emptywheel

Conyers cautions that the Committee can enact meaningful reform w bill more or less as is, or it can enact no reform at all if the Poe-Lofgren amendment passes.

Goodlatte also opposing the Poe-Lofgren amendment, citing that as drafted, it is unworkable, bc it requires FBI to determine if subject of query is a US person first, which it doesn't do and would substantially slow it's work (not sure that last part is true).

Goodlatte falsely argues that the Poe-Lofgren amendment would re-erect the wall. He & Conyers may be right that the amendment would kill the bill, which does have some meaningful reform, but this wall stuff is poppycock.

Lofgren supports (cosponsors) the Poe amendment. She disagrees that the amendment was poorly drafted. She also introduced three letters into the record on the Poe-Lofgren amendment.

Lofgren says that she will oppose the USA Liberty Act without the adoption of her and Poe's amendment.

Sensenbrenner just flasely claimed that there is no warrant requirement in national security cases. That is unequivocally false.

Sensenbrenner lost the thread, and the facts. I can't quite capture what he was saying, but suffice it to say, he needs some Con Law 101.

Nadler supports a stronger warrant requirement but opposes this amendment. Says requiring a court order if searching Americans' metadata (before the query) would be unworkable. He says the underlying bill is substantive reform & shouldn't let this amendment jeopardize it.