Rep. Van Orden gave an interview to Wisconsin Right Now explaining his vote(s) on FISA. As you recall, he voted for moving it to a final vote, then against it.
Huh?
Turns out he has a good explanation which also makes the (R) members of the Rules committee look like fools or knaves, maybe both. (See a list of those fools/knaves at the end of this post.)
Van Orden's complaint is this: the Rules Committee moved the renewal with a search-warrant requirement, BUT that warrant requirement came into play whenever there was a "US person" as a subject. The definition of "US person" covers anyone living (or merely being) in the US--which includes, by regulation, illegals, known terrorists who entered illegally and are in Brookfield (e.g.), etc.
IOW, the warrant requirement passed by Rules Republicans would significantly burden Intel were they looking at a known terrorist who is in telephone contact with anyone else in the US, or in a terror-sponsoring country.
In other words, Van Orden was absolutely correct in his votes. And he's also not stupid: he acknowledges that the FBI, CIA, NSA, (et al) will violate the law any time they damn well please no matter what the law says, and no matter the Fourth Amendment. His remedy for that: find 'em, prosecute them, and jail them. (Our remedy would take a lot less time and only call for a helicopter.)
As to Rules Committee Republicans, stupid or knave or both:
Burgess, Reschenthaler, Fischbach, Massie, Norman, Roy, Houchin, Langworthy, and Scott.
1 comment:
Van Orden carries a rather unique skill set for a people's representative and is still on that learning curve to becoming a politician. He's very reluctant to speak freely and when he can't chose his words quickly he tends to just go silent. His measured responses can come across as a bit odd when you're used to seeing politicians lie as easy as they breathe, but that's not at all a flaw. DC has to be a very uncomfortable place for a no-nonsense guy like him. Let's hope he never adapts.
Post a Comment