Glenn Greenwald on Al-Haramain ruling that repudiates Congress's plan to pass the FISA bill.

[madfloridian]

I have noticed something a lot here lately. Those of us who have posted about this FISA bill have been subjected to much criticism. I have been told by a lot of people that they "used to respect my writing." Past tense. Pretty clear.

Greenwald's write-up of the court ruling yesterday puts our Congress in the worst possible light for credibility. I did not do it. They did it with their claims on why they had to put this bill forward. We are remiss if we do not question.

I believe most of this sudden pulling to the far right on issues is being done by the usual Beltway strategists.

The decisions are still being made by the policy shop for the nominee as Harold Ford said earlier.

I am glad to see Glenn's post on this. It is long and powerful.

Ruling reveals that the Democratic leadership's primary defense of their new FISA bill is a ruse

Thus, we have extremely strong indications from multiple courts that the President deliberately broke the law for years -- a law that provides that violations of its provisions are felonies punishable with 5 years in prison for each offense. And yet our political establishment, with Democrats at the helm, are about to ensure that there are never any consequences for that lawbreaking and no accountability whatsoever in a court of law.

A typical line in Barack Obama's stump speech throughout the primary season was that "the era of Scooter Libby justice . . . will finally be over." But this new FISA bill -- and the immunity it bequeaths -- is the very essence of "Lewis Libby justice": ensuring that our highest political officials and other well-connected elites can break our laws with total impunity. Courts keep ruling that the President and his allies have no excuses for having broken our laws, while our political establishment acts to ensure that they are protected from the consequences.

..."This history of the telecoms -- faring no better in court than President has -- gives the lie to Fred Hiatt's deeply (and typically) dishonest Washington Post Editorial today -- by way of praising Obama's FISA stance -- that telecom immunity is a good idea because "The likelihood of prevailing -- or even getting very far -- with such lawsuits is low." The exact opposite is true: it's precisely because the telecoms know they are in severe danger of losing in court -- because they broke multiple laws -- that they and the White House are so desperate for amnesty.

The excuses offered by our political establishment for this rampant lawbreaking have been systematically rejected by the institution the Founders intended to adjudicate these legal issues -- our courts -- and it's for exactly that reason that our establishment is now conspiring to take away from the courts the responsibility they were assigned to hold lawbreakers accountable.

Talking Points Memo has a long history put together of Barack Obama's statements on FISA.

Please read it. Then think before you disparage those who are alarmed at the turnabout.

A Time-line Of Obama's Statements On FISA

Note the difference between the January statement and the June statement.

I have an Obama sticker on my car, our last donation was the other day for $100. I can post the receipt to establish my bona fides if necessary.

But in the end we are all accountable for our actions.

[madfloridian]

1. Ruling guts the central excuse of immunity advocates

From the link in the OP

"(3) The central excuse from leading Democratic advocates of telecom immunity -- that the poor telecoms are unfairly hamstrung in these lawsuits by the President's assertion of the "State Secrets" privilege from using the evidence that shows they're innocent -- was gutted by yesterday's ruling. That excuse was false all along, since FISA explicitly provides that any party can submit even classified evidence to the court. As I noted back in January in response to Jay Rockefeller's misleading claim that immunity was necessary to save the telecoms from the unfair predicament of being barred by the President from submitting exculpatory evidence in these lawsuits:

Rockefeller added: "If people want to be mad, don't be mad at the telecommunications companies, who are restrained from saying anything at all under the State Secrets Act. And they really are. They can't say whether they were involved, they can't go to court, they can't do anything. They're just helpless. And the president was just having his way."

Rockefeller's claim that telecoms can't submit exculpatory evidence to the court is flat-out false, an absolute lie. There is no other accurate way to describe his statement."

Never forget that Steny Hoyer said it best:

Hoyer: FISA bill passed to keep the Blue Dogs from demanding a stronger bill. Absurdity.

[pberq]

2. Message from Russ Feingold on FISA

Received by email today:

Dear Friend,

In recent days, people across the country have voiced the opinion that the so-called "compromise" FISA bill working its way through the Senate must be stopped.

As you already know, I am working hard to strip retroactive immunity for the telecommunications companies that allegedly cooperated with the President's illegal warrantless wiretapping program from the bill.

But that is not the only problem. This FISA legislation gives enormous powers to the government: including the ability to read emails and text messages and listen to phone conversations of anyone communicating with their family members, friends, associates, reporters, ANYBODY who may be overseas -- all with zero court review. Nobody should be supporting this legislation.

We can defend our country from terrorists while at the same time protecting the rights and freedoms outlined in the Constitution. It's time for our elected officials to stand up for the values on which our country was founded.

We should celebrate our Constitution this Fourth of July -- and do everything we can to prevent it from being torn up when the Senate returns to Washington next week.

Progressives everywhere have already had a tremendous impact -- with phone calls, emails, and letters pouring into offices by the hundreds (in some cases thousands), but the pressure on my colleagues to give in to this so-called "compromise" and President Bush is strong.

I'm going to continue to do everything I can to stand up for the rights and freedoms we all share. Thanks again for doing your part.

Sincerely,

Russ Feingold
Honorary Chair
Progressive Patriots Fund

[madfloridian]

3. Thank you for posting that. It does expand the powers apparently.

[pberq]

5. And thanks to you MadFL for your OP

We are fortunate to have Sen. Feingold, Sen. Dodd, and the others who are standing up for the Constitution.

[midnight]

4. We should celebrate our Constitution this Fourth of July --

and do everything we can to prevent it from being torn up when the Senate returns to Washington next week. I wish that the Senator who is running as our next president would get on board with this senitment.

[L. Coyote]

16. Message from NY Times on FISA

Mr. Bush says the law should give immunity to communications companies that gave data to the government over the last five years without a court order. He says they should not be punished for helping to protect America, but what Mr. Bush really wants is to avoid lawsuits that could uncover the extent of the illegal spying he authorized after 9/11.

It may be possible to shield these companies from liability, since the government lied to them about the legality of its requests. But the law should allow suits aimed at forcing disclosure of Mr. Bush’s actions. It should also require a full accounting to Congress of all surveillance conducted since 9/11. And it should have an expiration date, which the White House does not want.

Ever since 9/11, we have watched Republican lawmakers help Mr. Bush shred the Constitution in the name of fighting terrorism. We have seen Democrats acquiesce or retreat in fear. It is time for that to stop.

Editorial
Spies, Lies and FISA
Published: October 14, 2007
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/14/opinion/14sun1.html

[skepticscott]

32. I'm not sure how

the telecoms can claim that the government lied to them about the legality of its requests. The law in this case is clear and unambiguous, and it's not like those companies didn't have rooms full of lawyers to tell them that what the government was asking them to do violated it. The telecoms succumbed to pressure to do something that they knew was illegal, but unless the current FISA bill passes the Senate with immunity intact, we'll probably never know exactly what that the nature of that pressure was.

[skepticscott]

45. Sorry..Should have said

...IF the current FISA bill passes the Senate with immunity intact...

[Catherina]

6. Of course it's a ruse and an insulting one. It creates "infrastructure for a police state"

Echo In Light posted the following earlier today but it's not getting the kind of play it should.

I fear for my country, I really do.

FISA bill creates "infrastructure for a police state," says AT&T whistleblower
AT&T Whistleblower: Spy Bill Creates 'Infrastructure for a Police State'
By Ryan Singel June 27, 2008 | 1:14:59 PmCategories: Nsa

Mark Klein, the retired AT&T engineer who stepped forward with the technical documents at the heart of the anti-wiretapping case against AT&T, is furious at the Senate's vote on Wednesday night to hold a vote on a bill intended to put an end to that lawsuit and more than 30 others.

{Wednesday}'s vote by Congress effectively gives retroactive immunity to the telecom
companies and endorses an all-powerful president. It's a Congressional coup against the
Constitution.

The Democratic leadership is touting the deal as a "compromise," but in fact they have
endorsed the infamous Nuremberg defense: "Just following orders." The judge can only
check their paperwork. This cynical deal is a Democratic exercise in deceit and cowardice.

Klein saw a network monitoring room being built in AT&T's internet switching center that only NSA-approved techs had access to. He squirreled away documents and then presented them to the press and the Electronic Frontier Foundation after news of the government's warrantless wiretapping program broke.

Read more:
http://markcrispinmiller.blogspot.com/2008/07/fisa-bill...
========================

Will Dems hand Bush a knife to cut their throats with?

As Elliot Cohen notes here, the FISA bill that may be passed by Reid/Pelosi's Democrats--with Obama's (qualified!) support--is likely to be used against them (as well as all the rest of us).

Cohen's point about the bill's utility for BushCo in this next election is well-taken. It would be great (and an immense surprise) if Reid/Pelosi's Democrats, including Sen. Obama, would take it.

MCM
http://markcrispinmiller.blogspot.com/2008/07/will-dems...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

[Supersedeas]

7. does the law mean anything to these people?

[Luminous Animal]

8. Obama has responded on mybarackobama.com

http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/rospars/g...

Regrettably, his response is bullshit.

Now is the time for all good men and women to come to the aid of their party.

Go to the link and add your comments.

[madfloridian]

9. Regrettably, it is just that.

Sad.

[Luminous Animal]

19. Greenwald replies to Obama's bullshit.

http://utdocuments.blogspot.com/2008/07/obamas-new-stat...

It is a detailed response to Obama's stated positions on why he is supporting the eavesdropping bill. Well worth the read in its entirety.

I'll add a snip below but it really needs to be read in its entirety.

(Obama's text is in italics; Greenwald's response in bold)

But in a free society, that authority cannot be unlimited. As I've said many times, an independent monitor must watch the watchers to prevent abuses and to protect the civil liberties of the American people. This compromise law assures that the FISA court has that responsibility.

This is just false. The new FISA bill that Obama supports vests new categories of warrantless eavesdropping powers in the President, and allows the Government, for the first time, to tap physically into U.S. telecommunications networks inside our country with no individual warrant requirement. To claim that this new bill creates "an independent monitor must watch the watchers to prevent abuses and to protect the civil liberties of the American people" is truly misleading, since it actually does the opposite -- it frees the Government from exactly that monitoring in all sorts of broad categories.

Why else would Bush and Cheney be so eager to have this bill if it didn't substantially expand the Government's ability to eavesdrop without warrants?

The Inspectors General report also provides a real mechanism for accountability and should not be discounted. It will allow a close look at past misconduct without hurdles that would exist in federal court because of classification issues. The recent investigation (PDF) uncovering the illegal politicization of Justice Department hiring sets a strong example of the accountability that can come from a tough and thorough IG report.

Having the Executive Branch investigate itself for alleged lawbreaking is not "oversight." In our system of Government, government officials and corporations which are accused of breaking the law are subjected to courts of law -- just like everyone else -- not to "investigations" by their own branches of government with very limited powers. Marcy Wheeler has more on the extremely limited capacity of Inspectors General to investigate lawbreaking at high-levels of government.

[Randypiper]

38. I admire Greenwald

He explains things in a way I can understand and he backs it up with facts and examples.

[madfloridian]

10. A conservative speaks...

You need to scroll down the page a ways for the text to appear.


"P.S. I would add that the reflex of some Obama supporters to justify his reversal on the FISA legislation in terms of prudence and/or the political need to “move to the center” reinforces the unhealthy and dangerous pattern of identifying policies that subvert civil liberties and expand the power of government in the name of national security as “centrist.” This makes dissent from such terrible policies to be extremist by definition, which works to marginalise the genuinely more moderate, prudent and (in my view) properly conservative arguments against increasing the power of the security state. If an able rhetorician could make the argument with conviction that constitutional liberties are fundamental and non-negotiable and that we have an obligation to preserve the legacy that has been handed down to us, he might be able to reframe the entire debate. Or he could yield to the Washington consensus that says that civil liberties are the concern of the fringe and can be trampled on as and when necessary."

http://www.amconmag.com/larison/2008/07/03/wouldnt-be-a... /

We are allowing the policy guys supposed in our party to define our civil liberties as "the concern of the fringe."

[Randypiper]

11. Daniel Larison's post from yesterday

http://www.amconmag.com/larison/2008/07/02/is-there-any...

[madfloridian]

12. What I disagree about with that post....all the candidates would have done it

Because the policy is set, has been set for years.

We are only kept around to cheer and vote. Sorry if I sound cynical, but I guess I am a little.

It's not so much THIS nominee...at this point in our party it would be any nominee. Because the bosses are the same.

I do agree with this part of his post:

"For perhaps the first time there is sustained criticism of the nominee, and then only after the nominee did something that, as a matter of substance, is pretty terrible (and not just in the view of the left), but to listen to “mainstream” commentary everyone is supposed to treat this reaction as ludicrous. That says as much about what is wrong with our political culture as the cynical reversal itself."

He is dead on. It is being treated like a lefty fringe activist tsk tsk issue. And we are supposed to take it.

It really did not matter who the nominee was...the bosses haven't changed.

Thanks for the link to his new post.

[Bjorn Against]

13. Thanks again MadFloridian, don't let the criticism get to you because you rock. K&R

[Maureen1322]

14. I am waiting for the vote before I really go nuts. I've sent money to ActBlue.

I've called Reps (mine and others), I've called Senators. Believe it or not I spoke to Conyers the morning of the House vote (he told me Obama was a no vote). Next week I'll do it all again. This FISA bill really sticks in my craw. It's not a deal breaker, but I know in my heart if Barack votes yes, something will change for me.

[L. Coyote]

15. ALL COMMUNICATIONS routed overseas to circumvent US law and the Constitution?

Suddenly the Dems are fine with everyone being spied on, no matter what the law said?
We cannot condone a political class above the law, no matter how much money they contribute!!!

Telephone Utilities: Obama, Barack (D-IL) $307,870 - http://opensecrets.org/industries/summary.php?ind=B08&c...

============
Deja DU: Are ALL COMMUNICATIONS routed overseas to circumvent US law and the Constitution?
Nov-09-07 - http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

I was told years ago that ALL fiber optic communication traffic was routed overseas so that "everything" was moved outside the protections of the law and Constitution and ANYTHING could be monitored. I thought the idea quite fantastic even though it came from a very reliable source that would know exactly such things. Then, the story of the fiber optic splitters hit my radar. I now see now how easily exactly that, routing ALL COMMUNICATIONS overseas, was accomplished.

Is that Bush's and the Telecom's HUGE crime hidden and covered-up behind this story?

If the telecoms get immunity, will it aid in covering up Bush's crime.
ABSOLUTELY! That is why it is so important to the Rs! Support = obstruction of justice.

Have we arrived at the point in the history of the Bushco junta where
laws passed and people nominated are part of crimes of obstructing justice?

===================
AT&T Whistleblower: Telecom Immunity Is A Cover-Up
By Spencer Ackerman - Nov 7, 2007
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/004662.php


Earlier today we flagged that Mark Klein, who uncovered a secret surveillance room run by the NSA while employed as a San Francisco-based technician for AT&T, is in Washington to lobby against granting retroactive legal immunity to telecommunications companies. In an interview this afternoon, Klein explained why he traveled all the way from San Francisco to lobby Senators about the issue: if the immunity provision passes, Americans may never know how extensive the surveillance program was -- or how deeply their privacy may have been invaded.

"The president has not presented this truthfully," said Klein, a 62-year old retiree. "He said it was about a few people making calls to the Mideast. But I know this physical equipment. It copies everything. There's no selection of anything, at all -- the splitter copies entire data streams from the internet, phone conversations, e-mail, web-browsing. Everything."

What Klein unearthed -- you can read it here -- points to a nearly unbounded surveillance program. Its very location in San Francisco suggests that the program was "massively domestic" in its focus, he said. "If they really meant what they say about only wanting international stuff, you wouldn't want it in San Francisco or Atlanta. You'd want to be closer to the border where the lines come in from the ocean so you pick up international calls. You only do it in San Francisco if you want domestic stuff. The location of this stuff contradicts their story .....

=======================
NSA Monitors All Web Traffic, Says Ex-AT&T Employee

NSA Monitors All Web Traffic, Says Ex-AT&T Employee
Tom Corelis (Blog) - Nov 10, 2007
http://www.dailytech.com/NSA+Monitors+All+Web+Traffic+S...


Felt "forced to the connect the Big Brother Machine" if he wanted to keep his job

Mark Klein, the former AT&T technician and whistleblower who helped kick off the AT&T/NSA eavesdropping scandal, clarified further details regarding what he witnessed while connecting a secret NSA eavesdropping facility: secure room 641A in AT&T’s San Francisco switching center, presumably commissioned by the NSA, received copies of all the traffic its splitters were connected to, including both international and domestic e-mails, web traffic, and phone calls, both from AT&T’s customers as well as other providers.

Previous statements by the government, AT&T and President Bush indicated that the only affected communications are communications relevant to national security, like those of suspected terrorists and suspicious foreign nationals. According to Klein, however, the technology used to connect the secure room was far more democratic, consisting of simple, dumb splitters incapable of any kind of contextual filtering: essentially, room 641A received “a duplicate of every fiber-optic signal routed through facilities.”

Klein, appearing on MSNBC’s Countdown with Keith Olbermann show, told viewers about his personal association with secure room 641A. “When I was a technician, I had the engineering/wiring documents, which told me how the splitter was wired to the secret room … I had to know in order to do my job,” he said, “so I know that whatever went across those cables was copied; the entire datastream was copied into the secret room.”

Referring to the equipment itself, Klein states, “the splitter device has no selective capability, it just copies everything. .............

=======================
Interview: AT&T Whistleblower Mark Klein on Bush's Illegal Surveillance and Retroactive Immunity
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0dJJhLueEg

=======================
NSA Pressured LA Times To Kill Domestic Spying Story
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOI1VGKcgGY

=======================
November 5th, 2007
AT&T Whistleblower to Urge Senate to Reject Blanket Immunity for Telecoms
Press Conference on Capitol Hill on Wednesday, November 7
http://www.eff.org/press/archives/2007/11/05

Washington, D.C. - On Wednesday, November 7, at 10:30am, telecommunications technician and AT&T whistleblower Mark Klein will speak out at a press conference on Capitol Hill, explaining why he is asking lawmakers to reject immunity for telecoms who assisted the Bush administration's spying on millions of Americans.

Klein witnessed first-hand the technology AT&T built to assist the government's domestic warrantless wiretapping program at AT&T's main switching facility in San Francisco. As part of his job at AT&T, Klein connected high-speed fiber optic cables to sophisticated equipment that intercepted communications from AT&T customers and then copied and routed every single one to a room controlled by the National Security Agency (NSA). Klein has provided evidence for the Electronic Frontier Foundation's (EFF's) class-action lawsuit against AT&T for its role in the illegal spying.

"My job required me to enable the physical connections between AT&T customers' Internet communications and the NSA's illegal, wholesale copying machine for domestic emails, Internet phone conversations, web surfing and all other Internet traffic. I have first-hand knowledge of the clandestine collaboration between one giant telecommunications company, AT&T, and the National Security Agency to facilitate the most comprehensive illegal domestic spying program in history," said Klein.

Also speaking at the event Wednesday ...........

=======================
Judge Orders Telecommunications Companies to Preserve Evidence in Government Surveillance Cases
Ruling Advances EFF's Class-action Lawsuit Against AT&T
http://www.eff.org/press/archives/2007/11/06


San Francisco - A federal judge today ruled on a preservation motion filed by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), ordering that telecommunications companies must preserve any evidence of collaborating with the government in illegal spying on ordinary Americans.

In his ruling, U.S. District Court Judge Vaughn Walker ordered the telecommunications companies to halt any routine destruction of documents or to arrange for the preservation of accurate copies. On December 14, each party must provide the court with confirmation that the court's order has been carried out. The court order did not require the government or the carriers to reveal whether or not they had any relevant evidence.

The government and the carriers had opposed the preservation motion, claiming that the government's invocation of the state secrets privilege made it impossible to proceed with a preservation order. In litigation, parties are typically required to preserve all relevant evidence.

For the judge's order:
http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/att/393%20order.pdf

For more on the class-action lawsuit against AT&T:
http://www.eff.org/cases/att

===== MORE ======
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

[madfloridian]

17. Good information there....thanks for the good links.

This is vital issue.

[L. Coyote]

20. Lacking in the debate has been, "What is the crime?"

It is just incredible, if not totally Alice-in-Wonerland-esque, to not have
any info on what the crime is in some detail. If it is a crime, how can it
then also be a protected state secret? That's plainly a Bizzarro Mundo reality!

EVERYTHING is vacuumed up, everything. Otherwise, how can they monitor anything?
What they are hiding is what happens after the splitter, the routing overseas.

[NoFederales]

18. Good post; K&R. Dissent and Party Support are not mutually exclusive.

NoFederales

[bertman]

21. Excellent timing on this post. The day our forebears proclaimed their independence from a tyrant

is tomorrow 232 years past.

I read Greenwald last night and confirmed my gut feeling that Our Candidate was blowin smoke to cover his ass. It was hard for me to let him slide even a tiny bit because, after all, he is a constitutional law instructor.

Then, today I got a response to my two nasty emails to barackobama.com. They were from my man, the HopeMaster, explaining to me via mass emailing why he is compelled to vote for the FISA bill but will fight to stop the telecom immunity part because he thinks that part is the fly in the ointment. Man, I smelled a rotten, decaying smell in that sorry-ass fib.

It's almost as if the Democrats are just as intent on forcing this police state shit down our throats as the Repigs are.

What's scary about this is they're so goddam brazen. Call-me-Jay Rockefeller is making up lies for this piece o' shit fascist bill. And now Our Democratic Nominee is doing the same goddam thing.

WTF!!

WTFuckingFuck!!

[madfloridian]

25. You are right. Our Dems are not being honest with us about this.

There is something about Greenwald I appreciate...He knows people get mad because he posts the truth. But he does not let it deter him.

He is one I trust when he is talking about the constitution.

[bertman]

22. Obama's mass emailing GIVES ME HOPE!!

Hope that WE CAN FORCE HIM TO CHANGE HIS STANCE IF WE JUST BOMBARD HIS WEBSITE and PHONE BANKS WITH PROTESTS ABOUT THIS BILL.

It's obvious that the campaign was compelled to respond to everybody who's been slinging nasty missives at them since Our Democratic Candidate announced his conversion.

And even though he says he'll be sad if we don't support him, he says he will stand on his principles and vote for the bill, while trying to kill the telecom immunity part.

FOLKS, THIS IS CRITICAL MASS. EMAIL AND CALL ALL WEEKEND LONG. TELL YOUR FRIENDS AND OTHER OBAMA SUPPORTERS TO DELUGE THEM WITH OUR OUTRAGE THAT HE IS SCREWING THE U.S. CONSTITUTION.

Read these posts and be ready to explain to that phone banker on the other end of the line why you are so upset. Be nice but be forceful in your explanation. Threaten to withhold money and support. Explain that you think Senator Obama is OUR MAN and YOU REALLY WANT TO VOTE FOR HIM but he needs to get a backbone on this issue. WE STILL HAVE FISA to use when we need it.

Call your Senators and Reps. Call the wafflers who aren't your reps. Call the brave ones who voted against this abomination of a bill and tell them how much you appreciate what they have done.

WE NEED A LEADER NOW. Not a collaborator. STAND UP, BARACK OBAMA. FIGHT THE FASCISTS.



HAPPY INDEPENDENCE DAY TO ALL!!


IT'S A GREAT COUNTRY. LET'S HELP KEEP IT THAT WAY.

[tinkerbelle]

23. fwiw, I still respect your writing ...

an excellent post, thank you!!

[madfloridian]

24. Welcome to DU, and thanks.

[Hamlette]

26. this immunity is nothing new, the law has long recognized immunity

for people acting under color of law

Why not here?

Greenwald has gone off his rocker on this one.

[madfloridian]

27. My post is about far more than immunity.

The bill is about far more than immunity. It is dangerous bill that gives more power to the government.

Why are you okay with that? They did not even have to bring it up for a vote.

Greenwald is not the only voice angry about this.

The courts say no to it.

http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/07/court-rules-fisa-p...

Jim Dean and Feingold sent a letter opposing it.

Senator Feingold needs our help to stop the FISA "compromise" bill. Russ sent me this message to pass on to you. Please read it and then sign our Senate Petition to Stop Telecom Immunity. We will deliver the petitions to every Senator on Tuesday morning, right before the expected vote.

Let's make sure they get our message loud and clear.
CLICK HERE TO SIGN THE PETITION NOW

Senator Feingold's message directly to you:

Dear Friend,

In recent days, people across the country have voiced the opinion that the so-called "compromise" FISA bill working its way through the Senate must be stopped.

As you already know, I am working hard to strip retroactive immunity for the telecommunications companies that allegedly cooperated with the President's illegal warrantless wiretapping program from the bill.

But that is not the only problem. This FISA legislation gives enormous powers to the government: including the ability to read emails and text messages and listen to phone conversations of anyone communicating with their family members, friends, associates, reporters, ANYBODY who may be overseas -- all with zero court review. Nobody should be supporting this legislation.

We can defend our country from terrorists while at the same time protecting the rights and freedoms outlined in the Constitution. It's time for our elected officials to stand up for the values on which our country was founded.

We should celebrate our Constitution this Fourth of July -- and do everything we can to prevent it from being torn up when the Senate returns to Washington next week.

Progressives everywhere have already had a tremendous impact -- with phone calls, emails, and letters pouring into offices by the hundreds (in some cases thousands), but the pressure on my colleagues to give in to this so-called "compromise" and President Bush is strong.

I'm going to continue to do everything I can to stand up for the rights and freedoms we all share. Thanks again for doing your part.

Sincerely,

Russ Feingold
Honorary Chair
Progressive Patriots Fund

Russ also shot a video last Friday night to thank you and all progressives fighting against this bill. You can watch it while signing our Senate Petition to Stop Telecom Immunity.

CLICK HERE TO STAND UP FOR THE CONSTITUTION AND STOP TELECOM IMMUNITY

Working together, we will stop this bill.

- Jim

Jim Dean, Chair
Democracy for America

Andrew Sullivan opposes it:

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/20...

I could go on.

[Hamlette]

35. everything but immunity can be fixed in January. that's prolly why I'm not so freaked out

I actually can't believe the GOP is pushing it, they have to have a pretty good idea who will be enforcing it in 6 months. I trust Obama not to invade my privacy. Maybe that's stupid but its true.

[madfloridian]

36. What if it is McCain with that power?

[Hamlette]

39. then I'm not happy but

Obama is my candidate. I will try and persuade him when I think he is wrong (via the emails I send his staff) and I will work to persuade people who disagree with me.

I do not think it is productive for me to grouse (or work myself into a tizzy) online (or elsewhere). I had many differences with Carter and Clinton but it is safer for my mental health to use the "big picture" defense and say "he'll be tons better than McCain or any other democrat who could have gotten elected". And then hope that its true.

[madfloridian]

42. So you will do as Ari Fleischer said in 2003:

You will be careful what you say.

[Hamlette]

46. ok, I will

but I'm much more concerned about the war, torture, things like Schiavo, the economy, global warming, gas prices and getting ice and beer for the party tonight before the store runs out.

[bertman]

33. Hamlette, please go to salon.com, link to opinion, and read the Greenwald

articles cited here.

Greenwald has NOT gone off his rocker. He's one of the few media voices who seems to care that this impending legislation gives the Presidency more powers to invade our privacy and reduces the authority of Congress to intervene when there is Presidential malfeasance. Right now Judge Walker and a handful of Senators and Representatives are the only people in positions of power who are willing to take a stand on this.

I'm not a lawyer and I do not know what "color of law" implies; although, I have an idea. In this instance to say a telecom company with a staff of hundreds, perhaps thousands of lawyers, could somehow believe they were operating within the law by spying on Americans without legal warrants seems ludicrous. But, at a minimum, we should leave the law as is and let the courts decide. That seems to be the rub here.

[Hamlette]

37. I don't think its that easy

I am a lawyer and indemnification is a legitimate defense, might even work here. If the government told you the plans for your house met all building requirements, you built your house then found out it was too high, should you bear the expense of rebuilding? Even though you and your builder did everything possible to meet the requirements of what you thought the law was?

It is a narrow defense and my example is oversimplified. But your army of lawyers working for the telecoms is over simplified too. Laws in a time of war have been greatly expanded. Remember Eugene Debs? He spent 10 years in prison for criticizing the government during a war.

Do I think the war on terror is a war just because Bush says it is? No. Do I agree with putting Debs in prison? Should his guards or the prison be sued for holding him?

But if I am advising the telecoms and the government comes to me and says "give this up, this is a war and we have the authority" and I look at the war powers and the case law of expanded executive authority in a time of war, I have a much harder time advising my client than you seem to think.

[madfloridian]

43. The ruling says the telecoms CAN present their case.

Please read the link I posted.

The bill the Democrats are going to pass goes against the court ruling.

[John Q. Citizen]

47. If that were the case the telecoms wouldn't need this ex post facto immunity

But they do.

[robinlynne]

28. Why do they continue to say the spying started AFTER 9/11. we KNOW that it started on February 27,

2001. Seven months BEFORE 9/11/

which simply blows away any possible argument for the bill.

[L. Coyote]

29. Deja DU: TELECOM COVER-UP? Nacchio and Qwest: Another Political Prosecution?

TELECOM COVER-UP? Nacchio and Qwest: Another Political Prosecution?
Feb-28-08 - http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Given the importance of the telecom immunity debate, and all the Bush LIES,
I pasted up this tread from the Archive ....

[crickets]

30. Thank you for posting this! K&R

[unapatriciated]

31. k&r great post as usual.

[Wisconsin Larry]

34. You are dead right. Below is my mail to Senator Obama today

Regarding the Senator's position on the FISA Bill, I am extremely discouraged. In addition to my strong opposition on this bill, I also see the Senator's support of yet another indication of DLC handlers pushing him to the right on several positions.

This is not the change that I had believed in nor do I think that is necessary and in fact believe that history has shown that is does not work.

If we are truly in this together, it is time for the Senator to stand and say that after listening to his most ardent supporters, he will stand with Senator Feingold and stop the current FISA bill from eroding our rights even further and stop shielding lawbreakers from justice.

[Echo In Light]

40. FISA bill creates "infrastructure for a police state," says AT&T whistleblower

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

[Individualist]

41. K&R

Thanks especially for including this: The decisions are still being made by the policy shop for the nominee as Harold Ford said earlier.

[dailykoff]

44. A lot of truth telling in that post.

Money shot:

The excuses offered by our political establishment for this rampant lawbreaking have been systematically rejected by the institution the Founders intended to adjudicate these legal issues -- our courts -- and it's for exactly that reason that our establishment is now conspiring to take away from the courts the responsibility they were assigned to hold lawbreakers accountable.

Thanks MF, you are a true patriot!

[John Q. Citizen]

48. Thank you for your pariotism, madfloridian. I appreciate it.

[Elidor]

49. Not only do I still respect your posts

I look for them. I regret that I'm a few minutes too late to rec this one.

Some people have this perverse notion that there must be no criticism of the nominee, just give him a free pass until he's in office. At that point he could legitimately say, "Why didn't you say something sooner, when it might have mattered?"

[jumptheshadow]

50. I don't understand this...

Why do people believe that a vote for this bill would appeal to independents? It presumes that most independents are uneducated about or antagonistic to issues relating to constitutional freedoms. If anything, the independents I personally know tend to lean towards candidates they believe are "trustworthy," meaning that the candidates don't change their positions with the prevailing winds. Most independents I know also have deeply held convictions about constitutional freedoms that make them more objective about political parties but passionate about civil liberties. If anything, I see Barr and Nader peeling off more votes now because of the Democratic stance on this bill.

[madfloridian]

51. It was set into motion by the new policy bosses who are the same as....

the old policy bosses.