JULY 8, 2008, Senate to VOTE

puremagicpuremagic Posts: 1,907
edited July 2008 in A Moving Train
Should telecommunication companies receive immunity for their illegal wiretapping? On July 8, 2008, the Senate will decide whether or not these activities are illegal or whether these telecommunication companies will have their pass crimes forgiven and be protected in the future under Amendment to the FISA Act.

====================

Reid Says Senate Will Vote On FISA Measure After Recess

Fri. Jun 27, 2008

Unable to clear procedural hurdles, the Senate will hold off voting on legislation revising the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act until after the Independence Day recess, Senate Majority Leader Reid said late Thursday.

Reid said the Senate would vote on amendments to the FISA bill July 8, including one to strip a provision in the bill giving telecommunications companies legal protection for participating in the National Security Agency’s warrantless electronic surveillance program.

The Bush administration threatened Thursday to veto the bill if the Senate amends it.

In a letter to Reid, Attorney General Mukasey and Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell said the bill is “a carefully crafted, bipartisan compromise negotiated in good faith by both sides over the course of several months. “Accordingly, if any amendment that would jeopardize the authorities and protections contained in this bipartisan compromise were to succeed, we, as well as the president’s other senior advisors, will recommend that he veto the bill.”

Although the bill is expected to pass, the Senate was unable to finish work on it before the recess due to objections by Democratic senators who oppose shielding the telecoms from lawsuits.

Sens. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., and Russell Feingold, D-Wis., two of the most ardent opponents of the bill, have offered an amendment that would strike a provision requiring a federal district court to dismiss lawsuits against the companies if they show that they received written directives from the administration that the warrantless surveillance program was legal and authorized by the president.

Critics point out that such directives were given to the telecoms, which means dozens of lawsuits against them are sure to be dismissed.

Reid said an amendment from Senate Judiciary ranking member Arlen Specter will be considered. It would require district courts to determine the constitutionality of the administration’s warrantless surveillance program before granting immunity to companies.

The Senate will vote on a third amendment, offered by Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., Reid said. It would stay pending cases against the telecoms and delay the effective date of any immunity provisions until 90 days after Congress received a report from the inspectors general of the intelligence agencies on the warrantless surveillance program.
SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1

Comments

  • http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080709/ap_on_bi_ge/terrorist_surveillance

    Well, it passed....Way to go for vanishing personal liberties and rights!
  • Urban HikerUrban Hiker Posts: 1,312
    Fuckers :mad:
    Walking can be a real trip
    ***********************
    "We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
    ***********************
    Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
  • puremagicpuremagic Posts: 1,907
    Thanks for the update. What a sad, sad, day to see so many of our elected representatives both democrats and republicans fail America.
    SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
  • Urban HikerUrban Hiker Posts: 1,312
    Walking can be a real trip
    ***********************
    "We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
    ***********************
    Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
  • blackredyellowblackredyellow Posts: 5,889
    My whole life
    was like a picture
    of a sunny day
    “We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
    ― Abraham Lincoln
  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOY8p40QfqA


    *for those who might not be able to youtube*

    Good morning.

    This is Ralph Nader.

    Today is Wednesday July 9, 2008.

    And I'm listening now to the debate on the Senate floor over legislation that will give President Bush new warrantless eavesdropping powers.

    The bill will also grant immunity to telecom companies for cooperating with

    Mr. Bush in his illegal warrantless wiretapping on Americans - on any one of you.

    We were taught as young children that in our democracy, under our system of justice, nobody is above the law - nobody.

    But this bill puts the President and the telecom companies above the law.

    It also conveniently assures a coverup of Mr. Bush's past crimes in this area - of wiretapping and surveillance.

    On the Senate floor, Senator Feingold has just warned his colleagues that the Senate "will regret that we passed this legislation.

    As my home state Senator, Christopher Dodd, said:
    "If we pass this legislation, the Senate will ratify a domestic spying regime that has already concentrated far too much unaccountable power in the President's hands and will place the telecommunications companies above the law.

    What does it say that Senators Dodd, Feingold, Harry Reid, and Patrick Leahy have led the valiant fight against this bill, but Senator Obama has said he will vote for it?

    Again, this bill gives the President vast new warrantless eavesdropping powers and allows the government - for the first time ever - to tap into

    America's telecommunications networks with no judicial warrant requirement.

    President Bush and the Democrats who support him argue that the telecommunications companies were only doing what they were told by the

    President and were acting as "patriotic corporate citizens.

    This is pure hogwash.

    First of all, corporations aren't citizens.

    Second, the President can't order anyone - citizens or corporations - to break the law.

    This legislation, which the Senate is debating right now, sets up a double standard of justice.

    Break the law as a citizen, go to jail.

    Break the law as a corporation, go to Washington and get immunity.

    Remember, there were telecom companies, such as Qwest, that refused to follow President Bush's illegal wiretap orders and chose instead to obey the laws of the land.

    The Senate is now posed to bury the rule of law.

    What to do?

    Join Nader/Gonzalez - the candidacy that will shift the power from the corporations back into the hands of the people.

    We strongly oppose the wiretap surveillance legislation that Obama and McCain support.

    We stand strongly with the American people and for the Constitution.

    The Nader/Gonzalez campaign is now at six percent in the most recent CNN poll.

    We're in the middle of a fundraising drive right now to put Nader/Gonzalez on the ballot in 45 states by September 20.

    Help us get there now.

    Go to votenader. org.

    Donate to your heart's content.

    For the Constitution.

    For liberty.

    For freedom.

    For justice.

    For shifting the power from the corporations, back into the hands of the American people.

    "We the people" are the first words of the Constitution - we should always remember.

    Thank you.
    PS: We invite your comments to the blog
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • whatever chances Obama had of getting my vote are quickly slipping away.
  • normnorm Posts: 31,146
    um...

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

    anyone remember this?
  • jeffbrjeffbr Seattle Posts: 7,177

    Since we share the same senators, I'm part of the no vote. I'm happy to see a few senators are concerned with liberty (at least in this case). It is interesting that no Republicans sided with liberty, that McCain didn't vote, and that Obama sided with those who would take our liberty from us.
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • Urban HikerUrban Hiker Posts: 1,312
    jeffbr wrote:
    Since we share the same senators, I'm part of the no vote. I'm happy to see a few senators are concerned with liberty (at least in this case). It is interesting that no Republicans sided with liberty, that McCain didn't vote, and that Obama sided with those who would take our liberty from us.


    Obama is making my pitch for Nader easier and easier.
    Walking can be a real trip
    ***********************
    "We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
    ***********************
    Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
  • To play devil's advocate, you have to remember the fear mongering that Bush caused shortly after 9/11. It doesn't surprise me that the telecom companies went along with Bush's orders under the your either with us or against us pledge he was stating shortly after 9/11.

    So I DISAGREE with Obama that the wiretapping should continue. (look I disagree with him Abooks!)

    But I do side with Ammunity for the telecom companies.

    Only because everyone was confused and frightened after 9/11 and I don't think anyone should go to jail because of this.
    10/31/2000 (****)
    6/7/2003 (***1/2)
    7/9/2006 (****1/2)
    7/13/2006 (**** )
    4/10/2008 EV Solo (****1/2)
    6/25/2008 MSG II (*****)
    10/1/2009 LA II (****)
    10/6/2009 LA III (***** Cornell!!!)
  • unsungunsung I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
    Obama (D-IL), Yea
    Face it. Obama is no different than anyone else in Washington.


    People should have backed Paul for real freedom.
  • One of my senators voted no and one voted yes...
  • Urban HikerUrban Hiker Posts: 1,312
    jeffbr wrote:
    Since we share the same senators, I'm part of the no vote. I'm happy to see a few senators are concerned with liberty (at least in this case). It is interesting that no Republicans sided with liberty, that McCain didn't vote, and that Obama sided with those who would take our liberty from us.


    I'm super surprised that Murray didn't vote 'yea'. But, I think our Senators often follow the lead of Clinton. So...
    Walking can be a real trip
    ***********************
    "We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
    ***********************
    Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
  • Eliot RosewaterEliot Rosewater Posts: 2,659
    What say you, Obama supporters?? What a fucking joke. Why couldn't he just not show up again or just vote "present"?...whatever he usually does??

    Unfortunately I live in the reddest of red states and it would take a miracle for either of my senators to EVER disagree with Bush. I'm writing them both letters right now to express my disgust.
  • Eliot RosewaterEliot Rosewater Posts: 2,659
    unsung wrote:
    Obama (D-IL), Yea
    Face it. Obama is no different than anyone else in Washington.
    This certainly isn't the kind of change I want.
  • Eliot RosewaterEliot Rosewater Posts: 2,659
    What say you, Obama supporters?? What a fucking joke. Why couldn't he just not show up again or just vote "present"?...whatever he usually does??
    Anyone?

    Anyone??
  • fuckfuck Posts: 4,069
    Anyone?

    Anyone??
    don't bother...
  • What say you, Obama supporters?? What a fucking joke. Why couldn't he just not show up again or just vote "present"?...whatever he usually does??


    But he can take on Nader in a debate!

    *giggles*
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • But he can take on Nader in a debate!

    *giggles*
    :p He'd just agree with everything Nader said, or decline to comment, based on his voting record. :D
    Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
  • :p He'd just agree with everything Nader said, or decline to comment, based on his voting record. :D

    Looking at Obama's voting record it would be a whole lot of declining to comment or pleading the fifth.

    1,2,3,4 FIF!


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5nQePE6u2U
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • Looking at Obama's voting record it would be a whole lot of declining to comment or pleading the fifth.

    1,2,3,4 FIF!


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5nQePE6u2U

    I would actually have no problem with handing Obama the presidency if he stood at his debate podium, listened to what Nader had to say, and then pleaded the "Fiz-if". :D
    Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
  • Uncle LeoUncle Leo Posts: 1,059
    Anyone?

    Anyone??

    All right, I will. I've been pragmatically supporting Obama (i.e. as lesser of two evils or least of three evils) for a while.

    And I'm running out of defense. I'm drifting towards voting 3rd. And if I do, I know I'll remember this chicken shit vote. Christ, most of his own party voted against it, so it's not even as if he'd be going out on a limb.
    I cannot come up with a new sig till I get this egg off my face.
  • I am a big Obama supporter and will continue to be even on days like today where I don't agree with his vote. Overall I still agree with his agenda and believe he's set realistic goals that have a good shot at making it through the checks and balances of congress without increasing taxes on the middle and poor classes.

    I will never agree with him 100% so if you want me to defend him on this vote its not going to happen from me.
    10/31/2000 (****)
    6/7/2003 (***1/2)
    7/9/2006 (****1/2)
    7/13/2006 (**** )
    4/10/2008 EV Solo (****1/2)
    6/25/2008 MSG II (*****)
    10/1/2009 LA II (****)
    10/6/2009 LA III (***** Cornell!!!)
  • Heineken HelenHeineken Helen Posts: 18,095
    Wow :( speechless. This is absolutely fucking disgusting. Seems to be almost on a daily basis now that something is given up... or taken.

    :mad: Fuck every fucking one of them who voted for this :mad: There is NO defense of this... absolutely none!
    The Astoria??? Orgazmic!
    Verona??? it's all surmountable
    Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
    Wembley? We all believe!
    Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
    Chicago 07? And love
    What a different life
    Had I not found this love with you
  • puremagicpuremagic Posts: 1,907
    cutback wrote:
    um...

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

    anyone remember this?


    Apparently not!!! Words such as these aren't profitable, they're just words on a piece of paper.
    SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
  • Eliot RosewaterEliot Rosewater Posts: 2,659
    I would actually have no problem with handing Obama the presidency if he stood at his debate podium, listened to what Nader had to say, and then pleaded the "Fiz-if". :D
    lmao...very nice Rhino....I see an SNL skit in there somewhere.
  • Anyone?

    Anyone??

    allright, jesus, just got here!

    staggeringly dissapointed!

    I'm hoping this is strategic. Let's say Obama had voted nay. If we are attacked between now and November I wouldn't put it past the republicans (and certainly not Bushco) to play the evidence of such an attack linked to evidence collected from a "mysterious phone call". If properly staged (and run non stop on CNN) the repubs could use it to call obama "weak on defense".

    Plus he knows he's going to overturn it once he's elected anyway.

    It's farfetched I admit, but it doesn't make ANY sense.

    And the bottom line STILL is...

    Until there is a viable 3rd party candidate, I'm still voting for him for the reason that it will be guaranteed...

    he's not John McCain.


  • Do you happen to have a link that shows how the House of Representatives voted on this? I did a search on their website but couldn't find one.
  • Urban HikerUrban Hiker Posts: 1,312
    Do you happen to have a link that shows how the House of Representatives voted on this? I did a search on their website but couldn't find one.

    You bet, here you go:

    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2008-437
    Walking can be a real trip
    ***********************
    "We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
    ***********************
    Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
Sign In or Register to comment.