President Has Two Different Standards on Email Review in re FISA and FOIAs

There are two standards which do not reconcile: One for Americans, subjecting them to warrantless surveillance; and a different standard gving the DOJ OLC a shield to a review. The double standard is less important than the implications.
This note discusses the DOJ OLC legal positions on prisoner abuse, war crimes trial, and access to records. On pretext alone, DOJ OLC has argued for denying the rights to some Americans; yet, invoked those denied-rights to grant themselves immunity from government review.

DOJ Cannot credibly have it both ways. This note takes the DOJ OLC legal assertions and memoranda to their extreme application: It applies the DOJ OLC legal memoranda in re POW abuse, interrogation, and surveillance against people who might be terrorists disguised as legal counsel.

Emails: Impermissible Double Standard

First we were told, as Americans, we are not entitled to have any privacy, nor that our emails can be protected. We were told the President and others, on accusation alone, can intercept our emails, review them, and make accusations about us without any access to that evidence.

Now we’re seeing the absurdity of the argument. DoJ OLC says it is entitled to withheld emails out of personal privacy interest. This defies reason.

The President told us that there were important information in the emails. We were told that they stripped the important information out, and only relied on calling patterns. The same should be done on the DOJ Staff emails. But the DOJ Staff says that the President’s rules do not apply to them.

DOJ Cannot have it both ways. For every rule that they say does not apply to accused civilians, DOJ Staff cannot claim or invoke that defense or shield to block public review of their official, government activity. The error is twofold. First, in DOJ denying Americans have rights to require a warrant before their email is reviewed; second, in contradicting themselves and claiming they, despite their government status, are entitled to privacy protections.

When arguing for FISA violations, the DOJ OLC legal memoranda have argued that American citizens electronic header information is important to track communication patterns. However, when it comes to the EFF FOIA for DOJ Staff counsel emails, the DOJ OLC argues the opposite: That this information is private, and is not of any interest, and should not be disclosed. This defies reason.

DOJ OLC should explain how it inconsistently treats American civilian and DOJ emails. Where DOJ OLC says surveillance can be done without a warrant, the DOJ OLC staff cannot explain why it is relying on the court to block review of the same information from DOJ OLC. The DOJ Staff counsel cannot credibly argue that some email should be reviewed in violation of the law; but US government emails sent using official equipment cannot be subject to the same scrutiny. This raises doubts about the motivations, objectives, and surveillance objectives of the DOJ OLC and President.

Turning the DOJ Argument on its head, the DOJ Staff cannot explain why it is not fully reassuring Americans that there are not terrorists disguised as legal counsel; or that legal counsel are not disguised terrorists and using the secrecy in DOJ OLC to plan attacks on American civilians.

AlQueda Disguised As Lawyers, Allegedly Planning Terrorism Behind DOJ OLC Office Walls Against American Civilians

This not calls attention to the double standard DOJ OLC legal counsel have toward American civilians, the right to privacy, and the abuses imposed on non-charged civilians. We argue that anything DOJ OLC has argued could be done in the name of fighting terrorism could be applied to DOJ OLC legal counsel during a war crimes tribunal.

When the DOJ OLC staff counsel are forced to defend themselves at a war crimes tribunal they might be convinced to invoke the defenses which DOJ OLC staff counsel said unlawful combatants cannot invoke. The DOJ OLC theory of Geneva is that it is discretionary, and can be explained away for a good purpose. Arguably, it would be a good purpose to ensure terrorists have not disguised themselves DOJ OLC staff counsel, and are not using the secrecy of DOJ OLC to plan more attacks on American civilians.

DOJ OLC Determined To Abuse Secrecy within DoJ, Allegedly Assist AlQueda

Terrorists disguised as American legal counsel are allegedly using the safehaven of the DOJ OLC legal counsel’s office to plan attacks on American civilians. Recent intelligence reports from DHS suggest terrorists plan to attack shopping malls. DOJ OLC staff counsel refuse to disclose how many emails it exchanged planning this attack on American civilians at shopping malls.

It remains unclear how many civilian legal counsels will be tried as unlawful combatants or lawful ordered executed by an American war crimes tribunal for their alleged involvement with these non-specific charges. The President’s legal counsel approved procedures to prosecute war crimes against DOJ OLC staff counsel. DoJ OLC cannot explain why the same laws and rules are or are not lawful for all defendants; nor can the staff counsel explain why they are pretending that some laws are appropriate for some, but not others.

- Why is DOJ OLC staff counsel drafting and writing rules of procedure they, as alleged unlawful combatants, do not wish to be held accountable?

- Where are the DOJ OLC memoranda and opinions raising concerns that other nations may write similar rules and similarly, on accusation alone, prosecute DOJ OLC staff counsel as unlawful combatants?

DOJ OLC Opened Barn Door To Scrutiny of DOJ OLC Staff Communications

The Department of Justice Legal Counsel have crafted memoranda authorizing abuse against civilians in the name of preventing a terrorist attack. DOJ OLC legal counsel have given a green light to harsh interrogations of terrorists currently disguised as legal counsel working for the President.

DOJ OLC says that accusations, without evidence, are permitted when defending America. The DOJ Staff counsel cannot explain why similar accusations cannot be made against DOJ Staff counsel in the name of protecting America from domestic enemies.

Terrorists Disguised as Civilian Legal Counsel

By arguing the DOJ OLC staff communications are subject to “privacy” protections, the DOJ staff has implicitly admitted that terrorists could be disguised as lawyers, but abusing the DOJ OLC secrecy to communicate and plan terrorist attacks DOJ OLC has implicitly argued that they, as private citizens, should enjoy some special immunity to oversight.

DOJ OLC cannot explain why they believe some classes of citizens should be denied judicial review before having their emails reviewed; but another class of civilians working for the President should enjoy judicial shields barring any discussion of whether the DOJ OLC staff emails should or should not be reviewed.

Terrorists Disguised As Lawyers Exploit Shielded Environment

The DOJ OLC security procedures could be abused by terrorists disguised lawyers. Audit sampling is designed to mitigate risks internal controls are exploited for illegal activities. This President refuses to permit this risk mitigation within the Department of Justice. The President’s motives should be examined.

The President refuses to permit audits and independent reviews of DOJ OLC communications. This is a possible means terrorists disguised as legal counsel could use to plan attacks on innocent American civilians. Government auditors using Generally Accepted Auditing Standards could concluded AlQueda has planted terrorists disguised as legal counsel. It remains to be understood using GAGAS how terrorists disguised as legal counsel are using the secrecy of DOJ OLC to plan attacks on American civilians, Congress, and high government officials.

Terrorists Disguised As Lawyers Exploiting Inconsistent Legal Framework

There is a pattern of abuse and deception. The President has made inconsistent statements on whether emails can or cannot be reviewed. He has one standard that says American citizens emails should be subject to review; yet he has a different standard on whether DOJ OLC legal counsel emails should be reviewed. These double standards is troubling. Terrorists inside DOJ OLC could exploit this shield, and secretly plan an attack on the United States.

The President and DOJ OLC have not explained why they are not willing to comply with the same intrusions, oversight, and email reviews they say American citizens must endure. The President and DOJ OLC would like Americans to (falsely) believe that they are a different class of American citizens: One that is above review; but entitled to review others.

DoJ OLC Blocks Email Reviews: What Alleged Terror Plots Are Planning?

This defies the principle of checks and balances. Surely, if the DOJ OLC can make the case (rightly or wrongly) that American citizens’ emails must be reviewed on the chance that American civilians might be hiding as terrorists, then the same should apply to DOJ OLC. Terrorists could disguise themselves as lawyers, and secretly plan another 9-11 attack from within the safety and security of DOJ OLC offices.

Imminent Military Necessity To Challenging Possible DOJ OLC Terrorist Safehaven

DOJ OLC argued to prevent an attack, torture could be used. DOJ OLC has not assured Congress or the public that its staff members should not be tortured to prevent a possible attack plan by terrorists disguised as DOJ OLC staff counsel.

DoJ OLC says harsh interrogation and accusation without evidence is not an abuse nor a violation of Geneva Conventions. The intent of the oversight is to prevent a terrorist cell within DOJ OLC from carrying out an attack. DOJ OLC cannot explain why it is stifling this essential military objective of civilians, nor explain why possible terrorists disguised as DOJ OLC legal counsel should not be subject to harsh interrogation to safeguard America.

It is reasonable and civilized for the DOJ Staff counsel standards to be applied to DOJ OLC staff counsel. Only the DOJ OLC staff counsel will not permit the same email reviews the President admitted he lawfully ordered against American civilians. DOJ OLC cannot explain why they are above a law the President on his own implemented in secrecy to safeguard Americans. The President cannot explain why he is not willing to enforce his rules against possible terrorists who could be disguised as legal counsel working in DOJ OLC.

It is certainly not deplorable or unreasonable to apply the DOJ OLC standards to the DOJ OLC legal counsel. The only location on earth that will not permit oversight is the DOJ OLC staff. This appears to be one location terrorists, disguised as civilian lawyers, would most likely plan a terrorist attack on a scale not seen since 9-11.

It is possible there will be a terrorist attack from lawyers disguised as DoJ OLC staff counsel. This possible threat of an imminent attack against American civilians justifies close scrutiny of this possible terrorist safehaven in the Department of Justice. DOJ OLC-approved harsh interrogation methods should be employed to defend America: We do not object to DOJ OLC approving of similar treatment of their peers in DoJ OLC and the White House counsel.

Terrorists Disguised at DOJ Legal Counsel: Unlawful Combatants Inside DOJ

DOJ OLC cannot credibly argue that such an assertion, without evidence, is outrageous: DOJ OLC has argued that on accusation alone, civilians may be detained. DoJ OLC have argued they are civilians and entitled to protection. Under this nexus and rule, on accusation alone, DOJ OLC has the burden to prove it is not secretly harboring any terrorists disguised as DOJ OLC legal counsel.

The nation has a strong interest in ensuring there is no secret terrorist planning. We cannot have another 9-11. No terrorist disguised as a DOJ OLC legal counsel should be safe from scrutiny, nor left with any impression that they can hide.

The intent of confronting the President’s legal counsel has nothing to do with humiliating them, questioning their competence, or raising doubts about their fitness to act as competent legal counsel in re Geneva, but to defend America and American citizens from the likely chance terrorists disguised as lawyers are using the secrecy of DOJ OLC to hide their planning from the intelligence community, President, and Congress.

It is a legitimate security concern and interest for the American public to have reasonable assurances that no terrorists disguised as lawyers have infiltrated the President’s legal team, DOJ OLC, or the White House counsel’s office.

It is not an outrage against the personal dignity of DOJ OLC staff counsel to force them, as civilians, to endure the same intrusions they expect of other civilians. Indeed, by claiming they have “privacy” interests, the DOJ OLC staff have implicitly argued that they are civilians, and should be subject to the same protection methods used to ensure American civilians are not really disguised terrorists. DoJ OLC cannot argue that one class of citizens is denied privacy protections, but subject to intrusions; but, for arbitrary reasons, another group of similarly situated civilians is entitled to privacy protections, but not subject to intrusions.

DoJ OLC Legal Counsel Attempt To Assert Illusory Rights American Citizens Do Not Enjoy

DOJ OLC staff counsel says they have a right to privacy, and their emails should not be disclosed. Yet, American citizens are not afforded that deference. The only reasonable conclusion is terrorists disguised as legal counsel do not want their planned attacks against American civilians discovered.

The same secrecy within DoJ could be the very nexus a terrorist plan could unfold. DoJ OLC would have us believe the terrorists were so sophisticated, that they could do incredible things. The DOJ OLC should explain why they have so much knowledge, insight, and familiarity with terrorism, but refuse to permit any Congressional or public review of their emails.

- What review has there been done on DOJ OLC secrecy provisions to ensure that AlQueda has not penetrated the DOJ OLC and is secretly hiding behind the secrecy provisions to plan a terrorist attack from within the safety of DOJ OLC?

- After blocking outside reviews of DOJ OLC, what assurances can the President make that AlQueda has not penetrated the walls of DOJ OLC and is not abusing the secrecy and blocked oversight to continue planning attacks against Americans from within DoJ OLC?

- Why is DOJ OLC above scrutiny, but average Americans – on accusation alone – are forced to spend time defending themselves against charges, despite no access to records, evidence, or notes from interrogations?

- Where is the DOJ OLC memoranda that permits torturing American civilians; but prevents the CIA from using those same (in DOJ OLC words) reasonable methods against DOJ OLC staff counsel?

- Why has the DOJ OLC written memoranda that would legalize war crimes against some class of protected civilians, but said that other civilians disguised as lawyers enjoy higher protections and cannot be subjected to the same (DOJ OLC word) permitted war crimes?