emptywheel is spending a week in Scotland and is likely to be pretty soused most of the time. She left behind some good stuff about the Obama Administration’s recent record on Civil Liberties.
You know, things he’s fucked up just in the last week or so.
Generally they fall into 5 categories-
- 5 on Assassination Authority
- 2 on Intelligence Transparency
- 2 on Indefinite Detention
- 1 on Electronic Surveillance
- 6 on FBI Surveillance of Peace Activists
I’ve published some digests below the fold along with a bonus piece by bmaz on Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell
Assassination Authority
Obama Doesn’t Know Why the Fuck He’s Entitled to Kill Al-Awlaki, He Just Is, Damnit
By: emptywheel Saturday September 25, 2010 11:54 am
This is not a court filing. It’s a “choose your own adventure novel” for the judge:
- Is AQAP part of al Qaeda? (if yes, then go to dead al-Awlaki)
- Is AQAP an “organized associated force of al Qaeda”? (if yes, then go to dead al-Awlaki)
- Do Presidents get to self-authorize going to war (if yes, then go to dead al-Awlakil; if no, go to “alternatives to the AUMF”)
- What do you think of the “inherent right to self defense”? (if yes, then go to dead al-Awlaki)
- To abide by the Constitution and other laws, the President can’t be bound by “generalized standards.” The End. (go to dead al-Awlaki)
And mind you, we’ve set off on this “choose your own adventure in tyranny novel” even before we’ve gotten to the government’s invocation of state secrets. Just in case you had any doubts about their claim to unlimited power…
The Secrets They’re Keeping Selectively Leaking about Anwar al-Awlaki
By: emptywheel Sunday September 26, 2010 10:46 am
Rather than prove to a judge that they even have reasonable suspicion to believe al-Awlaki is part of AQAP, much less enough evidence to execute him, the government has instead asserted that all of that is a state secret. They’ve declared everything al-Awlaki would need to challenge his execution a state secret. Even KSM will be able to see the evidence against him; and he has admitted to killing 3,000 Americans. But American citizen al-Awlaki, whom no one has accused of actually killing anyone, can’t see the same kind of information.
Is this How the Yemeni-American Partnership Works?
By: emptywheel Monday September 27, 2010 10:18 am
In my post on the government’s invocation of state secrets to hide the things national security officials have already leaked to the press, I linked to David Ignatius’ largely-overlooked report that Yemen first asked us to target Anwar al-Awlaki, and only thereafter did we get around to targeting him and telling courts they had no business asking why we had done so.
A Defense of Tyranny?
By: emptywheel Tuesday September 28, 2010 9:49 am
If the government really were justifying its targeting of al-Awlaki because he’s an imminent threat (they don’t commit to that argument, but it is what John’s reader argues), then they’d effectively be arguing that al-Awlaki has been an imminent threat since at least December, when he was on a JSOC kill list. And yet, in that entire period, the only thing the government alleges al-Awlaki personally has done is make a video praising attacks on the US and justifying jihad. (It does note that AQAP claimed responsibility for an attempted assassination of the UK’s Ambassador to Yemen, but does not claim al-Awlaki had an operational role.) That video may be dangerous, but it’s the kind of thing that the government had previously considered protected speech.
Obama’s Still Obfuscating about Domestic Surveillance
By: emptywheel Tuesday September 28, 2010 10:52 am
The government’s invocation of state secrets in al-Haramain has even less to do with protecting operatives in the field. In that case, the government is (again) protecting publicly traded companies from even more certain backlash from consumers. And it is protecting the details about how and the extent to which the government conducts domestic surveillance and data mining. The government is not protecting operatives in the field at all. On the contrary, the government is protecting itself from the wrath of its citizens.
Intelligence Transparency
The Compromise Intelligence Authorization
By: emptywheel Wednesday September 29, 2010 10:04 am
Think of it this way. Under these rules, the Bush White House would have had to tell the entire Intelligence Committees they were systematically torturing prisoners by February 1, 2003 (or at least admit in writing they hadn’t and wouldn’t inform the committees, rather than altering documents after the fact to pretend they had). Technically, they would have to have informed Congress of the September 17, 2001 finding dubiously used to authorize the torture program by March 17, 2002. As it happened, they apparently didn’t brief any Democrats that they were torturing prisoners until February 5, 2003, at which point the one they did brief (Jane Harman) objected in writing (and asked whether the President had signed off on the policy, which presumably meant she had never been briefed on the actual finding). We know Bob Graham had been proposing oversight of the interrogation program by that point, backed by a majority of the committee, even though he had no clue they were torturing (though Tony Blair apparently did). So it’s possible Congress would have at least demanded more information sooner about the torture under this system.
Woodward’s Secrets
By: emptywheel Wednesday September 29, 2010 5:31 pm
Woodward is even more interesting. Woodward knew to ask certain pointed questions of Richard Armitage-the same questions, as it turns out, that Bob Novak asked to elicit information about Valerie Plame’s purported role in Joe Wilson’s trip to Niger. But according to John Brennan, at least, even if Richard Armitage leaked Plame’s role intentionally, it would not be illegal. And remember, too, that on July 8 or 9 (this is reflected in notes introduced at trial; you’ll have to take my word for it though, because I don’t have my records with me), the VP’s office did give Woodward detailed information about the Iraq NIE. In other words, we know Woodward was a part of the OVP’s strategy for rebutting Joe Wilson in what was effectively a political hit.
More generally, though, consider what this suggests about the excuse that Cheney was prepared to use for having ordered the leak of Plame’s identity. John Brennan, at least, argues that if the President “signals to his Administration” that he wants certain information out there, it’s legal to leak it. I don’t necessarily buy that, mind you.
But it suggests one of Obama’s key advisors buys off on the idea that it’s cool for the President to selectively declassify information (you know, like leaks to the press about targeting Anwar al-Awlaki, even if you later invoke state secrets about it) for political gain.
Indefinite Detention
By October 24, 2001, They Decided They Could Detain Prisoners as Long as the Afghan War Continued
By: emptywheel Wednesday September 29, 2010 6:03 am
Almost nine years ago, a British embassy official recorded the consensus among American and British officials that the plausibility that we were still at war would affect whether we could legally hold detainees for long periods without trial.
Nine years later, just a handful of the men ultimately captured have had a trial. Our sole claim to still be at war- aside from the Administration’s attempts to stretch the terms of the AUMF -are the 50 al Qaeda members still in Afghanistan. And on that basis, we still hold hundreds of men without trial.
You see, from the start this war was designed to be our longest war. Because all those Commander-in-Chief powers both Republicans and Democrats have grown to love so much depend on it continuing.
Our men and women are risking their lives in Afghanistan at this point to make indefinite detention more legally “plausible.”
DC Court: National Security Requires Dismissal of Suit Brought by Families of Men "Suicided" at Gitmo
By: emptywheel Wednesday September 29, 2010 2:36 pm
Given that our President now holds that he has the authority to assassinate US Citizens with no due process-and he doesn’t have to explain that authority to any court-it should be no surprise that the DC District Court has upheld its earlier decision dismissing the suit of a filed by the families of a bunch of men “suicided” at Gitmo. (I’m already 3 hours into my 15 hour transit from Holland to Holland, so I’m going to just quote from CCR’s press release; here’s one of Scott Horton’s articles on this to remind you of the background and the new evidence the plaintiffs submitted.)
Electronic Surveillance
Obama’s Panopticon
By: emptywheel Monday September 27, 2010 5:32 am
Any communication you make, any financial transaction you make, the Obama Administration thinks nine years after 9/11 is the time to demand such access.
FBI Surveillance of Peace Activists
Did OLC Change the Understanding of Riot Investigations to Time w/RNC Convention?
By: emptywheel Tuesday September 21, 2010 2:09 pm
This footnote seems to suggest that in July 2008, in the weeks before the Presidential Convention season, someone in OLC lowered the bar for starting an investigation into a potential riot. That’s all the more interesting, given the liberal use of the riot statute Ramsey County and FBI used in preemptively arresting people leading up to the RNC Convention in September of 2008.
Ongoing Investigation of Anti-War Activists
By: emptywheel Friday September 24, 2010 9:01 am
I wanted to call attention to a footnote that seems to suggest the emails from FBI employees in Pittsburgh who had conducted surveillance of the Thomas Merton Center and/or invented an excuse for doing so after the fact were unavailable when DOJ’s IG asked for emails in association with this investigation
The Six FBI Reports Treating Merton Center Anti-War Activism as Terrorism
By: emptywheel Thursday September 23, 2010 5:44 am
(This) report (.pdf) -examining whether the FBI investigated the First Amendment activities of lefty groups as terrorism -is a masterpiece of obfuscation. It manages to look at three different investigative efforts of the Thomas Merton Center’s anti-war activism, all treated as terrorism, and declare them unconnected and therefore not evidence that during the Bush Administration anti-war activism was investigated as terrorism.
Ongoing Investigation of Anti-War Activists
By: emptywheel Friday September 24, 2010 9:01 am
I … want to note that these investigations are ongoing. This morning, FBI in Minnesota raided the homes of some anti-war activists as part of a material support for terrorism investigation. (h/t fatster)
FBI’s Lies about Anti-War Surveillance Also Protected CIFA
By: emptywheel Friday September 24, 2010 12:01 pm
The FBI invented a number of stories to explain away their systematic, long-term investigation of Pittsburgh’s anti-war community, not to mention to explain away the lies FBI told Congress in response to inquiries about that surveillance. But to the extent that surveillance was systematic, those lies served to protect not only FBI, but the CIFA program as well.
This Raid on Peace Activists Brought to You By Elena Kagan
By: emptywheel Tuesday September 28, 2010 6:02 am
These descriptions suggest that the FBI is raiding a bunch of peace activists it tracked during the RNC Convention to establish attenuated ties between them and at least three groups on the Foreign Terrorist Organization list.
Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell
Witt Reinstated To The Air Force; Wittless In The White House
By: bmaz Friday September 24, 2010 6:22 pm
Now the hilarity and absurdity of the Obama Administration policy rears its ugly head because, you see, part of the government’s objection in LCR is based on the Witt 9th Circuit decision that they should at least be entitled to make a showing on a case by case basis. When, at almost the same exact moment, the Obama Administration was proving in the further proceedings of the Witt case itself, that they could not, and would not, adhere to the spirit of Witt and proceed intelligently and on a case by case basis where they could prove morale and unit cohesion were at risk.
Instead, what the Obama Administration, by and through the actions of their Department of Justice, have proven that their current rhetoric about being dedicated to ending DADT is as empty as their similar campaign promises were hollow. Yet day after day, the Administration wonders why those on the left are unhappy and chastises them for not clapping loudly enough heading into midterm elections where turnout of the base is critical. Tin ear does not begin to describe this arrogance.
1 comments
Author