• Andrew Ramonas
    Lobbying Reporter
  • Beth Frerking
    Editor in Chief
  • David Brown
    Vice President/Editor, ALM
  • Diego Radzinschi
    Photo Editor
  • Jenna Greene
    Senior Reporter
  • Marcia Coyle
    Chief Washington Correspondent
  • Mike Scarcella
    Washington Bureau Chief
  • Todd Ruger
    Capitol Hill Reporter
  • Tony Mauro
    Supreme Court Correspondent
  • Zoe Tillman
    D.C. Courts Reporter

« The Morning Wrap | Main | Study Shows Rise in FOIA Lawsuits During Obama's First Term »

December 28, 2012


kay sieverding

DOJ scares the hell out of me. I don't have a criminal record.
There was no "oath or affirmation" but without it DOJ detained me three times for 5 months. I was not criminally charged, did not have an arraignment, did not have a bail hearing, and was not allowed an evidentiary hearing. I was told in Federal Court that I didn't have a right to an attorney. The witnesses against me weren't sworn and I was not allowed to cross examine them. DOJ already filed in Federal Court see D of Columbia 09-0562 document 8-1 that it imprisoned me on purpose.


This is a tragedy on the level with America’s unwillingness to reign in Gun Ownership – a Government that has become even more incompetent, blind and yes, I dare say dishonest.
In the scope of just Prosecutorial Misconduct at the DOJ – a person needs only to search for that term to see that there are far too many examples of dishonest, illegally manipulative and extortionist acts by the DOJ staffers across the boards (US Marshals excepted). Hell, read the Schulke report on the late Sen Ted Stevens for a good foundational understanding of what happens daily in American proceedings – FISA is a system without any oversight and the DOJ runs like a wolf in a chicken coop. The wolf telling the farmer, “go to town, it’ll all be ok – trust me…..”

The Merkeley amendment needs to be re-positioned and put back on the table – NOW. America should treat this as important as the Fiscal Cliff for its long-term effect on us.


If FISA originally provided a mechanism for secret warrants for good old-fashioned searches and wiretaps, but later expanded its mission to "include the interception of digital communications," then shouldn't we require warrants for the digital surveillance and other high-tech searches?

Yes, I know the Bush Administration wouldn't and didn't propose such a logical, fair protection for America's civil liberties. But that's no reason we shouldn't propose and enact it now. The failure of the Paul amendment saddens and worries me.

I also see no harm in America knowing how such an important federal statute is being interpreted, especially if the disclosure of interpretive opinions would only apply to cases involving no threat to national security. That's even more appropriate now that FISA applies to new and future electronic technologies. The failure of the Merkeley amendment disappoints and scares me.

If we're going to give up personal privacy and governmental transparency to get more law enforcement and national security, it's just plain bad civics to opt for ignorance of what we're losing and why.

This space intentionally left blank

I'm feeling safer and more protected every day!
Thanks big government!

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad