Letters to the Editor

This letter is associated with the following article:
An interview with the lead counsel in the AT&T case reveals how much misinformation is being disseminated about telecom amnesty.
  • Big IF here

    IF the telcos did NOT break the law, why would the need immunity?

    I'd like to see a journalist ask someone in the whitehouse one of the following questions:

    1. If the telcos require immunity, wouldn't that mean they were indeed breaking the law? You don't seek immunity for innocent activities.

    or

    2. If the telcos require immunity for doing what the Bush administration told them to, does that mean that the Bush administration is also engaged in illegal activities?