Does this mean Dodd has to return the money and netroots love he earned for his conditional hold and double-conditional filibuster?

no. peeps that do the right thing get to keep the love and cash.

Does this mean Feinstein flip-flopped in the right direction?

I just don't see how that could be true.

Feingold's amendment to strip Title II and therefore immunity from the bill as written failed.

Title II was then still there. Unless it was specifically stripped in the final vote you mention, which is highly improbable, given the fate of Feingold's amendment, Title II must still be there, and they're leaving it to either a conference committee or the full Senate to resolve the issue. That's what this AP article implies, that the Judiciary Committee "punted" on the issue:
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hJKgeE0Z-SivATjok-utYBdh9wDwD8SUD33G0

Nice bait and switch on the TPM / Circuit City link team. Crude but effective.

As Harvey Keitel said in Pulp Fiction " let's not start sucking each other's dicks just yet". This is far from over and our Democrat friends in the Senate have disappointed us many times in the past.

Marco wrote on November 15, 2007 7:10 PM:
"...Democrat friends in the Senate have disappointed us many times in the past."

Amen-but at least we've won one battle. It could be an omen.

"dewey_m wrote on November 15, 2007 7:07 PM:

Nice bait and switch on the TPM / Circuit City link team. Crude but effective."

Um... You do know that firedoglake.com is a political blog, and it has nothing to do with Circuit City's firedog service, right?

Marco wrote,

...Democrat friends in the Senate...

From the usage of the term "Democrat" and the disparaging remarks, I am half inclined to consider Marco a concern troll.

If telecom immunity really is out, then this is a victory. Just look back at how this was considered a no-brainer by the powers that be.

Also, Senator Diane Feinstein, in a vote "on party lines," voted with the Dems.

I wonder if all the screaming at her over the last few days might have actually had an impact?

It didn't hurt.

veto on the way? Will the voting public view BushCo's veto of this as offensive?

electricphoto, you need to do more research on how ex post facto is applied: something that makes an action not a crime is allowed, but something that would retroactively turn an action into a crime is not allowed.

Yes, retroactive immunity is constitutional -- ex post facto only applies to making something a crime, not to making it not a crime.

A couple seconds googling makes this easy to find.

Sean - can you please post a link about retroactive immunity not being an ex post facto law ?

Thanks !

This has been an interesting day in Congress. Both the House and Senate are reporting out FISA bill without retroactive immunity for Telecom companies.

The Senate also dug in its heals on Iraq spending tied to a withdrawal schedule. The have the majority to pass this type of bill but not the super majority. It sounds like the Senate finally has the backbone to let the Republicans shut down the Senate with a filabuster as long as they damn please. My guess is that they will first do the other critical spending bills then dare the Republicans to shut down the Senate for weeks, if it should come to that. Well, about time!

I don't know where this backbone has come from but it is long, long overdue. Let's hope they stick to their guns.

what happened to that shit feinstein. did she finally fail to vote for telecom immunity that she said she favored.
surely there will be another vote in which she can vote for it. or did all the criticism of this silly old woman finally begin to take hold and force her to cast a sensible vote for the first time in a while?

Telecom immunity will most certainly be offered as an amendment to the bill. But now that the provision has been stripped from the bill, the amendment will be subject to filibuster. Dodd has promised to filibuster any such amendment that comes up. Breaking his filibuster will require 60 votes.

As long as Dodd hangs tough, those provisions will not get passed.

I'm surprised that Leahy found the wherewithal to outplay the Republicans procedurally. I too want to know how this happened. He's never shown this kind of shrewdness before, and I've been inclined lately to write him off.

As I see it, though, this really isn't much of a victory. As far as what happens nexts, we can pretty much gaurantee that the Dems will botch this one once on the floor. The Reps will filibuster, the Dems will cry foul, and they will fail to muster the votes.

The kick in the gut will be when, again, news sources insist that the Democratic leadership failed to the work of Congress. So it goes.

50 bucks says telco immunity is added back when Judiciary huddles with Intelligence to reconcile bills. (And, probably sometime between Thanksgiving and Christmas, in the hope it draws less notice.)

2008 Presidential Candidate Weekly Poll

www.votenic.com

Results Posted Tuesday At Midnight.

Next up: Bush vetoes it and the Dems cave. And the wheels on the bus go round and round...

If Congress doesn't give immunity, I believe it is likely that President Bush will try to add it to the bill with a Signing Statement.

Check out the Huffington Post for the details of the fight to censure Feinstein in the CA Democratic Party, Rules Committee. It got nasty