With Congress back in session and the fight over FISA set to begin once more, Dick Cheney emerged from his undisclosed location to lead the administration's crusade to protect the telecommunication companies. Speaking before a gathering of neocons and cons, Cheney began with thanks, a little self-deprecating humor and a joke:
And when the last chapter is written, it'll be said that we became a stronger, safer country because George W. Bush was President of the United States.
He then moved on to why Congress must act now to protect telecom companies & the administration our nation:
There's another piece of business that requires swift action...FISA, September 11th, danger to our country remains very real, terrorists are still determined, fanatical, hatred, violence, determined, death, hit again, heightened threat, terrorist adversary, 9/11, difficult choices, the lives of 3,000 Americans and turned 16 acres of New York City to ashes, strategic threat, We are at war, mass death, terrorists waging war, chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons, 9/11, beheadings, hatred, sudden, catastrophic violence, 9/11, 9/11...
You get the idea. Then came "some points of fact."
Under President Bush's leadership, after September 11th, the government made some difficult choices. [...]
Congress never intended to grant privacy rights to enemies overseas, yet because of modern technology, the law began to have that very effect. As a consequence, much information that was important to national security simply went uncollected. The intelligence director, Admiral Mike McConnell, alerted us to the intelligence gap, and we asked Congress to fix the law.
Now let's look at some points of fact that are actually based on facts. The Bush administration's warrantless wiretapping program came to light because of an article in the New York Times and until that time it's unclear how many members of Congress were even aware of the program. And during a January, 2006 press conference, George Bush contradicts Cheney's claim that McConnell alerted them to a problem and that they asked Congress to fix it.
Let me tell you exactly how this happened. Right after September the 11th, I said to the people, what can we do -- can we do more -- "the people" being the operators, a guy like Mike Hayden -- can we do more to protect the people...And so he came forward with this program.
Now, my concern has always been that in an attempt to try to pass a law on something that's already legal, we'll show the enemy what we're doing.
So much for Cheney's assertion that they wanted Congress to change the law. It should be noted that during that press conference, Bush also gave what was perhaps the first hint that he would protect telecommunication companies, while at the same time admitting that he knowingly broke the law:
But, John, I want to make sure that people understand that if it -- if the attempt to write law makes this program -- is likely to expose the nature of the program, I'll resist it.
It's a different world. And FISA is still an important tool. It's an important tool. And we still use that tool. But also -- and we -- look -- I said, look, is it possible to conduct this program under the old law? And people said, it doesn't work in order to be able to do the job we expect us to do.
And so that's why I made the decision I made.
Given that FISA wasn't an old law, it was the law, ignoring it was breaking the law. But back to Cheney's speech and the all-important protection for those patriotic telecommunication companies.
Second, the law should uphold an important principle: that those who assist the government in tracking terrorists should not be punished with lawsuits...This is an important consideration, because some providers are facing dozens of lawsuits right now. Why? Because they are believed to have aided the U.S. government in the effort to intercept international communications of al Qaeda-related individuals.
No, they aren't facing lawsuits because they are believed to have aided the government, they are facing lawsuits because they are believed to have broken the law. And while bearing responsibility for illegal acts is an alien concept to this administration, it is hoped that Congress still has some respect left for the rule of law. And after spending a few moments lamenting the possible damage to those companies reputation, Cheney made another joke:
One might even suppose that without liability protection for past activities to aid the government, the private sector might be extremely reluctant to comply with future requests from the government -- even though the requests are necessary to protect American lives.
Hilarious. Because as we now know, the only reason those companies won't comply with requests to protect American lives is if they aren't paid.
Then came the money quote:
That risk is unacceptable to the President. It should be unacceptable to the United States Congress. Liability protection, retroactive to 9/11, is the right thing to do. It's the right way to help us prevent another 9/11 down the road.
Actions by Congress sometimes have unexpected consequences. But a failure to enact a permanent FISA update with liability protections would have predictable and serious consequences.
Who knew? Only immunity for the companies that broke the law will prevent another 9/11. Of course it will also prevent the American people from ever learning the scope of the warrantless, illegal, domestic spying by this administration. And that of course is the whole point.
Comments are closed on this story.