WEAK, DEFENSIVE, PATHETIC DEMOCRATS CAVING TO BUSH'S DEMANDS FOR IMMUNITY FOR CORPORATE CRIMINALS IN SPYING BILL

Are the Senate Democrats indeed "weak, defensive and pathetic" or just eager to stay on the telecom gravy train? How about both. Perhaps you read the accounts in today's NY Times or Washington Post about how the bill being reported out of the Senate Intelligence Committee, chaired by  hopelessly corrupt insider Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), gives the big corporate telecoms "immunity for any role they played in the National Security Agency’s domestic eavesdropping program approved by President Bush after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks." According to the Times' story, for example, "Senators this week began reviewing classified documents related to the participation of the telephone carriers in the security agency program and came away from that early review convinced that the companies had “acted in good faith” in cooperating with what they believed was a legal and presidentially authorized program and that they should not be punished through civil litigation for their roles."

Yet the reporter doesn't think it's relevant to mention that the main lawbreakers who are desperate to get their top executive retroactive immunity, AT&T and Verizon, have been showering these very same senators with massive bribes. AT&T has pumped $38 million in "campaign contributions" into these crooked pols and Verizon has sent them $15.5 million. That is buying access-- and then some. And these folks certainly have figured out who to target with their legalized bribes. AT&T gave Bush $286,420 and Verizon gave him $145,980. And the two companies were quite generous to the two senators who worked out the deal, Rockefeller and ranking minority crook on the committee, Kit Bond (R-MO). AT&T gave Rockefeller $26,500 and Verizon gave him $20,800, while AT&T gave Bond $50,500 and Verizon gave him $8,000. They legislate that this bribery to themselves is legal and then they give retroactive immunity to the people who doled out the bribes when they commit grave crimes. What a system!

Disclosure of the deal followed a decision by House Democratic leaders to pull a competing version of the measure from the floor because they lacked the votes to prevail over Republican opponents and GOP parliamentary maneuvers.

The collapse marked the first time since Democrats took control of the chamber that a major bill was withdrawn from consideration before a scheduled vote. It was a victory for President Bush, whose aides lobbied heavily against the Democrats' bill, and an embarrassment for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who had pushed for the measure's passage.

The draft Senate bill has the support of the intelligence committee's chairman, John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), and Bush's director of national intelligence, Mike McConnell. It will include full immunity for those companies that can demonstrate to a court that they acted pursuant to a legal directive in helping the government with surveillance in the United States.

Such a demonstration, which the bill says could be made in secret, 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. Bush had repeatedly threatened to veto any legislation that lacked this provision.

The Senate bill lets the corporate criminals go scott free AND it allows Bush Regime lackeys who also broke the law by initiating and carrying out all the illegal surveillance to avoid future prosecution. So who will bring charges against the bribe-taking senators who are selling out the Constitution for campaign donations?

The Times further reported that "the episode revealed, once again, fault lines within the Democratic Party over how to tackle national security questions without appearing 'soft' on terrorism in the face of Republican criticism. Indeed, Republican leaders immediately praised their ability to block the N.S.A. measure as a sign of the Democrats' weakness on that issue. Representative Heather A. Wilson, Republican of New Mexico, said Speaker Nancy Pelosi 'underestimated the intelligence of the American people and the bipartisan majority in the Congress to understand what matters most: preventing another terrorist attack.'"

At least two senators, Chris Dodd and Russ Feingold, are not falling for the baseless Republican Party talking points. Each fully understands the tragedy inherent in this deal the Democrats have made with the Devil. Dodd:

"While the President may think that it's right to offer immunity to those who break the law and violate the right to privacy of thousands of law-abiding Americans, I want to assure him it is not a value we have in common and I hope the same can be said of my fellow Democrats in the Senate.

"For too long we have failed to respect the rule of law and failed to protect our fundamental civil liberties. I will do what I can to see to it that no telecommunications giant that was complicit in this Administration's assault on the Constitution is given a get-out-of-jail-free card."

Feingold:

“As a member of the SSCI, I will strongly oppose any FISA legislation that fails to protect the rights of law-abiding Americans, overseas and here at home.  When the Committee considers this legislation today, I will also fight to reject immunity for anyone alleged to have cooperated with the Administration’s illegal warrantless wiretapping program. The documents made available by the White House for the first time this week only further demonstrate that the program was illegal and that there is no basis for granting retroactive immunity to those who allegedly cooperated. The one silver lining of the flawed FISA bill passed in August was that it had a 6-month expiration date.  It would be shameful to miss this opportunity to fix the law.  It is time for Congress to stand up for the rights of Americans and to defend the Constitution and the rule of law.”

Yep, any corporate media firms who were worried that the "socialistic" Democrats would be less kind to them than the Republicans they already had in their pockets, were proven completely wrong. The Democrats have been as amiable to their greed and avarice as the GOP has.




TWO UPDATES

First off, Senator Dodd, fearlessly-- which is more than we can say for most of his craven colleagues-- is putting a hold on the FISA bill. And he's doing it specifically because it grants retroactive immunity to telephone companies for the role they played in the Bush Regime's warrantless eavesdropping program.

Second, the Mehlman Group has finished polling on how average Americans feel about Bush's illegal survelliance. Democratic senators pay attention.

Should The U.S. Gov't Have To Get A Warrant From A Court Before Wiretapping The Conversations That U.S. Citizens Have With People In Other Countries?

Yes     61%
No      35

How Important Is It For Congress To Take Action Now To Require The Gov't To Get A Warrant Before Wiretapping Int'l Phone Calls And Emails Of U.S. Citizens?


Very/somewhat important.    75% (57% of Republicans)
Not too/not important.   22   (39% of Republicans)


Bush Handling Terrorism

Excellent/good  41%  
Fair/poor       56  

Bush Handling Warrantless Wiretaps

Excellent/good  35%
Fair/poor       50


Which Of The Following Statements Do You Support?
Congress Should Give The Phone Companies Amnesty
From Legal Action Against Those Companies For
Selling Customers' Records To The Gov't.            31%
 
Citizens Who Believe Their Rights Have Been
Violated Should Be Free To Take Legal Action
Against Those Phone Companies And Let The
Courts Decide The Outcome.                          59


Are Each Of The Following Statements A Very Convincing Reason To
Vote Against A Member Of Congress?
The MoC voted to cut education funding                  51%
The MoC voted to cut healthcare for kids                48
The MoC voted to give retroactive amnesty to telecoms
  for laws they have broken by selling private phone
  records of U.S. citizens to the gov't                 35
The MoC voted to keep the U.S. troops in Iraq           34
The MoC voted to make it harder to stop terrorism by
  requiring the gov't to get a warrant every time
  they wanted to wiretap the phone of an American
  they thought might be helping the terrorists          28