Listening In

 

Email To A Friend

Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.

Separate multiple addresses with commas

SPONSORED BY
 

The administration and the Senate majority pressured the House to go along with the Senate bill. But the House approved a version which contained additional civil-liberties protections-and omitted any retroactive immunity for the telecoms. That left Congress deadlocked; the White House has indicated President Bush will veto any version of a new surveillance law that does not include the immunity provision.

The letter from Mukasey and McConnell does not spell out precisely what kind of new intelligence operations are being thwarted because of the congressional impasse. And administration critics, including Rep. Reyes, have recently accused the administration and its supporters of exaggerating the threat to current intelligence activities caused by the congressional standoff.

Administration critics note that eavesdropping operations undertaken under the intel law which just lapsed are allowed to continue for 12 months after they were first authorized. However, administration officials claim the telecoms are nervous that the situation leaves them with insufficient protection against new private lawsuits.

In a statement released late Friday, Reyes, Rockefeller and several other Democrats lashed out at the White House's tactics. "Further politicizing the debate, the administration today announced that they believe there have been gaps in security since the Protect America Act expired. They cannot have it both ways; if it is true that the expiration of the PAA has caused gaps in intelligence, then it was irresponsible for the President and congressional Republicans to openly oppose an extension of the law. Accordingly, they should join Democrats in extending it until we can resolve our differences."

© 2008

Label

Newsweek Top Stories
NEWSWEEK's 20/10
NEWSWEEK's 20/10

Our decade-in-review project recalls the highs and lows of the last 10 years.

Obama's Promises
Obama's Promises

Is the new president fulfilling his campaign pledges? Or falling short?

The Decade in 7 Minutes
The Decade in 7 Minutes

Video: A fast-paced review of the best and worst moments. Don't blink.

Accidental Celebrities
Accidental Celebrities

From Levi Johnston to Elian Gonzalez, these people never expected to be in the spotlight.

Discuss

Sponsored by

Member Comments

  • Posted By: Johndavidprince @ 03/13/2008 8:10:44 PM

    If the government has a legal warrant than lawsuit or no lawsuit they have to obey the law. What is so hard to understand about this issue?

  • Posted By: Johndavidprince @ 03/02/2008 2:47:26 PM

    If we Degrade the Bill of Rights so that corperations have no oversight when they have blatently broken the law we might as well erase the names of those buried at Arlington Nat. Cem. from the head stones. Just because a Corp. has a lawsuit against it does not preclude them from future Legal Surveillance programs. As well I believe the President is attempting to evade potential discovery of his program if the suits go foward.

  • Posted By: Johndavidprince @ 03/02/2008 2:40:52 PM

    Telecoms have to cooperate when a court issues a warrant. That is the law. The President has an argument that is not based in reality. How would any litigation from thier poss. lawsuits effect their participation if future FISA spying. The issue is, will we give a pass to warrantless wiretaps? If we do we errode the right of a redress of grievances and the right of Privacy. If we reliquish our sovereignty, our Liberty, we degrade the Bill of Rights.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse