Atrios and others are taking too hard a line on Barack Obama's FISA stance.

The key issue here is immunity. The Senator said he'd try to persuade the Senate to alter that provision. Furthermore, he said that as President he would make sure there's a way to get to the bottom of what happened here. I don't see what else can be expected under the current circumstances.

The deal here was negotiated by other people. I don't see how Senator Obama or for that matter Senator Clinton could be held responsible for those negotiations, which have gone on behind closed doors for several months. Moreover, the details of the surveillance legislation both require much more study and will be dependent on responsible enforcement by a new Administration. I think we'd all agree that the country would be best off if that were an Obama Administration. As to the immunity portions, the best that can be hoped for at this stage is what Senator Obama has promised.

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?