Who's Afraid of the Fourth Amendment?

The determination of Democrats in Congress to hand dictatorial powers to Smirky-Darth and amnesty to lawbreaking telecoms who spied on innocent Americans is far more complicated that it appears, as Glenn Greenwald makes clear.

But in addition to cowardice, corruption, political calculation, plain stupidity and old-fashioned bribery and blackmail, the FISA debate was for a moment or two distinguished by the rarest kind of passionate rhetoric in defense of American Democracy and the Constitution.

Chris Dodd went to the Senate floor last night to speak against the FISA bill and delivered one of the most compelling and inspired speeches by a prominent politician that I've heard in quite some time. He tied the core corruption of the FISA bill's telecom amnesty and warranltess eavesdropping provisions into the whole litany of the Bush administration's lawless and destructive behavior over the last seven years -- from torture and rendition to the abuse of secrecy instruments and Guantanamo mock trials -- with a focus on the way in which telecom amnesty further demolishes the rule of law among our political class.

That speech signals that the small minority in the Senate devoted to stopping this bill have made this a priority. Small, vocal, passionate minorities in the Senate -- backed up by vocal, passionate and engaged citizens -- can do much to prevent a bill's quick and painless passage. Dodd's speech can be seen and/or read here.

As salon commenter Wabanatta put it:

"Damn, a speech like that reminds me of when actual patriots roamed the halls of congress."

Cross-posted at Blue in the Bluegrass.

There's more: "Who's Afraid of the Fourth Amendment?" >>

The Breeze is Picking Up

Roper: "So now you'd give the devil the benefit of law?"

More: "Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the devil?"

Roper: "I'd cut down every law in England to do that."

More: "Oh, and when the last law was down, and the devil turned on you, where would you hide, Roper, all the laws being flat? This country is planted thick with laws from coast to coast, man's laws not God's, and if you cut them down -- and you're just the man to do it -- do you really think that you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then?

"Yes, I'd give the devil the benefit of the law, for my own safety's sake."

---A Man for All Seasons

UPDATE Below

TPM Muckraker has the list of the Teleco Ten, the "Democratic" Senators who voted this afternoon to kill a FISA bill that did NOT give amnesty to lawbreaking telecommunications companies.

The final tally was actually 60-36, not 60-34, and the full list of Dems voting to kill were: Sens. Evan Bayh (D-IN), Tom Carper (D-DE), Daniel Inouye (D-HI), Tim Johnson (D-SD), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Claire McCaskill (D-MO), Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), Bill Nelson (D-FL), Ben Nelson (D-NE), Mark Pryor (D-AR), Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), and Ken Salazar (D-CO).

Now comes the "debate" on the FISA bill that hands Smirky-Darth dictatorial powers and gives amnesty to the telecommunications companies who illegally wiretapped innocent American citizens.

Glenn Greenwald at Salon has a great analysis, and FiredogLake is liveblogging the debate.

Meanwhile, Salon commenter Jim White reports that John Edwards is finally stepping up on this issue:

I just got this email from Edwards. He stops short of calling for Obama and Clinton to go to Washington but he does say all of the right things otherwise. I think those calls and emails are helping.

Dear Jim,
When it comes to protecting the rule of law, words are not enough. We need action.

It's wrong for your government to spy on you. That's why I'm asking you to join me today in calling on Senate Democrats to filibuster revisions to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that would give "retroactive immunity" to the giant telecom companies for their role in aiding George W. Bush's illegal eavesdropping on American citizens.

The Senate is debating this issue right now -- which is why we must act right now. You can call your Senators here:

Mel Martinez, (R): (202) 224-3041

Bill Nelson, (D): (202) 224-5274

Granting retroactive immunity is wrong. It will let corporate law-breakers off the hook. It will hamstring efforts to learn the truth about Bush's illegal spying program. And it will flip on its head a core principle that has guided our nation since our founding: the belief that no one, no matter how well connected or what office they hold, is above the law.

But in Washington today, the telecom lobbyists have launched a full-court press for retroactive immunity. George Bush and Dick Cheney are doing everything in their power to ensure it passes. And too many Senate Democrats are ready to give the lobbyists and the Bush administration exactly what they want.

Please join me in calling on every Senate Democrat to do everything in their power -- including joining Senator Dodd's efforts to filibuster this legislation -- to stop retroactive immunity and stand up for the rule of law. The Constitution should not be for sale at any price.

Thank you for taking action.

UPDATE, 6 p.m.: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid rejected Mitch McConnell's motion to end debate - which would have handed Smirky-Darth their victorious execution of the Rule of Law - and postponed further debate until Monday.

That gives us all day tomorrow to call and email our Senators to warn them about the comming hurricane.

Cross-posted at BlueGrassRoots.

There's more: "The Breeze is Picking Up" >>

Last Chance to Save the Rule of Law

This is it. Tomorrow morning, Harry Reid is planning to ram through the Senate a FISA bill that not only hands Smirky/Darth all the dictatorial domestic spying powers they want, but also gives giant telecommunications companies amnesty for illegally spying on the phone calls, emails and text messages of millions of innocent American citizens for the past seven years.

He's doing it over the objections of Democratic Senators Chris Dodd and Russ Feingold, even though Reid always honors such "holds" by republican senators.

He's doing it just as Democratic senators prepare to jet off to Switzerland for a "retreat." This timing forces Dodd and Feingold to launch a filibuster that ruins their colleagues' nice European vacation.

Reid's throwing everything he's got at these lonely defenders of the Constitution and the Rule of Law because the last time he tried this, in November, a concentrated grassroots protest forced him to back off.

We've got to do it again, only harder, faster and better.

The same coalition of progressive groups and bloggers that stopped the wiretapping amnesty train last time is back on the case, this time with a new tactic:

Demanding former Senator and Presidential Candidate John Edwards take the lead as the only presidential candidate backing Dodd and Feingold's Last Stand Defense of American Liberty.

Jane Hamsher and Glenn Greenwald write in an email:

John Edwards should challenge his rivals Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton to go back to Washington, DC and fight against retroactive immunity for the telecoms.

Without the help of the presidential candidates, we are doomed to lose this fight. And all their calls for change will ring hollow if they allow George Bush to railroad this bill through a supine Democratic-controlled Senate because of their absence.

You can email Senator Edwards directly at john@johnedwards.com.

Greenwald adds this in a post:

UPDATE II: For what it's worth (not all that much), both Obama and Clinton have told Markos Moulitsas, in response to being asked, that they oppose telecom immunity and support Dodd's filibuster. Far more active efforts than that would be necessary to have an effect.

On a separate note, Christy Hardin Smith has the contact information for the 14 Senators who seemed prepared to support Dodd's filibuster back in December. It's probably worth calling as many of them as possible -- including Dodd -- to encourage them to do so again.

Credo Action (formerly Working Assets) has been pushing this hard all day, to the point that they crashed Obama's campaign email servers. But we can't let up. Email Edwards, email or call your own and everyone else's Senators, raise hell and keep raisin' it until we win.

Cross-posted at BlueGrassRoots.

There's more: "Last Chance to Save the Rule of Law" >>

At the end of today

Democratic Michigan primary results: CNN with 97% of the precincts reporting -- Clinton 55%, Uncommitted 40%, Kucinich 4%, Dodd 1%, Gravel 0%. Gender breakout of Dem voters -- 57% female, 43% male. GOP results at the CNN link. Liveblogging the Democratic debate, see Kevin Drum. Video clips and commentary at Taylor Marsh.

Missed last night: Ed Kilgore recommended a blog -- 2008 Democratic Convention Watch -- to track superdelegates. So far, how they line up.

Steve Benen summed up the hatred of McCain by conservative bloggers and Repub activists. McCain said, “I believe my party has gone astray…. I think the Democratic Party is a fine party, and I have no problems with it, in their views and their philosophy.” Hmm, how many Dem voters foolish enough to vote for K Street McCain? Too many!

Religious Right alert! Pulitzer prize-winning Chris Hodges warns about H. Res. 888, which "seeks to rewrite American history, turning the founding fathers into Christian fundamentalists." The full text of the bill contains 7 references to "Christian" or "Christianity," 22 to the "Bible," and 4 Biblical verses. Ahem! As Blue Girl reminded, "Lest you all forget, the war isn't on Christmas... ...The war is on Science..."

Back in the Senate, former presidential candidate and a real Democrat Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) returns to "play a key role in [Democratic] plans to make the economy a dominant issue this year." Via Roll Call.

Joint Chiefs chairman, Adm. Mike Mullen, said he'd like to see Gitmo shut down "because he believes negative publicity worldwide about treatment of terrorist suspects has been 'pretty damaging' to the image of the United States." Ya think?! (h/t Nicole)

Lawmakers are mad as hell over the DOJ's "[mis]handling of rape and sexual assault cases involving American women in Iraq." Dropping the ball there, AG Mukasey? Oh, yeah.

On the media front, Editor&Publisher editor Greg Mitchell covered Bill Kristol vs. the NYTimes op-ed page. Of course, Kristol is wrong. Again and again... about as often as Andrew Sullivan suffers from Clinton Derangement Syndrome.

Can't explain why I chuckled at this headline: FDA Says Clones Are Safe For Food. Wheeeee-oooo!

[That's all...no more after the jump.]

There's more: "At the end of today" >>

FISA and Dodd's Fight for the Constitution

Now that Senator Chris Dodd has dropped out of the presidential race, let's not forget that he was and remains the only prominent Democrat in the country fighting to restore our Constitutional rights.

And when I say "fighting," I don't mean complaining about that meanie in the White House after the latest dictatorial legislation has passed and it's too late.

I mean Dodd returned to D.C. at the height of the Iowa campaign to stand alone in the well of the Senate and say to telecom immunity in the FISA bill:

"This shall not pass."

And it didn't! Dodd won! Temporarily, yes, but it was the first and only victory by Democrats in defense of the Constitution in the 12 months since they took over Congress.

It was also the biggest single accomplishment by any of the Democratic presidential candidates, by far.

The Hydra-headed FISA re-authorization that hands amnesty to corporate law-breakers is coming back soon, and it's critical we stand behind Dodd again.

Glenn Greenwald, as always, nailed it:

Dan Froomkin yesterday reported on what the top legislative priority is for the Bush administration and the reasons why it is such: As President Bush begins his final year in office, the White House is aiming for one last major domestic legislative triumph: permanent expansion of government spy powers, including retroactive immunity for the telecom companies that assisted in warrantless surveillance.

(More after the jump.)

In an impromptu briefing aboard Air Force One, as Bush returned to Washington from his Texas vacation yesterday, White House counselor Ed Gillespie told reporters that an administration-supported bill to amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act is Bush's top priority.

"FISA is front and center," Gillespie said, according to a pool report from New York Times White House correspondent Sheryl Gay Stolberg. "If it is allowed to lapse we will be less safe as a country" . . .

Why is this such a big deal to the White House? Eric Lichtblau, James Risen and Scott Shane explained in the New York Times last month: "At stake is the federal government's extensive but uneasy partnership with industry to conduct a wide range of secret surveillance operations in fighting terrorism and crime". . . .

In short, it's a historic battle over the future of the country as a surveillance state.Indeed it is. I would add that retroactive immunity is also so vital to the White House because it is the key to suppressing permanently any prospect that their illegal spying will be investigated and adjudicated by a court.

That's why obtaining telecom immunity is the top priority for Bush. That's why stopping it ought to be a top priority for anyone who cares about the rule of law and limits on our government's surveillance powers. And that's why it is so obscene for Democrats such as Harry Reid and Jay Rockefeller to be leading the way in ensuring that Bush is given everything he is demanding.

In a email to supporters (I'm an Edwards partisan, but I gave money to Dodd to support his FISA fight) after Iowa, Dodd wrote this:

I know a lot of you came to this email list through a shared desire to return our nation to one that respects the rule of law, and I want to make one thing clear to all of you:

The fight to restore the Constitution and stop retroactive immunity does not end with my Presidential campaign. FISA will come back in a few weeks and my pledge to filibuster ANY bill that includes retroactive immunity remains operative.

You've been an invaluable ally in the battle, and I'll need you to stick by my side despite tonight's caucus results.

We made a real difference in shaping the debate, and we'll continue to do so in the coming days, weeks and years.

Chris Dodd

Smirky and Darth have a whole year left to finish shredding the Constitution and divide the citizenry into sheep and detainees.

Don't let the presidential election distract you from the fateful battle former candidate Chris Dodd is still fighting.

Cross-posted at BlueGrassRoots.

There's more: "FISA and Dodd's Fight for the Constitution" >>

Obama, Clinton and Biden Too Busy To Defend Constitution

Greg Sargent over at TPM has put up a post entitled Obama: I Might Be There For Dodd's FISA Filibuster. He might show up to defend the Constitution? That doesn't sound good. To my way of thinking you are either believe the Constitution is worth defending or you think it is "God dammed scrap of paper." There is no middle ground.

I went to TPM and followed the links over to FDL. Here is Obama's initial statement:

Senator Obama unequivocally opposes giving retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies and has cosponsored Senator Dodd's efforts to remove that provision from the FISA bill. Granting such immunity undermines the constitutional protections Americans trust the Congress to protect. Senator Obama supports a filibuster of this bill, and strongly urges others to do the same. It's not clear whether he can return for the vote, but under the Senate rules, the side trying to end a filibuster must produce 60 votes to cut off debate. Whether he is present for the vote for not, Senator Obama will not be among those voting to end the filibuster."

Sargent's characterization isn't far off. In summary Obama is saying "I am behind you all the way Chris, but don't count on me to have your back. My run for President is more important than the Constitution."

I am still looking for comments from Clinton and Biden, but like Obama, they were no shows when the chips were down. I sort of expected Clinton and Biden to take a pass, but if you haven't guessed, I am very upset with Obama. I thought better of him.

There's more: "Obama, Clinton and Biden Too Busy To Defend Constitution" >>

Five chickenshits on Mukasey?

The four Democratic senatorial presidential candidates — Clinton, Obama, Biden and Dodd — all say they opposed Michael Mukasey’s nomination as attorney general. Yet, none of them could actually be present in the Senate to officially vote no?

That’s pretty much ditto for McCain on the Republican side, who weaseled out of having to vote either for or against Mukasey despite saying he believes waterboarding is torture.

There's more: "Five chickenshits on Mukasey?" >>

Help Chris Dodd Save the Constitution

UPDATE After the Jump, UPDATE II

One - and only one - Member of Congress is at this moment standing in front of a stampeding horde of telecommunications companies, bushies and bought-off Senators determined to burn the Constitution to the ground in the name of giving the telcos amnesty for illegal spying.

Trust me on this: Go to Dodd's blog right now and add your comment supporting him. His office and campaign telephones are ringing off the hook, but so far the comment section on his blog is pretty open. Plus, it's more permanent and you can write rationally instead of screaming hysterically.

If you want the details, check out Glenn Greenwald's post on how the Senate is planning to cave completely to Smirky, the telcos and all the forces of UnConstitutional Evil.(More after the jump.)

UPDATE: To his credit, Chris Dodd has been, by far, the most vocal Democratic presidential candidate on the issues of executive power abuses and restoring our constitutional framework. Unsurprisingly, he has issued a very strong condemnation of telecom amnesty along with a vow to try to stop it:
While the President may think that it's right to offer immunity to those who break the law and violate the right to privacy of thousands of law-abiding Americans, I want to assure him it is not a value we have in common and I hope the same can be said of my fellow Democrats in the Senate.
For too long we have failed to respect the rule of law and failed to protect our fundamental civil liberties. I will do what I can to see to it that no telecommunications giant that was complicit in this Administration's assault on the Constitution is given a get-out-of-jail-free card.
The vow to "do what [he] can" to stop amnesty is interesting. Big Tent Democrat suggests he lead a filibuster to stop it (h/t Atrios), but I doubt, given Rockefeller's support, that they could get anywhere near the 40 votes necessary to sustain that. Dodd could, however, place a "hold" on any bill containing amnesty and prevent it from reaching the floor for a vote: "Senate tradition allows any senator to keep a piece of legislation from reaching the Senate floor by placing a hold on the bill." That is what Sen. Wyden did previously to prevent a vote on an anti-net-neutrality bill.
Dodd's emphasis in his campaign on constitutional issues -- along with his excellent voting record this year -- has generated significant positive feelings towards his campaign. But demonstrating real leadership on this incomparably important issue would almost certainly generate real, tangible support for his campaign in many circles.
Telecom amnesty implicates not only all of the issues raised by warrantless surveillance and the rule of law, but really calls into question the basic fairness of our entire political system, i.e, whether the wealthiest and most powerful corporations in Washington can literally buy their way out of lawbreaking. Anyone who boldly impedes what would be this bipartisan travesty -- and a "hold" on an issue of this magnitude would, in the context of Senate customs, be very bold -- is someone who will have demonstrated genuine leadership on a truly critical issue. There has been precious little of that thus far in the presidential race.
* * * * *
Amos Hochstein is the Policy Director for the Dodd Campaign. He can be reached at (202) 737-3633. It may be very helpful to have him hear from those who have appreciated Sen. Dodd's outspokenness thus far on constitutional issues to understand what Sen. Dodd's leadership on this issue here would mean. It is vital to have someone in the Senate take an emphatic stance against what would be the true atrocity of telecom amnesty (Atrios adds some insightful thoughts about the strategic rationale behind a Dodd hold).

Yeah, yeah, I'm committed to Edwards, and it's not really fair to compare him to Dodd on this one, since Dodd is right there in the Senate and Edwards is not, but I swear, if Dodd succeeds in stopping this abomination, his presidential campaign gets my Christmas Fund.

UPDATE, 2:50 p.m.: Senator Dodd has just successfully placed a hold on this disgusting piece of crap posing as legislation. Send the man some love!"

UPDATE II, 4:27 p.m.: Quote from Dodd: "It's about delivering results -- and as I've said before, the FIRST thing I will do after being sworn into office is restore the Constitution. But we shouldn't have to wait until then to prevent the further erosion of our country's most treasured document. That's why I am stopping this bill today."


Cross-posted at BlueGrassRoots.

There's more: "Help Chris Dodd Save the Constitution" >>

Democratic Candidate Pop Quiz --- August 23, 2007

Which Democratic Candidate recently said:

"Despite the exemplary performance of our troops, we are coming off the bloodiest summer of this misguided war and it should be clear that there can be no military solution in Iraq.

"It is useless to argue the merits of a specific tactic when the strategy itself is failed.

"In fact, debating over military tactics when there is no military solution only undermines efforts by those of us who believe that we must change course in Iraq now and begin to immediately redeploy US combat forces so that Iraqi leaders will have the impetus to find a political accord."

Was it:

A. Hillary Clinton;

B. Barack Obama;

C. Dennis Kucinich;

D. John Edwards; or

E. Chris Dodd.

You are right this is a hard question.

The correct answer is Chris Dodd.

There's more: "Democratic Candidate Pop Quiz --- August 23, 2007" >>

Barack Obama, Chris Dodd, Hillary Clinton Debate Foreign Policy

I picked this up at TPM. What I find intriguing about this video is that Keith Olbermann lets Hillary Clinton into the middle of the exchange. I thought it odd when I watched the debate tonight. I still think it is odd. The exchange was clearly between Dodd and Obama. Both were doing well. A third player wasn't needed. It looks like Olbermann gave Hillary is a chance to take some free shots at Barack who was in the middle of a tangle with Chris Dodd.

Notice that the crowd boos Hillary when she talks about Barack keeping his mouth shut, and applauds when Barack comments that the American people have a right to know what their leaders think about important foreign policy issues. My guess is that this exchange will be scored a Hillary win by the big boys, but both the crowd and PA commenter Leon723 disagree.

There's more: "Barack Obama, Chris Dodd, Hillary Clinton Debate Foreign Policy" >>

A Good Old Fashioned Chicago Political Convention

This is a really telling discussion captured by TPM at this afternoon's Yearly Kos meeting with 7 of the 8 Democratic Candidates. Chris Cillizza of The Washington Post's The Fix calls this exchange a situation where

Clinton got caught between a rock (Edwards) and a hard place (Obama) on accepting campaign donations from lobbyists. Under fire from her main opponents -- one of whom was sitting on each side of her -- Clinton said: "A lot of those lobbyists, whether you like it or not, represent real Americans." (She went on to names nurses and social workers as examples of "real Americans" who employ lobbyists.) Expect that line to be featured in some of her opponents' direct mail or even television commercials down the line.

Cillizza has the high and low points of the performances of all the candidates. Notice the argument Chris Dodd makes for public campaign financing, and the shot Dennis Kucinich takes at John Edwards.



No wonder things have been slow around here all day. All the action has been in Chicago.

There's more: "A Good Old Fashioned Chicago Political Convention" >>

There Is Only One Way To Deal With A Bully. Thanks, Senator Dodd

Here is the Chris Dodd / Bill O'Reilly video.



I used to hang out at the Daily Kos. These days I don't spend much time there, not because it contains a lot of hateful objectionable material (it doesn't), but because the site is so darn busy. It is hard not to get lost in the crowd.

No doubt you can find objectionable material on the Daily Kos, but to find it among the thousands of diaries you have to look pretty hard. If your mother says she has heard that the Daily Kos is objectionable, give her the link and ask her to check it out herself.

There's more: "There Is Only One Way To Deal With A Bully. Thanks, Senator Dodd" >>

"What Are You Going To Do With A Guy Like Dodd?"

Bill O'Reilly ended the segment of his radio show featuring his shouting match with Chris Dodd over Dodd's decision to attend the YearlyKos with "What are you going to do with a guy like Dodd?"

Well Bill, having listened to the audio of your Chris Dodd segment, I am tempted to go to Dodd's website and give him a contribution.

Regardless who you support, I think everybody in the netroots should send Dodd $50 and give him a cheer the next time you see him.

I am amazed that O'Reilly aired the segment on his radio show. Even with the luxury of editing, O'Reilly was unable to hide the fact that Dodd administered an old fashioned ass kicking. Go listen to it, the audio is simply amazing. Dodd left O'Reilly sputtering.

Unless O'Reilly decides not to show it, the video, which was preempted last night by the Minneapolis bridge collapse, should be on Faux Noise tonight.

There's more: ""What Are You Going To Do With A Guy Like Dodd?"" >>

Democratic Candidate Pop Quiz

Greg Sargent of TMP Election Central says one of the Democratic Candidates "has agreed to go on Bill O'Reilly's show to defend YearlyKos against O'Reilly's ongoing assault against the gathering and against DailyKos."

Is the candidate:

A. Bill Richardson;

B. Hillary Clinton; or

C. Chris Dodd?


The correct answer is C. Chris Dodd will soon appear to defend YearlyKos against O'Reilly's ongoing attacks on the Daily Kos.

Bonus point. How many people visited the DailyKos yesterday?

A. 50,325,

B. 150,235,

C. 353,235, or

D. 628,243?

If you said 628,243 give yourself extra credit. According to the Truthlaidbear.com, the DailyKos is an internet Higher Being. It's internet ranking is #1 with about five times the daily visitors of the number 2 ranked site, Michelle Malkin's blog. If you political animals are wondering WashingtonMonthly is a playful primate with about 35,000 daily visits. Today it is ranked #33.

There's more: "Democratic Candidate Pop Quiz" >>

When Does the Filibuster Start?

David Sirota asks Anyone Know When the Senate Filibuster Starts? WHERE'S THE BEEF? After all Russ Feingold and Chris Dodd are strongly denouncing the Harry Reid Surrender Bill (Er the War Funding Supplemental.) Surely the two of them could tag team an old Mr. Smith goes to Washington style filibuster to at least slow things down a bit. This morning Jerome Armstrong over at MyDD speculates that both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton will vote against the Harry Reid Surrender Bill. That makes 4 Senators to tag team a filibuster. I suspect that eventually all the Democratic Senators running for President will vote no on the Harry Reid Surrender Bill. That should be sufficient number of Senators to at least put up a fight. Jesus, if Senator Kyl could quietly stop the repeal of the Patriot Act provision at the center of the US Attorney firing scandal for months, then surly a bunch of big name senators wanting our votes and money to help them in their runs for President should be able to at least grab some headlines.

Any bets that they do it? With the exception of Russ Feingold, whose position is principled, the rest will moan and groan and vote a very polite and public "no" in hopes of keeping the support of the majority of folks who are fed up with the war, but in the end they won't do anything that might succeed or even call shame on their colleagues. Surrender monkeys are like that.

Oh you might want to follow that Sirota link. He has found and posted the old "Where's the Beef" commercial. A classic.

UPDATE: Keith Olbermann's Special Comment says it all. When does the filibuster start?

There's more: "When Does the Filibuster Start?" >>