The FISA fight
Jonathan Weisman and Paul Kane write in The Washington Post that the turnabout came when Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) “abruptly withdrew” the legislation.
“Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.) — a presidential candidate who returned from Iowa Sunday night to fight the measure — quickly claimed victory after the bill’s withdrawal, and he again vowed to ‘utilize all the tools available’ to block passage once Reid calls it up in January. . . .
“The White House yesterday strongly defended its push for immunity and raised the prospect of a veto if Congress sends the president a surveillance bill without indemnity.”
From Sen. Edward Kennedy‘s floor statement: “Think about what we’ve been hearing from the White House in this debate. The President has said that American lives will be sacrificed if Congress does not change FISA. But he has also said that he will veto any FISA bill that does not grant retroactive immunity. No immunity, no new FISA bill. So if we take the President at his word, he is willing to let Americans die to protect the phone companies. . . .
“It’s painfully clear what the President’s request for retroactive immunity is really about. It’s a self-serving attempt to avoid legal and political accountability and keep the American public in the dark about this whole shameful episode. Like the CIA’s destruction of videotapes showing potentially criminal conduct, it’s a desperate attempt to erase the past.”
And from Sen. Russell Feingold: “Let me say now to my colleagues: Do not believe everything you hear. Last week I sat with many of you in the secure room in the Capitol, S-407, and listened to arguments made by the Director of National Intelligence and the Attorney General. And I can tell you with absolute certainty that several of the examples they gave were simply wrong. I am happy to have a classified meeting with anyone in this body who wishes to discuss this. . . .
“Based on what I have learned, I have very serious questions about the way that the Administration is interpreting and implementing the Protect America Act, including its effect on the privacy of Americans.”
