Comments (57)

bob wrote on March 12, 2007 11:14 AM:

The justice Dept and Administration won't object because they KNOW the republican senate will. Dirty work done for them.

Go nuclear in the senate - fuck the republicans now and forever.

Com-n-sense wrote on March 12, 2007 11:16 AM:

Now these are the same people who screamed bloody murder every time the Dems even hinted they would object to one of the Repubs proposed bills.

It would be news if these bastards did anything with a minuscule of integrity in it.

Richard L. Adlof wrote on March 12, 2007 11:38 AM:

1. If you live in Kyl's state (Arizona), call his office daily.

2. If you know someone living in AZ, call them and ask that they call Kyl's office daily.

3. E-mail your Senators explaining that you are watching them on this subject. Explain that this needs to come to a vote. Explain that this is not an example of the 'Last sane man in Washington' rule and it is required for justice and human decency that this go before the entire Senate for an 'up or down' vote.

4. Write your local news rag and express your opinion. Mention your Senators by name and when they are up for re-election.

Arkansan wrote on March 12, 2007 11:39 AM:

Call their bluff. Fight hard, long and mean.

If the fight gets ugly enough the media won’t be able to ignore it. There isn’t one good thing in it for the Republicans or the administration, so why not?

This is a problem where time truly is of the essence.The Democrats should force the issue, the sooner the better. But they won’t.

Crust wrote on March 12, 2007 11:55 AM:

Jon Kyl's name keeps turning up. Remember his attempt with Lindsay Graham to mislead the Supreme Court in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld by filing an amicus brief based on a ficitious colloquy? (See e.g. http://www.slate.com/id/2138750 )

And here's another beaut
http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/whatsbehindthecloseddoors;_ylt=AjPPfVPxRQmMS18.dxGR0scDW7oF

"Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., has twice in recent weeks tried to sneak through legislative provisions without committee hearings that would amount to a federal Official Secrets Act. One was aimed at criminalizing certain leaks of information from anyone in government; a second effort targeted more narrowly at congressional staff. The issue is still pending."

vmckimmey wrote on March 12, 2007 12:00 PM:

Does Michael O'Neal still work for Senator Spector? Will he be brought before either the House or Senate committees to explain how he slipped the change into the final version of the Patriot Act? Will someone please force him to name names? My money is on Rove.

Arkansan wrote on March 12, 2007 12:28 PM:

They've done this before and no one cared:

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2005/08/08/bush_removal_ended_guam_investigation/

Crust wrote on March 12, 2007 12:35 PM:

By the way, the caption of the photo misspells the Kyl's first name; it is Jon without an "h" (his father was John Kyl).

Evil wrote on March 12, 2007 12:39 PM:

How is it that the Republicans can be so effective at stopping shit in the Senate while they are in the minority, while the Democrats couldn't do the same when they were in the minority????????

Anonymous wrote on March 12, 2007 12:39 PM:

What about the Foley scandal?

It was widely reported that he would not face federal charges - but that the state of Florida is investigating him.

What was the basis of waiving a federal investigation?

Crust wrote on March 12, 2007 12:39 PM:

What vmckimmey said. I just don't understand how Specter and Michael O'Neill are getting away with this. Really, Specter should show O'Neill the door. At an absolute minimum Specter owes the public an explanation of how this measure was slipped in under his name.

C92 wrote on March 12, 2007 12:43 PM:

"Crust" --

Don't forget the other half of this equation... US Attorney for Utah Brett Tolman (at the time an aide for Gonzales) was the DOJ's bag man on the Patriot II provision. He was the one working with Spector's staffer O'Neill to get the provision in there.

And, shortly afterward, 36 year old Brett was appointed US Attorney for Utah.

Coincedentally, press reports had Tolman as a dark horse candidate for the USA slot (the White House wanted to put their own guy up). But Hatch and Spector agitated on the issue -- and the Patriot slight of hand might have earned Tolman his reward...

Crust wrote on March 12, 2007 12:50 PM:

That's an interesting angle, C92; I didn't know that. That certainly raises questions about his claim of ignorance about the provision "he" slipped into the bill (as does his general pattern of being quietly much more friendly to the Bush administration that his public pronouncements would suggest).

Crust wrote on March 12, 2007 12:53 PM:

PS "He" in my previous comment is Specter (in case anyone's confused).

Matthew Giger wrote on March 12, 2007 12:55 PM:

Why don't they just slip it in at the last second just like the original provision was put in?

J R wrote on March 12, 2007 12:55 PM:

i just called my two senators (TX) to urge them not to cooperate with Kyl, and rather to support Spector's bill. Bailey-Hutchinson's staff did not know what I was talking about (and it's a mouthful to explain).

two suggestions:
** call your Senator, especially if that Senator is a Republican. 100 calls (from residents of the Senator's state!) might make a difference

**let's get the bill # up, so we can pass along our message with crystal clairty. the staffers I talked with didn't know what I was talking about, and a lot of explaining was necessary ("reverse the change slipped into the Patriot Act reauthorization concerning the president's power to appoint US Attorneys without Senate confirmation" is a mouthful).

Crust wrote on March 12, 2007 12:57 PM:

Arkansan, that's an interesting precedent in the Guam/Abramoff case. It's bad enough in itself, but it becomes more meaningful as part of a pattern.

P J Evans wrote on March 12, 2007 12:58 PM:

I wonder what they promised Kyl if he can keep it blocked.

RandyH wrote on March 12, 2007 12:59 PM:

Jon Kyl is a nazi. I used to live in Arizona and would write his office about issues from time to time and later just stopped. It wasn't worth it. The responses to my letters always blamed the media for getting the story wrong and that things are being handled just the way they ought to be by our mighty leader in the white house...

There's no getting through to him if you don't completely agree with him and his authority figures. He's the ultimate "Double-High Right Wing Authoritarian leader." (You can read about the subject at http://theauthoritarians.com/ )

He is a very dangerous man and, unfortunately, very popular among his constituents.

nulla bona wrote on March 12, 2007 1:07 PM:

Can we get confirmation hearings for the most recent newbies? Rove's chief dirt finder now an Arkansas AUSA has more or less admitted federal criminal voter fraud in 2004 by preparing lists of voters to be challenged/unregistered in key democratic districts and threatening them by mail.

wagonjak wrote on March 12, 2007 1:08 PM:

This is perfect for the administration. They seemingly go along with the Senate and drop their opposition to the bill. Then they ignore it behind the scenes, and have their facist ally Senator Kyle block it in the Senate.

Another Bait and Switch by this criminal administration...

Indict, convict and throw in jail Bush, Cheney, Gonzales and the whole bunch of them!

wagonjak wrote on March 12, 2007 1:09 PM:

This is perfect for the administration. They seemingly go along with the Senate and drop their opposition to the bill. Then they ignore it behind the scenes, and have their facist ally Senator Kyle block it in the Senate.

Another Bait and Switch by this criminal administration...

Indict, convict and throw in jail Bush, Cheney, Gonzales and the whole bunch of them!

oppositionradio wrote on March 12, 2007 1:15 PM:

good point matthew giger... come on schumer - lets play dirty like the republicons

Ron Byers wrote on March 12, 2007 1:15 PM:

The guy is playing with zero cards. Why is Reid letting him look powerful?

Push Kyl out of the way. What are the Republicans going to do, vote against cloture? Fat chance.

nofltwlt wrote on March 12, 2007 1:19 PM:

Americans are tired of these stay-the-course republican-Americans.

The Dems are doing a great job of uncovering some of the graft, corruption, mis-management and evil of the republican regime. Mr. Kyle is in support of this evil regime and for screwing 99% of Americans. Good luck Mr. Kyle, you are going to need it. Perhaps the administration has some real filth to hold over Kyle as a result of their illegal wiretapping of Americans.

Crust wrote on March 12, 2007 1:23 PM:

Re "What was the basis of waiving a federal investigation [of Foley]"?

Actually, the FBI is investigating, see
http://www.tcpalm.com/tcp/florida_news/article/0,2820,TCP_24432_5371115,00.html
although it is still a preliminary investigation, not a full-blown investigation unlike the Florida state investigation. It may be that the feds are deliberately slow-rolling this or it may be that this is entirely legitimate. It's like Josh said, now that this pattern of selective investigation has become clear, there is rightfully a pervasive cloud of suspicion over cases where they would otherwise be accorded the benefit of the doubt.

I think the issue in the Foley case is that he was more circumspect with how he behaved with minors than with pages who had reached the age of majority. So far as I know there's no evidence the feds behaved wrongly in that case.

SPENCER ADAMS wrote on March 12, 2007 1:37 PM:

This will go on and on; the Repubs can filibuster any legislation that the Dems can come up with; the idea is to focus on the individual Senators, like Kyl and especially, McConnell by rallying their consituents in their home states, convincing them to put pressure to let the legislation, any legislation come up for a vote and organize a veto-proof vote.

I know, easier said than done, but otherwise, Bush can hold the Dems off for the remainder of his term.

TheOtherWA wrote on March 12, 2007 1:44 PM:

Here's a phrase the Dems need to learn: The Republic members in congress are being obstructionist.

Repeat as often as necessary.

Ron Byers wrote on March 12, 2007 1:53 PM:

How about another oldie but goody, "up or down vote!" Just repeat that mantra all the rest of the month.

Actually I am still trying to figure out how Kyl's position helps Republicans. Could somebody tell me.

I guess it does help them if he is taken seriously and Leahy and Reid don't push the matter, but if they do, then I see no down side in the fight for Democrats. Does anybody else.

Ronald Cantrell wrote on March 12, 2007 1:56 PM:

Let's don't be quite so critical of the Democrats just yet. They have been in power two months so far. Actually, they blocked plenty of bad stuff when they were in the minority. If the Senate only took a straight majority vote, unions, abortions, gays, democrats, you name it would all be illegal. Plus, we don't really have majority, since Lieberman is the deciding vote.

POed Lib wrote on March 12, 2007 2:09 PM:

Time to go to the mattresses.

ALL CONFIRMATION HEARINGS NEED TO BE ENDED, NOW, TODAY, THIS VERY MINUTE, UNTIL THE RULE OF THE CONSTITUTION HAS BEEN RESTORED.

Arkansan wrote on March 12, 2007 2:15 PM:

"Let's don't be quite so critical of the Democrats just yet. They have been in power two months so far. Actually, they blocked plenty of bad stuff when they were in the minority. If the Senate only took a straight majority vote, unions, abortions, gays, democrats, you name it would all be illegal. Plus, we don't really have majority, since Lieberman is the deciding vote."

We have been waiting six long years now for the Democrats to act like an opposition Party. When they were in the minority, they had to “keep their powder dry.” Well it’s past time to use that powder and come out with both guns blazing.

What you need to do is visualize the Republican response to a similar Democratic abuse of power. That response (absent the corruption) is exactly the reaction the Democrats need to raise now. Enough is enough. There is no time or reason for weak, conciliatory reactions which assume a molecule of integrity on the part of the Republicans.

Lieberman is a monster of the Democrats creation, and they need to deal with him. When the Democrats gave their tacit support to his independent run, they made their bed now they should sleep in it. Let the rat Lieberman switch parties. He’ll be a nothing to the Republicans, which is what he should be to the Democrats. It is pathetic to allow him any control over the Democratic agenda, in fact he is symptomatic of what is wrong with the Party, that they let themselves be walked on by the likes of lying trash like Lieberman.

Anything short of unbridled outrage is just insufficient.

Uncle Don wrote on March 12, 2007 3:37 PM:

Remember, even if Lieberman switches to the Republican Party, the Democrats will retain their "majority" in the Senate and keep the committee chairs. Although Cheney would break a 50-50 tie vote, the Democrats could continue issuing subpoenas and investigating the Bush regime's malfeasance.

(The Senate adopted a rule at the beginning of the 110th Congress which would allow Democrats to retain their majority even if Lieberman switches.)

bjobotts wrote on March 12, 2007 4:05 PM:

This is infuriating. After it was secretly slipped into the Patriot Act without anyone knowing about it and finally is about to be repealed and the law put back to what it was we get objection from Kyl, on grounds of ...what? Hey, put it back to what it was...then, KYL, write legislation for others to discuss and vote on before it gets passed, Not after it was put in without knowingly being approved. There is an honest difference(honest being the key word). Kyl acts like he know what's best for the rest of us, so in spite of the fact that no one voted for this, He thinks because it's there we should just leave it there. Forget the fact it's there unintentionally, Kyl thinks it best and that's all you need to know about it. Kyl needs to relearn the word...INTEGRITY.

cal wrote on March 12, 2007 4:17 PM:

I looked up the bill and I think it's this one:

S.214
Title: A bill to amend chapter 35 of title 28, United States Code, to preserve the independence of United States attorneys.

Info here:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d110:11:./temp/~bdIA0L:@@@L&summ2=m&|/bss/d110query.html|

Nell wrote on March 12, 2007 6:12 PM:

"Separation of powers concerns?" Get out! U.S. Attorneys have been appointed in the same way for more than fifty years, at least.

If it was any kind of legitimate concern then the way to deal with it is to put the change openly into the legislation voted on in the House and Senate. Sneaking it into the conference report tells me all I need to know.

And anyone who believes Specter's chief counsel could put something like that into the conference report without his knowledge and say-so, something that removes a traditional function of the very committee Specter chaired, has no idea how things work on the Hill. Does the chief counsel still have his job? Then Specter knew.

Jason wrote on March 12, 2007 8:54 PM:

Don't you know the Republicon's get orgasms just thinking about all the indictments they can bring against Democrats? Just wait for the dust to settle and Democrats will suddenly get extremely corrupt. IF YOU DON'T STOMP ON REPUBLICON PROPAGANDA NOW DEMOCRATIC PARTY IT WILL BITE YOU DOWN THE ROAD.

Frank wrote on March 12, 2007 9:55 PM:

This is the same Kyle with Grahm, who tried to pull the wool over the eyes of the SCOTUS by offering a contrived "friends of the court" brief in the Hamdan case heard before the supreme court. The "recorded" exchange of words between the two, on the senate floor, WHEN IT WAS NOT IN SESSION, offered the SCOTUS a false "sense of the senate record" concerning that Hamdan case. This deceiving act, coming from so called distinguished lawyers, was shameful in the extreme by trying to offer bogus senate proceedings records to the highest court in the land. Both would have been robustly disbarred had they not been senators. Google this "happening", and judge for yourself the kind of corrupt goose stepping characters these rubber stamp repuglicans are. Now we are to listen from such dishonest "law makers" like Kyle re the patriot act?

I understand that law schools are using the Graham/Kyle SCOTUS "Hamdan friends of the court profferings" affair, as a classic case study in ethics. It was a shameful episode, a premeditated scheme to influence the highest court in the land, the supreme court, in their decision making. Unhappily, this bold and decitful attempt to hoodwind the supreme court by socalled distinguished lawyer senators, is not publicized enough in the MSM .

shano wrote on March 12, 2007 11:51 PM:

Randy H. is spot on about Kyle.

Kyle was voted one of the top ten dumbest members of the Congress. He gets his orders elsewhere and dumbly follows through.

Its like bashing your head against a wall trying to get him to respond to the real issues involved.
Dumb people are like that. sheesh.

please remain seated wrote on March 13, 2007 11:05 AM:

personally I think whoever said Kyl was a "danger" was spot on ... he should be removed and never allowed to represent anyone in a formal sense in our society, as he's clearly corrupted to the core and doesnt even care. what in the hell would we need a provision like that for anyways. It's inclusion is an indication of nothing short of racketeering. small town america says hello to mobtown global. it's my feeling the next serious war to be fought will be within the borders of this country.

brendan wrote on March 13, 2007 11:58 AM:

"What vmckimmey said. I just don't understand how Specter and Michael O'Neill are getting away with this. Really, Specter should show O'Neill the door. At an absolute minimum Specter owes the public an explanation of how this measure was slipped in under his name."

Actually, a lot of the adminsitration's misdeeds lead directly to Specter, who isn't going to show O'Neill the door: why would he, O'Neill takes the flack for Specter's decisions. There is NO WAY IN HELL Specter's line that "O'Neill did it" is true. No way: Specter's reputation as a demanding boss is legendary. All of a sudden his aides are doing things without his OK? Sure, and I have some oceanfront property in Montana.

Specter is linked to the following scandals, all reported here at TPM:
the National Security Letters, which he wrote to his Judiciary colelagues about in 12.05, tellign them their fears were empty;
the attorney purge: Specter wrote the language and slipped it in;
the illegal NSA spying: after rasing a stink about the program, Specter wrote legislation that gave the President everythign he wanted, incuding retroactive immunity (although the Senator lied repeatedly about that particular aspect, detailed by Glenn Greenwald;
tyhe military commissions act of 2006, which Specter claimed was "unconstitutional on its face" before voting for it anyway.

Specter's fingerprints are all over this latest scandal. "Show O'Neill the door?" Specter should show HIMSELF the door.

brendan wrote on March 13, 2007 12:14 PM:

And by the way, I forgot to mention: Specter has sat on the Vet's Affairs committee since the 97th congress, yet like everyone eldse, he is shocked, JUST SHOCKED, that soldiers were being mistreated at Walter Reed. His office told me when I complained, and this is a direct quote, "well he knows now!" That's right, his staff was actually ANNOYED that someone was angry about walter reed.

kc wrote on March 13, 2007 5:14 PM:

'very popular among his constituents.'

Like hell he is, maybe they like him in Phoenix but I don't think he will do very well in a lot of the state next time around. The only reason he is in the Senate is because the god dam DLC did not run anyone against him in 2000 and then a DLC real estate developer in 2006 (Pederson). What a gift to the repugs, a free Senate seat.

Progressive Patriot wrote on March 14, 2007 10:45 AM:

Dems need to pull out the Republican playbook. Smear Kyl and make his life very uncomfortable. That rumor of him with the hooker might upset his wife.

Call out the Repubs on being obstructionists.

"UP OR DOWN VOTE" "This is too important of an issue!"

And if the Repubs want to speak about anything contrary to the Dems agenda it needs to be done down in storage room B in the basement without a microphone.

Give them that treatment for the next year and then maybe we can go back to being civil. There needs to be consequences for their actions in the past.

Helen Rainier wrote on March 15, 2007 8:08 AM:

What I haven't seen is WHY does Kyl plan to block this? What is his rationale?

Tom Matarrese wrote on April 26, 2007 8:33 PM:

Report: Renzi "looking at" resignation

A Washington, D.C., newspaper reports that U.S. Rep. Rick Renzi, R-Ariz., is considering resignation and that he failed to disclose $200,000 from a former business partner involved in a land deal a federal grand jury is investigating.

http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/daily/local/49668.php

lfbmgr ynroidazq wrote on June 1, 2007 7:07 AM:

kujhl lujdzcx izpfogny nktfswy icbxafsd lmnwaof bqtxlc

lfbmgr ynroidazq wrote on June 1, 2007 7:07 AM:

kujhl lujdzcx izpfogny nktfswy icbxafsd lmnwaof bqtxlc

laix dctuk wrote on June 1, 2007 7:11 AM:

sxuwr kyfnldh duawezcty hblit sxbvr hscx ptrnfysg ptdfg lpftvsxbg

laix dctuk wrote on June 1, 2007 7:11 AM:

sxuwr kyfnldh duawezcty hblit sxbvr hscx ptrnfysg ptdfg lpftvsxbg

pldatyf wkde wrote on June 1, 2007 7:12 AM:

fxkdp opnjkzvr bojwqu fratj vkciyfute zbxwo vzxily [URL]http://www.bksh.qhlrgzop.com[/URL] vfypcmlb vdiyjlps

masxer wrote on September 2, 2007 11:58 PM:

Marusha

ewf wrote on October 6, 2007 4:11 PM:

very interesting

ma615zda wrote on December 13, 2007 12:47 PM:

c617t

garuda airlines wrote on December 20, 2007 6:38 AM:

powwyz6lz7eaosq garuda airlines garuda airlines

starlet susie wrote on December 28, 2007 3:23 AM:

<a href='htt

ill be ready baywatch lyrics wrote on January 10, 2008 1:10 AM:

ill be ready baywatch lyrics [URL=http://shigakogen.com/weather/images/colozar.html]ill be ready baywatch lar