General Discussion

kpete

(72,006 posts) Fri Mar 16, 2012, 04:25 PM Mar 2012

Government Confirms That It Has Secret Interpretation of Patriot Act Spy Powers

Government Confirms That It Has Secret Interpretation of Patriot Act Spy Powers

.............on Thursday, the government confirmed that it does indeed have a secret interpretation of Sec. 215, as Senators Wyden and Udall have been arguing. That confirmation comes in a document release to the ACLU from their FOIA request, but doesn't yet enlighten on what exactly that interpretation—which the Senators say will shock and enrage the public—says.

Although we're still reviewing the documents, we're not holding our breath for any meaningful explanation from the government about its secret take on the Patriot Act. We do know now that there are two memos from the Office of Legal Counsel (the same Justice Department group that issued the torture memos) relating to Section 215. But as has become a routine practice for the Justice Department, the OLC is keeping those memos entirely secret.

This secrecy is overbroad and unnecessary. Americans have a right to know how their government is interpreting public laws, especially when those laws give the government sweeping authority to collect more and more of our personal and private information.

http://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/government-confirms-it-has-secret-interpretation-patriot-act-spy-powers

LOTS MORE:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/03/16/1075072/-Administration-confirms-it-has-secret-interpretation-of-Patriot-Act-nbsp-provision

19 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Government Confirms That It Has Secret Interpretation of Patriot Act Spy Powers (Original Post) kpete Mar 2012 OP

K&R Solly Mack Mar 2012 #1

It's no secret... 3waygeek Mar 2012 #2

+1 tk2kewl Mar 2012 #3

Feeling old again gratuitous Mar 2012 #4

Our wonderful torture methods DefenseLawyer Mar 2012 #13

My friend Richard always said gratuitous Mar 2012 #14

We'll be notified when they start bombing Iran. leveymg Mar 2012 #5

i am absolutely ashamed MrDiaz Mar 2012 #6

He should be the one who is ashamed! SammyWinstonJack Mar 2012 #15

There is nothing more antithetical to the notion of the rule of law hifiguy Mar 2012 #7

Not much of a secret if everyone knows about it. Rex Mar 2012 #8

Knowing such a thing exists is one thing. hifiguy Mar 2012 #9

Just like when they whitewashed 9/11. Rex Mar 2012 #10

Rest assured, we the public will be told what we need to indepat Mar 2012 #11

Holder, Alberto -- what's the fkkin difference? elehhhhna Mar 2012 #12

I thought we elected a consitutional scholar and law professor _ed_ Mar 2012 #17

K&R (n/t) a2liberal Mar 2012 #16

"The most transparent administration in history" _ed_ Mar 2012 #18

The main problem Aerows Mar 2012 #19

Solly Mack

(90,779 posts)

1. K&R

Reply to kpete (Original post)

Fri Mar 16, 2012, 04:26 PM

Mar 2012

3waygeek

(2,034 posts)

2. It's no secret...

Reply to kpete (Original post)

Fri Mar 16, 2012, 04:27 PM

Mar 2012

they interpret the Patriot Act to mean they can do whatever the fuck they want.

tk2kewl

(18,133 posts)

3. +1

Reply to 3waygeek (Reply #2)

Fri Mar 16, 2012, 04:27 PM

Mar 2012

gratuitous

(82,849 posts)

4. Feeling old again

Reply to kpete (Original post)

Fri Mar 16, 2012, 04:38 PM

Mar 2012

I remember when the United States used to give the old Soviet Union about 18 shades of shit for its secret courts and hidden legalities. We used to say that their secrecy was the hallmark of tyranny, and proof of the soviet's animosity toward its own citizens.

Now? We'd probably praise Stalin, Beria and the rest of those thugs for laying out such a great blueprint.

DefenseLawyer

(11,101 posts)

13. Our wonderful torture methods

Reply to gratuitous (Reply #4)

Fri Mar 16, 2012, 06:09 PM

Mar 2012

came directly from the Chinese and the North Koreans. USA! USA!

gratuitous

(82,849 posts)

14. My friend Richard always said

Reply to DefenseLawyer (Reply #13)

Fri Mar 16, 2012, 06:15 PM

Mar 2012

"Steal from the best."

leveymg

(36,418 posts)

5. We'll be notified when they start bombing Iran.

Reply to kpete (Original post)

Fri Mar 16, 2012, 05:12 PM

Mar 2012

Until then, they aren't telling. Shhhh. National Secret!

MrDiaz

(731 posts)

6. i am absolutely ashamed

Reply to kpete (Original post)

Fri Mar 16, 2012, 05:33 PM

Mar 2012

That President Obama Signed an Extension for this bill.

SammyWinstonJack

(44,130 posts)

15. He should be the one who is ashamed!

Reply to MrDiaz (Reply #6)

Fri Mar 16, 2012, 06:15 PM

Mar 2012

hifiguy

(33,688 posts)

7. There is nothing more antithetical to the notion of the rule of law

Reply to kpete (Original post)

Fri Mar 16, 2012, 05:35 PM

Mar 2012

than the existence of "secret interpretations of the law." This is shit that War Criminal John Yoo would have come with.

Rex

(65,616 posts)

8. Not much of a secret if everyone knows about it.

Reply to kpete (Original post)

Fri Mar 16, 2012, 05:38 PM

Mar 2012

nt.

hifiguy

(33,688 posts)

9. Knowing such a thing exists is one thing.

Reply to Rex (Reply #8)

Fri Mar 16, 2012, 05:42 PM

Mar 2012

Knowing what it actually says is quite another. Whatever their "interpretation" is, I am sure it is horrifying.

Rex

(65,616 posts)

10. Just like when they whitewashed 9/11.

Reply to hifiguy (Reply #9)

Fri Mar 16, 2012, 05:48 PM

Mar 2012

The truth was probably far more horrifying then what we were told.

indepat

(20,899 posts)

11. Rest assured, we the public will be told what we need to

Reply to kpete (Original post)

Fri Mar 16, 2012, 05:52 PM

Mar 2012

know.

elehhhhna

(32,076 posts)

12. Holder, Alberto -- what's the fkkin difference?

Reply to kpete (Original post)

Fri Mar 16, 2012, 05:57 PM

Mar 2012

The Shock Doctrine breifly discusses certain think tanks' studying how much fascist shit a given population will accept from a "liberal" Prezzydent versus a "conservative" Prezzydent.

Seriously: Abu Gonzales and Hiding Holder -can't we find someone who's read the frikken Constitution?

_ed_

(1,734 posts)

17. I thought we elected a consitutional scholar and law professor

Reply to elehhhhna (Reply #12)

Sat Mar 17, 2012, 11:06 AM

Mar 2012

I guess he used his knowledge of the document to subvert and ignore it.

a2liberal

(1,524 posts)

16. K&R (n/t)

Reply to kpete (Original post)

Fri Mar 16, 2012, 06:50 PM

Mar 2012

_ed_

(1,734 posts)

18. "The most transparent administration in history"

Reply to kpete (Original post)

Sat Mar 17, 2012, 11:06 AM

Mar 2012

my ass.

Aerows

(39,961 posts)

19. The main problem

Reply to kpete (Original post)

Sat Mar 17, 2012, 11:49 AM

Mar 2012

Is that we have reached the point where the people serve the government, rather than the government serving the people.

You see it in things like that massive facility they are building in Utah to suck up every bit of telecommunications and archive it. Everything you do via communications will be archived. How does that serve the people? It doesn't. We are paying for things like that - we are paying the government to spy on us. Worse, rather than being apologetic about it, they expect to be thanked for doing things like this.

Is it Constitutional? No, of course it isn't, but they do it anyway. How can you challenge it when the second you mention it, they start screaming state secrets and national security?

When the government operates under a shroud of secrecy, it becomes completely unaccountable to the people. That's where we are. Do you honestly think any politician can speak out about it at this point? They are probably monitored more closely than anyone. No politician is going to risk having embarrassing or criminal actions being released - even if it was gathered in an Unconstitutional manner.

I don't know how we can get this country back under control at this point.

Reply to this discussion