It was one thing when President Obama reversed himself last month by announcing that he would appeal the Second Circuit's ruling that the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) compelled disclosure of various photographs of detainee abuse sought by the ACLU.  Agree or disagree with Obama's decision, at least the basic legal framework of transparency was being respected, since Obama's actions amounted to nothing more than a request that the Supreme Court review whether the mandates of FOIA actually required disclosure in this case.  But now -- obviously anticipating that the Government is likely to lose in court again (.pdf) -- Obama wants Congress to change FOIA by retroactively narrowing its disclosure requirements, prevent a legal ruling by the courts, and vest himself with brand new secrecy powers under the law which, just as a factual matter, not even George Bush sought for himself.

The White House is actively supporting a new bill jointly sponsored by Sens. Lindsey Graham and Joe Lieberman -- called The Detainee Photographic Records Protection Act of 2009 -- that literally has no purpose other than to allow the government to suppress any "photograph taken between September 11, 2001 and January 22, 2009 relating to the treatment of individuals engaged, captured, or detained after September 11, 2001, by the Armed Forces of the United States in operations outside of the United States."  As long as the Defense Secretary certifies -- with no review possible -- that disclosure would "endanger" American citizens or our troops, then the photographs can be suppressed even if FOIA requires disclosure.  The certification lasts 3 years and can be renewed indefinitely.  The Senate passed the bill as an amendment last week.

The Senate passed this amendment.  Passed it.

Now we're just making retroactive laws to prevent anyone in power from being held accountable for potentially illegal acts.  It's the New Way.

I have not followed today events so even if I had the inclination, which I do not right now (my brain is really fried), I could not post.

I think my sign will say:

During the tough primary face-off between Obama and Hillary Clinton last year, many of the Take Back America types were on his side, making up that base of Democratic progressives who wanted an end to the Iraq war. But the Obama White House isn't showing its appreciation. At the moment, Obama is riding high and may not need that base. But there are rough battles to come--health care reform and cap-and trade, for instance--and in politics, you never know when tables will turn and you'll need your friends. It would have been a wise move--and just plain menschy--for the Obama White House to have shared itself a bit more with the folks who Obama said helped him to win America.

I have an issue with the general approach of the left to Obama.  Clearly this article says "we don't know you anymore" - but instead of working to make him remember us, it decries a lost love.  

"The disclosure of these photographs serves as a further reminder that abuse of prisoners in U.S.-administered detention centers was systemic," said Jameel Jaffer, Director of the ACLU National Security Project. "Some of the abuse occurred because senior civilian and military officials created a culture of impunity in which abuse was tolerated, and some of the abuse was expressly authorized. It's imperative that senior officials who condoned or authorized abuse now be held accountable for their actions."

Ruling against a government plea to keep under cover the reasons it has for continued captivity of scores of Guantanamo Bay detainees, a federal judge ruled Monday that the press and public have a constitutional right of access to many of those files -- after some delay.  Senior U.S. District Judge Thomas F. Hogan, in a 19-page ruling, found that the government's sweeping demand to shield those documents from the public "attempts to usurp the Court's discretion to seal judicial records."

The ruling could amount to a significant victory, even if delayed, for press groups seeking access to the filings. It marked the first time that a federal judge has recognized a clear-cut constitutional right of public access to documents filed in federal habeas cases.

The decision shows that, nearly one full year after the Supreme Court's ruling in Boumediene v. Bush that Guantanamo prisoners have a right to challenge their ongoing detention, federal judges are still trying to work out the legal basis for processing those habeas cases.  Judge Hogan's order applies potentially to 107 such cases, although he indicated that not all of them will be directly affected.

While watching this stuff about one or two Senators short of a full Senate, plus debates turning about the Gitmo torture photo's, all the while considering General Motors impact to bankruptcy, and flipping back and fourth though CNBC, Fox, MSNBC, and CNN the very nature of honest and truthful reporting, then a kick in the head, one realizes truth in reporting is not there. Can it be argued, all these persons brought us to this point, that any legislation is weak to non effective without a full Senate? Yes, the argument exists where this happen many times. Perhaps that is one of the reason one could say America never really had a full functional Constitution. The Constitution of Corruption, by we the lobbyist. Sheesh.

Something very curious and funny in the sense that Cheney in an Interview with that Larry Kudlow guy on CNBC "gaffed" that is Cheney said they knew all along GM was going to go into bankruptcy. One should imagine perhaps years of secret money being paid to GM for the military complex essentially funneling money into secret political blind family baby trust funds only the rich know, likely surppressed by the media and also know of and can afford and buy off to keep silent and resilient . . . Face it America General Motors make our military machines or some one has too, wouldn't it be ironic if that stuff was made in Mexico. Hell they like to fight why not just let them build the stuff. Sheesh.  

The honesty of banking shows in the honesty of doing corruption in war fair business and torture. It was also interesting that Man Cow ABC radio host in the mornings at Chicago finely admits he is a diversion telecast essentially creating controversy. But on Keith Olberman goes through what appears as ten seconds of waterboarding to finally declare it as torture. Now sources calling, Olberman and Man Cow, is it a fraud telecast.

A serious consideration to toss out to the legal profession; If it can be shown that there was no effort to use very enhanced "English Interrogative" methods wouldn't it resolve this debate and extracting information. Using rhetorical skills to convince an enemy to confess even unknowingly. Hell, Rush Limbaugh and hate radio have been enlisting huge legions of unknowing Americans that follow the Limbaugh method over the cliff for decades. Yike maybe Rush was the one who thought of all this stuff.  What I mean is isn't there experts in the English language that can use go interrogative rhetoric to establish a directive of truth. If America was not at a military conflict what is used then if not waterboarding to save lives?  

And it is from an unexpected source, Bob Barr.