{"id":13275,"date":"2007-10-18T09:00:48","date_gmt":"2007-10-18T13:00:48","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com\/archives\/13275.html"},"modified":"2007-10-18T09:00:48","modified_gmt":"2007-10-18T13:00:48","slug":"white-house-lawmakers-reach-deal-on-telecom-immunity","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/white-house-lawmakers-reach-deal-on-telecom-immunity\/","title":{"rendered":"White House, lawmakers reach deal on telecom immunity"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>At yesterday&#8217;s White House <a href=\"http:\/\/www.whitehouse.gov\/news\/releases\/2007\/10\/20071017.html\">press conference<\/a>, a reporter asked the president whether he could find &#8220;common ground&#8221; with the congressional majority on anything. Bush brought up FISA.<\/p>\n<p>A few seconds after saying it was a &#8220;good law&#8221; that shouldn&#8217;t be changed, the president said, &#8220;[T]he law needs to be changed, enhanced, by providing the phone companies that allegedly helped us with liability protection. So we found common ground there.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>First, it wasn&#8217;t just &#8220;alleged&#8221;; the companies turned over phone records without warrants. Verizon has already admitted as much. Second, &#8220;we found common ground&#8221; on telecom amnesty? At least publicly, lawmakers and the White House were bitterly divided on the issue.<\/p>\n<p>But privately, they&#8217;d apparently <a href=\"http:\/\/www.washingtonpost.com\/wp-dyn\/content\/article\/2007\/10\/17\/AR2007101702438.html\">struck a deal<\/a>.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Senate Democrats and Republicans reached agreement with the Bush administration yesterday on the terms of new legislation to control the federal government&#8217;s domestic surveillance program, which includes a highly controversial grant of legal immunity to telecommunications companies that have assisted the program, according to congressional sources. [&#8230;]<\/p>\n<p>The draft Senate bill has the support of the intelligence committee&#8217;s chairman, John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), and Bush&#8217;s director of national intelligence, Mike McConnell. It will include full immunity for those companies that can demonstrate to a court that they acted pursuant to a legal directive in helping the government with surveillance in the United States.<\/p>\n<p>Such a demonstration, which the bill says could be made in secret, would wipe out a series of pending lawsuits alleging violations of privacy rights by telecommunications companies that provided telephone records, summaries of e-mail traffic and other information to the government after Sept. 11, 2001, without receiving court warrants. Bush had repeatedly threatened to veto any legislation that lacked this provision.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Senate Dems got some new requirements about deciding who is to be the subject of warrantless surveillance, but as is too often the case, they got a little and gave up a lot.<br \/>\n<!--more--><br \/>\nWhen it comes to this immunity deal, I&#8217;m inclined to <a href=\"http:\/\/www.tpmmuckraker.com\/archives\/004478.php\">borrow a phrase<\/a> from Attorney General nominee Michael Mukasey: &#8220;It&#8217;s worse than a sin; it&#8217;s a mistake.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Lawmakers and the White House have agreed to provide retroactive immunity to companies that cooperated in secret with the NSA to violate customers&#8217; privacy rights, apparently in violation of the law, long before a national emergency might have provided a legitimate rationale. These companies will be shielded from responsibility, <i>before<\/i> lawmakers even understand what exactly transpired.<\/p>\n<p>The NYT editorial board <a href=\"http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2007\/10\/14\/opinion\/14sun1.html?ref=opinion\">suggested<\/a> the other day that lawmakers might consider an immunity deal, but &#8220;the law should allow suits aimed at forcing disclosure of Mr. Bush&#8217;s actions [and it] should also require a full accounting to Congress of all surveillance conducted since 9\/11.&#8221; Yesterday&#8217;s deal includes neither.<\/p>\n<p>Glenn Greenwald <a href=\"http:\/\/www.salon.com\/opinion\/greenwald\/2007\/10\/18\/rockefeller\/\">emphasizes<\/a> the fact that this deal short-circuits, without justification, a legal process that is already underway.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>The question of whether the telecoms acted in &#8220;good faith&#8221; in allowing warrantless government spying on their customers <b>is already pending before a court of law<\/b>. In fact, that is one of the central issues in the current lawsuits &#8212; one that <b>AT&#038;T has already lost in a federal court<\/b>.<\/p>\n<p>Yet that is the issue that Jay Rockefeller and Mike McConnell &#8212; operating in secret &#8212; are taking away from the courts by passing a law declaring the telecoms to have won (&#8220;Senators this week began reviewing classified documents . . . and came away from that early review convinced that the companies had &#8216;acted in good faith&#8217; in cooperating with what they believed was a legal and presidentially authorized program&#8221;). They are directly interfering in these lawsuits and issuing a &#8220;ruling&#8221; in favor of AT&#038;T and other telecoms that is exactly the opposite of the one an actual court of law has already issued.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>It&#8217;s really painful to watch.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>At yesterday&#8217;s White House press conference, a reporter asked the president whether he could find &#8220;common ground&#8221; with the congressional majority on anything. Bush brought up FISA. A few seconds after saying it was a &#8220;good law&#8221; that shouldn&#8217;t be changed, the president said, &#8220;[T]he law needs to be changed, enhanced, by providing the phone [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[617],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-13275","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-general"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13275","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=13275"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13275\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=13275"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=13275"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=13275"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}