibility of any sort that a case can be brought up to SCOTUS demonstrating that Congress has once again circumvented the law in a similar manner as they did with Boumediene?
I know next to nothing about the law, but can a case be argued that granting such powers to the AG to retroactively dismiss current litigation under such highly questionable circumstances and no supportable rationale is not entirely legal?
Seems the only political pleasure I get in life these days is refreshing the ActBlue contribution page every couple of hours and watching the total amount grow. Damn, that feels good! Way to go people!
The lefty blogosphere spends thousands and thousands of man/women hours debunking the establishment media, faux news, and the rest of the vast right wing conspiracy, all in defense of the Democratic Party, with the idea being that the Democratic Party is the "party of the people" and better able to implement policies progressives in the lefty blogosphere support.
And in return the Democratic Party takes the impeachment of a gang of war criminals "off the table", refuses, even in the face of the outright refusal of the US Justice Dept to enforce the laws of the US, to even consider using their powers of inherent contempt to hold the executive accountable, refuses to use their power of the purse to stop ANY of the juntas worst policies, let alone the illegal occupation of a sovereign state which is resulting in the death, maiming and displacement of hundreds of thousand of innocent Iraqis and in short just never misses a chance to kick the lefty blogosphere in their collective crotches.
And yet the lefty blogosphere continues to support these useless scumbags.
I gotta admit, but I'm a little bit confused...
Thanks for all you do on this and other constitutional issues Glenn. But FISA bill really is the final straw for me.
I can't support the Democratic Party anymore. In fact I will be doing all I can to discourage people from voting for Dems and voting Green or Libertarian instead.
The Dems will never change until they are forced to pay a price.
And while electing "better" Democrats is certainly a laudable effort it's not enough.
So 4 or 5 "better" Dems get elected every year and then probably a couple of them sellout anyway.
Chris Carney started out as a Blue America candidate after all, and we all know how that worked out.
BOYCOTT these motherfuckers. A threat to their power is all they understand...
Hire a member of the Hollywood paparazzi to follow Hoyer around everywhere he goes in public for a year and take pictures of him nonstop. Then post the most unflattering pictures (both "bad photo day" pictures and pictures of Hoyer entering DC-area steakhouses with telecom lobbyists, etc.) to a website for appropriate public ridicule.
Hoyer and his kind have demonstrated a complete disdain for our privacy rights. More than that, they have manifested a complete disrespect for us by attempting to pretend that they are really opposed to the very legislation they are pushing through. I think subjecting Hoyer to (completely legal) paparazzi treatment for a year is a fitting punishment. Furthermore, the fruits of such an effort could be used in negative ads against Hoyer in the next Congressional election.
Whatever happened to the House FISA bill "Restore Act"? I thought it was supposed to be a reasonable update of FISA and had passed the House and Senate. Did it die from a non auto-immunity disease?
Here is my latest blogpost at http://www.theutahhornetsnest.blogpot.com addressing blue-belly Democrat Jim Matheson.
Blue-belly Democrats- Support the Rule of Law
The time has come for Democrats to actually stand for something. Jim Matheson has that opportunity. Blue-belly Democrats who refer to themselves as "blue dogs" are primed to surrender our Constitutional freedoms under the fourth amendment and grant a corrupt and imperial President, unprecedented powers. They are also primed to grant immunity to telecoms whose complicity in our executive branch's lawbreaking has created a serious Constitutional crisis.
I have no doubt, that Utah's authoritarian conservatives, namely, Hatch, Bennett, Bishop and Cannon will support telecom amnesty and a statutory rape of our freedom from unlawful surveillance. All of them are partisan hacks and respect the constitution as much as they respect the bacon they had for breakfast and just defecated prior to dinner. Bush asks them to jump, and they say how high on their way up. But Matheson, has the freedom to show principle and resolve. He has the truth, and he has the basic and fundamental intent of our founders on his side. If he wishes to oppose the tragic surrender of our civil rights under the Bush Administration's grasping for a FISA bill which grants retro-active immunity for law-breakers, he will show the sort of resolve that Wayne Owens showed when he voted for impeachment of a law-breaking President in Richard M. Nixon.
This issue is so fundamental to our Republic. Will our Congress decide to legitimize law-breaking by statute? Congress, which has oversight responsibilities on the actions of the executive branch cannot abrogate that responsibility without diminishing our Republic to imperial precedent. Will Jim Matheson have the courage and wherewithal to stand for fundamental constitutional principles. Or will he sell out to a fear-mongering executive which uses our fear of terrorism to grant to Al Qaeda further victories by surrendering our collective soul out of basic fear?
The law is the law. If you disagree with the law, change the law. But retro-actively legalizing illegal actions is reprehensible to the principles of the rule of law. What would Scott Matheson jr., a law professor think, of his brother enabling illegal actions by retroactively making them legal? What would his father think? Surrendering to the worst enabling of illegality out of political prudence?
Jim, grow some stones, and Scott, call your brother and set him straight. We are a nation of laws, not of men. Jim can show whether he supports the constitution and the rule of law. Or he can surrender to pragmatic politics.
I'm not a fan of the late Gordon B. Hinckley, but I agree that each of us, must "Stand for Something." Jim Matheson. Stand for the rule of law and oppose the evil and unprecedented FISA law that will come before the U.S. Congress. Show the resolve your predecessor, Wayne Owens showed when he voted for impeachment and probably doomed his ambitions to replace Wallace Bennett in the U.S. Senate. The time has come to show whether a future replica of John F. Kennedy will write of you in their 21st Century version of "Profiles of Courage."
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
