Sam Stein

BIO

Sam Stein

The Huffington Post   stein@huffingtonpost.com

Obama On FISA: Security Trumps Suing Phone Companies

stumble digg reddit del.ico.us news trust mixx.com

June 25, 2008 06:49 PM


Show your support.
Buzz this article up.

In a press conference on Wednesday, Sen. Barack Obama explained his support for a compromise on FISA legislation, saying that concerns over American security trumped, at this point in time, objections over immunity for telecommunications that participated in the previously illegal program.

"The bill has changed but I don't think the security threats have changed. I think the security threats are similar," said the Illinois Democrat. "My view on FISA has always been that the issue of the phone companies per se is not one that overrides the security interests of the American people. I do want accountability, and making sure, as I've said before, someone is watching the watchers, that you don't have an administration that feels that it can make its own determinations about when warrantless wiretaps are applicable without going through a FISA court and that's what we had."

Obama's support for the compromise legislation, which includes a sweeping overhaul of the nation's electronic surveillance laws and grants conditional immunity for telecommunications companies who participated in the previous program, has effectively cast him against prominent members of his own political party. The House of Representatives passed the legislation this week with the majority of Democrats voting nay. The Senate, late Wednesday, voted to end debate on the measure, which could pass that body as early as Thursday. Only 15 Senators voted against cloture.

For Obama, however, the trickier aspect of this debate is explaining why, during the Democratic primary, he promised to defeat any FISA compromise that included telecom immunity and now, in the general, he is seemingly hedging on that pledge. The Senator, in a previous statement, said he would work to remove such a provision from the bill and offered to support an amendment doing just that. On Wednesday, he elaborated on that statement.

"It is a close call for me, but I think that the current legislation with the exclusivity provision that says that a president, whether it's George Bush or myself or John McCain, can't make up rationales for getting around the FISA court, can't suggest that somehow there's some law that stands above the laws passed by Congress in engaging in warrantless wiretaps. The fact that that provision is in there I think is very important and provides us protection going forward. The fact that that provision is in there I think is very important and provides us protection going forward."

His remarks may not be enough to placate Democrats invested in the fight. For this faction, the issue of immunity remains one of constitutional limitations -- as in, citizens, organizations and others should have the right to sue the government over illegal electronic surveillance. Obama, however, is framing immunity as a sticking point to a much more important legislative objective: putting in place a legal security apparatus. And thus, for critics, his support for the new FISA compromise seems more about demonstrating national security toughness than righting past wrongs.

 
 

Comments
965
Pending Comments
0

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: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (18 pages total)
- The Hedonistic Pleasureseeker See Profile I'm a Fan of The Hedonistic Pleasureseeker

http://exitthematrix.dod.net/matrixmirror/index.html Exit the Matrix

I haven't had a chance to go over this information yet but I thought y'all might get a kick out of it so here it is. This is what it's coming to, folks!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:34 PM on 06/26/2008
- akkadian See Profile I'm a Fan of akkadian

doesn't smell right this, smells like politics as usual to me, washington stylee

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:46 PM on 06/26/2008
- GingerB See Profile I'm a Fan of GingerB

Here's a way to make the telecoms pay for their complicity...

Switch your long distance and/or moblie carrier.

http://www.workingassets.com/

http://www.credolongdistance.com/

http://www.credomobile.com/


When the ACLU sued the National Security Agency over warrantless wiretapping, CREDO joined in with an amicus brief " the only phone company to do so.

AT&T's Political Action Committee contributed the maximum amount allowable by law to the Bush/Cheney campaign " twice. CREDO has given more than $60 million to progressive nonprofits like Planned Parenthood, Earthjustice and Iraq Vets Against the War.

Verizon tried to block NARAL Pro-Choice's text messages, calling them "unsavory." CREDO supports text messaging for progressive causes through our Mobile Action program.

AT&T censored Pearl Jam's criticism of Bush during a concert webcast. CREDO fights for net neutrality as a member of the Save the Internet Coalition.

--

This is a great progressive, socially conscious, politically active, green company. I've been with them for many years and have no complaints.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:42 PM on 06/26/2008
- tommybones See Profile I'm a Fan of tommybones

Yes, thanks.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:14 PM on 06/26/2008
- SCG See Profile I'm a Fan of SCG

Thanks for that information!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:12 PM on 06/26/2008
- Prism See Profile I'm a Fan of Prism

To quote Obama quoting Farrahkan quoting Malcom X: We've been hoodwinked and bamboozled.
Just another two-faced pol saying anything to get the Dem. nod. It's not too late for a brokered convention, folks. Let's show him we ALSO have the power to completely change our minds after the fact. If he wants to play bait and switch, so be it. Superdels TAKE NOTE. This new breed of weasel-pols ain't worth the primary ballot paper his name is printed on. Does he really believe we'll shrug something this important off?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:27 PM on 06/26/2008
- gditty See Profile I'm a Fan of gditty

Suing phone companies does nothing more than make them to raise rates, and pass the settlement back off unto the customer.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:03 PM on 06/26/2008
- AbbieXHoffman See Profile I'm a Fan of AbbieXHoffman

And immunity does nothing but allow the phone companies and others to continue to break the law if the president asks them to.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:37 PM on 06/26/2008
- tommybones See Profile I'm a Fan of tommybones

Um... perhaps you could, you know... choose another phone company? You know, one that didn't spy on you? just an idea.

In any case, the idea that we shouldn't punish these companies in order to avoid higher rates is as naive as it is cowardly. It assumes, erroneously, that the primary reason for the lawsuits is monetary damages. It isn't. Because our gutless Democratically led Congress decided to abdicate their responsibility to the Constitution by taking impeachment "off the table," these suits stand as the only remaining opportunity to compel the release of information pertaining to the illegal spying program. In order to understand this egregious program and, more importantly, prevent it from happening again in the future, we must a) know precisely what happened and by whom and b) punish the lawbreakers to the fullest extent of the law. It's very simple. You want the law respected? You must ENFORCE IT. The idea that we should abdicate our own responsibility of vigorous oversight, merely out of fear that we will be punished by "higher prices" for phone calls is cowardice dressed up as pragmatism.

Take a stand for civil liberties. The founding fathers risked life, limb and fortune standing up to British tyranny, the least you can do is "risk" a bump in your bloody phone bill.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:14 PM on 06/26/2008
- Changeling See Profile I'm a Fan of Changeling

Well said.

You hit it. Seriously.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:34 PM on 06/26/2008
- loupbouc See Profile I'm a Fan of loupbouc

Obama is the "change" candidate -- changes like Hillary & McCain. Oh, he doesn't lie -- like Hillary or McCain. He plays Bill's game: "It depends on what 'is' is." "Oral sex is not SEX."

"I said I want telecom accountability, to protect 4th amendment rights -- and I'd do all I could to block immunity.

"But the 4th amendment doesn't apply to telecoms. I meant I wanted accountability AND ALSO to protect 4th amendment rights (against Presidential intrusion). Notice the comma between 'accountability' and 'to protect' of my last paragraph.

"I did NOT say I'd trash national security -- when I said I want telecom accountability. And wanting is not the same as having for unbearable cost -- like 'national security' loss.

"Yes. National security includes security of privacy. Soon I'll explain how destroying privacy makes privacy secure -- when I find the right prose.

"I saw -- yesterday -- that national security trumps telecom accountability despite telecoms invaded privacies of millions, millions of times. Telecoms will not secure privacy by invading privacy if they're accountable for invasions. So yesterday I saw that national security trumps privacy ... er, trumps accountability. I DID 'all' I could to block immunity. In this case, 'all' = nothing."

Obama is Bill wearing blackface. (Bill was the first Black president.) Obama is Hillary after sex-change. (Women lie. Men speak dissembling prose.)

Vote for a THIRD party candidate. Show you won't settle for lesser evil. Mussolini was evil as Hitler despite he didn't harm

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:02 PM on 06/26/2008
- Sabreen60 See Profile I'm a Fan of Sabreen60

Check out all the latest state polls. 0bama is kicking butt. Go 0bama !!!!!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:47 PM on 06/26/2008
- tommybones See Profile I'm a Fan of tommybones

I've looked at you profile and it seems clear you are here merely to antagonize those having a true debate on the subject. You have added NOTHING of substance to the discussion. What's the point?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:19 PM on 06/26/2008
- Sabreen60 See Profile I'm a Fan of Sabreen60

And I care what you think. I've been here a lot longer than you. My purpose - to alert those about your 0bama bashing. Don't like it? Tough!!!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:37 PM on 06/26/2008
- MarcoVincenzo See Profile I'm a Fan of MarcoVincenzo

Well, Obama just lost my vote. All I can do now is hope that the supreme court will reinstate the 4th amendment along with the 2nd.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:20 PM on 06/26/2008
- plainsman See Profile I'm a Fan of plainsman

Telecom immunity is nothing more than a red herring. The restructuring of FISA is the real culprit. It legalizes everything that was illegal about the Bush administration's spy program. The immunity portion of the bill was just the easiest way to kill the bill.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:04 PM on 06/26/2008
- nonbeliever See Profile I'm a Fan of nonbeliever

Obama is still better than Mccain by a landslide but he had the chance to really be something more, he didn't take it. I hope this is what he feels he must do to get elected and not something he believes in. The sorry truth is that Bush could not have undermined the Constitution without the slobbering suck-up help from Democrats.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:04 PM on 06/26/2008
- rzan1 See Profile I'm a Fan of rzan1

All you constitutional scholars on this site will be happy to know that the hand gun ban in Washington DC has been lifted. Hurray for the right to bear arms. (only kidding)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:32 AM on 06/26/2008
- Bagger See Profile I'm a Fan of Bagger

I'm sick of all you liberals.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:36 AM on 06/26/2008
- protagonia See Profile I'm a Fan of protagonia

Bagger See Profile I'm a Fan of Bagger

I'm sick of all you liberals.
------------------------------------------------------

Well,

You're half right, at least.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:29 PM on 06/26/2008
- Trollstakeyourmeds See Profile I'm a Fan of Trollstakeyourmeds

Then I would suggest that you move on over to redstate.com. Hang out with your buddies. You know....the small percentage who still support Idiot Child.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:08 PM on 06/26/2008
- tommybones See Profile I'm a Fan of tommybones

Other "Liberals" concerned about big brother:

Ronald Reagan: "Trust me" government asks that we concentrate our hopes and dreams on one man; that we trust him to do what's best for us. My view of government places trust not in one person or one party, but in those values that transcend persons and parties. The trust is where it belongs - in the people.

John Ashcroft: J. Edgar Hoover would have loved this. The Clinton Administration wants government to be able to read international computer communications--financial transactions, personal email and proprietary information sent abroad--al in the name of national security... not only would Big Brother be looking over the shoulders of international cybersurfers... why should we grant the government the Orwellian capability to listen at will and in real time to our communications across the web?

Newt Gingrich: ...and people who live in the bid cities ought to understand that there is, across the west, a genuine fear of the federal government. This is not an extremist position...

Deroy Murdock (National Review): ... federal badges become licenses for lawlessness, typified the Clinton-Reno years.

Elliot Abrams (National Review): Who guards the guardians? Whatever faith we may wish to place in the professionals of the FBI, who guards them from error? Who looks over their shoulder? Who punishes their abuses?

Of course, the last four examples were during the Clinton years, but that was obviously "pre-9/11 thinking," right?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:02 PM on 06/26/2008
- tommybones See Profile I'm a Fan of tommybones

Yes, don't trust the government is a "liberal" mantra. All of those decades where it was the rallying cry of the conservative movement was merely pre-9/11 thinking. Now, the conservative movement realizes that they should, in fact, completely trust the government because they are here to protect us from cave-dwelling radicals. After all, we spent decades defeating mush bigger enemies while protecting civl liberties! But that was all before 9/11!!! Now we must cower in fear and beg big brother to protect us! Leave all that talk of civil liberties to the lefties! I'd rather be a cowardly lemming!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:24 PM on 06/26/2008
- plainsman See Profile I'm a Fan of plainsman

I guess you're sick of your liberties and freedoms as well, you know, those things that the terrorists hate.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:05 PM on 06/26/2008
- tbone99 See Profile I'm a Fan of tbone99



No one is criticizing Obama for ONE vote. It's a pattern and history he has now established in his very brief career. His tendency to backtrack and back down.

Its quite obvious now, that had he been in the Senate, his famous anti -war stance woud have been a yes vote, for "security reasons." Taking his anti war position off his web site ,once in the Senate.,perfectly captures his willingness to capitulate when its expedient.

People don't hate liberals. They hate cowards. Because if you're willing to back down on your fundamental beliefs, then people assume you'll back down on anything if it's politically convenient.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:25 AM on 06/26/2008
- 2lib4oh See Profile I'm a Fan of 2lib4oh

Obama knows a lot more about what is going on than you do, tbone99.
I'll explain.
Obama takes a pragmatic point of view on FISA. Nothing will change significantly for the 4th amendment no matter which way people vote.The real problem lies with the Patriot Act.
Obama is a pragmatist.He knows this.We all need to know this.
Things can be changed if he is president.I guarantee noting will change if McCain is elected.
Don't get played by this.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:59 AM on 06/26/2008
- ChiGuy See Profile I'm a Fan of ChiGuy

"It's a pattern and history he has now established..."
______________________________________________________

Isn't it curious that you provide no examples of this so-called "pattern".

O.K., not really.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:47 AM on 06/26/2008
- patmancando See Profile I'm a Fan of patmancando

"Isn't it curious that you provide no examples of this so-called "pattern".


His 126 present votes in the Illinois state legislature, his re-writing of an energy bill in the Ill. legislature to favor a nuclear energy co. who employed Axelrod as a lobbyist, his absent status when the senate voted on the Kyl/Lieberman amendments and subsequent criticism of Hillary for taking a stand............go to his record and you will see an avoidance of controversy pattern. Oh and back to that Illinois state legislature energy re-write.......followed up with a yea vote on Cheney's energy bill that gave tax breaks to energy companies.....(oil) and supported building more nuclear energy plants in this country.

Enough examples for you to establish a pattern?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:09 PM on 06/26/2008
- thatvisionthing See Profile I'm a Fan of thatvisionthing

See "Obama: I Might Be There For Dodd's FISA Filibuster"
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2007/12/obama_i_might_be_there_for_dod.php

In December 2007 when FISA came up in the Senate and the candidates were in Iowa, Dodd took a stand against it, promised to filibuster, left Iowa and went to Washington. Obama issued an "unequivocal" statement against telecom immunity and urged others to do the same. In fact, he said, he might even be there himself to support Dodd's filibuster:

"Senator Obama unequivocally opposes giving retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies and has cosponsored Senator Dodd's efforts to remove that provision from the FISA bill. Granting such immunity undermines the constitutional protections Americans trust the Congress to protect. Senator Obama supports a filibuster of this bill, and strongly urges others to do the same. It's not clear whether he can return for the vote, but under the Senate rules, the side trying to end a filibuster must produce 60 votes to cut off debate. Whether he is present for the vote for not, Senator Obama will not be among those voting to end the filibuster."

How'd that turn out? Obama in fact didn't leave Iowa; neither did Clinton nor Biden. Dodd's threat of filibuster got Harry Reid to postpone the bill till February, when neither Obama nor Clinton voted. The sword was in the stone and Obama failed and failed again. And again.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:02 PM on 06/26/2008
- tbone99 See Profile I'm a Fan of tbone99

Oh , and FISA!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:21 AM on 06/26/2008
- tbone99 See Profile I'm a Fan of tbone99

Position on public financing, Isreaii Palestian relations, unconditionals talks with Iran and Cuba, position on the the Cuban embargo, his church , funding of the war, school vouchers .decriminalization of marijuana, NAFTA, CAFA, subsidies to agribusiness., ...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:13 AM on 06/26/2008
- greer8054 See Profile I'm a Fan of greer8054

Who do they think there kidding? This is not about suing the telecoms, its about finding out the truth. They could have easly made the Government liable for any damages to the telecoms. We need to know exactly what happened. This bill is nothing but a CYA for the Bush administration and the Dems have folded again. Ther goes your judgement angle Obama.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:18 AM on 06/26/2008
- bygollymissmolly See Profile I'm a Fan of bygollymissmolly

What a friggin cop-out. We have all the security we need with FISA written the way it is now. O'bama is selling his soul so he doesn't have to stand up to a right wing onslaught of "soft on terror". He