HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » I saw this book on Friday...

Sat Feb 1, 2020, 11:04 PM

I saw this book on Friday the same day the GOP said no to witnesses

Claim of Privilege: A Mysterious Plane Crash, a Landmark Supreme Court Case, and the Rise of State Secrets by Barry Siegel

It just felt like something from glancing at the flap jacket from today's headlines. Was wondering if anyone has read it.
and what they thought?
Below is what I pulled from Amazon for details. Reading them I think you can see what I mean (hopefully I am not over my copy pasting limit)

Review

“Barry Siegel’s Claim of Privilege uncovers the mystery behind a famous Supreme Court case, reveals its poignant human cost, and offers a timely reminder of the perils of government secrecy.” (Jeffrey Toobin, New York Times bestselling author of THE NINE)


Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Barry Siegel unfolds the shocking true story behind the Supreme Court case that forever changed the balance of power in America.

On October 6, 1948, a trio of civilian engineers joined a U.S. Air Force crew on a B-29 Superfortress, whose mission was to test secret navigational equipment. Shortly after takeoff the plane crashed, killing all three engineers and six others. In June 1949, the widows of the engineers filed suit against the government. What had happened to their men? they asked. Why had these civilians been aboard an Air Force plane in the first place?

But the Air Force, at the dawn of the Cold War, refused to hand over the accident reports and witness statements, claiming the documents contained classified information that would threaten national security. The case made its way up to the Supreme Court, which in 1953 sided with the Air Force in United States v. Reynolds. This landmark decision formally recognized the "state secrets" privilege, a legal precedent that has since been used to conceal conduct, withhold documents, block troublesome litigation, and, most recently, detain terror suspects without due-process protections.

Even with the case closed, the families of those who died in the crash never stopped wondering what had happened in that B-29. They finally had their answer a half century later: In 2000 they learned that the government was now making available the top-secret information the families had sought long ago, in vain. The documents, it turned out, contained no national security secrets but rather a shocking chronicle of negligence.

Equal parts history, legal drama, and exposé, Claim of Privilege tells the story of this shameful incident, its impact on our nation, and a courageous fight to right a wrong from the past. Placing the story within the context of the time, Siegel draws clear connections between the apocalyptic fears of the early Cold War years and post-9/11 America—and shows the dangerous consequences of this historic cover-up: the violation of civil liberties and the abuse of constitutional protections. By evoking the past, Claim of Privilege illuminates the present. Here is a mesmerizing narrative that indicts what our government is willing to do in the name of national security.

from Publishers Weekly

In 1948, three civilian engineers died in the crash of an air force B-29 bomber that was testing a missile guidance system; in their widows' lawsuit, the Supreme Court upheld the air force's refusal to divulge accident reports that it claimed held military secrets. But when the declassified reports surfaced decades later, the only sensitive information in them involved the chronic tendency of B-29 engines to catch fire, egregious lapses in maintenance and safety procedures, and gross pilot error. Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist Siegel (Shades of Gray) ably recounts the case, a scandal and cover-up with grave constitutional implications. The 1953 Supreme Court decision gave the executive branch sweeping authority to conceal information under national security claims without judicial review, a precedent confirmed when the Court refused to reopen the case in 2003. (The author notes the influence of Cold War anxieties and the 9/11 attacks in these rulings.) Siegel insists on decorating the story with often extraneous human-interest profiles of everyone involved. But his is an engrossing exposition of the facts and legal issues in the case, which produced a disturbing legacy of government secrecy and misconduct still very much alive.

6 replies, 2201 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 6 replies Author Time Post
Reply I saw this book on Friday the same day the GOP said no to witnesses (Original post)
thinkingagain Feb 2020 OP
FM123 Feb 2020 #1
ancianita Feb 2020 #2
thinkingagain Feb 2020 #3
ancianita Feb 2020 #4
thinkingagain Feb 2020 #5
ancianita Feb 2020 #6

Response to thinkingagain (Original post)

Sat Feb 1, 2020, 11:53 PM

1. Wow. I am definitely going to add that book to my list of those to read...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to thinkingagain (Original post)

Sun Feb 2, 2020, 01:08 AM

2. Are you saying we're looking at a similar case headed to SCOTUS with this precedent? If so, is it

McGahn's case? Or some other?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ancianita (Reply #2)

Sun Feb 2, 2020, 10:12 AM

3. It felt like when I saw the summary

That you could change a few words and you'd have all those Boltons book and the senate impeachment.
It feels eerily the same.
So I'm not sure if it's a good thing or bad.

One they already ruled you could hide documents and evidence by saying they have security protection
And two it was later proven the don't.

Plus Adam Schiff kept saying the truth will come out
And the book show it it did.

Hope that helps.

But it also looked interesting and I wondered if anyone had read it and their take?

Sorry if I'm rambling I just woke up and am blurred eyed.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to thinkingagain (Reply #3)

Sun Feb 2, 2020, 11:36 AM

4. If you're not a lawyer, we need one from DU to comment on its potential damage to constitutional

oversight and law enforcement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ancianita (Reply #4)

Sun Feb 2, 2020, 11:39 AM

5. Well I'm not a lawyer

But it would be awesome if one from Du could weigh in and most especially if they happened to read the book.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to thinkingagain (Reply #5)

Sun Feb 2, 2020, 11:49 AM

6. yep

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread