The Cost of Caving

[WillyT]

The Cost of Caving - Ken Silverstein - Harper's

<snip>

A few days ago, I took issue with a Washington Post op-ed by Michael Tomasky that argued against publicly discussing the possible impeachment of President Bush on the grounds that to do so would hurt the Democratic Party’s chances in the 2008 elections. My view is that the possibility of impeachment should be pursued if Bush has committed high crimes and misdemeanors—and abandoned if he has not. Tomasky’s op-ed implied that even if there are solid grounds for impeachment, the president should be elevated above the law in order not to damage the political chances of the Democrats. Elsewhere, it has been suggested that the Democrats are not eager to impeach Attorney General Alberto Gonzales because he’s such a rich target and political albatross for the administration.

E.J. Dionne has a column in today’s Post that well illustrates the fallacy of this type of calculation. His piece, “Why the Democrats Caved,” says that last weekend, “about 20 House Democrats huddled in Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s office to decide what to do about a surveillance bill that had been dumped on them by the Senate before it left town.”

According to Dionne, many of the Democrats “were furious.” They felt that they had “negotiated in good faith with Mike McConnell, the director of national intelligence,” and given the administration all the room it needed “to intercept communications involving foreign nationals in terrorism investigations while preserving some oversight.”

But the administration wanted more and Democrats in the Senate gave it what it wanted. Hence, it was up to the House to draw a line:

<snip>

More: http://www.harpers.org/archive/2007/08/hbc-90000844

Our side fucked up so badly here.

:banghead:

[Fovea]

1. The cost of caving?

Simple. It should be Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi's jobs.

[WillyT]

4. And It May Be Yet

Remember, this law expires in 6 months. What happens in 6 months? Holiday recess, and then the primaries.

Can't refuse GW what he wants THEN, we'll be called all manner of cowards, and nobody will like us anymore.

:puke:

:shrug:

[Double T]

2. It is extremely frustrating and DAMN discouraging to see how weak.........

the Dems appear to be; the perception and the poll numbers prove it.

[OzarkDem]

5. They don't seem to have a strategy

other than keeping their powder dry until Election 2008.

They're not even discussing pertinent issues, just laying low. They can't win in '08 only on Bush's failures, the party and its leaders have to define key issues - they're not getting that done.

There's a pervasive impression they don't have a sound strategy or long term plan, nor any plans for special contingencies.

[BlooInBloo]

3. Guantanamo detainees' lawyers have challenged the constitutionality of that law.

[lordsummerisle]

6. What's even harder to comprehend for me

is the fact that Gonsalez will be involved in the program.

[WillyT]

7. Yep... We Definitely Lost The Moral High-Ground There !!!

He's an amoral, incompetent, impeachable buffoon, but we will allow him to be in charge of spying on Americans.

It'll be seriously interesting to see how they try to argue for Gonzales' impeachment after this bone-head blunder.

:argh:

[Perry Logan]

8. I love the sound of Democrats bashing themselves in the morning.

It's just a liberal thang.

Here are some interesting comments from a blogger named Joe Cannon, on how little was actually changed by the new law:

"People who have never read the Act keep spreading the rumor that it allows Alberto Gonzales to listen in on all electronic communications without a warrant. That is simply not true. Virtually everyone, left or right, who has read the law will confirm this point.

"The new law permits warrant-free eavesdropping on foreign-domestic conversations. But guess what? So did the 1978 law.

"The update gives Gonzales the ability to initiate warrant-free wiretaps. But guess what? So did the 1978 law."

http://cannonfire.blogspot.com/2007/08/have-we-been-played.html

[WillyT]

9. Um, Yeah... But Instead of Getting The Warrant Within 72 hours, It's Now 120 Days !!!

And...

New FISA Law Means Bush "Can Listen To Every Single International Call That You Make"

<snip>

The White House has engaged in an all-out spin operation to downplay its new warrantless wiretapping powers. Yesterday, White House spokesperson Dana Perino falsely alleged that the new law returns the FISA law to "its original intent."

After the New York Times explained that "by changing the legal definition of what is considered 'electronic surveillance,' the new law allows the government to eavesdrop on conversations without warrants," spokesperson Tony Fratto issued a statement attacking the Times, arguing that it is "highly misleading" to say Congress has broadly expanded Bush's authority:

Under FISA, court approval is required for the government to target an individual located in the United States, and nothing in the new law changes that.

Fratto's claims are baseless. Today on C-SPAN's Washington Journal, former constitutional lawyer Glenn Greenwald, who blogs at Salon.com, debunked the White House's claim that the new FISA law requires "court approval" prior to spying on an "individual located in the United States." In fact, as Greenwald explained, the law now allows the government to "listen to our conversations, read our e-mails, with no connection to terrorism, with no proof that anyone has ever done anything wrong" -- without judicial oversight.

Specifically, the new FISA law permits warrantless domestic surveillance in the U.S. as long as the target of the call or e-mail is "reasonably believed" to be overseas. The implication of this loose clause, Greenwald notes, is far-reaching:

The government can monitor every single phone call that London is making to you in Washington, D.C., to any of the viewers at home. ... They can listen to every single international call that you make or receive, every e-mail that you write, and e-mail that you receive, in complete and total secrecy.

Under the new FISA law, the "sole authority" to authorize the warrantless surveillance of people is now granted to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

<snip>

Link: http://www.alternet.org/blogs/video/59129/?comments=view&cID=710029&pID=709999

Yeah... I'll bash my fellow Dems for capitulation to crap like this EVERY SINGLE DAY!!!

In fact, I hope they are all getting their asses chewed out by their constituents during their hurried little vacations right now!