FISA reform, finally: “The bill is passed,” 293-129
The House is now voting on the FISA reform deal. Moonbat callers on C-SPAN are going nuts over Democrat capitulation. I’ll post the tally and roll call vote as soon as the yeas and nays are all counted. (Update: 12:51pm Eastern. “The bill is passed.” Vote was 293-129.) Now, on to the Senate. The 9/10 Democrats succumb to reality.
Andrew McCarthy gives the compromise deal thumbs up:
Here is the bottom line: Our intelligence agencies will once again have authority to conduct aggressive monitoring of foreign powers, including terrorist organizations, which threaten the United States. In particular, this will be the case overseas — that is, when foreigners located outside our borders communicate with each other. The Central Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency will essentially be able to collect foreign intelligence without interference from the courts, the status quo ante that was U.S. law for decades before being upset by a secret court ruling last year.
Moreover, the telecommunications companies which patriotically complied with administration requests for assistance in the emergency conditions that obtained after nearly 3,000 Americans were mass-murdered in the 9/11 attacks will receive retroactive immunity. That is, they will be relieved of the potential billions in liability they (and their shareholders and customers) faced in scores of lawsuits.
The telecoms were sued by the ACLU and other privacy eccentrics because they cooperated in the NSA’s warrantless surveillance of suspected international terrorist communications that crossed U.S. borders — a program the legality of which is richly supported by precedent. Consequently, the American people will be relieved of the vulnerability they would face if industry’s top information technology experts were disincentivized from assisting in our security. (While I have long been a critic of our surveillance laws, I note once again, in the interest of full disclosure, that my wife works for Verizon.)
Contrary to the sky-is-falling hysteria we are likely to hear in the coming days, this immunity is not “blanket.” It benefits only private actors. That is as it should be. This controversy involves the executive and legislative branches of government fighting over ultimate control of surveillance authority. Private actors who merely complied with ostensibly lawful requests should never have been pawns in that political battle. And only those private actors who can show, by “substantial evidence” that they were complying with a written request from government will be afforded immunity.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- FISA Bill Passes Overwhelmingly : The American Pundit
- Congressional Leaders Strike Deal on Telecom Surveillance | OpenMarket.org
- House Passes Bill to Kill Multibillion-Dollar Lawsuits Against Phone Companies | OpenMarket.org
- House Passes Bill to Kill Multibillion-Dollar Lawsuits Against Phone Companies | OpenMarket.org
- Hot Air » Blog Archive » FISA reform passes the House
- The Jawa Report
- FISA Bill Passed Handly, The Nutroots Looses Its Mind « Beltway Snark
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: FISA
Sister Toldjah
» The anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall – and how the far left still hasn’t given upAmSpecBlog
» Carly Fiorina's Twitter OpponentPundit & Pundette
» Intelligence agencies knew Hasan was a traitorLegal Insurrection
» Will The Truth Be Hasan's Last Victim?The Powers That Be
» US Intel Knew Hasan Was Trying to Contact Al QaedaNewsBusters.org
» NYT's Krugman Quotes Song Proving ObamaCare Opponents' Point
The authorities are profiling you, Lion. They know you’re into kitty porn.
*Bows in Alohaguy’s general direction.
I think you hit the nail on the head.
Sam,
I am for animal rights as soon as they start paying taxes. That would be fair.
AlohaGuy:
I’ve seen TOS’ A-game. It ain’t pretty.
So if they broke the law, knew they were breaking the law, but went ahead and broke the law anyway because the goverment asked them, they get immunity? That does not seem right to me!
The telecoms didn’t break the law. You can be pure and innocent and still be hit with a civil suit.
The FISA Reform Act contained the equivalent of a Good Samaritan Law for telecoms.
Good clip.
Poor Arlen Specter…now all those nice people talking to terrorists can’t sue the telecom companies; and he cant stand it.
The interesting part is that all of the concern seems to be on monitoring phone calls, which of course NSA will not be doing under this law. The thing that the left and the other hysterics on the board seem to be completely unconcerned with is the Dodd bill’s mandate to report every credit and debit transaction. Talk about violating privacy!
This whole argument is absurd. The government has been monitoring telephone conversations ever since there were telephones.
Should read “..monitoring domestic phone calls…”
Or the equivalent of an Ex Post Facto Law which is prohibited under Article I, section 9 of the U.S. Constitution.
Or a clarification of current law, which isn’t.
Check out my initial post on the board. Believe me, I don’t trust the government to do anything right. I trust the second amendment.
I reiterated the point, because it seems to have gone over the heads of several of the commenters. I’d trust the 2nd a lot more if we could, as it indicates, form “well-regulated militias”. But every time somebody tries, the government attacks them, viz. the Michigan Militia.
Khan #22 posted:
With regards to the telecom companies and enemy intelligence intercepts?
Yes, I do know it for a fact. There were also no laws broken with Magic, Enigma, or Venona. You might want to look those things up.
Don’t confuse civil lawsuits aimed at extortion with prosecution for criminal violations.
Mixer14 #34 posted:
No offense to you, but the Nazis were to the left, not the right. You do know what NAZI means don’t you?
National Socialist Workers Party.
Ahh a Lion! #59 posted:
They want immunity from being extorted and harassed into bankruptcy from leftist groups like the ACLU. You don’t need to commit a crime for that to happen.
Good call JSHII,
The further you travel right, the less government you should get. The further left, the bigger the government gets. Stalin and Hitler were very close ideologically.
It doesn’t matter how many times you make this point, it never sinks in. Hitler was the antithesis of conservatism, but you’ll never see the left admit it. Funny that they still worship Lenin, Stalin, and Mao, given that they were even bigger mass murderers than Hitler.
JHSII & Ahh,
If you look solely at the size of government, then sure the American left is closer to Nazism, however that is a pretty short-sided arguments. Looking at the common characteristics of fascists regimes, one tends to see a more right-wing ideology:
1.Powerful and Continuing Nationalism – Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.
2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights – Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of “need.” The people tend to ‘look the other way’ of even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.
3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause – The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe; racial, ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists; terrorists, etc.
4.Supremacy of the Military – Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.
5. Rampant Sexism – The government if fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.
6. Controlled Mass Media – Sometimes the media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or through sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in wartime, is very common.
7. Obsession with National Security – Fear is used as a motivation tool by the government over the masses.
8. Religion and Government are Intertwined – Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government’s policies or actions.
9. Corporate Power is Protected – The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders in power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.
10. Labor Power is Suppressed – Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely or are severely suppressed.
11.Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts – Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.
12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment – Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses, and even forego civil liberties, in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.
13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption – Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions, and who use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability.
14. Fraudulent Elections – Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against (or even the assassination of) the opposition candidates, the use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and the manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.
Great post TOS,
One thing that has to be mentioned is if the current actions of the GOP defines “right-wing” ideology, then yes you are right in your comparison. However, many conservatives reject the Bush administrations actions as “right-wing” and consider his, and the Democrats as authoritarian in nature.
No dipstick, an ex post facto law criminalizes an act but does not exempt from prosecution those who engaged in the act before it became illegal.
Oh my God! My high school was a fascist regime! The girls on the flag line were storm troopers! The marching band was a platoon of brownshirts. My varsity letter was a swastika! Thank you for opening my eyes TOS!
Seriously, what grade did Prof. Churchill give you on that freshman paper? A+?
TOH #112
I’ll just tackle a few of these:
The “right-wing” has been the biggest supporters of human rights, not just mouthing the words like the left. It’s been the left that’s excused every bit of “torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.” by governments such as the old Soviet Union, Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, etc.
You mean we weren’t attacked by terrorists? The Soviet Union was never a threat?
The fact is that the description exactly defines the left and Global Warming or the left and Conservatism.
Remove “military” and insert “social welfare system”; remove “are widespread domestic problems” and insert “declared war against America” and it is correct.
This is another hallmark of the left and not the right. Look at Florida 2000.
Your idea is correct – but your targets are 180 degrees wrong.
#112, TheOtherSide
If you don’t give credit to The People Who Originally Wrote It (one of many places this shows up) then you are plagiarizing.
That’s right, I’m calling you out. That post was written by someone else and you are passing it off as yours. #113, AhaLion gives you props for it too.
Give credit where it’s due and we won’t automatically assume that you are a fraud. (Well ok, we will now.)
Maybe you teach at Columbia…
My apologizes AlohaGuy…I should have cited the source, but I was not trying to pass it off as my own. I’ll make sure to cite when needed in the future.
I’m glad to see you did your research in finding the original source, now care to comment on the actual argument?
AlohaGuy:
I don’t think TOS ever had an A-game. He probably peaked at the L-game. The text he plagiarized–at least a part he conveniently omitted–contains this nugget.
Maybe TOS thinks the USA is a part of Latin America.
I did, TOS. Refuted it easily.
Yawn.
Problem is, this isn’t the first time. You just did the same thing a while ago on another thread. Once is an oversight, twice is a trend.
What a weak refutation that it was…are you serious?
What, when I posted the facts from the Department of Energy reports, that when asked for citation I gave it? Like I said I will cite any reference from now on…but you better believe I expect the same of every fact and figure given be everybody else here.
TOS posted:
It wasn’t weak at all, but calling it that is a good way for you to avoid an actual response.
You have a credibility chasm. Let’s see how far down you can dig.
Citing facts and figures is one thing, quoting large tracts in their entirety is another. I cite facts and figures quite often, but they are as a rule gathered from a variety of sources, and in my own words. You lifted virtually the entirety of two different reports without attribution, in effect claiming them. I don’t mind, but don’t play the victim when somebody else calls you on it. And as far as the above is concerned, you’d have been a lot better off providing a citation, because the whole thing, as presented, is a good example of left wing propaganda (somewhat less so if the part you omitted is included).
Read up about “Echelon” – electronic eavesdropping spying has been going on a VERY long time.
Look up the incident that got Dan Brown to write Digital Fortress, his 1st novel:
supposedly a student got a visit from the Secret Service after joking in an email about “killing Bill Clinton”. NSA supposedly scanned all emails for key phrases.