Skip to main content

View Diary: HISTORY & TRUTH IN PROGRESS: Shady Companies Wiretap Americans For NSA (129 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Jesselyn (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I would accept an argument on what should be kept secret and what not but your diary is insuniating negative about an unknown: The "secret interpretation." It is even fear mongering.

    What exactly is this "secret interpretation"? How do you know it is unconstitutional or negative without knowing what it is? The history of the abuses started after 9/11 by the Bush admin does not warrant a negative about Obama admin's "secret interpretation." Not before we know what it is.

    Senators warn about the "secret interpretation" but I see nowehere they tell what it is.

    Get my point?

    "Corruptio Optimi Pessima" (Corruption of the best is the worst)

    by zenox on Tue Apr 03, 2012 at 08:28:16 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  The Senators have asked DOJ to disclose (13+ / 0-)

      the Executive Branch's secret interpretation of Section 215. DOJ has refused.

      My book, TRAITOR: THE WHISTLEBLOWER & THE "AMERICAN TALIBAN," is Amazon's #1 Best Seller in Human Rights Books for February 2012.

      by Jesselyn Radack on Tue Apr 03, 2012 at 08:34:06 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Disclose to them or to the general public? (0+ / 0-)

        "Corruptio Optimi Pessima" (Corruption of the best is the worst)

        by zenox on Tue Apr 03, 2012 at 08:38:42 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  In other words, do the sentators have a legal (0+ / 0-)

        right to demand the "Executive Branch's secret interpretation of Section 215" to be revealed to them? From Udall's letter, I gather he not only wants to know what it is but also he wants the secret interpretation to be made public.

        Maybe that's why the DOJ has refused?

        "Corruptio Optimi Pessima" (Corruption of the best is the worst)

        by zenox on Tue Apr 03, 2012 at 08:42:56 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yes, Congress does have the authority (5+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          elwior, aliasalias, Simplify, gatorcog, JVolvo

          the executive works based on delegated authority from Congress when acting pursuant to a statute, typically.  Congress' job is to keep tabs on the executive.  This is why we have a checks and balances system

          •  Of course, but does the congress have the power (0+ / 0-)

            to force the executive make public what they deem as "secret"?

            Congress have the power to make the executive reveal the secret to the members of the congress (not every member of the congress but specified groups) but do they have the power to force to executive make a "secret" public?

            The two are not the one and the same.

            "Corruptio Optimi Pessima" (Corruption of the best is the worst)

            by zenox on Tue Apr 03, 2012 at 12:00:20 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Because when something is made "public" (0+ / 0-)

              ...then it will not be only made "public" to the loyal voting American citizens but also to the entire world plus its uncle, if you get my drift.

              To my understanding, the Obama admin's argument in rejecting to make their "secret interpretation" public info is just that. They are not to make "secrets" public if they see harm in whole world finding about them.

              The congress member is entitled to know as a public REPRESENTATIVE, however. Can they make the secrets public, or demand them to be made public, also?

              I don't think so.

              Under the guise of "transparency," we are demanding our goverment to make its secrets public information.

              I am a voting American citizen and no I do not demand to have personal access to every government secret. In other words, I shouldn't.

              First, I don't have clearance, second, whatever info I have access to will also be accessed by everyone else in the world.

              That's why we have a REPRESENTATIVE government. We do not micromanage our government.

              "Corruptio Optimi Pessima" (Corruption of the best is the worst)

              by zenox on Tue Apr 03, 2012 at 12:11:42 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  B-b-b-but... Unitary executive!!!1! (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            elwior, JVolvo


            Government and laws are the agreement we all make to secure everyone's freedom.

            by Simplify on Tue Apr 03, 2012 at 12:08:10 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Joseph Heller mocked your thought processes (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      elwior, JVolvo

      50 years ago but it's still surprising to see a Catch-22 apologist in action today.

      "Well, yeah, the Constitution is worth it if you succeed." - Nancy Pelosi // Question: "succeed" at what?

      by nailbender on Tue Apr 03, 2012 at 09:08:35 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Well, that's why it's secret (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      elwior, aliasalias, Simplify, JVolvo

      If something of such constitutional  importance is a) kept secret and b) described as a serious breach by the people charged with oversight of the executive (namely Congress) who have seen this interpretation, that is enough to remove any presumption that the interpretation is protective of constitutional rights.  At this point, the burden should shift back to the executive to demonstrate that it is not engaged in wrongdoing, given the judgment of those with oversight duties.  We have limited evidence as the public, although our elected representatives have more.  That evidence does not cut in the administration's favor.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site