FISA

A grassroots group is trying to generate enough revenue to run a national ad asking to get redo the FISA bill and strip telecom immunity. The ad they want to run, as well as way's to help is here. There is much more at Wired.

And the spineless Democrats have agreed to immunity for the telecom giants. Glenn Greenwald has all the details on this travesty and McJoan has some steps you can take to help preserve our nation of laws.

"The President is wrong and he knows it!"

That's the words of Nancy Pelosi in her response to Bush's little presser this morning.

According to McJoan at Daily Kos there are a lot more House Democrats now siding with the law on this. This is great news. Hopefully the Senate will take notice and the Democrats that voted for immunity will reconsider. If not then we can always reconsider them as Senators.

Bush gave one of his little speeches today about FISA. Usually I just ignore these things, as they are so painful to watch. Today though, some things really stuck out at me.

Any companies that assisted us after 9/11 were assured their cooperation was legal and necessary

You assured them it was legal? Anyone with a 3rd grade education should know that the executive branch doesn't decide what is legal - the courts do.

Then there was this little charm:

it seems that House leaders are more interested in investigating our intelligence professionals then giving them the tools they need to protect us.

Really? Since Bush is threatening to veto this "tool", it sounds like he is more interested in protecting the multi-billion dollar telecom corporations than he is protecting us.

Here's the entire thing if you can stomach watching it.

I love them showing back bone. The White House doesn't know how to take it. It also looks like they aren't going to blink on telecom immunity:

In continued defiance of the White House, House Democratic leaders are readying a proposal that would reject giving legal protection to the phone companies that helped in the National Security Agency's program of wiretapping without warrants after the Sept. 11 attacks, Congressional officials said Monday.

Instead of blanket immunity, the tentative proposal would give the federal courts special authorization to hear classified evidence and decide whether the phone companies should be held liable. House Democrats have been working out the details of their proposal in the last few days, officials said, and expect to take it to the House floor for a vote on Thursday.

I can't wait to hear what the White House says on this.

Easy. They want money!

With the House Democrats' refusal to grant retroactive immunity to phone companies - stalling the rewrite of the warrantless wiretapping program - GOP leadership aides are grumbling that their party isn't getting more political money from the telecommunications industry.

Yes we will change the laws to give you protection from the laws - just pay us. It's not a democracy - it's an auction!

The Politico answers that:

Democratic leaders have vowed to work through their differences in the coming weeks and held a series of meetings last week to try to forge a compromise. Although the White House said Friday that the nation was losing intelligence as a result of the act's expiration - a claim it subsequently softened - Republicans boycotted the talks, saying they were unnecessary and that the House should vote on the Senate-passed version of the bill.

So Republicans are doing their typical stomp the feet, temper-tantrum to try and get FISA passed the way they want. Good for the House Democrats on not blinking to the typical Republican bullying.

Since the Supreme Court is saying people can't sue the telecom companies for illegal wiretapping, unless the plaintiff has actual documents proving it occurred (ie:  they have the classified documents of who was tapped - which they won't get), does that mean we can just get rid of the whole telecom immunity part of the FISA bill? Seems like it isn't needed as much now.

The Supreme Court has refused to hear a case regarding the warrantless wiretapping, which gives a defacto thumbs up to a lower court ruling that the plaintiffs couldn't sue, because they couldn't prove they were wirtetapped.

According to director of national intelligence, Mike McConnell, it is so the telecom companies can survive:

"It's true that some of the authorities would carry over to the period they were established for one year. That would put us into the August, September time frame. However, that's not the real issue. The issue is liability protection for the private sector. We can't do this mission without their help."

You know we wouldn't have this problem if the administration decided to actually follow the law to begin with, AND if the telecom companies also did the same. Protection? Everyone involved should not only be sued, but tried for actual crimes.

Here's something for the whiners to maul over. In a year we will most likely have a President Barrack Obama or Hillary Clinton. So do the whiners want these two to be able to ignore the law, give out immunity for their accomplices and be able to listen into phone calls without any oversight?

I guess the world will be ending. The government can't listen to al Qaeda on the phone, which means they will launch a massive Ma' Bell attack in a few short minutes. We will wake up in a new world full of chaos and mayhem. Here is our signing off song:

But wait! Isn't this whole argument over the government tapping our phones without warrants before? So it was fine for them to break the law a couple of years ago, but now it isn't? Maybe this is just part of the mayhem that is to come.

Yesterday:

I am scheduled to leave tomorrow for a long-planned trip to five African nations. Moments ago, my staff informed the House leadership that I'm prepared to delay my departure, and stay in Washington with them, if it will help them complete their work on this critical bill.

(emphasis added)

Today:

President Bush leaves Washington tonight on a six-day trip to Africa. It's his second tour of the continent since becoming president and he intends to use it to underscore how the U.S. is helping Africa achieve progress against war, disease and poverty.

So is he of no help (ie: not significant), or did he lie again?

Another spectacular special comment from Keith blasting the administration and their fear mongeing.

The House Republicans just stomped their feet and walked out of the House in protest to the FISA bill not being on the floor right now.

UPDATE:

The Republican leadership is speaking. They are trying to spin this as being the exact same law that is in effect now. No - there wasn't telecom immunity in the other bill. What I find most interesting is that our government thinks they can legislate away parts of our constitution.

Of course the GOP is going on that if it isn't extended next week we will all die. Fucking fear mongers - one and all.

UPDATE #2

According to TPM the Republicans have been disruptive all day. They even went as far as to disrupt a memorial for Tom Lantos. Why do the Republicans hate Jewish people so much?

Glenn is following all the details, and making sense of them, so we don't have to. I really liked America when it was a country of laws.