Glenn Greenwald

This is an ER review.

Glenn Greenwald is a constitutional lawyer and columnist for Salon.com. I've followed his blogs for 6 or 7 years, and he is always informed (and informative), factual, logical, and often frightening in his analyses of the assaults on our democracy and civil liberties. This, his third and most recent book, is no exception.

The central principle of the founding of the United States was that it was a nation of laws, not men. The fundamental requirement for a rule of law is show more uniform application of the law to everyone, including leaders. When law is applied only to the powerless, it becomes a tool of oppression, rather than a safeguard of liberty.

Greenwald's thesis is that not only is it the case that the powerful enjoy some advantages in the application of law in our judicial system, but that the powerful are now routinely allowed to break the law with no repercussions whatsoever. In clear, straight-forward language Greenwald lays out the history of this erosion, beginning with the crimes surrounding the Watergate break-in and coverup. Nixon, who inarguably committed serious felonies, was shielded from all legal consequences by the pardon of his handpicked vice president. Ford's statement, "Our long national nightmare is over..", and the reasons he advanced for the pardon, have been repeated so often since then that they have almost become cliche:

--Prosecution mires us in the divisive past when we should be looking forward;
--It's wrong to criminalize policy disputes;
--Political elites who commit crimes while carrying out their duties are well-intentioned and acting for the overall good;
--Being forced out of office with damaged reputation is punishment enough.

With incontrovertible facts, Greenwald also guides us through the Iran-Contra affair in which White House officials clearly and knowingly broke specific laws and lied to Congress. In fact, when the International Court of Justice ruled in favor of Nicuaragua and ordered the payment of compensation, Reagan refused to comply, and used the US's veto power on the UN Security Council to prevent efforts by the United Nations to enforce the judgement. Geenwald also details the documented crimes committed by the Bush administration--torture, warrantless eavesdropping, CIA "black holes" and renditins, politicized prosecutions, obstruction of justice, Scooter Libby, etc.--and the reasons advanced for ignoring them.

From these and other crimes the idea of "elite immunity" has emerged--some people are just so indispensable to the running of America that giving them immunity is not only in their best interest, but is in our best interest too. This idea has carried over into immunity for those in the private sector who are "too important" to prosecute. For example the wireless companies who were complicit in the violations of FISA were granted retroactive immunity by Congress--a nearly unprecedented departure from the norms of the rule of law. The rationale was that these companies were motivated solely by their feelings of patriotic duty, despite the fact that the one company that refused the government's requests to break the law was threatened with the loss of government contracts while compliant companies were paid millions. Elite immunity has become further embedded because of the revolving door that exists between government officials and private industry. Its latest manifestation is the failure for there to be any consequences for those who perpetrated the financial melt-down of 2008, and the ensuing mortgage foreclosure scandals.

Obama has continued policies eroding the rule of law, although he campaigned on promises to restore the rule of law. Almost immediately after taking office, he blocked and suppressed all investigations of the Bush administration with the excuse that the country needs to look forward, not backwards. Obama has gone so far as to threaten Great Britain with withholding US intelligence regarding terrorists if Great Britain investigated claims of torture by a British resident who was held captive at Guantanamo for 6 years. He also closed the investigation of the destruction by the CIA of videos relating to the torture of terror suspects it was expressly ordered to keep.

Most of the facts set forth in this book are and have been readily available, and are probably well-known to those who follow politics and law and are interested in the truth. The book is stunning in that it sets forth cogently and logically the story of how much our democracy has eroded. While an initial reaction to reading the book might be to close one's eyes in despair, knowledge is the first step to correcting these inequities. I urge you to read this book. Even if it sounds as though the book is on the opposite political spectrum from yours, this book is important if we are again to become a nation of laws. 4 stars show less

So I watched Citizen Four a while back, and think it helped in reading this. Though not nec. it certainly helped me remember parts of the documentary, as well as vicualize parts of the story as they unfolded.

That said, wow, good book. Scary, and pretty depressing, but good, and everyone should read it.

It's startling to see just how far our government (including the President i voted for and mostly love) has gone to erasing our privacy. How far in the pocket our journalists are, and how much show more we've willingly or otherwise given up in the name of (false) security.

Greenwald does an excellent job pointing out the lies (outright and by omission) our government and media have spread to convince us that we're somehow safer having either given up or (more often than not) had taken away our rights.

it's eye opening to see how bad it's gotten, and how completely untrustworthy our media is with regard to our government. show less

An important read just as much for the insight into media complicity with the surveillance state, than the revelations made by Snowden. Greenwald accurately and methodically shows how time honored dishonest tactics have allowed governments, and their media lapdogs to erode our freedoms. Criticism by some that Greenwald inders himself too much into the story are far off base. He was the one that had his character assassinated, his husband detained, his home broken into, was threatened with show more arrest, even murder. It is his story, and he is abig part of the story. show less

What a depressing book. Greenwald's primary, well-argued and substantiated point, is that ever after Ford's pardon of Nixon, the politically power and wealthy elite have enjoyed a growing exemption from the ordinary rules of law that apply to the "little people." Making his argument especially convincing is the manner in which he shows how, from that initial act of betrayal to the rule of law, the exceptionalism has incrementally radiated outward: first to politicians who should not be show more prosecuted because it would "traumatize" the nation; then to their subordinates who acted in "good faith" and out of a sense of patriotic duty; then to corporations who commit illegal acts at the behest of governmental officials, until, finally, it is just anyone with enough wealth and influence. All while never breaking for a moment the cant of devoted commitment to the rule of law. The hypocrisy is staggering.

I knew the book had something relevant to say to these times because, without intention, it offers a true insight into the provocations that created the Occupy Wall Street movement. Our system, Greenwald explains, allows and even encourages inequality in almost every way. "The one exception was the rule of law. When it came to the law, no inequality was tolerable." With that lever, the other vicissitudes of fortune could be borne with dignity. But that social contract has been broken, and now the wealthy claim immunity from even the law, while striving at every turn to use it increasingly as a weapon to control the lower classes. Under that condition, the duty to tolerate stark and irrational economic inequality no longer applies. Thus emerges OWS. The participants may not be fully aware of the genesis of their discontent, or why it emerges now rather than earlier, but Greenwald has here framed a viable explanation. When a book does more than the author intended, you know you have a book worth reading. show less