Wow. I haven't said that in a long time, but there might be hints of a spine spontaneously reappearing on the Democratic side of the House. A progressive group that could act as a counter-balance to the Blue Dogs? Whoda' thunk it?

Thanks for some encouraging news, Glenn. I look forward to the phone list. It's going to rain here today, so I might as well spend the afternoon on the phone...

If anyone I knew around me cared or kept up with this stuff like I do via Glenn, I would bet them a C-note that somehow, someway, all of this "opposition" to Graham-Lieberman will magically evaporate and the bill will get passed.

It'll go something like this: Republicans want the $5 billion for IMF taken out, Dems don't. Dems want to kill the torture photo secrecy law. Republicans will say no to Dems demand, and Dems will act like the the worthless trash they are and pass the spending bill with the secrecy law entirely intact, or with some worthless change that really doesn't make the bill any less anti-democratic. It's the Harry Reid/Nancy Pelosi 3 "Bs" to Democratic governance--1) Bark, 2) Backtrack, and 3) Bail.

As always, I hope I'm wrong, but I know much better by now.

It should be even easier to get information from our government, not harder. I hope this crazy Obabma administration plan is stopped. We need transparency in government, not secrecy.

the so called "liberal" members of the democratic party are effectively silenced.

I do not agree with every thing that he, or any politician does, but he is the man to push this.

As for NP, I hope she notices that little jab you sent her way; she needs a little spice in her energy drink.

Minor typo here: "attract"?

(either that, Frank said, or they would be forced to remove the IMF funding provision -- which Obama promised G-20 allies -- in order to re-attact GOP votes and then pass the bill with the Graham-Lieberman amendment included but without the IMF funding).

Why are you posting GG? I thought you were doing your part to participate in the pandemic?

... FOIA was enacted by Congress in 1966 -- more than 40 years ago...

We're talking about one of those old laws. Remember how the Bush regime was always going on about FISA being one of those nasty old laws, passed in the days of the virtual buggy whip, that was getting in the way of progress and it had to be updated to allow unlimited domestic surveillance without warrants (or whatever "Brazil" claptrap they wanted) and it had to be done now, now, now!!!™ or we'd all be slaughered in our beds?

Of course you do.

No doubt, given the sensitivity of the matter, the FOIA update to suppress any inconvenient picture Team Obama thinks should be suppressed won't be marketed quite so intensely, but the point is the same. You all but say so yourself.

These old laws might get in the way of progress, ie: The Agenda, or what's left of it. Ergo, updating is essential, or we'll all be slaughtered in our beds without healthcare.

No one wants that.

Simple.

This all over the headlines this AM. At the moment the GOP are all over this, crowing, 'See, we told ya so'.

House Republicans spilled the beans on the details of a confidential intelligence meeting on Thursday, repeating a well-known refrain that they have evidence that interrogations prevented terrorist attacks. The loose-lipped congressmen slipped out of the House Intelligence Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations hearings—and went straight to the press. But the admissions have outraged Democrats, who say that Republicans shouldn't have shared details of the closed meetings. The GOP, of course, fired back: "Democrats weren't sure what they were going to get," said Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-Mich.) of the meetings. "Now that they know what they've got, they don't want to talk about it."

TORTURE WORKS! GOD BLESS TORTURE!

http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheat-sheet/item/the-gops-interrogation-slip-/briefings/?cid=cs:comments3#commentarea

The Congress Critters need some chiropractic care by us citizens to help speed up the process of spinus regeneratus. Let the emails, phone calls, and letters begin!

To date, he’s (Obama) appointed at least six Republicans to significant positions inside his administration, including Defense Secretary Robert Gates, National Security Adviser Jim Jones, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood and China Ambassador Jon Huntsman. And that’s not counting Arlen Specter.

Empires seek to maintain and extend their power and influence through secrecy, bribery, intimidation, torture, and aggression. Republics aspire to free access to information, fair dealing, respect for individual rights, and use of force exclusively defensive purposes. Empires empty their treasuries to benefit the powerful few at the expense of the many. Republics aspire to responsible financing of government and an equality of opportunity for advancement.

We started out over two hundred years ago with an incipient empire that the Founders tried to make into a republic. This effort was at least moderately successful until our ruling classes became accustomed to think that the United States must act as a world power continually to check Soviet ambitions of hegemony. With the collapse of our former rivals a couple of decades ago, we have still maintained at fantastic expense a military apparatus that is currently not appropriate to any conceivable threat. We have also continued the mind-set of Empire: total control, all the time. In the process we are witnessing the piecemeal disintegration of our republic. I hope that this can be recognized and checked soon, so we can go about our business once more efficiently and at peace with the world.

Thanks Glenn for staying on top of this issue. The MSM has been mostly silent. I have called many of the liberal Democratic members on Judiciary and both David Obey and Adam Schiff on Appropriations and my own congress person to advise them not to allow this amendment to pass and why it was a very bad amendment. What was surprising to me is how few of their aides knew anything about it. I also contacted House Judiciary and made them aware of it too considering it has legal implications even though it isn't in their committee. I also backtracked and called several liberal members on the Senate Judiciary Comm to find out what could have been going through their minds to vote in favor of something like this and couldn't get a good answer. I spoke pretty bluntly and told them I couldn't understand why anything with the name "LIeberman-Graham" on it didn't send up a huge red flag. From the Senate side most of the aides didn't even seem aware of this amendment and one was surprised anyone was asking about it.

It's good news you are reporting today but we must not stop fighting this battle. That is why I want to urge everyone to keep making calls to House members especially those on Appropriations where this issue is sitting and voice your strong objections to LIeberman-Graham. Here is a list of the Dem members to call on this committee. Sorry I don't have their phone numbers handy to share but this info is easy to look up.

MAJORITY: Chair: Alan B. Mollohan (WV)
Patrick J. Kennedy (RI)
Chaka Fattah (PA)
Adam Schiff (CA)
Michael Honda (CA)
C.A "Dutch" Ruppersberger (MD)
Peter J. Visclosky (IN)
José E. Serrano (NY)
David R. Obey (WI), Ex Officio

RJ Crane