Except me.

The gals at FDL have been keeping on the NSA/censure case, and    were scathing last night about the investigation fig-leaf with which so many Senate Dems are trying to cover their embarrassments:

There is not going to be an investigation - we know it, they know it and George Bush knows it. The Senate Intelligence Committee voted on March 7 not to investigate...

And, normally, that would be that.

But the SIC is not as other committees. Set up in the 70s as part of the response (which included passing FISA) to the Church Committee's investigation into CIA activities, the SIC's rules are designed to ensure that a majority on the committee cannot prevent intel matters being investigated.

There's more...

The story is apparently straightforward: the Senate Intelligence Committee has voted not to investigate the warrantless spying affair.

Vice Chairman Rockefeller bellyaches

This committee is basically under control of the White House. It's an unprecedented bout of political pressure from the White House.

That's a high bar, but we'll pass the last remark.

So, you say, the man was outgunned; what do you expect? Majority rules.

Except, as I've mentioned before, the rules are different for the SIC.

There's more...

A Glenn Greenwald piece on Frist's letter to Reid on proposed (or is that, threatened?) Senate Intelligence Committee hearings on the NSA farrago has made waves in the lefty 'sphere (here, for instance).

Lefties seem to be shocked that Frist should propose amending the SIC rules to bar investigations being launched without the support of the chairman of the committee (the normal rule).

I've been not shocked but a little dismayed that lefties seem not to have realised that the Dems on the SIC have always been able to launch an investigation on their own!

There's more...