pecunium

Honestly, I'd have said this wasn't a question I could answer; the list of candidates was too long. At various times one might be able to indict any one of 100 people.

But nope, trust one of them to act in a way so egregious that he rises to a pinnacle hard to imagine overcoming.

I present to you all, for your derision, mockery, and if possible activism the honorable Arlen Spector.

Glenn Greenwald goes into detail on his blog.

So I'll sum up (I'd go off in painful... for I am pained, to the point of cold rage and fury, detail of my own, but Maia took her last final, graduates tomorrow and we already have company, so I am stealing time which could be better spent. Foolish me to glance at something while they were grabbing a cuppa).

Arlen Spector wants to make the need for warrants to eavesdrop optional, and to give blanket immunity to anyone who did it when it was illegal, if they did it because the president said to.

What The Fuck?!?

This is the man who said it was a travesty that his committee hadn't been briefed on how this thing was managed? This is the legislation he is refusing to hold hearings on the illegal (while the people who did it may not be convicted, but the guilty often go free... on it's face the whole thing is illegal), wiretapping, and data mining of American citizens to get?

This is a travesty, worse than crime, it's a mistake. It not only rewards bad behaviour, but it enshrines some principles of the Yoo Doctrine (which is at least as sweeping as the Nixon Doctrine that "it's not illegal if the president says to do it) into actual law, instead of mere posturing by the Office of the President.

It's a violation of his oath to defend the Constitution.

It's a shame.

And it's horrifying in its implications.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

From:

sethg

Meanwhile, publishing out of the Gamma Quadrant, today's Boston Globe has an article on Specter that leads:

"Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter emerged this week as a nemesis that the Bush White House hasn't had to face: A subpoena-wielding member of Congress who is ready to force a showdown over what he sees as the Bush administration's intrusion into legislative territory."

That's the first paragraph. In the fourteenth paragraph, we have:

"Yesterday, Specter irritated Democrats anew by supporting a bill that would more firmly establish the legal status of the domestic spying program. Specter said he just wanted to move the bill forward so it can be amended later to insert more safeguards, but Democrats said any action should wait until lawmakers can get a fuller picture of what the program entails."

AAAARRRGGHHH!