if the telecoms are doing nothing illegal, why in the world would they need immunity?
spanone
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
Thu Feb-28-08 07:28 PM
Original message
if the telecoms are doing nothing illegal, why in the world would they need immunity?
Edited on Thu Feb-28-08 07:35 PM by spanone
this is the question everyone should be asking imho:shrug: they should be able to easily win any lawsuit against them if they've done nothing wrong; they have their records to prove it !!!!
LakeSamish706
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
Thu Feb-28-08 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
1. I think you just answered your own question. n/t
spanone
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
Thu Feb-28-08 07:32 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. damn, i think you are correct!
Warpy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
Thu Feb-28-08 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
2. No, the question is who they were spying on
Stupid wants us to believe it was everybody. It wasn't. It would take staff equal in number to the subscribers to monitor everybody. My guess is that he's trying to hide targets he'd have had no chance of getting FISA warrants on: his enemies and most of his friends.
mediaman007
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
Thu Feb-28-08 07:37 PM
Response to Original message
4. If they have nothing to hide, what's the problem?
I've heard that from the NeoCons before. "What do you worry about privacy for, if you have nothing to hide." I guess that when the shoe flips to the other foot, they can't handle it!
angrycarpenter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
Thu Feb-28-08 07:38 PM
Response to Original message
5. If they were using baseball players to spy on us.
There would be no immunity.
malaise
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
Thu Feb-28-08 07:41 PM
Response to Original message
6. Watch Bush's press conference from today
He gave away more than a few clues. They broke the law for him.
spanone
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
Thu Feb-28-08 08:03 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. i did see that. you are correct.
malaise
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
Thu Feb-28-08 08:35 PM
Response to Reply #7
12. KOs about to deconstruct both Bush's brain and
the press conference. :rofl:
Rosemary2205
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
Thu Feb-28-08 08:06 PM
Response to Original message
8. I think part of the problem is the cost of self defense.
Pavulon
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
Thu Feb-28-08 08:08 PM
Response to Original message
9. So that operational methods will never see open court.
Telecom immunity is guarantee. There will be chat about it but in the end the possibility of discovery in these suits will require it to protect tlas from exposure. That is my take.
Canuckistanian
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
Thu Feb-28-08 08:16 PM
Response to Original message
10. According to the wingnuts, it's the "trial lawyers" that are against immunity
Because they want all that big settlement money. Of course, they never mention that WARRANTLESS WIRETAPPING IS ALREADY ILLEGAL , but hey, that's a minor detail.
indepat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
Thu Feb-28-08 08:35 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. And my take is that junior cannot legally give illegal orders
Canuckistanian
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
Thu Feb-28-08 08:53 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. Right. It's one of those "high crimes"
Forget where I heard that term. I think it's in one of America's founding documents.
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts)
Sat May 04th 2024, 04:31 AM
Response to Original message
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion
board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules
page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the
opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.