Greenwald reports that the ranking democratic member of the House Intelligence Committee (an oxymoron if there ever was one) and Bush wiretapping enabler, Rep. Jane Harman D-Ca was caught on tape offering to interfere with the espionage investigation of two American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee officials. Now here’s the good part, it was picked up by the NSA wiretapping program that she’s been such a cheerleader for. Let me savor the delicious irony of that, ahhhh yes…

This was captured on tape while Alberto (Fredo) Gonzales was AG and he personally intervened to kill the investigation in to Rep. Harman. She was a useful tool in protecting and defending Bush’s illegal wireptapping program. That makes this sort of a twofer.

Perhaps Rep. Harman has a better taste now of why allowing the government to sweep up massive streams of telecommunications is such a bad idea. Hoisted by her own petard, indeed.

Bush Warns House on Surveillance – New York Times
With the House moving toward a vote on electronic surveillance legislation that the White House has said falls far short of its requirements, President Bush warned legislators strongly Thursday morning against passing what he called “a partisan bill that will undermine American security.”

There is no issue affecting our ability to listen to terrorists. The real issue is the telecom immunity provision that would prevent the public from knowing the extent to which the Bush administration broke the law.

Here’s another gem:

“House leaders simply adopted the position that class-action trial lawyers are taking in the multibillion law suits they have filed” against the phone companies, he said. This “would undermine the private sector’s willingness to cooperate with the intelligence community, cooperation that is essential to protecting our country from harm.”

The lawyers helping the EFF in this case are working pro bono. And we don’t need “willingness to cooperate” with lawful court orders, they’re not optional. He must be talking about willingness to once again break the law. There’s no need to shield the telecoms, they already have immunity for acting in good faith to comply with a government request. The only people it protects are the policy makers who asked the telecoms to break the law in the first place. It’s not telecom immunity were talking about here, it’s Bush immunity.

They might be showing signs of growing some spine.  The provision authorizes judges to hear classified material, effective trumping the state secrets claim beloved by the Bush Justice Dept. It also adds a bipartisan commission to oversee surveillance program. It will almost certainly be vetoed, even if it gets out of committee and passes both houses of Congress. I doubt that telcom BFF and Intelligence Committee chairman Jay Rockerfeller would let his buddies down.

Hullabaloo – by dday
The intelligence leadership has been caught in an enormous lie, making false claims about lost surveillance gathering for purely political reasons. This cannot possibly be an isolated incident. Of coure, we KNOW it’s not an isolated incident. And indeed, many of the employees in the civil service who directed these lies and misstatements, not those at the top but the functionaries, will still be working in their same posts under a potential Democratic Administration. It needs to be extremely clear from the very beginning that they must be rooted out, expunged and turned over to the legal system for a determination. It should be a key part of the Democratic nominee’s platform. Only then can we truly “turn the page,” as our front-runner is likely to say.

In the interim, it has to be clearly stated: the Bush Administration overtly and admittedly lied about lost intelligence to bully the House into expanding executive power. This is a memorable episode.

In an all to common display of craven gutlessness the Senate once again rolled over and gave the White House what it wanted like a prison punk ass bitch. The only hope is that the House finds it’s balls in that other pair of pant in the laundry basket and stands up. Let’s just say I’m not very hopeful about it.

Firedoglake – Firedoglake weblog » FISA: GOP Blinks (Somewhat)…Let’s Get To Work
The go to guy on all things FISA, Glenn Greenwald isn’t a fan of it:

 The whole agreement seems designed to ensure that the GOP gets everything they want — that they are able to defeat all of the pending amendments which Dick Cheney dislikes, and to do so without having to engage in a real filibuster. In what conceivable way is this an instance of “Dems not caving” or “holding tough?” This is how CQ described the agreement:

Republicans pressed for the threshold to head off any amendments that would significantly change the bill, which was negotiated with the White House. Some amendments, though, would loosen restrictions currently in law or in the bill.

One by the vice-chairman of the Intelligence panel, Christopher S. Bond, R-Mo., would change definitions in the law to allow surveillance without a warrant in cases that involve the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Its adoption would require a simple majority vote.

The amendments the GOP likes (i.e., the Bond/Rockefeller amendment to change the Intelligence bill to match Dick Cheney’s demands by increasing eavesdropping powers further still), as well as those that can’t get 50 votes, are subject to the requirement of simple majority. The ones that can get 50 votes but which the GOP dislikes must get 60 votes. If you’re Mitch McConnell, what’s not to like about any of this?

This doesn’t impress me as a principled stand on basic constitutional rights. Does anyone on the Republican party believe in the constitution anymore? Guess not…

Crooks and Liars » Jay Rockefeller on FISA: Bush is committing Political terrorism: Cloture vote fails

Short story is that the GOP fell well short of their pathological attempt to play a national security issue for political advantage. The cloture vote in the Senate failed, so they’ll actually get to discuss amendments.
I’m certain that Bush will accuse the democratic majority of stalling the “Protect America Act” that he claimed to be so important, yet was willing to let expire in a game of political chicken. I guess we’ll hear Bush whine about it during his SOTU speech tonight. Stay tuned…

Reid Issues Ultimatum: More Time Or No Wiretaps – Politics on The Huffington Post
At a State of the Union preview speech today at the National Press Club, Majority Leader Harry Reid issued a dramatic ultimatum to President Bush: either sign an extension of the Protect America Act (which sets conditions for the administration’s warrantless surveillance) or “there will be no wiretapping.”

“It’s up to the president,” Reid announced during a question and answer session. “Does he want the law? It’s up to him.” Reid said Bush needs to sign the extension to give more time for the Senate to reach a compromise on a new bill. Senate Republicans this week obstructed every effort for amendments to be made to the pending FISA legislation.

“If it fails, he can give all the speeches he wants, including the State of the Union, about how we’ve stopped things,” Reid said. “If he does that, it’s disingenuous, and it’s not true.”

Rockefeller predicts win in FISA fight over telecom immunity – The Crypt’s Blog – Politico.com
Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) is predicting the Senate will grant retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies as Congress takes up reauthorization of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).

Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.) and other Democrats, however, are not backing down on their promise to filibuster the FISA bill over this issue.

The Intelligence Committee, chaired by Rockefeller, and the Judiciary Committee, chaired by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), have approved differing versions of the FISA reauthorization bill, with the Intelligence panel supporting immunity and the Judiciary Committee rejecting it.

“I think we will prevail,” Rockefeller said on Wednesday, adding that he hoped the Senate will finish the bill by next week. The FISA legislation expires in February, and both President Bush and GOP congressional leaders have demanded new legislation be in place by that time.

“It’s a pretty bad idea to appear cocky,” Rockefeller noted. “I am not pessimistic.”

Rockefeller also rejected a potential compromise being floated by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) that would let a secret FISA court decide whether the telecom companies, who are being sued for going along with official requests from the Bush administration to cooperate with warrantless surveillance programs, acted properly.

Greenwald believes Rockefeller is basically pathetic:

Jay Rockefeller’s unintentionally revealing comments – Unclaimed Territory
For an entire year, Congressional Democrats have won absolutely nothing. They’ve given in to the White House on every one of its demands. Yet here is Jay Rockefeller strutting around declaring Victory and having to battle against feelings of cockiness because, finally, he is about to win something.

But ponder the “win” that is giving him these feelings of immense self-satisfaction. Is he finally accomplishing what Democrats were given control of Congress to do: namely, impose some checks and limits on the administration? No. The opposite is true. Rockefeller is doing the bidding of Dick Cheney. The bill that he is working for is the bill the White House demanded. Rockefeller is supported by the entire Bush administration, urged on and funded by the nation’s most powerful telecoms, and is backed by the entire GOP caucus in the Senate.

When Rockefeller smugly announces that he “thinks we will prevail,” the “we” on whose behalf he is so proudly speaking is Bush and Cheney, lawbreaking telecoms, and all Republican Senators. The only parties whom Rockefeller is so happily “defeating” are civil liberties groups and members of his own party. That is what is making him feel pulsating sensations of excitement and “smugness.”

I tend to agree. “Best Sycophantic Dance to the Opposition’s Tune” is not something to claim as a victory. It’s a sell out of the bedrock principles of both parties and constitution. The senator should be ashamed, but I suspect he’ll pocket some nice campaign contributions and dance on with his overweening smugness. He’s another democrat who ought to be opposed in the primaries he’s up for election in 2008. Sadly, he’d probably buy his seat with his personal fortune the same way he did originally in 1984.