Dear bile,

Barack Obama is now the presumptive Democratic nominee, and hundreds of thousands of new supporters have joined our movement for change in the past few weeks.

This is from an email I just received from Obama for America <info@barackobama.com>

The reason I’m receiving spam from Barack Obama’s presidential campaign is that I sent them a message through DownsizeDC.org asking him to fight the FISA telecom immunity.

I wonder how many of those thousands were in fact auto signups from emails from DownsizeDC.org like I did. Sorry Barack but we aren’t supporters and we surely have not joined your movement for “change.”

I received this in my inbox this evening. Since I used DownsizeDC.org’s service to send him a message to not support the FISA bill I’ve been getting Obama spam.

Dear Friend,

Thank you for contacting us and sharing your strong feelings about this important issue.  Please find a statement from Senator Obama below.

We appreciate hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Obama for America,

—
Given the grave threats that we face, our national security agencies must have the capability to gather intelligence and track down terrorists before they strike, while respecting the rule of law and the privacy and civil liberties of the American people. There is also little doubt that the Bush Administration, with the cooperation of major telecommunications companies, has abused that authority and undermined the Constitution by intercepting the communications of innocent Americans without their knowledge or the required court orders.

That is why last year I opposed the so-called Protect America Act, which expanded the surveillance powers of the government without sufficient independent oversight to protect the privacy and civil liberties of innocent Americans. I have also opposed the granting of retroactive immunity to those who were allegedly complicit in acts of illegal spying in the past.

After months of negotiation, the House passed a compromise that, while far from perfect, is a marked improvement over last year’s Protect America Act.  Under this compromise legislation, an important tool in the fight against terrorism will continue, but the President’s illegal program of warrantless surveillance will be over. It restores FISA and existing criminal wiretap statutes as the exclusive means to conduct surveillance - making it clear that the President cannot circumvent the law and disregard the civil liberties of the American people. It also firmly re-establishes basic judicial oversight over all domestic surveillance in the future.

It does, however, grant retroactive immunity, and I voted in the Senate three times to remove this provision so that we could seek full accountability for past offenses.  Unfortunately, these attempts were unsuccessful.  But this compromise guarantees a thorough review by the Inspectors General of our national security agencies to determine what took place in the past, and ensures that there will be accountability going forward. By demanding oversight and accountability, a grassroots movement of Americans has helped yield a bill that is far better than the Protect America Act.

It is not all that I would want. But given the legitimate threats we face, providing effective intelligence collection tools with appropriate safeguards is too important to delay.  So I support the compromise, but do so with a firm pledge that as President, I will carefully monitor the program, review the report by the Inspectors General, and work with the Congress to take any additional steps I deem necessary to protect the lives - and the liberty - of the American people.

———————-
Paid for by Obama for America

Compromise? Hardly. Capitulation. Absolutely.
Legitimate threats? Sure from the government. From the gang who goes around the world killing brown people and trying to force “democracy” on the rest of them in our name.

http://blog.wired.com/…

A group of high-profile progressive bloggers and libertarian Republicans are rolling out a new political action committee called Accountability Now to channel widespread anger over pending legislation that would legalize much of the president’s warrantless electronic surveillance of Americans, and grant retroactive legal immunity to telephone companies that cooperated with the spying when it was still illegal.

Progressive author and lawyer Glenn Greenwald, who writes for Salon, and blogger Jane Hamsher of Firedoglake are spearheading the effort. They’ve hired the political media consultants behind a historic Ron Paul online fundraising drive to organize a similar “moneybomb,” set to go off on August 8.

“That is the day Richard Nixon resigned, and the idea is that 35 years ago when you did this kind of stuff, you were forced out of office, and now congress drops everything to make your crimes legal,” says Hamsher in an interview.

The campaign marks a milestone in the evolution of online grassroots organizing. The PAC is cherry-picking the tactics and tools that proved most successful in the presidential primary campaigns, and is using them to corral online support for the single issue of domestic spying. The PAC’s money pay for advertisements in the districts of the House Democrats who voted for the spy bill — potentially causing problems for those capitulating on the Bush wiretapping program.

Key to the new effort are consultants Trevor Lyman and Rick Williams, whose successful online money-raising effort for Ron Paul, the libertarian-leaning Texas congressman, broke records last year. The pair masterminded a “moneybomb” drive called “This November 5th.” that brought in an unprecedented $4.2 million in contributions in a single day. A repeat effort in December raised another $6 million for Paul.

Now the pair have built a web page for Accountability Now where opponents of the spy bill can commit in advance to donating money to the PAC. Similar to the Ron Paul drives, netizens can grab Accountability Now badges to place on their blogs, which link back to the fundraising pledge page.

The moneybomb is only one out of several techniques, both online and off, that Hamsher’s Firedoglake is experimenting with to make offending members of congress feel the anger of their constituents.

Firedoglake has already hired Advomatic Designs in New York City and Advomatic Laboratories in Anchorage, Alaska to create an online VOIP widget that lets voters call their senators ask them what their stance is on the spy legislation, and to urge them to vote for an amendment that would remove the telecom immunity provision.

Using money its already raised, the group ran a full-page advertisement in the Washington Post Tuesday with bullet points explaining what’s wrong with the pending legislation.

The Senate is expected to follow the House in approving the new spy legislation Wednesday.

You can go to DownsizeDC.org to easily send the following message to your congress critters.

Please do everything you can to defeat the Senate version of HR 6304, the FISA Amendments Act of 2008. Please use your power to filibuster.

You can also send Barak Obama a message asking him to lead the fight in fighting this.

Update:

Arstechnica has a brief article on the Bingaman amendment which is causing some stir.

Instead of immediately granting retroactive immunity to telecoms being sued for their role in the NSA’s warrantless wiretapping program—or, what amounts to the same thing, instructing a federal court to grant such immunity—Bingaman would stay the suits until 90 after the delivery of a report by the Inspector General’s on the president’s secret surveillance programs. Immunity would still follow automatically at this point, but the provision might provide an incentive for the administration not to drag its feet in complying with the investigation, and it would give Congress the opportunity to reconsider once it actually knows what behavior it is immunizing. The Electronic Frontier Foundation and prominent immunity opponent Glenn Greenwald have both endorsed the amendment.

Perhaps tellingly, even this stay-and-delay provision is apparently unacceptable to Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell and Attorney General Michael Mukasey, who in a letter to Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) write:

Any amendment that would delay implementation of the liability protections in this matter is unacceptable. Providing prompt liability protection is critical to the national security. Accordingly, we, as well as the President’s other senior advisers, will recommend that the President veto any bill that includes such an amendment.

http://www.antiwar.com/…

Mr. Speaker, I regret that due to the unexpected last-minute appearance of this measure on the legislative calendar this week, a prior commitment has prevented me from voting on the FISA amendments. I have strongly opposed every previous FISA overhaul attempt and I certainly would have voted against this one as well.

The main reason I oppose this latest version is that it still clearly violates the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution by allowing the federal government to engage in the bulk collection of American citizens’ communications without a search warrant. That US citizens can have their private communication intercepted by the government without a search warrant is anti-American, deeply disturbing, and completely unacceptable.

In addition to gutting the fourth amendment, this measure will deprive Americans who have had their rights violated by telecommunication companies involved in the Administration’s illegal wiretapping program the right to seek redress in the courts for the wrongs committed against them. Worse, this measure provides for retroactive immunity, whereby individuals or organizations that broke the law as it existed are granted immunity for prior illegal actions once the law has been changed. Ex post facto laws have long been considered anathema in free societies under rule of law. Our Founding Fathers recognized this, including in Article I section 9 of the Constitution that “No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.” How is this FISA bill not a variation of ex post facto? That alone should give pause to supporters of this measure.

Mr. Speaker, we should understand that decimating the protections that our Constitution provides us against the government is far more dangerous to the future of this country than whatever external threats may exist. We can protect this country without violating the Constitution and I urge my colleagues to reconsider their support for this measure.

He missed the vote because he was speaking at the Montana state GOP convention.

http://arstechnica.com/…

Floor debate on the measure, which expands executive branch surveillance authority and provides retroactive amnesty for telecoms implicated in warrantless NSA wiretapping, consisted largely of mutual congratulation. Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-MO) lauded the bill as a shining example of “what we can do when we come together,” a sentiment echoed by Rep James Langevin (D-RI), who said that the compromise “illustrates what this House can do when it deliberates with care, holds steady against fearmongering, and acts in the best interests of the country and its citizens.”

Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-TX) interrupted the good vibes briefly to charge Democratic leaders, who had blocked a vote on a previous version of reforms to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, with “playing potliics with national security.” But even he managed to close on a positive note, stressing that “when this House is allowed to vote, we can come together and accomplish things for the country.” Perhaps most effusive was Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD), the chief architect of the deal, who after being introduced as a man with the “wisdom of Solomon and the patience of Job” delivered an encomium to his colleagues and staff so fulsome that I found myself searching in vain for the golden statuette.

Some Democrats nevertheless felt obliged to assure skeptics that the compromise bill did not simply represent a capitulation to White House demands. Intelligence Committee Chair Silvestre Reyes (D-TX), for instance, distinguished the bill from legislation passed in the Senate by noting that “in this bill, Congress does not grant immunity. Congress isn’t deciding the question of immunity; the district court will.” Which is true: The Senate language granted immunity from lawsuits to any telecom that received a written directive from the attorney general, regardless of whether the company believed its actions to be lawful. The new, improved language instructs a federal court to grant immunity from lawsuits to any telecom that received a written directive from the attorney general, regardless of whether the company believed its actions to be lawful.

Lone When the votes were tallied, just under half of House Democrats joined Republicans in supporting the bill. A lone Republican,  Rep. Tim Johnson (R-IL), voted against it. A spokesman told Ars that Johnson “voted that way, consistent with all of his past votes on the FISA bill, because he’s worried about its impact on civil liberties, and he belives that the necessary authority for the intelligence agencies already exists. He’s talked to people on the front lines, and the system works very effectively now.”

Lone Republican voted Na and it wasn’t Ron Paul??? Well unfortunately he had the long planned speaking position at the Montana GOP convention. He didn’t get any of the delegates even though he came in 2nd in the Montana GOP caucus over McCain’s 3rd place showing. Tell me again how it’s unfair that Paul supporters were trying to get more delegates then their percentage of the vote?

Anyway, this capitulation by the Democrats while not surprising is no less disappointing. If they want to stop it they could have but they don’t. Just like they don’t want to stop the war in Iraq or impeach president or vice president for gross violations of the Constitution.