On ‘State Secrets,’ Meet Barack W. Obama
In February, President Obama’s Justice Department quietly argued in a San Francisco court that it was maintaining the same position as President Bush’s Justice Department on a case involving detainees trying to sue a private company for its role in their (allegedly) extraordinary renditions.
The Obama administration pushed the status quo administration argument by invoking the "state secrets" argument, also a Bush-era fave.
"It is the policy of this administration to invoke the state secrets privilege only when necessary and in the most appropriate cases," said DOJ spox Matt Miller.
Last week, Team Obama did it again.
And why wouldn’t they?
Attorney General Eric Holder recently said he was reviewing the way the Bush administration used the "state secrets" argument, but "on the basis of the two, three cases that we’ve had to review so far — I think that the invocation of the doctrine was correct."
Huh.
That seems a little different from the Obama-Biden campaign website where "The Problem" is described in part as the Bush administration having "invoked a legal tool known as the ‘state secrets’ privilege more than any other previous administration to get cases thrown out of civil court."
Because that’s just what the Obama administration tried to do.
This time the issue was the National Security Agency’s warrantless wiretapping program, and whether courts would be able to assess its constitutionality in a case called Jewel v. NSA, where the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is challenging the NSA surveillance by suing on behalf of AT&T customers whose records may or may not have been caught up in the NSA "dragnet."
Last Friday, while President Obama traversed throughout Europe, his Justice Department sought to have Jewel v. NSA dismissed because "the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction with respect to plaintiffs’ statutory claims against the United States because Congress has not waived sovereign immunity" and "because information necessary to litigate plaintiffs’ claims is properly subject to and excluded from use in this case by the state secrets privilege and related statutory privileges."
Argued the Justice Department: Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair "has once again demonstrated that the disclosure of the information implicated by this case, which concerns how the United States seeks to detect and prevent terrorist attacks, would cause exceptionally grave harm to national security."
"President Obama promised the American people a new era of transparency, accountability, and respect for civil liberties," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Kevin Bankston. "But with the Obama Justice Department continuing the Bush administration’s cover-up of the National Security Agency’s dragnet surveillance of millions of Americans, and insisting that the much-publicized warrantless wiretapping program is still a ‘secret’ that cannot be reviewed by the courts, it feels like deja vu all over again."
This of course is just the latest in Mr. Obama’s evolution on the matter. When the question came up last Summer as to whether then-Sen. Obama would support a filibuster of a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act bill if it allowed telecommunications firms immunity for cooperating with the NSA program, Sen. Obama’s flip on the matter was worthy of an Olympic gold medal.
Obama spox Bill Burton had told Talking Points Memo in October 2007 that "Barack will support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies."
His office reaffirmed that position in December 2007: “Senator Obama unequivocally opposes giving retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies … Senator Obama will not be among those voting to end the filibuster.”
But things change. And Mr. Obama voted to end the filibuster.
On June 25, 2008, Mr. Obama said, "It is a close call for me but I think the current legislation with exclusivity provision that says that a president — whether George Bush, myself or John McCain — can’t make up rationales for getting around FISA court, can’t suggest that somehow that there is some law that stands above the laws passed by Congress in engaging in warrantless wiretaps. … The underlying program itself actually is important and useful to American security as long as it has these constraints on them. I thought it was more important for me to go ahead and support this compromise."
DOJ spox Miller says that "the administration recognizes that invoking the states secret privilege is a significant step that should be taken only when absolutely necessary. After careful consideration by senior intelligence and Department of Justice officials, it was clear that pursuing this case could unavoidably put at risk the disclosure of sensitive information that would harm national security."
Continued Miller: "An examination by the Director of National Intelligence and an internal review team established by the Attorney General determined that attempting to address the allegations in this case could require the disclosure of intelligence sources and methods that are used in a lawful manner to protect national security. The administration cannot risk the disclosure of information that could cause such exceptional harm to national security."
But there’s a new wrinkle to the Obama DOJ argument, critics say.
As Glenn Greenwald wrote in Salon earlier this week, "beyond even the outrageously broad ‘state secrets’ privilege invented by the Bush administration and now embraced fully by the Obama administration, the Obama DOJ has now invented a brand new claim of government immunity, one which literally asserts that the U.S. Government is free to intercept all of your communications (calls, emails and the like) and — even if what they’re doing is blatantly illegal and they know it’s illegal — you are barred from suing them unless they ‘willfully disclose’ to the public what they have learned…
"Everything for which Bush critics excoriated the Bush DOJ — using an absurdly broad rendition of ‘state secrets’ to block entire lawsuits from proceeding even where they allege radical lawbreaking by the President and inventing new claims of absolute legal immunity — are now things the Obama DOJ has left no doubt it intends to embrace itself," Greenwald writes.
– jpt

Email
Chrysler Super Bowl Ad Pro-Obama?
President Obama Tops Mitt Romney in New Poll
Change, anyone? The man is simply shredding the Constitution, isn’t he?
Posted by: Fascist Hyena | April 10, 2009, 9:25 am 9:25 am
Thank God we have a Bush appointee, right-wing Judge John D. Bates, to rein in Obama’s efforts to destroy the Consitution. This is from the right-wingers at Slate:
“Last week, in the case Fadi al Maqaleh, United States District Judge John D. Bates denied that President Obama could make suspected “enemy combatants” disappear into the Bagram Theater Internment Facility at Bagram Airfield in Afghanistan without an opportunity for exoneration. (While President Obama has abandoned the term enemy combatant for Guantanamo Bay detainees, he has retained the label for detainees held elsewhere.)
“Bates’ ruling is a welcome check on an emerging pattern of mightily expansive claims of executive authority by the new administration.”
Posted by: Fascist Hyena | April 10, 2009, 9:34 am 9:34 am
It’s so sad. In less than three months we’ve gone from a national sense of hope and change to this, as reported by Yahoo News today:
“When he ran for president, Barack Obama was one of the most inspirational candidates in a long time, able to draw huge numbers of new voters to the polls by engaging them with a message of change and hope.
“Now that he has been in office for two months, reality is overtaking charisma. Obama’s positive aura is dissipating….
“Obama is facing an additional problem that has been little noticed by the media and little discussed by his own strategists, at least in public. He is turning out to be what he said he wouldn’t be: a polarizing figure. Each of his immediate predecessors was popular with core members of his own party–Bill Clinton with Democrats, George W. Bush with Republicans–but alienated the other side. That’s what’s happening to Obama as his ratings remain strong with fellow Democrats but slide with Republicans. Independents remain up for grabs.”
God–it once all seemed so promising.
Posted by: Fascist Hyena | April 10, 2009, 9:40 am 9:40 am
So many of my friends were so naively hopeful about this man. Blind adulation is actually a better term. For the 1st time in my life I voted for a Republican over a Democrat. I have no regrets today about my personal choice. He is a fraud, plain and simple.
Posted by: Michael ONeal | April 10, 2009, 9:59 am 9:59 am
Some of us recognized the problems in advance, and were told we were racists.
Now, I think we need to go back and do some investigating:
1. Demand a birth certificate
2. Who paid for his college education?
3. What were the cases he worked on at the Chicago law firm?
Posted by: tina | April 10, 2009, 10:10 am 10:10 am
I suppose once Obama became President, those men who actually run the country had a little meeting with him and said…
“This is how it is….”
Has anyone heard of Brandon Mayfield?
Arrested by the FBI at his law office (where a Newsweek reporter was already waiting) for his supposed involvement in the Madrid, Spain train bombings in 2004.
He wasn’t charged, his wife and family wasn’t informed where or why he was taken, and it wasn’t until the FBI released information to the LOCAL MEDIA that his family learned about their motives while watching the news one night. Hard to believe.
His wife is an Egyptian and he converted to Islam years ago.
So he was arrested without charges while the FBI was putting the finishing touches on their investigation. The officials in Spain insisted that the fingerprint found WASN’T that of Mayfields. Finally Mayfield was let go.
He later sued the government and won $2 million. Brandon Mayfield was himself a lawyer.
The FBI never said which one of their agents leaked the arrest to Newsweek….
A U.S. citizen (born and raised) arrested without charges and could have possibly been executed without any trial or explanation.
Welcome to America.
Although the FBI afterwards apologized for their acts, Mayfield filed several lawsuits over this invasion of his privacy. One sought to force the government to return or destroy copies of items seized from his home. Another, which was argued before U.S. District Court Judge Ann Aiken on July 15, 2005, challenged the law which was used against him as unconstitutional.
Posted by: Barry Broom | April 10, 2009, 10:15 am 10:15 am
The solution is fairly easy. Enable citizens who have had their rights violated to sue the government in the FISA court, instead of having to go through the regular district.
Posted by: Flash Override | April 10, 2009, 10:31 am 10:31 am
Funny how everyone who challenged the Bush “Patriot” Act was shouted down as a traitor – but now that Obama isn’t moving quickly enough to abolish BUSH’S rules he’s a dictator …
Repubs: please try to get your story straight.
Posted by: R Mutt | April 10, 2009, 10:37 am 10:37 am
Okay, Jake.
First of all its not ‘Mr’ Obama. Its ‘President’ Obama. In all my years of existence (which spanned Bush’s and Clinton’s presidency), I have never heard a reporter refer to a “Mr Bush” or “Mr Clinton” while they were in office. So, please clarify that for us. Second, let me now go back and read the actual substance of your post.
Posted by: Question | April 10, 2009, 10:38 am 10:38 am
Thank you, Jim. It is important to keep the President honest.
‘Don’t spy on me’ might be the new ‘Don’t tread on me.’
Posted by: Crab Cake Eater | April 10, 2009, 10:38 am 10:38 am
anybody with a brain could’ve predicted this. Obama, and his cadres, had no problem morally with the police state powers of Bush….simply that it was Bush that held that power. Leftists, as much as Rightists, enjoy police state tactics and, in most cases, even go further in their dreams for total control, indoctrination, surveillence, and reeducation of citizen that don’t agree with the “dear leader”.
Posted by: Ed | April 10, 2009, 10:42 am 10:42 am
I’d imagine Obama has a slightly different take on the Bush era now that he’s in the White House.
Posted by: matt | April 10, 2009, 10:50 am 10:50 am
Terrific article and analysis. Jake, keep pulling the curtain open that shrouds the “great and wonderful OZ!”
Posted by: Linkster | April 10, 2009, 10:50 am 10:50 am
LMAO At Obama
Ready for the tea parties ABC? Got your people in with ACORN and the HUFF and PUFFERS to cover the set-up disruptions?
Posted by: Obama cabinet of corruption featuring TURBOTAX TIMMY | April 10, 2009, 10:52 am 10:52 am
Ever since the state secrets privilege was created 50 years ago, it has always been used as a shield against oversight of embarrassing or culpable government actions.
The main problem is that courts often do not exercise their authority. They have absolute authority to review the executive’s evidence and judge their privilege claims.
Posted by: Flash Override | April 10, 2009, 10:53 am 10:53 am
It’s good that this is getting attention. It’s too bad the commentators here don’t really care about the issues (and probably don’t understand them either) and are just glad to score any point against Obama.
But it’s great that the left is really challenging Obama for his continuation of Bush’s expansion of exec. power.
Posted by: MrPinchy | April 10, 2009, 10:56 am 10:56 am
for question- it is proper to use the title in the first mention in the report(as you see in the first sentence) and thereafter refer to him as either “Mr.” or “the President”.
If you are curious, you can google ‘stylebook’. You’ll find various publications’ stylebooks which delineate the way reporters refer to groups, people with titles, etc.
Posted by: MayBee | April 10, 2009, 10:59 am 10:59 am
Look! A hat has dropped. Attack!
Oh hang on that’s what idiots do.
Posted by: ed | April 10, 2009, 11:01 am 11:01 am
Fascist Hyena:”Change, anyone? The man is simply shredding the Constitution, isn’t he?”
No, a better analogy is he doesn’t seem willing to get the tape and start putting this section back together. Recall that all these court cases are pursuing the actions of the last administration.
Posted by: jhw539 | April 10, 2009, 11:14 am 11:14 am
“Leftists, as much as Rightists, enjoy police state tactics and, in most cases, even go further in their dreams for total control, indoctrination, surveillence, and reeducation of citizen that don’t agree with the “dear leader”.”
wrong. it is actaully leftists that are going after obama on this. we don’t have the same immature hero-worship/daddy’s-my-protector habits that conservatives cling to.
in fact, the only people defending this are conservatives, like redstate
Posted by: brendancalling | April 10, 2009, 11:16 am 11:16 am
Does it make anybody reconsider the idea that perhaps it is the right thing to do?
Posted by: MayBee | April 10, 2009, 11:21 am 11:21 am
Vindication for Bush is so sweet.
Posted by: riley | April 10, 2009, 11:22 am 11:22 am
Somehow the BO supporters will turn this into some kind of brilliant chess move by Obama.
The truth that he has hoodwinked them is just too much to accept.
Posted by: ross | April 10, 2009, 11:25 am 11:25 am
Glenn Greenwald has an incredible update on the lawyer(Smith) on the Binyam Mohamed case, in which he reveals the following:
…the Privilege Review Team blocked Smith from communicating to President Obama the facts surrounding his client’s torture at Guantanamo. Smith then sent that redacted memo directly to Obama along with a new cover letter informing Obama of the “bizarre reality” that “you, as commander in chief, are being denied access to material that would help prove that crimes have been committed by US personnel. This decision is being made by the very people who you command.”
As a response to that new letter, Smith and a colleague of his have now been summoned to appear before a Washington court on May 11, to answer a criminal complaint filed by the Privilege Review Team, alleging that Smith — merely by sending Obama the redacted memo — has violated the secrecy terms to which he is bound. He faces up to six months in prison if found guilty.
Posted by: Flash Override | April 10, 2009, 11:26 am 11:26 am
Obama: SOSDD
Posted by: dl | April 10, 2009, 11:30 am 11:30 am
MayBee, apparently not. The bizarre claim of ‘vindication’ of Bush aside, it seems that the dominant view from the right is once more IOKIFAR.
Posted by: Flash Override | April 10, 2009, 11:31 am 11:31 am
See? Concerned makes my point for me.
Posted by: Flash Override | April 10, 2009, 11:38 am 11:38 am
Obama is a mythical figure. He only exists in people’s minds. The real Obama has been revealed to be a snake oil salesman.
Posted by: jack | April 10, 2009, 11:41 am 11:41 am
Flash: it seems that the dominant view from the right is once more IOKIFAR.
=========
I haven’t seen that.
I think the view from the right is more aptly summed up as, “See? We tried to tell you”
Posted by: MayBee | April 10, 2009, 11:41 am 11:41 am
Except that Obama is worse. From the Telgraph of London:
“President Barack Obama has recently completed the most successful foreign policy tour since Napoleon’s retreat from Moscow.
You name it, he blew it. What was his big deal economic programme that he was determined to drive through the G20 summit? Another massive stimulus package, globally funded and co-ordinated. Did he achieve it? Not so as you’d notice.
Barack is not the first New World ingenue to discover that European leaders will load him with praise, struggle sycophantically to be photographed with him and outdo him in Utopian rhetoric. But when it comes to the critical moment of opening their wallets – suddenly it is flag-day in Aberdeen. Okay, put the G20 down to inexperience, beginner’s nerves, what you will.
On to Nato and the next big objective: to persuade the same European evasion experts that America, Britain and Canada should no longer bear the brunt of the Afghan struggle virtually unassisted. The Old World sucked through its teeth, said that was asking a lot – but, seeing it was Barack, to whom they could refuse nothing, they would graciously accede to his wishes.
So The One retired triumphant, having secured a massive contribution of 5,000 extra troops – all of them non-combatant, of course – which must really have put the wind up the Taliban, at the prospect of 5,000 more infidel cooks and bottle-washers swarming into the less hazardous regions of Afghanistan.”
Posted by: drjohn | April 10, 2009, 11:43 am 11:43 am
Posted by: R Mutt | Apr 10, 2009 10:37:27 AM
Oh right.
Looks like Bush was entirely right and those of you who believed in Obama are the tools the rest of us knew you are.
Posted by: drjohn | April 10, 2009, 11:45 am 11:45 am
Flash- I think “concerned” is being tongue-in-cheek. Bush had to deal with accusations of the wars being illegal every day. Now Obama is in charge, and Code Pink has moved on to Wall Street, and Cindy Sheehan isn’t camping outside of his house.
Posted by: MayBee | April 10, 2009, 11:45 am 11:45 am
When the hell are you people finally going to wake up to the fact that BOTH of these parties are rotten and corrupt up to their eyeballs? You slow learners are making it hell for the rest of us.
Posted by: Jim | April 10, 2009, 11:50 am 11:50 am
Told you so!
But did anyone in the media listen to the libertarians? NO!
Posted by: Doc Merlin | April 10, 2009, 11:57 am 11:57 am
ross:”The truth that he has hoodwinked them is just too much to accept.”
His centrist leanings on these issues were made quite clear prior to the election during the FISA debate. The people who voted for him know that he’s not the hard core leftie that Republicans tried to paint him as and can accept that politics is not a zero tolerance matter of with us or against us.
Posted by: jhw539 | April 10, 2009, 11:59 am 11:59 am
Obama: The socialists best friend
Posted by: dl | April 10, 2009, 12:03 pm 12:03 pm
Kucinich ’12!
Posted by: mesquito | April 10, 2009, 12:06 pm 12:06 pm
MayBee:
“Does it make anybody reconsider the idea that perhaps it is the right thing to do?”
No. It was wrong when Bush did it, and it’s wrong now that Obama is doing it. There absolutely must be oversight of any government surveillance apparatus, because we’ve seen time and time again that it is human nature to abuse power when there’s no one to hold you accountable.
Posted by: The Wrath of Oliver Khan | April 10, 2009, 12:08 pm 12:08 pm
White Houses don’t give up power willingly. That’s been true for, oh, at least since George Washington opted not to seek a third term in office. Why anyone thought the Obama White House was going to be different is just a matter of people believing what they wanted to believe.
As far as this current battle, the one thing the Obama team knows is that all their plans to make major changes in domestic and fiscal policy go out the window if there’s a successful terrorist attack on U.S. soil, since that would mandate a ratcheting up of military spending in response, or risk being voted out of office in 2012 (let alone the 2010 midterm problems in foreign policy and national defense Democrats would have).
Whatever the Obama campaign may have said about undoing some of the actions of the Bush Administration, and despite any committment some lower-level people in the Obama Administration might have to doing that, it’s not going to happen, both for reasons of not wanting to give up power and the fear of what would happen to their mandate if loosening those rules could be linked to a terrorist incident in the future.
Posted by: John | April 10, 2009, 12:09 pm 12:09 pm
Tell me again exactly when Mr. Hopey Changey is going to, you know, start changing things to give us some hope that his administration isn’t taking this country down the express elevator to hell?
Posted by: Rocket Man | April 10, 2009, 12:11 pm 12:11 pm
Let’s try this one more time:
We’re fighting a war. Under other circumstances, I’m as passionate about total government openness as anybody else, but not when it comes to how we wage war. In this case, I expect my government to keep secrets. Alas, I also expect some abuse of this power, but am willing to wait to correct these errors until we defeat our enemies.
Posted by: Jesme | April 10, 2009, 12:15 pm 12:15 pm
Well I guess he came across information that changed his mind.
Posted by: Thinking | April 10, 2009, 12:18 pm 12:18 pm
Look here the protection of the Constitutin of the United States can never just be the responsibility of one party. All executive level office holders agreed to the protection of the same, as it is always the sitting president job to be commander and chief of the armed forces no matter his opinion on any military conflict.
Posted by: Patrick Hagger | April 10, 2009, 12:19 pm 12:19 pm
I voted for Obama in 2008. I will not be voting for lawlessness in 2012.
Posted by: DCX2 | April 10, 2009, 12:35 pm 12:35 pm
“Words, just words”.
Posted by: OxyCon | April 10, 2009, 12:37 pm 12:37 pm
Allow me to summarize: So B ush was right after all.
Posted by: John | April 10, 2009, 12:38 pm 12:38 pm
“Words, just words”.
Hmm: is the “Obama” organization doing the moderating of this board now?
Does anybody NOT assume the telecomm sabotage in San Jose is the result of Obama’s embrace of the neo-cons’ programme?
Freedom of speech in such situations. I don’t know that censoring comments critical of the “Obama” organization furthers.
Posted by: Pants on Fire | April 10, 2009, 12:43 pm 12:43 pm
Some of this stuff has scared me as well, but when contrasted with the rest of Obama’s actions since in office, such as comments about “moving on” when bringing up possible war crimes against the previous administration, it seems like he’s trying to focus on one issue at a time, and not allow our country to get into an issue that may further damage our credibility and our sense of stability in an already incredibly unstable time. These things may be dealt with in time, and if not we can take him to the street about it, but he’s had a somewhat discernible MO of “one at a time”, brushing off issues that are important to many but do not represent the most pressing threat. I could be wrong though.
Posted by: blakerblaker | April 10, 2009, 12:43 pm 12:43 pm
“such as comments about “moving on” when bringing up possible war crimes against the previous administration,”
“Moving on” to WHAT? The Obamas’ phony-baloney Seder suggests He’s not so hyped on “moving on” from the German war crimes of the 1930s and 1940s that, according to His election rhetoric, make Israel “sacrosanct”.
People should fight this neo-neocon takeover NOW, rather than wait for some sign that He’s not what he clearly IS.
Posted by: Pants on Fire | April 10, 2009, 12:51 pm 12:51 pm
“The people who voted for him know that he’s not the hard core leftie that Republicans tried to paint him as and can accept that politics is not a zero tolerance matter of with us or against us.”
That seems a little different from the Obama-Biden campaign website where “The Problem” is described in part as the Bush administration having “invoked a legal tool known as the ‘state secrets’ privilege more than any other previous administration to get cases thrown out of civil court.”
It is amazing what you learn when go form being a peon in the Senate to the Presidency. You learn that just maybe the other guy was right more often than not!
Posted by: Mike_C | April 10, 2009, 1:20 pm 1:20 pm
I am more firmly convinced now than ever that Barack Obama doesn’t say what he believes – primarily because he hasn’t fully formulated what he believes. He has hardly been on the national stage long enough to have firm opinions on much more than simply the social reform issues he worked on in Chicago communities. Mr. Barack Obama does his best to say what he thinks you want to hear – nothing more.
Posted by: NPage | April 10, 2009, 1:21 pm 1:21 pm
Here is how Mr. Obama “made his centrist views known” on the campaign trail in January, 2008:
“In our own Technology Voters’ Guide, when asked whether he supports shielding telecommunications and Internet companies from lawsuits accusing them of illegal spying, Obama gave us a one-word response: ‘No.’”
Posted by: Fascist Hyena | April 10, 2009, 1:35 pm 1:35 pm
Why doesn’t anyone speak to the fact that not only does this make Obama a political hippocrite,and vendicate Pres. Bush, it goes much further then that by the fact that Obama is taking this even further then the Bush admin. and going for even greater control of our lives! Phoney is too good for this man, he is dangerous! And the next move i feel is really going to scare us all.
Posted by: James | April 10, 2009, 2:01 pm 2:01 pm
Bwaahahahahaha!!!!!
All he needed was your votes, and he got them. Now that he’s in, what you think doesn’t mean squat. Suckers!!
Posted by: Blacque Jacques Shellacque | April 10, 2009, 2:03 pm 2:03 pm
Obama: An empty suit!
Posted by: dl | April 10, 2009, 2:27 pm 2:27 pm
Wow, and yet there seems to be people crying foul, yet these are the same people checking their mailboxes and check stubs for the beneficial “stimulus” aid, looking to refinance your homes and purchasing hybrids to qualify for the tax deduction programs which the Obama cabinet created. I have held this in for a while and I can’t restrain it anymore…..
You people disgust me and give me anxiety for future generations. How dare you fault Barack when this mess was created by the bumbling idiots of the Bush administration for the past 8 years. For Christ Sakes, you republican politicians have only been out of office for 12 weeks (you guys act as those this is over 2 decades long)
Why don’t those that feel Obama is doing such a horrible job, start paying attention to YOUR local congressman and state senators. You will see that your main problem has nothing to do with the President or his current administration, but with your state’s politicians.
Posted by: A Real American | April 10, 2009, 2:28 pm 2:28 pm
Republicans had egg on their face after 8 years of George Bush and now its turn for the stupid Dems to get the facial omellete.
Breaking News: The GOP and the Dem leadership are essentially one in the same. One group, power structure looking to rape you out of your life, liberty and wealth
Posted by: Brian | April 10, 2009, 2:29 pm 2:29 pm
Obama will try to make you believe that he has the right to “change his mind” due to the current state of affairs, giving him the power to shred the constitution.
He bowed to King Abdullah, (the president should not bow to anyone).. he accused Americans of being “arrogant, derisive and dismissive. He further dissed us saying that “Americans do not respect the muslim world”. Obama to me, was NOT an option for President due to his backround, his associations, his appalling arrogance and his socialist tendencies. I knew he was a poser from the beginning.
Posted by: mjl | April 10, 2009, 2:32 pm 2:32 pm
Seems this part election America could have voted for McCain, gotten near the same result as Obama is doing except McCain actually told people he’d be doing this.
At least Bush was not trying to intercept everything you did, only those going to international destinations.
Posted by: Zaggs | April 10, 2009, 2:36 pm 2:36 pm
Obama hasnt kept his promises to the American public. And all we have left to do (other than complain) is vote for the other guy in 2012 and pray, in the meantime, he doesn’t keep screwing us and the country too badly.
Yeah, sure, anyone can compare him to Bush or say that he has a really tough job because of how Bush left things – but I don’t see that anymore. What I see is a man that is President who fooled us all. And I feel like an idiot.
Posted by: Kim | April 10, 2009, 2:40 pm 2:40 pm
Obviously President Obama, upon reading intelligence reports has reassessed his views. That or he was playing his sheep like followers (both the public and the media) during the 2008 campiagn like a drum.
I applaud the President’s decision, as I am all for NSA wiretapping. In my opinion it is this type of intelligence gathering that is needed to prevent another 911. (how else do you catch 20 random guys armed with nothing more than box cutters).
While I may not agree with Glenn Greenwald on alot of these security issues at least he is honest and consistent.
On the other hand I won’t hold my breath for another Olbermann special comment.
Mr. Mathews, is your leg still tingling now?
Posted by: j | April 10, 2009, 2:43 pm 2:43 pm
if you want to look at U.S. future you only need to look at Rome, with it’s two party system and plebian riots. But in Rome they didn’t allow woman to come in to become Ceasar, that might be the difference, the results i am pretty sure will be no different. I just hope people understand democracy doesn’t mean a republic. This surveillance thing has been done for a long time, since FDR decided to become dictator for life.
I think what is important is that, one view it as no “coincidence” that the financial crisis demands all these new things to control people with, when the management of these too big to fail should of been replaced and the companies names bought out as these companies bought out others. This financial crisis is a perfect storm to bring on the big brother systems that some in Britain says is called democracy/freedom while in reality there is none and no security.
financial brother
healthcare sister
All for the sake of transparency and other words to create the sense of comfort. kind of like the cameras in britain and yet there is no comfort there.
Posted by: abel | April 10, 2009, 2:48 pm 2:48 pm
A Real American said: “Why don’t those that feel Obama is doing such a horrible job, start paying attention to YOUR local congressman and state senators. You will see that your main problem has nothing to do with the President or his current administration, but with your state’s politicians.”
Where have you been the last eight years when you were all saying everything was Bush’s fault!?!
Posted by: Steve | April 10, 2009, 2:50 pm 2:50 pm
A Real American said: “Why don’t those that feel Obama is doing such a horrible job, start paying attention to YOUR local congressman and state senators. You will see that your main problem has nothing to do with the President or his current administration, but with your state’s politicians.”
For the last eight years you liberals have been saying everything was Bush’s fault. A little inconsistent, don’t you think?
Posted by: Steve | April 10, 2009, 2:54 pm 2:54 pm
“I applaud the President’s decision, as I am all for NSA wiretapping. In my opinion it is this type of intelligence gathering that is needed to prevent another 911. (how else do you catch 20 random guys armed with nothing more than box cutters).”
what about rapist, what about drunks, what about normal people asking for crazy things, drug war for drug company’s? seriously more people die from other things than 9/11, if you only think about the drunk driving deaths, and compare it, that is like a holocaust than.
Not saying it wasn’t painful or it should be repeated, or whatever, just think about proportions………gather intelligence where it is needed most, you gather the intelligence where it is needed the least. if a plane is flying in every week, which it isn’t, why would you gather everyone’s information instead of only the airline’s seat list?????????????????? that is called in-efficiency and probably the addiction to power.
People die constantly in this world. 9/11 is horrible event, but more people die and have pain by rapist, drunks, and other things which doesn’t command your attention……..your reaction to someone else action is exactly what they wish for you to do. Can you not see, you are more Taliban than the Taliban, with your acceptance of these things, without Taliban people would not have something to point and say look, that is why we require the most ineffective way to gather any intelligence.
Because of your fears, you lose the sense of who you are, and instead everything this country was founded on has been forgotten by a single event.
why even have the revolution against britain in the first place then.
Posted by: jojo | April 10, 2009, 3:00 pm 3:00 pm
j: “On the other hand I won’t hold my breath for another Olbermann special comment.”
Olbermann has already devoted a large portion of two shows to covering this.
Posted by: GambitRF | April 10, 2009, 3:01 pm 3:01 pm
Of course it’s not shredding the Constitution when a (R)epublican does it, YES?
Of course it’s not warrantless wiretapping when a (R)epublican does it, YES?
Of course it’s not fighting illegal wars when a (R)epublican started them, YES?
Of course it’s not tanking the economy when a (R)epublican did it, YES?
Dear (R)epublicans,
Where was your outrage when a (R)epublican did it?
p.s.
And of course it’s not Fascism when it’s a (R)epublican giving those marching orders, no?
Posted by: Max-1 | April 10, 2009, 3:12 pm 3:12 pm
You go, Jake Tapper. This story should be on the front page of ABC’s website, but we all know the most important story out of Washington today is the President’s dog. Shameful.
Posted by: Babs | April 10, 2009, 3:12 pm 3:12 pm
Stop the spying!
Posted by: ldyofzion | April 10, 2009, 3:15 pm 3:15 pm
Of course it’s not shredding the Constitution when a (R)epublican does it, YES?
Of course it’s not warrantless wiretapping when a (R)epublican does it, YES?
Of course it’s not fighting illegal wars when a (R)epublican started them, YES?
Of course it’s not tanking the economy when a (R)epublican did it, YES?
Dear (R)epublicans,
Where was your outrage when a (R)epublican did it?
p.s.
And of course it’s not Fascism when it’s a (R)epublican giving those marching orders, no?
Posted by: Max-1 | April 10, 2009, 3:19 pm 3:19 pm
The Gop already destroy partialy destroyed the constitution and because someone is not moving fast enough for some Posts like these come out.How many repugs claiming to be dems changed their minds really!!! anyone can say anything on these sites including me but at least i don’t claim to be something I am not.We were all scarred into letting the patriot act get passed and that fact is on the Bush administration not Mr Bush himself
Posted by: joyce | April 10, 2009, 3:28 pm 3:28 pm
Max-1: We were outraged enough to elect A Democrat to the White House. Arguments that rationalize away the actions of the Democrats now in power are really getting tiresome. There are no excuses for the financial hole we are digging, this continued assault on our Constitution. And if you can defend Obama’s actions only by continuing to refer to the Bush administration and what they did or didn’t do, the message is clear that the actions of the Democrats in power now are simply indefensible.
Posted by: Babs | April 10, 2009, 3:34 pm 3:34 pm
Keep in mind that Obama has also approved a law to search all your laptops, flashdrives, mp3 players, digital cameras, or any other media/computer/storage device at borders (with new laws and treaties regarding “pirated” music/movies A LOT of people could be in trouble- not just terrorists or paedophiles). Obama is even going further than Bush with his “big brother” tactics. Soon he will have a federally funded youth batallion on the streets to help “volunteerism” in his pursuits to power.
Posted by: Ed | April 10, 2009, 3:46 pm 3:46 pm
“Of course it’s not shredding the Constitution when a (R)epublican does it,”
Were you alive during the Bush administration? He was roundly pilloried throughout the now-silent press for shredding it.
And ditto for everything else you’re whining about. And by the way, if the war in Afghanistan is illegal, what is Obama doing sending 21,000 additional troops there, and why did he support that war from the beginning?
As for trashing the economy, let’s look at today’s news:
“Of course it’s not shredding the Constitution when a (R)epublican does it,
Posted by: Fascist Hyena | April 10, 2009, 4:00 pm 4:00 pm
And speaking of tanking the economy, let us take a look at today’s news:
“Washington – The U.S. budget deficit surged in March as tax payments by companies and individuals dropped and the government spent more to rescue banks and revive the economy. The excess of spending over revenue climbed to $192.3 billion, compared with a gap of $48.2 billion in the same month a year earlier. Spending increased to $321.2 billion, and revenue fell 28 percent to $129 billion.”
Some “revival” we’re getting from all that spending. We’re getting a national debt that exceeds all the accumulated debt from George Washington to George W. Bush. More than doubling it in five years, tripling it in ten.
Posted by: Fascist Hyena | April 10, 2009, 4:04 pm 4:04 pm
Meet the new boss..same as the old boss.
Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | April 10, 2009, 4:10 pm 4:10 pm
My goodness! And I believed so much in Obama’s promises for a while.
Posted by: tv-1944 | April 10, 2009, 4:20 pm 4:20 pm
See. BHO broke every promise he made during the campaign trail. Anyone who listens or believe him is a FOOl. Look an American captain is held hostage by pirate and a reporter asking BHO direct question about the situation and the answer was ” Guys we are talking about housing today.” Yeah Americans fool, it is OK if you are held hostage or Dead as long as I am on the roll with my agendas. Pathetic, we got a fool, a cons and a chicken droop in the whitehouse. How did he end up there? He has lied all the way to there.
Posted by: THANG | April 10, 2009, 4:29 pm 4:29 pm
How many of you voted for BHO and now change your mind and regret?
BHO is so HIPPOCRITED that the more he sreamed on top of his lung about BUSH’S FAIL policies, the more he kisses and loves them now. In the end he is just an INEXPERIENCED junior two term state and one term US senator.
One more stupid inexperience act on the world stage from BHO is he freaking BOWED to Saudi guy. Oh yeah, no wonder most of his 700 mili. campaign money came from the, whereelse, kingdoom of saudi. He is a disgraced to America in the name of lying and playing the “RACE CARD” all the way to the whitehouse.
Posted by: THANG | April 10, 2009, 4:42 pm 4:42 pm
well the George W Lovers on Board and Fox News and Rush Limbaugh and Glen crybaby Beck should love this!
Posted by: Angie In PA | April 10, 2009, 5:06 pm 5:06 pm
‘Hopey-Changey’.
Exactly what many of us knew was a load of crap during the election season.
-at least he hasn’t added trillions of dollars to our national debt in 80 days … wait …
-or embarrass us by bowing to a muslim king.
-or give Gordon Brown a bunch of crappy DVD’s that won’t play in Great Britain.
-or give the Queen of England an ipod.
-on and on and on ….
Yeah, Bush is the idiot. Ha~
I have to stop now. I’m laughing too much to continue.
Posted by: Jim | April 10, 2009, 5:11 pm 5:11 pm
“And by the way, if the war in Afghanistan is illegal, what is Obama doing sending 21,000 additional troops there, and why did he support that war from the beginning”
Nope, the War in Afghanistan has the blessing of the UN and NATO.
That is where our enemies are.
The illegal war you are thinking of is Iraq which was started based on Bush’s lies.
Posted by: Ryan C | April 10, 2009, 5:20 pm 5:20 pm
JIM
Well at least he is not a Falling down drunk Or got us into a War without getting full and Accurate Information and then Invading with no exit Plan And I recall W Kissing and Hugging the Saudis and Begging them for Oil Last summer yeah W was real smart and Not Embarrsing at all check Out the Videos of him Falling down drunk at the Olympics and Trying to Feel up the Soccer team Girls
Posted by: Angie In PA | April 10, 2009, 5:23 pm 5:23 pm
It bugs me how you guys glory over Obama making decisions. Kind of how you guys got all hysterical when Rev. Wright was pumped on FIX NEWZ, how you got all anxious about how his campaign was sure to be over, how he had no chance. My advice is sit back and watch the man show you how to stay focused (a good lesson for the youth), when everything around you seems to crumble (i.e. the USA economy). Obama will not always do what you want but one thing is for sure he will surely try to do what is best for the people.
This article tells me it must have been a slow news day.
Posted by: Oliver Nelson | April 10, 2009, 5:50 pm 5:50 pm
I can only say I hope all are satisfied.
YOU ALL VOTED FOR HIM. Reality is a convincing thing, and grown up folks know what has to be done and they do it. I think at times, BHO, appears to, a
hyperactive child, running from one thing to another, but not accompolishing much.
He loves the shock value, and there is plenty of that. I can only hope he grows up fast, Some things you just have
to live a little and experience some hard places, to reach maturity. Lets pray he does that fast. How in the world can we put up with 4 years of this?
B
Posted by: betsy/B | April 10, 2009, 6:07 pm 6:07 pm
Obama: Still a Chicago mobster!
Posted by: dl | April 10, 2009, 6:18 pm 6:18 pm
Abe Lincoln is from Chicago too!
Posted by: Teoa | April 10, 2009, 6:36 pm 6:36 pm
Wow. The vindication of GWB is speeding along quite nicely, no?
Posted by: CH | April 10, 2009, 7:10 pm 7:10 pm
Nope, the War in Afghanistan has the blessing of the UN and NATO.
That is where our enemies are.
The illegal war you are thinking of is Iraq which was started based on Bush’s lies.
So.. How many troops did those magnificent war allowers give to ol Prez when he asked for their help in the escalation of the “good, correct” war?
Of course you’re still wrong. Our enemies as you define them aren’t in Afghanistan, they’re in Pakistan.
Posted by: Jay | April 10, 2009, 7:31 pm 7:31 pm
Folks, the US Government is not the answer to our problems. If we take the responsibility ourselves, we can fix most of the problems. A fine example was in the State of Hawai’i (Island of Kauai). If the people had waited for the Federal Government fix the proble, there is no true telling as to just how long it could have, would have take to fix this problem? When the people band together (hence strenght in numbers). My hat is off to those fine folks who have shown what true community spirit is. They dam sure didn’t need a community organizer to assist in the process. They pulled together their resources, labor, monies,and time to fix the problem. In all the problem was solved in 8 days. If left to the Federal Government, they could not have achieved anything in that amount of time. This is a lesson to all of us, that we can do it ourselves. And not a government that is full of waste, manusha, along with the cost of government going thru the roof. Wake-up people.
Posted by: US Taxpayer | April 10, 2009, 8:15 pm 8:15 pm
I’m tired of hearing about Bush/Illegal war…
1. Cia chief, put in place by Clinton, told Bush there were WMD’s
2. Saddam Hussien claimed he had WMD’s
3. The Iraqi scientists who claimed they helped build/worked on WMD’s said they existed. In fact, they say the WMD’s were probably dismantled and moved in the huge trucks to Syria. You know, the trucks used to transport Aid? (while we all gave time for the UN to do their own inspections, remember?)
and yet, everyone want’s to blame Bush…What the hell was he supposed to believe?? what would you be saying if Bush disregarded all of the above and Saddam had used them? You would crucify him, just like you are now.
I say err on the safe side…
Posted by: vpritner | April 10, 2009, 9:36 pm 9:36 pm
Will somebody please tell whomever controls the teleprompter to do what we elected him to do?
His teleprompter is the only thing he listens to!
Posted by: vpritner | April 10, 2009, 9:50 pm 9:50 pm
If anyone had checked Sen Obama’s voting record, you’d know he wasn’t around long enough to know the truth about running the government, so when Candidate Obama became President Obama, he was faced with unpleasant realities that didn’t match campaign rhetoric. So we ended up with the practices of Bush without the skill of Bush, and no savvy Second in Command worth backing him up. Change for the sake of change is not always healthy. Watch and learn.
Posted by: OldGuy | April 10, 2009, 10:27 pm 10:27 pm
I gotta tell you, it is absolutely hilarious reading comments by the Obama sycophants claiming that now that a guy with a D behind his name is doing this stuff, it somehow doesn’t matter anymore. It is topnotch hypocritical entertainment at its finest. And to make matters worse, Obama wants to vastly expand these programs. Go on Obama drones, keep telling us why it doesn’t matter anymore, just like you tried to tell us with signing statements, rendition, earmarks, increased troops in Afghanistan, deficit spending, etc. The hypocrisy would be absolutely hilarious if it weren’t so damaging to the country. But as this and other episodes of Obama’s hypocrisy prove, the Democrats and those on the left didn’t oppose Bush’s plans out of principle, it was solely for political gain.
This president has proven himself to be an incompetent fraud whose tendency toward hypocrisy is absolutely staggering. When he is not nominating tax cheats, he is shredding the Constitution.
Posted by: Mark | April 10, 2009, 11:33 pm 11:33 pm
“Nope, the War in Afghanistan has the blessing of the UN and NATO.”
Wow, good thing too, because as a sovereign nation, the United States needs the blessing of the UN to go to war, right?
“The illegal war you are thinking of is Iraq which was started based on Bush’s lies.”
Illegal war? Ok, tell me which laws of the United States were broken by George Bush when he launched the war against Iraq. He received authorization via a vote in Congress to do what he did in Iraq. The notion that this is illegal because the UN didn’t give its blessing is just silly nonsense. The United States does not have to clear its actions with the UN.
Bush’s lies? Guess you missed the report put forth by the bipartisan commission formed by Congress to investigate such claims. You know, the one that found that Bush in fact didn’t lie, rather he placed too much emphasis on intelligence that later was found out to be not accurate. The very same intelligence pretty much every single Western nation agreed at the time was valid. The very same intelligence that members of Congress were privy to before they authorized the action in Iraq.
You can criticize the war in Iraq all you want, but the notion that it is “illegal” because the UN is against it is baloney.
Posted by: Mark | April 10, 2009, 11:46 pm 11:46 pm
You can’t traverse through Europe, you can only traverse it. Good copy editors are relatively cheap, you know.
Posted by: Sven | April 11, 2009, 1:31 am 1:31 am
“ALL GOVERNMENT,OF COURSE,IS AGAINST
LIBERTY”. H.L. MENCKEN
Posted by: Old Dog | April 11, 2009, 2:40 am 2:40 am
So, all you poor silly slobs are confused now that obama has ‘grown up’ in his presidency and supports state secrets. He is W all over again! Well, more simply, he is now privy to the state secrets and agrees with W. Just as he will close gitmo as he promised you, when he can find another prison for its inmates. Liberals and dems in general are boring, paranoid and just plain wrong in their single-minded blatherings…
Posted by: vic g | April 11, 2009, 2:46 am 2:46 am
U GUYS ARE REALY HILARIOUS…..OBAMA IS TAKING ALL THE HARD DECISIONS AND ACCEPTING ALL THE TOUGH RESPONSIBILITIES WHILST U SIT ON UR LAZY BOYS AND SPOUT “INFORMED COMMENTARIES” MAYBE IF U SPENT A DAY IN A DEVELOPING COUNTRY WITH CLASSICALLY INEPT LEADERSHIP U WOULD APPRECIATE DAT…GUYS AND GALS IN AMERICA…IF UR NOT HAPPY WITH OBAMA WAIT PATIENTLY FOR HIS TERM TO EXPIRE AND SEND HIM DOWN TO AFRICA TO HELP US FIX THAT CONTINENT…UR WELCOME TO RE-INSTALL BUSH AND HIS CRONIES….TOO MUCH HAMBURGERS AND TABLOID DRIVEN LIFESTYLES GETTING TO UR COLLECTIVE HEADS
Posted by: seye | April 11, 2009, 4:27 am 4:27 am
Obama is a nut, and even worse he is a clueless nut. No backbone and no clue, he has already broken most of his campaign promises and flip flops openingly in the wind.
Posted by: PresGov | April 11, 2009, 5:29 am 5:29 am
Obama has already said he doesn’t like the constitution for americans………
Posted by: PresGov | April 11, 2009, 5:30 am 5:30 am
Shredding the constitution should be automatic impeachment.
Posted by: PresGov | April 11, 2009, 5:30 am 5:30 am
A multi thousand dollar pizza for Obama – flown in from where? I must have dreamed this.
Posted by: Jimbo | April 11, 2009, 5:44 am 5:44 am
THIS GUY HAS HIS FINGERS ON “THE FOOTBALL?” TALK ABOUT ANOTHER DISASTER WAITING TO HAPPEN!!!
Posted by: Jimbo | April 11, 2009, 5:47 am 5:47 am
THE IRONIC THING ABOUT OBAMA BEING COMMANDER IN CHIEF IS THAT AS A CIVILIAN JOINING THE MILITARY – HE WOULD ONLY BE ABLE TO GET MINIMAL SECURITY CLEARANCE
Posted by: Jimbo | April 11, 2009, 5:52 am 5:52 am
I thought Bush was bad on alot of things, but geez Obama is far far far far worse. He has to go before he buys enough votes with giving the illegal criminals citizenship by the millions and free health care at the cost of the rest of us.
Posted by: PresGov | April 11, 2009, 6:05 am 6:05 am
RE:Oliver Nelson’s comment: Dude, look me in the nothern gulag before BHO’s term is up so we can discuss how everything is gonna be alright with “The One” in charge!
My main issue with the man is his total disregard for the United States Consititution. Thing is he claims to be a constitutional scholar. He also said the constitution is a living breathing document that is not perfect. That sould have SCARED every single registered voter right there!
Posted by: Dan Davidson | April 11, 2009, 6:40 am 6:40 am
OBAMA IS TAKING ALL THE HARD DECISIONS AND ACCEPTING ALL THE TOUGH RESPONSIBILITIES WHILST…
I have to admit, whatever you’ve been having, it must be pretty good. When it wears off, do you sleep for a whole day? Or do you wake up with a throbbing headache?
Posted by: Blacque Jacques Shellacque | April 11, 2009, 3:17 pm 3:17 pm
JFK declared, “The very word “secrecy” is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, secret oaths, and secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it.”
I wonder how we should consider Obama’s mysterious background, shady associates, and clandestine policy making in light of the above?
As they say, we ultimately receive the very government which we deserve.
Posted by: h5mind | April 12, 2009, 10:01 pm 10:01 pm
Why are people surprised? Did anyone who voted for Obama know Obama? No one that I know personally who voted for Obama for president had any idea what he might do. They voted for him based on his Harvard law degree and his rhetoric. They thought McCain and Palin were dumb. They thought Obama was the smartest man in Washington. But no one could tell me what he would do once president based on any track record or past action; nor could they tell me what qualifications he had to tackle our economic crisis or global issues. They just thought he was going to be great. Oh, goody. Now he has proven in only 3 months to be an unmitigated disaster. We have over 3 more years of this. It’s only going to get worse. Good luck to us all.
Posted by: JMS2008 | April 15, 2009, 10:53 pm 10:53 pm
“and yet, everyone want’s to blame Bush…What the hell was he supposed to believe?? what would you be saying if Bush disregarded all of the above and Saddam had used them? You would crucify him, just like you are now.
I say err on the safe side…”
I agree 100% stop bashing and let’s look at the facts of the president we have in office now. You go around holding on to something without questioning it and nothing good will come from it. Knowone is saying hate him, just take the blinders off and keep track, question things. Its okay to like someone and sometimes disagree.
Posted by: Paula | April 24, 2009, 12:07 pm 12:07 pm
Thanks for spending the time to discuss this, I feel strongly about it and love reading more on this topic.
Posted by: military electronics | September 6, 2011, 8:31 am 8:31 am