SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Bill Grant who wrote (22416)12/19/1998 10:22:00 AM
From: Les H  Respond to of 67261
 
The President's Ironic Defense

Clinton's lawyers complain he is being denied a fair
trial, but his administration has been chipping away
at civil liberties for years.

by Suzie Larsen
December 15, 1998

Throughout the impeachment hearings,
Democrats and their hired lawyers have
complained that Republicans are ignoring the
Constitution in their zeal to punish the president.
At the outset, Clinton's special counsel Gregory
Craig proclaimed, "[L]ike any American, the
president deserves and has the right to know
precisely what the charges are against him [and]
what the standards are that are going to be used
to judge his conduct."

Unfortunately, like any American, President
Clinton's civil liberties have eroded over the past
six years, thanks to his own administration. From
the right to privacy to the right to a fair and open
trial, the rights accorded to Americans have taken
a dive. Says Laura Murphy, national director for
the ACLU, "In many important civil liberties
areas the Clinton administration has been
disastrous." How so? The MoJo Wire gives you a
peek at the recent history of scuttled rights:

The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty
Act of 1996: Signed into law one year after the
bombing of the Federal Building in Oklahoma
City, it created a Secret Evidence Court for
aliens. The court, in certain circumstances, allows
the government to detain and charge foreigners
without revealing the evidence against them. This
act also diminished habeas corpus (translation:
"you shall have the body") rights to petition a
court over issues of innocence or fairness of a
trial.

The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant
Responsibility Act of 1996: Strips the courts of
the ability to review deportation orders. That may
impede due process, which is included in the Fifth
Amendment to the Constitution. This act also
expands the allowable use for secret evidence.

Why isn't that a good thing? Just ask Mr. Craig,
one of Clinton's lawyers: "Without fair notice of
what these charges are, we will have no fair
chance to represent our client...adequately.... It's
like attacking a man who is blindfolded and
handcuffed."

Tell that to Nasser Ahmed, an Egyptian
immigrant who has been detained for 16 months
on secret evidence under the supervision of
Attorney General Janet Reno, according to Gail
Pendleton, coordinator of the National
Immigration Project of the National Lawyers
Guild.

The Communications Decency Act of 1996:
The law that spawned a thousand ugly blue
ribbons and censored free speech on the Internet
was overturned by the Supreme Court. But its
child, called the Child Online Protection Act but
better known as CDA II, was signed by Clinton in
1998. That bill also limits free speech on the
Internet.

The Intelligence Authorization Act of 1999:
The White House cried when Bill's and Monica's
rights to privacy were abused. Books she bought
were released to federal prosecutors; Secret
Service agents were investigated; phone
conversations were taped. But Clinton himself
recently signed the Intelligence Authorization Act
(a.k.a. the roving wiretap law) making it legal for
law enforcement authorities to tap not just a
specific phone, but any phones a suspect comes
near. The result is what Greg Nojeim, legislative
counsel of the ACLU considers a "floating
no-privacy zone." Sound familiar, Bill?