Senate grants telecom immunity; Feinstein's contradictions
Bad? Brilliant?
You can rate this post.
Register or login now and
tell us what you think.

Today the US Senate, in an unprecedented act, granted retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies that illegally spied on Americans in cooperation with the Bush Administration. Amendments that would have reiterated support for the 1978 FISA law, including Dianne Feinstein's so-called "exclusivity" amendment that would have confirmed FISA as the exclusive arbiter of wiretap legality, were rejected. Feinstein's "good faith" amendment was rejected, as were Chris Dodd and Russ Feingold's effort to strip telecom immunity from the bill.

Significantly, Dianne Feinstein helped to kill the Dodd-Feingold effort to strip telecom immunity from the bill. And while she did ultimately vote against the FISA bill, it came after she voted FOR cloture on the bill. Were she truly interested in stopping the bill she would have joined Senators Feingold, Dodd, and Leahy in voting against cloture.

Feinstein's press release would have us believe she did all she could to stop immunity:

However, I believe this bill didn't do enough to protect against the assertion of executive power. I have said on many occasions that without the additional language to strengthen and tighten the exclusivity already in FISA, I could not support final passage....

There should never be another warrantless surveillance program. And I continue to believe that there should be a strong statement in law making it crystal clear that FISA must be followed, period.

But her votes against the Dodd-Feingold amendment, and her vote for cloture, contradict these claims. The sad truth is that Senator Feinstein failed to take a consistent stand against telecom immunity and against this bill, and the result is a bill that gives the White House everything it had demanded of the Senate.

Reaction around the blogosphere was damning. At Calitics David Dayen said "Feinstein pulled a Lieberman here" and "[sold] us out and give the phone companies what they wanted for violating civil liberties." Kagro X at Daily Kos said "The US Senate commits suicide on national television" and wondered why Senators even bothered to show up for work if all they were going to do is legitimate Bush's flouting of the law. Glenn Greenwald denounced the entire proceeding:

I used to think that amnesty supporters held their position because they didn't understand this extremely simple point, but now I think that most of them have their position precisely because they do understand it. A lawless "police state" -- and that's the only term that can be used to describe what this bill creates -- is exactly what our political establishment desires.

This defeat stings. Many believed that Feinstein would never have come around and joined us in defense of the Constitution, and that this outcome was assured back in December when Harry Reid brought the immunity-giving Senate Intelligence Committee bill to the floor, and it certainly has played out that way. But it doesn't make it any easier to swallow the stunning abrogation of basic constitutional principles, the direct assault on the rule of law, and the creation of a potential police state - all of which are the outcomes of today's vote. History will not remember this day well.

The fight is not yet completely lost. The House must now reconcile the Senate's evisceration of FISA with their own RESTORE Act, a much better bill that does not grant telecom immunity. Glenn Greenwald and Firedoglake are hosting a petition to convince the House to defend the RESTORE Act and reject the Senate's granting of immunity. It may seem like a longshot, but given the stakes, fighting hard on FISA is well worth the effort.


Reader Comments

Comments are closed for this post.

  
Feinstein
By mcQuaidLA, Feb 13, 2008 at 6:03:42 AM PT
I started to watch Feinstein closely after that big, wet, kiss of an intro she gave Condi Rice at the start of her confirmation hearings to be Secretary of State.

I find Feinstein breathtakingly disingenuous. She has certainly studied the Bush playbook and perfected the art of creating a narrative to fool voters into thinking she actually cares about the issues they care about. Her voting record, of course, says something else entirely.

And her feigned umbrage earlier this week at Mukasey's position on torture was droll to say the least. I just wanted to call her office and say "Gee honey, his position on torture hasn't changed since the hearings. And you voted for him and told us all how great he was. Do you really think we're going to fall for this faux-outrage bit now?"

Well, yes, she does. And a lot of us do fall for it. The dreadful California referendum/recall process might have a silver lining worth looking into.
  
Disingenuous
By seg Feb 13, 2008 at 12:49:01 PM PT
Equally disingenuous was Senator Clinton's actions. Not showing up to vote was another rubber stamp for Bush by her, just letting him eat away at the Constitution.
  

Community Posts

1St Grade Reading
Posted Dec 01, 2011 8:44pm
by Unknown user
Comments (0)

Salon Computer Software
Posted Nov 22, 2011 8:59pm
by Unknown user
Comments (0)

Business_Link
Posted Nov 17, 2011 4:24am
by Unknown user
Comments (0)

Read More >

Recent Comments

Re: Voting Guide for Judicial?
Frustrating that the Courage Campaign did not prov...

Re: Voting Guide for Judicial?
Frustrating that the Courage Campaign did not prov...

Re: Voting Guide for Judicial?
Unfortunately there is almost no discussion about ...

Voting Guide for Judicial?
Can't seem to find any guide for judicial? Can you...

Proposition 8 is about Equality!
Proposition 8 is all about equality! The Founding ...


Blog Roll


Calitics
The Bayne of Blog
California Progress Report
California Majority Report
D-Day
DailyKos Down With Tyranny
Fog City Journal
High Speed Rail Blog
Left in SF
The Liberal OC
Living in the O
Michigan Liberal
MyDD
OB Rag
San Diego Politico
Square State
Surf Putah
Sweet Melissa
Unite the Fight