Feingold Gives Obama A "D" On State Secrets

ABC News:

President Obama is receiving a "D" for his handling of state secrets in a "rule of law" report card prepared by fellow Democrat Russ Feingold, a Wisconsin senator who heads a subcommittee on the Constitution.

"One hundred days into this administration, it's appropriate to assess how well the president has done so far," Feingold told ABC News. "I recognize that some of these issues will take time, but given how important these issues are to the country, Americans deserve a fair assessment of the administration's progress."

Read the whole story: ABC News

Comments

[evekendall]

04:23 PM on 04/28/2009

Thank you, Sen. Feingold! I'm a big Obama supporter for the most part, but on these state secrets issues, he seems to be channeling Bush. It's puzzling, to say the least.

[blimie]

07:37 PM on 04/28/2009

I'm thankful a Democrat senator is speaking out. On these critical issues, we have to go beyond being disappointed or puzzled. We have to let Obama know he is wrong. It's not the change we voted for.

[brandnewstuff]

04:03 PM on 04/28/2009

So That a City is looting a life personally and using law eforcement in the most corrupted form of constitutional abuse for criminal activty and then Violating the Laws and LYING Claiming State Secrets due to Political Contributions FOR CORRUPTION
HR 984
State Secrets Protection Act of 2009
http:www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-984-31k

[iblog]

04:05 PM on 04/28/2009

The bill doesn't exist anymore.

2007.

[brandnewstuff]

03:53 PM on 04/28/2009

Congress is move to make HR 984- to resolve State Liars -

such as Texas the most corrupt place on earth
Have a big slice of homeaid fake smile and southern slavery In Victoria Texas were pretending is a grandstand- Texas Oil and Torture- giddy up

[iblog]

04:01 PM on 04/28/2009

What are you talking about?

That a dead bill from 2007-2008 when they were trying to get a handle on the Bush Administration's state secret pledges.

[TJCole]

03:08 PM on 04/28/2009

State Secrets, it has such a Soviet ring to it...?

Also we are still violating the Magna Carta at Baghram Air Base, and now the President wants to take away your right to an attorney when being interrogated by police, which is just medieval and draconian and disgraceful...

Obama is more Clarance Thomas, than Dr. King in regard to these issues..

[iblog]

03:58 PM on 04/28/2009

oooo...you just dropped your whole moderate image.

Head ex.plosions everywhere!

[TJCole]

04:10 PM on 04/28/2009

Moi..?

Moderate, me, never...!

[kathy001]

04:05 PM on 04/28/2009

If you're going to throw accusations around, at least get your facts straight. Obama is not - by any stretch of the imagination - trying to "take away your right to an attorney when being interrogated by police."

[creepsinc]

02:15 PM on 04/28/2009

Russ Feingold, 2012.

[iblog]

04:08 PM on 04/28/2009

O...he's sure to make senator again...don't worry.

[creepsinc]

10:46 PM on 04/28/2009

I meant president.

[Daniboy]

01:19 PM on 04/28/2009

Specter can again be for card check-buy Dem votes -now he can be a two face Dem!

[jubei]

12:40 PM on 04/28/2009

Off Topic BREAKING NEWS!! Former Republican Sen.Arlen Specter is officially a Democrat!!hip hip hooray!!

[Academic]

12:23 PM on 04/28/2009

Is it acceptable for the Bush administration to have used torture to fabricate "evidence" on which the invasion of Iraq was based? One detainee Abu Zubaydah was "waterboarded" 83 times - drowned alive, in other words - until he finally produced a LIE that Bush and Co required. Bush and Co found willing legal stooges to advise them that treatment of this kind, and far worse, didn't amount to torture. Giving them legal cover, in other words.

The reality was that brutal, illegal behaviour was sanctioned by Rumsfeld and by the CIA director George Tenet. And it was Rumsfeld's idea to use "enhanced interrogation techniques - torture - to prove there was a link - which there wasn't - between Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaida. Simply stated, they conspired - with the help of Tony Blair, and false intelligences concocted by the British security services - mislead Americans into blaming Iraq for 9/11 atrocities, as well as illegally torturing detainees into providing bogus information supporting this barmy theory.

If knowing this the US public at large, including its politicians, still want to sweep this under the carpet on the dishonest pretext of "protecting state secrets" then you’re just as barbaric as the perpetrators and deserve everything you get. However dressed up this isn’t civilized conduct or how civilized countries act. Imagine waterboarding US couples abroad to force a lying confession from them that the wives are up for it, then raping these women?

Professor Dr. Stanley Collymore.

[bassnman]

02:41 PM on 04/28/2009

Well Professor, it appears you need to go back to school and get a better education. I have never seen anything in writing or speeches that tied 9/11 to Iraq. The only close tie was that Irag had training facilities (actually many throughout the entire middle east) and that they took in and treated a top Al-Qaida operative. What they got out of Zubaydah was the plan for the follow up attack on the secondary attack that was to take place in Cali. Thanks to what they found out, it stopped another attack that could have taken many more Americans lives.

As far as the Geneva convention rules go as everybody brags that we have signed, they do not apply to ANYONE who is not wearing a uniform as specified by a specific country or a symbol of that country, (note the American flag on all our uniforms). Anyone captured in not in uniform or that of any other country other than their own could be shot for being a spy. These rules do not apply to terrorists as they hide in the civilian population.

I don't care for torture, but ask the people that were beheaded if they were tortured? This waterboarding is a tough call and seems to have worked, but no one died!

[Bushwillresign]

02:49 PM on 04/28/2009

We could have seen all your Facts on Facts News, however, no one here watches Facts News to get the real lowdown.

When you talk about people that were beheaded, you left out the best part, the "dull sword". Otherwise, all your facts are Fox Facts, we've heard them all before, so watch some more Fox and come back with some better arguments, yawn.

[Epiphany2b]

12:14 PM on 04/28/2009

It sounds to me as if they want to thoroughly review the cases to see if Bush has good reason to determine that they should not be made public at this time, and when they know what they're talking about, then they will release the information. Things take a little time. It's only been a couple of months, remember??? Can't deal with everyone's pet project all at once. What would he do during the remaining 3 years 8 months??

[Yermammy]

12:31 PM on 04/28/2009

A) The rule of law isn't a "pet project"
B) Barack blocked these lawsuits when they could have gone forward with no loss of national security.
C) The President's job isn't to "fill" four years, it's to serve and protect by way of following the Constitution of the United States of America.
D) Good people have amassed a mountain of evidence to start investigations the day Barack took office.
E) If we don't prosecute for War Crimes, the world will (Conference on Torture treaty; Geneva Convention per the International Red Cross, the Nuremberg Trial precedents; International Criminal Court re: Rome Statutes; Article Six U.S. Constitution)

[maggienash65]

12:05 PM on 04/28/2009

My opinion is that this was all going to come out anyway as Mr Gates said. There were agencies fighting in court to get anything they could. I, as a citizen want to know what happened. I believe there are a few more questions about torture that need to be answered

[petphotos]

12:03 PM on 04/28/2009

I'll give Feingold an "F" for being a human.

[gbrooks]

12:19 PM on 04/28/2009

What? Because he's got a problem with the lack of openness about wiretapping cases? It's about OUR civil liberties and right to privacy.

[iblog]

04:04 PM on 04/28/2009

and cameras.

[Bruupo]

12:20 PM on 04/28/2009

I'd love to know why. Really.

Has everyone here completely forgotten who Senator Russ Feingold is, or did they just not know in the first place?

Or is every third person here commenting without reading a single sentence of the actual story?

[MissingAmerica]

11:47 AM on 04/28/2009

We cannot mend this country without looking at what has caused the damage. When it comes to this matter, there should no secrets. Therefore, I would have to give Obama an "A". Information as to the misconduct of the previous administration has been slowly leaking for years, so there is nothing wrong with providing the truth. With the Swine flu and other viruses, researchers must first find the cause in order to find a cure; healing a nation should be treated no differently.

[Bruupo]

12:17 PM on 04/28/2009

How bout you go and read WHY he gave the grade of "D".

Hint: It was because Feingold feels Obama hasn't released -enough- of the truth.

[creepsinc]

02:49 PM on 04/28/2009

I'll second that. Read more than the headline. Obama gets a D (an F in my book) for continuing to obstruct on the subject of the Bush Crime Family.

[serindipity803]

11:41 AM on 04/28/2009

Feingold = hiding something personal

[Bruupo]

11:53 AM on 04/28/2009

?

Are you kidding? Take a couple glue-free breaths of air.

Do you honestly think that guy would have made it through eight years with Bush in the White House if he had a single skeleton in his closet?

Do you even know who Feingold is?

He gave him a "D" for invoking the state secrets privilege too often, not as a criticism of releasing the torture memos. He would have given him an "F" if not for that.

Does the ACLU have the dirt on Feingold? Does Amnesty International know where he buried the bodies???
.

[Yermammy]

11:54 AM on 04/28/2009

Baseless accusation with no links or justification. What tripe and slander. The only thing that I know that Russ Feingold is "hiding" is he was the ONLY Senator to NOT vote for the Patriot Act. I wish that was my only "secret". Too funny.

[creepsinc]

02:50 PM on 04/28/2009

Which is why he's the only Senator who served at that time with my respect. I often wonder how Obama would have voted.

[TedB]

11:30 AM on 04/28/2009

Transparency isn't opaque, Mr President.

[GhostNyc]

11:30 AM on 04/28/2009

Bush and his cohorts did unprecedented damage to our country's constitutional rights, our judicial system and frankly our entire executive office. Now Obama is forced to make some very tough decisions that no POTUS has made before regarding persecution of the previous POTUS's administration.

Obama will be damned if does, damned if he doesn't. I hope in all sincerity the Constitution is restored and the rule of law is reestablished. I agree with President's Obama first decision in allowing the AG to decide whether or not to pursue action. However as a necessary step an independant council should be established to remove any possible bias.

[Yermammy]

11:45 AM on 04/28/2009

Barack has a very hard row to hoe. I certainly wouldn't want to be in his shoes, but if he does NOT prosecute the law, the U.N. will be compelled to per the Conference on Torture treaty (with 145 Countries as signatories). And the I.C.C. may have something to say about this, also, per the Rome Statute.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5544629&mesg_id=5544629

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/33818
The blocking of justice will only go so far before the World takes over the case (and War Crimes have NO statute of limitations (i.e. forever and ever, amen))

[creepsinc]

02:52 PM on 04/28/2009

And, if it does come to that, he could be considered an accessory after the fact (I think. I'm not an expert on International Law.)

[glockman]

11:45 AM on 04/28/2009

It's not a difficult decision to stop the govt. from spying on its own people, and to then allow those people to sue the telecoms for their complicity in that spying.