Obama Backs Bill Giving Immunity To Telecoms

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Obama Backs Bill Giving Immunity To Telecoms stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

The Huffington Post
First Posted: 06-20-08 04:25 PM   |   Updated: 06-28-08 05:12 AM

I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Telecom

Sen. Barack Obama's campaign released a statement Friday afternoon saying that while Obama opposes amnesty for telecom firms that spied on Americans, he will support the House compromise legislation.

The statement in full:

"Given the grave threats that we face, our national security agencies must have the capability to gather intelligence and track down terrorists before they strike, while respecting the rule of law and the privacy and civil liberties of the American people. There is also little doubt that the Bush Administration, with the cooperation of major telecommunications companies, has abused that authority and undermined the Constitution by intercepting the communications of innocent Americans without their knowledge or the required court orders.


"That is why last year I opposed the so-called Protect America Act, which expanded the surveillance powers of the government without sufficient independent oversight to protect the privacy and civil liberties of innocent Americans. I have also opposed the granting of retroactive immunity to those who were allegedly complicit in acts of illegal spying in the past.

"After months of negotiation, the House today passed a compromise that, while far from perfect, is a marked improvement over last year's Protect America Act.

"Under this compromise legislation, an important tool in the fight against terrorism will continue, but the President's illegal program of warrantless surveillance will be over. It restores FISA and existing criminal wiretap statutes as the exclusive means to conduct surveillance - making it clear that the President cannot circumvent the law and disregard the civil liberties of the American people. It also firmly re-establishes basic judicial oversight over all domestic surveillance in the future. It does, however, grant retroactive immunity, and I will work in the Senate to remove this provision so that we can seek full accountability for past offenses. But this compromise guarantees a thorough review by the Inspectors General of our national security agencies to determine what took place in the past, and ensures that there will be accountability going forward. By demanding oversight and accountability, a grassroots movement of Americans has helped yield a bill that is far better than the Protect America Act.

"It is not all that I would want. But given the legitimate threats we face, providing effective intelligence collection tools with appropriate safeguards is too important to delay. So I support the compromise, but do so with a firm pledge that as President, I will carefully monitor the program, review the report by the Inspectors General, and work with the Congress to take any additional steps I deem necessary to protect the lives - and the liberty - of the American people."

Also today, in an interview with Bloomberg's Al Hunt, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said he would attempt to remove the amnesty provision in the bill:

Reid said the Senate may try to remove a provision from the bill that shields telephone companies from privacy lawsuits. Holding a separate vote on that issue next week may provide political cover for Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama. Even though the attempt may fail, Reid said the vote would allow those opposed to the liability protection to "express their views."


"I'm going to try real hard to have a separate vote on immunity," Reid said in an interview to be aired this weekend on Bloomberg Television's "Political Capital with Al Hunt."

"Probably we can't take that out of the bill, but I'm going to try."

McJoan at Daily Kos writes, "That effort should be helped by Obama's opposition to the provision. His support of the remainder of the bill is disappointing, but that would be in large part offset if he can help kill immunity."

Sen. Barack Obama's campaign released a statement Friday afternoon saying that while Obama opposes amnesty for telecom firms that spied on Americans, he will support the House compromise legislation. ...
Sen. Barack Obama's campaign released a statement Friday afternoon saying that while Obama opposes amnesty for telecom firms that spied on Americans, he will support the House compromise legislation. ...
Report Corrections
 
Comments
4113
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next › Last » (61 pages total)
- XME I'm a Fan of XME 26 fans permalink
photo

Isn't excuses...it's understanding politics. It's not black and white, and I don't change my vote based on one thing.

Whoever I back, there are issues I won't agree with, but. I look at the whole thing, including what a President McCain would do to our country, our economy, and our troops. To me it's a no brainer.

It sounds like you might be one of those young, idealistic first-time voters notorious for being unreliable in November. They expect a candidate to be perfect and get disillusioned at the drop of a hat. It worries me that Obama has a lot of young supporters. I don't think they get the whole picture or think they can be counted on to vote. They're the ones who may ensure McCain is who we get stuck with.

I like Obama and support him 100%, but his supporters who think he's the best ever and a perfect candidate and isn't a politician are setting themselves up for disappointment, and setting a bar bound to dissappointment. That's why Obama's supporters are referred to as naive and are viewed as seeing Obama as a "messiah", because they are kidding themselves if they think he's NOT a politician. He is, he's flawed, and he isn't completely selfless...and yet he's still the best candidate I've seen in decades.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:41 AM on 06/22/2008
- tel8034 I'm a Fan of tel8034 88 fans permalink

DON'T REACT TO THE HEADLINE ............... READ THE STORY.

Obama says that this bill is an important tool to fight terrorism BUT the bill will also end the Bush administration's illegal program of warrantless surveillance ............. George Bush will NOT be able to circumvent the law, NOR will he be able to disregard the civil liberties of the American people.

The bill also re-establishes judicial oversight over domestic surveillance.

Obama also emphasizes that there MUST be accountability going forward.

What Obama OPPOSES, is the fact that there is a RETROACTIVE IMMUNITY CALUSE in the bill.

He says that he will work with the Senate to REMOVE this provision and will seek to ensure that there is full accountablility for all past offenses.

Obama's stated OPPOSITION is definately the contrary to what this story's headline suggests..

Remember Obama DOES NOT vote in the House of Representatives (Obama is a Senator NOT a Congressman) ........... He has not yet taken a vote on this bill .................. Allow him to do his work in the Senate BEFORE the criticism begins (if necessary).

AGAIN READ THE STORY ..........­..........­. DO NOT REACT TO THE HEADLINE.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:05 AM on 06/22/2008
- DocJerome I'm a Fan of DocJerome 22 fans permalink

Some will and some only want to undermine.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:51 AM on 06/22/2008
photo

I READ THE POST!!!!! I REALLY DID!!!! I AM REACTING TO THE STORY!!!!!

If Obama votes for immunity for the Telecoms thats a bad thing. He has not voted yet, but says he will support the bill and he will try to strip the bill of the immunity.

What if the bill's immunity cannot be striped out?

It is unacceptable to a lot of people -- mostly Democrats -- that the Telecoms are given immunity. It's not going to stop me from voting for O, but this is an important issue and it will put a chink in his amour.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:25 AM on 06/22/2008
- trinity29 I'm a Fan of trinity29 22 fans permalink
photo

you need to call your senator to make sure that he helps BO to strip the immunity. BO is one man one vote. He needs the critical mass of support in the senate to do this.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:11 AM on 06/22/2008
- Ping I'm a Fan of Ping 63 fans permalink


This comment is pending approval and won't be displayed until it is approved.

The tobacco lawsuits have done nothing for the average American except raise the price of cigarettes. The tobacco lawsuits however, have made people like John Edwards very rich.

The telecom lawsuits would be the same thing, we the public who were snooped on would get nothing except the phone bill increasing, but the lawyers would rake in the big bucks. We would forever be paying these trial lawyers through the telephone companies because they sued on our behalf. It's the biggest joke on the face of the planet.

Tell me, what is to be gained by suing these telecoms, what kind of damages can we expect?

Also no jury in the USA is ever going to convict any telecom employees for acquiescing to illegal government requests based on "National Security Needs".

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:38 PM on 06/21/2008

I only believe Dennis Kucinich & Ron Paul. I'd get rid of the rest of them & start over with non political blood in their veins. I dislike what I see politics turning into more & more each day. Why do'nt WE put more real people in office? Why is Bush tap dancing & laughing so much?

Oh, sorry. Do we put anyone in office anymore? Bush acts likes he's already in for his 3rd term. (Thank you Saul about 51,) We have'nt put a president in in 8 years, what makes anyone think this year will be any different? We're still not getting receipts when we vote, they're still doing recounts from 2004.

Reid & Pelosi are in on this vote too. Impeachment proceedings by Kucinich have been buried. People here & around the world are watching their lives go down all around them. I'm watching more natural disasters in Bush's term than I've seen in my whole life, & less help each time. This is the most important election in my life time, will my vote even be counted? Will yours?

Telecome immunity....Bush immunity....Cheney immmunity, is'nt it all the same thing? What can really be done right now?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:54 PM on 06/21/2008
- Ping I'm a Fan of Ping 63 fans permalink

This comment is pending approval and won't be displayed until it is approved.

It was a telecom in San Francisco that open a door to a room that gave the Government agents access to everything. That's why Pelosi, Feinstein are working so hard for this immunity. They want to make sure that the people of San Francisco aren't paying $2000 per month for phone service because the telecom got sued and lost.

As for Bush and Cheney.....War Crimes....

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:38 AM on 06/22/2008
- joeyp404 I'm a Fan of joeyp404 4 fans permalink
photo

So, in other words - he was for it before he was against it. I'm a believer.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:29 PM on 06/21/2008

And according to your profile, you never were!

Thanks anyway :)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:11 PM on 06/21/2008
- Sabreen60 I'm a Fan of Sabreen60 53 fans permalink
photo

Is it possible that you don't know what "See Profile" means???

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:24 PM on 06/21/2008

People are making me crazy...if you wanna level harsh criticism at Obama because you think he's making the wrong call here, so be it.

But refusing to vote for him? Your choices are -- help elect Obama, help elect McCain, refuse to provide input.

Your faucets were leaking and your house was being water damaged and flooding, and your roommate/l­andlord/sp­ouse called 2 plumbers. One of the plumbers says he can help, and promises to try and fix them -- however, you're skeptical of his promises/abilities. The other plumber says he'll come take a look, but he's sure that nothing needs to be done and your pipes are fine.

Your roomate is going to choose one of the plumbers, and you're going to be stuck with half the bill, (plus the mess). Regardless of HOW skeptical you are of plumber 1, would you really let the other person hire plumber 2, and pay him $100/hr to tell you nothing needs fixing (which is clearly not true)?

Democracy needs an informed and active electorate. If you're upset about Telecom immunity, you're more informed than most. But if you're willing to let McCain take the White House over it, you might need to take a step back and look at the bigger picture.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:04 PM on 06/21/2008
photo

Criticism of Obama is not mutually exclusive of voting for McCain. We can criticize him and still end up voting for him. The truth is that Dodd, Kucinch and others stood up for us. Why not Obama? He is just reinforcing my original thoughts of him that he doesn't really STAND for anything. He takes the easy way out and has the audacity to attack others that have taken a stand, like the vote for force in Iraq. I bet you my life he would have made the same compromise that most of those that supported the war too when the rubber hit the road.

When people tell you who you are, be skeptical.
When people SHOW you who they are, believe them.

Show me Obama that you are who you say you are.--for America, not for Obama.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:27 PM on 06/21/2008

So you think that it's easy to come to a compromise with people you don't agree with?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:04 AM on 06/22/2008

The first line of my post that you replied to:

"if you wanna level harsh criticism at Obama because you think he's making the wrong call here, so be it."

I did not say that criticizing Obama = voting for McCain; but many on here have claimed to now renounce their support of him/refuse to vote for him. My post is calling this logic into question, and I've yet to see a response.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:29 AM on 06/22/2008
- trinity29 I'm a Fan of trinity29 22 fans permalink
photo

First, voting for the war on Iraq based on information presented then is not excusable but understandable given the faulty intelligence. However, not admitting that the vote was a mistake is inexcusable. Not admitting that you made an error in judgment is inexcusable.

Second, what would you like BO to do? This bill passed in the house. BO is in the senate. It has not come to the senate yet. When it does come he has two choices. Reject the bill entirely. Or support the bill for its strength and get a provision passed to strip the immunity. Thats exactly what he is doing to stand up for people. However, BO is one man one vote. You need to call your senators so that they know that you want them to support the provision to take off the retroactive immunity.

Last, but not least, the idealism of Kucinich and Dodd are admirable. However, with each political decision comes consequences. Kucinich, Ron Paul, Mike Gravel, cannot ever be elected as President because their purist positions are unfortunately shot down. However, if BO were to adopt an all or nothing position, he cannot make the argument of reaching across the aisle, it would end his run for Presidency and the bill would still pass. If you are upset, be upset at more than BO.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:20 AM on 06/22/2008

I knew when I began to support Obama that I wouldn't agree with every position he took. If Obama agrees with everything I do that would be called "pandering". I'll leave that to McBush the flip-flopper.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:16 PM on 06/21/2008

"Your choices are -- help elect Obama, help elect McCain, refuse to provide input." Say what? There are other choices; perhaps you need to be reminded that voting is not about 'choosing the winner' but expressing one's preferences. Both Nader and Barr are against this bill ; what's that you say, 'they can't win'? Well, if enough people vote for them the election goes into the House of Rep's.

But more to the point; ANYONE who is willing to support a politician who subverts the Constitution -and the FISA bill does just that, it's a lot more than just Sections 802 and 803- deserves the oligarchy this country has become.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:18 PM on 06/23/2008
- 1rewd1 I'm a Fan of 1rewd1 3 fans permalink
photo

Completely OT but I'm curious if the story concerning the removal of the two Muslim women from an Obama rally/photo-op ever made HuffPo?

I've been looking but can't find a thing ....

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:02 PM on 06/21/2008
- samandally I'm a Fan of samandally 4 fans permalink

It was here for about 5 minutes, you should know the Huff by now.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:40 PM on 06/21/2008
- trinity29 I'm a Fan of trinity29 22 fans permalink
photo

i saw the story, BO's subsequent apology, and the ladies' acceptance of the apology here. it was under the politics link.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:21 AM on 06/22/2008

WOW! OMG......

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:03 PM on 06/21/2008
- bryan0218 I'm a Fan of bryan0218 4 fans permalink

Very cool, and all true. they pretty much say it on there own website. When the msm does an hour long documentary on this then and only then will I be convinced that AIPAC does not control the media.

Paul/Rev. Wright 2008. The only 2 not afraid to tell it like it is.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:11 AM on 06/22/2008
- onenation I'm a Fan of onenation 4 fans permalink

Just wait till your boss gets home! Does she spank?

I hope so

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:27 PM on 06/21/2008
- INDmind I'm a Fan of INDmind 2 fans permalink

Oh this is very disappointing. The republicans will eat us alive on this one. Barack says he will work in the senate to strip this from the bill, but he is running to be president. When will he have time to work in the senate. This is too important! I would've rather he just voted "present" rather than for it. NAFTA was a mistake, now he's saying it's good. Public Financing is American voter's money. It's from tax returns when we choose to give $3 to presidential campaigns. What next?

I have some thinking to do.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:36 PM on 06/21/2008
- Forsetti I'm a Fan of Forsetti 66 fans permalink
photo

Public financing is not for a specific candidate. The money he has raised is specifically for his campaign. Why would we want it any other way? If you don't support a specific candidate do you want you money going to them?

The republicans will attack him on the FISA issue regardless of what he does. Any issue that they can tie to the "War on Terrorism" is fodder for them and they will twist everything to make it look like he is soft and cannot protect the Amercian public.

I have yet to read anything about his support of NAFTA, do you have a reference?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:52 PM on 06/21/2008
- pupbayer I'm a Fan of pupbayer 23 fans permalink

He said it in an interview this month with Fortune Magazine. I guess he figured none of his supporters read Fortune Magazine and you'd never notice. If you'll notice, he said he was guilty of overstating his opposition to NAFTA so I'm sure that makes it OK.


WASHINGTON (Fortune) -- The general campaign is on, independent voters are up for grabs, and Barack Obama is toning down his populist rhetoric - at least when it comes to free trade.

In an interview with Fortune to be featured in the magazine's upcoming issue, the presumptive Democratic nominee backed off his harshest attacks on the free trade agreement and indicated he didn't want to unilaterally reopen negotiations on NAFTA.

"Sometimes during campaigns the rhetoric gets overheated and amplified," he conceded, after I reminded him that he had called NAFTA "devastating" and "a big mistake," despite nonpartisan studies concluding that the trade zone has had a mild, positive effect on the U.S. economy.

Does that mean his rhetoric was overheated and amplified? "Politicians are always guilty of that, and I don't exempt myself," he answered.

Obama says he believes in "opening up a dialogue" with trading partners Canada and Mexico "and figuring to how we can make this work for all people."

You can read the rest online.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:22 PM on 06/21/2008

Obama did except public financing. I am the public and I finance his campaign everytime I donate! I have never agreed with public financing. My tax dollars shouldn't go to a candidate I don't agree with, there is nothing democratic about that.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:20 PM on 06/21/2008
- Probus I'm a Fan of Probus 9 fans permalink
photo

It doesn't take long to write an amendment to a bill. He can get his legislative staff to do that. Obama has never said that NAFTA was a good thing. He has chosen to bypass public financing which is the right thing to do.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:34 PM on 06/21/2008
- onenation I'm a Fan of onenation 4 fans permalink

Can someone CHANGE the banner teaser title??? Misleading would be a complement

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:13 PM on 06/21/2008
- Forsetti I'm a Fan of Forsetti 66 fans permalink
photo

The headline is, was and always has been misleading. It doesn't even take a careful reading of the article to see that Obama is against what almost every single poster on this thread is against; immunity for the telecoms. If this headline would of been: "Obama Unhappy With Telecom Provision" would there have been this type of response? Doubtful.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:20 PM on 06/21/2008
- pupbayer I'm a Fan of pupbayer 23 fans permalink

But he's still going to vote FOR it. That's the point. Immunity is not a small issue in this. It is THE issue in this.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:25 PM on 06/21/2008

"The headline is, was and always has been misleading."

By suggesting a revised headline, "Obama Unhappy With Telecom Provision", you have indicated that your revision would be more accurate than "Obama Backs Bill Giving Immunity To Telecoms".

How about:
"Obama Supporters Claim that He is Unhappy With Telecom Provision That He Will Vote For"

Or if that is too long:
"Obama Claims to be Unhappy With Telecom Provision That He Will Vote For"

Or:
"Obama Claims to be Unhappy With Telecom Provision That He Supports"

Or, shorter still:
"Obama Backs Bill Giving Immunity To Telecoms".

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:47 PM on 06/21/2008
- Chillinout I'm a Fan of Chillinout 125 fans permalink
photo

If you really want to stop this, email and call your Senators and tell them that they need to kill this bill. Gently remind them that their JOB is to uphold the Constitution and the laws of this land.

Also write to Senator Obama and tell him the same thing. Put "no to FISA" in the subject line so he will know your sentiments without having to read the email. (I sent an email to him and got one back that said they were currently receiving about 1000 emails a day. So by the time they get around to reading it, it is going to be way too late).

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:50 PM on 06/21/2008
- Ping I'm a Fan of Ping 63 fans permalink


This comment is pending approval and won't be displayed until it is approved.

Predictably my trail lawyers post was censored by Huffpo.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:35 PM on 06/21/2008
- nunzia I'm a Fan of nunzia 31 fans permalink

Are you claiming to be a trial lawyer?
Ain't gonna fly after your willingness to accept warrantless search.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:10 PM on 06/21/2008
- Ping I'm a Fan of Ping 63 fans permalink


This comment is pending approval and won't be displayed until it is approved.

Every time you hit a sobriety checkpoint or get pulled over by a cop, you are being subject to a warrant less search. It's time for you to open your eyes and see what the rest of us have been seeing for years.

The way I see it, if the telecoms were sued and lost, they would just pass that cost on to you and me.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:41 PM on 06/21/2008
- lizr I'm a Fan of lizr 221 fans permalink
photo

shouldnt this HEADLINE be changed now that there is another one which explains that he plans to strip the retroactive immunity piece of the bill?

It's in another Huffpo article today.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:16 PM on 06/21/2008
- Forsetti I'm a Fan of Forsetti 66 fans permalink
photo

He says that he wants the immunity provision stripped from the bill in this article. The headline is misleading and by a lot of the comments it was effective.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:27 PM on 06/21/2008
- tommybones I'm a Fan of tommybones 18 fans permalink
photo

Actions speak louder than words. Let's stop the cycle of focusing merely on the words of our "leadership" and look more at the actions. He can kill this bill without too much trouble, should he choose to take that stance.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:38 PM on 06/21/2008
- tommybones I'm a Fan of tommybones 18 fans permalink
photo

Really? He plans to strip the bill? Or he plans to put on a dog-and-pony show that ultimately fails so he can fool gullible voters into thinking he "tried"? Call me when he actually succeeds in stripping the bill of immunity. I'll be the one NOT holding my breath...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:30 PM on 06/21/2008
- lizr I'm a Fan of lizr 221 fans permalink
photo

And do you know so little about government that you think that he alone can stop the bill?

Time to go back to HS CIvics...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:47 PM on 06/21/2008

This is part of the letter I sent to Bill Burton (bburton@b­arackobama­.com)

Dear Mr. Burton,

I do not believe that Senator Obama thinks voting for this bill is the right thing to do, but rather, that it is the politically smart thing to do. As a Constitutional Law professor, Senator Obama knows that this bill is an evisceration of the Fourth Amendment.


I am not an innocent. I have never believed that Senator Obama was beyond the lure of political necessity. At most I hoped that under the administration of a President Obama, we as a country would begin an incremental movement back toward the right path. The path of good government and constitutional principle. I prayed that we could stop using fear as the motivation for everything we do, and replace it with hope. I thought that we might begin again to practice our “civil religion” under the United States Constitution, the only religion that all Americans should be expected to profess.


There is still time for Senator Obama to reverse himself on this issue. Please tell him to not go down the path of false compromise by abandoning our fundamental rights. I don’t want to feel fooled again and to find out that a man whom I took to be a good man, and a man who just might bring us needed change, is just another politician.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:01 PM on 06/21/2008
- olivia I'm a Fan of olivia 96 fans permalink

As only one Senator there is a limit to what Obama can do.

I do expect him to try - his hardest, and not just make a fine symbolic gesture.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:50 PM on 06/21/2008
- tommybones I'm a Fan of tommybones 18 fans permalink
photo

Newsflash: the "one senator" happens to be the Democratic nominee for President and the absolute future and current face of the party. A filibuster led by Obama would fail? In a Democratic led Congress? Just to protect telecommunications companies? Is this your opinion????

Demand more.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:36 PM on 06/21/2008
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next › Last » (61 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect