New Presidential Memo permits Negroponte to sidestep telecom SecuritiesLaw

[seafan]

New Presidential Memorandum Permits Intelligence Director To Authorize Telcos To Lie Without Violating Securities Law

Ordinarily, a company that conceals their transactions and activities from the public would violate securities law. But an presidential memorandum signed by the President on May 5 allows the Director of National Intelligence, John Negroponte, to authorize a company to conceal activities related to national security. (See 15 U.S.C. 78m(b)(3)(A))

[ShortnFiery]

1. Can't Congress LIMIT these ludicrous "Memos" & "Signing Statements

It seems that their only purpose is to circumvent the LAWS made by our Legislative Branch. :shrug:

Without LIMITS to this "out of control" Executive Branch, there are NO Checks and Balances. :(

[shance]

2. Sure they could. If they did their job and acted like adults instead of .

scaredy cat children.

[Jack Rabbit]

17. Yes, they could. It's called impeachment.

It seems that (the memos') only purpose is to circumvent the LAWS made by our Legislative Branch.

Impeachment is what Congress is supposed to do to a President who insists on circumventing the law.

Without LIMITS to this "out of control" Executive Branch, there are NO Checks and Balances.

Impeachment is part of the system of checks and balances. Using it will restore the balance in government.

[Supersedeas]

3. side-stepping the law has become an * pasttime

[Metta]

4. It's my understanding that * can't unilaterally bless people

to break the law. Congress makes the laws whether they're asleep now or not.

[babylonsister]

15. "...he has the power to set aside the laws..."

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/04/30/examples_of_the_presidents_signing_statements/

Examples of the president's signing statements

April 30, 2006

Since taking office in 2001, President Bush has issued signing statements on more than 750 new laws, declaring that he has the power to set aside the laws when they conflict with his legal interpretation of the Constitution. The federal government is instructed to follow the statements when it enforces the laws. Here are 10 examples and the dates Bush signed them:

more...

[welshTerrier2]

5. my call to Verizon

yesterday, i called Verizon to ask them what the hell they thought they were doing ...

the person i spoke to read me their "official memo" on the subject:

(quoting from memory): "Verizon is not able to either confirm or deny these rumors. It would be inappropriate for us to comment on matters of national security."

I told the person that she just had ...

[BrklynLiberal]

6. We are living in an Orwellian world!!!!

[seafan]

7. Also from an internal link in this story:

WHY DID VERIZON AND BELLSOUTH ISSUE DENIALS AFTER THE STORY BROKE?

By Greg Sargent
May 17, 2006

snip

One possibility: Buried in the USA Today story about Bellsouth's denial is this: "The night before the story was published, USA TODAY described the story in detail to Bellsouth, and the company did not challenge the newspaper's account." I have to say that "the night before" seems to be awfully short notice for a story of this magnitude. It's possible the company simply didn't have enough time to do the requisite internal check, though it's also quite possible that a few calls to the company's top execs would have sufficed, and there would have been enough time for that.

Bottom line: The Bellsouth denial remains somewhat troubling, but nonetheless inconclusive. Meanwhile, we can reasonably assume -- based on Verizon's own statements -- that Verizon has some sort of relationship with the NSA.

snip

[C_U_L8R]

8. How is this legal....

wouldn't these seemingly illegal signing
statements crumble under any sort of challenge?

Have any of the lawsuits brought forward been shareholder suits?

But most of all... these companies are all still very susceptible to consumer action...
like a simple boycott. If they insist on playing footsie with the law and abuse the public trust,
they could see a backlash that they might regret (and pay dearly for)

[seafan]

9. It's all about releasing *Co's pals from any legal liability.

Those nasty lawyers representing the little people, don't-cha know....

[seafan]

10. It's time for law enforcement to drag these criminals out of the WH.

Yes, we will have hearings and evidence gathering, but now it's time for arrests in the Oval Office and Pentagon.

[Jane Austin]

11. Will this be the straw that breaks the back of the camel?

What the hell is it going to take.

This bush guy is out of control.

[LiviaOlivia]

12. Bush Gives Telecoms License To Lie...

Wednesday :: May 17, 2006
Bush Gives Telecoms License To Lie - But AT&T Case Moves Forward
by Steve Soto
http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/007685.php

Following up on my post from yesterday about the telecoms willingness to state that they haven't given phone records or data to the NSA, and my question on why they would stake the credibility and reputation of their firms on word parsing if in fact they were lying about these denials, we now find out about the presidential memo from earlier this month that now allows the telecoms to lie without worry of a securities inquiry or enforcement action from the SEC.

Three things:

1. I guess we can now formally distrust anything the telecoms say in denial of the USAT story;

2. Since when does a presidential memo hold any water in a court of law or override statutes on the books?

3. I guess if the White House issued such a memo then that in essence confirms the story itself.

....The court cases should be fun now, and I'm sure that Arlen "Single Bullet" Specter will get to the bottom of this.

~snip~

[seafan]

13. Memos to *cover* torture, memos to *cover* bypassing FISA,

memos to *cover* wiretapping Americans without a court-ordered warrants,


memos to *allow* telecoms to lie to and betray their customers,


memos to *cover* secret incarcerations without legal representation,


memos to *park* tens of millions of dollars in hidden programs for secret uses by the Pentagon Special Ops Command in Tampa, outside the required jurisdiction of Congress,



I will say it again. It is time to send in law enforcement to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

[yy4me]

14. seafan, This information is very important,

I think you should compose a new title and post again. I read about this in this mornings paper and had intended to post myself if it did not show up. Perhaps someone else has posted it but it needs big notice. What it means is that it is OK to LIE

[McCamy Taylor]

16. OMG! The stock market should be plunging over this news.

This means that any Bush buddy can lie about anything---Diebold can lie about their crappy machines, the feds can say it is a matter of "national security", and they can hide the info from their stock holders and the public.

Makers of drugs, weapons, almost any product can be included in the umbrella of national security if they pay enough money to the Bush Administration.

This is going too far.