Dodd: Warrantless Wiretaps a Victory for Terrorists
By Leslie on October 24, 2007 at 1:23 AM in Current Affairs
Speaking in Iowa today, Senator Dodd said:
The president’s willingness to trample Constitutional rights hands terrorists a “victory” beyond what they could achieve through another attack. “When you give up basic Constitutional rights, you give terrorists a far greater victory in ways.”
Today Senator Dodd also wrote every member of the Senate urging them to stop Bush’s surveillance reform bill from being considered or voted on, especially the provision granting immunity to telecoms. In his letter, Dodd insisted that the judicial branch ought to be allowed to do its job in considering whether the telecoms had violated the law and should be criminally or civilly held liable. If the Senate acquiesces to the Administration, Dodd wrote, the Senate “will be complicit in the President’s attempt to circumvent the rule of law and the Administration’s continuing efforts to keep Americans in the dark.”
Hillary Clinton says she would support a filibuster of the FISA reform bill.
YES, this is what the Dems ought to be doing! Dodd is sending just the right message: Gutting the US Constitution helps the terrorists win.
UPDATE: Dodd is asking everyone to help make sure the telecom immunity amendment never makes it out of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Support Dodd here by calling up members of the Senate Judiciary Committee and asking them to oppose retroactive immunity.
on sale for only $16.95.
also comes with a special spatula.)
(List Price: $27.95 - Your Price: $15.47)
“The story of poker is that of risk-loving America ... a crazy ride in unparalleled detail, driven by wit, wisdom, true love, and sizzling style. As analyst, historian, devotee, and no mean player, James McManus is poker’s most eloquent advocate.”
By Sarah Palin (Release date: November 17. 2009)
To quote Lincoln about Grant - I like this man. He fights.
It is about bloody time a federal elected official had the nerve to say the obvious, even if it’s a Presidential candidate whose campaign’s been stuck in neutral. We’ve given them our rights, and for what, so we won’t end up being Muslims?
That Clinton and Obama took this long, and needed this kind of pressure to take a position on this just shows that they aren’t the people I want running the party right now.
Cujo359 says..
“…….they (Clinton and Obama) aren’t the people I want running the party right now”
You got that right…..
How about this from Hillary…..?
Read on…..
From the Guardian America….
“Hillary Clinton would launch a policy review as president with an eye towards giving up some of the executive powers accumulated by George Bush, she tells Guardian America in an interview today.”
Now isn’t that special??
A review of the executive powers? Only a review? Are f**king kidding me?
And then she may “cherry pick” and give up some of them? Are you double f**king kidding me?
What kind of Bullshit is this?
Does this mean she wants to be the “Unitary Executive lite?”
What is she going to do about the war in Iraq?
Conduct a review? Commission another “F**king study?
Bring it on (pun intended) all you Hillary lovers, rip me a new one and try to convince me that Hillary in not Bush “lite”.
Hillary doesn’t want to limit the powers of the Presidency when she believes that she is about to acquire those very same powers within a little over a year. Whatever else, she isn’t a fool.
Nobody is the perfect candidate, however we can vote for people who best embody the overall approach to Individual Rights and Sovereignty.
Dodds is scoring well in that category.
With this latest, I’m even more in favor of Dodd than I already was.
Real leaders lead in the direction which is best for the country. Fake leaders find a crowd that’s wandering somewhere and walk in front of it.
Dodd’s a longshot at the moment. But it’s worth stepping back from the heat of the moment and viewing a bigger picture. Kerry upset Dean as the frontrunner by making a dramatic entrance. Many other examples in history.
We haven’t even had the first primary yet. Dramatic events can change everything. Dodd’s achiles heal is that he’s not the hottest campainer or the biggest fundraiser. He does however function in in a way that’s most required of what a president needs to do on the job.
If, and I emphasize IF, Dodd can have enough effect with this move, there would be potential for a flip in front-runners. Still a longshot presently, but hypothetically if Dodd were to get the nomination, then the campain would align behind him.
Dodd or Ron paul are not bad choices. I wish the media wouldn’t marginalize them as they have but I guess the main steam media has already anointed it’s candidates regardless of not one vote being cast. herding sheep is what they are doing.
baaaaaah
I wonder why this sage advice hasn’t been offered by anyone else? Dodd is correct, as was Pete Stark. How long will it take for him to apologize to the war criminals?
if you have the tools, you can fix something. They must match though. Pliers aren’t much good with paper.
So this one guy stands up and says in effect, “This shall not pass.” And the vast majority of people in the country agree with him, as we already knew. And lo and behold, the lemmings in the Senate begin to turn to his side.
A very long time ago I read this book called Profiles In Courage. Seems to me it was about people who did things like this.
Hillary Clinton only said she would filibuster the damn FISA extension with retroactive immunity after Dodd long ago announced he would summarily hold the bill.
Hillary Clinton’s advisers told her that Dodd looked good politically because of that, so Hillary told her press people to tell the public “What Dodd said” in essence.
Dodd is the leader here. The name “Hillary Clinton” should not be spoken in the context of the discussion of the activities of a leader.
I guess I don’t understand: If the Democrats are in the majority in the Senate, why don’t they just all vote against the bill and not pass it? What’s with the “not come to a vote” or “filibuster” horseshit? These are the tactics of an obstructionist minority, not a courageous majority.
They’re only in the majority by one vote Retired, and not all the Dems vote along party lines.
If you follow the Dodd link, which I provide above, he explains why it’s important that the telecom immunity amendment never make it out of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Shorthand version: It’s all about the numbers [votes].