Not surprising at all:
“While we still have concerns about aspects of the new House FISA bill, the American Civil Liberties Union is encouraged by the new draft – particularly the language on state secrets, which would allow the cases to go forward…

To reitereate my point – if the request is legal; I have no issue with it. If the request is illegal then, well, its illegal and should be brought out so it doesn’t happen again.

The argument that it’s OK, even if illegal, because we are in a “very real war” doesn’t persuade me. I oppose this immunity for the same reason I oppose warrentless searches and warrentless wiretaps.
I’m a Constitutionalist at heart and we do have laws.

It’s really risky, but the results are proven. It works because in the end civil courts, unless judges throwout the ridiculous transgressions of the plaintiff’s attorney(s), are cases that will be decided by our peers in the jury. Put enough teachers, labor activists, and social justice advocates on the jury and it’s basically a win win strategy. You get your legal precedent and you insulate the party from having to author the legislation and face a campaign that would cite it.

tgillian on March 12, 2008 at 8:25 AM

Taking notes of the standards of usage for posters, including the prohibition on ad hominem attacks, I can only say that if a person were to hold views such as these I would have to reach the conclusion that he was rather more an idiot than a genius.

I would much rather this was hashed out in court. It will help determine if the Govt exceeded its legal power or not. I don’t care if a couple of lawyers make some money if it means oversight of actions taken that may have been illegal at the cost of less freedom.

alphie on March 11, 2008 at 7:03 PM

What’s it all about?

My guess is consumers.

Um, its not Congres’s place to declassify information, and thats EXACTLY what they would have to do.

Romeo13 on March 11, 2008 at 7:14 PM

And just for good measure, c) the Democrats in Congress are promising what they don’t have, anyway, since they have no authority to declassify documents.

theregoestheneighborhood on March 11, 2008 at 11:30 PM

Exactly what I was thinking…they have no authority to declassify them, and when some telecom would sue, I’m sure they would be told the records are too classified to be used.

…or they don’t exist. Who would know since they’re classified?

But would any surrendercrat voter know this? No.

The government tells the telecoms to turn over information about foreign enemies based on national security.

The telecoms obey.

Class action lawsuits are filed against the telecoms — NOT criminal charges, since no one seems to really believe there was a crime here. (Yes, some keep screaming about it, but you’ll notice they never ask for criminal charges to be filed)

And Democrats in Congress, rather than reward the telecoms for doing their patriotic duty, want to allow the lawsuits to go forward.

From this, you might conclude that a) the Democrats in Congress don’t care an inch about national security, and b) the Democrats in Congress don’t care that the telecom companies are being effectively punished for doing the right thing.

But wait! The Democrats in Congress do care about the telecoms’ predicament, and are willing to let them defend themselves in court with classified documents.

From which we can only conclude that a) the Democrats in Congress don’t care that much about the telecoms’ predicament, or they wouldn’t force them to go through the trial, and b) the Democrats in Congress really don’t care at all about national security, since they’d allow classified documents to be part of public trials.

And just for good measure, c) the Democrats in Congress are promising what they don’t have, anyway, since they have no authority to declassify documents.

Maybe they want a veto?

Wow, indeed.

bigbeas on March 11, 2008 at 10:11 PM

Um, you do realize that there will be lawyers on BOTH sides of this?

Plantifs and defending the telcoms? And of course, government lawyers?

Look at the stinkin Exon Valdeez case… BILLIONS are on the line in PUNTATIVE damages… and I personaly know a lawyer who, if that goes through, will make over 35 million on it… beyond what he billed his clients over the years…

Housed

= Houses. Knuckles are dragging well today :)

House Democrats have acted in the best interest of their trial-lawyer contributors.

In this thread, everybody hates lawyers. OK… the number of lawyers that have major telecom corporations as clients is pretty small in the grand scheme of things. Can you honestly argue that this legislation was the result of American Trial Lawyers Association lobbying? or the ABA?

P.S. It’s the consumer that will be paying the lawyers. You wanna know why fast food prices are going up? Ask the million dollar hot coffee chick.

Did you know that the McDonalds jury award in that case was reduced to under $600,000 on appeal? Do you know that the coffee was so hot that it caused 3rd degree burns and permanent injuries to a 79 year-old woman? If you’re going to use the McDonalds case as an example, you should know the facts.

Yes, many lawyers are liberal d-bags. But it’s stupid to blame bad Democrat policies on all lawyers.

Democrat traitor scum (redundant, I know) are mere errand boys and girls for their paymasters.

Their fellow Americans mean NOTHING to Democrat politicians.

Again I’ll say it – anyone who votes for a Democrat, any Democrat this fall is a complete idiot.

>:-(

I don’t know why the President just doesn’t hand out pardon’s to those companies that may be affected by this Democratic “hooray for me, screw you” game.

How do these people get elected into office? It’s little wonder why nothing in Washington seems to get done.

We need term limits for all politicians. Get elected to the next higher office after two terms or get a real job inside the U.S. economy.

This is nothing more than a means to ENSURE folks like the NY Times get access to classified info…

Romeo13 on March 11, 2008 at 7:14 PM

Bingo!

- The Cat

P.S. It’s the consumer that will be paying the lawyers. You wanna know why fast food prices are going up? Ask the million dollar hot coffee chick.

Can ya tell?

Someone’s gonna pay, alright.

All of us.

No one besides a battalion of trial lawyers is going to see squat.

Democrats suck.

And beside that, they suck.