Earlier today:
House Intelligence Chairman Silvestre Reyes (D-TX) may have agreed to a compromise on a deal to rewrite the nation's electronic surveillance laws.
That would be the bad deal I criticized here, for basically amounting to handing the decisions about immunity to a hand picked bench of John Roberts' personal favourite judges.
But:
But an aide for Reyes appeared to backpedal, saying Reyes still supported a proposal being pushed by House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) to shift the decision-making about immunity from the secret FISA courts to traditional federal courts.
So that's a better sign. So if I'm following the timeline properly we get this news tonight from the Hill about Bush going over Kit Bond's head:
|
Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) said that negotiations were occurring without Sen. Kit Bond (Mo.), the ranking Republican on the panel.
Ok, so what's going on here? Well, when the supposedly opposition Senate Intelligence chairman wants telco immunity as badly as the President does, why not cut out the Ranking Minority middleman?
Rockefeller said that Bond had made the talks more difficult by insisting he have private negotiations with House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), a move Rockefeller called a "non-starter."
"You know, Bond, he's just complicating things," Rockefeller said. "And I've never talked to him about [his one-on-one talks with Hoyer], so I don't understand it."
Reading the tea leaves here, I wonder if Bond's efforts to negotiate a Democratic capitulation compromise were working to drive the House Dems away from Rockefeller's position, so Rockefeller, (Mike) McConnell and Bush agreed to cut Bond out so they can arm-twist the House Democrats without him.
I suppose it makes it easier for Hoyer, Reyes and Conyers to publicly reject deals offered by Republicans than Democrats.
If I'm reading this right, Hoyer (or more likely, Pelosi) saw through Bond's offer and countered with the offer to let ordinary Federal courts decide on immunity, which is a non-starter for Bush and DCI McConnell since it would make this travesty public, and allows a slight chance immunity wouldn't actually be granted, which is the whole point of this endeavour.
Anyone see it differently? |
STATE BLOGS
