One more false smear of our President....State Secrets

[catnhatnh]

"Proof" from Salon:
Lawyer for the government, Douglas N. Letter, made the same state-secrets argument on Monday, startling several judges on the panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

“Is there anything material that has happened” that might have caused the Justice Department to shift its views, asked Judge Mary M. Schroeder, an appointee of President Jimmy Carter, coyly referring to the recent election.

“No, your honor,” Mr. Letter replied.

“The change in administration has no bearing?” she asked.

“No, your honor,” he said once more. The position he was taking in court on behalf of the government had been “thoroughly vetted with the appropriate officials within the new administration,” and “these are the authorized positions,” he said.

So who the hell is "Douglas N. letter"??? Google him and the top info site on him is a Who's Who type ego site being hawked at $12.95...

http://www.leadershipprofiles.com/preview.asp?docid=447297&t=0

So essentially Mr Letter is a way down the food chain functionary. On the other hand the new Attorney General is reviewing all claims under the States Secrets act:

http://www.leadershipprofiles.com/preview.asp?docid=447297&t=0

So essentially when you go off on this you believe a lower ranked Bush appointee and ignore an Obama cabinet member. DUer's should research further before believing this crap.

[liberalmuse]

1. Absofuckinglutely.

I will withhold judgment on this one until I hear it from our President. It simply does not ring true.

[EraOfResponsibility]

2. I knew it

thanks for this.

[LakeSamish706]

3. If true, then AG Holder should kick Mr. Letter's ass out of Justice ASAP. n/t

[catnhatnh]

5. Not really....

He's just down the food chain...if he asks his superiors there is no change...His superior's superiors have just begun reviewing the policy. The sad part is spinning this to indicate the support comes direct from the top.

[LakeSamish706]

6. Letter has to seriously know that what he said is BS... There is (better be)...

a huge change from business as usual at Justice.

[Canuckistanian]

4. Somehow, I don't think Doug Letter has a bright future in the DOJ

Every new administration has a Doug Letter. The difference is, Bush would have promoted him.

His time shall pass.

[struggle4progress]

45. Douglas Letter seems to have been with the DOJ since 1978, so he probably

usually likes what he does, and there's a real chance he's good at it, since he also seems to teach at GWU. If he's a lower level lawyer, he's not the one who decides how certain cases are handled; since the el-Masri torture lawsuit was thrown out for the same reason two years ago, the Bush administration may have told Letter to copy arguments from that case. This "state secrets exemption" is nasty-smelling crap, but it's not immediately clear to me how a real opponent should proceed now: if the government backs down on the current suit, nothing prevents a replay of the situation in future years, whereas if one pushes the "state secrets" argument to SCOTUS, then one might either get the courts to rule against it or (if the courts accept the argument) one might generate enough outrage to get a legislative remedy against the final court decision


Mr. Letter serves as the terrorism litigation counsel at the Department of Justice, where he supervises and coordinates terrorism-related litigation. Mr. Letter has been with the Justice Department since 1978, and has principally handled cases involving national security, foreign state immunity, constitutional separation of powers issues, civil and criminal enforcement of the federal consumer protection laws, and civil fraud prosecution. In 1994-95, he served in the White House Counsel's Office as associate counsel to the president. http://www.law.gwu.edu/Faculty/profile.aspx?id=8229

CIA 'torture' lawsuit thrown out
Last Updated: Thursday, 18 May 2006, 23:05 GMT 00:05 UK
A US court has dismissed a lawsuit brought by a German citizen who says he was kidnapped and beaten by the CIA. Khaled el-Masri aimed to sue former CIA chief George Tenet and other officials for their alleged role in the "extraordinary rendition" programme. Mr el-Masri says he was picked up in Macedonia in 2003 and flown to Kabul, Afghanistan, where he alleges torture. The judge did not rule on the truth of the allegations, but said letting the case proceed might endanger security ... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4996140.stm

[midnight]

7. I like what I think you are suggesting here. Mr. Letter is

promoting this idea, that this administration will be like the last, with states secrets. When in fact, the new attorney general is still reviewing this body of work?

[catnhatnh]

8. Exactly...

and DUer's are using the Salon piece to slam President Obama as "more of the same"...

[defendandprotect]

9. GOOD!! thank you!!

[mmonk]

10. The court case was today.

Bush isn't President.

[catnhatnh]

13. Yes, and Eric Holder has had how long to review this? N/T

Edited to add... was confirmed A WHOLE WEEK AGO!!! Can't these people get anything done? He's had a work week to reverse 8 years of evil...

[mmonk]

16. There's nothing new in the case including what the government has.

[BlooInBloo]

11. Interesting. Still wanna know more.

[pot luck]

12. This isn't the first time that Bush loyalists have spread lies about Obama,

nor will it be the last. Rachel did a segment on this a week or two ago. Bush loyalists are trying to make Bush's policies look better by spreading false stories saying that the Obama administration will continue them. I'm surprised that people around here haven't caught on yet.

[cascadiance]

42. Umm... If he's spreading lies, then why doesn't Obama fire him!

Instead of allowing him to continue to try to argue to the court of Appeals *on behalf of the Obama administration!*, that an appeal to this case shouldn't be allowed. That sounds like the Obama administration agrees with him (allowing him to continue to work on this case and to speak in court on its behalf), not some "rogue Republican critic" of Democrats trying to "spread lies" about the Obama administration. In most cases, if you "spread lies" about your employer, you get fired.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-na-torture10-2009feb10,0,6909985.story

This is where the quotes above were from I believe. Read more to get the context. I don't know if Salon was quoting the L.A. Times or not...

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

14. I called it in one of the earlier threads.

Right, Liz?

And I also brought up the fact this place reads more like FweepieVille than any DU I have ever known, these days, on stories like this. Rather than learn the facts, like we used to do, people just start looking to wind Obama's intestines up on a garden hose reel at the merest hint that one of theor oxen might, just might be in danger of being gored.

There are a lot of fucking idiot clowns, or worse, here these days. People here need to start engaging their brains.

[EFerrari]

18. Yes, you did. n/t

[mmonk]

20. Fact: The Justice Department invoked the state secrets privilege today.

That means if the court agrees, it can't be brought forward. Fact: Today the AG was Holder and the President Obama. Therefore, facts cannot be smears.

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

22. Causation != Correlation

Was this pleading the result of Eric Holder's directives? It's looking more likely that it was not.

[mmonk]

25. Are you saying the lawyers of the justice department do not take their positions

from the justice department?

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

26. Entirely possible.

After all, we know that the government agencies are shot through with Bush political true believers who have been burrowed in. We know civil service hiring practices were politicized. What is the worst that can happen to him for this? He gets fired and then goes to work for a white-shoe Federalist Society law firm, while being made a martyr.

[walldude]

15. So you are saying that Douglas Letter lied to a federal judge when he

said that this was an authorized position. You are saying he went into court and lied. That Obama's Attorney General who you just said is "reviewing all claims under the SS act" told this man that he was not allowed to invoke the state secrets act and this man did it anyway. Wow even for a Bush appointee this guy has brass fucking balls to lie to a federal judge in a federal court about the use of the state secrets act. Especially without his Bush/Cheney safety net.

[catnhatnh]

19. NO I didn't say he lied....

I said he repeated what is in fact the current DOJ position which is under review by his new, one week old department head. But to imply the position will not change and represents our Presidents position is horseshit spin from the article.

[walldude]

23. I didn't see any implication that nothing would change

This is what you said:

So essentially when you go off on this you believe a lower ranked Bush appointee and ignore an Obama cabinet member". Looks to me like you are accusing some Du'ers of believing the Bush appointee over Obama's AG. Which means you think he's lying. I find it hard to "believe" that anyone would be stupid enough to lie to a Federal Supreme court. Of course you didn't say he lied, you said "you believe a lower ranked Bush appointee and ignore an Obama cabinet member" So you are saying that the AG just hasn't had time to fix Bush's Nazi faux pas? Is that it?

[catnhatnh]

24. That's pretty much it....

I believe even if this had been priority one of the new AG the one week time frame could not permit a review of the policy, promulgation of new rules, and notification of all employees downstream.

It's more of the "look, nothing's changing, I'm sorry I voted for him" horseshit. If anyone thinks I'm wrong please present a timetable to show how this should have been handled.

[EFerrari]

17. He was representing the government. Maybe HE should research further. n/t

[mentalslavery]

21. Thats so funny, this is all over the big liberal websites

thanks for the gut check. We are some "attack first, ask questions after we accuse obama of being yellow" dumbass's. Its going to take a couple years to get over the "we are getting sold down the river, attitude". I swear, everywhere we look, we see it. Doesnt matter what it is, we see it.

I just thought about something-how many times we been bitchin about how he's going to screw up and how many times we been right? I don't know, but second guessing obama is like breathing.

[uberblonde]

27. You might want to take a look at this...

Douglas Letter

Title(s)
Professorial Lecturer in Law

Biographical Sketch
Mr. Letter serves as the terrorism litigation counsel at the Department of Justice, where he supervises and coordinates terrorism-related litigation. Mr. Letter has been with the Justice Department since 1978, and has principally handled cases involving national security, foreign state immunity, constitutional separation of powers issues, civil and criminal enforcement of the federal consumer protection laws, and civil fraud prosecution. In 1994-95, he served in the White House Counsel's Office as associate counsel to the president.

http://www.law.gwu.edu/Faculty/p...le.aspx? id=8229

[liberalsince1968]

28. It would be pretty bad if Obama didn't know what his own Justice Department was up to.

That hardly makes this situation more tolerable.

I'll go with Glenn Greenwald and the ACLU on this one.

[Garbo 2004]

29. DOJ could have asked court for delay for new admin to review case, but evidently did not.

Justice Department spokesman Charles Miller said Friday he knew of no plans to change the government's position or to ask for a delay so that the department under new Attorney General Eric Holder can review its position.

Miller said, "As far as I know, we will be presenting our position as previously stated."

http://cbs5.com/local/overseas.prisons.torture.2.929940.html

Also, per link in post #27, Douglas Letter appears to be career DOJ, beginning under Carter, except for a year as associate counsel to Bill Clinton (WH Counsel's Office).

[Oilwellian]

30. "Proof" isn't coming from just Salon

Obama Administration Maintains Bush Position on 'Extraordinary Rendition' Lawsuit

February 09, 2009 2:44 PM

From Jake Tapper and Ariane de Vogue:

The Obama Administration today announced that it would keep the same position as the Bush Administration in the lawsuit Mohamed et al v Jeppesen Dataplan, Inc.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/02/obama-administr.html


The Binyam Mohamed Case

The Obama administration will continue the cover-up of the alleged torture of the British resident. The argument is that revealing the extent of the man's torture and abuse would reveal state secrets. No shit. This is a depressing sign that the Obama administration will protect the Bush-Cheney torture regime from the light of day. And with each decision to cover for their predecessors, the Obamaites become retroactively complicit in them.

So what are they hiding from us? Wouldn't you like to know?

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/02/the-binyam-moha.html

Obama Backs Off a Reversal on Secrets

(snip)
A lawyer for the government, Douglas N. Letter, made the same state-secrets argument on Monday, startling several judges on the panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

“Is there anything material that has happened” that might have caused the Justice Department to shift its views, asked Judge Mary M. Schroeder, an appointee of President Jimmy Carter, coyly referring to the recent election.

“No, your honor,” Mr. Letter replied.

“The change in administration has no bearing?” she asked.

“No, your honor,” he said once more. The position he was taking in court on behalf of the government had been “thoroughly vetted with the appropriate officials within the new administration,” and “these are the authorized positions,” he said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/10/us/10torture.html?_r=1&hp



"Thoroughly vetted with the appropriate officials within the new administration": that's about as explicit as it gets. It will be extremely difficult for even the most loyal Obama followers to deny that this was an active and conscious decision on the part of the Obama DOJ to embrace one of the most extreme abuses of the Bush presidency.

It isn't merely that the Obama DOJ is invoking the privilege for this particular case, which contains allegations of torture that are as brutal and severe as any. That's bad enough. But worse is that they're invoking the most abusive parts of the Bush theory: namely, that the privilege can be used to block the adjudication of entire cases (rather than, say, justify the concealment of specific classified documents or other pieces of evidence), and, worse still, can be used to prevent judicial scrutiny even when the alleged government conduct is blatantly illegal and, as here, a war crime of the greatest seriousness.

They're embracing a theory that literally places government officials beyond the rule of law. No minimally honest person who criticized the Bush administration for relying on this instrument can defend the Obama administration for doing so here.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/02/09/state_secrets/index.html

[Hippo_Tron]

32. I'll be interested to see what Robert Gibbs has to say about this tomorrow

[ima_sinnic]

33. thanks for the additional information

I will not be supporting Obama until he deals with this as I will consider him a war criminal like all the rest who are involved in the cover-up.

[Hekate]

31. Thank you SO much for doing this research. Maybe DU should start a list of moles...

It would be a worthwhile DU project to identify and keep track of these Bush-vermin.

Again, thank you.

Hekate

[4lbs]

34. Yes, Letter appears to be one of the Bushie burrower appointees whose purpose is little more than to

cause trouble for the Obama Administration.

The SuperChimp made sure to scatter these burrowed troublemakers all over the federal government. There are dozens of them.

[Garbo 2004]

40. Letter career DOJ, starting under Carter. Served in Clinton WH Counsel's office. n/t

[seaglass]

35. Unless a statement is made today that this is NOT the position of the Obama administration - it IS

the position. The argument has already been made in court.

Obama is now complicit in Bush crimes and as an Obama voter - so am I. My feelings at this time...DISGUST.

[mmonk]

36. You're not. You were lead to believe something different.

[seaglass]

37. I should not have given him the benefit of the doubt after the FISA vote.

Seriously this is crushing - more important to me than any damn economic stimulus bickering - and with 1 kid in college, 1 going next fall, having just missed getting laid off 2 weeks ago and with the threat of more fire stations closing (my husband is a firefighter) the economy is important to me. But not ANYWHERE near as important as the morality of this country and the cleansing of the last 8 years that I was expecting.

I am truly ashamed.

[mmonk]

38. I understand. I have one kid in college and one in private school

due to learning problems and I'm a real estate broker. But my and my family's freedom comes before all else and whether the government is constitutional or not is my non negotiable.

[katandmoon]

39. Bingo. This is an important case. So why are they letting some low level Bush flunky call the shots

If he doesn't represent the Obama administration position?

Has anyone in the Obama administration refuted this?

If not, then it's still on Obama. They knew this court date was coming up, this should have been the first state secrets case they studied. If it wasn't, and they just let it happen anyway, then that's just criminally incompetent.

I see no way to spin this that does much credit to the Obama administration.

[cascadiance]

41. That is precisely what's needed!

This shouldn't have been an issue to "creep up" on an informed Obama administration. They should have been prepared for a case like this and how to rule on such a case early in his administration.

Either:

a) do the status quo "State Secrets" privilege ruling, but have a very publicized public statement saying that they are only trying to keep in place what's happening until they can study the cases in more details, and will work with appeals courts to address this case once newer policies, etc. have been put in place.

b) do a hold on such a decision and again VERY publicly say that we need to review the details of such cases before the justice department seeks their resolution.

Since this was done in quiet, and is staying with the Bush administration modus operandi, it doesn't send a very good message to those concerned about restoring confidence in our government's and system's transparency.

I don't care how you might trust Obama's true agenda/ambitions and therefore feel you need to give him wiggle room on this. I think there are certain changes that absolutely MUST be made. Fixing the "state secrets" privilege usage is one of these.

Obama should also be publicly pushing congress to pass Gerrold Nadler's State Secrets Privilege reform bill that's moving through the House at this point. Then Obama can explain what he wants to see in its place too that he feels needed, but that we can accept as sufficient reform.

[mmonk]

43. How is the denial thread going?

[chill_wind]

44. "False Smear"? Senator Feingold must not have gotten the memo.

He must be in cahoots with Glenn Greewald.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5024292