Obama needs to be called on this one. It's just plain wrong!

We didn't elect him to pull this shit

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu5OhONi15c


5 Comments

Did you like this post? Vote Up or Down.
0

You can't say you didn't see it coming

FearlessFreep's picture

I haven't forgotten how Obama voted for telecom immunity last year.

 

Czar Obama claims state-secrets-privilege

Dan_in_Cincinnati's picture

President Obama pledged to restore the rule of law. But the state-secrets-privilege wars with that promise. It encourages torture, kidnappings, inhumane treatment, and similar abuses, all carried out in the name of fighting international terrorism. That encouragement is compounded by the president's adamant opposition to criminal prosecution of former or current government officials for open and notorious abuses—for example, water-boarding or illegal surveillance. His stances on habeas corpus and state secrets flout twin verities of Justice Louis D. Brandeis: Sunshine is the best disinfectant; and, when the government becomes a lawbreaker, it invites every man to become a law unto himself.

In the Bagram Prison litigation, Judge Bates summoned the observation of Alexander Hamilton writing in The Federalist 84: "[C]onfinement of the person, by secretly hurrying him to jail, where his sufferings are unknown or forgotten, is a less public, a less striking, and therefore a more dangerous engine of arbitrary government." Accordingly, he held that enemy combatant detainees at Bagram who were captured outside Afghanistan and who were not Afghan citizens could challenge the constitutionality of their detentions in federal courts through writs of habeas corpus.

http://www.slate.com/id/2215818/

{;-) Dan in Miami

PS:  Obama can't possibly think he will win in the courts can he?  He claims to be an expert on constitutional law.

I think hes just pandering to those who initially voted for Bush

TMundo's picture

A lot of people voted for Bush initially because they thought he was going after the terrorists at a breakneck speed.  Safety was an issue, and it seemed after 9/11 that, at first, Bush still had a handle on things. Obama is just pandering to those same people.  If he doesn't keep on with the wiretapping, people will cry that the country isn't as safe, and you know what, in a way, they'd be right.  Although on the other hand, you don't need a warrant immediately to get a wiretapp.  You can get one after the fact as long as you prove, later on, that your motives were kosher.  Personally, it does infinge on your right to privacy, but as long as your not being a bonehead and committing terrorist acts, you have nothing to worry about, right? RIGHT? RIGHT?!!!

The issue of "safety"

FearlessFreep's picture

Is a citizen safe whose government does what it pleases?

"First they came for the communists..."

 

Should we hold Obama to a higher standard?

Rajah's picture

Or has Bush lowered everybody's expectations?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.