Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Obama knew CIA secretly monitored intelligence committee, Sen. Udall claims [View all]Octafish
(55,745 posts)48. Right, that we know about. And the whistleblowers.
Silencing Whistle-Blowers Obama Style
By Peter Van Buren, TomDispatch
This piece first appeared at TomDispatch.
The Obama administration has just opened a new front in its ongoing war on whistleblowers. Its taking its case against one man, former Transportation Security Administration (TSA) Air Marshal Robert MacLean, all the way to the Supreme Court. So hold on, because were going back down the rabbit hole with the Most Transparent Administration ever.
Despite all the talk by Washington insiders about how whistleblowers like Edward Snowden should work through the system rather than bring their concerns directly into the public sphere, MacLean is living proof of the hell of trying to do so. Through the Supreme Court, the Department of Justice (DOJ) wants to use MacLeans case to further limit what kinds of information can qualify for statutory whistleblowing protections. If the DOJ gets its way, only information that the government thinks is appropriatea contradiction in terms when it comes to whistleblowingcould be revealed. Such a restriction would gut the legal protections of the Whistleblower Protection Act and have a chilling effect on future acts of conscience.
Having lost its case against MacLean in the lower courts, the DOJ is seeking to win in front of the Supreme Court. If heard by the Supremesand theres no guarantee of thatthis would represent that bodys first federal whistleblower case of the post-9/11 era. And if it were to rule for the government, even more information about an out-of-control executive branch will disappear under the dark umbrella of national security.
On the other hand, should the court rule against the government, or simply turn down the case, whistleblowers like MacLean will secure a little more protection than theyve had so far in the Obama years. Either way, an important message will be sent at a moment when revelations of government wrongdoing have moved from the status of obscure issue to front-page news.
The issues in the MacLean casewho is entitled to whistleblower protection, what use can be made of retroactive classification to hide previously unclassified information, how many informal classification categories the government can create bureaucratically, and what role the Constitution and the Supreme Court have in all thisare arcane and complex. But stay with me. Understanding the depths to which the government is willing to sink to punish one man who blew the whistle tells us the world about Washington these days and, as they say, the devil is in the details.
CONTINUED with LINKS, etc...
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/silencing_whistleblowers_obama-style_20140306
By Peter Van Buren, TomDispatch
This piece first appeared at TomDispatch.
The Obama administration has just opened a new front in its ongoing war on whistleblowers. Its taking its case against one man, former Transportation Security Administration (TSA) Air Marshal Robert MacLean, all the way to the Supreme Court. So hold on, because were going back down the rabbit hole with the Most Transparent Administration ever.
Despite all the talk by Washington insiders about how whistleblowers like Edward Snowden should work through the system rather than bring their concerns directly into the public sphere, MacLean is living proof of the hell of trying to do so. Through the Supreme Court, the Department of Justice (DOJ) wants to use MacLeans case to further limit what kinds of information can qualify for statutory whistleblowing protections. If the DOJ gets its way, only information that the government thinks is appropriatea contradiction in terms when it comes to whistleblowingcould be revealed. Such a restriction would gut the legal protections of the Whistleblower Protection Act and have a chilling effect on future acts of conscience.
Having lost its case against MacLean in the lower courts, the DOJ is seeking to win in front of the Supreme Court. If heard by the Supremesand theres no guarantee of thatthis would represent that bodys first federal whistleblower case of the post-9/11 era. And if it were to rule for the government, even more information about an out-of-control executive branch will disappear under the dark umbrella of national security.
On the other hand, should the court rule against the government, or simply turn down the case, whistleblowers like MacLean will secure a little more protection than theyve had so far in the Obama years. Either way, an important message will be sent at a moment when revelations of government wrongdoing have moved from the status of obscure issue to front-page news.
The issues in the MacLean casewho is entitled to whistleblower protection, what use can be made of retroactive classification to hide previously unclassified information, how many informal classification categories the government can create bureaucratically, and what role the Constitution and the Supreme Court have in all thisare arcane and complex. But stay with me. Understanding the depths to which the government is willing to sink to punish one man who blew the whistle tells us the world about Washington these days and, as they say, the devil is in the details.
CONTINUED with LINKS, etc...
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/silencing_whistleblowers_obama-style_20140306
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
120 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Obama knew CIA secretly monitored intelligence committee, Sen. Udall claims [View all]
Octafish
Mar 2014
OP
Excellent post, Octafish. I do not understand how ANYONE who calls themselves and American, can even
sabrina 1
Mar 2014
#89
Fascists with the Rainbow Coaltion of Racists 1%er's of Fundamental Greed-neo-lib's/ Third Way=Third
bobthedrummer
Mar 2014
#100
Damn! Way to go a thousand miles around to avoid the point which is the rogue nature of the security
TheKentuckian
Mar 2014
#10
Oh. Is it a "big deal" now? Because we weren't supposed to care when they were merely spying
Romulox
Mar 2014
#13
And in Hell, Nixon was heard to say "Well that's a great weight off my shoulders!"
kenny blankenship
Mar 2014
#20
I am often compelled to consider that Obama and family lives might have been threatened
2banon
Mar 2014
#105
Missing brother of Senator Mark Udall found dead in Wyoming (Keith Coffman 7-4-13 Reuters)
bobthedrummer
Mar 2014
#34
The US national security community has gotten away with murder right here for decades. Not
bobthedrummer
Mar 2014
#41
It's sad to see the Guardian stoop to this level of misrepresentation
struggle4progress
Mar 2014
#35
***********************BULLSHIT ASS'D MISLEADING ARTICLE ALERT***********************
uponit7771
Mar 2014
#37
How about Obama just tells the CIA to release all the documents and let the chips fall
Tierra_y_Libertad
Mar 2014
#40
The fact there is anything to spy on shows Congress isn't completely transparent
treestar
Mar 2014
#60
Battle Rages Between CIA and Senate Intel Committee over Torture Report, Conflicting Intelligence
bobthedrummer
Mar 2014
#64
You folks really believe that Obama could be in charge of the "shadow government" when he
kelliekat44
Mar 2014
#66
Reid disappointed CIA 'apparently unrepentant' for what he understands they did
Octafish
Mar 2014
#68
Porter J. Goss's GESTAPO imo. No one can make this stuff up. You've got that pic of him and his
bobthedrummer
Mar 2014
#72
The National Security Archive's Torturing Democracy has many documents for those of US that want
bobthedrummer
Mar 2014
#74
A kick to further the discussion of the many domestic "precedents" taken against we, the people. n/t
bobthedrummer
Mar 2014
#75
Senator Udall: "The president has stated an unequivocal commitment to supporting..."
ProSense
Mar 2014
#77
Failing to investigate and prosecute torture is itself an international crime
Oilwellian
Mar 2014
#79
I like Sen. Udall but I do NOT understand why President Obama would want to spy on Congress.
jwirr
Mar 2014
#83
Since Frank Wisner Jr. is one of President Obama's "special envoys" this thread gets another kick
bobthedrummer
Mar 2014
#84
Just think Arab Spring, too big to fail, energy czars, we don't torture, land of the free, etc...
bobthedrummer
Mar 2014
#87
We (people) don't "...turn to Ergo for intelligence, political and risk analysis..." yet FedGov does
bobthedrummer
Mar 2014
#91
A bit of a historical kick-Constituitional lawyers like President Obama, Cass Sunstein, NSA, CIA
bobthedrummer
Mar 2014
#93
I thank Octafish for being the OP, Spencer Ackerman @ The Guardian, DU... n/t
bobthedrummer
Mar 2014
#112
So President Obama now is talking about what, exactly when it comes to we, the people
bobthedrummer
Mar 2014
#117