Dodd Exposed the unconstitutionality of FISA-Call your Senators to support him!

[InsideJob]

Chris Dodd is filibustering right now in protest of granting retroactive immunity to the telecoms. He's already been at it for hours.

[Chocolaty]

http://www.c-span.org/watch/cs_cspan2_wm.asp?Cat=TV&Code=CS2

[Dig]

holy shit!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[pac522]

You mean against the world's longest statement?:

Notwithstanding any other law, and in addition to the immunities, privileges, and defenses provided by any other source of law, no action shall lie or be maintained in any court, and no penalty, sanction, or other form of remedy or relief shall be imposed by any court or any other body, against any person for the alleged provision to an element of the intelligence community of any information (including records or other information pertaining to a customer), facilities, or any other form of assistance, during the period of time beginning on September 11, 2001, and ending on the date that is the effective date of this Act, in connection with any alleged classified communications intelligence activity that the Attorney General or a designee of the Attorney General certifies, in a manner consistent with the protection of State secrets, is, was, would be, or would have been intended to protect the United States from a terrorist attack.

[Dig]

The big story...


TOTAL MSM BLACKOUT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It is as if they have no clue what actually is going on in this country.

Not one article on this world event!!!!!!!!

[Dig]

Dodd: No Immunity for Phone Companies that Gave Feds Info
http://blogs.courant.com/on_background/2008/02/dodd-no-immunit.html
February 11, 2008 [not info on the filibuster, but on his stand against this anti-constitutional nonsense!]

Minutes ago, Sen. Chris Dodd emerged from his latest speech on the Senate floor railing against the provisions in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act granting a free pass ("retroactive immunity") to the communications companies that cooperated for years with government requests to gather information on their customers.

Dodd has introduced an amendment to FISA that would slash that immunity, and in his argument for it, he invoked the bedrock rule-of-law philosophy the nation was founded on.  It shouldn't have anything to do with politics, he argued.

"We're here to hold open the courthouse door," he said, advocating the courts be allowed to determine the legality of the actions by the government and the companies.  "That's all we're asking," Dodd said loudly, to a Senate chamber in which every other senator's seat was empty.

The National Security Agency's warrantless electronic surveillance was written to target foreign powers, their agents or suspected terrorists, giving the government the ability to eavesdrop on international telephone calls and e-mails.  It has allowed surveillance of U.S. residents, though not all companies have complied with government requests.

FISA is a 1978 law. The bill under debate this week is an overhaul of it. This version would give legal immunity to companies that have cooperated with government requests, so people affected by their participation would be unable to take them to court.

The White House has threatened to veto any version that puts the companies in danger of exposure in the courts. Other senators, such as Orrin Hatch of Utah, also weighed in today.  Hatch said he was "proud" of the bill as it stands.  He has regularly given the bill his support, saying the companies should be protected, and any possible revelations of classified information in the courts would be a threat to national security.

If the Bush administration gets its way, and the matter is never examined in court, Dodd said, "It will be buried for all history."

[rphope]

It is a true shame that not one other member of senate appears to be supporting this Filibuster. Not One???

Correction:

Kennedy, Edward M. D YES
Feingold, Russell D. YES

Lets call the others tonight!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[rphope]

http://chrisdodd.com/filibuster

[InsideJob]

I've been watching for over an hour and his speech has been quite moving. If he fails in his attempt to sway the vote, I hope that this transcript gets dug out of the Congressional record and prominently preserved online. He's distinguishing himself tonight.

[corbettlashbrook]

I find it disgusting that I actually have to CALL my Senator to ask him to support the LAW!!! My God... how far have we fallen?

[Dig]

All of this is getting read into the public record (the public record could use a historical account of how f**ked up the FISA crap is).

[Dig]

Feingold, Russell D. YES

The only Senator to vote against the US Patriot Act!

[rphope]

OH Shit...

He is talking about the wire taps before 9/11!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[jflack]

OH Shit...

He is talking about the wire taps before 9/11!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Wow!!!!  He actually talked about the Bush administration seeking wiretaps in January 2001!!!

[Suriel]

OH Shit...

He is talking about the wire taps before 9/11!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It's good to see that talked about on the Senate floor.

[InsideJob]

OH Shit...

He is talking about the wire taps before 9/11!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

He also talked about how the CEO of Qwest got railroaded because he refused to comply with NSA.

[Dig]

Surprise, Surprise, the only 3 presidential candidates who are also senators are not supporting the filibuster...

Barack Obama

Hillary Clinton

John Mccain

[corbettlashbrook]

Hmmmm, I'm seeing a car accident in his future... 

[unclecliffy]

thanks for the tip

cspan2 on now...live

[Dig]

Now this is some quality TV!!!!!!!!!!!!

100x better than fricking psyops distracting sporting crap.

I cannot wait to support their advertisers!!!!!!

[Dig]

Hmmmm, I'm seeing a car accident in his future... 

he deserves more protection than our chimp fake president!

[jflack]

This is definitely brave of Dodd to speak out.  He seems so relaxed up there.  He is definitely not reading from some crazy teleprompter.  It seems heartfelt...we'll see.

[trixi1]

Well, he's raising the bar higher. Good for him.

[trixi1]

He's questioning that by passing this ridiculous bill, what crimes are going to be made public by going retroactive? Way to go.

[unclecliffy]

Dodd is on fire!

[trixi1]

Listing all of the crimes...

[Dig]

after 27 years as a senator, he has an amazing talent for gab.

[Dig]

Hmmmm, I'm seeing a car accident in his future... 

Christopher Dodd sat on the United States House Select Committee on Assassinations with the following conclusion: The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that the Secret Service, Federal Bureau of Investigation, and Central Intelligence Agency were not involved in the assassination of President Kennedy.

[Chocolaty]

Alex ought to get him on his show
This is great stuff

[trixi1]

Retroactive immunity is one of the most dangerous policies they could try to implement.

[rphope]

so, in the morning they pass the bill....

[Dig]

anybody understand how filibustering works?

we need gravel to explain it!

[trixi1]

It's funny that at the end, Madame Speaker didn't know quite what to say.

[setmefree]

This is bad, now they are all going to leave, get a phone call and vote nay.

[jflack]

Is there a Bill Number to this or is filibustering a different type of beast?

[setmefree]

Chris Dodd, bless your heart.  I hope/pray your colleagues grow a set and vote with you.  

[Dig]

It's funny that at the end, Madame Speaker didn't know quite what to say.

2.5 hours of straight truth in a world of deception is a bit shocking

[rphope]

leave a message for Chris Dodd and tell him you support his many hours fighting for the rights of Americans.

http://action.chrisdodd.com/signUp.jsp?key=1639

This was not a filibuster. They would have had to pull the cott's in if it were and he would have gone until the vote was up in the morning. Actually beyond that, not allowing it to move through. Fact is he only took it so far. He had no support, no media coverage.

What a shame.

[dogmadestroyer]

anybody understand how filibustering works?

we need gravel to explain it!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster_(legislative_tactic)

I loled at the part about Strom Thurmond dehydrating himself so he could drink without pissing his pants. 

[Dig]

Gravel and filibustering the draft in 1971:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Gravel
By June 1971, some Democratic senators opposed to the war wanted to limit the renewal to a one-year extension, while others wanted to end it immediately;[34] Gravel reiterated that he was one of the latter, saying, "It's a senseless war, and one way to do away with it is to do away with the draft."[34] A Senate vote on June 4 indicated majority support for the two-year extension.[34] On June 18 Gravel announced again his intention to counteract that by filibustering the renewal legislation,[39] defending the practice against those who associated it only with blocking civil rights legislation.[39] The first filibuster attempt failed on June 23 when, by three votes, the Senate voted cloture for only the fifth time since 1927.[40]

Protracted negotiations took place over House conference negotiations on the bill, revolving in large part around Senate Majority Leader Mike Mansfield's eventually unsuccessful amendment to tie renewal to a troop withdrawal timetable from Vietnam; during this time the draft law expired and no more were conscripted.[41] On August 5 the Nixon administration pleaded for a renewal before the Senate went on recess, but Gravel successfully blocked an attempt to limit debate by Stennis and no vote was held.[42] Finally on September 21, 1971, the Senate invoked cloture over Gravel's second filibuster attempt by one vote, and then passed the two-year draft extension.[41] Gravel's attempts to stop the draft had failed[19] (notwithstanding Gravel's latter claims that he had stopped or shortened the draft, taken at face value in some media reports, during his 2008 presidential campaign[43]).

Meanwhile, on June 13, 1971, The New York Times began printing large portions of the Pentagon Papers.[44] That was a large collection of secret government documents and studies pertaining to the Vietnam War, of which former Defense Department analyst Daniel Ellsberg had made unauthorized copies and was determined to make public.[45] Ellsberg had for a year and a half approached members of Congress such as William Fulbright, George McGovern, Charles Mathias, and Pete McCloskey about publishing the documents, on the grounds that the Speech or Debate Clause of the Constitution would give congressional members immunity from prosection, but all had refused.[46] Instead, Ellsberg gave the documents to The Times.

The U.S. Justice Department immediately tried to halt publication, on the grounds that the information revealed within the papers harmed the national interest.[45] Within the next two weeks, a federal court injunction halted publication in The Times; The Washington Post and several other newspapers began publishing parts of the documents, with some of them also being halted by injunctions; and the whole matter went to the U.S. Supreme Court for arguments.[45] Looking for an alternate publication mechanism, Ellsberg returned to his idea of having a member of Congress read them, and chose Gravel based on the latter's efforts against the draft;[5] Gravel agreed where previously others had not. Ellsberg arranged for the papers to be given to Gravel on June 26[5] via an intermediary.[47] Gravel used his counter-intelligence experience to choose a midnight transfer in front of the Mayflower Hotel in the center of Washington.[48]

On the night of June 29, 1971, Gravel attempted to read the papers on the floor of the Senate as part of his filibuster against the draft, but was thwarted when no quorum could be formed.[49] Gravel instead convened a session of the Buildings and Grounds subcommittee that he chaired, and began reading from the papers with the press in attendance,[49] omitting supporting documents that he felt might compromise national security,[50] and declaring, "It is my constitutional obligation to protect the security of the people by fostering the free flow of information absolutely essential to their democratic decision-making."[50]

He read until 1 a.m., until with tears and sobs he said that he could no longer physically continue,[50] the previous three nights of sleeplessness and fear about the future having taken their toll.[5] Gravel ended the session by inserting 4,100 pages of the Papers into the Congressional Record of his subcommittee.[45][19] The following day, the Supreme Court's New York Times Co. v. United States decision ruled in favor of the newspapers[45] and publication in The Times and others resumed. In July 1971, Bantam Books published an inexpensive paperback edition of the papers containing the material The Times had published.[51]

--------------------------

This seems to be a process.  It is like everyone is waiting for the score at the end of the game.  Guys, the truth comes out in the journey.  Not at meaningless so called milestones.  2.5 hours of truth on TV is a pretty damn good start against a law that is unconstitutional anyway.

Congress might as well pass a law requiring everyone to throw their babies out the window.  It is just as constitutional as granting immunity to phone companies for destroying America!