Read other letters about this article
Countdown is available here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/
Olbermann mentioned Katie Couric's interview with Eric Holder, which aired this week (tonight?).
Holder:... I have ordered a review of the state secrets doctrine. All the cases in which - we have invoked that doctrine. I think there are a total of maybe 20 or so, just to make sure that it was properly invoked. And to see, in those cases, where it was properly invoked, if there's a way we can be more surgical, whether there is a way in which we can share more information.
A report is in the process of being prepared. I'll expect I'll have it in the not too distant future. And my hope is to be able to share the results of that report with the American people. So they'll understand exactly - why we've had to use the state secret - state secrets doctrine in certain cases. And why we - decided not to use it in - in certain other cases....
Couric: So you think it's appropriate to invoke it at certain times?
Holder: At certain times. But I want to make sure that we only do it where it's absolutely necessary. I would only apply the doctrine where - national security was at stake, where the lives of the American people were at stake. Where sources and methods used by our intelligence - at - our intelligence assets were used. This is a very transparent administration.
This is going to be a very transparent Justice Department. But I'm not gonna sacrifice the safety of the American people or our ability to protect - the American homeland. And that is - as I said, first and foremost.
Couric: Having said that, do you believe the state secrets doctrine was abused by the Bush administration?
Holder: Well, I'm in the process of looking - that is being reviewed now. And so, I'll see what the result of that - review is. And as I said, try to share the results of that review with the American people.
Couric: What's your gut though?
Holder: Well, I don't know. On the basis of the two, three cases that we've had to review so far - I think that the invocation of the doctrine was correct. We - we reversed - are in the process of looking at one case. But I think we're likely to reverse it. [p. 4]
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/04/08/eveningnews/main4930388.shtml
Thanks, DCLaw1 - I tried to read it and the part of the Patriot Act it references, and couldn't make heads or tails of it.