FEINGOLD on DKOS is asking we CALL SENATORS about NSA wiretapping

[jsamuel]

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/2/7/133648/8044

"You need to make your voices heard. Tell every member of the Senate not to back down. Speak out against cutting a deal that tries to save face but doesn't save our rights. You've got my commitment that I will strongly oppose, and use every option at my disposal to stop, any deal to reauthorize the Patriot Act that does not protect the rights and freedoms of law-abiding Americans with no connection to terrorism."

It is time for Alito Filibuster version 2...

Tell every member of the Senate not to back down!

1-888-818-6641 Capitol Switchboard

[Maat]

1. Got you!

Will do!

[jsamuel]

34. LIST OF SENATORS TO CALL HERE AT THIS WEBSITE:

http://truthdigger.blogspot.com

[jsamuel]

67. MAKE SURE TO CALL THE REPUBLICANS!

You should tell them this:

If you understand anything about our constitution, then you must understand that by letting the President ignore the law Congress makes, then you are destroying America. The founding fathers based this country on the idea of Separation of Powers. If the President is able to circumvent both the Legislative Branch and Judicial Branch, then we are in a dictatorship. Even if you trust Bush, the next president (maybe a Dem even) could use this as precedent to take total control of the government because he would be immune from law.

[OG Yankee Patriot]

80. 86% Say IMPEACH BUSH

OK, it's an MSNBC poll and not exactly scientifically
accurate, but still, over 200,000 votes and 86% say TOSS THE
CHIMP.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10562904/

[leftstreet]

2. 1-888-818-6641 Capitol Switchboard

[jsamuel]

6. Thanks, updated

[seabeyond]

3. same fiengold that is on dlc's list that we are all suppose to hate???

you go girl (or am i getting her confused with the dude) kick ass

gonna call
and email

break the law, go to jail. like the rest of us

[jane_pippin]

5. Uh, Russ isn't on that list that I can see.

And even if he was, he's RUSS and he rocks.

I'd write to my Senators, but he's one of em.

Maybe a thank you note and a kick in the pants to Kohl are in order though.

Go Russ!

[seabeyond]

8. damn i get these two confused. feinstein, female, calif

feingold male illnois? i listened to him yesterday. i sure did like him. thanks for clarification

[jane_pippin]

9. No, male Wisconsin!

But close. :D

I'm happy to see so many DUer's taking notice of him. The more you get to know him, I think, the more there is to like about him.

[seabeyond]

11. lol lol knew it was up there in one of those states, lol lol. now

i think i am clear. and ya...... i really liked how he presented both himself and his case. i remember him from other stuff too.

[Catrina]

52. Just remember, he's 'gold' ~ Russ for President! :-)

[JohnnyCougar]

49. I can guaruntee you Kohl needs a kick in the pants...

He isn't automatically with Feingold on issues like this.

[jane_pippin]

55. No he's not, which is sad. Sometimes I forget we even have Kohl around.

But that's Herb's way, I guess. He's getting a call or two from me on this. :hi:

[EFerrari]

4. I think I need to vote for this man.

:kick:

[pstans]

47. Check it out

http://www.russforpresident.com

[blm]

7. Will do...even though I begged his office to do the same about the DSM

letter of inquiry.

I expect better luck now that their eyes are more open now. Thanks for this action, Russ.

[madrchsod]

10. no problem- i`m from illinois

i know how my senators are going to vote.

[jsamuel]

13. I am from Arkansas and I am not sure, but we need to call Republicans too

[nosferaustin]

25. I know how mine will, too...

I'm in Utah, damn it...

you guys out there in the free world don't mind if I call yall's Sanators, do you?

}(

[jsamuel]

12. Posted at ActivistHQ

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=106&topic_id=26796&mesg_id=26796

[King Coal]

14. It won't do any good.

[samhsarah]

15. Will get right on it....

:kick:

[Rex_Goodheart]

16. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah

blah blah blah blah blah blah

"I will strongly oppose" blah blah blah blah

"and use every option at my disposal" blah blah blah blah

Alito strolls in, Gonzales testifies without swearing in, and the Democratic Party just bends over with its pants down.

blah blah blah blah blah.

It's become just about pointless supporting this gaggle of losers.

[savemefromdumbya]

18. who else is going to do it?

[Rex_Goodheart]

21. Is Feingold on the current committee?

Why isn't he on the news blasting the other Dems for sitting in on that farce instead of imploring people like you and me to write Senators when he knows it won't do an ounce of good?

None of these jokers can be taken seriously. Feingold is saying just enough to make us think he gives a rat's ass, when he actually does nothing productive about it.

DEMAND ACTION FROM YOURSELF AND YOUR SENATE BUDDIES, RUSS. Until then you're just a drain on my pocketbook.

[worldgonekrazy]

23. I understand your frustration, but Feingold is for real

He's got more integrity than the other 99 members of Senate combined, at least since Wellstone died in that unfortunate plane accident whose cause was never discovered.

[jane_pippin]

24. This is Feingold's issue, and he takes it seriously

so please don't claim that he does nothing about it or doesn't give a rat's ass. He went out on what was then a huge limb to be the only one to actually stand up and vote against this monster Patriot Act and he's been speaking out and working hard to keep our civil liberties entact. And don't think they didn't try to "swift boat" him out of office with that vote of his either. Russ knew voting against the Patriot Act was the right thing to do, and he knew that voting against it shouldn't have been the huge political limb it was, but there it was anyway and he still did it.

It's hard to be productive when you aren't allowed to have hearings. It's hard to be productive when you're the minority. But you have to keep trying and you have to keep working and that's exactly what Russ does. He's a good man. You don't have to support him if you don't want to, but he's been my Senator for years and I feel very comfortable giving him my support.

[JohnnyCougar]

51. Did you listen to Feingold?

He made a big issue of the fact that Gonzales was not sworn in. He laid into Specter for pulling that off.

What more do you want him to do?

[Rex_Goodheart]

68. DEMAND?

What a cheap word... DEMAND... when he didn't do a damn thing when that "demand" wasn't satisfied.

He participated in that farce, instead of storming out, bringing his party members with them, and then telling the media why. And then he has the nerve today to tell us he's going to fight?

Demand.... pfffft. What I hear is blah blah blah blah blah

Just another wimp with cheap words is all I see.

[jsamuel]

72. You are wrong

Insane points...

Yeah, lets have the Dems just walk out of the hearing that proved that Gonzo lied and just lied more.

Insane...

[Catrina]

57. Who says it won't do any good? Did you see what happened on the

medicaid bill and how many Republicans changed their minds after being bombarded by calls from groups and from constituents and from US citizens across the country? With another week, we might have swayed a few more but 13 going against the party shows that they can be pressured, and the more people who let them know they will pay with their seats if they fail to represent the people, the better.

I intend to call Republicans who get off the hook because people think they know how they will vote. Well, the Medicaid bill proved otherwise ~ so let them know about the anger of the people they represent as this president steals away their rights better than any terrorist could do, while claiming he's protecting them.

They need to know how many in their OWN party oppose this destruction of rights and nothing is every wasted. The voices against this administration are increasing. Bush's poll numbers are in the 30's. If they want to get re-elected, it's time for them distance themselves from him and his criminal administration, two of whom have already been indicted for major crimes, with more coming.

[pstans]

54. Feingold is not one of the "blah, blah, blah" types

He is the one who demaded that Gonzalez be sworn in. He is the first one to say that we needed a timetable out of Iraq (months before Murtha said this), he is the only to vote against the Patriot Act. The man stands on his beliefs and fights for them.

Russ Feingold wrote a blog on DailyKos and talked about how the President thinks he is above the law.

This administration reacts to any questions about spying on American citizens by saying that those of us who stand up for our rights and freedoms are somehow living in a "pre-September 11th, 2001 world."

In fact, the President is living in a pre-1776 world.

Our Founders lived in dangerous times, and they risked everything for freedom. Patrick Henry said, "Give me liberty or give me death." The President's pre-1776 mentality is hurting America and fracturing the foundation on which our country has stood for 230 years. The President can't just bypass two branches of government, and obey only those laws he wants to obey. Deciding unilaterally which of our freedoms still apply in the fight against terrorism is unacceptable and needs to be stopped immediately.

Feingold ends the blog by saying...

Stop the power grab, stop the politics, stop breaking the law.

It's time to stand up - not to cheer, but to fight back.

http://www.russforpresident.com

[savemefromdumbya]

17. ask for an independent investigation preferably with a prosecutor

wishy-washy political committees are no good.

In the meantime Dems should be asking why haven't the terrorists like Bin Ladin been rounded up with this fantastic spying (pre and post 9/11) - they have been too busy wiretapping political opposition.

[radio4progressives]

19. K&R

:kick:

[BReisen]

20. Emailed Arlen the following (can't call right now...)

"I want you to know that you have my full support towards holding hearings into the wiretapping the White House has authorized. I believe that the President has broken the law, and I'm counting on you to hold the White House accountable for this illegal action.

Please do not be intimidated by those who would like you, and all Republicans, to "shut up and fall in line" with the Administration. You have always followed your conscience, and I encourage you to do so on this issue as well. Your moderate approach has represented us, the people of Pennsylvania, well over these past years.

I am counting on you to do the right thing on this issue, and I'm sure that my fellow Pennsylvanians are, too.

Thank you!!"

While I don't agree with everything he's done in the past, I figure a little positive reinforcement can't hurt! ;-)

[SammyBlue]

22. Done. . .called John McCain's Tucson and Washington HQ

Jon Kyl supports the America hating agenda of the Bush Administration.

[Idioteque]

26. Russ is speaking about NSA on the Senate floor right now. n/t

[Chalco]

27. I already contacted Spector about his not swearing in Gonzo.nt

[yellowdogmi]

28. It seems like the battle over Alito tapped

the collective strengths of DU to the Limit. Right now the urgent call for the defeat of the Patriot act needs attention. Beyond that I would like to see my fellow DUer's hammer all of their elected officials on the domestic spying issue. Finally if you still have some time and energy left lets start promoting the passage of House Resolution 635. The battle isn't over. Get your asses in gear. Please!


PS. I am confident that Obama and Durbin know where I stand. Make yourselves heard. Before it is too late.

[jsamuel]

29. Added LIST OF SENATORS TO CALL AT THIS WEBSITE...

http://truthdigger.blogspot.com

Senator Russ Feingold asks us to CALL EVERY SENATOR over the NSA warrantless wiretap hearings:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/2/7/133648/8044

"You need to make your voices heard. Tell every member of the Senate not to back down. Speak out against cutting a deal that tries to save face but doesn't save our rights. You've got my commitment that I will strongly oppose, and use every option at my disposal to stop, any deal to reauthorize the Patriot Act that does not protect the rights and freedoms of law-abiding Americans with no connection to terrorism."

It is time for Alito Filibuster version 2...

Tell every member of the Senate not to back down!

Toll Free: (just ask for specific senator)
1-888-818-6641 Capitol Switchboard

Or contact each one directly:

*** - Members of the Judiciary Committee
Bold and Red - Republicans that are "moderate"
Bold - Republicans
Blue - Idependents/Democrats that are "moderate"

This list is preliminary and will be updated:


AKAKA, Daniel K. (D-HI) 202-224-6361
ALEXANDER, Lamar (R-TN) 202-224-4944
ALLARD, Wayne (R-CO) 202-224-5941
ALLEN, George (R-VA) 202-224-4024
BAUCUS, Max (D-MT) 202-224-2651
BAYH, Evan (D-IN) 202-224-5623
BENNETT, Robert F. (R-UT) 202-224-5444
*** BIDEN, Jr., Joseph R. (D-DE) 202-224-5042
BINGAMAN, Jeff (D-NM) 202-224-5521
BOND, Christopher S. (R-MO) 202-224-5721
BOXER, Barbara (D-CA) 202-224-3553
*** BROWNBACK, Sam (R-KS) 202-224-6521
BUNNING, Jim (R-KY) 202-224-4343
BURNS, Conrad (R-MT) 202-224-2644
BURR, Richard (R-NC) 202-224-3154
BYRD, Robert C. (D-WV) 202-224-3954 (Should be a defender of the Constitution)
CANTWELL, Maria (D-WA) 202-224-3441
CARPER, Thomas R. (D-DE) 202-224-2441
CHAFEE, Lincoln (R-RI) 202-224-2921
CHAMBLISS, Saxby (R-GA) 202-224-3521
CLINTON, Hillary Rodham (D-NY) 202-224-4451
*** COBURN, Tom (R-OK) 202-224-5754
COCHRAN, Thad (R-MS) 202-224-5054
COLEMAN, Norm (R-MN) 202-224-5641
COLLINS, Susan M. (R-ME) 202-224-2523
CONRAD, Kent (D-ND) 202-224-2043
*** CORNYN, John (R-TX) 202-224-2934 (Not likely)
CRAIG, Larry E. (R-ID) 202-224-2752
CRAPO, Mike (R-ID) 202-224-6142
DAYTON, Mark (D-MN) 202-224-3244
DeMINT, Jim (R-SC) 202-224-6121
*** DeWINE, Mike (R-OH) 202-224-2315 (Up for election in 2006)
DODD, Christopher J. (D-CT) 202-224-2823
DOLE, Elizabeth (R-NC) 202-224-6342
DOMENICI, Pete V. (R-NM) 202-224-6621
DORGAN, Byron L. (D-ND) 202-224-2551
*** DURBIN, Richard (D-IL) 202-224-2152
ENSIGN, John (R-NV) 202-224-6244
ENZI, Michael B. (R-WY) 202-224-3424
*** FEINGOLD, Russell D. (D-WI) 202-224-5323 <--- The Senator who asked us to do this.
*** FEINSTEIN, Dianne (D-CA) 202-224-3841 FRIST, William H. (R-TN) 202-224-3344 (Majority Leader)
*** GRAHAM, Lindsey (R-SC) 202-224-5972
*** GRASSLEY, Chuck (R-IA) 202-224-3744
GREGG, Judd (R-NH) 202-224-3324
HAGEL, Chuck (R-NE) 202-224-4224
HARKIN, Tom (D-IA) 202-224-3254
*** HATCH, Orrin G. (R-UT) 202-224-5251
HUTCHISON, Kay Bailey (R-TX) 202-224-5922
INHOFE, James M. (R-OK) 202-224-4721
INOUYE, Daniel K. (D-HI) 202-224-3934
ISAKSON, Johnny (R-GA) 202-224-3643
JEFFORDS, James M. (I-VT) 202-224-5141
JOHNSON, Tim (D-SD) 202-224-5842
*** KENNEDY, Edward M. (D-MA) 202-224-4543
KERRY, John F. (D-MA) 202-224-2742
*** KOHL, Herb (D-WI) 202-224-5653
*** KYL, Jon (R-AZ) 202-224-4521
LANDRIEU, Mary L. (D-LA) 202-224-5824
LAUTENBERG, Frank R. (D-NJ) 202-224-3224
*** LEAHY, Patrick J. (D-VT) 202-224-4242 (Ranking Democratic Member of Judiciary Committee)
LEVIN, Carl (D-MI) 202-224-6221
LIEBERMAN, Joseph I. (D-CT) 202-224-4041 (Might need some more work than others)
LINCOLN, Blanche L. (D-AR) 202-224-4843 (Akansas, get on the phone)
LOTT, Trent (R-MS) 202-224-6253
LUGAR, Richard G. (R-IN) 202-224-4814
MARTINEZ, Mel (R-FL) 202-224-3041
McCAIN, John (R-AZ) 202-224-2235
McCONNELL, Mitch (R-KY) 202-224-2541
MENENDEZ, Robert (D-NJ) 202-224-4744
MIKULSKI, Barbara A. (D-MD) 202-224-4654
MURKOWSKI, Lisa (R-AK) 202-224-6665
MURRAY, Patty (D-WA) 202-224-2621
NELSON, Bill (D-FL) 202-224-5274
NELSON, E. Benjamin (D-NE) 202-224-6551
OBAMA, Barack (D-IL) 202-224-2854
PRYOR, Mark L. (D-AR) 202-224-2353 (Akansas, get on the phone)
REED, Jack (D-RI) 202-224-4642
REID, Harry (D-NV) 202-224-3542 (Minority Leader)
ROBERTS, Pat (R-KS) 202-224-4774
ROCKEFELLER IV, John D. (D-WV) 202-224-6472
SALAZAR, Ken (D-CO) 202-224-5852
SANTORUM, Rick (R-PA) 202-224-6324 (Up for election in 2006)
SARBANES, Paul S. (D-MD) 202-224-4524
*** SCHUMER, Charles E. (D-NY) 202-224-6542
*** SESSIONS, Jeff (R-AL) 202-224-4124
SHELBY, Richard C. (R-AL) 202-224-5744
SMITH, Gordon H. (R-OR) 202-224-3753
SNOWE, Olympia J. (R-ME) 202-224-5344
*** SPECTER, Arlen (R-PA) 202-224-4254 (Chairman of Judiciary Committee)
STABENOW, Debbie (D-MI) 202-224-4822
STEVENS, Ted (R-AK) 202-224-3004
SUNUNU, John E. (R-NH) 202-224-2841
TALENT, James M. (R-MO) 202-224-6154
THOMAS, Craig (R-WY) 202-224-6441
THUNE, John (R-SD) 202-224-2321
VITTER, David (R-LA) 202-224-4623
VOINOVICH, George V. (R-OH) 202-224-3353
WARNER, John (R-VA) 202-224-2023
WYDEN, Ron (D-OR) 202-224-5244

[jsamuel]

31. If someone wants, please post this info at DKOS as I already used my diary

today. Please include the link to http://truthdigger.blogspot.com thanks!

[icymist]

30. Done!

Just sent off two emails to Murray and Cantwell.

[G_j]

32. K & R !

[brainshrub]

33. Prediction: Some Dem will whine about it, but nothing will happen.

Nevermind that they COULD have done something or made a strong statement... we will just have to be satisfied with some "bold" statement and some harrumphing.

Walk out of the Senate in protest? Nope. Call for a mass protest or general strike? Nope. Demand that the president resign? Nope.

If congressional Dems don't do SOMETHING major, it may be time to call for a split within the Democratic party.

[GreenPartyVoter]

35. I am afraid of that too. I am waiting for the big movie ending, where

there's a big showdown and the good guys (the underdogs to boot) make a heck of a stand and win the day. But will I wait in vain?

[Dembo98]

36. Question

Being an avid reader and never wanting to sound stupid, I have been doing a lot of reading on FISA. As much as I don't like it, it seems to me that if you look at a couple court rulings (the "Keith case" and the "Truong case), the courts of appeal are unanimous in their decisions that warrantless wiretapping is OK when the primary purpose is for foreign intelligence. Even if one of the parties is an American citizen. Please tell me I am reading these rulings wrong. If not, it seems to me that the courts have already ruled and that it is legal. Someone help.

[LynnTheDem]

43. 4th time, same Q, 4 diff threads; the 2 cases you cite were BEFORE FISA.

The law is plain & simple; if you wiretap without a warrant it is ILLEGAL.

[jsamuel]

46. Thanks for that!

:hi:

[LynnTheDem]

50. You're welcome.

We all gotta fight em here coz they're too fucking chickenshit to go fight & die for their bush-god's bullshit pile of lies over there.

[Sparkly]

53. Maybe you should change your reading material.

The RNC is spinning like mad, dragging up cases and procedures used BEFORE the current FISA.

[brainshrub]

70. Keith & Throug did not deal with FISA law.

The 1972 Keith case and the 1978 Throug case did not deal with FISA law. They dealt with the legal realities pre-FISA.

Please read read the 2002 review decision by the FISA appeals court:

"We reiterate that Truong dealt with a pre-FISA surveillance based on the President’s constitutional responsibility to conduct the foreign affairs of the United States."

[mmonk]

37. My Senators are not people that would go against

the ruler they have sworn their souls to. I am an American that is not represented in the US Senate.

[Imalittleteapot]

42. Same here. Cornyn and Hutchison - yet

have sent them 2 emails on the NSA spying issue. I'm afraid all it will get me is a lame response and my name on some subversive list. Hardly seems worth the effort, but my hope is to get through their sick skulls one of the days.

:rofl:

[jsamuel]

45. Call them anyway, they know that Congess has NO POWER if they let this go

[pbear81]

38. Tell senators to ask for a vote

Tell senators to ask for a vote on the floor. Up or down: Do you want the NSA to listen in when an overseas Al Qaeda connected person talks to someone in the US, and if time is a factor, do you want them to do it even without following due process?

[jsamuel]

40. That is not the question here

The question is "Do you want the President to be able to override any law of Congress he does not want to follow?" That is what the whole "inherent authority" argument means.

[pbear81]

41. You're living in a bubble where

your mistrust obscures your ability to grasp real danger.
The issue is, do we want the NSA to have the flexibility to listen to certain communications if they judge that doing so could prevent a terrorist attack here?
Don't you cheer for Jack Bauer and the CTU when they intercept calls between bad guys, without warrants? I sure do. I know it is a TV show. But it illustrates why following a process for obtaining warrants is not practical in cases of hot pursuit.
Why is it so hard to see that this IS the issue?

[jsamuel]

44. You are part of the Cult of Personality

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult_of_personality

Please wake up.

Please stop letting fear block your judgment.

If you understand anything about our constitution, then you must understand that by letting the President ignore the law Congress makes, then you are destroying America. The founding fathers based this country on the idea of Separation of Powers. If the President is able to circumvent both the Legislative Branch and Judicial Branch, then we are in a dictatorship. Even if you trust Bush, the next president (maybe a Dem even) could use this as precedent to take total control of the government because he would be immune from law.

If you want warrantless wiretapping SO bad, then tell your congressional representative to pass a law that lets the President do that, until then it is ILLEGAL and must be prosecuted.

[pbear81]

48. The thought that GWB

could inspire a cult of personality is so bizarre I have to interpret it as humor. JFK, yeah, he could have inspired "a cult of personality." Perhaps Bill Clinton. MLK, Jr. too. But not GWB!!!

Now I want to imagine what happens after we prosecute GWB and Gonzales and all the rest for having the common sense to authorize this program.
Henceforth, common sense will be forbidden in the counter-terrorism decision making apparatus.
But at least we'll know no one will be listening if Al Qaeda happens to call us.

[Sparkly]

59. You're missing the point.

Nobody is against wiretapping Al Qaeda.

All they need to do is FOLLOW THE LAW to ensure they aren't violating the privacy of law-abiding Americans (including political opponents, for example).

[jsamuel]

62. nice that you completely skipped my argument

so I will say it again

Please stop letting fear block your judgment.

If you understand anything about our constitution, then you must understand that by letting the President ignore the law Congress makes, then you are destroying America. The founding fathers based this country on the idea of Separation of Powers. If the President is able to circumvent both the Legislative Branch and Judicial Branch, then we are in a dictatorship. Even if you trust Bush, the next president (maybe a Dem even) could use this as precedent to take total control of the government because he would be immune from law.

If you want warrantless wiretapping SO bad, then tell your congressional representative to pass a law that lets the President do that, until then it is ILLEGAL and must be prosecuted.

You can't even refute my points at all. You are part of that cult.

(PS - Yes the 36-39% of people who still support Bush are part of a Cult of Personality. What do you think the whole "who would you rather have a beer with" questions in polls were about? It is the idea that a leader's personality is what keeps people following him rather than the results and merits. Same thing Stalin and Hitler had in their contries. "Oh, Stalin couldn't possibly know that my whole family is getting thrown into slave camps run by the government or he would do something about it!" Yeah, right...)

[pbear81]

81. I reject your premise.

[ToolTex]

56. They have up to 72 hours or 15 days to go to the court.

There is no reason if it is for legal reasons that the FISA court won't allow- After the fact. Bush is choosing to break the law for power, no other reason.

[Sparkly]

58. There IS "flexibility."

The warrants can be issued retroactively.

[Laurab]

75. Mistrust is most certainly a NORMAL reaction

and, that is NOT the issue - the issue is that they are doing warrentless wiretaps, NOT for "hot pursuit" because, under FISA, you can do the wiretapping, and don't have to fill out the paperwork until after. The issue IS that they don't want to do the paperwork at all....now WHY would that be? Could it possibly be because their wiretapping is not related to whatever the hell they say it's related to? THAT is the issue, and that would be my guess. Mistrust...in an administration that can't open their collective mouths without lying, is an appropriate reaction. FEAR would be appropriate as well.

I don't live in a bubble, I live in REALITY. They cannot explain why they can't follow a simple procedure, in order to do their spying legally. Not one of their ridiculous explanations makes any sense at all. This pResident thinks he is above the law. He is NOT.

[pbear81]

82. You are just plain wrong about “hot pursuit” and FISA.

It is a myth that under FISA the NSA has authority to intercept such a call as long as they proceed to do the legal work after the fact. Under FISA, they need approval from the AG who will not give it without a written demonstration of probable cause from lawyers at NSA and DOJ.

Now, neither you nor I knows the exact nature of this program, and neither you nor I is an expert on the law, including precedents.

But I think we both have the capacity for common sense.
And I know you have an imagination so let’s use that.
NSA intercepts a communication in let’s say, Pakistan, between two Al Qaeda types.
The discussion includes veiled reference to a planned operation, and to a phone call that will be made by one of the individuals in one hour, to an unknown person in the US.
NSA wants to hear that phone call, a clear case of hot pursuit.

Let’s say the President never authorized the program in question, and therefore NSA gets its authority strictly from FISA. This is how it works.
Now, before they can listen in, the NSA operatives need to draw up paperwork on the case, get it signed off by their chief, and run it up to their lawyers. Their lawyers ask some questions to be sure the standard of probable cause has been met. Now they draw up some more documents and send them to DOJ, where other lawyers examine them. The papers next go the AG for signature. At each layer, the lawyers have questions, and the documents need to be amended.
Meanwhile, NSA has no authority to intercept the expected call.
Finally the document is signed by the AG, and authority is given to listen to the call. (This has to happen before the call can be intercepted under FISA, even if they are going to use the 72 hour rule for getting an actual warrant, another layer of the process.)
Alas, the phone call has already happened. Either NSA listened in anyway because common sense and the necessity to prevent an attack told them they had to, or they didn’t listen in because they followed the law to a T. If the former, they have broken the law and their asses are on the line.
The President’s authorization, using authority in the law that gave him power to use force to prevent attacks and using his constitutional power as Commander in Chief, makes it possible for NSA to intercept that call in a timely fashion under hot pursuit, without their asses on the line.

Let’s at least be clear that this is the type of operation in question while we’re calling for prosecution of the president and other public servants.

[Laurab]

83. Oh, I CAN'T be clear on that

The AG has proven to me that he believes the president is above the law. The president has lied over and over and over to the American people. You are asking what they are asking - in other words "trust them". I don't, and for good reason.

I'm quite sure the AG will give authorization for anything his boss wants it for. I'm also quite sure he can get a written demonstration of probable cause in a heartbeat. There is NO reason they should not go through proper channels, and I have no reason to believe this has anything to do with "terrorists" or "Al Qaeda" types. I don't trust the administration, obviously, and there's no doubt in MY mind that this program is NOT being used in whatever way they're trying to spin it.

To be honest, I don't really think they're all that interested in "al qaeda types", either. Have you seen any proof of that? Why do these records have to be subpoenaed by Congress? Why aren't they making them available to the other branches of government that provide the checks and balances, to ensure the president does NOT ABUSE his office? They are there for a reason, and if ever a president needs checks and balances, it's this one.

I DO have common sense. It says do NOT trust them. It also says what they are doing is illegal, and their attempts to justify it are ridiculous. Anyone with common sense would have learned by now this administration is NOT to be trusted.

Welcome to DU.

[Chimichurri]

39. Called today. Will call again tomorrow.

I'm tired of the inaction. Bush has to go!

[Alexodin]

60. I am calling my Senators action time!!! n/t

[ClintonTyree]

61. So they can ignore us again?

These "Democrats" aren't going to do anything that might jeopardize their nice, cushy jobs. We learned that from the Alito "non-filibuster". It's an election year and they're not going to do anything to draw attention to themselves, especially anything the Republicans can use to accuse them of being soft on "terra" :eyes: which is just about everything. This country is screwed, our elected Democrats don't care about anything but their jobs.

[jsamuel]

63. They couldn't have ignored us and didn't.

25 Dems voted for the Filibuster. The filibuster only failed by 12 votes (72 for Cloture). Plus, only 3 Dems ended up voting for Alito. That number would have been much higher if we had not called them. I know, because Pryor and Lincoln both voted NO on Alito and Pryor was going to vote YES before we all called him. Lincoln may have voted yes as well before we called them. And those are just the Senators from my state.

[Rainscents]

64. I made call to Cantwell and Murray!

Thanks for the informations!

[raysr]

65. What's the point of

having reps if they have to be "hammered" into what we sent them there to do? What do they think their job IS anyway?

[jsamuel]

66. Call the Republicans too. They KNOW this is illegal and they KNOW it

leaves them (Congress) powerless.

"We" didn't elect the Republicans.

[Rainscents]

73. I know what you mean, I shouldn't have to call as, it is their job to

protect us and represent us. However, nowadays, only way these people listen (half way) when they get mass emails and phone calls. Shame, isn't it?

[jazzjunkysue]

69. Already did. They're sick of me.

[Cocoa]

71. Feingold leading the way again

:bounce:

[williesgirl]

74. When calling don't make political issue - NO president should be able to

circumvent the law regardless of WHY. Don't act like a Dem or Repub - be an American. Ask Repub Senators and Reps if they'd like Clinton to have this ability or any other future Democrat president.

If we make this a * issue, we'll lose again. Tell Repubs that Rove is wrong - this isn't about party - it's about our Constitution regardless of which party is in power. Tell them to make it illegal, period. No exceptions. None of *'s "notes" when signing legislation.

If ANY President needs more on any given situation, tell him/her to go to Congress for exceptions. Not the courts, only elected representatives.

Give them the cover they'll need to stand up for every American.

[snot]

76. Will call tomorrow; here's what I just e-'d, if anyone else want to use it

Dear Senator:
I'm writing regarding the hearings on the President’s order for warrentless spying on U.S. Citizens.
Personally, I do not believe the case has been made that warrantless spying on citizens is worth the incursion on our liberties.
But much more important even than that issue is the fact that the President is attempting to put himself above the law.
We are witnessing an attempted coup. It is not a military coup; it’s an executive coup.
Our constitution and our democracy are based on a system of checks and balances among the three branches. The President is attempting to arrogate to himself the unilateral power to violate both a federal Congressional statute that is well within Congress’s purview and our Constitutional rights.
The vast majority of legal experts agree: the President broke the law.
Members of Congress who fail to hold the President accountable for his violation will have breached their duty to resist an executive coup as well as their oaths of office.

[JackORoses]

77. Fax The Senate Free

All the Democrats & Jeffords:
http://capwiz.com/thedeanpeople/mail/?id=202&id=361&id=235&id=696&id=397&id=358&id=622&id=11025&id=9482&id=10902&id=453&id=46684&id=686&id=454&id=210&id=629&id=347&id=249&id=201&id=537&id=297&id=298&id=628&id=273&id=378&id=592&id=310&id=688&id=292&id=395&id=287&id=611&id=10748&id=10892&id=3181&id=31613&id=523&id=370&id=623&id=31624&id=286&id=402&id=320&id=488&id=593

All the Republicans:
http://capwiz.com/thedeanpeople/mail/?id=20000&id=679&id=10919&id=587&id=349&id=255&id=263&id=362&id=444&id=40039&id=197&id=483&id=341&id=130476&id=283&id=31770&id=206&id=207&id=532&id=456&id=20005&id=396&id=25&id=641&id=540&id=531&id=248&id=375&id=365&id=586&id=552&id=481&id=698&id=203&id=342&id=234&id=10033&id=192&id=262&id=810&id=256&id=498&id=269&id=158&id=489&id=282&id=497&id=159&id=376&id=352&id=640&id=538&id=699&id=457&id=595

You can use these lists to Fax or email them all at once, or you can pick and choose those you want.

Let 'em hear it!

[upi402]

78. i have DINO senators

Murray may turn around seeing she will face her own base if she doesn't become a Dem.

Cantwell is gone.

[meowomon]

79. I faxed Mel Martinez...

...and told him Fidel would be proud. Martinez is Jeb Bush's "pequeño perro" in the senate.

[janx]

84. kick