Posted on 02/18/2006 5:31:00 AM PST by FerdieMurphy
On Thursday, a federal judge decided that Americans' safety and security takes a back-seat to a left-wing groups' right to view and promulgate top secret National Security Agency documents relating to the terrorism surveillance program.
In this case, one of the left-wing groups has direct ties to Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT), who was forced to step down from his perch on the Senate Intelligence Committee in 1987 over allegations he leaked classified information to news reporters.
Just one lawyer wearing black robes has usurped the authority of the Commander-in-Chief to wage war as he believes it should be waged. As a result of this decision, the US Justice Department is ordered to respond within 20 days to requests by a civil liberties group for documents about President George W. Bush's NSA surveillance program.
The ruling is being heralded by the news media as "a victory for the Electronic Privacy Information Center," which sued the Justice Department under the Freedom of Information Act in seeking the release of classified documents. In other words, an unelected lawyer is using the FIOA to divulge the information gathered during a war to a left-wing group of lawyers, college professors and antiwar activists who will make they documents public. By public, I mean releasing classified information to everyone including terrorists, insurgents, international gangsters and other assorted misfits.
US District Judge Henry Kennedy ordered the department to finish processing the group's requests and produce or identify all records within 20 days.
"Given the great public and media attention that the government's warrantless surveillance program has garnered and the recent hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, the public interest is particularly well served by the timely release of the requested documents," Judge Kennedy brazenly pontificated from on high as he sat in a courtroom far from the battlefield. Appointment to the federal bench suddenly made this lawyer an expert in warfare, intelligence, counterterrorism and homeland security. Amazing what a black robe can do for the intellect. Put it on and -- voila! -- you're an intellectual giant.
However, Kennedy did say that the Justice Department could give the left-wingers an index of the documents and a declaration stating why the documents should be withheld within 30 days. Hopefully, the left-wingers will end up with a list and an empty file folder.
David Sobel, the group's general counsel, said, "The court's opinion vindicates the public's right to know about an extremely invasive and potentially illegal government program." Since he has not received access documents regarding the NSA spy program, it boggles the mind how Sobel knows the program is invasive, unless he believes any spy program is invasive. Most clear-thinking Americans have no problem in using a program that's invasive to terrorist organizations and cells.
Anthony Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union, which filed a similar lawsuit, said, "Now the Justice Department must turn over documents showing the extent of the ... warrantless domestic surveillance program." I can go on for hours about why the ACLU is a pack of disingenuous troublemakers, but suffice it to say that Mr. Romero's use of the word "domestic" is misleading and he knows it.
These groups argued that the Department of Justice played a key role in authorizing, implementing and overseeing the program, which involves surveillance by the National Security Agency.
The records sought by the group -- and ordered released by the judge -- include an audit of the program, a "checklist" guide used to determine whether an individual's phone or e-mail messages could be monitored, documents showing how information gleaned through eavesdropping had been used, and other legal opinions about the program.
The program, adopted by President Bush after the September 11 attacks, allows the monitoring of international communications into and out of the United States of persons linked to Al-Qaeda or related terrorist groups. The President is authorized by the war powers provisions in the US Constitution and the September 14, 2001 Congressional Resolution that gave President Bush the power to wage war against terrorists.
Part of waging war includes tactical intelligence gathering, as opposed to strategic intelligence gathering. We are witnessing how slowly but surely judges are being allowed to undermine the authority of the current president to wage and win a war.
Judge Henry Kennedy was appointed federal judge by none other than President William Jefferson Clinton. Prior to that he served in a number of positions, including Assistant US Attorney under another liberal president -- Jimmy "at least Hamas isn't corrupt" Carter. To say that Judge Kennedy is a liberal is the epitome of understatement. He's a favorite judge of the ACLU, the Center for Constitutional Rights -- which is trying to get suspected terrorists and enemy combatants released -- and other leftist organizations.
The group, the Electronic Privacy Information Center, or EPIC, brought the case before a judge they knew they could rely on to comply with their requests for documents. The executive director of EPIC is Marc Rotenberg, who served as counsel to Senator Patrick Leahy. Another EPIC honcho is Dave Sobel, who's made a name for himself fighting the Patriot Act. He's also affiliated with the left-wing magazine The Nation and is working to assist terrorists being detained by the military to have access to the US justice system. Another staff member, H. Kate Rears calls herself a "radical, militant librarian," although I have no idea what that entails unless she means she throws books at conservatives.
These liberal-left groups, many Democrat politicians (and some Republicans, as well), the news media and others are filling the American people's heads with garbage. I've got a news flash for the overwhelming majority of US citizens: the federal government doesn't care what you say on your telephone or what you write in your e-mail. Trust me, please. They just don't care. You have more to fear from unelected, leftist judges who believe the US Constitution says whatever they wish it to say, than from a President who in three years will be playing golf and riding bikes in Crawford, Texas. Just think, nine unelected lawyers wearing black robes decided the lives of 45 million unborn babies could be extinguished. No American president has ever killed that many people -- born or unborn.
Wait and see what happens the next time America is struck by terrorists.....
It will bring a whole new meaning to "neighborhood watch".
A Clinton appointee. That's all that needs to be said.
Is this so-called judge Teddy Kennedy's love child? :0 )
Ferdie, you'll be interested in this flashback post by kristinn from last December at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1544623/posts .
It exposes Judge J. Robertson--the one who got all the press recently for resigning from the FISA court--as one of the eight Clinton appointed judges who met monthly in DC back when the Clinton regime was still in power.
More importantly, Chief US District Judge Norma Holloway Johnson was managing to funnel all the Clinton related cases to these judges instead of allowing them to be randomly assigned as they're supposed to be.
Robertson is the one who prevented a case against Webb Hubbell from even being heard. He was reversed (haha).
Another carefully assigned Clintonista US District Judge Paul L. Friedman threw out charges against Charlie Trie, Maria Hsia, and Pauline Kanchanalak; but that was reversed also (haha).
The Trie and Hsia cases were described as being about illegal campaign contributions which sounds small but not if you realize it was really about Chinagate!
Unfortunately, these cases resulted in plea bargains which kept a lot of evidence from being exposed.
Two more of the Judge Johnson assigned cases revealed in the article include Judge Henry H. Kennedy Jr., a 1997 Clinton appointee, and Judge Emmet G. Sullivan, a 1994 appointee. It'll be interesting to see when and where these names pop up again as I'm sure they will.
Something to consider: President Bush made NO mention of not trusting any/some of the FISA court judges, but given the background and previous corrupt and highly political decisions of Robertson, does anybody doubt that he would deny perfectly good cases and/or leak the information to God knows whom?
How many other Clintonista judges infest the current FISA court?
Hey, come on, maybe the judge is setting the stage for a "speech" to the Saudis -- or his liberal friends are going to talk to them. You know, ka-ching, ka-ching, ka-ching.
Give the judge his 30 pieces of silver - he's earned them...
You are so right! Classification of documents occur way before they reach the President. It is the responsibility of originating office to classify based on stringent guidelines.
I know, it's another world where right is wrong,
and evil is called good.
I hope the country continues to polarize so that the difference
between us becomes even more vivid.
Then maybe we can go our seperate ways.
And that was my point. NSA is not going to fold for a single federal judge.
??????How do you impeach a judge?????
These were judges to whom US District Judge Norma Holloway Johnson improperly assigned cases related to the Clintons, including but not limited to Chinagate.
One possible way to slow down the RatCom assault on our national security is, every time the Enemy Within makes such an assault, we respond by bringing back FACTS from the Clinton era that most Americans never found out about.
We've got a lot better chance of getting information out now than we did back then.
Oh my God
Justice Kennedy is black.
If we complain, we'll all be called racist!
Which leads me to believe that the Judicial branch, and coming from a lower court judge, has no authority to order classified documents to be released.
This has to be nothing more than political posturing on the part of the leftist/activist judiciary and the actual release of documents won't happen.
The only authority that can make this happen is congress and it will still remain classified no matter what the case. It can only be viewed in a closed session.
I agree with you, but I wish they'd play a little hardball and remind people just who and what these judges are. Please see #44 and especially go back and read the link to Kristinn's earlier thread--dynamite.
They won't, of course, they'll just get the BS reversed. These corrupt judges are used to getting reversed, but they fully expect they'll never be exposed and that's what really needs to happen.
Which is why the MSM hasn't really picked up on this. It's a non-story.
Hmmmm. I knew it wouldn't take long to find out the ACLU was behind this trashy sceme. Aren't they always?
    |
Our congress is a filthy joke filled with gonadless "moderates," leftists, socialist/communists who don't give a damn about Americans' future just for today's posturing before C-Span cameras to an empty peanut gallery and building up their empire of staffers!""
In other words, Joseph McCarthy was correct.
This part of the article stands on its own:
We are witnessing how slowly but surely judges are being allowed to undermine the authority of the current president to wage and win a war.
Judge Henry Kennedy was appointed federal judge by none other than President William Jefferson Clinton. Prior to that he served in a number of positions, including Assistant US Attorney under another liberal president -- Jimmy "at least Hamas isn't corrupt" Carter. To say that Judge Kennedy is a liberal is the epitome of understatement. He's a favorite judge of the ACLU, the Center for Constitutional Rights -- which is trying to get suspected terrorists and enemy combatants released -- and other leftist organizations.
The group, the Electronic Privacy Information Center, or EPIC, brought the case before a judge they knew they could rely on to comply with their requests for documents. The executive director of EPIC is Marc Rotenberg, who served as counsel to Senator Patrick Leahy. Another EPIC honcho is Dave Sobel, who's made a name for himself fighting the Patriot Act. He's also affiliated with the left-wing magazine The Nation and is working to assist terrorists being detained by the military to have access to the US justice system. Another staff member, H. Kate Rears calls herself a "radical, militant librarian," although I have no idea what that entails unless she means she throws books at conservatives.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.