« We are headed for the cliff. | Main | Israel states its defiance once again. »

01 December 2012

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

John Minnerath

A fearful and unconscionable move by a government more and more disfunctional and disconnected from those they're supposed to serve.

Fred

And Democrats thought John Yoo was safely out of the administration.

MS2

I can see how a potential whistleblower would think twice about scanning around a classified network for corroboration for some suspicions of theirs, due to such a program. But if the whistleblower is blowing the whistle on something within their normal sphere, why would the whistleblower expect any detection and therefore be deterred?

Personally it seems pretty understandable to react like this after a public scandal involving the head of the CIA doing embarrassingly crude and shady computer stuff without detection. Generally, I would hope someone is monitoring classified networks. How is this not basic counter-intelligence?

Harper

This latest move, IMHO, is an indication that Obama also has some concerns that he could be nabbed for his unconstitutional actions. He has insisted that Eric Holder stay on as Attorney General for another year, because Holder is his bodyguard against any serious probe or the initiating of an independent counsel. The Obama administration has prosecuted more whistleblowers under the Espionage Act than all previous presidents combined. He has drawn a clear line in the sand between "authorized leaks," like those to the New York Times lauding his successful killing of Osama bin-Laden, his Tuesday "kill target" sessions and his drone warfare programs. The people who make "authorized leaks," like Tom Donilon, David Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett, will be protected by Obama's bodyguard of lies and Holder's corrupt DOJ/FBI complex. Anyone who is a legitimate whistle blower, like the DEA people who blew the whistle on Fast and Furious or the military people who provided Congress with some key information on the security failures prior to the Benghazi attack, is now going to be a target of preventive purges and worse. Obama has gone several steps beyond what Bush and Cheney could pull off, because ultimately, the Congressional Democrats who waged the fight against Bush and Cheney (up to a point) are giving Obama a free ride. Partisanship has become the fatal disease that is going to kill our Republic if it is not cured very soon.

Clifford Kiracofe

Gestapo tactics?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gestapo

But not surprising given the bi-partisan support for the phased construction of our American "national security state"/"garrison state" and for our imperial foreign policy dedicated to the fascist concept of "National Greatness".

On Fascism:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism


Basilisk

The Presidential Memorandum is new, the internal monitoring programs are decidedly not.

Clifford Kiracofe

Harper,

Normal security and CI activity is certainly warranted and proper in the world in which we live.

But your comment seems rather to point to political police action designed to protect the White House politicians politically from "internal enemies" rather than to increase protection against foreign espionage and other hostile activity against our country.

I agree with your point on Democrats but I would also say that Republicans are guilty of "authorized leaks" for political purposes as the Karl Rove/Valerie Plane case indicates.

The would seem to be constitutional issues here. Both Democrats and Republicans of the imperial persuasion work to construct the "principate." In Roman terms, this was launched by the astute Augustus and he cloaked the dictatorship with the mere forms of the former Republic.

In our traditional political culture, this would violate our concepts of constitutional government and the doctrine of the separation of powers. Under our traditional concept, the three branches are separate but co-equal.

With the advent of the imperial faction to dominance as of 1898 with their Spanish-American War, it has sought the aggrandizement of the Executive Branch and the usurpation of powers from the Legislative Branch. Unfortunately, the Legislative Branch has often gone along with the construction of the "Imperial Presidency."

Arthur Schlesinger, Jr's book, "The Imperial Presidency" gives excellent insight on modern times with the Nixon years etc.

Obama, not to mention some Republicans, aims to cut against, if not eliminate, the traditional "checks and balances" in our constitutional order as envisaged by James Madison and other Founding Fathers, IMO.

Obama taught constitutional law at UC and he was the editor of the Harvard Law Review. Clearly he has the legal knowledge to know what he is up to. Is there any difference between Holder and Bush43s John Yu?

In a sense, Obama is merely continuing the "Unitary Executive" concept and action of Bush43 and his stable of fascist lawyers.

It seems to me that BOTH parties are the problem. Both parties seem to follow the lead of Carl Schmitt with his concepts of "states of emergency", "The Leader", and all the rest.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Schmitt

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

October 2020

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31
Blog powered by Typepad