Obama Adviser: I ‘Strongly’ Believe Telecoms ‘Should Be Granted Immunity’

[ElsewheresDaughter]

Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) has consistently spoken out and voted against granting retroactive immunity for telecoms that participated with the administration’s warrantless wiretapping program. This stance was part of the reason he won the support of Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT), a leader on civil liberties issues.

One of Obama’s advisers on intelligence and foreign policy advisers, however, is someone who “strongly” supports telecomm immunity. John Brennan is a former CIA official and the current chairman of the Intelligence and National Security Alliance. In a new National Journal interview, Brennan makes it clear that he agrees with the Bush administration on the issue of immunity:

There is this great debate over whether or not the telecom companies should in fact be given immunity for their agreement to provide support and cooperate with the government after 9/11. I do believe strongly that they should be granted that immunity, because they were told to do so by the appropriate authorities that were operating in a legal context, and so I think that’s important. And I know people are concerned about that, but I do believe that’s the right thing to do. I do believe the Senate version of the FISA bill addresses the issues appropriately.

These corporations may not have been acting within law, which is why many of them are now pushing for immunity. They chose to break the law and profited greatly from doing so. (At least one company refused to comply with the Bush administration’s request because it knew the actions were illegal.)

Because they complied in illegally wiretapping their customers, telecoms currently face around 40 lawsuits. Telecomms have nothing to fear from going to court, as long as they can prove that what they did is lawful.


Brennan also warned the next president from making any partisan “knee-jerk” decisions on intelligence when he or she takes office.



http://thinkprogress.org/2008/03/07/obama-brennan/


Did Obama dump this guy yet?



.

[Vinca]

1. I don't know. Has Hillary dropped Mark Penn since his firm is

also working on the McCain campaign? Must each and every one of us share identical opinions on each and every topic in order to work together?

[kristopher]

2. My thought exactly.

[Maribelle]

4. Well then, either you're not thinking clearly, or ....

you do not realize that a campaign adviser and a policy adviser are totally different positions in the extreme.

[kristopher]

12. I'm thinking ok, and I understand the difference so I'll take door 3

Or are you suggesting that a good leader only have input from people he agrees with on everything. Policy issues also have to be vetted.

And on it's face the suggestion that no policy adviser can have an opinion contrary to the established platform of the candidate is not just tenable. Is he talking out of turn? Or is someone trying to stir controversy where there is none?

[Maribelle]

28. A policy adviser speaking in public with words that contradict the candidate?

But my count this is the third one to do this in the short period of time since the Ohio race, if one is to believe Obama's words on the issues.

1. Nafta
2. Troops out of Iraq
3. Telecom immunity

This speaks directly to Obama's poor judgment, and should be of utmost concern to his supporters.

[Tellurian]

33. By having a campaign adviser and policy adviser having conflicting opinions in Obama's Camp

Obama can have it both ways. Think the NAFTA Canada flap. This is just another way of delivering the same message in a subtle,(confusing) way.

The policy wonk says NO... The campaign surrogate says, yes, it's OK! Voila! NAFTA/Canada

[kristopher]

34. A real issue would be refreshing...

Nafta, a full reading of the memo makes clear that Goolwhatshisname said nothing that was like the portrayal. He said nothing that different from what both Clinton and Obama have publicly stated.

The troops out of Iraq is simple truth. He will have to attain the presidential level of . That opportunity will start presenting itself when he becomes the nominee and will continue between when he is elected and when he takes the oath.

He seems like he can handle the challenge to me. Do you suppose Hillary might also have a little boning up to do or are you stating that she has been part of Shrubs war council?

And this one is absurd. Another cheap shot designed just to set up a resonance in the news media.

That's the way we get good leadership in this country!

[rodeodance]

8. changing the topic of the OP is a distraction. very Rovain in fact.

[kristopher]

30. Oh no! They just won't take the bait.

Read the full interview and let everyone judge the man for themselves.

But wait, then they wouldn't really get the same message as the OP hopes to convey would they?

Oh, oh, ok, I got it.....

http://news.nationaljournal.com/articles/080307nj1.htm

[rodeodance]

44. glad you 'got it"

[Maribelle]

3. Mark Penn is not hardly a policy adviser.

Apples and oranges.

[Vinca]

5. Okay - must we be clones of each other in order to work together?

I have a relative who's a Buddhist - must I become one, too? Step away from the Hillary bandwagon and use some common sense. I'm sure she's got people on her team who disagree with her on some policies.

[Maribelle]

9. You're totally missing the point in this.

[Vinca]

32. It doesn't matter what I say or think. Unless I put up a Hillary avatar,

you won't agree with me.

[rodeodance]

7. stay focused on the OP--or start another thread with your topic

[JTFrog]

16. Focus on the watch... No! Don't look over there...you're getting sleepy...sleepy...

[ElsewheresDaughter]

We’ve got plenty of time to ask Obama about this subject. 6 weeksPA .And it’s high time we started.

[JTFrog]

35. Good. Keep bringing it up so I can keep reminding everyone how the actual vote went.

On stripping immunity from the FISA bill:

Obama - Yea

Clinton - Not Voting.

[Window]

40. LOL!

[kristopher]

26. know I know it's another Hillary hit job.

"stay focused on the OP--or start another thread with your topic" says an "avid and energetic supporter of Sen. Clinton...

[ElsewheresDaughter]

19. Penn is a campaign manager NOT a "top policy adviser"

[catgirl]

24. Obama voted against immunity...Hillary skipped the vote (nt)

[zabet]

27. This is who is working for McCain....

Mehlman, Rove boost McCain campaign

By: David Paul Kuhn
Mar 8, 2008 07:08 AM

John McCain is getting much more than President Bush's endorsement and fundraising help for his campaign. He’s getting Bush's staff.

It’s no secret that Steve Schmidt, Bush’s attack dog in the 2004 election, and Mark McKinnon, the president’s media strategist, are performing similar functions for McCain now.

But other big-name Bushies are lining up to boost McCain, too.
Ken Mehlman, who ran Bush’s 2004 campaign, is now serving as an unpaid, outside adviser to the Arizona Republican. Karl Rove, the president’s top political hand since his Texas days, recently gave money to McCain and soon after had a private conversation with the senator. A top McCain adviser said both Mehlman and Rove are now informally advising the campaign. Rove refused to detail his conversation with McCain.

snip

Rove explained that he and McCain “got to know each other during the 2004 campaign.” In a separate interview, Mehlman noted that “McCain was completely loyal to the president in 2004 and worked incredibly hard to help him get elected.” According to Taylor, “The Bush Republicans here in town are excited for John McCain.”

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/8911.html

[Maribelle]

6. The scary part about this to me is that most policy advisers on a presidential campaign ...

end up with positions in the administration, should their candidate win.

Why on earth would Obama want and adviser with an opinion in direct opposition to his platform? It truly does not make sense.

[HooptieWagon]

10. If Immunity means testimony, I might consider it.

Think the Telecoms might throw bush and dick under the bus to remove several hundred million in potential liabilities? Damn straight they would. Would it be worth it to see bush and dick in jail? Damn straight it would.

[JTFrog]

11. Why is speculation more important than HIS ACTUAL VOTE? Oh, because Clinton showed her

ass on this one too and reality is just too much for her supporters.

The vote on February 12, 2008, 11:03 AM: Senate Votes to Give Retroactive Immunity for Telecoms

Ammendment: Amdt. 3907 to S.Amdt. 3911 to S. 2248 (FISA Amendments Act of 2007): "To strike the provisions providing immunity from civil liability to electronic communication service providers for certain assistance provided to the Government."

Akaka (D-HI), Yea
Alexander (R-TN), Nay
Allard (R-CO), Nay
Barrasso (R-WY), Nay
Baucus (D-MT), Yea
Bayh (D-IN), Nay
Bennett (R-UT), Nay
Biden (D-DE), Yea
Bingaman (D-NM), Yea
Bond (R-MO), Nay
Boxer (D-CA), Yea
Brown (D-OH), Yea
Brownback (R-KS), Nay
Bunning (R-KY), Nay
Burr (R-NC), Nay
Byrd (D-WV), Yea
Cantwell (D-WA), Yea
Cardin (D-MD), Yea
Carper (D-DE), Nay
Casey (D-PA), Yea
Chambliss (R-GA), Nay

Clinton (D-NY), Not Voting

Coburn (R-OK), Nay
Cochran (R-MS), Nay
Coleman (R-MN), Nay
Collins (R-ME), Nay
Conrad (D-ND), Nay
Corker (R-TN), Nay
Cornyn (R-TX), Nay
Craig (R-ID), Nay
Crapo (R-ID), Nay
DeMint (R-SC), Nay
Dodd (D-CT), Yea
Dole (R-NC), Nay
Domenici (R-NM), Nay
Dorgan (D-ND), Yea
Durbin (D-IL), Yea
Ensign (R-NV), Nay
Enzi (R-WY), Nay
Feingold (D-WI), Yea
Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Graham (R-SC), Not Voting
Grassley (R-IA), Nay
Gregg (R-NH), Nay
Hagel (R-NE), Nay
Harkin (D-IA), Yea
Hatch (R-UT), Nay
Hutchison (R-TX), Nay
Inhofe (R-OK), Nay
Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Isakson (R-GA), Nay
Johnson (D-SD), Nay
Kennedy (D-MA), Yea
Kerry (D-MA), Yea
Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Kyl (R-AZ), Nay
Landrieu (D-LA), Nay
Lautenberg (D-NJ), Yea
Leahy (D-VT), Yea
Levin (D-MI), Yea
Lieberman (ID-CT), Nay
Lincoln (D-AR), Nay
Lugar (R-IN), Nay
Martinez (R-FL), Nay
McCain (R-AZ), Nay
McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
McConnell (R-KY), Nay
Menendez (D-NJ), Yea
Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Murkowski (R-AK), Nay
Murray (D-WA), Yea
Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Nelson (D-NE), Nay

Obama (D-IL), Yea

Pryor (D-AR), Nay
Reed (D-RI), Yea
Reid (D-NV), Yea
Roberts (R-KS), Nay
Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Sanders (I-VT), Yea
Schumer (D-NY), Yea
Sessions (R-AL), Nay
Shelby (R-AL), Nay
Smith (R-OR), Nay
Snowe (R-ME), Nay
Specter (R-PA), Nay
Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Stevens (R-AK), Nay
Sununu (R-NH), Nay
Tester (D-MT), Yea
Thune (R-SD), Nay
Vitter (R-LA), Nay
Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Warner (R-VA), Nay
Webb (D-VA), Nay
Whitehouse (D-RI), Yea
Wicker (R-MS), Nay
Wyden (D-OR), Yea



http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=2&vote=00015

[Maribelle]

14. lol That was an amendment. Obama missed the actual FISA vote.

Sorry, he left town.

[JTFrog]

15. You really don't have a fucking clue do you? Twist and distort. Is that all you get paid for? n/t

[ElsewheresDaughter]

18. I suggest you use Thomas once in a while.

[JTFrog]

29. WTF is your point? Was there a vote to strip immunity from the FISA bill or not? What color is the

sky in HillaryWorld?

Here in America it's still blue and there are plenty of links and sources to choose from to see how that vote went.

[zabet]

20. Hillary was a co-sponsor to this bill.

Even though she missed the vote..
(like obama did the kyl-liebermann
vote and overall missed more votes than
clinton) she would not have voted
NO on a bill she co-sponsored.

COSPONSORS(11):

Sen Feingold, Russell D. - 1/24/2008
Sen Leahy, Patrick J. - 1/24/2008
Sen Kennedy, Edward M. - 1/24/2008
Sen Harkin, Tom - 1/24/2008
Sen Wyden, Ron - 1/24/2008
Sen Sanders, Bernard - 1/24/2008
Sen Obama, Barack - 1/24/2008
Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham - 1/24/2008
Sen Biden, Joseph R., Jr. - 1/24/2008
Sen Kerry, John F. - 1/24/2008
Sen Boxer, Barbara - 1/25/2008
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:SP3907:

[JTFrog]

31. Her silence has been noted on this.

Spin on spinmeisters.

http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=2369

Today, Obama is throwing down the gauntlet on internet freedom, telecom lobbyists, and on opening up government in general to the public. It's some genuinely radical stuff, and it includes the use of blogs, wikis, and openness in government hearings.

----

And then of course there is spectrum and net neutrality. Both Edwards and Obama have made it clear they will break the power of the wireless gatekeepers, the telecom lobbyists who gut our laws, and the Comcast traffic shaping tyrants. Clinton, though, has been a noted absence in the debate about spectrum, mumbling about it incoherently at Yearlykos, and her plan for broadband was written by the telcos and doesn't include net neutrality. She still hasn't come out clearly on retroactive immunity, as her campaign's ties to telecom lobbyists are not trivial, and it looks from her possible FCC choices that her administration would be a continuation of the Clinton-Bush years of media and telecom deregulation.

...much more at link

[zabet]

36. Listening to spin by bloggers..

that is what made the Muslim meme
grow legs and continue to be about.
It works both ways. Look for the
Clinton camp to take the gloves
completely off. The little 'love
taps' she has thrown at Obama had
a great effect of throwing his campaign
on the defensive and start making mistakes.
Just look what happened to Samantha Powers,
that was a rookie mistake fueled by
frustration. I say rookie because she
is not a politician and has never had to
deal with the media scrutiny over every
word. Hillary did say after Ohio, "Now,
the fun begins!".

[JTFrog]

39. .Yes the horrors of progressive thinkers who link to actual documentation

such as both of their innovation plans that are available from the candidate's websites. That's the kind of thing that is destroying our country and we need Hillary to save us from it.

You have to hate those guys that use a candidate's record against them.

[zabet]

41. Jeebus..

You know what I mean. Facts
can be spun according to ones
perception of those facts.
The same facts about Obama will
be spun positively by an Obama
supporter and spun negatively
by a McCain supporter.

You have to hate people having
different perceptions and understanding
of facts.

[Honeycombe8]

13. And we care what non-candidates think because....why? There is this pervasive...

thought process among candidate supporters, that somehow the candidates should be "thought police," burrowing deeply into the thought processes of any and all of those around them, and preventing anyone with a differing view from coming anywhere near them. This is what happened with the homophobic guy during the gospel tour, and this seems to be another instance.

It does not matter one bit what those around a candidate think about one issue or another. What matters is what the candidate thinks.

You will ESPECIALLY find differing views among Obama supporters and advisors, since he has made an effort to include everyone in his tent, even though he disagrees with some of their positions.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

17. we care because "top policy advisers" USUALLY become part of a presidents administration

[Honeycombe8]

45. A foreign policy advisor has a view different from Obama's on a domestic matter. So what.

It would be impossible to find a cabinet, or a panel of advisors, who agree with the candidate on every issue.

[rug]

21. If they were "operating in a legal context" they don't need immunity.

You don't have to be a part-time instructor in election law to know that.

[rucky]

22. What's with all these so-called advisors overstepping & overreaching?

Or even being in front of the camera in the first place?

I thought the whole advisor thing involved sitting in a smoke-filled room, drafting policy or planning strategy?

I thought public information came directly from the candidate and/or a designated media contact?

That's how I'd run it, at least.

[pdxmom]

23. I thought one of our complaints about Bush is that he surrounds himself

with a bunch of toadies that never offer up an opinion that differs from his. I have no problem with an advisor who has a differing opinion on an issue from the candidate, as long as the candidate does the right thing. I believe it's a good thing to hear different opinions so that you have all of the information.

Why fire a guy for having one opinion that differs?

[kristopher]

25. This is a hit job. Did anyone bother to read the original interview?

Did anyone bother to read the original interview?It is wide ranging and Brennen is an obvious professional from inside the intelligence community. It is also obvious his basic values are democratic, with a small d. This criticism is like criticizing a general for wanting more tanks or an admiral for wanting more ships.

He speaks to the concerns regarding civil liberties and pushes the intel gathering side of the issue.
Now, I wonder, do you suppose Obama has someone sitting on the other side of the table that might have a different view of the priorities?

Or maybe all his other advisers are also (not so) secretly supporting the Bush Agenda...

[ElsewheresDaughter]

38. yes I did & Brennen is strongly advocating for making Bush's domestic spying agenda permanent

[leftofthedial]

37. "lawful"? "legal context"?

what BS. Sue the crap out of them, take all their money and nationalize telecommunications.

And make the fucking king obey the fucking law.

[stray cat]

42. Advisors with diverse opinions - unlike our current bubble president

[rodeodance]

43. K and REC