"I Am Troubled" Statement of Sen. Russ Feingold on the Obama DOJ's brief

[kpete]

Thursday April 9, 2009 19:32 EDT
TPM: "Obama Mimics Bush on State Secrets"

Statement of Sen. Russ Feingold on the Obama DOJ's brief in Jewel:

I am troubled that once again the Obama administration has decided to invoke the state secrets privilege in a case challenging the previous administration’s alleged misconduct. The Obama administration’s action, on top of Congress’s mistaken decision last year to give immunity to the telecommunications companies that allegedly participated in the warrantless wiretapping program, will make it even harder for courts to rule on the legality of that program. In February, I asked for a classified briefing so that I can understand the reasons for the Department’s decision to invoke the privilege in another case, and I intend to seek information on this new case as well. I also encourage the greatest possible public accounting of the use of the state secrets privilege and welcome the Attorney General’s statement that he hopes to share his review with the American people.

Beyond the particular case at issue here, it is clear that there is an urgent need for legislation to give better guidance to the courts on how to handle assertions of the state secrets privilege. The American people must be able to have confidence that the privilege is not being used to shield government misconduct. That is why I am working with Senators Leahy, Specter, and others to pass the State Secrets Protection Act as soon as possible.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/04/09/tpm/index1.html

[FLAprogressive]

1. K&R -- I'm sure the True Believers will come out of the woodwork to bash Russ

[SammyWinstonJack]

2. Any minute now.

[FLAprogressive]

3. you see....Obama obviously has a grand master plan in...he's actually waiting for a supreme court

decision. :sarcasm: :rofl:

[SammyWinstonJack]

6. .

:evilgrin:

[TBF]

36. Yes, a fan club member reminded me of that in another thread.

But if they think those Nazis are going to protect anyone's privacy they're in for a big surprise.

[disndat]

68. IMHO

that's exactly what Obama wants to do. The Repugs are forcing his hand. What if the "sovereign immunity" issues were to be brought to the Supreme Court. Now there is a turnabout. Obama can spy on the key Republicans who are threatening the nuclear option of obstructing all the important bills Obama needs to get through Congress in the next months, if Obama opens up the documents revealing all the crimes Bush had committed. If sovereign immunity were to be brought up to the Supreme Court, how would Scalia, Thomas, Alito, and Roberts be voting, if they, as well as the Bush gangsters, be opened to wiretapping? It is possible that Obama is trying to make an "end run" around the Republicans in Congress to bring the Bush crimes before the public.

[democrank]

4. K & R

I`m troubled as well.

[dbackjon]

5. Another FAILED appointment by the right-wing Obama

[Democracyinkind]

7. I really do hope that I am simply "not in" on the master plan.

if there isn't one, I'm leaving the benefit of the doubt boat.
I have sworn to make this one of the points where I draw the line and make no concessions, and that was 6 or 7 years ago. Anyone wanting my vote must be 100% clear on this, in action and in word.

[slipslidingaway]

8. K&R thanks n/t

[camera obscura]

9. k&r

[Bluenorthwest]

10. Also troubled

[bvar22]

11. If Russ Feingold is worried....

...then there is something to be worried about.

Russ speaks for me.

[SlingBlade]

45. And me, Troubling, Yes

[lostnotforgotten]

62. Trouble Is When INdependent Thinking Voters Express Concern Here They Are Marginalized

Thank You Russ Feingold for speaking truth to power.

[Myrina]

67. Same here.

:patriot:

[waiting for hope]

12. I wonder how many politicians who

praised and endorsed Obama are rethinking their actions? It seemed to me that Russ preferred Obama because of his "progressive" stance - and this:

Asked to explain what precisely he found problematic, Feingold offered that Edwards had "taken in" voters by switching positions on several key issues.

"You have to consider what the audience is, and obviously these are very popular positions to take when you are in a primary where you are trying to get the progressive vote. But wait a minute -- there were opportunities to vote against the bankruptcy bill, there was an opportunity to vote against the China deal. Those are the moments where you sort of find out where somebody is. So I think, people are being taken in a little bit that now he is taking these positions."


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/25/feingold-rips-edwards-aga_n_83225.html

Gee Russ - all pols switch positions, didn't you know that?
:sarcasm:

[leftofthedial]

13. That Feingold is a closet freeper who probably voted for bush twice.

:sarcasm:

[TBF]

37. lmao...

:rofl: :toast:

[Seldona]

49. +1

[Jax]

50. Love you leftofthedial

and kpete!!!

:thumbsup:


and many thanks to you both.

Alyce

[leftofthedial]

51. wow!

:blush:

[barbtries]

14. it certainly has and is

being used to cover up government misconduct.

[alarimer]

15. One of the few good Democrats left.

I admire him, Kucinich and Bernie Sanders (who is not actually a Democrat). The rest are sometimes useful idiots but mostly just idiots.

[Political Heretic]

16. PLEASE come in here and trash Russ Feingold all you Obama is never wrong people.

Please.

I'd really like to hear it...

[ProSense]

44. Wow, defense of Obama is really getting to you, huh? Why would anyone trash this statement?

It's reasonable:

I am troubled that once again the Obama administration has decided to invoke the state secrets privilege....That is why I am working with Senators Leahy, Specter, and others to pass the State Secrets Protection Act as soon as possible.

And no claims that Obama is just like Bush.

[SlingBlade]

46. K & R

[omega minimo]

17. of COURSE this is a kpete thread, didn't even notice. RF did The People's business while HC & BO ran

for pretzeldent and he is STILL DOING THE PEOPLE'S BUSINESS.

kpete :yourock: Senator Feinfold :yourock:

Lets hear more about this "working with Senators Leahy, Specter, and others to pass the State Secrets Protection Act as soon as possible."

[Gabi Hayes]

18. very well said...here's your reward, with the site included:

http://www.flickr.com/groups/flickrpediahouseofknowledge/

I may be among the many who'll be choosing to drop out....spending my time at sites like the above, instead of making myself sicker than I already am

I know, I know, but I don't have much left in the tank these days.....

[omega minimo]

19. sweet. a real live twitterer.

thanks.

[bahrbearian]

66. Great site , thanks for link

?v=0

[Sparkly]

20. I agree.

:kick:

[inna]

21. RUN Russ, RUN!! NT

[Pastiche423]

22. Thank you, Russ

It's good to know that there is at least one thinking person in the Senate.

[soryang]

23. Obama, Secrecy and Surveillance- Jewel v. NSA

I took the time to review the pleadings in Jewel v. NSA, the class action involving government surveillance. This is the case where the NSA just hooked up to ATT communications hubs and started copying everything that went across them in a nearby NSA communications node. The case is a class action against the government. The class includes virtually all persons in the US whose private communications are being monitored by the government without consent, notice or probable cause or other statutory authority. The plaintiffs seek legal (money) damages under the relevant statutes for class members as well as (equitable) injunctive relief to stop this illegal and unconstitutional acitivity.

I read the original complaint and the government brief. The government seeks a motion to dismiss on the basis that sovereign immunity has not been waived. It also seeks to dismiss the case on the basis of the state secrets privelege, in essence saying even if the plaintiffs had a case you couldn't prove it because we won't let you see the evidence because it would reveal intelligence sources and methods. One must fault the courts and Congress for creating a veritable minefield to plaintiffs raising this challenge and minimizing the equitable rights of plaintiffs seeking to redress ongoing outrageously unconstitutional action by the executive branch. Rather than pose as a consensus maker in this respect, the Obama administration picks up the baton where Rove and Cheney left off, to protect and extend the most radical enlargement of unreviewable executive power possible.

The government brief fails to address the fact that sovereign immunity may not be total where the government is operating outside the Constitution. The chilling effect on First Amendment rights by using dragnet collections on all communications cannot go unquestioned by the courts based simply upon the recital of "state secrets" by the government. Secondly, government officials named in the suit as defendants are persons, as defined under the waivers that do exist. The government inexplicably denies this. Thirdly, third party disclosure is not the sine qua non of actionable wrong doing, the unlawful use or endeavor to use private party communications is actionable, whether disclosed or not. If I am not mistaken, I recall that a footnote in the government brief revealed this so as to color the Rovian approach with an ethical lifesaver for the attorneys involved. In fact, the defense brief if accepted by the courts would be such an all encompassing bar to litigation in these cases that one could suppose that the "state secrets" privelege could bar any suit under any circumstances regardless of the merits. If that were the case, why allow for a disclosure exception? If the disclosure exception is enough to get to discovery as intended by Congress, (and why shouldn't it?) then " the use or endeavor to use" intercepted communications should be sufficient as well. It is simply absurd to contend that the government could continue on without equitable bar by the courts in any unconstitutional activity because it is barred by the state secrets privelege.

In essence the government's argument is specious, and avoids the fundamental undisputed contention of the plaintiff that the Government's wholesale or dragnet interception of private communications of American citizens is unconstitutional, unlawful and continuing. The notion that the courts have no role in such a situation is a direct attack on the third branch of government rendering it superflous when it is most required.

[JDPriestly]

33. Soryang, excellent post! Hats off!

[pacalo]

39. Welcome to DU, soryang!

:hi:

Great post.

[Strong Atheist]

61. Welcome to DU!

:toast:

[soryang]

24. Obama, Secrecy and Surveillance- Jewel v. NSA

I took the time to review the pleadings in Jewel v. NSA, the class action involving government surveillance. This is the case where the NSA just hooked up to ATT communications hubs and started copying everything that went across them in a nearby NSA communications node. The case is a class action against the government. The class includes virtually all persons in the US whose private communications are being monitored by the government without consent, notice or probable cause or other statutory authority. The plaintiffs seek legal (money) damages under the relevant statutes for class members as well as (equitable) injunctive relief to stop this illegal and unconstitutional acitivity.

I read the original complaint and the government brief. The government seeks a motion to dismiss on the basis that sovereign immunity has not been waived. It also seeks to dismiss the case on the basis of the state secrets privelege, in essence saying even if the plaintiffs had a case you couldn't prove it because we won't let you see the evidence because it would reveal intelligence sources and methods. One must fault the courts and Congress for creating a veritable minefield to plaintiffs raising this challenge and minimizing the equitable rights of plaintiffs seeking to redress ongoing outrageously unconstitutional action by the executive branch. Rather than pose as a consensus maker in this respect, the Obama administration picks up the baton where Rove and Cheney left off, to protect and extend the most radical enlargement of unreviewable executive power possible.

The government brief fails to address the fact that sovereign immunity may not be total where the government is operating outside the Constitution. The chilling effect on First Amendment rights by using dragnet collections on all communications cannot go unquestioned by the courts based simply upon the recital of "state secrets" by the government. Secondly, government officials named in the suit as defendants are persons, as defined under the waivers that do exist. The government inexplicably denies this. Thirdly, third party disclosure is not the sine qua non of actionable wrong doing, the unlawful use or endeavor to use private party communications is actionable, whether disclosed or not. If I am not mistaken, I recall that a footnote in the government brief revealed this so as to color the Rovian approach with an ethical lifesaver for the attorneys involved. In fact, the defense brief if accepted by the courts would be such an all encompassing bar to litigation in these cases that one could suppose that the "state secrets" privelege could bar any suit under any circumstances regardless of the merits. If that were the case, why allow for a disclosure exception? If the disclosure exception is enough to get to discovery as intended by Congress, (and why shouldn't it?) then " the use or endeavor to use" intercepted communications should be sufficient as well. It is simply absurd to contend that the government could continue on without equitable bar by the courts in any unconstitutional activity because it is barred by the state secrets privelege.

In essence the government's argument is specious, and avoids the fundamental undisputed contention of the plaintiff that the Government's wholesale or dragnet interception of private communications of American citizens is unconstitutional, unlawful and continuing. The notion that the courts have no role in such a situation is a direct attack on the third branch of government rendering it superflous when it is most required.

[anaxarchos]

25. K & R

Under the bus with him...

[MasonJar]

26. Thank you, Russ, for again standing tall.

[ima_sinnic]

27. thank goodness one Senator gets it. This is a dealbreaker for me that exposes Obama as a fraud.

screw obama with his LIES on virtually his first day in office about "restoring habeas corpus and our standing in the world."

What kind of fake "constitutional scholar" uses the Constitution for toilet paper? He's like a little tin pot dictator, eavesdropping on the citizens without a warrant and holding prisoners without charging them with anything. He blatantly LIED about this stuff and how it was all going to "change," the "constitutional scholar" was here to save the fucking day.

Single-payer universal health care? oh, that would "raise taxes." The health and lives of We The People just isn't worth it, doncha know? Can't get those nice payola-paying banker and insurance company billionaires upset or anything.
Oh, and legalization of marijuana, the #1 most-requested issue needing change in at least two phony efforts to "listen to the people"? ha ha, don't make him laugh!
And illegal occupations and empire-building? No problem! It's business as usual for mercenaries and warmongers, no budget can be too big for mass murder and mayhem in other parts of the world while we "can't afford" health care.
He thinks he can do whatever he wants because he has, what? 80% approval? Hey, Bush had 90% once upon a time. Even the most blatantly arrogant will inevitably fall. The rest of We The People will eventually see through the fraud. Whoever runs against him in the 2012 primary, that person has my vote. In the meantime, he can act all bewildered as his base falls by the wayside. You'd think, with the concerted attack on him by the right, he'd at least try to keep the goodwill of his base. But what does he care? He's got the bankers, and they've got the money! That's all that matters to him, apparently.

[SlowDownFast]

53. My sentiments, exactly. n/t

[G_j]

69. would he answer a straight forward question for us?

are war crimes acceptable?

[ima_sinnic]

70. why don't the goddam reporters ever ask that question in those "press conferences"?

I'm beginning to think he's as staged as bush ever was in those things.

Maybe I will e-mail Helen Thomas and ask her to ask him.

[QC]

28. Feingold is an enemy of the people. n/t

[G_j]

29. If Obama won't do it, Congress needs to make some noise! nt

[defendandprotect]

30. "It's only been 60 days!" . . . doesn't Feingold know that --- !!!!

:evilgrin:

[chill_wind]

31. K & R for Russ Feingold n/t

[PeaceNikki]

32. Russ makes me beam with pride.

:loveya:

[soryang]

34. Obama, Secrecy and Surveillance- Jewel v. NSA

Please see my post above. I posted this again by mistake as my wireless went down.

[mitchtv]

35. K&R

good post

[femrap]

38. wasf nt

[roamer65]

40. Russ has it right.

[Bluebear]

41. PUMA! Hater!!!!1

[ProgressIn2008]

42. ZOMG, Russ is endangering our president!! I hope he's happy!! nt

[Bluebear]

43. And the President has two young children!!!!1

[autorank]

47. Reportin in. Another salient contribution n/t

[Truth2Tell]

48. K&R Russ Rules.

And nary a peep from the tortured rationalization brigade.

[PuraVidaDreamin]

52. I was gonna give him 6 months before really unleashing

I'm not gonna make it.

[SlowDownFast]

54. I knew as soon as I saw his cabinet picks.

No Fucking Change.

What happened to Transparency? With our gov't AND banks?

No Fucking Change to any of that.

Well, No Fucking More for me.

I'm very perturbed with what I've seen so far and getting more so every day.

I'm ready to tell the whole two-party system to fuck off completely.

Just about there, and I will not look back.

I joined in the Nader-bashing these last several years, but I'm starting to realize he was right.

[PuraVidaDreamin]

57. really deep down inside me too

I would vacillate between keeping his enemies closer, and that pit in my stomach alarm.

Then I would try and go with he just moving slowly with calculated steps, and then that stomach alarm.

Restore the Constitution Already! How can that be so freaking hard?

Seigleman, Sybil, Why can't these people come forward and have their names cleared?

More oversight and transparency with OUR bailout money! Where is the difficulty here?

How much more patience am I supposed to have when we are talking about my children's future here?

[TBF]

58. "I'm ready to tell the whole two-party system to fuck off completely."

It took me awhile to see it as well. Until last June specifically. When Obama told us he would "fix" FISA after the election I was skeptical. And now we've seen how he chooses to "fix" it - he petitions via his DOJ to get even more power than Bush had. Nice guy.

[lostnotforgotten]

63. Independent Since 2002 - The Two Party System Needs Reinvention

eom

[acmavm]

55. Things are becoming obvious now. Even to those who thought that they

would get the guy who promised to prosecute, end the wars, and intitiate all that 'CHANGE' bullshit.

[lostnotforgotten]

64. Sad, But True - Let's Hope Most Here Can See The Same Truth

eom

[xchrom]

56. recommend

[FlyByNight]

59. K'ed & R'ed

[ima_sinnic]

60. kicking again--we need more like Feingold to say no to this fraud

[omega minimo]

71. 2ndd

[Orwellian_Ghost]

65. K&R