I was driving to work this morning when I heard Mike McConnell interviewed briefly on NPR's Morning Edition. Among other things, he stated twice that "liability protection" for the telecoms was necessary, because they were being sued for billions of dollars, and the "fiscal responsibility" of the boards of the telecoms was forcing them to be "less cooperative" with the government's surveillance program.
I couldn't get notes, since I was driving, but he also reiterated the older talking points about the changing nature of telecommunications requiring the updated law. He conceded the host's point that currently authorized programs can continue for a year from their authorization without renewing the current law, but said the law needed renewal immediately to respond to changing conditions, etc. I'm unfortunately blocked from the NPR and Minnesota Public Radio websites by the firewall here at the hospital, so I really can't recheck anything I heard, so I hope I'm not mis-stating anything.
This was the first time, though, that I've heard a "national security" argument for the telecom immunity. He didn't respond to the host's question about the need for "liability protection" when the "cooperation" they need from the telecoms is supposedly all within the law. The question about whether the lawsuits might reveal illegal activities wasn't raised.
Update: Thanks to sharilynn, who pointed out McConnell's
Washington Post op-ed today, which expands on the same points.