On the heels of President Barack Obama again assuring that public that there is no domestic surveillance programs on their communications, the New York Times is reporting even broader surveillance by the Administration than previously reported.
Category: Congress
It is with great joy that I can report the decision of the Obama Administration to turn down the controversial permit application of the Georiga Aquarium to import 18 beluga whales captured and held in Russia. I have had the honor of serving as lead counsel with the J.B. and Maurice C. Shapiro Environmental Law Clinic of The George Washington University Law School in representing an international consortium of scientists, environmentalists, and organizations in challenging the permit application and preparing for litigation to block any permit issuance. My colleague GW Law Professor Joan Schaffner, Director of the GW Law Animal Welfare Project, has joined me in this representation with a team of GW law students, including Tyler Sniff, one of our Shapiro Fellows and a recent graduate. The Administration and specifically the National Marine Fisheries Service (“NMFS”) deserves to be commended for this decision to protect the whale population from continued depletion by these live capture operations. Here is the press release from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
The desperate efforts of Congress to change the public view of Edward Snowden appears to be continuing. This week someone in the Senate attempted to change the description of Snowden as a “dissident” to a “traitor” on Wikipedia. The White House and congressional leaders are clearly alarmed that many view Snowden as a whistleblower. The media groups like NPR previously yielded to pressure not to call Snowden a whistleblower and instead use the less flattering term “leaker.” However, that is not enough because it does not seem to have helped.
Respectfully submitted by Lawrence E. Rafferty (rafflaw)-Guest Blogger
It has not made a lot of noise in the main stream media, but recently, an important case filed jointly by the ACLU and the Center for Constitutional Rights challenging the Department of Justice and the Obama Administration’s drone war was argued in front of Judge Rosemary Collyer. That case is Anwar Al-Aulaqi vs. Panetta, et al and it was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in 2012. You can find the filing here.
What makes this case so important is that it was filed on behalf of the estate of a 16-year-old American citizen who was killed by an American drone strike, along with other victims, in Yemen in 2011. Recently the United States Department of Justice presented a defense that is quite striking. Continue reading “The Most Important Court Case You May Never Have Heard Of”
The Atlantic Magazine has an interesting article out this week on a little known effort by the Administration to stop Americans from listening to a speech in Mexico by Leon Trotsky that would be transmitted over a telephone line. Assistant Solicitor General Golden W. Bell wrote the memo below stating that the Administration had no such authority. That was before the Office of Legal Counsel and the rest of the Department became more ambitious and less principled. Today they can find interpretations to allow the circumvention of the separation of powers, the assassination of citizens, the establishment of a torture program, and the maintenance of an Imperial Presidency.
Continue reading “DOJ Memo Reveals Effort To Block Trotsky Speech”
This morning we have yet another article detailing a warrantless surveillance program by the National Security Agency that contradicts representations made by President Barack Obama and members of Congress. You may recall how Obama has tried to get citizens to embrace a new surveillance-friendly model of privacy after the disclosure of massive surveillance of citizens, including programs acquiring every call made by citizens. Various Democratic members came forward to admit that they knew of such programs and not to be afraid . . . they have our backs. Yet every story that has surfaced has contradicted claims that such programs are limited and do not involve the content of communications in emails and messages. The latest program being reported is called XKeyscore and is described as scouring emails, chat rooms, and browsing histories . . . all without a warrant. In the meantime, citizens in polls are saying that they are more concerned with the threat of their own government to their privacy than the threat of terrorism. Once again, citizens learned of this program not from their representative or their media but largely from the foreign press and the disclosures of Edward Snowden.
After years of abuse in confinement from denying him a charge to denying him counsel, Pfc. Bradley Manning finally had a trial on the most serious charge against him: aiding the enemy. He was convicted on lesser charges. The verdict should again focus attention on the mistreatment of Manning by the Obama Administration for leaking classified reports and diplomatic cables. Many of these documents showed that the U.S. government was lying to the public and to its allies.
Continue reading “Manning Acquitted Of Aiding The Enemy in Wikileaks Case”
Submitted By: Mike Spindell, Guest Blogger
One month before I was scheduled to begin my freshman year in College my mother died. My father had gone bankrupt in his automobile franchise the year before and was working as a car salesman. Money was tight, but I had won a full tuition scholarship under the New York State Regents Scholarship program. While tuition was not a problem, there would be other costs associated with College, such as books and various student fees. My father found out about New York State’s student loan program and signed me up for a low amount of money, with the understanding that he would repay it. Due to his business failure my father had no way to get credit in his own name. Ironically, one month before my sophomore year my father died. I was 18 years old and the only work I had ever done was as a “car jockey” at the dealership where my father worked. There was little money in my father’s estate and I soon had to start school. I upped my student loan to the maximum allowed so that I would have living expenses until I could get a job to support myself through my remaining college years. Within two months, still reeling from the effect of being orphaned, I had gotten a job as a Night Watchman in a municipal hospital and arranged my course schedule around it. I lived in a furnished room, with a bathroom in a common hall, but my life slowly began to normalize. Later I got a job as a Clerk/Delivery boy in a liquor store, working 35 hours a week after school and making $32.50 plus tips, using my own car. I managed to scrimp by with the aid of taking out the maximum available student loans each year. The loans under the program them were from a bank, guaranteed by New York State. After I graduated I got a job for $6,000 a year and tried to pull my financial head above water. Six months after graduation though, I was notified by the bank that my student loan was to start being repaid, at a fixed rate that to me was a hardship financially. I went to the bank to ask to restructure the deal so I would pay less each month and they refused. It turned out that the New York State Student Loan plan was set in such a way that if the borrower defaulted the State would pay the bank the full amount immediately and then go after the borrower. It was therefore in the bank’s interest to have the student default, since they would get their return much more quickly.
Flash to many years down the road and my two daughters going to college. I was forced to take out student loans for their education, but I made each of them the promise that I, not they, would pay it back. This was of course the result of my own experience and I considered it my duty. I paid off my oldest daughter’s debt and am now paying off my youngest daughter’s debt. On my fixed income this is difficult. Both of them are working with good jobs, however, I don’t want my children to go through what I went through and would prefer they are not burdened by the costs of their education. Incidentally, they both worked part time when they went through college, although in both instances I didn’t want them to have to do so and that is only a minor part of why I am so proud of them. Which leads me to what is going on today with the Federal Student Loan Program, which brings in a surplus of $184 billion for the Federal Government. Call me what you will, but I don’t think that government should be a profit making enterprise and I certainly believe that it is in all of our interests to educate our children. At least one Senator feels the same way. Continue reading “The Student Loan Problem”
While some Democratic voters continue to debate whether to support Anthony Weiner in the wake of additional sextexting to women (after he resigned from office), there has been attention drawn to the extraordinary deal given to his wife Huma Abedin, a close aide to Hillary Clinton. This town is infamous for such special deals but this one takes my breath away. It appears that Abedin, the deputy chief of staff at the State Department under Clinton while she was at the State Department, was granted status as a “special government employee” after the birth of her son in the midst of the scandal. That allowed her to continue to earn $135,000 as a government employee while also earning as much as $355,000 as a consultant for Teneo. You guessed it. Teneo Holdings happens to have former President Bill Clinton is a board member.
Continue reading “Weiner Scandal Focuses Attention On Lucrative Deal Given Huma Abedin”
The respected Foreign Policy magazine details how the recent close vote on the NSA warrantless surveillance program was heading to a victory for privacy when the White House called in Nancy Pelosi. With heavy pressure from Pelosi, the White House was able to get just enough votes to kill privacy. Even with her ignoble role in this vote (and prior work to reduce civil liberties), many democrats are still supporting Pelosi in what is now a robotic form of politics. As their leader takes an axe to privacy, Democrats are again adopting the mantra that the other guys are worse and she is still good on other issues — making privacy just another item to trade off as part of the blue state/red state paradigm maintained by our duopoly of government.
For many years, there has been controversy over the funding of military chaplains and the preferences given certain faiths. The problem is that as much 23 percent of our military list no religious association or preference. While many simply have no religious association with a particular faith, some are agnostics, some are atheists, and some are generally humanists. It would seem logical to have some chaplains who can relate to those groups. However, members of Congress are irate and insist that chaplains must believe in a deity to be funded. They warm that humanist or secularist chaplains would be traumatizing dying soldiers about being “worm food” and dying without hope.
Continue reading “Congress Moves To Block Atheist Chaplains”
Respectfully submitted by Lawrence E. Rafferty (rafflaw)-Guest Blogger
There has been a large volume of discussion on this blog concerning the loss of our personal liberties and constitutional freedoms. One of the most important of those “freedoms” that seem to be at risk is the Freedom of the Press, especially in light of recent events.
“Following the amendment of a long-standing U.S. law, people in this country will now be exposed to news which is produced by the U.S. government. On Jul. 2, a change to the U.S. Information and Educational Exchange Act, also known as the Smith-Mundt Act, came into effect, reversing a ban on the State Department and U.S. international broadcasting agencies which had prevented them from disseminating their program materials within U.S. borders. The Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), the U.S. federal government agency which oversees all U.S. government-supported media internationally, notes that individuals residing in the U.S. will now have access to vast amounts of new information.” Nation of Change Continue reading “Is Freedom of the Press Dead?”
There has been considerable criticism of the fact that the massive new immigration bill seems to be something of a mystery to even sponsors who have indicated that they have either not read it entirely or even know many of its provisions. This seems a new fact of life for Congress — something we saw with the Patriot Act where many members admitted they never read before voting to curtail civil liberties. There remains a huge debate in the country over the fairness of allowing millions to apply for citizenship after knowingly entering the country illegally while others wait in other countries. Others insist that this is dealing with a difficult problem in a humane way and is good for the economy and good for the GOP. Putting aside those sweeping issues, I was struck by one provision of the law that deals with people who have forged two passports or sold false passports.
We have been discussing the collapse of the American civil liberties movement and the attacks on the free press and privacy under the Obama Administration. As discussed in prior columns, we continue to refer to the United States as the “land of the free” despite a comprehensive reduction of civil liberties and due process in this country. The Snowden affair has put that record in sharp relief as the White House and Congress has joined together in barring the prosecution of perjury by high ranking officials and pursuing Snowden with close to unhinged rage. As previously discussed, our governing class has created a new American Animal farm. Long ago, American politicians adopted a type of dismissive paternalism toward the public as shepherds to so many sheep. Then one sheep goes and spooks the flock. The response has been bipartisan rage that has included demands to cut off aid to entire nations if they grant sanctuary to this whistleblower and even boycott the Olympics. The shepherds want Snowden made into mutton for stampeding the flock and no measure appears too extreme. Now Jimmy Carter has entered the fray and said what many citizens are saying in denouncing our duopoly. Carter told Spiegel “America has no functioning democracy.” Of course, you have to live in Germany to read such views.
Continue reading “Carter: The United States Has No Functioning Democracy”
Submitted By: Mike Spindell, Guest Blogger
As I write this I’ve just read a story in the New York Times about the U.S. threatening countries in South America to not grant asylum to Edward Snowden. In typical “Times” fashion these countries are characterized as “leftist” mavericks against the assumed U.S. hegemony in that vast continent. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/12/world/americas/us-is-pressing-latin-americans-to-reject-snowden.html?pagewanted=2&_r=0&hp . The attitude of the story is that these countries by resisting our government’s pressure are acting in a petulant manner. This is typical of the mindset of many supposed journalists today who are unable to put in context the history behind the actions of certain players on the world stage. What it highlights for me is that there seems to be unprecedented pressure by our government to capture and punish Mr. Snowden for his “crimes”. With my admittedly jaundiced view of much of the history of my country in my lifetime, the attempt to take Snowden down for his “crimes” makes sense if you put into the context of American history with respect to foreign relations and how foreign relations has impacted the growing unconstitutional treatment of United States citizens at home and abroad. Since this is a huge topic deserving of many tomes and therefore doesn’t lend itself to the guest blog format, my piece will present my own impressionistic view of the interaction between foreign policy and the growth of the American Police State since World War II, which can be expanded, abetted or contradicted by you the reader.
For all practical purposes the Second World War began with the almost total loss of the U.S. Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor. While it was known that President Franklin Delano Roosevelt had actively been trying to aid Great Britain in its struggle against the Axis Powers in Europe, the American Congress was skeptical of foreign involvement and there was a large “isolationist” strain in the American people. The devastation of Pearl Harbor shocked the nation into realizing that it had to focus upon the rest of the world and awakened within the country a strong thirst for revenge. I say this not disparagingly since were I alive at the time, I would have been one with this national outrage and blood-lust. The problem with arousing such a strong emotional call for action in any society is that in the frenzy to act, societal norms are often breached in the name of expediency. In the case of our country World War II planted the seeds of the Corporate/Military/Intelligence Complex (CMIC) that is reaching full flower today. What follows is my personal overview of this development since that embattled time and why this government has such a great need to crush Edward Snowden for his deeds. Continue reading “Who Do You Trust, US or Your Lying Eyes?”