bullypulpit
01-31-2008, 09:43 PM
...What Chimpy McPresident is thinking.
I mean, he wants a FISA bill from Congress which has no meaningful oversight and, this is the kicker, immunity from lawsuits for the telecom companies he believes may have assisted in his illegal domestic surveillance operation.
Now if the surveillance operation was not illegal, as he claims it wasn't, why do the telecoms need immunity from any prosecution for actions which weren't illegal? The only basis for that claim of legality stems from Chimpy's claim of such authority under the 2002 use of force authorization...A claim which few legal scholars believe to be tenable.
His threat to veto the legislation without this immunity for the telecoms throws his own motivations into question. Chimpy keeps babbling about how, if Congress fails to pass this crucial piece of legislation, we'll be drowning in our own blood the next day. Following the same twisted, tenuous and tortured thread of logic, were Chimpy to veto this legislation simply because it lacked the immunity provisions for the telecom companies, well...gosh...we'll be drowning in our own blood the day after he vetoes it. So, one can only wonder if Bush is more concerned about the fate of the telecom companies than he is about the fate of America and her people.
The demand for this bit of legislation is reminiscent of the "Lex Krupp" was issued in 1943 to keep the Krupp family fortune intact in circumvention of German estate law. And we know where that led. Alfried Krupp and 11 of the company's senior managers were tried for war crimes at Nuremburg.
I mean, he wants a FISA bill from Congress which has no meaningful oversight and, this is the kicker, immunity from lawsuits for the telecom companies he believes may have assisted in his illegal domestic surveillance operation.
Now if the surveillance operation was not illegal, as he claims it wasn't, why do the telecoms need immunity from any prosecution for actions which weren't illegal? The only basis for that claim of legality stems from Chimpy's claim of such authority under the 2002 use of force authorization...A claim which few legal scholars believe to be tenable.
His threat to veto the legislation without this immunity for the telecoms throws his own motivations into question. Chimpy keeps babbling about how, if Congress fails to pass this crucial piece of legislation, we'll be drowning in our own blood the next day. Following the same twisted, tenuous and tortured thread of logic, were Chimpy to veto this legislation simply because it lacked the immunity provisions for the telecom companies, well...gosh...we'll be drowning in our own blood the day after he vetoes it. So, one can only wonder if Bush is more concerned about the fate of the telecom companies than he is about the fate of America and her people.
The demand for this bit of legislation is reminiscent of the "Lex Krupp" was issued in 1943 to keep the Krupp family fortune intact in circumvention of German estate law. And we know where that led. Alfried Krupp and 11 of the company's senior managers were tried for war crimes at Nuremburg.