Corrupting Congress, Subverting the Bill of Rights

<p><i>If congressional grifters who have reaped serious campaign contributions from deep-pocket telecoms had not granted companies such as AT&amp;T, Sprint, Verizon and other carriers retroactive immunity, potential privacy breaches and claims from EFF's Hepting vs. AT&amp;T, and dozens of other lawsuits, could have potentially cost the firms billions in damages.</i></p > <!--break--> <p><b>Telecom Lobbying, Congress &amp; the National Security State</b></p > <p>The bipartisan consensus that encourages unaccountable secret state agencies to illegally spy on the American people under color of a limitless, and highly profitable, "war on terror" was dealt a (minor) blow October 13.</p > <p>Federal District Court Judge Jeffrey White denied a motion by the Obama administration that the court issue a 30-day stay to "release records relating to telecom lobbying over last year's debate over immunity for corporate participation in government spying," the Electronic Frontier Foundation reported.</p > <p>The Justice Department had argued that the Bush, and now, the Obama administration's Office of Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and Congress were exempt from releasing lobbying records under the Freedom of Information Act, since consultations amongst said grifters were protected as "intra-agency" records.</p > <p>One might add, since the 2001 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, a well-funded surveillance-industrial-complex fueled by giant defense firms and the telecommunications industry have, as investigative journalist Tim Shorrock reported back in 2005 "fielded armies of lobbyists to keep the money flowing."</p > <p>White's denial of a motion for a stay followed a startling admission by Department of Justice (DoJ) attorneys that America's telecommunication firms are actually "an arm of the government&#8212;at least when it comes to secret spying," Wired reported October 8. The government had argued that:</p > <p>"The communications between the agencies and telecommunications companies regarding the immunity provisions of the proposed legislation have been regarded as intra-agency because the government and the companies have a common interest in the defense of the pending litigation and the communications regarding the immunity provisions concerned that common interest."</p > <p>U.S. District Court Judge Jeffery White disagreed and ruled on September 24 that the feds had to release the names of the telecom employees that contacted the Justice Department and the White House to lobby for a get-out-of-court-free card. (Ryan Singel, "Telephone Company Is Arm of Government, Feds Admit in Spy Suit," Wired, October 8, 2009)</p > <p>EFF had sued the state in order to discover what role telecom lobbyists played in persuading Congress to grant the nation's telecommunications' giants retroactive immunity for their role in illegal spying as part of the Bush, and now, Obama regime's Presidential Spying Program.</p > <p>If congressional grifters who have reaped serious campaign contributions from deep-pocket telecoms had not granted companies such as AT&amp;T, Sprint, Verizon and other carriers retroactive immunity, potential privacy breaches and claims from EFF's Hepting vs. AT&amp;T, and dozens of other lawsuits, could have potentially cost the firms billions in damages.</p > <p>A federal district court judge dismissed Hepting in June, ruling that the companies had immunity from liability under provisions of the despicable FISA Amendments Act (FAA).</p > <p>In dismissing the state's motion for a stay in the telecom lobbying records case, EFF senior staff attorney Kurt Opsahl wrote,</p > <p>On October 8, the day before the documents were due, the DOJ and ODNI filed an emergency motion asking the Court of Appeals for a 30-day stay while the agencies continue to contemplate an appeal. Around noon on October 9, the Ninth Circuit denied their emergency motion, telling the government it had to file for a motion for a stay pending appeal in the district court first.</p > <p>Later that afternoon, the government filed again in the federal district court, but once again did not seek a stay pending an actual appeal. Instead, for the third time, the government insisted it could delay the release of telecom lobbying records while it considered the pros and cons of appealing. Briefing was complete by noon today, and Judge White denied the third attempt at delay this afternoon. (Kurt Opsahl, "Federal Court Denies Government Attempt to Delay Release of Telecom Records. Again.," Electronic Frontier Foundation, News Update, October 13, 2009)</p > <p>Judge White noted that the Obama administration's cynical "directive on transparency in government" applied to "the warrantless wiretapping program" and insisted that the "public interest lies in favor of disclosure" of pertinent lobbying records.</p > <p>The ruling is all the more remarkable when one considers that Judge White was appointed to the U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, the most civil liberties' friendly court in the nation, by none other than world class war criminal and corrupter-in-chief, George W. Bush.</p > <p><a href="http://pages.citebite.com/y1p8u6s4h3exv">Read more about the shadowlands of the corporate police state</a></p >

<p><i>If congressional grifters who have reaped serious campaign contributions from deep-pocket telecoms had not granted companies such as AT&amp;T, Sprint, Verizon and other carriers retroactive immunity, potential privacy breaches and claims from EFF's Hepting vs. AT&amp;T, and dozens of other lawsuits, could have potentially cost the firms billions in damages.</i></p> <!--break--><p><b>Telecom Lobbying, Congress &amp; the National Security State</b></p> <p>The bipartisan consensus that encourages unaccountable secret state agencies to illegally spy on the American people under color of a limitless, and highly profitable, "war on terror" was dealt a (minor) blow October 13.</p> <p>Federal District Court Judge Jeffrey White denied a motion by the Obama administration that the court issue a 30-day stay to "release records relating to telecom lobbying over last year's debate over immunity for corporate participation in government spying," the Electronic Frontier Foundation reported.</p> <p>The Justice Department had argued that the Bush, and now, the Obama administration's Office of Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and Congress were exempt from releasing lobbying records under the Freedom of Information Act, since consultations amongst said grifters were protected as "intra-agency" records.</p> <p>One might add, since the 2001 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, a well-funded surveillance-industrial-complex fueled by giant defense firms and the telecommunications industry have, as investigative journalist Tim Shorrock reported back in 2005 "fielded armies of lobbyists to keep the money flowing."</p> <p>White's denial of a motion for a stay followed a startling admission by Department of Justice (DoJ) attorneys that America's telecommunication firms are actually "an arm of the government—at least when it comes to secret spying," Wired reported October 8. The government had argued that:</p> <p>"The communications between the agencies and telecommunications companies regarding the immunity provisions of the proposed legislation have been regarded as intra-agency because the government and the companies have a common interest in the defense of the pending litigation and the communications regarding the immunity provisions concerned that common interest."</p> <p>U.S. District Court Judge Jeffery White disagreed and ruled on September 24 that the feds had to release the names of the telecom employees that contacted the Justice Department and the White House to lobby for a get-out-of-court-free card. (Ryan Singel, "Telephone Company Is Arm of Government, Feds Admit in Spy Suit," Wired, October 8, 2009)</p> <p>EFF had sued the state in order to discover what role telecom lobbyists played in persuading Congress to grant the nation's telecommunications' giants retroactive immunity for their role in illegal spying as part of the Bush, and now, Obama regime's Presidential Spying Program.</p> <p>If congressional grifters who have reaped serious campaign contributions from deep-pocket telecoms had not granted companies such as AT&amp;T, Sprint, Verizon and other carriers retroactive immunity, potential privacy breaches and claims from EFF's Hepting vs. AT&amp;T, and dozens of other lawsuits, could have potentially cost the firms billions in damages.</p> <p>A federal district court judge dismissed Hepting in June, ruling that the companies had immunity from liability under provisions of the despicable FISA Amendments Act (FAA).</p> <p>In dismissing the state's motion for a stay in the telecom lobbying records case, EFF senior staff attorney Kurt Opsahl wrote,</p> <p>On October 8, the day before the documents were due, the DOJ and ODNI filed an emergency motion asking the Court of Appeals for a 30-day stay while the agencies continue to contemplate an appeal. Around noon on October 9, the Ninth Circuit denied their emergency motion, telling the government it had to file for a motion for a stay pending appeal in the district court first.</p> <p>Later that afternoon, the government filed again in the federal district court, but once again did not seek a stay pending an actual appeal. Instead, for the third time, the government insisted it could delay the release of telecom lobbying records while it considered the pros and cons of appealing. Briefing was complete by noon today, and Judge White denied the third attempt at delay this afternoon. (Kurt Opsahl, "Federal Court Denies Government Attempt to Delay Release of Telecom Records. Again.," Electronic Frontier Foundation, News Update, October 13, 2009)</p> <p>Judge White noted that the Obama administration's cynical "directive on transparency in government" applied to "the warrantless wiretapping program" and insisted that the "public interest lies in favor of disclosure" of pertinent lobbying records.</p> <p>The ruling is all the more remarkable when one considers that Judge White was appointed to the U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, the most civil liberties' friendly court in the nation, by none other than world class war criminal and corrupter-in-chief, George W. Bush.</p> <p><a href="http://pages.citebite.com/y1p8u6s4h3exv">Read more about the shadowlands of the corporate police state</a></p>