Wired: Obama Sides with Bush in Spy Case
The Obama administration asks Federal Judge to stay ruling, takes position that President can bypass Congress to 'listen in' on Americans' communications?
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2009/01/obama-sides-wit.html
Another Wired article last week - "Obama to Defend Telco Spy Immunity" reported that the incoming Obama administration would "vigorously defend" (Holder) Telecom Immunity for spying.
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2009/01/obama-to-fight.html
In light of the comments made by former NSA agent Russell Tice on "Countdown" the last two nights, this merits more than the "almost no" attention it's been getting both here and in the MSM. Ironically enough, these two stories share the same sidepanel on Wired's "Threat Level" blog with "Obama promises New Era of Openness."
Isn't this case being allowed to proceed WITHOUT the document, anyway? That was my understanding. As for the DOJ defending the idiot telecom immunity provisions, I don't think that they have a choice, do they? Congress needs to overturn that law.
January 23, 2009 12:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Getting rid of telco immunity would put telecom executives in an impossible position; either they risk personal prosecution for obstruction of justic, or corporate prosecution for allowing spying.
Getting mad at corporations for doing what law enforcement asks them to do is not a proper method of going about it.
We need to get the FBI and other agencies to stop acting as if they are above the law.
January 23, 2009 12:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Getting mad at corporations for doing what law enforcement asks them to do is not a proper method of going about it.
_____
Getting mad at corporations who have their own in-house legal departments for their own self-defense for not complying with due process requirements and their assurances of privacy to their customers is wholly justified.
One telecommunications corporation REFUSED to do as requested BECAUSE NOT provided the REQUIRED COURT ORDER.
January 23, 2009 1:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
In the age of Rule 10b5 and Sarbanes-Oxley, there is nothing scarier to a major business' legal department than the Justice Department.
If Justice decides you're going to jail, you're going to jail.
The problem is the climate of cover-your-heinie fostered by twenty years of blaming Wall Street for government malfeasance, and then proposing more malfeasance to fix the problem.
In that climate, I can support giving telecoms immunity. They aren't supposed to protect their customers from the government. They aren't supposed to HAVE to.
It's the government's fault.
January 23, 2009 3:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
the telco immunity is a secondary issue. of principal import is the Obama administration's position that the president should be able to bypass congress to listen in. from the document cited in the first linked article:
1 Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P.25(d), President Obama is substituted in his official capacity as a defendant in this case.
January 23, 2009 1:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hang on, this does deserve more attention. When Obama voted for the telecom immunity over our objections we were told that he was compromising, not that he'd enthusiastically support that position as president.
January 23, 2009 5:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
exactly. now he's not only willing to "vigorously defend" telecom immunity (which i actually have mixed feelings about) but also wants to keep the program, and without congressional oversight? i'm confused...
January 23, 2009 6:18 PM | Reply | Permalink