Russ Feingold goes after AG on wiretaps...
Progressive Jewish Battleground State Senator Russ Feingold went after Attorney General Gonzales on the wiretaps. The full story here , from Carol D. Leoning of the Washington Post. Here's a snippet:
In a letter to the attorney general yesterday, Feingold demanded to know why Gonzales dismissed the senator's question about warrantless eavesdropping as a "hypothetical situation" during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in January 2005. At the hearing, Feingold asked Gonzales where the president's authority ends and whether Gonzales believed the president could, for example, act in contravention of existing criminal laws and spy on U.S. citizens without a warrant.
Gonzales said that it was impossible to answer such a hypothetical question but that it was "not the policy or the agenda of this president" to authorize actions that conflict with existing law. He added that he would hope to alert Congress if the president ever chose to authorize warrantless surveillance, according to a transcript of the hearing.
...
"It now appears that the Attorney General was not being straight with the Judiciary Committee and he has some explaining to do," Feingold said in a statement yesterday.
---
Russ, that's what you get for expecting a member of this administration to be straight with you, even the Judiciary. I love you, man, and I hope to G-d you run for president... but I still haven't fully forgiven you for passing this guy's nomination out of committee. Maybe this is karma.
In a letter to the attorney general yesterday, Feingold demanded to know why Gonzales dismissed the senator's question about warrantless eavesdropping as a "hypothetical situation" during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in January 2005. At the hearing, Feingold asked Gonzales where the president's authority ends and whether Gonzales believed the president could, for example, act in contravention of existing criminal laws and spy on U.S. citizens without a warrant.
Gonzales said that it was impossible to answer such a hypothetical question but that it was "not the policy or the agenda of this president" to authorize actions that conflict with existing law. He added that he would hope to alert Congress if the president ever chose to authorize warrantless surveillance, according to a transcript of the hearing.
...
"It now appears that the Attorney General was not being straight with the Judiciary Committee and he has some explaining to do," Feingold said in a statement yesterday.
---
Russ, that's what you get for expecting a member of this administration to be straight with you, even the Judiciary. I love you, man, and I hope to G-d you run for president... but I still haven't fully forgiven you for passing this guy's nomination out of committee. Maybe this is karma.
posted by Ruby K at 4:12 PM
4 Comments:
Don't you EVER call Wisconsin a red state! Not only did it go blue in 2000 and 2004, it even voted for Dukakis!
True true, BZ. My bad. Though their current governor is the first dem governor in over 16 years, the Republicans have control over both state houses, and their House delegation is firmly split.
Some of the bluest states unfortunately have Republican governors, including NY, CA, MA, and HI. And what's with NY's state senate?
Also, Gov. Doyle had a state Festivus Pole.
BZ,
yurmyboyblue helps make my point more clear. Wisconsin went blue, its true. But it did so by less than 13,000 votes, the smallest percentage margin of victory in the entire Union. Feingold's election victory was much more handy, thus blowing the idea that a real progressive can't win a swing state out of the water.
Post a Comment
<< Home