ON SECURITY & FORGIVENESS

One of the things I've been meaning to post on the past couple of days was the Obama administration's decision not to prosecute those in the CIA who used torture techniques during the Bush administration.



Asserting that the country needed to move beyond "a dark and painful chapter in our history" President Obama made it clear that that those who used enhanced interrogation tactics during the Bush administration are officially off the hook, and will not have to pay legal fees (or judgments) should they be pursued via other channels.

This is an interesting position because others who were wrapped up, or who got caught up in, the Bush administration's dark side of governance have not fared so well. This story about Thomas Tamm, who received the Ridenhour Prize for Truth-Telling, is illustrative. In a few words Tamm was one of the first to "drop a dime on the Cheney-Bush administration's illegal interception of phone calls and e-mails."

Tamm was a lawyer at the Department of Justice when he anonymously called The New York Times. He told Eric Lichtblau that the NSA was illegally spying on U.S. citizens. Lichtblau and Times reporter James Risen eventually won a Pulitzer for telling the story that Tamm brought to their attention. Tamm, however, hasn't fared so well.

The FBI has pursued him relentlessly for the past two and a half years. Agents have raided his house, hauled away personal possessions and grilled his wife, a teenage daughter and a grown son. More recently, they've been questioning Tamm's friends and associates about nearly every aspect of his life. Tamm has resisted pressure to plead to a felony for divulging classified information. But he is living under a pall, never sure if or when federal agents might arrest him.

Exhausted by the uncertainty clouding his life, Tamm now is telling his story publicly for the first time. "I thought this [secret program] was something the other branches of the government—and the public—ought to know about. So they could decide: do they want this massive spying program to be taking place?" ... If somebody were to say, who am I to do that? I would say, 'I had taken an oath to uphold the Constitution.' It's stunning that somebody higher up the chain of command didn't speak up."

And just who is Mr. Hamm? Meteor Blades at Dailykos tells that this was a "guy whose uncle and father were FBI agents, who led the Young Republicans when he was at Brown University and who had a stellar career at the DoJ until he decided to expose the criminal behavior of the government he served ..."

And for his patriotism Mr. Tamm has been treated like a criminal. If President Obama can forgive CIA torturers who believed they were acting to serve this nation I think we can forgive Mr. Tamm. As Joe Conason put it:

If the telecommunication companies that helped the NSA to violate the law could be immunized with Obama's vote last year, if the Obama administration is reluctant to prosecute former Bush officials for their alleged crimes, and if the president and the attorney general recognize that illegal wiretapping is an intolerable offense against the Constitution, then it is long past time to lift the burden of investigation from Thomas Tamm. Let the government acknowledge what by now is obvious. No fair-minded jury would convict him, and none ever should.

I hope he gets his life back.

- Mark

REP. TOM UDALL GETS IT

U.S. Representative Tom Udall (D-New Mexico) gets it when it comes to President Bush's efforts to illegally spy on Americans, and then grant the telecom industry "retroactive immunity for helping him do so. Here's his statement on H.R. 6304 in it's entirety.





**********************************************************************
JUNE 20, 2008: UDALL: FISA BILL INFRINGES AMERICANS’ FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS

WASHINGTON – U.S. Representative Tom Udall, D-N.M., today released the following statement regarding H.R. 6304, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Amendments Act:

"The FISA legislation we considered today has important implications for Americans' fundamental freedoms.

“First, today's legislation gives the Bush Administration considerable leeway to continue spying on Americans. The Administration has shown that if Congress gives them an inch, they will take a mile. After their past behavior, it would be irresponsible to give them an opportunity to further encroach on our civil liberties and right to privacy.

“The legislation also sends the message that private actors can work with the Executive Branch to violate the rights of Americans with impunity. Throughout the FISA discussion, I have been clear: I will not support legislation that would grant blanket immunity to telecommunications companies that may have unlawfully helped the Bush Administration spy on Americans. Make no mistake, today's legislation provides blanket immunity. By letting companies off the hook if they were asked to commit illegal acts by the government, the bill ensures that any Americans whose rights were violated will never have their day in court.

“Although the Democratic leadership supported this bill, I could not. It infringes freedoms so fundamental that they cannot be compromised. The right to be free from governmental spying is enshrined in our Constitution, our basic American values and the principles of ordered liberty.

“America's laws should keep us both safe and free. Today’s bill would sacrifice essential liberty in ways that do not contribute to our security. For that reason, I could not support it.”

Let's hope Rep. Udall unseats Sen. Pete Domenici in their New Mexico Senate race.

- Mark

FLUSHING THE CONSTITUTION DOWN THE TOILET …

Just great.

The House of Representatives has finally caved into the Bush administration’s proposed spying program, which gives the telecom industry retroactive immunity for helping President Bush spy on Americans at will, and without cause (check out the discussion on MSNBC).

As I’ve pointed out again and again on this site over the past six months, someone needs to look into why the Bush administration was asking the telecom industry to help them spy on Americans at least six months before 9/11. Perhaps we can get someone in the House of Representatives, like Christopher Dodd did in the Senate back in December, to step in and block this freedom and liberty destroying piece of legislation.

And for those of you who are not up to speed on FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillence Act) legislation – which the new legislation impacts – you really only need to know two things.

First, FISA was a Watergate era piece of legislation designed to give the president the legal authority to track and listen in on perceived foreign threats to this nation. It’s roots are tied to President Nixon’s claim that he did what he did because he feared foreign subversives. It was, of course, a bogus claim (Nixon was paranoid and vile), but Congress decided there was some merit to the argument and passed FISA in the 1970s.

Second, apart from the fact that there was no 9/11 national security threat when President Bush first asked the telecom industry to help him spy on Americans (and if there was, why didn't Bush listen to Richard Clarke in the summer of 2001?), 9/11 led to legislation that now allows our national security guys to wiretap and spy on anyone they suspect. The only proviso is that they have to ask for a FISA warrant up to 72 hours after the fact. In other words, with the Patriot Act, the president didn’t need to illegally spy on Americans after 9/11 – as long as we had a reasonable hunch.

At the end of the day, the president’s search for retroactive immunity for the telecom industry is little more than a search for personal protection, and protection for his Constitutionally challenged team (and the few complicit Dems who were brow beaten into supporting the president’s spying initiatives early on). Team Bush knows the telecom industry will not go down quietly if they alone are fingered in court for violating the Constitution and our 4th amendment rights.

And they will have much to answer for, as this August 2002 article from Jonathan Turley in the LA Times makes clear.

- Mark

P.S. And for those who can't remember, here's the 4th Amendment:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

"WE HAVE NOTHING TO FEAR ..." EXCEPT CONSERVATIVE FEAR-MONGERING

Whatever happened to “We have nothing to fear, but fear itself”?

… I’ve been commenting on this issue for a while now. Put simply, the Bush administration is still trying to get the telecommunication industry legal cover for helping his administration spy on Americans. The problem is that the Bush administration was asking for the industry's help months before 9/11.

Again, I ask, What was the national emergency before 9/11?

Now we have another Right Wing, Swiftboat-like group attempting to scare Americans into thinking that we need to give the Bush administration what they want. If we don’t, according to Senator Mitch McConnell, “some Americans are going to die.” Newsweek has the “Factcheck” goods on their fear-filled efforts here.

At the end of the day while these conservatives groups may be effective, they're pathetic losers. They need to get off their knees, change their drawers, and grow a spine.

America should be beyond living in perpetual fear.

- Mark

TWILIGHT ZONE MOMENT REVISITED

President Bush continues to push for telecom immunity from prosecution. Recall, the industry bought into the president's fear-mongering early on, and helped the president spy on ordinary Americans. Here's President Fear-Mongerer doing what he does best ... crowing like Chicken Little:

Unfortunately, instead of holding a vote on the good bipartisan bill that passed the United States Senate, [the Democrats] introduced a partisan bill that would undermine America's security. This bill is unwise ... Yesterday the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence sent a leader [sic] to the Speaker explaining why the bill is dangerous to our national security.

Again, as I pointed out several weeks ago, here’s our Twilight Zone Moment on the issue: The Bush administration asked the telecom industry to help them spy on Americans … back in February 2001.

And, again, if we do the math, this is seven months before 9/11. Can anyone explain, What was the national emergency in February of 2001?

- Mark

P.S. Let's keep in mind that the Bush administration also asked Qwest to help them spy on Americans, six months before 9/11.

OUR TWILIGHT ZONE MOMENT

The Senate has voted to expand the spying powers of the fear mongering Bush administration. Worse, claiming that the telecom industry was simply helping “in times of national security emergencies” the Bush administration got the Senate to approve retroactive immunity for the telecom industry’s spying. But here’s our Twilight Zone Moment: The Bush administration asked the telecom industry to help them spy on Americans … back in February 2001.

Do the math. That’s seven months before 9/11. Can anyone explain to me, What was the emergency in February of 2001?

- Mark

DODD TO THE RESCUE ...

President Bush was asking congress to grant the telecom industry retroactive immunity for their part in granting the Bush administration access to their networks to spy on ordinary Americans … seven months before 9/11! Yesterday, thanks to Senator Chris Dodd President Bush didn’t get his way. There are a lot of procedural and technical details involved – not to mention the telecom “retroactive immunity” lobby will be back – so click on this link to Glen Greenwald, who explains what’s happening (if the link doesn’t work click here for the Dailykos intro).

For now, Dodd gets kudos for standing tall, and reminding us all that the Democratic Party can stand up to Mr. 24% and his disasterous presidency.

- Mark

DOES THE CRIMINALITY EVER END?

By way of the Washington Monthly ...

It turns out that the Bush administration was asking the telecom industry to work with them to spy on Americans … back in February, 2001. Do the math. That’s seven months before 9/11. Here’s a snippet from the NY Times.

… in February 2001, just days before agency officials met with Qwest officials, the N.S.A. met with AT&T officials to discuss replicating a network center in Bedminster, N.J., to give the agency access to all the global phone and e-mail traffic that ran through it.

And the Bush administration wants retroactive immunity for the telecom industry, claiming they were helping “in times of national security emergencies”? Can anyone explain, what was the emergency in February of 2001?

- Mark