« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Nadler To Hold Hearing On State Secrets
We've told you about one way in which President Obama has so far continued his predecessor's tactics: by invoking the state secrets privilege to argue for the dismissal of lawsuits in the war on terror.
And now Congress will consider reforming the State Secrets Act, in an effort to make it more difficult to invoke it when national security concerns are not truly at take.
Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY), who chairs the Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties subcommittee of the House Judiciary committee, will host hearings Thursday to examine how to curb abuse of the privilege, while protecting true state secrets.
As a candidate, Obama criticized President Bush for being too quick to invoke the privilege. But since taking office, his administration has angered civil libertarians by likewise invoking it in cases involving warrantless wiretapping and renditions.
Testifying at Nadler's hearings will be Patricia Wald, a retired federal judge; Asa Hutchinson, the former GOP congressman from Arkansas; Ben Wizner of the ACLU; and Andrew Grossman of the Heritage Foundation.
Josh
Zachary
This is nonsense and seemingly the 'Same Pack of Lies' (AND SEEMINGLY CONTINUING WITHIN THIS PRESIDENT OBAMA ADMINISTRATION AND ALSO DIRECTLY FROM OUR US EXECUTIVE, LEGISLATIVE AND JUDICIAL BRANCHES OF OUR US GOVERNMENT).
This is already covered in the SO-CALLED ONGOING ??!! 7/2008 'US JUDICARY CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE, JOHN CONYERS CHAIRMAN, 'PRESIDENTIAL POWERS AND ITS LIMITATIONS' IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS'!! The Testimomy was also testifed as the most important hearings in memory (50+years).
ALSO AND IMPORTANTLY IT IS WELL KNOWN THAT 'STATE SECRETS' ARE ALREADY FULLY ENTITLED AND MANDATED WITHIN OUR US CONSTITUTION TO FULL AND COMPLETE US LEGISLATIVE AND JUDICIAL REVIEW.
June 2, 2009 1:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with tpmreader.
We have had laws on the books for generations limiting presidential powers, but our elected House and Senate have chosen to either ignore them or have not enough sense of public duty to actually learn them. My view is the latter. It seems more beneficial for them to just spout off about whatever they choose, hoping spouting will either get them their way or perhaps take any heat off them which they have collected.
We have, as a nation, lost the ability to elect actual patriots and now seem to get nothing but parrots, mimicking whatever will keep them in power and fulfill their opportunistic goals.
Having said that... I firmly believe ALL the blame stops at the voting booths, where we have decided to place anything BUT patriots in Washington... as long as they are OUR cronies and not THEIR cronies, we seem to be content. Too bad, because we are getting closer and closer to the bottom of this downhill slope... IMHO
June 2, 2009 6:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
TRANSLATION:
"But since taking office, [Obama's] administration has angered [Glenn Greenwald and his lunatic acolytes]"
RESPONSE:
Who cares what Greenwald says? He doesn't even know what he is talking about half the time. Constitutional law expert, my foot.
That said, I'm all for hearings on the state secret privilege and many other Bush legacy issues. But one must bear in mind that the fundamental difference between Obama and Bush on these matters is that Obama is working with Congress and within the judicial system to address them. He is NOT acting unilaterally except where his authority to do so is clear and necessary. That is how the system is supposed to work.
June 2, 2009 8:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Greenwald is at least as much of a Constitutional law expert as the President himself.
And as for Obama's desire to curb such abuses as warrantless wiretapping, yes, he is better than his predecessor (whom he enabled [and indeed, enabled himself to receive the same illegal priviliges] when he voted to strip the FISA Court of its authority last year).
But to say that is surely to damn him with the faintest of praise. It is signally NOT evidence that "the system is working the way it is supposed to work."
June 2, 2009 11:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
You litigate many Con Law cases?
Get back to us when you have.
June 2, 2009 6:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
"You litigate many Con Law cases?"
As a matter of fact, yes. I have. And that's how I know that Greenwald is a fraud. Happy now?
June 2, 2009 7:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
You seem to be in the minority in that opinion.
June 2, 2009 9:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Woebegone
Infamous Salon troll.
baba durag: "You litigate many Con Law cases?"
Woebegone straight-up lying with traces of unconsumed shit on face from lunch: "As a matter of fact, yes. I have. And that's how I know that Greenwald is a fraud."
Some examples of Woebegone's irritating trolling on UT:
*That's one difference. Another is that I've yet to see any evidence that GG is principled. From what I've seen, GG just likes to be paid attention to.
*Think of it as my public service, correcting the lies GG spreads
*There's no hate involved in it . . . You Stupid Motherfucker. Persuasive.
*Yes, you are ALL brilliant, witty and 100% pure. And you SHOULD keep telling yourselves that over and again. Yes, indeed, stay right here in GG's Perfect Little World and applaud one another until GG -- or some other complete fool -- is elected president. Any day now, I'm sure. Meanwhile, enjoy the CJ.
*President Obama has utterly failed to follow the instructions of the genius Glenn Greenwald.
Bunch of whining losers.
As you can see, Woebegone has attention issues.
ie: He's not getting nearly enough which explains his frequent tantrums and generous use of invective.
However, he is only twelve.
June 2, 2009 9:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Jerry, why don't you invite Sibel Edmonds also. Don't count on too much help from your fellow congresspersons...there are too many skeletons in the closet.
June 2, 2009 10:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
"[Glenn Greenwald and his lunatic acolytes]"
Right on cue.
Now I encourage anyone interested (and with far too much free time) to go through the threads at Glenn Greenwald's blog. Look at the comments his regulars regularly make. Obama is just as bad as Bush. Obama has betrayed the country. Impeach Obama. See if those people are or are not the left-wing equivalents of right-wing nutjobs.
Not bored yet? Take a look at those recent posts where Greenwald declares that Obama is inventing preventive detention in the United States. Or where Greenwald states that Obama is not required to protect the American people because those words aren't in the Constitution. (Neither is the word "abortion.")
One last thing: I very seldom swear in any comments. Very seldom. In fact, in the quote above, I was REPEATING what one genteel commenter at Greenwald's blog had just called me.
And that's enough about that, I'd say.
June 2, 2009 10:30 PM | Reply | Permalink