Sen. Feinstein responds to netroots on "Good Faith" FISA amendment
By Julia Rosen Thursday Jan 24, 2008 12:31pm(full disclosure: I work for the Courage Campaign)
You have Senator Feinstein's attention.
All of your calls are getting through to her. The proof: her Communications Director actually felt compelled to respond directly to the Courage Campaign this morning after bloggers, CREDO Mobile, MoveOn and others flooded her phone lines.
At issue: Besides the general argument for or against immunity for the law-breaking telecom companies are the two amendments Senator Feinstein is pushing forward, one of which is her "good faith" amendment, a "compromise". That amendment according to Glenn Greenwald has a reasonable chance of passage.
Here is why this "compromise" to have the FISA courts determine if the companies deserve immunity is such a bad idea:
Scott Gerber, Senator Feinstein's communications director, claimed that Feinstein's amendment to have the FISA court decide immunity is a "reasonable alternative." Gerber pointed out that the "state secrets" privilege would not apply, that those already in litigation could make their case against immunity to the FISA court, and that their decision could be appealed. But this plan is still far from reasonable. Americans not already party to a telecom lawsuit would not be able to go in front of the FISA court and if immunity were granted would never get to seek justice.
More importantly, the FISA court would still merely have to agree with the Bush Administration that the telecoms acted in "good faith" for immunity to be granted. The Senate has no place making any provision to immunize companies guilty of illegal activity, and Feinstein's amendment merely gives the appearance of protecting the rule of law while stacking the deck in favor of immunity.
The ACLU is on record opposing this concept, though they have not specifically commented on this official amendment.
Meanwhile, CREDO Mobile just released a statement on the "good faith" amendment:
"We oppose the Feinstein compromise on FISA. It plays into the hands of AT&T, Verizon and the Bush administration. Federal courts already have the power they need to handle cases against the telecom companies while protecting state secrets. Senator Feinstein's amendment is a recipe for immunity by secret court and amounts to an unnecessary turn away from the rule of law."
Long story short. Sen. Feinstein "good faith" amendment bad. Your calls good.
Keep up the pressure. We have until Monday at 4:30 EST on Monday to make sure our Senators do not cave by passing "compromises" that undermine our Constitution, our privacy and the rule of law.
Here is the Capitol Switchboard, which will put you through to your Senator: 202-224-3121. Fill up their voicemail boxes at night and flood their phone lines during the day.
Login or Register to post comments.
A response? From Feinstein?
DiFi, The telecoms are already protected if they acted in "good Faith." What did they do that they need this extra immunity?
Bush and the Telecoms have broken the FISA Laws, Criminally!
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=cafferty+file+bush&num=100&so=0&st...
They have broken the laws of this nation and deserve to be held accountable for their actions.
ABSOLUTELY NO IMMUNITY FOR THE ILLEGAL DOMESTIC WARRANTLESS WIRETAPPING FOR EIGHT MONTHS PRIOR TO SEPT 11TH!
Why doesn't she just go ahead and join Lieberman's party or W's?
This bitch is crazy
It's the administration that wants the immunity. The telecoms have a defense that says the administration is the party responsible by saying it was for national security. Now, reports are coming out that they spied on political rivals. You wonder why impeachment is off the table? It is because they are very likely being blackmailed.
Feinstein is a fraud. Her husband (Blum) has made Millions from defense contracts she has helped push through as a committee member in the Senate. So once again she is protecting her own personal interests. Wouldn't expect anything less. She will back imunity for telecoms in the end. She is only looking for a way to put lipstick on a pig at this point.
What is wrong with
OBEY THE LAW !!
The linchpin of the FASCIST STATE is COMPLICIT CORPORATIONS.
That's what happened in Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Pinochet's Chile, etc, etc.
Unless the corporations are held responsible to WE THE PEOPLE it's no longer a democracy.
And that means OBEY THE LAW!!
I must obey the law .. they must too.
Nobody should get a pass in this administration. Crimes against the American People have been committed, Americans are pissed about being lied to repeatedly.
I know they wont impeach the bastards, but trials can and should be held after the fact.
Who appoints the FISA judges? The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, if Im not mistaken. Who is the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court from now until half of us are dead? A Bush appointee.
Feinstein's idea is terrible.
I wish Dianne Feinstein would retire.
Maybe her replacement would believe in civil liberties.
Not in letting a secret court throw out lawsuits.
What is the other side giving up that makes this a compromise?
Let's call it what it is: a less obvious capitulation.
I only wish people were equally outrage over the vaccine courts and liabilty portections given the manufacturers by Frist and Co.
Come on, you people arent really buying the story being spoon fed from the media on that issue but not this one are you?
Ron @ 6:
Who are "they"? Please be more specific.
benotafraid @ 13:
It's the republican way, cover the crimes of your fellow criminals.
At least the other California Senator (Boxer) has the principles to stand up for what is right. Boxer supported Dodd in his fight for no immunity for telecoms, Feinstein, no where to be found.
JudyLou @ 14:
The NSA, by using the Telco's.
What makes Feinstein's proposal fail even the laugh test is the part where telecoms that didn't provide assistance get immunity.
That's right. She's offering immunity to the few companies that did nothing wrong and, therefore, have zero need for immunity.
Giggle.
Dianne Feinstein is Joe Lieberman with a vagina.
Here's the message for Feinstein's phone: "No immunity, no CHANCE for immunity."
I'm looking forward to the Democratic candidates from the Senate rejoining Senators Dodd and Feingold in resisting telecomm immunity.
Dianne Feinstein is a 'military industrial complex' wolf in sheep's clothing.
1-800-Capitol-Switchboard
1-800-965-4701
No sense in dialing that 202 number
Good faith! In Bush? In corporations? In Diane Feinstein? That photo of Feinstein arm in arm with Bush during the fires in Southern California says it all for me.
Left&Left @ 19:
That would give him two.
Poo Diane, she's toast come re-election time. Toast.
This "good faith" FISA bill is a joke, not only will it immunize the telephone companies it will also immunize Cheney and Bush and Gonzales and Rove and anyone else that instigated this illegal wiretapping.
And Why in the WORLD would anyone trust anything this administration says anymore? I'm surprised they don't feel like Charlie Brown after Lucy pulls the football away time after time... "Fool me once... shame on me, fool me twice... you can't get fooled again."
*Shakes head* and wonders where the rule of law went in this country.
This is not a "reasonable" compromise. It is an unconscionable compromise of our Constitutional rights and a governmental endorsement of illegal acts. It is ultimately about bedrock principles versus political expediency of which Mrs. Coward seems happy to endorse the latter. We must never give in on this matter as it would set a very dangerous precent. Dianne, if you can't stand for what is right, at least have the sense to step aside and let principled leaders like Sen. Dodd show us the way.
This compromise is an unbelievably bad idea.
Any qualifications, conditions or ambiguities in the law will only play into Bush's hands. Bush has written, what, over a thousand signing statements? - by which means, he presumes to ignore or re-interpret the laws passed by Congress.
Not a big stretch here for Bush to append a signing statement giving the President the right to declare 'good faith' and 'national security' exceptions to the law, along with FISA.
Why give the bastard the opportunity?
Plus, doesn't this compromise render FISA itself pointless? If the FISA court has the right to ignore the requirement for legal warrants based on criteria as vague as 'national security' and 'good faith', what is the point of having such a court at all??
What prevents the Dems from simply not proceeding with the bill? I thought we controlled the calendar. Why not just leave it off? What happens if the bill is not passed?
Oh, I'm going to call that number. DINO Feinstein will hear from me often. Very often.
Is she using Botox? ICH!
Johnny2Bad @ 24:
Unfortunately, re-election time for Diane was back in November 2006. By the time 2012 rolls around I believe she will be something like 79 years old and probably not seek reelection. In the intervening years she will be able to cause all kinds of havoc, and we won't be able to do a damn thing about it because there also is no recall apparatus for federal legislators.
JudyLou @ 14:
I tried to find a link on one of C&L's earlier posts. Two FBI agents in the article said that it is likely that some political rivals were being spied on.
I don't even understand how "retroactive" immunity is a legal option. If you broke the law, you broke the law. Is there a historical basis for what Bush wants here?
How would it be any different to change the law so that somebody retroactively committed a felony?
FISA: Take Action Today
1 (800) 828 - 0498
1 (800) 459 - 1887
1 (800) 614 - 2803
1 (866) 340 - 9281
1 (866) 338 - 1015
1 (877) 851 - 6437
Several Senators could use extra contact on this -- tell them to vote "no" on cloture. It is well past time that respect for the rule of law and the role of Congress in the balance of powers was restored:
Bayh (202) 224-5623 (202) 228-1377
Carper (202) 224-2441 (202) 228-2190
Obama (202) 228-4260 (202) 224-2854
Inouye (202) 224-3934 (202) 224-6747
Johnson (202) 224-5842 (605) 332-2824
Landrieu (202)224-5824 (202) 224-9735
McCaskill (202) 224-6154 (202) 228-6326
Mikulski (202) 224-4654 (202) 224-8858
Nelson (FL) (202) 224-5274 (202) 228-2183
Clinton (202) 228-0282 (202) 224-4451
Nelson (NE) (202) 224-6551 (202) 228-0012
Pryor (202) 224-2353 (202) 228-0908
Salazar (202) 224-5852 (202) 228-5036
Specter (202) 224-4254 (202) 228-1229
OK John, are you ready to knock down your "100X better" by an order of magnitude yet?
In a couple of weeks and just a few more typical democrat roll-overs, your comparison should reach 1:1.
It was already there six months ago by my calculations.
Here's what I wrote to Senator Feinstein:
Since I am from Texas, and my representatives have proven to be rubber stamps for what ever this administration does, I am compelled to contact representatives in Washington that might share my concerns. You have been one of those representatives that I have watched, and admired, for the last 7+ years. However, I am extremely disappointed in the handling of the FISA bill. What part of illegal is so difficult to understand. If the telecommunication companies were compelled to wiretap American citizens based on legal guidance of the administration, IT IS WRONG! Granting immunity to these companies will have a lingering affect on those that have been harmed, or have current legal proceedings ongoing. Why doesn't the majority unequivocally support NO IMMUNITY, and stand up for the laws of this nation? There should be no attempts to make this a grey area issue. The law is black and white, and the courts are the means to determine what is or is not legal and penalties for violation. What has happened to my party? Trust me, Ms Feinstein, there are millions out here with me, watching, and shaking their heads in dismay. We thought we were voting for change last November. We thought our voices were heard, and the NEW majority would stand up against what has been allowed in the past 6 years. Each day we see less and less.... congressional subpoenas are even "non-binding" apparently. If a President says do it, and it's legality is questionable, no problem... we'll just get congress to pass a blanket immunity provision. Sad... Our rights are your responsibility to protect. NOT anyone else's. You are not responsible for protecting illegal acts by the President, his agents, or even corporations that willingly violate the law under direction of any President. We have spent too many years watching absolutely NO oversight from the previous majority. Do you realize how sad it is for us to watch the current majority constantly bending to the will of the minority, and what appears to be a continuation of absolutely no accountability, or oversight? Neither of my representatives (Hutchinson or Cornyn) would give a tinker's damn what I think about FISA immunity, or impeachment hearings for Bush, Cheney, etc. It doesn't coincide with the republican agenda -- Party At All Cost.. Please do not support ANY type of immunity attachments to the FISA bill. Let our magnificent courts do exactly what they are there for....investigate the truth, and find for or against the charges pending. It's that simple. Our country is based on that premise. Please do not sell it, or us, out.
Why are these Democrats so spineless! This president has no credibility and his poll numbers are in the toilet. Vote all these idiots out! It's our only hope!
LOOK, everybody... the USA IS MOVING towards a martial law / police state. That move happens everyday, bit by bit and will not be stopped by whinning about Bush and "bad" Dems.
The Dems are just as responsible as BushCo, the Dems are just better at happy talk. This is the truth. The election will change nothing. NOTHING. Just you watch.
There is no "free" press, everything is owned, elites control everything and buy off or bribe what they can't. We live in a feudal system of latte drinking, tabloid reading, flat screen watching serfs.
The Dems will not help you, the USA is a one party state ( the Money Party ) with two factions and I DON'T CARE IF YOU CAN'T OR WON'T ADMIT THAT. It has been that way since 1963.
.
SINCE WHEN IS WARRANTLESS... LEGAL?
SINCE WHEN IS WARRANTLESS... CONSTITUTIONAL?
JUST WHAT DOES CONGRESS SUPPORT AND DEFEND IF NOT THE CONSTITUTION OF THE USA?
.
Big John @ 36:
Hey! I happen to like my lattes, thank you very much. I'm drinking one right now. But I don't watch the corporate news or read stupid tabloids. You are right though -- liberty is slowly chipped away, day by day by the oligarchy that runs this country. Getting fire-breathing, screaming mad about the telecom immunity is a good start to putting a wrench in it.
KEEP CALLING PEOPLE!I'm calling my other senator's (the worthless one) office today.
I agree with the general sentiment on impeachment for the president on this, as well as other issues. Those who call for it, and wonder why it's "off the table" seem to forget there were Democrats who knew it was happening while it was happening, said nothing about it. Just like there were Democrats who knew about torture while it was happening, and said and did nothing about it. Just like there were Democrats who voted for the Iraq war resolution despite available information to the contrary.
The point is they are complicit. There are many impeachments that are needed. Not just George and Dick. They're really unable to hold the president or veep accountable when they are unable or unwilling to hold themselves accountable. And why should they hold anyone accountable when their constituents ultimately don't either?
JTM @ 18:
I'm sure Qwest Communications International shareholders are overjoyed at this news!!!
chris @ 39:
Of whom do you speak, other chris? Could it be HRC? Nah! She's a Democrat, and all Democrats are good, and even when they're not, it's Dubya's fault, just like whenever Repubs do something bad it's really All Bill Clinton's Fault (SM)*, because most are, unfortunately, born without a backbone.
* All Bill Clinton's Fault is a registered service mark of the Republican Party. All rights reserved.
She can run but she can't hide.
It's all or nothing, and we're not accepting nothing.
KEEP THE PRESSURE UP.
These companies are CRIMINALS and have no respect for out privacy , our freedoms and the Constitution and first of all you have to find out and prove you're being spied on , even though you can assume you are . So what snow ball chance in hell , does an average citizen have against AT&T or the FISA court . And any politician who participates in this illegal spying, is JUST AS COMPLICIT .
Goggle RFID chips , the complicit governor of Washington State implemented a program that will track drivers and intrude on our privacy via RFID CHIPS EMBEDDED in DRIVERS LICENSES and no doubt they will try to spread all over the Nation .
Embedded RFID chips wil contain massive amounts of personal data , banking, address, employment etc etc. WAKE UP PEOPLE . WAKE UP !
Drivers going into Canada, which USE TO be an easy thing to do, can be tracked via RFID chips, and even in Bermuda they track Speed & location .
[Deleted-Sitemonitor] ...ENGLAND is the model , since they have the most intrusive and massive surveillance of any country in the world . One Camera for every 14 people and it's coming here ..ba - by . Don't give up with out a fight , people . When our freedom is gone , it ain't coming back ..adios .
I called and wrote Feinstein's office about this issue when it aired and got a robo-reply email about her supposed "compromise." Here's the response I sent her. Please feel free to use any part of it in communicating with her or any other senator to help stop this travesty:
Dear Senator Feinstein:
I appreciate your response below to my concern regarding immunity for telecom companies that aided the Bush Administration’s violation of FISA with regard to electronic surveillance. While you say that the proposed amendment you describe below strikes “the correct balance” in this controversy, it manifestly does not.
The requirements of FISA are clear, and the telecom companies that chose to violate these provisions should not be entitled to rely on a letter on executive branch stationery to escape liability for their conduct. The law allows for civil suits as a means of effectively enforcing the statute. Granting immunity would retroactively destroy a long standing cause of action, depriving litigants of their opportunity to pursue an express statutory cause of action. The illegal program that the telecom companies knowingly facilitated is the same program that Mr. Comey and Mr. Ashcroft refused to reauthorize. It is the same program about which the President will not even disclose the text of the authorizing Executive Order.
With all due respect, Senator Feinstein, your supposed compromise is a sham. Your proposal would allow these companies to go to the FISA court and simply submit the Administration’s letters as evidence of their “good faith, reasonable belief that their assistance was legal.” Who will be in a position to argue to the contrary? Of course, deliberations that these companies had with their attorneys that could disprove their supposed “good faith, reasonable belief” that these letters justified FISA violations will be shielded by claims of attorney-client privilege. Your amendment’s “good faith reasonable belief” exception is simply going to swallow the rule as a practical matter. The hearings themselves would not be subject to public scrutiny nor, I dare say, will the lockstep grants of immunity on a supposedly case-by-case basis be reported in the media to any significant extent.
I watched your argument on this issue during the December 17, 2007 debate on this issue, including your statement that the Administration should bear the responsibility for the violations of FISA and not the telecom companies. This position raises three issues in my mind. First, why should the Administration's bad actions absolve the telecom companies if both are required to comply with the law? Second, will your amendment substitute the government for these private companies as a liable party? Finally, does your amendment do anything to actually hold anyone in the Administration accountable for violating the law? This last prospect seems particularly unlikely in light of the short time remaining for the current administration and Congress’ inability to even get reasonable document disclosure from the White House on this issue.
I bring the experience of 17 years of legal practice to my observations of politics and government. (I am not a trial lawyer or otherwise personally interested in any of the telecom suits.) I try to be practical in my perspective on the realities of political influence and compromise. I must say, however, that granting immunity to the telecom companies – even with the minor procedural hurdle your amendment proposes – is beyond the pale. Passing any kind of immunity for these companies should be abhorrent to any public servant, especially a member of the United States Senate. This issue is nothing less than a test of your commitment to the rule of law. I urge you NOT to support any kind of telecom immunity and can pledge that you will lose my support if you do so.
Left&Left @ 19:
prove it.
Mike Mid City @ 46:
Trying to prove that would scar anyone for life.
Max-1 @ 38:
Good point Max. Shouldn't an amendment to the Constitution be required?
John Edwards on FISA, leading again (since I am in NY, the NY senators are indicated. Replace w/ yours).
From John Edwards, on January 24, 2008:
""Urgent: Stand Up for the Constitution
When it comes to protecting the rule of law, words are not enough. We need action.
It's wrong for your government to spy on you.That's why I'm asking you to join me today in calling on Senate Democrats to filibuster revisions to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that would give "retroactive immunity" to the giant telecom companies for their role in aiding George W. Bush's illegal eavesdropping on American citizens.
The Senate is debating this issue right now -- which is why we must act right now. You can call your Senators here:
Hillary Rodham Clinton, (D): (202) 224-4451
Charles E. Schumer, (D): (202) 224-6542
Granting retroactive immunity is wrong. It will let corporate law-breakers off the hook. It will hamstring efforts to learn the truth about Bush's illegal spying program. And it will flip on its head a core principle that has guided our nation since our founding: the belief that no one, no matter how well connected or what office they hold, is above the law.
But in Washington today, the telecom lobbyists have launched a full-court press for retroactive immunity. George Bush and Dick Cheney are doing everything in their power to ensure it passes. And too many Senate Democrats are ready to give the lobbyists and the Bush administration exactly what they want.
Please join me in calling on every Senate Democrat to do everything in their power -- including joining Senator Dodd's efforts to filibuster this legislation -- to stop retroactive immunity and stand up for the rule of law. The Constitution should not be for sale at any price.
Thank you for taking action.
John Edwards
January 24, 2008 """
.
This Saturday, January 26, is primary day in South Carolina. With just 24 hours left, we need to make the final outreach push happen.
If you can make phone calls into South Carolina, urging folks to get out and vote on Saturday for John, please make those calls now. This is the time when a call urging someone to vote for John Edwards can have a powerful and positive impact.
The online phonebanking tool allows you to work at your own pace, once you are verified/ cleared by the campaign (within an hour). You can register here to do the phonebanking from YOUR HOME.
http://www.johnedwardsphonebank.com/
The calls are made only between 10 am - 9 pm EST. The system provides you with a simple script, and ONE phone number at a time - you fill in simple info after completing the call.
For those of you who live within driving distance of South Carolina, Edwards campaign can use your help on primary day -- Saturday, January 26.To find one of Edwards' South Carolina offices close to your home where your assistance can be used, please click here:
http://www.johnedwards.com/sc/offices
Every little bit of effort helps over the next 24 hours. We need to get voters to the polls to vote for John on Saturday. Your help can make the difference in bringing about a strong finish for him in this key state.
Due to outstanding results of January 18 netroots fundraising, if we can raise $360,000 online by January 31 -- 6 days from now -- we will have raised more
money for this campaign in one month than in any previous three month period.
We're that close to setting this fundraising record for the campaign. Will you help us get there?
Click here to help us raise $360,000 for JRE
Within this SECURE LINK there is a sublink for AMERICANS living ABROAD.
Edwards is NOT a corpowhore as other candidates. All through January, you and thousands of others have made contributions to Edwards campaign -- more than half of you for the first time. Your support has allowed to put resources into South Carolina where John Edwards is going to win delegates. And your contributions have helped us get John's message out in key states that will go to the polls on February 5.
Raising $360,000 by January 31 is not only about setting a new campaign record. Most
importantly, it will give us the opportunity to get into the next round of key states and buy time to broadcast spots, purchase newspaper advertisements, expand our door-to-door canvassing efforts and get phone banks up-and-running.
Please take upon the challenge to help bring in $360,000 online for John Edwards over the next 6 days !!
John Edwards is counting on US.
Thanks for your support!
.
KongreSS toll FREE numbers:
justabill @ 22:
justabill @ 32:
I did my part on this. However I left the demoquacks last fall, after being with them for the 10 years since getting my citizenship, because of feinstein and her bizarre votes on several issues that seemed hellbent on undermining our Constitution. There were other issues involved, but feinstein's actions as my senator were the straws that broke the camel's back.
Hope she begins listening to her constituency - but I am not holding my breath.
I just called my Oregon senator and talk to the aid, and she said she never heard of the "FISA" and ask me to spell it. I explain to her what FISA stand for and what they do, and so forth. I am in awe that we have people in the position that never heard of this term. Talk about disconnection of govt! This takes the cake!
Chris @ 47:
And it's shaped like a princess phone!!
C'mon...you let this comment above stand, sitemonitor, and deleted mine yesterday...and mine was eminently funnier. ;)
naschkatze @ 30:
Won't run again? Bet ya she does.
Ms. Finefasciststein is just another worthless whore for the traitorous Bush gangster regime...
DiFi is a sad joke; a Republican Senator from San Francisco! Like Nancy Pelosi, another wealthy society dilettante who is more at home with the old Republican party (before it was hijacked by Newt's jihad) than with a progressive Democratic party. They are the status quo, pro-establishment conservatives who can be counted to cower every time the Republicans raise the "terrorism" threat. Russ Feingold, now he is a true progressive. If he has doubts about Edwards' sincerity, it means something to me. Hillary, I think, is a little more left of DiFi and Pelosi;all perhaps not that much. But the ferocity of the attacks on her from the Left and from the Right, and even from some feminists with a puritan's zeal of what feminism is all about, has helped clarify matters for me. I have a strong sense that she has been subjected to standards that few male candidates ever have, and the fact that she is still standing brings to mind that women often have to be twice as good as men in order to be given parity. I don't expect her to lead the charge to filibuster the FISA bill, which disappoints me no end. However, I also realize that there are many male democratic senators and candidates who are just as cowardly and don't get judged the same manner as Hillary is. I believe that the Republican attack machine will chew up and spit out Obama, like nothing he has been subjected to from the Clinton tag-team. The kumbaya great communicator image that he aspires to will not work against the Rovian machine, and the fawning media will turn against him just as quickly as they anointed him the new messiah.
The odious Howard Fineman was on Olbermann's news show last night, and he parroted the establishment line on how the Republicans were salivating to tar the Democrats as being soft on terrorism. When KO helpfully pointed out Dodd's statement that the administration only needed to vouch in court that they had authorized the telecoms to bypass FISA to let the companies off the hook, Fineman sputtered that the Dems had the legal argument but would still lose the public debate. It is too bad that KO didn't pursue this further, in the manner he dogs O'Reilly for example, but it was still refreshing to hear at least one newscaster present an opposing view. The case against amnesty is out there; well laid out by Feingold, Dodd, Kennedy, Greenwald, etc, but the MSM refuses to present this any way other than through Republican talking points. If it weren't for the internets no one would know any better.
Wow! CREDO Mobile!! Way to go!
I am doubly glad I told Verizon to go fuck themselves and switched to CREDO. Call me a corporate shill, I don't care. I don't work for them. It sure appears that they're working for me!!
Now if I could just get rid of Comcast...
It is absolutely essential to saving our country that we defeat fake Democrats and corporate sellouts like Diane Feinstein.
DiFi is practicing impression management. She's "cares" about the constitution in a way that's All Form and no Substance.
Dear Dianne has trouble not protecting the big-moneyed interests. Essentially - protect the corporations at all costs.
These people HAVE NO CLUE and even less COMPASSION - about the plight of the ordinary American. A more narrow, self-interested group of REAL CRIMINALS as those we currently have in Congress I've never seen.
What's this? It's okay to be greedy because the repiglicans are being greedy?
Dianne Feinstein is all about GREED - I'll get mine - F*** THE REST OF YOU.
*
This issue of "offering the FISA court the chance to grant immunity" is absurd. This amounts to Congressional meddling in ongoing litigation.
This bill that "offers" the defendants an "immunity on litigation that is ongoing" would, half-way through the litigation, change the rules, and give the defendants another card to play, which the court -- as a separate branch of government -- alone, outside Congress, decides. This is offensive conduct. This is not a "compromise". This is legislative meddling to give the telecoms another chance to avoid consequences, ones which the courts -- according to current law, and the laws which existed when the FISA violations occurred -- alone have the power to decide.
It appears as if Congress believes it cannot change the past law; so it is going to change the way the courts interpret the existing laws; and grant more immunities than the original statute intended, and which the Congress and Executive knew or should have known did not permit, even with the secretly implemented changes to FISA.
The time for playing these extra cards was when the original surveillance was discussed; and when the changes to FISA were approved in secret. These changes -- after the fact -- ask that we ignore the rules they did ignore; and reward them for not pressing this legal defense while in court. This is like asking Congress to change the law and directions to the court midway: This is an unconstitutional intrusion into a separate branch of government.
This proposed immunity -- to be granted on ongoing matters of pending litigation - is not something any American should credibly support, much less take seriously. If passed, it should be struck down by the Court as unconstitutional.
yeah, but the minute you aren't watching she'll be back at it. she is a democrat like joe loserman
This bitch needs to be in jail, along with her husband for bilking the American people.
groucho @ 62:
They're both AIPAC before anything else. Once you establish this, ALL else falls in place. They both should be purged from the party.
We have two Senators in Oregon, Ron Wyden and a pathetic guy named Gordon Smith. You most likely talked to a non-paid intern, and if you talked to Gordon Smith's office I am not surprised at all.
BTW... FISA is an act..
Login or Register to post comments.