Reid Ignoring Dodd's Hold?

As Bill mentioned in his post below, it "appears Harry Reid plans on sticking it to his own and going around Dodd's hold" of the Senate FISA bill, which he's trying to stop because it grants retroactive immunity to the telecoms for their role in the Bush administration's warrantless eavesdropping program. Democratic Senate Majority Leader Reid, however, according to Tim Starks of Congressional Quarterly via Spencer Ackerman, nonetheless plans to bring the Senate's bill up for floor debate next month despite the hold.

That just doesn't happen.

It just doesn't.

Jane Hamsher notes, by way of comparison: "Consider what happened when Chris Dodd introduced the Emmet Till cold case bill, which called for more money for unsolved civil rights crimes. Tom Coburn put a hold on the bill—and Reid just let it go. The bill died. Strange set of priorities you've got there, Senator Reid."

And strange loyalties. No, I'm not just talking about party loyalty, either—I'm talking about loyalty to lawbreaking telecoms versus loyalty to the Constitution.

Whatever defense there is from Senate Dems in support of the bill rests on pointing out that the bill is still being marked up behind closed doors, although I'm not sure WTF that's supposed to be worth, given that just yesterday the big story was that they'd "reached agreement with the Bush administration yesterday on the terms of new legislation to control the federal government's domestic surveillance program, which includes a highly controversial grant of legal immunity to telecommunications companies that have assisted the program, according to congressional sources"—you know, that whole thing that prompted Dodd's hold in the first place.

But, safe and late as usual, Obama's now come out against the bill, too. If fellow day-late-and-dollar-shorter Clinton also comes out against it, that will be three sitting Senators—all presidential candidates—departing from the Democratic Senate leadership's line on this bill.

I can't wait to hear Reid's explanation for why they're wrong and he's so right that it's worth ignoring a hold, against all precedent, to give the administration and the telecoms retroactive immunity for breaking the law and spying on American citizens.