truly constructive criticism, it is just spreading misinformation.



The telecoms and anyone else sued for violating a US citizen's civil rights by tapping their phones or internet or whatever have defenses without FISA, those defenses are pretty basic and obvious and are outlined in the proposed FISA legislation. Go read them again, there has to be proof of particulars (which are truly common sense defenses) and the certification is subject to challenge and judicial review (the challenge allows discovery so the courts can review the certification and/or the courts can review the matters in camera). It is no absolute and the basic premise of those "defenses" (not immunity) is that the actions be lawfully ordered and did not violate the 1st or 4th amendments. That language, about the actions be lawful, legal, and the 1st and 4th amendment rights of US citizens be safeguarded are through the proposed legislation.

Criminal prosecutions should require heavy lifting, there is no "ifs, ands, or buts" about that - criminal actions should not be taken lightly.

Feingold is just ticked his bill wasn't made a part of this pending legislation. If he ever practiced law in federal court (meh, state court for that matter) he would know that the Rules of Civil Procedure allows for more defenses than what the bill outlines. He would know that to sue the Federal government today one has to comply with the Federal Tort Claims Act which provides more absolutes than this FISA legislation (the review is much more limited). He would know that the Tucker Act has cushioned many financial institutions. Oh and I haven't even hit on sovereign immunity, that one is a kicker too and is truly immunity (except if the government agent violates the law and/or someone's civil rights while violating the laws).

I hate the wet raw hides - they distract and when pulled down bogus trails they make us loose sight of what matters. All the abuses of the wiretaps and targeting citizens came about because this admin ignored the FISA laws, did not follow them or utilize the FISA Court, and they are the ones that own, control and have packed the folks that took an oath to investigate crimes and prosecute those that break the law.

That hasn't happened because they OWN the DOJ/FBI/CIA, yadayadayada - that won't change until we get someone in office that respects the rule of law, that knows the constitution and that respects the citizens of the USA.

That someone could be just about any of the dem candidates, it is definitely Obama, our dem nominee.

And the one thing all your FISA freaks miss is something so bloody obvious it isn't even funny. Without these defenses which folks are referring to as "immunity" the president is more likely to pardon all involved when he leaves office. He doesn't need FISA, he can do it just for shits, grins and because he can. Maybe this FISA will lull him in to boredom and he won't worry about it. I doubt it, but I hope that is the case.

And in parting, congress cannot constitutionally oversea FISA matters, that is not what they are constitutionally allowed to do. They are the ones that write laws, they are not the body that enforces them or carries them out.

So, if you want to be constructive try to shoot for factual.