« Speculation on social status in an age of networked participation | Home | Going Overboard on Russert »
FISA
It's very unusual for any company to obtain immunity from liability before anyone knows what that firm has done. Yet rumors are that Congress is about to assure the telephone companies such immunity from allegedly illegal surveillance, while passing the responsibility for actually conferring the immunity to courts, who are to ask a question that inevitably will obtain an answer resulting in immunity.
Is this really what is being negotiated? Does anyone know what's happening?
Advertisement
I think that’s about it, Reed. The court asks if they were told that they were acting legally at the time, which they already claim, and then grants them immunity on that basis. It’s your typical Dem Congress cave with enough time elapsed from the threatened Dodd filibuster and public uproar to slide the president’s bill back in with a nice disguise. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/13/AR2008061303419.html
"> Pitiful .
June 17, 2008 12:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
June 17, 2008 12:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
Mr. Hundt,
As an Obama campaign insider who has access to the next President, can you find out why our nominee has not publicly come out and said he will personally make sure no retroactive telecom immunity bill passes? Couldn't our nominee simply make clear to Harry "the great capitulator" Reid that no telecom immunity is to pass the US Senate? Couldn't you ask him to to do this on our behalf?
I would think Senator Obama has that kind of power just now and to sit back and allow that retroactive immunity question to simply hang out there and drift into passage, now that Bush's power has been reduced to a shadow of it's former self, would be a travesty. Can't you ask Obama to make a point of telling the Democratic congressional leadership that all this talk of cutting a deal to provide the telecoms retroactiveimmunity for breaking our laws and spying on our people is unacceptable to the next President?
I'm not trying to be a smart ass here. I really mean it.
Obama's silence on the reports of a deal being near on the retroactive immunity issue is deafening. He can and should put a stop to all that kind of absurd talk and demand that those who have broken the law be held accountable whether as members of the administration or as Executives of telecommunications companies. Obama can demonstrate real and courageous leadership by killing the entire idea of retroactive immunity now.
If any such "deal" or "compromise" goes through his hands will not be clean simply by saying he voted against it. As the nominee of our party he could easily stop any deal or compromise by making his wishes known on this or any other issue before the Congress.
June 17, 2008 12:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
The best Congress money can buy.
June 17, 2008 7:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Purple State: I agree that Congress (both parties) takes money (bribes, election contributions, free this & free that...). At the core of our problems is that there is no substative difference in the results the people get from the two major parties. No matter whicj party has been in power over my life time (Truman was pres when I was born)my civil liberties have been diminished, my taxes have increased and we've been at war (cold and hot) with some other county or countries.
June 17, 2008 2:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, isn't it on Obama as our nominee with all eyes on him, to filibuster this thing? Dodd will help him.
June 17, 2008 7:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Really excellent idea and great opportunity for Obama during the campaign. Obama is in a position to make a lot of noise about this. If he takes this on, it will assure many voters of his sincerity and demonstrate his ability to get things done.
June 17, 2008 9:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think it's a great opportunity for him too. Sure, it will take some time from his campaign but anything that turns his senate work into a news event is a net positive.
How will McCain be able to criticize Obama for a thin legislative record when Obama will be able to quip that he's been on the senate floor for hours, standing on principal while McCain missed 7 votes and has been picking fights about town halls?
June 17, 2008 9:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
And if he does not it will speak volumes about what will and will not occur if he's elected.
June 17, 2008 11:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
If he doesn't, I'm really going to have to hold my nose when I go to vote for him.
This is serious.
June 17, 2008 5:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Lets face it, this isn't about the telecoms. It is about the administration trying to cover its own ass. We are all more interested in the discovery than the punishment. Why don't we simply pass a bill saying that if the telecoms broke the law at the request of the administration the government will pay any award. We could also require full discovery from the telecoms on the issue of damages to insure the extent of the violation is exposed.
June 17, 2008 8:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
No, I want punishment so that next time the government asks a major corporation to do something illegal that they say no.
June 17, 2008 9:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
"We are all more interested in the discovery than the punishment."
Speak for yourself!
I want the harshest punishment available meeted out to anyone and everyone who can be prosecuted for having violated the law by spying on our people. I think many agree with this position. If there are no prosecutions it is as good as immunity for all of the criminals involved. There is no deterrent if there is no punishment. Our laws mean nothing if they are not enforced. What is the lesson to the lawbreakers if all we do is "discovery"? Pretty limp wristed approach if you ask me and certainly sends the message to go ahead and violate the law because you will pay no price for having done so.
June 17, 2008 11:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is a sham. The WH is seeking confirmation that the president has the authority to spy on Americans. Congress will go along because it increases the power of the federal government and thus the power of congresspersons which then has the effect of enhancing the wealth potential of all congresspersons.
Dems should long ago have impeached Bush. That they haven't sends a clear message to the nation. Government has become an entity unto itself and is very clearly no longer bound by our constitution or any law. Dems can point to the Bush wrongdoings for political purposes but when it comes to actually enforcing the law they do nothing because the precedent being set is to their long term advantage. This is the backdoor method of rendering every law and our constitution moot for the sole purpose of empowering government. There is no longer the least shred of difference between dems and reps.
June 18, 2008 1:32 AM | Reply | Permalink