- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
Glenn, perhaps I'm reading this wrong, but just based on the section of the bill that you quoted, it looks like there might be something else going on that in some ways might make this a bit more of a compromise.
If (and I really mean IF) that is what is going on, the compromise might be something like this: OK, you can have your stupid amnesty for any actions taken within these specified dates, but in exchange, there is no amnesty for anything that happens after January 17th 2007.
If that is the case, then perhaps that's the compromise right there.
I still agree with you 100% that this is unnecessary and craven, and a huge cave-in to Bush and the tele-comms, but perhaps (and I really mean perhaps) it's not quite as bad as it seems right now.
Do you know what aspect of the law applies to actions taken after January 17th 2007? Thanks,
-- Joel
