<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Senate FISA vote: Klobuchar tries to have it both ways</title>
	<atom:link href="http://minnesotaindependent.com/4486/senate-fisa-vote-klobuchar-tries-to-have-it-both-ways/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://minnesotaindependent.com/4486/senate-fisa-vote-klobuchar-tries-to-have-it-both-ways</link>
	<description>News. Politics. Media.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 02:49:47 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: jonerik</title>
		<link>http://minnesotaindependent.com/4486/senate-fisa-vote-klobuchar-tries-to-have-it-both-ways/comment-page-1#comment-5902</link>
		<dc:creator>jonerik</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2008 20:50:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.minnesotaindependent.com.php5-9.websitetestlink.com/?p=4486#comment-5902</guid>
		<description>Apparently a lot of people are still buying the lie about the FISA-&quot;Protect America&quot; BS: to repeat: all FISA requires is a warrant approved by an independent judge. The purpose being to ensure that the givernment is not using electronic surveillance for political purposes, like blackmail or to intimidate. This amendment returns us to the pre-1978 days of J. Edgar Hoover who used his authority to eavesdrop to blackmail all kinds of people and of course to keep himself and his inept agency in power.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Jane Mayer who just published a book called &quot;The Dark Side&quot; has it right I think. This is from achat with the Washington Post Tueday:&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;    &quot;New York, N.Y.: In your interview with Harper&#039;s yesterday, you said this about why war crimes prosecutions are unlikely: &quot;An additional complicating factor is that key members of Congress sanctioned this program, so many of those who might ordinarily be counted on to lead the charge are themselves compromised.&quot;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;    What did you mean by that? Who specifically is compromised &quot;who might ordinarily be counted on to lead the charge&quot; -- Nancy Pelosi, Jane Harman, Jay Rockefeller? -- and how are they &quot;compromised&quot;?&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;    Jane Mayer: The ranking members of the Senate and House Intelligence Committees were briefed dozens of times about the CIA&#039;s interrogation and detention program over the past seven years -- so any member who has held one of those posts has arguably been complicit. Some say they tried to object, internally. But either because of the threat of violating national security, or, because of the fear of the political price of dissent, these figures in both parties would find it very hard at this point to point the finger at the White House, without also implicating themselves.&quot;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Klobuchar&#039;s failure to vote for cloture was a vote to cover Democratic leadership rears from complicity in War crimes and other wrongdoing. The FISA votes shows how the blackmail is already working.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Apparently a lot of people are still buying the lie about the FISA-&#8221;Protect America&#8221; BS: to repeat: all FISA requires is a warrant approved by an independent judge. The purpose being to ensure that the givernment is not using electronic surveillance for political purposes, like blackmail or to intimidate. This amendment returns us to the pre-1978 days of J. Edgar Hoover who used his authority to eavesdrop to blackmail all kinds of people and of course to keep himself and his inept agency in power.</p>
<p>Jane Mayer who just published a book called &#8220;The Dark Side&#8221; has it right I think. This is from achat with the Washington Post Tueday:</p>
<p>    &#8220;New York, N.Y.: In your interview with Harper&#39;s yesterday, you said this about why war crimes prosecutions are unlikely: &#8220;An additional complicating factor is that key members of Congress sanctioned this program, so many of those who might ordinarily be counted on to lead the charge are themselves compromised.&#8221;</p>
<p>    What did you mean by that? Who specifically is compromised &#8220;who might ordinarily be counted on to lead the charge&#8221; &#8212; Nancy Pelosi, Jane Harman, Jay Rockefeller? &#8212; and how are they &#8220;compromised&#8221;?</p>
<p>    Jane Mayer: The ranking members of the Senate and House Intelligence Committees were briefed dozens of times about the CIA&#39;s interrogation and detention program over the past seven years &#8212; so any member who has held one of those posts has arguably been complicit. Some say they tried to object, internally. But either because of the threat of violating national security, or, because of the fear of the political price of dissent, these figures in both parties would find it very hard at this point to point the finger at the White House, without also implicating themselves.&#8221;</p>
<p>Klobuchar&#39;s failure to vote for cloture was a vote to cover Democratic leadership rears from complicity in War crimes and other wrongdoing. The FISA votes shows how the blackmail is already working.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nospamformo</title>
		<link>http://minnesotaindependent.com/4486/senate-fisa-vote-klobuchar-tries-to-have-it-both-ways/comment-page-1#comment-5901</link>
		<dc:creator>nospamformo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Jul 2008 12:16:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.minnesotaindependent.com.php5-9.websitetestlink.com/?p=4486#comment-5901</guid>
		<description>That would be Amy, not May.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That would be Amy, not May.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nospamformo</title>
		<link>http://minnesotaindependent.com/4486/senate-fisa-vote-klobuchar-tries-to-have-it-both-ways/comment-page-1#comment-5900</link>
		<dc:creator>nospamformo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Jul 2008 12:15:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.minnesotaindependent.com.php5-9.websitetestlink.com/?p=4486#comment-5900</guid>
		<description>Smart Politics on May&#039;s part.   It would be a bit hypocritical of her (but typical of dems) to keep the majority of the Senate from voting on the bill.  Shouldn&#039;t &quot;count every vote, and let every vote count &quot; be applied to the Senate?  Why should a few petty little men hold up this extremely important bill that was already guaranteed to pass?&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Once Amy voted to allow it to get to a full vote, she could then publicly pay off her liberal constituency and vote against it like a good little pro-terrorist liberal.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Smart Politics on May&#39;s part.   It would be a bit hypocritical of her (but typical of dems) to keep the majority of the Senate from voting on the bill.  Shouldn&#39;t &#8220;count every vote, and let every vote count &#8221; be applied to the Senate?  Why should a few petty little men hold up this extremely important bill that was already guaranteed to pass?</p>
<p>Once Amy voted to allow it to get to a full vote, she could then publicly pay off her liberal constituency and vote against it like a good little pro-terrorist liberal.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: westover4</title>
		<link>http://minnesotaindependent.com/4486/senate-fisa-vote-klobuchar-tries-to-have-it-both-ways/comment-page-1#comment-5899</link>
		<dc:creator>westover4</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jul 2008 13:54:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.minnesotaindependent.com.php5-9.websitetestlink.com/?p=4486#comment-5899</guid>
		<description>Nice piece of work!&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;That there are no Republican defectors on this bill is a sad commentary on the GOP. If ever there was a issue of individual liberty and rule of law, this is it. Conservatives ought to have led the charge against this bill.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice piece of work!</p>
<p>That there are no Republican defectors on this bill is a sad commentary on the GOP. If ever there was a issue of individual liberty and rule of law, this is it. Conservatives ought to have led the charge against this bill.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: noahkunin</title>
		<link>http://minnesotaindependent.com/4486/senate-fisa-vote-klobuchar-tries-to-have-it-both-ways/comment-page-1#comment-5898</link>
		<dc:creator>noahkunin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Jul 2008 18:16:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.minnesotaindependent.com.php5-9.websitetestlink.com/?p=4486#comment-5898</guid>
		<description>Klobuchar explains her previous vote on FISA here&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://uptake.blip.tv/file/419375/&quot;&gt;http://uptake.blip.tv/file/419375/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Zakoul is obviously spinning you here but unnecessarily.  Do you really think a filibuster would have stopped this bill?  This isn&#039;t Mr Smith Goes to Washington.  No one is going to rush just as Dodd/Feingold collapse and scream out &quot;Bush LIED to us! Vote against the bill!&quot;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The facts are out - buying time via filibustering seemingly accomplishes nothing.  If Dodd/Feingold couldn&#039;t sway their colleagues behind closed doors nothing anyone would have said on the floor could have changed today&#039;s outcome.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Klobuchar probably reasoned as such and thus cut her losses via her June 25th vote.  That being said I think we&#039;d all like to see the documents/links Zakoul sent you.  What are they? Because it seems CRYSTAL clear that a vote for &quot;cloture&quot; ends any debate/filibuster regardless of what other news agencies say.  See: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Filibuster_Cloture.htm&quot;&gt;http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/com...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I think you overpromise on the chance of stopping this bill in June of this year.  Enough Democrats had already sided with the Administration to ensure bill passage AND cloture.  Since there are no Republican defectors on this issue the Admin only needed to peel off 17 Dems.  Looking at the voting record this had been accomplished long before June 25th 2008.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Klobuchar explains her previous vote on FISA here</p>
<p><a href="http://uptake.blip.tv/file/419375/">http://uptake.blip.tv/file/419375/</a></p>
<p>Zakoul is obviously spinning you here but unnecessarily.  Do you really think a filibuster would have stopped this bill?  This isn&#39;t Mr Smith Goes to Washington.  No one is going to rush just as Dodd/Feingold collapse and scream out &#8220;Bush LIED to us! Vote against the bill!&#8221;</p>
<p>The facts are out &#8211; buying time via filibustering seemingly accomplishes nothing.  If Dodd/Feingold couldn&#39;t sway their colleagues behind closed doors nothing anyone would have said on the floor could have changed today&#39;s outcome.</p>
<p>Klobuchar probably reasoned as such and thus cut her losses via her June 25th vote.  That being said I think we&#39;d all like to see the documents/links Zakoul sent you.  What are they? Because it seems CRYSTAL clear that a vote for &#8220;cloture&#8221; ends any debate/filibuster regardless of what other news agencies say.  See: <a href="http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Filibuster_Cloture.htm"></a><a href="http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/com.." rel="nofollow">http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/com..</a>.</p>
<p>I think you overpromise on the chance of stopping this bill in June of this year.  Enough Democrats had already sided with the Administration to ensure bill passage AND cloture.  Since there are no Republican defectors on this issue the Admin only needed to peel off 17 Dems.  Looking at the voting record this had been accomplished long before June 25th 2008.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jonerik</title>
		<link>http://minnesotaindependent.com/4486/senate-fisa-vote-klobuchar-tries-to-have-it-both-ways/comment-page-1#comment-5236</link>
		<dc:creator>jonerik</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.minnesotaindependent.com.php5-9.websitetestlink.com/?p=4486#comment-5236</guid>
		<description>Apparently a lot of people are still buying the lie about the FISA-&quot;Protect America&quot; BS: to repeat: all FISA requires is a warrant approved by an independent judge. The purpose being to ensure that the givernment is not using electronic surveillance for political purposes, like blackmail or to intimidate. This amendment returns us to the pre-1978 days of J. Edgar Hoover who used his authority to eavesdrop to blackmail all kinds of people and of course to keep himself and his inept agency in power.

Jane Mayer who just published a book called &quot;The Dark Side&quot; has it right I think. This is from achat with the Washington Post Tueday:

    &quot;New York, N.Y.: In your interview with Harper&#039;s yesterday, you said this about why war crimes prosecutions are unlikely: &quot;An additional complicating factor is that key members of Congress sanctioned this program, so many of those who might ordinarily be counted on to lead the charge are themselves compromised.&quot;

    What did you mean by that? Who specifically is compromised &quot;who might ordinarily be counted on to lead the charge&quot; -- Nancy Pelosi, Jane Harman, Jay Rockefeller? -- and how are they &quot;compromised&quot;?

    Jane Mayer: The ranking members of the Senate and House Intelligence Committees were briefed dozens of times about the CIA&#039;s interrogation and detention program over the past seven years -- so any member who has held one of those posts has arguably been complicit. Some say they tried to object, internally. But either because of the threat of violating national security, or, because of the fear of the political price of dissent, these figures in both parties would find it very hard at this point to point the finger at the White House, without also implicating themselves.&quot;

Klobuchar&#039;s failure to vote for cloture was a vote to cover Democratic leadership rears from complicity in War crimes and other wrongdoing. The FISA votes shows how the blackmail is already working.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Apparently a lot of people are still buying the lie about the FISA-&#8221;Protect America&#8221; BS: to repeat: all FISA requires is a warrant approved by an independent judge. The purpose being to ensure that the givernment is not using electronic surveillance for political purposes, like blackmail or to intimidate. This amendment returns us to the pre-1978 days of J. Edgar Hoover who used his authority to eavesdrop to blackmail all kinds of people and of course to keep himself and his inept agency in power.</p>
<p>Jane Mayer who just published a book called &#8220;The Dark Side&#8221; has it right I think. This is from achat with the Washington Post Tueday:</p>
<p>    &#8220;New York, N.Y.: In your interview with Harper&#8217;s yesterday, you said this about why war crimes prosecutions are unlikely: &#8220;An additional complicating factor is that key members of Congress sanctioned this program, so many of those who might ordinarily be counted on to lead the charge are themselves compromised.&#8221;</p>
<p>    What did you mean by that? Who specifically is compromised &#8220;who might ordinarily be counted on to lead the charge&#8221; &#8212; Nancy Pelosi, Jane Harman, Jay Rockefeller? &#8212; and how are they &#8220;compromised&#8221;?</p>
<p>    Jane Mayer: The ranking members of the Senate and House Intelligence Committees were briefed dozens of times about the CIA&#8217;s interrogation and detention program over the past seven years &#8212; so any member who has held one of those posts has arguably been complicit. Some say they tried to object, internally. But either because of the threat of violating national security, or, because of the fear of the political price of dissent, these figures in both parties would find it very hard at this point to point the finger at the White House, without also implicating themselves.&#8221;</p>
<p>Klobuchar&#8217;s failure to vote for cloture was a vote to cover Democratic leadership rears from complicity in War crimes and other wrongdoing. The FISA votes shows how the blackmail is already working.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nospamformo</title>
		<link>http://minnesotaindependent.com/4486/senate-fisa-vote-klobuchar-tries-to-have-it-both-ways/comment-page-1#comment-5237</link>
		<dc:creator>nospamformo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.minnesotaindependent.com.php5-9.websitetestlink.com/?p=4486#comment-5237</guid>
		<description>That would be Amy, not May.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That would be Amy, not May.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nospamformo</title>
		<link>http://minnesotaindependent.com/4486/senate-fisa-vote-klobuchar-tries-to-have-it-both-ways/comment-page-1#comment-5238</link>
		<dc:creator>nospamformo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.minnesotaindependent.com.php5-9.websitetestlink.com/?p=4486#comment-5238</guid>
		<description>Smart Politics on May&#039;s part.   It would be a bit hypocritical of her (but typical of dems) to keep the majority of the Senate from voting on the bill.  Shouldn&#039;t &quot;count every vote, and let every vote count &quot; be applied to the Senate?  Why should a few petty little men hold up this extremely important bill that was already guaranteed to pass?



Once Amy voted to allow it to get to a full vote, she could then publicly pay off her liberal constituency and vote against it like a good little pro-terrorist liberal.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Smart Politics on May&#8217;s part.   It would be a bit hypocritical of her (but typical of dems) to keep the majority of the Senate from voting on the bill.  Shouldn&#8217;t &#8220;count every vote, and let every vote count &#8221; be applied to the Senate?  Why should a few petty little men hold up this extremely important bill that was already guaranteed to pass?</p>
<p>Once Amy voted to allow it to get to a full vote, she could then publicly pay off her liberal constituency and vote against it like a good little pro-terrorist liberal.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: westover4</title>
		<link>http://minnesotaindependent.com/4486/senate-fisa-vote-klobuchar-tries-to-have-it-both-ways/comment-page-1#comment-5239</link>
		<dc:creator>westover4</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.minnesotaindependent.com.php5-9.websitetestlink.com/?p=4486#comment-5239</guid>
		<description>Nice piece of work!

That there are no Republican defectors on this bill is a sad commentary on the GOP. If ever there was a issue of individual liberty and rule of law, this is it. Conservatives ought to have led the charge against this bill.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice piece of work!</p>
<p>That there are no Republican defectors on this bill is a sad commentary on the GOP. If ever there was a issue of individual liberty and rule of law, this is it. Conservatives ought to have led the charge against this bill.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: noahkunin</title>
		<link>http://minnesotaindependent.com/4486/senate-fisa-vote-klobuchar-tries-to-have-it-both-ways/comment-page-1#comment-5240</link>
		<dc:creator>noahkunin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.minnesotaindependent.com.php5-9.websitetestlink.com/?p=4486#comment-5240</guid>
		<description>Klobuchar explains her previous vote on FISA here

http://uptake.blip.tv/file/419375/

Zakoul is obviously spinning you here but unnecessarily.  Do you really think a filibuster would have stopped this bill?  This isn&#039;t Mr Smith Goes to Washington.  No one is going to rush just as Dodd/Feingold collapse and scream out &quot;Bush LIED to us! Vote against the bill!&quot;

The facts are out - buying time via filibustering seemingly accomplishes nothing.  If Dodd/Feingold couldn&#039;t sway their colleagues behind closed doors nothing anyone would have said on the floor could have changed today&#039;s outcome.

Klobuchar probably reasoned as such and thus cut her losses via her June 25th vote.  That being said I think we&#039;d all like to see the documents/links Zakoul sent you.  What are they? Because it seems CRYSTAL clear that a vote for &quot;cloture&quot; ends any debate/filibuster regardless of what other news agencies say.  See: http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Filibuster_Cloture.htm

I think you overpromise on the chance of stopping this bill in June of this year.  Enough Democrats had already sided with the Administration to ensure bill passage AND cloture.  Since there are no Republican defectors on this issue the Admin only needed to peel off 17 Dems.  Looking at the voting record this had been accomplished long before June 25th 2008.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Klobuchar explains her previous vote on FISA here</p>
<p><a href="http://uptake.blip.tv/file/419375/" rel="nofollow">http://uptake.blip.tv/file/419375/</a></p>
<p>Zakoul is obviously spinning you here but unnecessarily.  Do you really think a filibuster would have stopped this bill?  This isn&#8217;t Mr Smith Goes to Washington.  No one is going to rush just as Dodd/Feingold collapse and scream out &#8220;Bush LIED to us! Vote against the bill!&#8221;</p>
<p>The facts are out &#8211; buying time via filibustering seemingly accomplishes nothing.  If Dodd/Feingold couldn&#8217;t sway their colleagues behind closed doors nothing anyone would have said on the floor could have changed today&#8217;s outcome.</p>
<p>Klobuchar probably reasoned as such and thus cut her losses via her June 25th vote.  That being said I think we&#8217;d all like to see the documents/links Zakoul sent you.  What are they? Because it seems CRYSTAL clear that a vote for &#8220;cloture&#8221; ends any debate/filibuster regardless of what other news agencies say.  See: <a href="http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Filibuster_Cloture.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Filibuster_Cloture.htm</a></p>
<p>I think you overpromise on the chance of stopping this bill in June of this year.  Enough Democrats had already sided with the Administration to ensure bill passage AND cloture.  Since there are no Republican defectors on this issue the Admin only needed to peel off 17 Dems.  Looking at the voting record this had been accomplished long before June 25th 2008.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
