-
Website
http://www.americablog.com/ -
Original page
http://www.americablog.com/2008/07/bush-signs-fisa-law-aclu-sues-to.html -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
All Comments
I would be shocked if a court gives them standing.
Let me correct that. A liberal judge would probably find a way to give them standing. They also need a liberal appellate court. The Supreme Court would find 'no standing' for the ACLU and refuse to hear the case - unless inferior courts had ruled in favor of the ACLU. But then this might still be a problem for them. The meaning of the language of the 4th amendment is quite clear. The legislation ignores it, so it's unconstitutional.
The upside is that Bush might fail to give himself and his buddies pardons because they believe they are cloaked by the legislation. Once the legislation is found unconstitutional, they would be exposed, and by then it might be too late for Bush to grant a pardon. In the mean time, he can't grant a pardon if they haven't done anything wrong as the new law says.
You can't pardon people for a violation that doesn't exist.
I can now.
Money better spent.
A demented sneer, I think you meant to say. But other than that a truly accurate assessment.
Lawdy, lawdy, lawdy...
From '01 to '06, maaaybe, but certainly not since when they know full well they were tasked with ending the mess in Iraq and at least reigning in Bush.
But then to go and do something so patently Unconstitutional is making my head explode.
And we all know we can be trusted right?
Each member of congress might as well just wear a sandwich board displaying the cost of their vote.
But even if the rest of the bill is overturned, the telecoms keep their immunity, because they can't be punished now for actions that were illegal before.
And don't look for an Obama Administration to hold anyone from the current group accountable for the lie-based Iraq clusterfuck, or prosecute those individuals and corporations who have profited so handsomely from this obscene travesty called a "war".
Adding insult to injury, the Democrats aren't planning any more legislation before inauguration day, saying those decisions on issues like housing and spending can wait until after the elections.
Nice to know they didn't feel the 4th Amendment warranted the same treatment.
---
I don't understand that... I mean, an example...
a chemical company dumps tons of toxic waste into a landfill in the 30's... the chemical company eventually covers over the landfill and plants grass . the chemical company is eventually bought out by another chemical company, who sells the land to a development company. years later, birth defects/ cancers/ other health issues pop up on land (which is now a housing development).
the chemical company is eventually held accountable by the government for cleanup and compensation to the families who lived on the land... even though the second chemical company didn't do the toxic waste dumping, they were responsible... pretty much because by selling the land for $1, they showed they knew something wasn't good with the land.
how can the telecoms have immunity for something they KNEW was wrong to begin with? they wouldn't have fought for immunity if there were no legal need.
maybe they can't be held liable for breaking the law... but a civil suit should be in the works. you can't tell me that the lawyers who work at the telcoms don't know constitutional law.
.
At least the ACLU is trying to do something--unlike the Vichy Dems who voted for this POS FISA bill (and I include Obama in that--it was a political decision on his part, and he should have known better, teaching the Constitution and all that). I want my 4th Amendment rights (and yours, too) to remain in the Bill of Rights. Don't you?
Damnit, let's fight.
There is the link......
I'm done with the Democrats. This is the last sellout I can stomach. I just mailed the DNC their donation request with $0 and an explanation of why.
The Dems and Repubs are both beholden to corporate interests. The people are just used as ATM machines.
Obama was a damn liar in the primary. He never intended to stop the FISA bill. What a disgrace.
This is just too much. Obama deserves to lose. He sold out on our constitution. The Obama apologists are a disgrace as well.
http://judiciary.house.gov/newscenter.aspx?A=996
(I guess MSNBC was a bit premature when they reported earlier that the House Judicial Committee was not going to cite Rove for contempt--or, as I really believe, stupid.)
Perhaps it is time I stopped voting too. We have one corrupt regime after another, and it is disgusting that we have to put up with these so called leaders in our country.
I can't bring myself to quit voting yet but I totally get where you are coming from.
president's oath: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States"
notice it doesn't say "protect and defend united states citizens" it says "the constitution"! presumably that's because the constitution is what makes this country so great. it's our foundation. if mr. constitutional law professor can't be trusted with the constitution then he can't be trusted with the presidency!
while she who shall not be named is nothing but a shrill bush clone. The Audacious Hoper is raking in
warehouses full of cash by appealing to the proggressive end of the spectrum, while the distinguished
senator from New York is portrayed as practically in bed with every corporate interest, lobbying firm and more of the same from DC.
Once the primary is sealed, within a week he's over at AIPAC rattling sabers with Iran, followed by FAITH BASED HANDOUTS and now -- this?!
ACLU gets my dough from now on...