A number of readers have pointed me to this rant from Salonโs habitual ranter Glenn Greenwald. I should ignore it, as I regularly ignore Greenwaldโs work, because itโs too moronic to rate an answer. But as people are asking about it, Iโll just say that virtually everything he says in it is wrong:
I didnโt suggest that Bill Ayers is the author of one of Barack Obamaโs biographies โ I reported that someone else had made the suggestion and had made an interesting case, and that Obama was not helping matters by refusing to disclose any of his prior writings which might put any doubt to rest by demontrating his writing skills.
I didnโt โattack my own editorsโ over Sarah Palinโs โdeath panelsโ description of Obamacare. I disagreed with them โ on the Right, we actually have internal debates from time to time. (On the Left, this is known as โattackingโ or, as I was told by a Lefty on Sean Hannityโs show a couple of weeks ago, โhate speech.โ) I thought, and still think, that Palin had the better of the argument, whether or not the words โdeath panelsโ appeared in the legislation. I donโt think Iโm alone in that view.
I did not defend the โbirther movementโsโ claim that Obama was not born in Hawaii โ Iโve stated that I believe he was born in Hawaii. What Iโve argued is that Obama was born a dual citizen (of Kenya and the U.S.), almost certainly became an Indonesian citizen, and has not been forthcoming about his past. What I said I donโt understand, and still donโt, is why people like Greenwald support the stonewalling and arenโt at least curious about why Obama wouldnโt want to release something as seemingly innocuous as the full-form birth certificate.
I do think Obama has aligned himself with the worldโs tyrants. Greenwald says Rich โexcoriatedโ me over this view (in fact, he was mainly criticizing a post by Michael Ledeen that I agreed with and still agree with). Readers can judge for themselves whether Greenwaldโs description is accurate โ Rich hasnโt left a pink slip in my inbox that I know of.
Finally, the point of all this ad hominem seems to be Greenwaldโs insistence that the Classified Information Procedures Act is just dandy and solves any problems of sharing national defense secrets with jihadists in civilian trials. No one familiar with the Moussaoui case (where CIPA patently did not work) or the Oliver North case (where the judge had to rewrite CIPA to try to implement it) would make such a claim. But I just want to address Greenwaldโs typically uninformed account of the list of unindicted coconspirators that was leaked in the Blind Sheikh case and ended up in the hands of Osama bin Laden in Sudan.
Greenwald says the fault here lies not with the secrecy laws but with my purported failure, or then-Judge Mukaseyโs, for failing to use the protections of CIPA to keep the document secret. First of all, CIPA doesnโt prevent the defense from getting classified information; it prevents the defense from getting irrelevant classified information โ if information is material to the preparation of the defense, the defense must get either the raw information or a substitute that puts the defense in the same position as it would be if it got the raw information. When a court tells the prosecutor to turn over material like a co-conspirator list for defense preparation, it is by definition material to the preparation of the defense, and no secrecy law can stop the defense from getting it.
Second, it has never been the practice of the Justice Department to classifiy materials that are generated for the purposes of trial (as opposed to intelligence information that exists independent of the trial and may be relevant to the trial). If you had to get each letter or communication between lawyers classified, a trial would take about a hundred years โ and people on the Left would howl that there is too much secrecy in government and that the Justice Department was using classification procedures as a ploy to hide its crimes, corruption and incompetence.
Finally, the practice with trial-generated discovery materials is to disclose them with protective orders requiring that they be kept secret. That is, materials are turned over to defense counsel under the direction that that they are only being disclosed for trial preparation purposes and are not to be communicated to third parties. All discovery in the Blind Sheikh case was turned over to the defense with such orders in effect.
Hereโs the late breaking news for Greenwald: People who are willing to blow up the courthouse arenโt terribly impressed by court orders. So, youโll be shocked to learn, terrorists ignore them routinely and communicate what they learn to their confederates.






Comments