Glenn Greenwald: Reid and company target the True Enemy: "Dodd and his allies"

[babylonsister]

Reid and company target the True Enemy: "Dodd and his allies"

(updated below)


During yesterday's chat with Washington Post Congressional reporter Paul Kane, this extremely revealing exchange occurred, regarding the view of Harry Reid and other anonymous Democrats of Chris Dodd's actions this week, whereby Dodd disrupted their collective desire for quick, smooth, trouble-free passage of Bush's surveillance and immunity bill:

New Hampshire: Hi Paul and thanks for taking my question. I read your article from the 18th about Harry Reid pulling the FISA bill and still am left wondering why "Reid spokesman Jim Manley said the decision had nothing to do with the efforts of Dodd and his allies."

I watched the entire proceedings and remain incredibly moved and thankful for the efforts of Sen. Dodd and his "allies" to protect and defend our Constitution by objecting to retroactive immunity for the telecoms. Can you fathom why this dismissive and seemingly disingenuous statement was made? Was there more to your interview with Manley that you will share?

washingtonpost.com: Telecom Immunity Issue Derails Spy Law Overhaul (Post, Dec. 18)

Paul Kane: Jim Manley, Reid's spokesman, was speaking the truth as Harry Reid viewed things. Reid could have pushed the FISA bill through if he wanted to, over Dodd's objections, but it would have taken time, several days. Reid decided to wait till mid-January.

A little noticed statement Reid made to reporters on Tuesday: he said that by mid-to-late January, when the Senate takes up FISA again, it's likely the presidential campaign will be finished. That was a not-so-subtle dig, I think, at Dodd, who some Democrats believe was grand-standing to try to gain attention for his floundering '08 campaign. Don't yell at me for saying this, this is what some Democrats here on the Hill believe.

Eventually, in a month or two, it's extremely likely the Senate will pass a FISA reauthorization with telecom immunity, so Manley's comment in that regard was accurate. So those of you in the blogosphere attacking Jim should understand, he's channeling Reid when he says that.

Where to begin? In the Beltway world, anyone who aggressively objects to the Bush administration's extremism, and especially its lawbreaking, is always guilty of (at least) one of two sins: they are either fringe, unSerious, overly earnest losers, or -- as in the case with the accusations against Dodd here -- simply pretending to be bothered by such things in order to rouse the rabble and exploit them for cynical political gain. Anyone who disrupts Beltway harmony in order to hold the Bush administration accountable -- anyone who seems actually bothered by the rampant lawbreaking -- is thus easily dismissed as an annoying radical or a self-promoting fraud.

After all, it can't possibly be the case that Dodd actually believes in what he's doing and saying. He can't really care if telecoms are protected from the consequences of their years of deliberate, highly profitable lawbreaking. Clearly, Dodd's just doing all of this to prop up his flagging presidential campaign, just a cynical ploy for attention, not because he has any actual convictions that there is something wrong with granting such an extraordinary and corrupt gift to lawbreaking telecoms. No Serious person would ever actually get riled up about anything like that.

This is what exactly the same people -- Democratic insiders, GOP operatives, and the Establishment pundit-propagandists -- spent all of 2006 doing to Russ Feingold. Feingold was one of the few voices on the national political scene who actually objected meaningfully to the fact that the President was deliberately breaking our laws in how he spied on Americans ever since October, 2001. Feingold spent the year espousing what ought to have been the uncontroversial proposition that for Congress simply to look the other way and to ignore these revelations of illegality would be to reward lawbreaking and eviscerate the rule of law. But his motives were impugned by the Beltway establishment exactly as they are doing now to Dodd.

more...

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/?last_story=/opinion/greenwald/2007/12/21/dodd_reid/

[ellie]

1. I have no words

These people are supposed to be on our side? WTF? It's enough to make me want to undergo a voluntary news blackout.

[iconoclastic cat]

2. Reid isn't on our side, that's for sure. nt

[vssmith]

3. I would like to see more Senators GRANDSTAND

[mmonk]

4. That inspires me to make another contribution to Dodd.

[disndat]

7. ditto

metoo. Suggest everyone concerned about the do-nothing Congress do the same.

[robinlynne]

5. absolute disgust.

[KoKo]

6. Reid has to go. He double talks. Promises things he has no intention of

delivering and whines constantly about "not having votes" when he has many tools at his disposal that he refuses to use. He's a disgrace when he ruffles papers as he speaks haltingly, giving the impression he hasn't taken the time to work out a procedure or even read whatever Amendment or Bill he is bringing to the floor. One could get the impression that his staffers or the lobbyists just hand him stuff on the fly.

He's a disgrace.

[bbgrunt]

8. Reid definitely needs to GO.

[roguevalley]

9. he deserves being attacked if he can work for Reid. Reid must go.

"the blogosphere attacking Jim should understand, he's channeling Reid when he says that."

[NNN0LHI]

10. Dodd spends too much time hanging out with the likes of Imus for my taste

Lay down with dogs and you get fleas.

Don

[Lance_Boyle]

16. Really? Working an Imus slam into this topic? That's... weird.

And after all, what does Reid get for laying down with fascists? Shiny boots and a funny little mustachio?

[OzarkDem]

11. Beltway establishment is on life-support and doesn't know it

They're all about to be taught a really hard lesson when the 2008 election season begins. Quite a few should be looking for new employment.

I can't imagine Reid being in leadership much longer. Dodd definitely has more power, more connections in the Dem party and a far greater record of success in campaigns and leadership than Reid.

Reid has nothing, I don't understand how Dems ever elected him as leader anyway. What has he ever accomplished other than getting himself re-elected?

[Kolesar]

12. Greenwald is basing this tempest on ONLY what his buddy Paul Kane THINKS. And GG admits it.

Only what Paul Kane THINKS that Reid said. This is pure projection and the first cousin of bullshit. You're going to have to try a little harder at "reporting", Glenn Greenwald. Then again, you never try very hard to get substance into your columns and Salon.com still pays you.

Paul Kane: Jim Manley, Reid's spokesman, was speaking the truth as Harry Reid viewed things. Reid could have pushed the FISA bill through if he wanted to, over Dodd's objections, but it would have taken time, several days. Reid decided to wait till mid-January.

A little noticed statement Reid made to reporters on Tuesday: he said that by mid-to-late January, when the Senate takes up FISA again, it's likely the presidential campaign will be finished. That was a not-so-subtle dig, I think, at Dodd, who some Democrats believe was grand-standing to try to gain attention for his floundering '08 campaign. Don't yell at me for saying this, this is what some Democrats here on the Hill believe.

Congratulations to Reid and Pelosi for accomplishing auto fuel economy standards. I never thought we would see this guy in the white house sign that bill.

[Leopolds Ghost]

13. Fuel economy is nice, but Paul Kane is obviously sympathetic to Reid here.

Paul Kane and Reid agree:

* "FISA expansion with telecom immunity will be passed this season,
whether or not the peanut gallery thinks otherwise. Demolition
of public housing, expansion of surveillance is our LEGACY. we
won't actually move on bills from the Progressive Caucus intended
to PREVENT these things that we actually DESIRE. we tolerate
and say nice things about these bills in the manner of a mother
patting her son on the head when he reaches for a lollypop she
has no intention of buying. The liberal wing of the party will
thank us one day once they realize they are bereft of ideas --
and once we've gotten rid of the remains of their broken legacy.
It's time to move on from the Roosevelt-Era THEY want us to live
in. This is the 21st century, a dynamic, business-oriented
society in which the citizen is a consumer and democracy is a
product. And you don't roll out a new product in December."

* "It's likely the presidential campaign will be finished in mid-January"
referring to Dodd, since the statement is meaningless otherwise.

[Kolesar]

15. Sorry, don't follow

Can you put a finer point on it?

[Leopolds Ghost]

17. Reid is a cenrist Democrat. as such, he has no problem with Paul Kanes interpretation

However much those on the left of him might object.

It is not an insult to him to say that he is assiduously working towards
a center-right Democratic agenda along the lines of a good old-fashioned
19th century parliamentarian.

Sincere liberal convictions have no place in that world, the
Johnson-Roosevelt liberal agenda has already been killed in the view
of ruling class Democratic elected officials, and trying to resurrect it
(prosecuting telecoms for past offenses you hope to legalize, say)
is pointless and Quixotic.

[Kolesar]

21. What does that have to do with Paul Kane "making stuff up"?

I mean "making up a story" that candidate Dodd is only protesting to get some attention to his campaign?

[Leopolds Ghost]

23. No, Paul Kane is simply conveying the opinion of his Hill colleagues/lawmakers.

Like Sauron, their one weakness is that they are incapable
of imagining selflessness or idealism, especially when the
consequences carry no material benefit to them.

The very notion that a responsible lawmaker would SEEK to
prosecute telecoms for criminality strikes them as absurd
pandering to the "base".

It doesn't even rise to the level of Quixotic,
because it's not something center-right Dems would DESIRE,
even in an ideal world it's not something they want to see happen.

They don't want to see large-scale public housing projects
in New Orleans, they don't want to see an America unguarded
by comprehensive wiretapping, they don't want to see Iraq
selling oil to non-US oil cos.

It's just something a segment of the Dems think they will
recieve, a bone to be tossed to what Reid et al. regard as
the liberal fringe of the caucus.

They hate Bush because he gave neoliberalism
(the doctrine of DLC and the Blue Dogs) a bad name.
Not because they disagree with every single policy of Bush.

[Kolesar]

24. "some Democrats here on the Hill believe" A blind attribution. It could be just a lie

We would disembowel the republicans for doing such. This is irresponsible rumor mongering.

"Go ahead and tell yourself whatever you have to tell yourself to get through the day, Joe Dirt"

[Truth2Tell]

18. So you disagree with

the interpretation of Reid's statement about the Presidential campaign season being over when they re-visit FISA? (That was an actual statement, not speculation.) You don't believe Reid thinks, and was suggesting, that Dodd was just grandstanding? His apologists here on DU have certainly expressed that same view. What do you think his point was then? Just a random observation?

[Kolesar]

22. I think Glenn Greenwald is dreadfully boring and awful

And if a column about "alleged grandstanding" is the best that he can do on the issue of retroactive immunity for telecoms, then he is not an effective messenger.

[Truth2Tell]

25. The issue at hand

isn't the retroactive immunity. And you didn't answer my question - which was: what do you think Reid meant with his statement?

The issue is Reid and Rockefeller and the rest of the cowardly sell-outs holding us all down while George Bush ass-rapes us. At least Greenwald gets it in that regard.

[Kolesar]

27. Bollocks to the Glenn Greenwald hyperbole

I have seen this so many times in so many endeavors. Reid is just stalling.

[Leopolds Ghost]

14. "it's extremely likely the Senate will pass a FISA reauthorization with telecom immunity"

Reid and his allies feel free to say it in public.

[in_cog_ni_to]

19. "Telecom Immunity Issue Derails Spy Law Overhaul (Post, Dec. 18)" Derails the retroactive immunity

added to the Intelligence Committee's Bill? I sure as hell hope so! They can just overhaul the overhaul WITHOUT THE DAMN IMMUNITY! They had better start listening TO THE PEOPLE!

Harry needs to GO and GO NOW.

[KaptBunnyPants]

20. Go to Hell, Harry!

nm

[diane in sf]

26. Well, this was quite revealing. I like the Kos idea of going after the bad Dems

in primaries. One could get a lot of bang for the buck.

Funny to know that we're the enemies because we want to defend the rule of law and the constitution.

[Orsino]

28. Well, let's keep it in perspective.

Dodd has kept alive the possibility that telecoms could be punished for complicity, but there are certainly no guarantees yet. I'll praise him for standing alone, but I'll send him a dozen roses if he takes an equally principled stand on actual prosecution. Or impeachment. Or any real consequences for the spies or spy-masters.

I know, I know--we have to celebrate every little victory. But won't you feel foolish when Congress eventually immunizes the telecoms, anyway, or when the DoJ sandbags any investigation? I know I will, and I'm trying hard not to be suckered.

[pberq]

29. The enemy is the DLC and other Dem "leaders"

The Democratic party purports to be the opposition party, but instead enables the crimes of the Bush administration.

[SergeyDovlatov]

30. Go Harry Go. Dodd can take your spot n/t