Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. Senator Questions Attorney General about Aaron Swartz

cornyn.senate.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 144 posts

Re: U.S. Senator Questions Attorney General about Aaron Swartz

#21

Post by anigbrowl »

pemulis wrote: post #16
danso wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, this is most definitely a proxy in the ongoing political battle between the Senate Republicans and the DoJ. It's a little surprising that he would side with Aaron just to take a potshot at the U.S. attorney's office. It's also worth pointing out that Texas (at least until recently) had some of the best open-records laws in the country. Cornyn argued that the Feds should emulate Texas in this regard -- during the…

If he was advocate for more open access to government records, why is it surprising that he would be concerned about the Aaron Swartz case? I agree that this letter could be seen as part a larger battle between Republicans and the Obama DoJ, but does that mean that questions about Aaron Swartz' prosecution are only valid if they come from Democrats?

His point is that the Obama administration actually did revamp the federal FOIA policy and got no credit for it, I think. But that's kind of by-the-by.

Re: U.S. Senator Questions Attorney General about Aaron Swartz

#22

Post by abraininavat »

gyardley wrote: post #7
tptacek wrote: post #3

This is the same hyperpartisan Senator who was at the forefront of the effort to deny habeas rights to Guantanamo inmates; he was also involved in the Bush wiretapping scandal. Expect to see lots of superficial genuflection from Republicans towards the Swartz case; the GOP is in a constant low-grade conflict with the Democratic DoJ. Here, let me put it this way: what do you honestly think Aaron Swartz would think abo…

Or perhaps he's simply being responsive to his constituents here in Texas, some of whom took the time to urge him to act. I'm proud to have him as a Senator.

Seriously? You feel that his thinly veiled threats of violence to federal judges makes him a credit to your state? You think it's representative of the popular opinion in Texas to suggest that "None of your civil liberties matter much after you're dead"? Pretty low standards, eh?

Re: U.S. Senator Questions Attorney General about Aaron Swartz

#23

Post by abraininavat »

scarmig wrote: post #17
tptacek wrote: post #3

This is the same hyperpartisan Senator who was at the forefront of the effort to deny habeas rights to Guantanamo inmates; he was also involved in the Bush wiretapping scandal. Expect to see lots of superficial genuflection from Republicans towards the Swartz case; the GOP is in a constant low-grade conflict with the Democratic DoJ. Here, let me put it this way: what do you honestly think Aaron Swartz would think abo…

True, but so what? Isn't the point of having an adversarial political system that when one side fucks up, the other will call them on it? Even if they're being giant hypocrites in the process?

Is a modicum of integrity really too much to ask?

Re: U.S. Senator Questions Attorney General about Aaron Swartz

#24

Post by AnIrishDuck »

tptacek wrote: post #3

This is the same hyperpartisan Senator who was at the forefront of the effort to deny habeas rights to Guantanamo inmates; he was also involved in the Bush wiretapping scandal. Expect to see lots of superficial genuflection from Republicans towards the Swartz case; the GOP is in a constant low-grade conflict with the Democratic DoJ. Here, let me put it this way: what do you honestly think Aaron Swartz would think abo…

> This is the same hyperpartisan Senator who was at the forefront of the effort to deny habeas rights to Guantanamo inmates; he was also involved in the Bush wiretapping scandal.

This is poisoning the well. There are some good questions in the posted letter. Unfortunately, we are unlikely to get good answers. Whatever their political stripes or past failings, at least someone is willing to press the issue instead of dropping it.

Of the asked questions, the ones with veiled accusations of retaliation demand an especially compelling answer. The DoJ should definitely be on the spot for their prior entanglements with Schwartz. Their conduct in this case could easily be construed as retaliatory (we couldn't get you then, so we'll slam you now).

The only question that seems silly to me is the last one. Of course a DoJ prosecutor is aware of the concept of prosecutorial discretion. To be fair, it's also a good counterpoint to the current silly "Congress made us be mean" line the prosecution is taking. It's just more of a statement than a question.

> Expect to see lots of superficial genuflection from Republicans towards the Swartz case; the GOP is in a constant low-grade conflict with the Democratic DoJ.

One of the nice things about an adversarial system is that you can benefit from the conduct of parties whose views don't align with your own.

I'm not saying we should act ignorant of the Senator's motivations here. We just shouldn't dismiss his concerns outright because of them.

Re: U.S. Senator Questions Attorney General about Aaron Swartz

#25

Post by danso »

anigbrowl wrote: post #21
pemulis wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If he was advocate for more open access to government records, why is it surprising that he would be concerned about the Aaron Swartz case? I agree that this letter could be seen as part a larger battle between Republicans and the Obama DoJ, but does that mean that questions about Aaron Swartz' prosecution are only valid if they come from Democrats?

His point is that the Obama administration actually did revamp the federal FOIA policy and got no credit for it, I think. But that's kind of by-the-by.

That wasn't my point...and while Obama has opened some new doors, the thinking in the journalism community is that his administration is actually more closed when it comes to raw request numbers:

http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/mediawire/156227/obama-ad...

This is of course a quantitative measure...but given that Obama wrote a very direct order to officials to err on the side of openness, it's striking that that order is being ignored so casually...I don't think it's hard to make a case that the culture of the bureaucracy is not particularly mindful of openness.

Re: U.S. Senator Questions Attorney General about Aaron Swartz

#26

Post by politician »

"Finally, the U.S. Attorney has blamed the “severe punishments authorized by Congress” for the apparent harshness of the charges Mr. Swartz faced. Does the Department of Justice give U.S. Attorneys discretion to charge defendants (or not charge them) with crimes consistent with their view of the gravity of the wrongdoing in a specific case?"

Interesting game of "hot potato" going on. Nonetheless, I applaud Sen. Cornyn for asking these questions.

Re: U.S. Senator Questions Attorney General about Aaron Swartz

#27

Post by vec »

abraininavat wrote: post #23
scarmig wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, but so what? Isn't the point of having an adversarial political system that when one side fucks up, the other will call them on it? Even if they're being giant hypocrites in the process?

Is a modicum of integrity really too much to ask?

Given the historical record, probably.

Re: U.S. Senator Questions Attorney General about Aaron Swartz

#28

Post by miked »

tptacek wrote: post #3

This is the same hyperpartisan Senator who was at the forefront of the effort to deny habeas rights to Guantanamo inmates; he was also involved in the Bush wiretapping scandal. Expect to see lots of superficial genuflection from Republicans towards the Swartz case; the GOP is in a constant low-grade conflict with the Democratic DoJ. Here, let me put it this way: what do you honestly think Aaron Swartz would think abo…

This is the same hyperpartisan Senator who was at the forefront of the effort to deny habeas rights to Guantanamo inmates.

The Entitled Party had complete control of the House and a 60 senator supermajority in the Senate for the first year of Obama's presidency, not to mention near complete control of the "news" media, Hollywood, television, the arts, the unions, etc, etc. If they wanted to introduce habeas rights for prisoners of war for the first time in US (or most any other country's) history, Obama et al could have done it anytime they wanted. State-run news media would have dutifully reported the wonderfulness of it all. Television programs and Hollywood movies would have exclaimed over the Nobel Peace Prize winner's greatness in their plot dialogue. They didn't do any of it.

Remember, it's Cornyn that's being "hyperpartisan", not you.

Re: U.S. Senator Questions Attorney General about Aaron Swartz

#29

Post by tptacek »

AnIrishDuck wrote: post #24
tptacek wrote: post #3

This is the same hyperpartisan Senator who was at the forefront of the effort to deny habeas rights to Guantanamo inmates; he was also involved in the Bush wiretapping scandal. Expect to see lots of superficial genuflection from Republicans towards the Swartz case; the GOP is in a constant low-grade conflict with the Democratic DoJ. Here, let me put it this way: what do you honestly think Aaron Swartz would think abo…

> This is the same hyperpartisan Senator who was at the forefront of the effort to deny habeas rights to Guantanamo inmates; he was also involved in the Bush wiretapping scandal. This is poisoning the well. There are some good questions in the posted letter. Unfortunately, we are unlikely to get good answers. Whatever their political stripes or past failings, at least someone is willing to press the issue instead of…

I'm happy the questions are being asked, but Cornyn's no friend of civil liberties and I suggest you keep that in mind.

Re: U.S. Senator Questions Attorney General about Aaron Swartz

#30

Post by jlgreco »

tptacek wrote: post #3

This is the same hyperpartisan Senator who was at the forefront of the effort to deny habeas rights to Guantanamo inmates; he was also involved in the Bush wiretapping scandal. Expect to see lots of superficial genuflection from Republicans towards the Swartz case; the GOP is in a constant low-grade conflict with the Democratic DoJ. Here, let me put it this way: what do you honestly think Aaron Swartz would think abo…

Enemy of my enemy is... well, quite possibly also my enemy.. but at least it is nice to see them fighting.
Post reply on HN