Author Topic: NEW YORK TIMES: The Obama Administration 'Has Now Lost All Credibility'  (Read 1176 times)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39437
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
NEW YORK TIMES: The Obama Administration 'Has Now Lost All Credibility'


 
Brett LoGiurato   |   20 minutes ago   | 0 |     
 

The New York Times editorial board ripped the Obama administration in a scathing editorial Thursday afternoon, writing that it has "now lost all credibility" after revelations that the administration has been collecting the phone records of millions of Verizon customers.

It came as something of a surprise, considering the board's normally friendly view toward the administration.

But in the editorial, the Times' board criticized the Obama administration in much of the same way it scrutinized the Bush administration. It wrote that the Obama administration's justification for the program — the Patriot Act — is not good enough:

Mr. Obama clearly had no intention of revealing this eavesdropping, just as he would not have acknowledged the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki, an American citizen, had it not been reported in the press. Even then, it took him more than a year and a half to acknowledge the killing, and he is still keeping secret the protocol by which he makes such decisions.

We are not questioning the legality under the Patriot Act of the court order disclosed by The Guardian. But we strongly object to using that power in this manner. It is the very sort of thing against which Mr. Obama once railed, when he said in 2007 that the Bush administration’s surveillance policy “puts forward a false choice between the liberties we cherish and the security we provide.”

The editorial board called for the Patriot Act to be "sharply curtailed, if not repealed."


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/new-york-times-obama-nsa-phone-scandal-editorial-nyt-2013-6#ixzz2VTJJR686

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39437
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.

Bad Boy Dazza

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3372
Good.

whork

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6587
  • Getbig!
NEW YORK TIMES: The Obama Administration 'Has Now Lost All Credibility'


 
Brett LoGiurato   |   20 minutes ago   | 0 |     
 

The New York Times editorial board ripped the Obama administration in a scathing editorial Thursday afternoon, writing that it has "now lost all credibility" after revelations that the administration has been collecting the phone records of millions of Verizon customers.

It came as something of a surprise, considering the board's normally friendly view toward the administration.

But in the editorial, the Times' board criticized the Obama administration in much of the same way it scrutinized the Bush administration. It wrote that the Obama administration's justification for the program — the Patriot Act — is not good enough:

Mr. Obama clearly had no intention of revealing this eavesdropping, just as he would not have acknowledged the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki, an American citizen, had it not been reported in the press. Even then, it took him more than a year and a half to acknowledge the killing, and he is still keeping secret the protocol by which he makes such decisions.

We are not questioning the legality under the Patriot Act of the court order disclosed by The Guardian. But we strongly object to using that power in this manner. It is the very sort of thing against which Mr. Obama once railed, when he said in 2007 that the Bush administration’s surveillance policy “puts forward a false choice between the liberties we cherish and the security we provide.”

The editorial board called for the Patriot Act to be "sharply curtailed, if not repealed."


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/new-york-times-obama-nsa-phone-scandal-editorial-nyt-2013-6#ixzz2VTJJR686


I didnt know a kenyan muslim communist dictator had any credibility to begin with?

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39437
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Rev. E.M. Camarena, Ph.D.
Hells Kitchen, NYC

..


Criminals ALWAYS have a ready excuse to justify their law--breaking, whether they are knocking over a filling station or shredding the Bill of Rights. Enough is enough. I am NOT a suspect. If you want to get something on me, if you think I am a threat, get a warrant based upon probable cause. Not based upon an empty, hollow platitude, but probable cause supported by oath or affirmation. Till then, back off.
(Will someone please read this "constitutional law professor" the 4th Amendment?)

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Rev. E.M. Camarena, Ph.D.
Hells Kitchen, NYC

..


Criminals ALWAYS have a ready excuse to justify their law--breaking, whether they are knocking over a filling station or shredding the Bill of Rights. Enough is enough. I am NOT a suspect. If you want to get something on me, if you think I am a threat, get a warrant based upon probable cause. Not based upon an empty, hollow platitude, but probable cause supported by oath or affirmation. Till then, back off.
(Will someone please read this "constitutional law professor" the 4th Amendment?)


what law breaking ?

do you even read the stuff that you post

from your article in your first post

"We are not questioning the legality under the Patriot Act of the court order disclosed by The Guardian."

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39437
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.

The stunning decline of Barack Obama: 2013. Ten key reasons why the Obama presidency is in meltdown




By Nile Gardiner World Last updated: June 6th, 2013

212 Comments Comment on this article



Obama's second term is shaping up to be a disaster

The last few weeks have been among the worst of Barack Obama’s time in office, recalling earlier periods of turmoil for the president in 2010 and 2011, when his ratings also plummeted. In 2013, the situation is significantly worse for the White House, with the Obama administration engulfed in a series of major scandals (IRS persecution of conservative groups, the Benghazi debacle, and the Justice Department seizure of journalists’ phone records) that are not only eroding trust in government but also in the office of the president itself. This is undoubtedly a period of steep decline for the Obama presidency, whose imperial-style big government approach is being increasingly questioned not only by American voters, but also by formerly subservient sections of the liberal-dominated mainstream media. In contrast to his first term, Barack Obama is finding himself less and less shielded by the press, and far more vulnerable to public criticism.

With good reason, Americans don’t feel optimistic about their country’s future with President Obama at the helm. According to the RealClear Politics polling average, less than one in three Americans believe the United States is heading in the right direction. A new Economist/YouGov poll has the president’s job approval rating at just 46 percent, with 49 percent of Americans disapproving. Strikingly, 35 percent of Americans “strongly disapprove” of the president’s job performance, 15 points higher than the number who “strongly approve.” A mere 31 percent of Americans surveyed by YouGov believe the United States is “generally headed in the right direction.”

In addition to damaging scandals, which have raised major questions over the integrity and judgment of the Obama administration, there remain deep-seated concerns over the US economy and the enormous national debt, widespread opposition to the president’s health care reforms, and significant fears over national security. Barack Obama’s second term could not have started more badly for the “hope and change” president, who, with three and a half years in office remaining, looks more and more like a lame duck. Here are ten key reasons why the Obama presidency is in trouble, with the outlook exceedingly grim for the White House.

1. The American public is losing trust in Obama

A recent Quinnipiac survey found that less than half of Americans (49 percent) now view their president as “honest and trustworthy.” According to Quinnipiac, the series of recent scandals have begun to significantly dent the president’s standing with the American people, with his approval rating standing at just 45 percent. The IRS targeting of conservative groups has been particularly damaging, with 76 percent of voters supporting the appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate the scandal, and a series of Congressional hearings putting the Obama administration on the spot. Another survey, by NBC News/The Wall Street Journal, reveals a great deal of public concern over the “overall honesty and integrity of the Obama administration,” with more than half of Americans agreeing that recent scandals have “raised doubts” about the government’s trustworthiness. 41 percent of Americans believe that President Obama himself is “totally” or “mainly” responsible for the government’s handling of Benghazi – just 19 percent believe he bears no responsibility. On the IRS issue, only 24 percent say the president is not responsible in any way, while a third of Americans think he is largely culpable.

2. The Obama presidency is imperial in style and outlook

Leading conservative talk radio host Mark Levin was absolutely right when he blasted Barack Obama on Fox News back in January as “an imperial president.” It would be hard to find a US president in recent times who has behaved in a more arrogant fashion than President Obama, and that includes Richard Nixon. The Obama White House is routinely disdainful of criticism, sneeringly dismissive of Congressional opposition, nasty and brutish towards dissenting voices in the media, and completely lacking in humility. Even veteran reporters such as Bob Woodward, one of two journalists who broke the Watergate scandal, have found themselves on the sharp end of the White House’s boot after publishing unflattering stories. Woodward was warned earlier this year by a senior White House official that he would “regret” his remarks about the president’s handling of the sequester issue. At the same time the Obama presidency exudes a shameless “let them eat cake” mentality, abundantly on display with the president’s lavish vacations and golfing expeditions while millions of American families have struggled to pay their mortgage and stay afloat against the backdrop in recent years of the biggest economic downturn since the Great Depression.

3. Most Americans are still worried about the economy

Economic concerns are the top priority for Americans according to Gallup. In a recent poll, 86 percent of Americans agreed that “creating more jobs” and “helping the economy grow” are the top two priorities. “Making government work more efficiently” came third, at 81 percent. Despite a slight uptick in economic growth, and improving housing prices in some markets, the United States still has deep-seated economic problems. Most Americans are still nervous about the economy. According to the new NBC News/Wall Street Journal survey, just 46 percent of Americans approve of the job Barack Obama is doing in handling the economy. 64 percent of Americans are “somewhat dissatisfied” or “very dissatisfied” with the state of the US economy today. Only 32 percent believe the economy will get better in the next 12 months. 58 percent of Americans still think the country is in an economic recession.

Strong job creation and robust economic growth are being significantly hampered in the United States by declining economic freedom, including rising tax rates, the growing burden of government regulation, and a rising dependency culture. Unemployment still remains at 7.5 percent, with nearly 12 million Americans out of work. 47 million Americans are living on food stamps (the highest figure in American history), and a staggering 128 million Americans are now dependent upon government programmes. A full economic recovery still remains far away. According to the Federal Reserve, Americans have rebuilt less than half of the wealth lost to the recession. As The Washington Post reported: “The research from the St. Louis Fed shows that households had accumulated net worth totaling $66 trillion at the end of last year. After adjusting for inflation and population growth, the bank found that number amounted to only 45 percent of the wealth that Americans had during the peak of the boom in 2007.”

4. America’s level of debt is frightening

America’s economic problems are compounded by its huge debt problem. Barack Obama continues to lead the United States down the path of European Union-style decline, with incredible levels of public debt, currently standing at $16.85 trillion, a per person debt of $53,000. President Obama has done nothing to confront the vast entitlement programmes that are a yoke around the necks of future generations of American taxpayers, while taking an axe to defense spending, resulting in politically driven cuts that undermine America’s national security while doing nothing to reduce the country’s debt burden. As he made clear in his Inauguration address in January, President Obama remains committed to a big spending, big government vision, and one that will force the United States down the road to economic ruin unless it is reversed.

5. Obamacare is hugely expensive and increasingly unpopular

A key liability that will further expand America’s debt mountain is Obamacare (the Affordable Care Act), the Obama administration’s hugely ambitious and expensive health care reform initiative that threatens to dramatically increase the cost of healthcare for ordinary Americans as well as businesses, when it goes into effect next year. Forbes Magazine reports that in California Obamacare is expected to increase individual health insurance premiums by 64 to 146 percent. The latest Congressional Budget Office estimate puts a $1.85 trillion price tag on Obamacare in its first 10 years. A clear majority of Americans oppose Obamacare. The latest CNN/ORC International poll shows 54 percent opposing the law. A Reason/Rupe poll found that a mere 32 percent support it. An April poll by the Kaiser Foundation, and reported by Politico, revealed that “just 35 percent of Americans view Obamacare ‘very’ or somewhat’ favorably, down 8 points since Election Day.” Opposition in the business community is also high, especially among small businesses, the bedrock of the US economy. Gallup finds that 48 percent of small business owners say the Affordable Care Act is bad for business – just nine percent say it will be good for business. As Obamacare rolls in, opposition to its implementation will only grow. If the Republicans retake the Senate in 2014, expect Congress to launch a major effort to repeal it.

6. Independents are rapidly withdrawing support for Obama

As Gallup polling has consistently shown, America is ideologically a conservative nation, with conservatives outnumbering liberals by a nearly two to one margin. Strikingly, as Gallup has found, more than 50 percent of Americans view Obama as more liberal than themselves, with just 27 percent of voters declaring that they share the same ideology as the president. Despite a clear advantage in terms of ideology, the Republicans have struggled to win over sufficient numbers of “moderates” (roughly a third of US voters) in the last two presidential elections, many of whom identify themselves as “Independents.” There are signs, however, that support for Obama among Independents is dramatically falling. According to the recent Quinnipiac survey, 57 percent of Independent voters give Obama a negative rating, up from 48 percent on May 1st. 56 percent of Independents do not believe the president is “honest and trustworthy.” By a 45 percent to 35 percent margin, Independents believe that Republicans in Congress are doing a better job than President Obama on handling the economy.

7. The liberal media is less deferential to Obama in his second term

The Washington Post, standard bearer of the liberal establishment in the US capital, has labeled the IRS scandal a “horror story” for the Obama administration. Even The New York Times, the de facto inflight newspaper of Air Force One, recently carried a headline on its front page declaring: “Onset of Woes Casts Pall Over Obama's Policy Aspirations.” The liberal mainstream media closed ranks behind Barack Obama for most of his first term in office, and relentlessly pummeled his presidential election opponent Mitt Romney ahead of the November 2012 vote, in a shameless display of bias towards their favoured candidate. The big liberal newspapers and the major television networks, NBC, ABC and CBS, have been less willing to bat for Obama in his second term as public opinion has begun to turn against the White House. Clearly, there are some things even the most liberal columnists are finding hard to defend, such as the ruthless targeting of political opponents. Meanwhile, MSNBC, President Obama’s biggest flag-waver on cable news, has seen its ratings plummet in recent months, with Fox News further building its dominance of the ratings.

8. The Benghazi scandal has been extremely damaging

Much as the Obama administration tries to downplay the significance of the Benghazi scandal, it refuses to go away, with 46 percent of Americans believing “the administration deliberately misled the American people about the events surrounding the death of the American Ambassador to Libya” according to Quinnipiac. Like the IRS scandal, the Benghazi debacle has undermined trust and confidence in the Obama presidency. 58 percent of Americans in the most recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal survey agree that that the State Department’s handling of the Benghazi attack raises doubts “about the overall honesty and integrity of the Obama administration.”

In the aftermath of the barbaric killing of Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans on September 11, 2012 at the hands of al-Qaeda linked Islamist militants, the Obama administration tried to pass off the brutal attack as a spontaneous response to an anti-Islamic video that hardly anyone has seen. Undoubtedly worried that the killings would upset the White House’s carefully crafted narrative in the lead up to the 2012 election that al-Qaeda was in retreat, administration officials sought to downplay the broader significance of the attack in the run up to the presidential vote, a strategy that succeeded in the short term, but has since imploded in the face of sustained Congressional scrutiny. Not only has Benghazi damaged the president, it also hurt former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s image too. As former Reagan speechwriter Peggy Noonan noted in The Wall Street Journal: “Will this story ever be completely told? Maybe not. But it’s not going to go away either. It’s a prime example of the stupidity of all-politics-all-the-time. You make some bad moves for political reasons. And then you suffer politically because you make bad moves.”

9. Obama’s national security strategy is weak and confusing

President Obama’s recent address to the National Defense University at Fort McNair in Washington has to go down as one of the most weak-kneed speeches by a US Commander-in-Chief in modern times. His call for a winding down of the global war against Islamist terror was naïve in the extreme, and sent completely the wrong signal to America’s enemies at a time when al-Qaeda is strengthening its presence in parts of the Middle East as well as North, West and East Africa. His declaration (once again) that the detention facility at Guantanamo should be shut down was hopelessly unrealistic in the face of concerted Congressional opposition as well as a humiliating exercise in pandering to international condemnation in Europe and the Muslim world. His Guantanamo policy is deeply out of touch as well with American public opinion. US polls have consistently shown strong support for keeping the camp in operation. This is hardly a strategy that will endear President Obama to an American public that feels less safe today than it did in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks in 2001.

10. Obama is “leading from behind” on the world stage

American foreign policy has become even more weak and incoherent in President Obama’s second term. On the world stage the United States has not been this powerless and disengaged since the days of Jimmy Carter. “Leading from behind” is no longer just a mantra for the Obama administration – it has become its philosopher’s stone. Washington’s leadership on the Syria crisis is non-existent, with the White House content to farm out its foreign policy to Moscow and the United Nations. On Afghanistan, Obama’s position is one of retreat and a handover of power back to the Taliban. Iran is barely mentioned by the president, as Tehran’s nuclear ambitions march on. Meanwhile key allies such as Britain are treated with contempt and lectured to on European policy as though it were a schoolboy being reprimanded for speaking out of turn, while the Special Relationship and the transatlantic alliance continue to be eroded. At home and abroad, the Obama presidency is weakening America, while undercutting the strength and ability of the world's only superpower to lead internationally.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39437
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.

Skip8282

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7004
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/06/08/us/politics/08obama-surveillance-history-video.html?_r=0



OUCH!!!! 

nyt on a rampage





He welcomes the debate my ass  ::)

If that were true, he would've opened it up for discussion and come forward.

Bitch got caught and ALL 3 branches are knee deep in fucking us over.  Unreal.

Wrote all my congresspeople....and they probably won't do a fucking thing.


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39437
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Yup = Mccain Rubio King Feinstein Obama et all can all suck a dick





He welcomes the debate my ass  ::)

If that were true, he would've opened it up for discussion and come forward.

Bitch got caught and ALL 3 branches are knee deep in fucking us over.  Unreal.

Wrote all my congresspeople....and they probably won't do a fucking thing.



Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39437
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.

→ Civil Liberties, Obama, Politics, Top Stories


Justice Dept. Loses a Round in Battle to Keep Surveillance Wrongdoing Secret
 






—By David Corn

| Thu Jun. 13, 2013 8:57 AM PDT


5


.

Stock Vector IllustrationShutterstock   

Last week, I reported that in the midst of revelations about the National Security Agency's extensive top-secret surveillance operations to collect domestic phone records and internet communications, the Justice Department was fighting to keep secret a court opinion that determined that the government on at least one occasion had violated the spirit of federal surveillance laws and engaged in unconstitutional spying.

Last year, after Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) released a declassified statement noting that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court had found that the US government had engaged in surveillance that had circumvented the law, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a public interest outfit that focuses on digital rights, submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to the Justice Department for any FISA court opinion or order that had reached such a conclusion. FISA court proceedings and opinions are top secret, and the Justice Department said, in essence, get lost. EFF sued, and in the course of the proceedings, the Justice Department revealed that the FISA court in 2011 had indeed produced an 86-page opinion concluding a government surveillance program was not constitutionally kosher. But the department provided no details regarding the program the opinion covered, and it contended the opinion could not be released because it was classified and the department itself did not have the authority to release a FISA court opinion, under that court's rules.

So EFF went to the FISA court last month and filed a motion that essentially asked the court to tell Justice that there was nothing in it's rules that would prohibit a federal court from ordering the agency to release this opinion. And last week, the Justice Department responded, filing a motion arguing that the FISA court did not have jurisdiction to rule on the EFF motion. It also claimed that if the FISA court did rule in favor of EFF on this point, the court would create a precedent that could lead to the release of redacted opinions that would be "misleading to the public about the role of this Court." That is, the Justice Department was issuing a stark warning to the FISA court: agree with EFF, and who knows what will happen. "A release involving the disclosure of some parts of a FISC opinion while concealing other parts creates a substantial risk of public misunderstanding or confusion regarding this Court's decision or reasoning," the department's motion stated.

The FISA court did not buy the agency's arguments. On Wednesday, it handed EFF a slam-dunk victory in this side battle, ruling, "The Court concludes that it has jurisdiction to adjudicate the EFF Motion and that the FISC Rules do not prohibit the Government's disclosure of the Opinion in the event it is ultimately determined by the District Court to be subject to disclosure under FOIA." So now the Justice Department cannot hide behind its claim that FISA court rules prevent it from releasing the opinion in response to a FOIA lawsuit.

EFF, though, has not yet reached the promised land. It still must beat the Justice Department in district court on the substance of the dispute: can the government be forced to release a FISA court opinion—or portions of it—that declared a government surveillance program unconstitutional?

The FISA court, says David Sobel, a lawyer for EFF, "has made clear that there is nothing in its own rules that prohibits disclosure of the 2011 opinion we're seeking. So we go back to district court and continue our fight under FOIA, having removed DOJ's argument that it has no discretion to release FISC material." Pointing to this FISA court decision and a bill recently introduced in Congress that would require the declassification of certain FISA court opinion, Sobel remarks, "we might be on the verge of re-thinking the degree of secrecy that surrounds all these activities." But he still has a tough fight ahead in this case, for the Justice Department has certainly demonstrated it will fiercely oppose disclosing an opinion revealing government surveillance gone wrong—even when the nation's most secret court has no objection

Skip8282

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7004
→ Civil Liberties, Obama, Politics, Top Stories


Justice Dept. Loses a Round in Battle to Keep Surveillance Wrongdoing Secret
 






—By David Corn

| Thu Jun. 13, 2013 8:57 AM PDT


5


.

Stock Vector IllustrationShutterstock   

Last week, I reported that in the midst of revelations about the National Security Agency's extensive top-secret surveillance operations to collect domestic phone records and internet communications, the Justice Department was fighting to keep secret a court opinion that determined that the government on at least one occasion had violated the spirit of federal surveillance laws and engaged in unconstitutional spying.

Last year, after Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) released a declassified statement noting that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court had found that the US government had engaged in surveillance that had circumvented the law, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a public interest outfit that focuses on digital rights, submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to the Justice Department for any FISA court opinion or order that had reached such a conclusion. FISA court proceedings and opinions are top secret, and the Justice Department said, in essence, get lost. EFF sued, and in the course of the proceedings, the Justice Department revealed that the FISA court in 2011 had indeed produced an 86-page opinion concluding a government surveillance program was not constitutionally kosher. But the department provided no details regarding the program the opinion covered, and it contended the opinion could not be released because it was classified and the department itself did not have the authority to release a FISA court opinion, under that court's rules.

So EFF went to the FISA court last month and filed a motion that essentially asked the court to tell Justice that there was nothing in it's rules that would prohibit a federal court from ordering the agency to release this opinion. And last week, the Justice Department responded, filing a motion arguing that the FISA court did not have jurisdiction to rule on the EFF motion. It also claimed that if the FISA court did rule in favor of EFF on this point, the court would create a precedent that could lead to the release of redacted opinions that would be "misleading to the public about the role of this Court." That is, the Justice Department was issuing a stark warning to the FISA court: agree with EFF, and who knows what will happen. "A release involving the disclosure of some parts of a FISC opinion while concealing other parts creates a substantial risk of public misunderstanding or confusion regarding this Court's decision or reasoning," the department's motion stated.

The FISA court did not buy the agency's arguments. On Wednesday, it handed EFF a slam-dunk victory in this side battle, ruling, "The Court concludes that it has jurisdiction to adjudicate the EFF Motion and that the FISC Rules do not prohibit the Government's disclosure of the Opinion in the event it is ultimately determined by the District Court to be subject to disclosure under FOIA." So now the Justice Department cannot hide behind its claim that FISA court rules prevent it from releasing the opinion in response to a FOIA lawsuit.

EFF, though, has not yet reached the promised land. It still must beat the Justice Department in district court on the substance of the dispute: can the government be forced to release a FISA court opinion—or portions of it—that declared a government surveillance program unconstitutional?

The FISA court, says David Sobel, a lawyer for EFF, "has made clear that there is nothing in its own rules that prohibits disclosure of the 2011 opinion we're seeking. So we go back to district court and continue our fight under FOIA, having removed DOJ's argument that it has no discretion to release FISC material." Pointing to this FISA court decision and a bill recently introduced in Congress that would require the declassification of certain FISA court opinion, Sobel remarks, "we might be on the verge of re-thinking the degree of secrecy that surrounds all these activities." But he still has a tough fight ahead in this case, for the Justice Department has certainly demonstrated it will fiercely oppose disclosing an opinion revealing government surveillance gone wrong—even when the nation's most secret court has no objection





Disgusting.