FISA-related updates

Senator Chris Dodd:
"We’ve just sanctioned the single largest invasion of privacy in American history."

h/t to fatbyjhnsn who has links and info at Daily Kos.

Occam's hatchet had this to say (and much more):

It is beyond my comprehension how any senators who voted today in favor of the telco immunity provisions of the FISA can dare to claim that they represent the interests of their constituents. The only interests served by the passage of a bill granting immunity from civil damages for felonious violations of citizens' privacy are those of the corporations, NOT those of the individual citizens who make up any senator's state.

My own senator, Dianne Feinstein, ought to be ashamed of her vote today - although I know she is not, nor will she ever be.

Jim Webb's vote is hugely disappointing, and indefensible.

And Hillary Clinton's absence from the vote leaves me absolutely cold.

There are others, to be sure - and we must never forget who they are.

Because they, evidently, have forgotten who put them into office, and whose interests they are supposed to represent.

Rep. John Conyers, Chair of the House Judiciary Committee, sent a little valentine to White House Counsel Fred Fielding:

First, please provide access to all Members of the House Judiciary Committee those briefings and materials you have made available to 19 Members as of now. Currently, it is my understanding that the entire membership of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Committee on the Judiciary and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence has been permitted to be “read in” to the TSP program. The only Committee of jurisdiction that has not been offered the same access is the House Judiciary Committee. This is unacceptable and serves little purpose but to impede our Members review of the program and understanding of your request for retroactive amnesty.

Second, please provide the Memorandum for Alberto R. Gonzales, Counsel to the President, and William J. Haynes, II, General Counsel Department of Defense, from John C. Yoo, Deputy Assistant Attorney General and Robert J. Delahunty, Special Counsel, Office of Legal Counsel, Re: Authority for Use of Military Force to Combat Terrorist Activities Within the United States. It is believed that this Memorandum is dated either October 17, 2001, or October 23, 2001. Based on the title of this document, and based on the contents of similar memoranda issued at roughly the same time, it appears that a substantial portion of this Memorandum provides a legal determination and analysis as to the nature and scope of the Presidential war powers to accomplish specific acts within the United States. Congress is entitled to know the executive branch’s interpretation of its constitutional powers.

Third, please provide copies of filings, correspondence or transcripts of colloquies with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court about TSP or other warrantless or other electronic surveillance programs, containing legal analysis, arguments, or decisions concerning the interpretation of FISA, the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, the Authorization for the Use of Military Force enacted on September 18, 2001, or the President’s authority under Article II of the Constitution.

h/t to Emptywheel for that.
Glenn Greenwald, as usual, had lots to say today:

The Senate today -- led by Jay Rockefeller, enabled by Harry Reid, and with the active support of at least 12 (and probably more) Democrats, in conjunction with an as-always lockstep GOP caucus -- will vote to legalize warrantless spying on the telephone calls and emails of Americans, and will also provide full retroactive amnesty to lawbreaking telecoms, thus forever putting an end to any efforts to investigate and obtain a judicial ruling regarding the Bush administration's years-long illegal spying programs aimed at Americans. The long, hard efforts by AT&T, Verizon and their all-star, bipartisan cast of lobbyists to grease the wheels of the Senate -- led by former Bush 41 Attorney General William Barr and former Clinton Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick -- are about to pay huge dividends, as such noble efforts invariably do with our political establishment.

It's worth taking a step back and recalling that all of this is the result of the December, 2005 story by the New York Times which first reported that the Bush administration was illegally spying on Americans for many years without warrants of any kind.

In an update he adds:

On a related note, The Washington Post's Dan Froomkin cites the primary justification for telecom amnesty -- that these companies were just doing what they were told by the Government -- and then asks rhetorically: "isn't that the very definition of a police state: that companies should do whatever the government asks, even if they know it's illegal?" I used to think that amnesty supporters held their position because they didn't understand this extremely simple point, but now I think that most of them have their position precisely because they do understand it. A lawless "police state" -- and that's the only term that can be used to describe what this bill creates -- is exactly what our political establishment desires.

[Emphasis mine]

Just so you know: today the Senate of the United States voted to throw the Fourth Amendment out the window and your right to privacy with it.
--the BB