According to Fox News' Cameron, the Senate "tweaked" FISA "a little bit"
SUMMARY: On Special Report, Carl Cameron reported that Sens. John McCain and Barack Obama "were both present for the debate and vote on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act [FISA] being tweaked a little bit today." However, if the FISA amendments bill becomes law, it would do far more than "tweak[]" FISA "a little bit" -- as The Washington Post reported, it "include[s] major revisions to the 30-year-old Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which established a secret court to issue warrants for domestic spying on suspects in terrorism and intelligence cases."
On the February 12 edition of Fox News' Special Report with Brit Hume, chief political correspondent Carl Cameron reported that Sens. John McCain (R-AZ) and Barack Obama (D-IL), both presidential candidates, "were both present for the debate and vote on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act [FISA] being tweaked a little bit today." Cameron was reporting that "perhaps the shot of the day took place on the Senate floor" during that debate and vote, "and we have some video of the two of them on the Senate floor shaking hands and it raises the question, is that the fall contest right there?" However, the FISA amendments bill that the Senate was considering at the time -- and which it later passed -- would, if it became law, do far more than "tweak[]" FISA "a little bit." Rather, as The Washington Post reported on February 13, the Senate bill "include[s] major revisions to the 30-year-old Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which established a secret court to issue warrants for domestic spying on suspects in terrorism and intelligence cases."
The Senate-approved bill would, for the most part, extend until the end of 2013 revisions to FISA enacted by Congress in August 2007 as the Protect America Act (PAA). The PAA, which is set to expire on February 15 if Congress does not act, is not simply a "tweak[]" to FISA. Rather, as the Post article explained, the PAA "expanded the government's authority to intercept -- without a court order -- the phone calls and e-mails of people in the United States communicating with others overseas." The Post article continued: "U.S. intelligence agencies previously had broad leeway to monitor the communications of foreign terrorism suspects but needed warrants to monitor calls intercepted in the United States, regardless of where they originated."
As Special Report guest host Bret Baier noted about 10 minutes after Cameron's report, the Senate version of the FISA amendments bill would also grant retroactive immunity to telecommunications providers who cooperated with the Bush administration in the conduct of its warrantless domestic wiretapping program.
From the February 12 edition of Fox News' Special Report with Brit Hume:
CAMERON: So, McCain has this problem of a rival picking up support of conservatives and highlighting that he still has some problems sowing up the socially and religious conservative base of the Republican Party. While all that's going on, they also recognize that they have to begin to build an organization for a national campaign in the general election, hiring former [Rudy] Giuliani staffers, former [Mitt] Romney staffers.
And today, perhaps the shot of the day took place on the Senate floor when John McCain and Barack Obama were both present for the debate and vote on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act being tweaked a little bit today, and we have some video of the two of them on the Senate floor shaking hands and it raises the question, is that the fall contest right there?
Barack Obama seeming to pick up more and more momentum on the Democratic side, and John McCain confident that, statistically, he's going to be a lot closer to the nomination by the end of this evening -- Bret.
[...]
BAIER: As Carl Cameron mentioned, Senators McCain and Obama were on the Senate floor today, although Hillary Clinton was not. McCain voted for and Obama against ending debate over a bill giving retroactive immunity to telecom companies that helped the government eavesdrop on suspected terrorists. The cloture resolution passed 69-to-29, and the bill itself also easily passed, 68-to-29. There is a chance the House may not act by the end of the week when the current temporary law expires.















A little bit?!?!?......
Are you fricken kidding me!!
How dare those 16 Senate Dems vote yes to allow the telcom companies retroactive immunity for all their collective law breaking!
Jim Webb? Tim Johnson? Claire McCaskill?....
This is as much a slap in the face to We the People as when the Supreme Court bestowed upon us an illegally given presidency to Bush in 2000!
Sick! Disgusting! Un-Democratic! Un-American!
Each of these Dems need now to be replaced in their next election cycle!
SAVE DEMOCRACY, VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT!!
May 2001! You Wingnuts that call yourself Republicans, or Conservatives do you hear me, May 2001. Thats 5/11/2001 opposed to four months later 9/11/2001.
When does a "true conservative" approve of surrendering their 4th Amendment rights, when do Republicans deem it alright for the President to spy on whomever, where ever, when ever without any sort of oversight of any kind, to violate the law with historic contempt?
Answer: When the opportunity presents itself to us FEAR to take the reins of power, and transform American democracy into American Fascism.
Proud Republicans who proudly discard the "rule of law.' I suppose we should not care if they pass a law to make marriage only between a man and woman since they have as many gays as Democrats, their just crouded in the closet. It's not like they'll respect the law or anything.
Happy Thoughts;
Dan Grady
SAVE DEMOCRACY, VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT!!
I too hate the idea fact that Democrats would grant "blind retroactive immunity" to these scoundrels, and their names will not be forgotten.
Also, May 2001 is when they started the "program" to spy on Americans. If you have convinced yourself they have not used this spying to subvert, and coerce political rivals, you are a fool.
Happy Thoughts;
Dan Grady
Troll, no content
I'm familiar with the 2nd amendment, but please inform us all what the "2nd amendent" is. Is that in the Conservative Constitution that was handed out at the CPAC conference? Is it the one that says "ignore all facts and historical evidence and just make crap up to suit your current desires."
68-to-29?
What those numbers say to me is that there are 68 Senators who need to be sent home, immediately.
hstybuf6553,
If there is anyone that is a fool in here, it is you!
However, I sincerely hope that you are just being funny and don't really mean all the stupid, moronic, and illogical posts that you grace us with here at MMFA? But I digress.......
Of course, you have every right, granted to you by the 1st, 9th and 14th amendments to make yourself heard here....... oh wait... you only care about your childish right to own a bunch of guns.....
Lot good they will do ya when your sitting in a cell at Gitmo because you were too braindead to have allowed your Republican government to take away your 4th, 5th, 6th, and 8th amendments rights away....... oh wait... you only seem to care about having your precious guns.... how foolish of me to intrude on your right to make an a$$ of yourself!
At least the turrists will not have blown you up!
Actually, it's not. A person within the Democratic party is a Democrat, but I'm sure that the facts are somewhat lost on you, so I digress. I'm sure any moment now, you'll name drop someone else that you went to a party with last weekend, or some fancy shmancy party you are supposedly attending this weekend with your high powered lawyer type friends from the Federalist Society. For someone who is allegedly so intelligent, you neither write that way, or present anything resembling fact based opinions, it makes me wonder if you are what you say you are, which I doubt very much, but hey, it's the internet, you can present yourself however you'd like to. Silly as that may be.
Anyway, the democrats who voted for this should really be ashamed of themselves, as should the republicans who voted for it also. Since when is it OK to remove our rights? If they want to listen in on, or look at e-mails from an American citizen, they need to get a warrant, I'm pretty sure that the Constitution says something like that in there. I have no problem with them not getting warrants to listen in to people overseas, unless they are American citizens. I love how they named it the Protect America Act, in other words, the Spy on Americans Act. Not to mention they're letting lawbreakers go (the telecommunications companies who spied on us). I can't believe that the majority keep letting Bush get his way, when some of them know that it's completely and ignorantly wrong.
Buf:
For somebody who regularly insults people on grammatical errors in their posts you seem to have little understanding of such rules yourself. The name of the party is the DEMOCRATIC party. Members of the DEMOCRATIC party are DEMOCRATS. Once again you disregard whatever you dislike.