# Rep. Sensenbrenner Tries to Silence PATRIOT Act Debate **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [June 11, 2005, 2:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rep-sensenbrenner-tries-to-silence-patriot-act-debate/307826 "2005-06-11T02:17:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Binarydrone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/3da27b/32.png) [@Binarydrone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Binarydrone)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2005, 5:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rep-sensenbrenner-tries-to-silence-patriot-act-debate/307826/41 "2005-06-12T05:21:45Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > The question is not if I’m OK with it… Wrong. That is the questions that I am asking. While I applaud you in your knowledge of the procedures of congress, while I even concede that you are more knowledgeable about this than I, at the end of the day that is still the question that I am asking you. When you get right down to it, now that I think about it, you and Sensenbrenner seem to share some of this letter of the law fetishist behavior and it would seem to me serve the same masters. You yourself have admitted that his behavior, was boorish and against the spirit of the rules and have further admitted that testimony ranging much farther afield that this is pretty much business as usual. But no, like clock work you have to chime in to mention that what he did was technically within the rules. Quite a coincidence that this technicality just happens to be in the ruling majorities interest. While I can’t pretend to read your mind or heart, I do find it specifically ironic that you are bitching about other posters not being intellectually honest, because from where I sit you appear to be guilty of the same crime. I am not sure that I know of any other way to see you than as a hypocritical apologist for the ruling majority. ---
**Author:** ![brianjedi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/3be4f8/32.png) [@brianjedi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brianjedi)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2005, 5:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rep-sensenbrenner-tries-to-silence-patriot-act-debate/307826/42 "2005-06-12T05:39:06Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > It’s the fact that twenty posts vilifying the action are made here without one acknowledgment that (a) the actions are within the rules, (b) the clear implication that the actions taken were inviolation of the rules, and (c) no acknowledgment of how the testimony that was “silenced” was irrelevant to the question under discussion. I notice the quotes from Robert’s Rules of Order up there, but I would ask this: Where in the Rules of the House does Rep. Sensenbrenner have the ability to unilaterally gavel a meeting concluded? Where in the Rules of the House does he have the ability to impair the audio recording of a public meeting of the House Committee on the Judiciary? Here, I’ll even give you the link to the Rules of the House: [http://www.house.gov/rules/house\_rules\_text.htm](http://www.house.gov/rules/house_rules_text.htm) If you’d like to argue that Rep. Debbie Wasserman Lee doesn’t know the Rules of the House based on [this](http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/fl20_schultz/judgavelledoff.html) press release issued by her office, we can discuss that too, I’m sure. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2005, 5:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rep-sensenbrenner-tries-to-silence-patriot-act-debate/307826/43 "2005-06-12T05:45:13Z")
Yep, says so right there, rule 22: “If the Chairman is in possession of a legally obrtained and licensed firearm, he is authorized to gun down any obstructionist, obstreperous, or needlessly tiresome member and/or witness, at his sole discretion…” ---
**Author:** ![Exploding\_Kitchen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Exploding\_Kitchen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exploding_Kitchen)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2005, 6:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rep-sensenbrenner-tries-to-silence-patriot-act-debate/307826/44 "2005-06-12T06:00:46Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > obstreperous I think I learned a new word. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2005, 10:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rep-sensenbrenner-tries-to-silence-patriot-act-debate/307826/45 "2005-06-12T10:25:59Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Yes, its true, Officer Sens beat the little old lady senseless, then kicked out her dentures and stomped them. But then you guys come in with all these wild charges, and don’t even mention that she was jay-walking, which means Officer Sens was legally within his rights to use deadly force. > > Why, who knows what ghastly results might have ensued if people were allowed to, you know, talk and stuff! Yes, you’re right – completely by accident, of course, but yes. If Officer Sens did such a terrible thing, but was within his legal rights to do so, then an intellectually honest person attacking Officer Sens for his actions must mention that his actions were at least technically legal. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2005, 10:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rep-sensenbrenner-tries-to-silence-patriot-act-debate/307826/46 "2005-06-12T10:45:09Z")
> [@brianjedi](#): > > I notice the quotes from Robert’s Rules of Order up there, but I would ask this: > > Where in the Rules of the House does Rep. Sensenbrenner have the ability to unilaterally gavel a meeting concluded? Where in the Rules of the House does he have the ability to impair the audio recording of a public meeting of the House Committee on the Judiciary? [House Rule XXVIII(1)](http://www.house.gov/rules/RXXVIII.htm): > [@](#): > > …and the rules of parliamentary practice comprised by Jefferson’s Manual shall govern the House in all cases to which they are applicable and in which they are not inconsistent with the Rules and orders of the House. Jefferson’s Manual arose from the same basic parliamentary procdures as Robert’s Rules, and the procedures therein are not inconsistent with Robert’s. However, since you require a specific [cite of House rules](http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=104_cong_house_rules_manual&docid=hrmanual-24): > [@](#): > > In the House of Representatives recognition by the Chair is governed > by clause 2 of rule XIV and the practice thereunder. > . > . > . > …the power of recognition is ``just as absolute in the Chair as the judgment of the Supreme Court of the United States is absolute as to the interpretation of the law’’ (II, 1425-1428), and in the later practice no appeal is permitted (VIII, 2429, 2646, 2762). I grant you that this does not address the audio recording portion of your question. I am not aware of any authority one way or another on that point. But given the chairman’s broad powers in general, I’d argue that the power to stop recording of a closed session is implied, and ask YOU where the Rules say he can’t do it. But he is certainly privileged (from my last post) to rule witnesses and testimony out of order, and to adjourn, and (from this post) to fail to recognize a member. The question of adjounrment is not absolute, of course, and the decision of the chair may be appealed and overridden by a majority of the members. Given that there were clearly a majority of members in agreement with his decision - we may infer this because they left with him, rather than staying and voting to overturn his decision - there was no appeal possible. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2005, 10:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rep-sensenbrenner-tries-to-silence-patriot-act-debate/307826/47 "2005-06-12T10:51:51Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Yep, says so right there, rule 22: “If the Chairman is in possession of a legally obrtained and licensed firearm, he is authorized to gun down any obstructionist, obstreperous, or needlessly tiresome member and/or witness, at his sole discretion…” No, it doesn’t say that. Cite? > [@Binarydrone](#): > > While I can’t pretend to read your mind or heart, I do find it specifically ironic that you are bitching about other posters not being intellectually honest, because from where I sit you appear to be guilty of the same crime. I am not sure that I know of any other way to see you than as a hypocritical apologist for the ruling majority. How so? I’m the only one in this thread acknowledging the truth of at least some of the opposing side’s arguments… indeed, argreeing with the truth of the basic complaint of the opposing side. I am the only one here that was willing to concede where the opposition had made a point… how does that put me in the camp of intellectual dishonesty? Your side, on the other hand, had twenty chances for someone to say, “As irksome and boorish as the conduct was, we should acknowledge that it was within the bounds of the rules… which does not excuse Sensenbrenner, of course.” That never happened. There was no attempt at intellectual honesty – just the usual bash-fest for everything GOP. ---
**Author:** ![TwistofFate](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/cdc98d/32.png) [@TwistofFate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TwistofFate)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2005, 11:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rep-sensenbrenner-tries-to-silence-patriot-act-debate/307826/48 "2005-06-12T11:46:05Z")
well, perhaps if the GOP didn’t act like fucking thugs when things don’t go their own way there wouldn’t be such chances to have a bash fest. And just becasue it’s a bash fest doesn’t mean it isn’t correct. ---
**Author:** ![Binarydrone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/3da27b/32.png) [@Binarydrone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Binarydrone)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2005, 12:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rep-sensenbrenner-tries-to-silence-patriot-act-debate/307826/49 "2005-06-12T12:52:42Z")
**Bricker** , I am sure that some of it is my fault, but when I read your posts explaining that these actions are technically within the letter of the law I read that as a defense of those actions. If that is not the case, I am not sure what purpose your posts serve. I think that what it boils down to is that I see the Law as simply a springboard to the Good. My take is that you see the Law as an end unto itself, rather than simply a stage that we pass thorough as we develop morally. My problem with you basically stems from the fact that in post after post of yours, I see you explaining why the actions of “your side” are technically lawful, only to mention much later as an aside that they may not be a great idea and that you may not agree with them. In other words, I find the lens through which you view the world, or at least seem to based on your posts, to be rather strange. ---
**Author:** ![Harborwolf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Harborwolf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harborwolf)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2005, 1:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rep-sensenbrenner-tries-to-silence-patriot-act-debate/307826/50 "2005-06-12T13:07:44Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Your side, on the other hand, had twenty chances for someone to say, “As irksome and boorish as the conduct was, we should acknowledge that it was within the bounds of the rules… which does not excuse Sensenbrenner, of course.” > > That never happened. There was no attempt at intellectual honesty – just the usual bash-fest for everything GOP. 1)Bricker, let’s not start assigning sides to everything. This isn’t dodge ball. 2)Few of the first twenty posts that you are harping on about had much to do with the op. I won’t speak for the intent of the other dopers but my two were jokes. The first posited that Karl Rove would be unattractive without his shirt on which I think few here will debate. The second was, if anything, vilifying the technique of using words like “patriot, freedom, liberty, etc.” to sell laws to the american public in the same way that Mountain Dew uses the word “extreme.” 3)Get the fuck over yourself. You know damn well that most of the first few posts in pit threads regarding the administration are usually chuckleheaded remarks. When did this become something worth twisting your britches about? “Intellectual honesty.” :rolleyes: If you want to take this as seriously as possible, more power to you. I personally don’t think that this little lapse in senatorial decorum is worth frothing over. ---
**Author:** ![Merijeek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f05b48/32.png) [@Merijeek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merijeek)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2005, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rep-sensenbrenner-tries-to-silence-patriot-act-debate/307826/51 "2005-06-12T16:38:06Z")
> [@Otto](#): > > Feingold for President! I’m pretty sure he’s the only political representative from Wisconsin I’ve ever been proud of… -Joe, Tailgunner ---
**Author:** ![Merijeek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f05b48/32.png) [@Merijeek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merijeek)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2005, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rep-sensenbrenner-tries-to-silence-patriot-act-debate/307826/52 "2005-06-12T16:49:57Z")
> [@Harborwolf](#): > > 3)Get the fuck over yourself. You know damn well that most of the first few posts in pit threads regarding the administration are usually chuckleheaded remarks. When did this become something worth twisting your britches about? “Intellectual honesty.” :rolleyes: If you want to take this as seriously as possible, more power to you. I personally don’t think that this little lapse in senatorial decorum is worth frothing over. Oh, please, little **bricker** only operates in two modes: Gloating and Oppressed By The Numberless Liberal Hordes. This is just yet another case where he has found some small thread to cling to. That thread allows him to ignore everything and just keep shouting “TECHNICALLY CORRECT! TECHNICALLY CORRECT!” It’s what he does. And it’s all he does. Still, without his…spirited defense I’m sure all the fucking commies in here would tear apart both America and the GOP. -Joe, IOKIYANAFLT ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2005, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rep-sensenbrenner-tries-to-silence-patriot-act-debate/307826/53 "2005-06-12T18:49:47Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), one of the Democrats who kept the hearing going after Sensenbrenner left, said, “At the end, I wanted to make a statement. I sought recognition, but the chairman declared the hearing adjourned. I said, ‘point of order,’ and he just got up and walked out.” Proper parliamentary practice in the House generally requires that committee chairman adjourn on motion or without objection, neither of which was the case this morning. Well, so much for the argument that Sensenbrenner was simply enforcing the letter of the rules. ---
**Author:** ![xenophon41](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xenophon41/32/253_2.png) [@xenophon41](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xenophon41)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2005, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rep-sensenbrenner-tries-to-silence-patriot-act-debate/307826/54 "2005-06-12T18:56:59Z")
Well, it would almost appear that you got us, **Bricker** , and that Sensenbrenner _was_ technically acting within the rules of the House. This assertion appears to be your entire SPECIFIC defense of his action. You’ve cited House Rules 20, 21, 24 and 28 as evidence that the Chair has the right to _unilaterally adjourn a hearing_. You’ve pointed in particular to the supreme right of recognition invested in the Chairman as support for this assertion. And yet, without any citation of the explicit rule governing adjournment of a hearing, your assertion is an unsupported extrapolation; it is in fact an interpretation disputed by actual members of the Judiciary Committee (see [press release from Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz](http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/fl20_schultz/judgavelledoff.html), cited earlier by **brianjedi** ). Intellectual honesty might have compelled a less obviously forthright correspondent to acknowledge the controversial nature of the question, and to characterize his assertion as interpretive rather than absolute. Which leads us to the larger question of good faith, which seems near and dear to you and many of your conservative brethren. (Even the intellectually honest ones.) > [@](#): > > It’s the fact that twenty posts vilifying the action are made here without one acknowledgment that (a) the actions are within the rules, (b) the clear implication that the actions taken were inviolation of the rules, and © no acknowledgment of how the testimony that was “silenced” was irrelevant to the question under discussion. > > An intellectually honest appraoch would have been for someone to point this out. In a word, bullshit. In more than a word: Not only is your part (a) disputed by more knowledgeable authorities than are present in this thread, your (b) is less a “clear implication” than an inference based on said expert opinion, and your © is both an assertion completely belied by the fact that such testimony was specifically called for by committee members, and an evasion of the numerous repetitions by participants here of it’s pertinence to the question of executive and judicial powers. “Intellectual honesty” certainly seems to be marvelously flexible in your application of it. ---
**Author:** ![Binarydrone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/3da27b/32.png) [@Binarydrone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Binarydrone)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2005, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rep-sensenbrenner-tries-to-silence-patriot-act-debate/307826/55 "2005-06-12T19:01:30Z")
> [@xenophon41](#): > > …“Intellectual honesty” certainly seems to be marvelously flexible in your application of it. Yeah, but I am sure that it technically conforms to the definition so its all good. ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2005, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rep-sensenbrenner-tries-to-silence-patriot-act-debate/307826/56 "2005-06-12T19:33:46Z")
I find it rather telling that **Bricker** is the only person to step forward in defense of Sensenbrenner’s thuggish tactics. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2005, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rep-sensenbrenner-tries-to-silence-patriot-act-debate/307826/57 "2005-06-12T20:35:37Z")
> [@xenophon41](#): > > Not only is your part (a) disputed by more knowledgeable authorities than are present in this thread… Which authorities are those? Ms. Wasserman Schultz. a freshman member of the Judiciary Committee who is not even a lawyer? Is she the more knowledgeale authority? ---
**Author:** ![brianjedi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/3be4f8/32.png) [@brianjedi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brianjedi)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2005, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rep-sensenbrenner-tries-to-silence-patriot-act-debate/307826/58 "2005-06-12T20:50:34Z")
**Bricker** , I present to you unassailable evidence that Rep. Sensenbrenner’s actions in gaveling the hearing closed is a violation of House rules. > [@U.S. House Committee on Rules](#): > > To Adjourn > > ``` > * It is privileged and not debatable. > * A chairman cannot unilaterally adjourn. A majority vote of the Members is needed. > > ``` Taken from: [http://www.house.gov/rules/motion\_committee.htm](http://www.house.gov/rules/motion_committee.htm) So, still want to argue that his actions were within his authority as chairman? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2005, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rep-sensenbrenner-tries-to-silence-patriot-act-debate/307826/59 "2005-06-12T20:59:13Z")
What? She’s _not_ a lawyer? Merely a Representative to the House and a member of the Judiciary Committee? How can she possibly be expected to know \*anything \* about the rules of the House in which she serves? But note, if you will, the cited report, wherein we find these bolded words: \*\* THE MINORITY DID NOT GET TO CALL A SINGLE WITNESS. \*\* For some reason, they seem to find this telling, as if their points of view were not adequately represented by the people telling them to shut up. ---
**Author:** ![brianjedi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/3be4f8/32.png) [@brianjedi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brianjedi)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2005, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rep-sensenbrenner-tries-to-silence-patriot-act-debate/307826/60 "2005-06-12T21:07:40Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > What? She’s _not_ a lawyer? Merely a Representative to the House and a member of the Judiciary Committee? How can she possibly be expected to know \*anything \* about the rules of the House in which she serves? > > But note, if you will, the cited report, wherein we find these bolded words: > \*\* > THE MINORITY DID NOT GET TO CALL A SINGLE WITNESS. \*\* > > For some reason, they seem to find this telling, as if their points of view were not adequately represented by the people telling them to shut up. It’s important to note that the hearing Friday was called to allow the minority witnesses to testify. The prior hearing was the one where minority witnesses were not allowed to testify. Also, my apologies to Rep. Wasserman Schultz, who I referred to late last night as Rep. Wasserman Lee. It was 2 a.m., I was tired. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rep-sensenbrenner-tries-to-silence-patriot-act-debate/307826.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rep-sensenbrenner-tries-to-silence-patriot-act-debate/307826.md?page=4)