Rush Holt: "They Said-If You Go Home & Something Happens-We're Going to Say-Its Your Fault"

[kpete]

Rush Holt Just Blew My Mind on FISA Bill
by nehark
Tue Aug 07, 2007 at 11:30:47 AM PDT
News diary. It's going to be short:

Ed Schultz interviews Rep. Rush Holt and asks "Why did Democrats roll over?" Rep. Holt says: "It was fear mongering. They said 'If you go home and something happens, we're going to say it's your fault for not giving us the tools we need to protect America.'"

Ed asked Rep. Holt how serious the passing of this bill is. Holt says it's damned serious and many of them (Dem. Congressmen) wanted to take the month of August to work through opposing the bill but, he said "I'm sorry to say, we didn't prevail." Again, when asked why, he used the term "fear mongering."

My point is this: If this doesn't sound like bare-faced threats are being made, I don't know what does. Yes, we have many Dems in Congress who are just Republicans filling Dem seats. I think we can all agree on that. But I've had to ask myself over and over, "What could be so compelling that so many U.S. Congressmen and Senators (from both parties) would vote to eviscerate our Constitution's 4th Amendment?" If another terrorist attack is imminent, shouldn't our government warn us? Are these just empty threats from the Administration scaring our elected officials into taking away our rights, or do they know something?

I ask myself, "If something real was scaring the pants off our members of Congress, enough to sell out the Constitution that they took an oath to protect, how would they tell us? What are they so afraid of? Their jobs?" Somehow I've stopped believing that most of our officials would sell out our Country to protect their jobs.


more at:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/8/7/13477/18990
http://www.bigeddieradio.com/todayonshow/index.asp

[notadmblnd]

1. Then I would have said... If I go home and something happens, then I'll know it was you

it wasn't fear mongering. It was a threat.

[loudsue]

73. Bingo!

The first one (9/11) was theirs, too. If 63% of the population thinks the gov't knew full well about 9/11 beforehand, how come the idiots in congress ignore it?

It was them then, and it will be them the next time, God forbid, if there is a next time.

:kick:

[AX10]

2. Sad

.

[BOSSHOG]

3. Since bush, cheney, rove let the 9-11 attack happen for their supposed

political gain, I think the threat was serious.

Between the lines: if you don't push through the bill, karl will ensure something bad will happen and you will get the blame.

[phantom power]

4. The GOP is going to portray the Dems as soft on terror no matter what

Do the Dems really not understand this basic fact of life?

[Robbien]

45. So true. I see this as just a CYA interview. Dems saying oh please voters

don't blame us for going behind closed doors with GOPers and making policies to give Cheney/Bush/Gonzo more power.

So their excuse is "we were peeing in our pants with feeeear! We had to do it. Ignore the fact that we were in on the secret closed door planning. Ignore the fact that we oh so quickly pushed the bill through when previously all we did is whine about not being able to push bills through. No, even though all signs point to the fact that we really really wanted this bill, really we didn't. Don't be mad at us."

Not buying.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

49. Exactly

No matter how much they "enable" this President, Rush, Sean, Bill, et. al are going to keep on bashing the Democrats as are the rest of the GOP and other like-minded voters, so whatever they are trying to accomplish by enabling the White House in getting everything it wants in terms of increased powers is beyond my formidable powers of comprehension. If Bush and the Republicans are not bashing the Democrats over national security it will be about taxes or they will find something else. Republicans just don't like Democrats (politically) and vice versa. As a previous poster pointed out, it is a "basic fact of life." Republicans aren't out there trying to get liberals to like them. Why do some of our members seem to worry so much about attracting conservatives (or at least avoiding their wrath)? Also, it seems like Bush/GOP really seem to know a lot about possible terrorist threats and what might happen if Congress doesn't pass certain pieces of legislation (coincidentally, the same legislation that President desperately wants). Shouldn't somebody be asking about how they always seem to know so much about what *might* happen and how whatever it is they want passed is actually going to prevent whatever *might* happen? If members of our party are going to vote for this kind of legislation, shouldn't we at least expect them to vote for it because they have good reason to believe it will actually protect us instead of whether or not they will get bashed (which they will whether or not they vote for it) if they vote against this kind of legislation? *sigh*

[Lydia Leftcoast]

5. The way to defuse a threat is to PUBLICIZE it

If that's the case, if the Dems WERE being threatened with being blamed for terror if they didn't vote for FISA, then they should have called a news conference, assembled on the Capitol steps en masse, as they did to defend Social Security (the ONE time they all stood together), and told the world that the Republicanites were pressuring them.

The Republicanites would then have been forced to play defense instead of their accustomed position of offense.

[tridim]

9. Sounds like Holt is attempting to publicize it

But doing so on Ed "DLC" Shutlz' radio show isn't going to work.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

34. And just one person trying to publicize it sounds paranoid

They need to all do it.

[Selatius]

6. It's easier to go with the flow than to pick a fight.

Politics is not for pale colors and timid leaders. You need people with convictions willing to stand up. Middle-of-the-road types often don't have the strong convictions on many issues that people on the right and the left do. It's why they're called moderates. People who have strong convictions don't moderate. They draw lines in the sand.

[burythehatchet]

7. Rep. Holt realizes what most people already know

Bush, Inc. will attack us if it means more power for them. It s really no more complicated than that.

Cheney said as much before the last election. Paraphrasing, if a democrat is elected we'll get hard. Of course we will because that is what Dick Cheney will do. Whether its sending anthrax to dem leadership or bringing down skyscrapers, Cheney can and will do what it takes.

[treestar]

18. Interesting thought; I wonder if this really is the case

Most of this type of thing is labeled :tinfoilhat: but there are times when it seems possible that the WH does try to terrorize people, including those in Congress.

I remember when Cheney said something about if we elected Kerry there would be an attack. One knew what he meant in PNAC terms, but it still sounded like it could be a direct threat from him.

They have the reins in their hands, too.

[mwb970]

74. Our government has become our enemy.

Bush, Inc. will attack us if it means more power for them.

The terrorists attacked us once, six years ago. Bush, Cheney, and their thugs and weasels attack us every single day from the safe, secret hideout called the White House.

Bush proudly says he ignores "the polls". But "the polls" represent the opinions of the people of America, you know, the ones Bush works for. When our little tinpot dictator ignores Congress, who represent the people of America, and ignores "the polls", that represent the people of America, he is ignoring us, you and me, all of us.

The battle is not with the terrorists, the jihadists, the Islamists, or whatever the right-wing word du jour for "rotten pinko liberal commies" is now. The battle is with an out-of-control fascist government that threatens our country, our Constitution, and our rights and liberties every single day.

It's time to impeach, folks. Either that or just give up on America and hand it to the fascists.

[burythehatchet]

75. The interests of Bush, Inc. and the so-called al-queda are perfectly aligned

what helps one helps the other.

[tridim]

8. There's the threat folks.

"They" just made a direct terrorist threat. Now, who is going to call them on it? Whining to Ed Schultz is going to accomplish nothing.

[Jackpine Radical]

10. What would happen if the Dems called a press conference & announced

that they had been threatened? "President Bush's people have just told us that if we don't go along with their plans to take away your freedoms, they will stage a terrorist attack and try to blame us for it. We aren't going to allow them to bully us, and we're telling you now that if any major attack happens, it will be the work of our own administration, and we will immediately order our Sergeant At Arms to arrest the President, following which we will commence impeachment proceedings."

[tekisui]

23. Hell yea. I'd be pround and stand as backup to the sargent

[Virginia Dare]

30. Because it was all probably implied. Maybe nobody even said anything..

maybe they were just shown some pictures or a paper at a high level security briefing. They can't really go public with that stuff. It's probably very high level intimidation and innuendo that's going on. Bushco always leaves that certain degree of plausible deniability.

[Bob3]

11. it doesn't' matter they are going to say it's their fault anyway

even with this craven cave in. That is one of the most galling things about this - for some reason these members of congress have absolutely no pattern recognition. None.

[PearliePoo2]

12. it's like extortion

if you don't vote for this then the next event is your fault.
I think it was Feinstein who said she voted yes after a high level briefing.
They KNOW something. What the hell is going on? :scared:

[spinbaby]

14. They know the next attack is coming

They know because they planned it. Not in August, though. Never introduce new product in August.

[Virginia Dare]

27. Yes, Feinstein seemed very cryptic and ominous to me..

I got the sense from her words that they had told her something in those briefings that she definitely didn't like. It was enough to sway her vote anyway.

[Zodiak]

32. It's like the mob

Pay us protection money and we will take care of you...make sure you are safe.

There sure are a lot of crazy assholes around....one of them might come in here and bust the place up. You wouldn't want that to happen, would you?

It is not a direct threat, but a threat nonetheless...the mob is famous for this type of threat.

[Neecy]

43. I think they do know something

This is what Barbara Mikulski - also a member of the Intelligence Committee - said on the floor on August 2nd.

“I agree with my colleagues – as we come into this August we have a certain level of anxiety. And all of us know, as we look back on 2001, if in fact we could have done something to stop what happened on that terrible day on September 11, we would do it. We know that right now, this minute, we have another rendezvous with destiny and we will meet that rendezvous. And in meeting that rendezvous, we will arrive at a legal framework that’s constitutionally compliant and that will enable the intelligence community to be able to do what it needs to without being shackled by more bureaucratic mandates."

If there's such blood-curdling stuff going on, shouldn't we be told, clearly, without the booga-booga hints and fearmongering?

[bluethruandthru]

48. Well, what she voted for wasn't constitutionally compliant!

I sent her a scathing e-mail today letting her know what I thought of her vote to give bush and gonzo more power. :grr:

[rucky]

13. I think I just figured out the root of the problem.

Both sides - Dems and Republicans - think we're stupid.

[Hydra]

26. Yes, they do

You're not a millionaire in the high power club- you must be a moron!

George Carlin put it well about that club in his latest show. We don't matter, and we're too stupid, because we believe them when they prattle on about "The Greatness or America" or "In God We Trust" and "The War on Terror"

Since we're too stupid to hang them all for selling us out, we must deserve what we get, in their minds.

[OzarkDem]

62. Actually

The Republics know we're smart, but that they control the message.

The Dems just think we're stupid.

[me b zola]

65. I don't think that the Dems think that we are stupid

I think that the Dems know that they have us in check.

They know that the vast majority of the grassroots will always vote Dem because we are aware of the ramifications if another pub takes the WH and/or the Congress (SCOTUS nominations, further merging of church and state, further degregation of our civil liberties, the economy continuing to favor the uber wealthy at the expense of the rest of us, continued assault on social and governmental programs that benifit society, more deregulation, and failure to address global warming and environmental issues).

I have said in the past that if a certain "Dem" gets the nomination that I will not vote for her. Well, for all of the reasons that I listed above, the sad truth is that I probably will vote for her if she gets the nomination. The leadership knows this to be true about most of us and so they continue to pursue what benifits them, not what is best for the party or the nation. This is probably what I am most angry about.

We must develop strong primary candidates to challange those in the party who have shown that they have no intention of representing Democratic values and in being a strong oppositional party to the publicans.

[endarkenment]

15. So did Rep Holt get this on tape?

Does he have names? Who exactly are 'they'? If Holt is serious and did not document this claim then he is an idiot.

[The Backlash Cometh]

16. Well that settles it. Until the Democrats can directly control the

information agencies, and clean them out of right-wing nutjobs who think it's patriotic to send anthrax to American Congressmen, our Democratic Congress will forever rule in fear and allow themselves to be manipulated by Republicans.

[tridim]

19. Pretty much.. The GOP/Neocon mafia has made Congress an offer they can't refuse

The Dems need to grow a pair and go public NOW.

There are two choices, speak up about the threats or stay silent and watch America die. I'm positive the Neocon mafia can't take out every Dem, so the truth will get out.

[Virginia Dare]

29. What happens if you go public with information that you..

have received in a top secret security briefing though?

[tridim]

50. The person who went public would be an instant national hero..

Then he/she would be thrown in jail or killed and everyone would know exactly who did it.

I don't see any downside. I'd make the sacrifice if I were in Congress.

[OzarkDem]

64. Who cares when its information that threatens our country?

Who is going to send you to jail for exposing a plot to harm US citizens?

[The Backlash Cometh]

40. They need to stop being ruled by fear, and start demanding facts.

[OzarkDem]

63. What would Harry Truman do?

What would Sen. Sam Ervin do? What would Thomas Jefferson do? I'd like to think my party has a history of standing up to tyranny no matter how fearful they are. I'd like to think they are smart enough to find a way to stop this.

They can call Bush's bluff and they should. Not even the news media would support an attack by the GOP on their own citizens.

[mikelgb]

17. I knew it

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3430707&mesg_id=3430756

[rodeodance]

20. Many ARE afraid of being labled 'SOFT ON TERROR' simple as that.

[CANDO]

21. Santorum said we're "going" to get hit.

I've been putting this together in my mind and that's what I come up with. These fucking freaks know something is planned for this fall and have warned the Democrats that if they don't play along, they will get the blame. And they caved. I am so god damned spitting mad right now. Who among our leadership has the balls to call a press conference and air this shit out ahead of time and let us know the back door bullshit and threats?

[EFerrari]

22. What utter crap. n/t

[Lincolnian]

24. Why the hell

'Ed asked Rep. Holt how serious the passing of this bill is. Holt says it's damned serious and many of them (Dem. Congressmen) wanted to take the month of August to work through opposing the bill but, he said "I'm sorry to say, we didn't prevail." '

Why the hell would it take the whole month of August just to say NO!

[Solly Mack]

25. "they"? Precisely.Their names.

Expose them

Sure, they'll deny it - but they'll deny a nameless accusation as well

So...Name them. Expose them.

[dorkulon]

28. This is a foregone conclusion anyway. It's not like the GOP isn't going to blame Dems anyhow. /nt

[Hydra]

31. We all know it's coming

It's time everyone to dare them to do it, and refuse to do what they want.

Once it happens, just as they said, it's time to put them on trial for treason against the american people.

Forget the votes- it's time for a war crimes tribunal. It's time that they are branded what they are Traitors to our nation and to our people.

Then it's time for the firing squads, long ropes and headsman's axes.

Enough is enough.

[truebrit71]

33. Harold Ford is a fucking DINO...why should anyone care what he thinks?

...plus he has THE most annoying speech patern of any human being on the planet...

Loves the sound of his own voice apparently...

And lest anyone try and kid themselves, this fucking guy would have hurt someone in the rush to vote on the new FISA bill this past weekend...

[Zodiak]

38. What is also scary

is that if Tim Johnson was well, he would have voted for the White House FISA bill, as well.

His record clearly shows he is a DINO, along with Salazar, Lincoln, the Nelson twins, Landrieu, Carper, and Feinstein.

[Zodiak]

35. Unfortunately, Holt's explanation does not explain

Why it was specifically the DLC and the blue dogs that sold us out. If they were threatened, you would think that the capitulation wold be more widespread....not almost exclusively within a small caucus of corporate Dems in both chambers of Congress.

It also does not explain the rules difference between the Democratic and Republican bills (2/3 needed for Democratic, simple majority for the pukes).

And their whining that they are the victims falls short to me. There is NO EXCUSE for pissing on the Constitution. The REAL victims are the American pople who now have a legal surveillance society....a HUGE step towards totalitarianism.

[glitch]

44. Politics - they only sacrificed the pawns that could weather the backlash.

They didn't need to bring the bill to vote in the first place, they didn't need to make it a simple majority in the second place.
The fact that they allowed it to be voted on and then made it easier to pass makes the Dem leadership complicit. And the most likely explanation for that, to me, is that they're being threatened by a protection racket being run out of the White House.
Because I don't believe the Dem leaders are corrupt. Or fools. I could be wrong, time will tell.

[Zodiak]

56. For me, belief doesn't come into it.

I do not know whether they are complicit or not...it really doesn't matter. In this way, I can set my beliefs aside.

What we do have is evidence before us that they are compromised in one way or another, and therefore completely ineffective at representing their constituents.

Our leadership is compromised...what to do?

I say replace them, and do it now before th shit hits the fan. Too bad, because I really wanted us to make strides in showing that women can lead just as effectively as men. Pelosi was a great hope in that endeavor.

But her and Reid must go....along with the rest of the leadership.

And the Democrats who voted for this bill and others like it need to go, too. I have a list of them.

Cantwell (Washington) DLC 48.27586207
Stabenow (Michigan) DLC 46.55172414
Kohl (Wisconsin) DLC 44.82758621
Feinstein (California) DLC 44.82758621
Leiberman (Connecticut) DLC 44.82758621
Rockefeller (West Virginia) 41.37931034
Conrad (North Dakota) DLC 41.37931034
Baucus (Montana) DLC 39.65517241
Carper (Deleware) DLC 34.48275862
Johnson (South Dakota) DLC 31.03448276
Lincoln (Arkansas) DLC 31.03448276
Salazar (Colorado) DLC 24.13793103
Pryor (Arkansas) DLC 22.4137931
Nelson (Florida) DLC 20.68965517
Landrieu (Louisianna) DLC 17.24137931
Nelson (Nebraska) DLC 3.448275862

All of these Senators betrayed us at least 50% of the time in the last Congress. I know that the left gets accused of being the "purity police", but that is a false construct. We all know that Senators vote against progressives from time to time, but over 50% of the time and you might as well have a Republican there. Note also, that Leiberman has left the party and is rabidly anti-Democrat. How do you think the ones below Leiberman would act if we took the mask off of them?

[glitch]

60. Agreed, only it's a protection racket and the way to eliminate that is to prosecute the racketeers.

Until we can do that our leaders will always be compromised. I think I would be compromised too if I believed another American city was at grave risk from enemies domestic. I am speculating reasons for their inexplicable actions, not excuses.

We must elect people who are prepared to successfully prosecute and disable the racketeers (IMPEACH). Pelosi and Reid are certainly a tragic disappointment there.

(The blue dogs and DLC and other moles needed to be replaced long before this FISA vote. I believe they would've been, or at least have been made irrelevant, if we had fair elections. )

[KoKo]

52. Agree...and thanks for pointing that out!

[Raksha]

69. There were some freshman Dems in both houses who voted for it...

who aren't all that conservative either. Jim Webb was one, and wasn't Claire McCaskill another one? You'd think both of them would have more brains and more integrity--and they do! These are very weird votes that just aren't explainable any other way. They must have been motivated by fear, and not just fear of being called "soft on terror" by the corporate media either. That's happened too many times to all of them.

Edited to add: I just saw the list and Jim Webb's name wasn't there, so I guess I didn't have my facts straight. But I know there were some freshman Dems who disappointed everyone, who aren't usually thought of as Blue Dogs or DLC types.

[Zodiak]

70. Both Webb and McCaskill were DSCC's chosen candidates

As was Kobuchar.

Schumer (head of the DSCC) is not a member of the DLC, but he has taken a lot of money from them for travel and has been quoted many times on the DLC website. He also does speeches for them.

To be more specific, I should have said DLC/DSCC, but I did not want to complicate things. These are the gatekeepers in the Senate, and they are not progressives or good Democrats in my opinion.

I would imagine that many of the freshmen who voted for the FISA bill in the House were Rahm Emmanuel/Steny Hoyer approved, but I have not collected that evidence.

The only one of the 16 that does not belong to those two groups was Mikulski.

[glitch]

36. So who controls "something happening"? I agree with nehark. K & R

"Somehow I've stopped believing that most of our officials would sell out our Country to protect their jobs."

[uberblonde]

37. The only question is...

LIHOP or MIHOP? I've been hearing the same thing via people who worked for the CIA. Everyone expects something big this summer.

[donkeyotay]

58. I've always wondered how you could both know and not know

They know we're going to get hit, something big, something this summer...well, if they know this, how come they don't know enough to stop it? For all the spying and torture and the billions spent on defense and the wars and intelligence and the Department of Homeland Security (aka the blackhole of taxdollars) ... no one knows enough to stop the plan that they know is in play. I want my money back.

[sandnsea]

39. We need a Red State Strategy

We have to Change Minds in order for these reps to Change Votes. I don't know how many times it has to be said before people who are in a position to organize begin to do it.

[Zodiak]

57. Red states will elect Populists

I happen to come from a very, very red region of Texas, and I hear a lot of good things said about Gore and Edwards. Both populists.

Redstaters want a guy who shows up to church on Sunday but still will vote for bread and butter issues for average Americans. They are the opposite of DLCers, who tend to be liberal socially, but not economically.

I believe that a good, strong, charismatic field of populists will win the day for the red states, but of course, you have to convince the gatekeepers that it is in their interest to allow it. As we have it now, the DSCC and the DLC exert too much influence over our primaries and direct their own to win in winnable red districts. Populists are anathema to corporatists, so the gates are kept closed.

Only a grassroots effort to promote populists despite the millions and millions of the DLC and the DSCC's money will overcome this red state barrier. The drawback, of course, is that we have to take a hit on social issues in favor of the economic ones. Oh...when it comes to things like FISA, Populists tend to err on the side of the Constitution. When it comes to school prayer, not so much.

[damntexdem]

41. And that now they've helped pass this abomination, ...

if something happens, the Bushistas are still going to say that it's their fault.

Sorry, suckers, you've been GOPeed on again!

[Harry Monroe]

42. If this is true then Democrats in Congress...

...are spineless, gutless turds!!!!

[rainy]

46. The threat is not idle. Remember the anthrax scare? This admin is

dark and mad. They must be stopped. The truth needs to get out. We have a bunch of gutless leaders. Of course not all of them,but, enough to make difference for the worst.

[quiet.american]

47. And this was a surprise to our Dem leadership? They couldn't see that coming?

They couldn't see that coming and have an answer ready for it?

[Disturbed]

51. Rethugs timed this perfectly.

They waited until the last day to push this on the Dems. This was extortion, Mafia style. The majority of Dems in both houses did not fold but enough of them were scared into voting for this sell out Bill.

[KoKo]

53. Nancy was in charge of when the vote came up and how it was handled.

I wouldn't blame this on fear. There's more to it than that. Threats, maybe...fear that Repugs had something on them...who knows. But, not fear of a terrorist attack because then more Dems would have voted for it.

[quiet.american]

55. It's hard to believe career politicians were scared witless of schoolyard bullies.

Once again it seems to have come down to a reluctance to go on the defensive, and the usual smattering of DLC-enablers voting with the Republican cockroaches.

[redqueen]

54. Excuses, excuses... they SWORE to uphold and protect our rights.

Do your fucking jobs, you cowards.

[superkia]

59. And this isnt on the tube why? Rediculous!

Still I see it as an excuse. You are there to do a job, not bow to ones threats, people are dying because of our politicians and they are afraid of name calling?

[OzarkDem]

61. Then stand up on your hind legs and tell the country

If every Dem in Congress took a hard line against intimidation and called these bullies bluff, they would back down.

Stop being scared of these bullies - you only make them stronger when you let them intimidate you.

Fight, dammit!

[BeHereNow]

66. Soft on the Constitution is no better than "soft on terror." What a ridiculous phrase anyway.

The whole point of terrorism is that it is unpredictable.
The point of the constitution on the other hand, is fairly concrete.
I much prefer representatives who stick to defending what is concrete
rather than crumbling before what is abstract.

BHN

[MasonJar]

67. There is no way that the dems wanted this bill. There is something behind it. Either threats

or lies. Pelosi is going to get on it immediately in September. NOW we MUST get in touch with our dem reps and be sure they know what we expect.

[FogerRox]

68. Bullshit Rush, the leadership scheduled it to be voted on

Steny and Nancy decide what goes to the floor, no votes are taken, Nancy and Steny let it go to the floor.

So Rush why are ya carrying water for this bill ?

Of course the DEM leadership knows exactly what the are doing, so why did they send this bill to the floor? And why is Rush covering fotr Nancy ?

[tbyg52]

71. That's exactly what I first thought

And the Blue Dogs (including my rep) bought it.

See the thread:

Very Hard Truth -- If You Want To Live In A Free Society Some People Will Die From Terrorist Attacks

Haven't even read it yet, but I have known it's true.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1532285&mesg_id=1532285

[gulliver]

72. In case no one has noticed, let me point out that the American ...

... people are ignorant and decisive, a heck of a mix.

The Bush Administration is not out to help the people, either. The Bush Administration is out to feed on the credulity of the American people.

Under the circumstances, the Dems were right to cover their asses. The Bush Administration has the Contsitution, plenty of gasoline, and matches. The Dems are facing what is in effect a political hostage situation.