Skip to main content

View Diary: What If You Pulled Back the Curtain and Found a Real Wizard? (181 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Do you dispute the court's (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JayBat, Tortmaster

    conclusion that it cannot provide meaningful oversight of misuses of the system because of misrepresentations from the users? We just got to see this opinion yesterday, much is still redacted. I am not in a position to know what the secret laws say or mean, how the secret interpretations of those secret laws change the nature of any restrictions that MIGHT be in the secret laws, any other rulings of the secret court in charge of applying the secret interpretations to secret laws to the secret agencies who do the misusing and misrepresenting. Are you?

    •  Joieau, if you are the ... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ricklewsive

      ... Chairwoman or Chariman of a giant IT hardware company, and your tech gurus tell you that they are working on a new technology that will revolutionize the industry, and they say it will be able to do this and this and that, but it turns out the new hardware can only do this and this at this time, then that was perhaps a misrepresentation, but I would think it was made in good faith. This is just my speculation, but that could've been the problem in the instance you cite. (And no, I'm not aware of any Top Secret stuff!).  

      The Court does have the power of contempt, and it does have other enforcement mechanisms, including ordering that the Government not look into a particular chest, ordering the appearance of Government personnel, and requiring sworn affidavits from agency heads. Moreover, this is one layer of the oversight. Additionally, there's Congressional oversight, there's the executive branch through the AG and the Civil Liberties Protection Officers, and there are whistleblowers, audits and Inspector Generals.

      Another important aspect of the Court's decision in this case, in my opinion, is that it was rendered "Classified: TOP SECRET." This Judge had every reason to believe that the decision wouldn't be made public during his lifetime and probably for many years after that. Yet, there is still this huge effort to provide oversight, understand the issues involved with privacy and the Fourth Amendment, push back where appropriate, work on creating a balance between the competing interests (foreign intelligence versus civil liberties) and not a one-page rubber-stamp at all.

      That's what I meant with the title of the diary.

      Rand Paul is to civil liberties as the Disney Channel is to subtle and nuanced acting.

      by Tortmaster on Thu Aug 22, 2013 at 10:43:47 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site