House votes 213-197 to reject retroactive telecom immunity

[RonPaulVolunteer]

The U.S. House of Representatives on Friday narrowly approved an electronic surveillance expansion without immunization for any telecommunications companies that illegally opened their networks to intelligence agencies.

The 213-197 split, with most Democrats voting in favor of the bill (PDF) and most Republicans opposing it, hardly means that the political tussle over retroactive immunity is over. It now shifts to the Senate, where Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat, said he was "encouraged" to see the House vote.

But the primary obstacle remains President Bush, who has threatened a veto. The White House circulated a statement after the vote calling it a "a significant step backward in defending our country against terrorism" that was "not a serious effort to move the legislative process forward."

Another section that the Republicans (haha, except our Ron Paul I bet ya!) dislike is this, which I'll excerpt:


ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMISSION.--There is established in the legislative branch a commission to be known as the "Commission on Warrantless Electronic Surveillance Activities"

The Commission shall ascertain, evaluate, and report upon the facts and circumstances relating to electronic surveillance activities conducted without a warrant between September 11, 2001 and January 17, 2007 (and shall) evaluate the lawfulness of such activities.

Source: http://www.news.com/8301-13578_3-9894474-38.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-5

Hooray to the Democrats!! EEEeeek. Did I really just say that?!?!

[boberino]

12 Democrats voted no.
All Republicans voting, voted no.

[boberino]

Also, depending on who would be appointed to the commission, in regards to the excerpt, that could be good for either side and end up becoming defacto immunity.

[Ex Post Facto]

This is all part of another plan. Impeachment will begin shortly. With Bush attacking Democrats outright, Democrats risk creditability issues if they don't impeach soon. My thinking on this is that the more Bush veto's legislation, the more congress appears inept-the more Bush puts corporations before citizens the more ammo they have for impeachment.

[-lotus-]

Democrats siding with the law and people? hang on i have to go build a snowman in hell...brb

[torchbearer]

Democrats siding with the law and people? hang on i have to go build a snowman in hell...brb

They aren't voting for the people, they are voting against the president. there is a difference.
If John Kerry was in office, the votes would be the other way around. THat is how effed up our two party system is... its about power and control, not the people's work.

[Kade]

Democrats siding with the law and people? hang on i have to go build a snowman in hell...brb

Could we stop this shit? Please? You have no idea what you are talking about.

[link88]

I think Ron Paul voted yes

[phixion]

Bush will veto this - so why the heck are people even bothering to show up and vote at all?

Pete

[OptionsTrader]

Instead of establishing a money wasting commission, I would prefer these politicains would just follow the constitution and stop with this nonsense.

[Shed]

I think Ron Paul voted yes

Actually he voted Nay.

[link88]

Actually he voted Nay.

oh..i went by what this site has posted

http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=296

under Budget Spending and Taxes..
maybe I looked at the wrong thing? :p

[runderwo]

I think Ron Paul voted yes

He voted 'no', because FISA gives the government more than enough foreign surveillance power already, so there is no reason to expand it, with or without immunity.

[link88]

yea, my mistake :(

[Hook]

So the businesses were simply complying with official looking requests from the Feds with enormous pressure put on them. What would you do if some NSA spooks showed up at your door threatening your family if you didn't help them.

Anyway, the bill should remove immunity from the federal agencies that asked the telecoms to help them. If a few high-level NSA managers got sent to prison, I bet it would put a real dent in the warantless wiretappings.

[kpitcher]

So the businesses were simply complying with official looking requests from the Feds with enormous pressure put on them. What would you do if some NSA spooks showed up at your door threatening your family if you didn't help them.

Actually Qwest stood up to them and told them to bugger off. In response, they lost part of a multi billion dollar contract with the DoD. 1 baby bell out of all the rest, really sad. The rest should be sued for buckling.

These are not small companies, these are companies worth billions and have a whole legal department to identify what is and isn't illegal. Telco law is twisted and convoluted enough - they do have good legal teams. For not listening to legal the CEO s should also be held liable. Sadly by time the blame game is through, Bush + Co will be out of office and out of reach of prosecution.

[colecrowe]

Must Watch (about fisa & immunity):
Keith Olbermann Special Comment *MR BUSH YOU ARE A FASCIST!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEcBjpsP1bU

[Kludge]

Actually Qwest stood up to them and told them to bugger off. In response, they lost part of a multi billion dollar contract with the DoD. 1 baby bell out of all the rest, really sad. The rest should be sued for buckling.

These are not small companies, these are companies worth billions and have a whole legal department to identify what is and isn't illegal. Telco law is twisted and convoluted enough - they do have good legal teams. For not listening to legal the CEO s should also be held liable. Sadly by time the blame game is through, Bush + Co will be out of office and out of reach of prosecution.

Mixed economy in practice! wOOt'Merica!Government offers contracts, offend them and you lose them. They're out for self-profit, as they should be. Business and government only mix when enslavement is openly accepted. Most Americans still deny their enslavement.

[Hook]

Actually Qwest stood up to them and told them to bugger off. In response, they lost part of a multi billion dollar contract with the DoD. 1 baby bell out of all the rest, really sad. The rest should be sued for buckling.

These are not small companies, these are companies worth billions and have a whole legal department to identify what is and isn't illegal. Telco law is twisted and convoluted enough - they do have good legal teams. For not listening to legal the CEO s should also be held liable. Sadly by time the blame game is through, Bush + Co will be out of office and out of reach of prosecution.

That is true, and the CEO that told them to bugger off is now in jail from "unrelated" charges.

I still asert that the Federal employees that pulled this off should hold the majority of the responsibility and punishment.

EDIT: Nacchio hasn't been sent to his 6 year prison conviction yet. "As of October 15, 2007 he was free on bail, appealing his conviction on the basis that the U.S. government retaliated against Qwest for his refusal to give customer data to the National Security Agency."