Democrats pull fast one on Republicans, re: Phone Company Immunity

[CT_Progressive]

WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 — Leaders of the Senate Intelligence Committee reached a tentative agreement on Wednesday with the Bush administration that would give telephone carriers legal immunity for any role they played in the National Security Agency’s domestic eavesdropping program approved by President Bush after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, a Congressional official said Wednesday.

more...

Article

Note the bolded part: "program approved by President Bush after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks"

The program was started BEFORE the Sept 11 attacks.

This immunity is WORTHLESS!

Go Dems !

[peacebird]

1. Sweet!

[librechik]

2. Good point

but didn't they change the wording to accommodate the new documents the WH is supposed to turn over? What program exactly are we talking about--indeed.

A ray of hope? I doubt it, since they ignore anything that's not convenient for them anyway. But that is interesting.

[Ian David]

3. Yes! The Democrats must have been listening to The Thom Hartman Show! n/t

[mvd]

4. Good point

It might not be all bad, then.

[BuyingThyme]

5. The NYT has agreed to lie about the date.

I suspect the language in the bill will give immunity to all criminals, past, present, and future.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=226611

[backscatter712]

6. Nice!

You have a point there - Bush had the NSA start warrantless wiretaps the day he took office.

If it were up to me, I'd slap the phone companies with enough punitive damages for assisting in illegal wiretaps that they'd all be fucking bankrupt. If they don't like it, maybe they should have stuck to their guns when the NSA came calling.

[TwilightGardener]

7. The bolded part is merely a description of when the program

was approved by Chimpy--I don't see where any particular time frame is specified in terms of immunity coverage--sorry, but this is meaningless.

[rocktivity]

8. But if this program was started PRIOR to 9/11

Then Bush has some questions to answer: Why did he start the program? Why didn't he get Congress involved? Why was the August 6 daily briefing ignored? And WHY CAN'T HE SPY DOMESTICALLY WITH WARRANTS?

:headbang:
rocknation

[TwilightGardener]

9. Unless an investigation is launched, or unless Congress specifically

limits immunity to POST-9/11 spying (there's no evidence of that in the draft's description), then Chimpy and the telecoms will not face recrimination, and we'll never get to the bottom of just what they were doing all those months before 9/11. Even IF the telecoms don't have immunity pre-9/11 in terms of civil proceedings (they're already protected from criminal proceedings), someone would have to file a civil suit against them for those pre-9/11 activities--but no one knows just what the fuck they were doing, because it's all still a big secret. So, how do you file a suit for something that you don't know actually happened?