Comments on: Obama Weighs in Again on Telecom Amnesty…

By: vwcat

vwcat — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 15:42:56 +0000

A former Appellate Atty in Criminal defense who worked mostly on constitutional issues posted a very good diary on Daily Kos. He explains alot about his bill and how obama saw it as a classic bait and switch. And that in reality the bill would not be something worth falling on his sword over.
He'd rather go after the root problems and the bill is something that will not remedy much of anything.
I would urge people to read this diary and think about what the writer is saying
http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/6/26/62819/0...

By: Nutroots Really Upset Over Obama’s FISA Stance | McCain Blogs

Nutroots Really Upset Over Obama’s FISA Stance | McCain Blogs — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 13:10:05 +0000

[...] The Moderate Voice and First Draftare looking at Obama as if he was just the same old politician, and back him for it. Hope! Change! [...]

By: DAMOZEL

DAMOZEL — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 07:36:19 +0000

Actually, Marlowecan, I *don't* want to 'punish Bush at all costs.' I just want to ensure that people whose rights have potentially been violated can test this in the proper forum, which is the Courts. Corporate entities, like individuals, shouldn't be permitted to violate the law on the plea that they were too intimidated to say no. If our government asks us to do wrong things, we have the obligation to refuse. 'I was only following orders' isn't a defense, though a wrongful act done in a good faith belief that it wasn't wrong might be excused or mitigated…. I'm uncomfortable with the notion of overriding any requirement that this be established in this manner.

As CHRISWWWW says, Telecoms can't refuse to comply with a lawful order. And I am not in favor of immunity period, by the way.

By: ChrisWWW

ChrisWWW — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 05:51:32 +0000

By your logic, Damozel...one can easily imagine targeted lawsuits against US servicemen and women that could bankrupt them and their families in the process of defending against them.

Wow, that's a stretch. How much coke did your snort before that made sense?

"Wouldn’t it be sufficient just to give them immunity in the future?"

Because the Telecoms would tell the govt to go fly a kite in the future. Think about it.

Nice try, but the telecoms are required BY LAW to comply with a legal request for a wiretap. (And IIRC correctly, they are paid for their compliance).

By: ChrisWWW

ChrisWWW — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 05:48:23 +0000

Where is the public support for this un-American retro-immunity and evisceration of the 4th Amendment?

Once again, our interests are being traded for campaign donations from large corporations.

By: Marlowecan

Marlowecan — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 05:39:41 +0000

"If they truly acted in good faith, why can’t those who wish to challenge their actions have their day in court?"

Because then it becomes open season on anyone who accepts orders from duly elected authority in the United States.

If US soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan are supposedly acting in good faith in attacking Al-Queda and the Taliban...why can't those who wish to challenge their actions have their day in court?

By your logic, Damozel...one can easily imagine targeted lawsuits against US servicemen and women that could bankrupt them and their families in the process of defending against them.

The objective of the AQ and the Taliban in those cases would be exactly the same as the lawsuits in this case . . . to punish anyone who cooperates with the hated and despised Bush.

"Wouldn’t it be sufficient just to give them immunity in the future?"

Because the Telecoms would tell the govt to go fly a kite in the future. Think about it. After following requests from intelligence officials in the past...and being subjected as a result to millions in legal fees, and potentially billions in costs and stock price hits . . . you would expect them to fulfill the same requests in the future.

There is no way any self-respecting counsel would advise a telecom to agree to the potential liability. A nutroot majority in Congress could strip them of their future immunity retroactively . . . and they would be screwed again.

I realize you want to punish Bush at all costs, Damozel.

But at least Obama realizes the lunacy of that action . . . and the deep distrust it would engender among those who followed in good faith the requests of a President. He hopes to be President, and is acting with corresponding maturity.

By: vunerability statement

vunerability statement — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 05:38:05 +0000

[...] Senate floor concerning his reasons for opposing FISA discussed here. He and the many Dems House …http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/democracy/20631/obama-weighs-in-again-on-telecom-amnesty/Month of Apple Bugs: So VLC is Apple software? I have been reading up on this ubiqutous ???Month of [...]