No surprise here

Updated below It appears that that there will be no Dodd-lead filibuster today of Senate passage of the FISA bill, or any other kind of filibuster, either. Glenn Greenwald brings the word:

Under the Unanimous Consent framework agreed to by all Senators (including Dodd), there will be a 60-vote requirement to invoke cloture on the FISA bill and for ultimate passage, followed by an allotted 4 hours of post-cloture "debate," but there will not be any real filibuster to prevent cloture.

I can't say I'm surprised. On Saturday, I wondered

if Chris Dodd will have the spirit to follow through on his pledge to filibuster a bill containing immunity, especially in the face of Harry Reid's open antagonism - or will he make just a symbolic gesture, just a way to put an exclamation point to his opposition, before giving it up.

That was especially so since, as I'd noted earlier, I suspected the Senate Dummycrat misleadership was telling Dodd "You've made your point, now shut up." I was backed up by an item in Roll Call (via Crooks & Liars) that suggested Dodd had become "very isolated" within the Democratic caucus. The four hours of post-cloture "debate" will just be a matter of a meaningless running out of the clock that will provide that opportunity for Dodd's exclamation point.

GG goes on to say that

Dodd's efforts against this bill have been quite commendable, and the UC Agreement isn't completely worthless. It means that Democrats do not need 60 votes, or even 50 votes, to stop this bill. Rather, they only need 41 Senators willing to oppose cloture (which everyone knows they're not going to get).

"Which everyone knows they're not going to get." In fact, I expect opposition to cloture to get 35 or 36 votes, the votes of the same Senators that have supported Russ Feingold's attempts at amelioration of this abomination. Indeed, the phrase "not going to get" was the disgusting intent all along. Again, quoting myself from Saturday,

those amendments that were expected to fall short of a majority anyway only need 50 votes to pass, while those that it was thought might get to 50 votes would need 60. It is a procedure designed to have all amendments - including those that would strip telcom immunity - fail.

It was also a procedure designed to have any filibuster fail. And, with the active assistance of Jay Rockefeller and Harry Reid, it has done just that. And it's done it without the need for a single "stand up and talk" filibuster on a single amendment, must less on the whole bill, "exactly the situation," GG pointedly noted, "which Harry Reid vowed just two weeks ago he would not permit."

Which, frankly, is something else that doesn't surprise me: When Reid talked tough about extending the life of the temporary bill, I called it a case of "the mouse baring its teeth to the cat" and said

pardon me for being skeptical, but if once burned is twice shy, then repeatedly burned is I'm not enough of an idiot to touch that again until after its been thoroughly doused with water.

So the action moves quickly to the House, which will now be pressured not only by the White House but also by Harry Reid, who doubtless is already imploring House Democratic leaders to pass the Senate bill quickly, without any real debate, so as not make him look like a fool. The proper response to which is "Harry, you are a fool and there is no way this body is going to endorse that piece of tyranny-loving trash you sent over here." I have no hopes that will be the response; the Pelosi gang has shown itself to be as adept at dropping to its knees with its mouth open as has its Senate cousins. Yet the fact remains the House did pass a bill that is in just about every way superior to the Senate version and it is barely possible - barely possible - that there is some fight in this still.

I say call your Senators and say this is a deal-breaker: Be wrong on this - and that means on cloture, not on the bill itself; voting for cloture but against the bill is an empty gesture designed to look good to folks like us while actually capitulating - be wrong on this, and you will not work for them, contribute to them, or vote for them.

And then call your Representatives with the equivalent message: Stand fast for the House version, accept no changes, no weakening of oversight, no telcom immunity. This, again, is a deal-breaker.

At some point, enough has to be enough. This is more than enough.

Update As I expect you already know, the amendment to strip immunity lost this morning by a margin of 31-67. For those of you that follow such things, the 31 included 30 Democrats (including Barack Obama) and Bernie Sanders; the 67 included all GOPpers (including McCain) plus the rest of the Dims, including such supposedly "liberal" members as Evan Bayh, Diane Feinstein, Daniel Inouye, Barbara Mikulski, and Jim Webb. Hillary Clinton did not vote. (Note that the link is to an Obama campaign site. Do not read anything into that; it's just were I found the list of how people voted.)

Two amendments passed, both on voice vote: Sheldon Whitehouse's to allow the FISA court to consider how well the spooks have implemented "minimization" (minimizing the collection of incidental data about non-targeted Americans) and Kit Bond's to expand the definition of "agent of a foreign power," giving the WHS* even more power to spy.

The final vote on cloture did even worse than I expected; the vote was 69-29. I delayed posting this update for a bit because I wanted to find out the actual voting tally to see who in the last regard was prepared to stand up for the Constitution. It's available here. Some 28 of the 31 who voted against immunity also voted against cloture. Again, Clinton did not vote.

*WHS = White House Sociopaths