Immunity for ATT worth American lives??!!!!
David Kurtz is absolutely right in his post on talkingpointsmemo.com that Bush's threat to veto the surveillance bill over immunity for ATT really exposes the lie behind this being about threats to American lives.
If Bush's previous statement that not having this surveillance ability will cost American lives is true, then it means that the President is willing to see Americans die to protect ATT from liability.
Actually, it's worse than that. Bush has the ability to pardon ATT as president. So he's really just holding out for immunity so that he doesn't have to take the political hit for pardoning corporations for unknown activities, leaving everyone wondering exactly what he was up to that he felt the need to do that.
We should NOT wait for Democratic politicians to make these points. We need to be screaming the outrageousness of it from the rooftops. We need to get mad!!
We need to start building the public case right now that if Bush vetoes the bill to protect ATT, then he, not Democrats are responsible for any deaths that occur as a result. If we can make this case strongly enough, then it gives our vascillating Democrat politicians the cover they're looking for against the possibility that of another attack being blamed on them.
They know full well that an attack wouldn't probably be successful because of a lack of this surveillance bill, but they also know the GOP would claim it was. If they can turn it around on them, say that Bush and the GOP are the ones that ILLEGITIMATELY killed the bill, not Dems, then they --- the Dems -- might be more willing to not offer a new bill giving Bush what he wants. In fact, they should go for an override on the existing extension plan arguing that any GOP member who doesn't help extend it is putting American lives at risk to protect ATT's balance sheet. Get all Republicans on record as opposing extension of surveillance, and thus risking American lives, to protect ATT.
One supposition is that immunity for the telecoms provides a cover-up for crimes by bushco. Thus, for bush, any number of deaths is worth saving his skin.
Think of it as the telecoms entwined with the administration. Protect one and you protect the other.
Your outrage is indeed warranted. You might be interested to go back and take a good look at some of the comments on the muckraker threads devoted to this topic during the past week.
November 9, 2007 2:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right, and I think an obvious question to keep asking again and again is WHY does ATT need immunity if the President and his people have done nothing wrong.
At the same time, I think making those kind of accusations is generally ineffective because there's no way to prove it, it becomes he said-he said, and they'll just say it's political, yada, yada, yada.
Arguing that he's putting American lives at risk works better because it's based in his own words -- nothing to prove.
Generally, I've always found that the best way to catch liers is to take them at their word. They're always ready to defend the lie, but in my experience they've rarely thought through what happens if people take their claims at face value.
November 9, 2007 5:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I doubt the telecoms independently decided to gather this info. They were pressured by the government.
If immunity is granted, the ongoing lawsuits will be prevented from going forward. But if they do go forward subpoenas can eventually unearth a great deal of evidence.
This is not he said, she said. There are facts. These rooms exist. The cables go somewhere. None of this could have happened without authorizations of many types. Paper trails.
History will show the crimes that have been committed. And we must do all we can to ensure that history has as much data to work with in this regard as possible. Thus, no immunity should be granted. Laws have been broken. Courts must decide this, not the legislature. The Rule of Law.
November 9, 2007 8:39 PM | Reply | Permalink