TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- I know that this is probaly old news, but ...

I know that this is probaly old news, but ...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20884696/site/newsweek/

Case Dismissed?
The secret lobbying campaign your phone company doesn't want you to know about

Web exclusive
By Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball
Newsweek
Updated: 7:00 a.m. ET Sept 20, 2007
Sept. 20, 2007 - The nation�s biggest telecommunications companies, working closely with the White House, have mounted a secretive lobbying campaign to get Congress to quickly approve a measure wiping out all private lawsuits against them for assisting the U.S. intelligence community�s warrantless surveillance programs.


The campaign�which involves some of Washington's most prominent lobbying and law firms�has taken on new urgency in recent weeks because of fears that a U.S. appellate court in San Francisco is poised to rule that the lawsuits should be allowed to proceed.

If that happens, the telecom companies say, they may be forced to terminate their cooperation with the U.S. intelligence community�or risk potentially crippling damage awards for allegedly turning over personal information about their customers to the government without a judicial warrant.

�It�s not an exaggeration to say the U.S. intelligence community is in a near-panic about this,� said one communications industry lawyer familiar with the debate who asked not to be publicly identified because of the sensitivity surrounding the issue.

But critics say the language proposed by the White House�drafted in close cooperation with the industry officials�is so extraordinarily broad that it would provide retroactive immunity for all past telecom actions related to the surveillance program. Its practical effect, they argue, would be to shut down any independent judicial or state inquires into how the companies have assisted the government in eavesdropping on the telephone calls and e-mails of U.S. residents in the aftermath of the September 11 terror attacks.

�It�s clear the goal is to kill our case," said Cindy Cohn, legal director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a San Francisco-based privacy group that filed the main lawsuit against the telecoms after The New York Times first disclosed, in December 2005, that President Bush had approved a secret program to monitor the phone conversations of U.S. residents without first seeking judicial warrants. The White House subsequently confirmed that it had authorized the National Security Agency to conduct what it called a �terrorist surveillance program� aimed at communications between suspected terrorists overseas and individuals inside the United States. But the administration has also intervened, unsuccessfully so far, to try to block the lawsuit from proceeding and has consistently refused to discuss any details about the extent of the program�rebuffing repeated congressional requests for key legal memos about it.

CONTINUED
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 | 2 | 3 | Next >

Re: I know that this is probaly old news, but ...

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium [COLOR=FF7F50] http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20884696/site/newsweek/ Case Dismissed? The secret lobbying campaign your phone company doesn't want you to know about Web exclusive By Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball Newsweek Updated: 7:00 a.m. ET Sept 20, 2007 Sept. 20, 2007 - The nation�s biggest telecommunications companies, working closely with the White House, have mounted a secretive lobbying campaign to get Congress to quickly approve a measure wiping out all private lawsuits against them for assisting the U.S. intelligence community�s warrantless surveillance programs. The campaign�which involves some of Washington's most prominent lobbying and law firms�has taken on new urgency in recent weeks because of fears that a U.S. appellate court in San Francisco is poised to rule that the lawsuits should be allowed to proceed. If that happens, the telecom companies say, they may be forced to terminate their cooperation with the U.S. intelligence community�or risk potentially crippling damage awards for allegedly turning over personal information about their customers to the government without a judicial warrant. �It�s not an exaggeration to say the U.S. intelligence community is in a near-panic about this,� said one communications industry lawyer familiar with the debate who asked not to be publicly identified because of the sensitivity surrounding the issue. But critics say the language proposed by the White House�drafted in close cooperation with the industry officials�is so extraordinarily broad that it would provide retroactive immunity for all past telecom actions related to the surveillance program. Its practical effect, they argue, would be to shut down any independent judicial or state inquires into how the companies have assisted the government in eavesdropping on the telephone calls and e-mails of U.S. residents in the aftermath of the September 11 terror attacks............

Thank you for posting this. There's an important passage in that article that is worth mentioning:

quote:

The nation's biggest telecommunications companies, working closely with the White House, have mounted a secretive lobbying campaign to get Congress to quickly approve a measure wiping out all private lawsuits against them for assisting the U.S. intelligence community's warrantless surveillance programs. The campaign -- which involves some of Washington's most prominent lobbying and law firms -- has taken on new urgency in recent weeks because of fears that a U.S. appellate court in San Francisco is poised to rule that the lawsuits should be allowed to proceed. Among those coordinating the industry's effort are two well-connected capital players who both worked for President George H.W. Bush: Verizon general counsel William Barr, who served as attorney general under 41, and AT&T senior executive vice president James Cicconi, who was the elder Bush's deputy chief of staff. Working with them are a battery of major D.C. lobbyists and lawyers who are providing "strategic advice" to the companies on the issue, according to sources familiar with the campaign who asked not to be identified talking about it. Among the players, these sources said: powerhouse Republican lobbyists Charlie Black and Wayne Berman (who represent AT&T and Verizon, respectively), former GOP senator and U.S. ambassador to Germany Dan Coats (a lawyer at King & Spaulding who is representing Sprint), former Democratic Party strategist and one-time assistant secretary of State Tom Donilon (who represents Verizon), former deputy attorney general Jamie Gorelick (whose law firm also represents Verizon) and Brad Berenson, a former assistant White House counsel under President George W. Bush who now represents AT&T.

This is a critical piece of information on a number of fronts. First off, if anyone doesn't remember Jamie Gorelick, she was part of the 9/11 Commission and was a target of a number of smears by the Right Wingers:

http://thinkprogress.org/2005/08/22...pundit-new-low/

http://thinkprogress.org/2005/08/19/gorelick-ignorance/

Now it appears that she is going to end up being one of the Right Wing's bestest buddies by pressuring the Democrats to capitulate on Bush's demands to retroactively allow the phone companies off the hook for their role in Bush's illegal wiretapping activities. Furthermore, by capitulating to this, the Democrats would essentially wipe out any lawsuit or legal activities to, at the very least, EXAMINE in detail these activities by the Bush Administration and the phone companies.

And while Gorelick denies any lobbying activity, she does concede that she "confirmed that she is providing 'strategic advice'" to Verizon on obtaining that immunity. Again this is what folks like Gorelick are involved in:

quote:

According to three industry sources, these and other players have been conferring with each other over legislative strategy and targeting key lawmakers and staffers, especially those on the House and Senate Intelligence and Judiciary Committees. The lobbyists have set up meetings and arranged conference calls, pressing the argument that failure to provide protection to the companies could interfere with the vital assistance they say the telecom industry has provided the intelligence community in monitoring the communications of Al Qaeda and other terrorist operations overseas.

This Newsweek article confirms what the NYTimes published a few days earlier when it leaked this nugget:

quote:

Mr. McConnell argued on Tuesday that the expanded surveillance powers granted under the temporary measure should be made permanent. He also pushed for a provision that would grant legal immunity to the telecommunications companies that secretly cooperated with the N.S.A. on the warrantless program. Those companies, now facing lawsuits, have never been officially identified. Democratic Congressional aides say they believe that a deal is likely to provide protection for the companies. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/19/washington/19nsa.html

Jesus.

Again, just to make sure anyone didn't quite understand this, it's the DEMOCRATS, not Republicans, but the DEMOCRATS that are taking a role in helping cover the tracks of these phone companies and this Administration's illegal activities and thus throwing out lawsuits like this one against these phone companies:

http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/att/

The Democrats are effectively wiping out any and all consequences to this illegal behavior by this Administration, and by doing so they are directly implying approval of such behavior. Say what you will about Bush and McConnell who has some very serious ties to the phone companies himself and would like nothing more than these lawsuits being dropped and immunity given:

http://salon.com/news/feature/2007/...nell/index.html

But for someone like Gorelick to act as a typical Beltway lobbyist/consultant who's obvious ties to one of the phone company giants who's directly involved in this whole mess to whisper these sweet nothings to Democrats who, as they've continually done in the past, tow to the conventional Beltway wisdom and will now likely let Bush off the hook on clearly one of his most egregious illegal acts as President?

To top things off, Gorelick is also a pretty big Clinton supporter and contributor (no surprise given her past):

http://www.newsmeat.com/washington_...ie_Gorelick.php

As is Telecom lobbyist Donilon:

http://www.newsmeat.com/fec/bystate...on&first=Thomas

So now I think we can see why our current Congress actually has more support from REPUBLICANS than their own fucking Democrats:

http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=1471

You heard that right, and now you know why. Nothing changes in Washington. Despite all the outcries for change by the American people, the Beltway is far too powerful and comfortable with their establishment and ties to make any real changes and hold any real accountability.

Fucking makes me sick.

Yeah, aren't laws and regulations and ethics a bitch?

Just like payback!

this is so frustrating! they actually stand a good chance of getting this. the bush administration got retroactive immunity in the military commissions act of 2006. granted repubs had the senate then but thats whats so frustrating, the dems haven't exactly been the bastions of reform they promised and this stands to be yet another provision they roll over and lick their nuts on.

Holly shit Opus. Nice follow-up.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.