DoJ still protecting Bush eavesdroppers, says ACLU

[markpkessinger]

So reading this, does anybody still need proof that this president, at least when it comes to the rule of law and civil liberties, is acting 180 degrees counter to what he promised in his campaign? He continues to shield both war criminals and unconstitutional domestic spying by the previous administration, while simultaneously pursuing some of the most aggressive prosecutions of whistle-blowers in American history. I voted for this President -- and quite happily at the time -- but I have to admit that those fellow progressives who were raising red flags during the campaign, warning us that he was not necessarily what he seemed to be, have turned out to be exactly right. And the sad result, I fear, will be deep and long-lasting damage to the already hurting Democratic brand.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/03/19/doj-still-protecting-bush-eavesdroppers-says-aclu/

DoJ still protecting Bush eavesdroppers, says ACLU

By David Ferguson

Saturday, March 19th, 2011 -- 6:48 pm

The American Civil Liberties Union has released a statement that memos it requested by way of the Freedom of Information Act have been released, but in "heavily redacted" form.

The two memos, one by former head of the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel Jack Goldsmith, and another by then deputy assistant Attorney General John Yoo contain details about National Security Agency's warrantless wiretapping programs. They were released to the public on Friday but the ACLU states that they are "most notable for what they don’t reveal".

Attorney for the ACLU National Security Project Alexander Abdo says, "Despite a much-trumpeted commitment to transparency and accountability, the Obama administration has continued to shield the surveillance practices of the past from meaningful scrutiny. Nearly a decade after President Bush authorized a set of intelligence activities that almost led to the resignation of the attorney general, the FBI director and other Justice Department officials, the American public still knows virtually nothing about what it was that President Bush authorized."

[slipslidingaway]

1. knr nt

[babylonsister]

2. Maybe they are. I need more info, like 'why'? Maybe the DOJ

knows more than we do?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x630635

[nosmokes]

3. Maybe cause they're Obama's ears now...

[markpkessinger]

4. I seem to remember the President saying...

...something like, "I don't want to relitigate the past; I want to focus on the future." The trouble is, the particular past he is talking about was never litigated in the first place, let alone "relitigated." And just like a bad infection, the longer it goes untreated, the more it festers and the more it ultimately imperils the one infected.

By refusing to deal with the past, this President has ensured that we will remain mired in it ever more deeply. I am ashamed to be member of the same party of a President who acts in such a manner.

[babylonsister]

5. So. Were you 'proud' of the previous admin?

I learn daily what I wish this admin would do vs. what they do. I can be disappointed, or jazzed.

I'm not ashamed at all. Must suck to be so disappointed. :eyes:

[markpkessinger]

6. I am ashamed that it's happening under a Democratic President...

...As for the previous administration, well, I expect as much from today's Republican party.

[upi402]

7. What Democrat?

if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck....

He is done in my world.

[markpkessinger]

8. Point well taken! n/t

[HR_Pufnstuf]

9. The Obama administration retroactively legalized the entire fiasco through...

...a secret ruling from the Office of Legal Counsel.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/01/fbi-att-verizon-violated-wiretapping-laws/

The FOIA should request the NAMES of each and every US Citizen that were illegally wiretapped so we could put Verizon, ATT, and MCI out of business for good via a class action suit.

[markpkessinger]

10. The OLC cannot "legalize" anything

It can only offer its legal opinion to an administration. But it is not empowered to make legal determinations; that is up to the courts.