Welcome to PatsFans.com

Boy King wants retroactive immunity for wiretapping

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by PressCoverage, Oct 11, 2007.

  1. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,608
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    gotta love when the Bush League will only agree to something new and just when it can get confirmation its enablers won't get in trouble for the old and sinister arraingment it preferred ...

    Dems Muscle Through Surveillance Bill

    By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
    Published: October 10, 2007
    Filed at 10:31 p.m. ET


    WASHINGTON (AP) -- House Democrats pushed their government eavesdropping bill through two committees Wednesday with only minor changes, setting the stage for a confrontation with the Bush administration.

    President Bush said that he will not sign the bill if it does not give retroactive immunity to U.S. telecommunications companies that helped conduct electronic surveillance without court orders.

    The measure advanced by the House Judiciary and Intelligence committees left out the immunity provision Bush wants. Democrats also voted down Republican attempts to tailor the legislation more to the administration's liking.

    ...

    A top Democratic leader opened the door to allowing an immunity provision. But House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said the Bush administration must first detail what the companies did that requires the immunity. About 40 pending lawsuits name telecommunications companies for alleged violations of wiretapping laws.
     
    Last edited: Oct 11, 2007
  2. sdaniels7114

    sdaniels7114 Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Messages:
    5,738
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    So Bush wants to give these companies immunity for completely separate legal violations, right? None of 'em have anything to worry about with this new bill as long as they stop their actions when it goes into effect. There's no 'retroactive' crimes in the USA.

    Is he trying to get them 'grandfathered' in in some stupid, Bushian way? or is he already starting his post-government career as some sort of lobbyist?
     
  3. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    25,586
    Likes Received:
    166
    Ratings:
    +455 / 12 / -14

    The article doesn't indicate the administration wants exclusion of telco's from the bill. IT indicates that it want immunity from retroactive prosecution. Why would Hoyer view this as a problem?
     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>