Cui bono? Who profits?

It seems that the Republicans have another concern about the telecommunications companies. Some of the corporate donations are beginning to head toward the Dem side of the aisle.

Mcjoan concludes:

Hmmmm.... Sounds to me like the telcos are a little less concerned about amnesty than they are about coming out on the right side of the next Congress. And maybe it sounds like the Republicans are a little more concerned about trying to protect their hold on the telco lobbyists and all their money than they are protecting America.

You can read the post with a clip from Roll Call here.

Then there's His Majesty the Lying Sack whining and bullying and posturing and pouting. Oh, the urgency! Not to mention the issue of fairness, and we all know George IV is about what's fair, right?

President George Bush today repeated his call for Congress to approve legislation that would protect phone companies from lawsuits filed by people who oppose the role they play in providing terrorist surveillance information to the US government.

'Allowing these lawsuits to proceed would be unfair,' Bush said in the White House today.
[CNNMoney.com]

Bush tries to give the impression that those who pursue transparency in government and want to investigate possible illegal actions at high levels are the equivalent of cheesy ambulance chasers exploiting tort law. [Of course, Bush's beloved theme of "tort reform" is really about making corporations immune from accountability, much as he wishes to be himself. But that's another, yet related, topic.]

In an earlier post mcjoan shares Bush's whining and fearmongering.

More important, Bush added, "the litigation process could lead to the disclosure of information about how we conduct surveillance and it would give al Qaida and others a roadmap as to how to avoid the surveillance."

To which mcjoan responds:

Of course, the litigation process would disclose information on the illegal activities of the government, which is more to the point. Classified information about surveillance processes would of course remain classified in the process. Another straw man from the administration.

BarbinMD has a post with a lucid response to Bush at Daily Kos.

Rush Holt (NJ-12), the Chair of the House Select Intelligence Oversight Panel had this to say about George Bush's latest fearmongering on the need to pass the Protect AT&T Act:

What the President really wants is a permanent blank check to conduct indiscriminate collection and fishing expeditions without any judicial oversight. This does not lead to better intelligence.

The President has had multiple opportunities to work with Congress to modernize FISA. Instead, he has chosen to demagogue this issue through a propaganda campaign, one dependent on fear-mongering and false accusations. If the President is serious about protecting the American people, he'll drop the campaign-style rhetoric and work with us to pass a realistic and workable intelligence surveillance bill.

[Emphasis mine]

--the BB