Read other letters about this article
From the bmaz/emptywheel link Jim White provided: It is my contention that the telcos have just such indemnification agreements with the Administration/government, that we do not know about because they are classified and hidden, that so protect them for any liability and losses resulting from the litigation they are faced with; thus they do not need immunity to protect them from potential liability verdicts, they are already covered.
Why would the telecoms increase their contributions to Rockefeller (and probably others - I didn't look) and actively lobby on FISA if they're already indemnified? Why would they bother?
Mr. Rockefeller received little in the way of contributions from AT&T or Verizon executives before this year, reporting $4,050 from 2002 through 2006. From last March to June, he collected a total of $42,850 from executives at the two companies. The increase was first reported by the online journal Wired, using data compiled by the Web site OpenSecrets.org. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/23/washington/23nsa.html
And this:
* Charlie Black, a top McCain political adviser, worked for lobbying firm BKSH until March of this year. AT&T paid the firm $120,000 for the first three months of 2008, in part to lobby for the FISA amendments. Black was listed as one of AT&T's lobbyists.
* The influential Wayne Berman, one of McCain's national finance co-chairs, works for Ogilvy, a prestigious lobbying firm which represents AT&T on FISA. Berman was listed in the first quarter of 2008 as having lobbied for the company.
John Green, also from Oglivy, lobbied on wiretap bills and amnesty for AT&T. He now reportedly works as a full-time liaison to Congress for the McCain campaign.
* Dan Coats, a member of the McCain's Justice Advisory Committee, formerly lobbies for Sprint on FISA reform. http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/06/mccains-ties-to.html
-------
Good Celery! Sublime. Thanks.