Richard WarnickFISA: Why Should We Care?
Barack Obama promised “change,” and he has delivered on that promise. We wanted Obama to change Washington, and instead he’s inexplicably changing his policy positions to accommodate the Bush administration and the far right. The most immediate problem: a proposal to make unconstitutional changes to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).
Senator Obama has reiterated his vow to vote for the FISA cave-in bill that passed the House last month. He says the cave-in bill is bad, but still better than the horrendously unconstitutional Protect America Act (PAA) that Congress enacted last August– after the Bush administration claimed that terrorists were getting ready to blow up the Capitol. This argument is irrelevant because the PAA has already thankfully expired.
I think Obama wants to vote for this just to deliberately spite his own supporters, in a misguided effort to steal votes from McCain.
In case you haven’t been following the blog typhoon on MyBarackObama.com, it’s unprecedented. As of yesterday, the “Senator Obama - Please, No Telecom Immunity and Get FISA Right” group had 19,000 members.
Like many other people, I didn’t change the default e-mail setting when I signed up. My e-mail is overflowing with messages from dedicated Obama volunteers who want to save this country’s Constitution from unprincipled politicians. And a few like this guy (misspellings and fractured English in the original):
Can I say something, past 3 days, I have received 777 emails on this FISA issue. Now… will this FISA bill ruin your life? Will it discontinue your life? Will you stop going to work because of this FISA bill?
How does it effect your life?
Who cares about the damn FISA, what you should care that clearly reflects your life, your friends lives, and your families/relatives. And does it?
What you should care is about your bills, gas, health thinks that matter?
For example, lets say if Obama said… we will pass a bill that will change the national speed limit to 35, I will be pissed… but FISA, how does it matter to me or anyone I KNOW?
It’s the Constitution, stupid. In legal proceedings, the Bush administration’s lawyers have argued that the President, in his capacity as Commander in Chief, has the power to ignore not only the FISA law but all laws and international treaties. This theory of presidential omnipotence strikes at the very heart of our system of government, and has been rejected by the courts three times already.
Glenn Greenwald give us the bottom line:
The reason the President broke the law was because he claimed that he has the power under Article II to ignore Congressional statutes restricting eavesdropping. He still claims that power, and this law does nothing to address that.
The Fourth Amendment requires court warrants to conduct searches. Warrantless surveillance of Americans is unconstitutional and Congress does not have the power to legalize it.
Last February, Senators Chris Dodd and Russell Feingold stopped a bill to authorize warrantless surveillance and provide unprecedented retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies that helped the Bush Administration spy on us. At that time Senator Obama pledged to “support a filibuster” of ANY bill that contained retroactive immunity. Now that he has secured the Democratic nomination, he has decided to vote in favor of retroactive immunity for the telecoms.
Don’t forget, telecom immunity = Bush immunity. This law would make it impossible for lawsuits to ever reveal the full extent of the Bush administration’s illegal surveillance program.
Glenn Greenwald, again:
People who defend telecom immunity or who say that it’s not a big deal are, by logical necessity, adopting this view: “Our highest political officials and largest corporations shouldn’t face consequences when they break our laws as long as they claim it was for our own good.” That’s the destructive premise that lies at the heart of this deeply corrupt measure, the reason it matters so much.
Let’s take some time on the Fourth of July weekend to save this country’s Constitution. Senators Dodd and Feingold will filibuster, however right now it looks like Barack Obama is going to break his promise and go against the filibuster.
More information here:
Senator, please get FISA right
Salon.com: Glenn Greenwald
July 5th, 2008 at 3:38 pm
It seems to me that if the phone companies did something illegal, they should be prosecuted for it. If what they did was illegal, but justified for overriding reasons of national security, then the President should pardon them and take the political heat. If the phone companies did nothing illegal, then there is no need to give them immunity. A court case would clarify the constitutional issues and, if successful, provide further political support and legal grounds for impeachment. Even if President Bush runs out the clock on impeachment, a court case would be useful for re-establishing the Constitution in the face of claims of virtually unlimited presidential power.
July 5th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
An apt analogy would be for a future president to authorize physicians to perform partial birth abortions on all fetuses deemed genetically inferior because their parents vote Republican, and then immunize from prosecution those same physicians.
The telecoms should be prosecuted and their leaders jailed!
July 5th, 2008 at 8:30 pm
Before we jail them, there needs to be a trial. I still like the presumption of innocence until guilt is proven. I think the President deserves a trial, too.
July 5th, 2008 at 9:15 pm
I am more than happy to see the President tried for a whole host of crimes.
July 6th, 2008 at 12:09 am
I think we can expect to see a record number of Presidential pardons near the end of Bush’s tenure. Unless he is impeached, Bush could even pardon himself!
Art. II Sec. 2 of the Constitution states, in part, that the president “shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.”
July 6th, 2008 at 5:27 am
If he pardons himself, which I think highly unlikely, there would be a political firestorm, followed by, in effect, truth commissions. And there would always be the threat, again unlikely to be actualized, to take Bush to the International Court of Justice.
Bush has not issued a lot of pardons during his tenure. It would be interesting to see if he does leave with a flurry of pardons. The controversy over Clinton’s pardons at the end of his term might give him pause. I think the number of Bush pardons will be relatively few in number.
July 6th, 2008 at 10:53 am
Leo, this is George W. Bush we’re talking about. Clinton was shameless, but Dubya took it to a whole new level never seen before. Bush commuted “Scooter” Libby’s sentence because he might have been tempted to spill the beans if faced with jail time. Libby and others can expect pardons, because otherwise they might write books about what they did.
July 6th, 2008 at 12:35 pm
You people have so much concern about the rights of terrorists but then at the same time are hoping for a big Democrat victory in November. If Barack Obama wins and if he gets a filibuster proof Senate it will result in the greatest loss of freedom this country has ever seen and it will be our freedom lost not the terrorists.
July 6th, 2008 at 1:06 pm
Ken:
A rather conclusory statement.
Perhaps you will enlighten us as to any substance you might have to support the statement. I am not holding my breath!
July 7th, 2008 at 2:48 pm
Tell Reid to stop the FISA bill.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid
Washington DC: 202-224-3542
If the DC number is busy - Try reaching his district offices:
Reno Office: 775-686-5750
Vegas Office: 702-388-5020