FISA -- WHAT was the "compromise":?

[gateley]

What did the Reps give up in return for our letting the retroactive immunity stay?

How did they compromise?

Anybody know? Thanks.

[Eric J in MN]

1. The phone companies have to show a memo...

...from a Bush official claiming that warrantless-wiretapping is legal, under the House version.

In the previously-passed Senate version, phone companies got retroactive immunity without even showing a memo.

The phone companies have these memos, and so it isn't a signficant difference.

[Waya]

2. The warrants.......

...have to get them......within seven days instead of three days - but still.....no warrantless anything......

[Junkdrawer]

8. And if they're refused, they're allowed to continue the wiretap during "appeals"...

Court review? Pssh. Please. This is how it would work: The government wants to tap someone’s phone. It claims “exigent circumstances” and begins to do so. Then it goes to the FISA Court to be granted a warrant. “Hold up,” says the court. “This application is problematic and based on heresay.” Now the government starts the appeals process and that goes on for heaven knows how long. When does the surveillance stop on the problematic target? Um, never. The government is allowed to begin tapping without the courts and continue tapping when the court says no, provided it appeals. Nice, strong and meaningful judicial review, huh?

http://blog.aclu.org/2008/06/19/this-spade-is-a-spade-fisa-deal-is-bunk/

[cornermouse]

3. It's the same type of compromise they've "worked out"

for the last 12 years or more in the legislative branch.

Sorry. I'm feeling really cranky today.

[Junkdrawer]

4. They "compromised" our rights. n/t

[EFerrari]

6. Right In particular, they put in what passes for judicial review

of existing cases but in fact is not judicial review because the courts will have no mechanism to avoid killing existing cases. They will have to throw them out if the AG says the telcos et all were only acting on a government request.

[gateley]

10. Yep - you got that right. nt

[kentuck]

5. We agreed there would be no Vaseline.

That's about it.

[ananda]

7. They didn't compromise.

They caved in to lobbyist pressure and the
way their leadership turned against them.

I mean, Pelosi can hurt a lot of careers
and ambitions.. and the telecoms have a LOT
of money and the ability to lobby with a
vengeance.

Still..

[asjr]

9. For the next Congress I wish someone

would write a new dictionary on CongressSpeak. Compromise? Not on the table? Special immunity? I have come to believe Congress makes it up as they go along.

[Uncle Joe]

11. The Republicans told the Democratic Corporatists

they still respected them after it was over and they decided the American People could clean the sheets.