... and a lot of Democrats appear to have found one!
Good for you House Dems, now, if only the, self styled, greatest deliberative body in the world -the Senate - could, likewise, wipe the fear from their sweating brows and stand up to this recidivist administration we may have a Congress of the United States that actually works for the people of the United States rather than as a rubber stamp for the worst president in American history.
Watch those congressional approval numbers go up... we wanted you to fight them not continually capitulate your responsibilities.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Yes! Bravely standing up for their patrons in the trial bar, who will be the only people who benefit from being allowed to sue the phone companies. Maybe we should call this the trial lawyer full employment act.
One thing I truly don't understand. Why the bloodlust for the phone companies? Even if, and I truly don't beieve they did, but even if they committed some technical violation who the fuck cares? Who's been harmed?
This is just about simple decency. Our government went to these people for help, and they helped. Now, our government is going to open them up for a plague of lawsuits that will cost millions to defend, even though they'll win, all the while relying upon them for ongoing monitoring. I ask you, why do you want to make it harder for the government to defend us? Is this some sort of sick attempt to damage Bush even more by allowing a terror attack before the election?
Reprehensible.
The American people will benefit from this and only the American people.
We have an administration that has, in its seven years of tyranny, shown nothing but contempt for the American people, it lied us into an unneccesary war that will cost $3 trillion and countless ruined lives. It has shown nothing but contempt for the Constitution of the United States, a document once envied around the world and contempt for the rule of law by forcing the Telco's to commit crimes against the American people.
The phone companies were quite willing to defend their actions in a court of law but this administration prevented them from doing so by slapping a states secrets priviledge on the evidence. I know you have little curiosity about this subject and a blind faith in this administrations motives but why would they do that? It is quite obvious to anyone following this closely that the telco's have an out but this administration does not. High crimes and misdemeanors - I know it's difficult for you to accept that you have ideologically and idiotically allied yourself to a bunch of criminals but, quite frankly, you have.
In order for us, the American people to understand why the head of the FBI and several high ranking officials at DoJ were willing to resign enmasse over actions perpetrated by this administration, that evidence must see the light of day, even in a closed court under FISA jurisdiction. It's the American way.
Plus, we must prevent succeeding Presidents from ever having the power to indiscriminately spy on his/her own people. The president is not above the law, despite what Dick Cheney thinks.
"The American people will benefit from this and only the American people."
How? In what way do the American people benefit from a raft of class action lawsuits against phone companies? Higher phone bills? Here's how a class action lawsuit works: A law firm brings an action on behalf of some aggrieved "class", say phone company customers, and asks for $1 Billion. The phone companies consider the costs and risks of litigation and settles for $200 Million. The lawyers split up $66 million and the phone company customers get $3 each. Then the lawyers make a $10 million payoff to the DNC.
Your evidence of wrongdoing against the administration is, to put it charitably, a little thin. Of course the administration put a states secret privilege on the evidence. There are state secrets involved! There are secret surveillance techniques, and tons of secret information we've gathered on terrorists, all of which would have to come out on discovery.
Let me ask you this. In the wake of 9/11, as these programs were being conceived and implemented, would you expect this or any other administration to do anything less than the most the law would allow to protect the American people?
The moral imperative of the executive in this instance is to devise the maximally effective defense strategies that the law will allow. Surveillance, obviously, plays a far more pivotal role in the current conflict than it has historically. New technologies exist that weren't there when older laws were written.
Our existing systems had failed. It was time to find new ways to prevent future attacks. The almost-rseignations that you refer to took place within the confines of a fierce debate about the means and methods by which to proceed, as would be expected.
It serves no one, save a few trial lawyers, to attempt to settle serious constitutional issues by suing phone companies. If congress has oversight issues with what the Executive has done here, they have a duty to raise those issues themselves. The reason they haven't is because they don't have a constitutional leg to stand on.
So instead, a small minority of House Democrats wants to pander to the nutroots and create a financial bonanza for an important constituent and contributor by taking this backdoor approach to limiting the executives rightful constitutional authority to perform surveillance not on Americans on US soil, but on foreigners on foreign soil! It's beyond belief.
What's next, requiring a warrant for a soldier in the field to intercept enemy communications?
"Former chief executive Joseph P. Nacchio, convicted in April of 19 counts of insider trading, said the NSA approached Qwest more than six months before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, according to court documents unsealed in Denver this week."
"The U.S. National Security Agency asked AT&T Inc. to help it set up a domestic call monitoring site seven months before the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, lawyers claimed June 23 in court papers filed in New York federal court."
Too bad this is not really about 9/11... It's about an administration out of control.
Post a Comment