Not being a regular poster here, but a frequent lurker, I simply have a small question to raise. First off, take a look at The Spitzer Scandal: asking that question by Red Wind over at the Seminal. The article is a good look at how the Spitzer scandal is almost certain to have relied upon the extraordinary wiretapping that the Bush administration has put in place.
But here’s what I am amazed by: I am amazed that a Democrat—no, let’s make that any Democrat—thinks that he or she can do anything on the sly and keep it secret these days.
I actually have to wonder, as I've wondered before, if elected Democrats realize that issues like the US Attorney scandal and warrantless surveillance are not just inside baseball, not just about a debatable difference of opinion on the balance to strike between security and civil rights, but are rather about Republican attempts to lock in one party rule.
Does Spitzer or any of the Democratic Party leadership really believe that their calls and e-mails are not being monitored? Ten years ago, maybe I would have broken out the tinfoil hats, but now, after all we know? C'mon!
Since 2006 I've been repeatedly flummoxed by the seeming inability of the Democrats to take a stand against what should be easy issues for them. I've had this sneaking suspicion for awhile that the Bush administration had managed to find a way to pin down our politicians to the point where they couldn't effectively act. It's pretty easy to force the hand of any politician if you happen to know what they're hiding in the closet. And if you can read every email your political opponent has sent...
My supposition is that the leading Democrats are more than aware of this - they know they've been monitored since 9/11. Now, what happens if telco immunity doesn't get put into the FISA bill? It means that the lawsuits against the telcos can go forward, which means that there's a good chance that the evidence will reveal the mother of all Watergate scandals by the Bush administration.
Which I'm betting, will reveal the blackmail of leading Democratic politicians, and most likely, the revelation of the secrets they wanted to hide.
Who do I think has been blackmailed? I'm not sure, but it might be good to take a look at who voted for what on FISA.
See, the Spitzer scandal isn't about Spitzer. It's a warning shot, fired by the Bush Administration, across the bow of a Democratic Congress that had the audacity to exercise some of their Constitutional authority.
Not convinced? Spitzer vs. Vitter - which one got their name leaked to the press, and which one is being pressured to resign?
Brief update: a great diary has made the rec list on why this investigation really seems to stink of a hack job: http://www.dailykos.com/...
And what the hey, how about a poll?