SOTU: Bush Continues To Seek Warrantless Wiretapping Power Without Any Oversight
SOTU: Bush Continues To Seek Warrantless Wiretapping Power Without Any Oversight
Bush said: ” The Congress must pass liability protection for companies believed to have assisted in the efforts to defend America. We have had ample time for debate. The time to act is now.”
FACT — IMMUNITY ABSOLVES TELECOM COMPANIES OF VIOLATING THE LAW: Immunity “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.” [Washington Post 10/18/07]
FACT — WHITE HOUSE SUPPORTS WIRETAP LEGISLATION WITH PRIVACY VIOLATIONS: The Protect America Act gave “U.S. spy agencies expanded power to eavesdrop on foreign suspects without a court order” and “broadly expanded the government’s authority to eavesdrop on the international telephone calls and e-mail messages of American citizens without warrants,” “as long as the target of the government’s surveillance is ‘reasonably believed’ to be overseas.” [Washington Post 08/04/07, New York Times 08/06/07, Washington Post 01/24/08]
FACT — BUSH AND HIS CONSERVATIVE ALLIES ARE BLOCKING THE EXTENSION OF FISA REVISION: With the expiration of the temporary surveillance bill looming, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid sought a temporary extension this week in order to avoid “political gamesmanship” while completing the bill, but Senate conservatives blocked it procedurally and Bush issued a veto threat. [The Hill 12/18/07, Politico RESTORE Act]
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
13 Responses to “SOTU: Bush Continues To Seek Warrantless Wiretapping Power Without Any Oversight”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Bush and the Republicans forget the 4th amendment that protects us from these types of unlawful searches. We already have a policy in place that works.
January 28th, 2008 at 9:57 pmFear, be afraid, the terriorists are out there. If you don’t give me what I want, they will come to get you. I’m so sick of the fear card. My biggest fear is that Bush will never leave office.
January 28th, 2008 at 10:00 pmLegally, immunity ends all pending suits against the telecoms and precludes further legal action against Bush/Cheney for illegal spying without warrants. Go, Dodd!
January 28th, 2008 at 10:14 pmBush and Cheney want to know what everyone is up to……….
At the same time they don’t want anyone to know anything about what they’re up to
Sounds fair to me…sorta like heads I win tails you lose
January 28th, 2008 at 10:37 pm“al Qaida’s top commander in Iraq declared that they will not rest until they have attacked us here in Washington.â€
is this NEWS?
January 28th, 2008 at 10:37 pmfor companies believed to have assisted …….believed?…they admitted it! you dummy! They broke the law at your request, now get in the paddy wagon and put on the orange suit!
January 28th, 2008 at 10:53 pmRediculous! Retroactive immunity is the same thing as ex post facto. Am I the only one who thinks so?
January 28th, 2008 at 11:00 pm‘“al Qaida’s top commander in Iraq declared that they will not rest until they have attacked us here in Washington.â€
is this NEWS?
Comment by katy — January 28, 2008 @ 10:37 pm’
It is MSM news.
January 28th, 2008 at 11:01 pmRight. It’s time to act on this matter.
Impeach, arrest, sue!
January 28th, 2008 at 11:35 pmRight. It’s time to act on this matter.
Impeach, arrest, sue!
Comment by enough
Ahem, the clarion call goes:
Arrest, Try, Hang
January 29th, 2008 at 8:09 amHow does the argument go? If we don’t give companies immunity for breaking the law at our request, they’ll never do it again? Um, yeah.
January 29th, 2008 at 8:31 amIt was Bush’s last speech thankfully, and it’s the same old crap. Less than a year to go and it’s no more Chimpy. It’s been a totally disgusting 8 years and history will not treat Bush kindly. He has no legacy - only one of death and destruction.
January 29th, 2008 at 10:44 amIf we don’t give companies immunity and protect them from laws that they might have broken; laws that are in place to protect Americans,…
then the terrorists win!
(Definition of terrorist in this case: law abiding citizens.)
January 29th, 2008 at 11:19 am