Marc Ambinder was doing a substantial amount of reporting on this issue. Please rec this up, if only for explanatory purposes.
The gist of the issue has to do with not opening the can of worms without seeing the end of the can. (That's my analogy and I'm sticking to it)
Immediately after Obama had invoked the State Secrets in the case, I'll admit I was perplexed. Not perplexed, mind you for the actual invocation but perplexed because there was no real explanation for it. It didn't make any sense based on what Obama campaigned on.
While defending his actions immediately after, I began to question why? I mean on the face of it, it was nothing better than what Bush did. It was very disgraceful and disconcerting, but at the same time I couldn't figure out why.
Well, it looks like I wasn't the only one. Marc Ambinder from the Atlantic was thinking of this very same issue. He made several phone calls and came up with A answer. I don't know if it'll make everyone happy, but at least we have an explanation.
Why They Kept Secret
Money quote: "If you decide today precipitously to waive this privilege, you can't get it back,
an administration official said. "If you decide to assert it, you can always retract it in the future."