GOP to attach telecom immunity to media shield law?
GOP to attach telecom immunity to media shield law?
Since February, when House Democrats refused to vote on a Senate Intelligence bill that included retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies, conservatives have been seeking to force the vote any way they can. Now, according right-wing insider Jeb Babbin, House Republicans may try to tie immunity legislation to a media shield law bill:
House Republicans are considering a new strategy to break the deadlock. A media shield bill — introduced in the House by Cong. Mike Pence (R-In)d and Rick Boucher (D-Va.) — passed the House in October by the overwhelming vote of 398-21. […]
House sources say that the combination of the House bill and the Senate FISA bill could penetrate Pelosi’s wall around FISA. Those sources also said that the media shield bill is a “must pass” piece of legislation this year because the Democrats reportedly are under enormous pressure from their media pals to pass the bill.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
24 Responses to “GOP to attach telecom immunity to media shield law?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Think ProgressContact Us
Donate
If it has immunity for the telco’s lawbreaking, don’t pass it, or strip immunity from the bill. Its not like the house doesn’t have an overwhelming majority, unlike the senate.
May 12th, 2008 at 1:20 pmThe GOP will do anything to get this law passed beofre Bush leaves office. I have contacted my congressman and flatly stated that if he votes for immunity, sat goodbye to my vote. I suggest to all of you to do the same.
May 12th, 2008 at 1:22 pmAny one taking the bet’s on this herring.?…My bet it will be the biggest cave in since all last year’s mining accident’s….Tick, tock, run out the clock, not likely with the team of Palosi and Reid..We will loose again…Blessings
May 12th, 2008 at 1:23 pmRepublicans are refusing to face the critical question: Does the President have the constitutional authority to search through our phone calls and records without a warrant issued by a judge (even a warrant issued three days after they start the tap)? The answer is clearly “No”, but because they put loyalty to one man (Bush) ahead of loyalty to their country (USA), they will continue to protect the telecoms who knowingly broke the law. (BTW, wouldn’t all that warrantless wiretapping also constitute conspiracy, for which the telecoms could also be charged?)
May 12th, 2008 at 1:25 pmDeal breaker! (unless,of course, the Democrats are in on it. In which case we’ll know soon enough).
May 12th, 2008 at 1:25 pmSorry media pals! You’re probably not doing your jobs anyway!
May 12th, 2008 at 1:31 pmExcept for the politics inside The Beltway, this should be a no brainer (ha!) for the Dems! The with the shield law in place, Administration toadies such as Judith Miller would continue to carry water for this and future administrations with no legal recriminations. By attaching the shield law to the AT&T and Cheney get out of jail free card (aka telcom immunity), Dems could do a twofer; kill a bill detrimental to good and responsible journalism and continue to hold the Administration and Telecoms responsible for any and all illegal intrusions on our privacy! Not going to happen of course.
May 12th, 2008 at 1:31 pmThose sources also said that the media shield bill is a “must pass” piece of legislation this year because the Democrats reportedly are under enormous pressure from their media pals to pass the bill.
This comes from a republican, so it’s only about half true, as usual.
The problem with this scenario, is that since corporate media has literally billions of dollars at stake with media shield legislation, to suggest that it’s dems who will feel the heat, when republicans have the most to lose, is a truly weak lie.
May 12th, 2008 at 1:49 pmPass a bill to make the criminal activities of Telecoms/Bush/Cheney legal, well isn’t that surprising that the Republican Mafia would want to make legal their crimes?
Not at all.
May 12th, 2008 at 1:49 pmThe desperation to give blanket immunity when we don’t even know what crimes were committed proves, once again, how our politicians are bought and sold. The telecoms are one of the largest lobbies in our entire government. You know these politicians can’t be THIS worried about possible lawsuits against telecoms for violating their own consumer privacy guarantees.
Besides, what “friends in the media” do Democrats have exactly? I can count them on one hand and still have fingers remaining.
I think what we really need in our country is a consumer bill of rights that protects us from corporations secretly giving our information away without our consent. If corporations plan to give the feds access to our conversations, they have to tell us up front and let the free market decide. We need to have the choice to not use the services of that company.
May 12th, 2008 at 1:50 pmuh uh uh, so sorry, there comparing apples to oranges! The Shield Law that protects a privacy and not reveals it should have nothing at all to do with an immunity bill protecting invasion of a privacy! Damn they’re so stupid!
May 12th, 2008 at 1:54 pmIt takes a lot of nerve to push that one on society
May 12th, 2008 at 1:55 pmAny representative who would vote for a single bill designed to protect the corrupt practices of two irresponsible industries should be returned to the private sectors by the voters.
May 12th, 2008 at 2:05 pmBring it on GOOPers. You haven’t got the votes. See you in November.
May 12th, 2008 at 2:37 pmHouse Republicans are considering a new strategy to break the deadlock. A media shield bill — introduced in the House by Cong. Mike Pence (R-In)d and Rick Boucher (D-Va.) — passed the House in October by the overwhelming vote of 398-21. […]
House sources say that the combination of the House bill and the Senate FISA bill could penetrate Pelosi’s wall around FISA. Those sources also said that the media shield bill is a “must pass” piece of legislation this year because the Democrats reportedly are under enormous pressure from their media pals to pass the bill.
What in the hell does the media have to do with telecom companies illegally assisting the garbage Chimpy administration’s illegal spying on Americans ?
What next , GOP ?
Adding certain caveats to a Homeland Security bill that will give the entire Congress more options to hold hearing on athletes using steroids ?
What a bunch of unfunny , stupid clowns……….
May 12th, 2008 at 2:39 pmAny “media pals” that the Dems have should be well aware that the bill is now in jeapordy and will likely have to wait until next January. The RepubliCONs might obstruct legislation and put forward meaningless bills and hearings but they sure can jump through hoops when it comes to protecting their criminal cohorts in the WH. The next time one of these sh1tbags does the Sunday morning TV circuit someone should ask them about they’re selective tenacity on legislation when it comes to Herr Chimp and the Dick. Oh, they won’t? Then I guess the Dems don’t really have all that many media pals to worry about.
May 12th, 2008 at 2:49 pmPelosi will be playing with fire and will get burnt if she falls for this!
May 12th, 2008 at 3:13 pmSeems a simple strategy: don’t let the GOP immunity bill go forward till after next January. Then the dems can pass the shield law without problem.
May 12th, 2008 at 3:17 pmyeah, everything sounds simple enough until the losers get their greedy blood-stained hands on it
May 12th, 2008 at 3:27 pmhttp://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23957172
May 12th, 2008 at 4:07 pmoops…..report about internet providers spying
May 12th, 2008 at 4:08 pmthat human events article is so full of wrongness its ridiculous.
the most blatant:
‘But the interim fix expired on February 16 because the House refused to act on a long-term fix that included the civil immunity for the telecom companies.”
-WRONG, democrats voted on another extension but republicans voted against it.
“One House source said that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has a veto-proof sixty votes lined up for the media shield bill. ”
-You need 68 votes to override a veto, 60 is to break a filibuster.
and what would a house source know about what Reid is doing?
May 12th, 2008 at 5:39 pmWhat horseshit. I don’t care how “must pass” some insiders think the media bill is, if the senate attaches telecom immunity the House will not let it pass.
News flash: the media shield bill is not “must pass”. If the Senate tries that the House will simply not take it up for a vote or strip it out. The House is not the senate. They can do whatever they want. Majority rules.
Also, If this Human Events guy knew anything about how congress works he would know that that BS discharge petition is going nowhere. Discharge petitions almost ALWAYS fail. They are political gimmicks used by the minority to create press pretending that they are doing something. There’s one on immigration, one on earmarks. They are all pointless. R’s simply do them so they can add it to their constituent newsletters so the voters think they are doing something.
And now that I read the article this Human Events guy is an idiot. Some examples:
Well guess what, Republicans were actually given a chance for another extension in order to continue negotiating the telecom immunity part of the bill. They voted against it. So it expired because they refused an extension. And now of course they allcry that we are in more danger than ever. Well then, why did you vote against extending it?
Or where he said that Pelosi blocked immunity because she is “in thrall to the trial lawyers”. Huh? As opposed to things like constitutional rights. This is the kind of stuff you expect in right wing paranoid bulletin boards.
Then why did Republicans vote against extending it?
One House source said that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has a veto-proof sixty votes lined up for the media shield bill.
Then maybe you should stop talking to HOUSE sources when talking about the inner workings of the Senate. It takes 68 votes to override a veto you idiot. 60 is to break filibuster.
And yet you put a D on his name. Did a 3 year old write this shit?
It’s not going to happen. And I am particulacy amazed that Think progress picked this up. Its just not credible.
May 12th, 2008 at 6:35 pmhey scumbag politicians ive got news for you, you cant write a law that sanctions a violation of the constitution, and even if you could, there is supreme court precedent that ongoing lawsuits are considered property which invokes 4th amendment “taking with no compensation” issues if you try to squash one,,,
i predict the courts will keep hold of this one way or the other..
May 13th, 2008 at 12:20 am