Yet another nail (I hope) in Cheney's coffin

[irishgrl]

White House, Cheney's office, subpoenaed By LAURIE KELLMAN, Associated Press Writer


WASHINGTON - The Senate Judiciary Committee subpoenaed the White House and Vice President Dick Cheney's office Wednesday for documents relating to President Bush's controversial eavesdropping program that operated warrant-free for five years.

Also named in subpoenas signed by committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., were the Justice Department and the National Security Council. The four parties have until July 18 to comply, according to a statement by Leahy's office.

The committee wants documents that might shed light on internal disputes within the administration over the legality of the program, which Bush put under court review earlier this year.

"Our attempts to obtain information through testimony of administration witnesses have been met with a consistent pattern of evasion and misdirection," Leahy said in his cover letters for the subpoenas. "There is no legitimate argument for withholding the requested materials from this committee."

Echoing its response to previous congressional subpoenas to former administration officials Harriet Miers and Sara Taylor, the White House gave no indication that it would comply.

"We're aware of the committee's action and will respond appropriately," White House spokesman Tony Fratto said. "It's unfortunate that congressional Democrats continue to choose the route of confrontation."

The showdown between the White House and Congress could land in federal court.

Leahy's committee and its counterpart in the House have issued the subpoenas as part of a sweeping look at how much influence the White House exerts over the Justice Department and its chief, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

The probe, in its sixth month, began with an investigation into whether administration officials ordered the firings of eight federal prosecutors, for political reasons. The House and Senate Judiciary committees previously had subpoenaed Miers, one-time legal counsel, and Taylor, a former political director, in that probe.

But with senators of both parties already concerned about the constitutionality of the administration's efforts to root out terrorism suspects in the United States, the committee shifted to the broader question of Gonzales' stewardship of Justice and his willingness to go along with the wiretapping program.

The Bush administration secretly launched the spy program, run by the National Security Agency, in 2001 to monitor international phone calls and e-mails to or from the United States involving people the government suspected of having terrorist links. The program, which did not require investigators to seek warrants before conducting surveillance, was revealed in December 2005.

After the program was challenged in court, Bush put it under the supervision of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, established in 1978. The president still claims the power to order warantless spying.

Debate continues over whether the program violates people's civil liberties, and the administration has gone to great lengths to keep it running with extensive presidential discretion.

Piquing the committee's interest was vivid testimony last month by former Deputy Attorney General James Comey about the extent of the White House's effort to override the Justice Department's objections to the program in 2004.

Comey told the Judiciary Committee that Gonzales, then-White House counsel, tried to get Attorney General John Ashcroft to reverse course and recertify the program. At the time, Ashcroft lay in intensive care, recovering form gall bladder surgery.

Ashcroft refused, as did Comey, to whom Ashcroft had temporarily shifted the power of his office during his illness.

The White House recertified the program unilaterally. Ashcroft, Comey, FBI Director Robert Mueller and their staffs prepared to resign. Bush ultimately relented and made changes to the classified program that the Justice officials had demanded, and the agency eventually recertified it.

The fight was one of the most bitter disputes of the Bush presidency and questions remain over whether the program tramples people's civil liberties. The administration says the program is crucial to preventing more terrorist attacks.

Fratto defended the surveillance program as "lawful" and "limited."

"It's specifically designed to be effective without infringing Americans' civil liberties," Fratto said. "The program is classified for a reason — its purpose is to track down and stop terrorist planning. We remain steadfast in our commitment to keeping Americans safe from an enemy determined to use any means possible — including the latest in technology — to attack us."

Majority Democrats and some Republicans are skeptical and have sought to find out more details about the program and how it has been administered.

Leahy's panel is required to serve the subpoenas to specific people within the offices named. One is addressed to Gonzales, while the others are addressed to: David S. Addington, Cheney's chief of staff; White House Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten, V. Phillip Lago, executive secretary of the National Security Council - or "other custodian of records" in their offices.

The subpoenas themselves seek a wide array of documents on the program from the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks to the present. Among them are any documents that include analysis or opinions from Justice, the National Security Agency — which administers the program — the Defense Department, the White House, or "any entity within the Executive Branch" on the legality of the electronic surveillance program.


(can you say ASSHAT boys and girls?)

[gldstwmn]

I don't think it's going to be much longer. I could be wrong though. I've never seen an administration brazenly sink so low. Wonder what his poll numbers will have to get to? -5?

[irishgrl]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

I don't think it's going to be much longer. I could be wrong though. I've never seen an administration brazenly sink so low. Wonder what his poll numbers will have to get to? -5?

I cant believe this administration has gotten away with the crap it has and yet all Clinton did was have an affair (ack dont get me started)....and he had to go thru the impeachment process and the whole thing gave our country a black eye all for what????? and now this? it makes no sense to me...

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by irishgrl

I cant believe this administration has gotten away with the crap it has and yet all Clinton did was have an affair (ack dont get me started)....and he had to go thru the impeachment process and the whole thing gave our country a black eye all for what????? and now this? it makes no sense to me...

It's not on television, at least not enough. The Vice President of the United States claims both executive and legislative privilege, which no Vice President has ever done before. It is in flagrant violation of the Constitution and America watches television. I just don't know what to think anymore.

[irishgrl]

I did hear some brief bits about it on NPR so its on the airwaves...I cant believe Cheney has the chutzpah (wait, maybe I can) to claim immunity like this...where is that lightning bolt when you need it?

[irishgrl]

No surprise here I guess:

Bush won't supply subpoenaed documents

By TERENCE HUNT, AP White House Correspondent 15 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - President Bush, moving toward a constitutional showdown with Congress, asserted executive privilege Thursday and rejected lawmakers' demands for documents that could shed light on the firings of federal prosecutors.

Bush's attorney told Congress the White House would not turn over subpoenaed documents for former presidential counsel Harriet Miers and former political director Sara Taylor.

"With respect, it is with much regret that we are forced down this unfortunate path which we sought to avoid by finding grounds for mutual accommodation," White House counsel Fred Fielding said in a letter to the chairmen of the House and Senate Judiciary Committees. "We had hoped this matter could conclude with your committees receiving information in lieu of having to invoke executive privilege. Instead, we are at this conclusion."

Thursday was the deadline for surrendering the documents. The White House also made clear that Miers and Taylor would not testify next month, as directed by the subpoenas, which were issued June 13. The stalemate could end up with House and Senate contempt citations and a battle in federal court over separation of powers.

In his letter, Fielding said Bush had "attempted to chart a course of cooperation" by releasing more than 8,500 pages of documents and sending Gonzales and other senior officials to testify before Congress. The White House also had offered a compromise in which Miers, Taylor, White House political strategist Karl Rove and their deputies would be interviewed by Judiciary Committee aides in closed-door sessions, without transcripts. Democrats Patrick Leahy of Vermont and John Conyers of Michigan, the chairs of the Senate and House Judiciary Committees, have rejected that offer.

On the other hand, Fielding said Bush "was not willing to provide your committees with documents revealing internal White House communications or to accede to your desire for senior advisors to testify at public hearings.

"The reason for these distinctions rests upon a bedrock presidential prerogative: for the President to perform his constitutional duties, it is imperative that he receive candid and unfettered advice and that free and open discussions and deliberations occur among his advisors and between those advisors and others within and outside the Executive Branch," Fielding said.

"The doctrine of executive privilege exists, at least in part, to protect such communications from compelled disclosure to Congress, especially where, as here, the president's interests in maintaining confidentiality far outweigh Congress's interests in obtaining deliberative White House communications," Fielding said.

"Further, it remains unclear precisely how and why your committees are unable to fulfill your legislative and oversight interests without the unfettered requests you have made in your subpoenas," Fielding said. "Put differently, there is no demonstration that the documents and information you seek by subpoena are critically important to any legislative initiatives that you may be pursuing or intending to pursue."

It was the second time in his administration that Bush has exerted executive privilege, said White House deputy press secretary Tony Fratto. The first instance was in December, 2001, to rebuff Congress' demands for Clinton administration documents.

Tensions between the administration and the Democratic-run Congress have been building for months as the House and Senate Judiciary panels have sought to probe the firings of eight federal prosecutors and the administration's program of warrantless eavesdropping. The investigations are part of the Democrats' efforts to hold the administration to account for the way it has conducted the war on terrorism since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

Democrats say the firings of the prosecutors over the winter was an example of improper political influence. The White House says U.S. attorneys are political appointees who can be hired and fired for almost any reason.

Democrats and even some key Republicans have said that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales should resign over the U.S. attorney dismissals, but he has steadfastly held his ground and Bush has backed him.

Just Wednesday, the Senate Judiciary Committee subpoenaed the White House and Vice President Dick Cheney's office, demanding documents pertaining to terrorism-era warrant-free eavesdropping.

Separately, that panel also is summoning Gonzales to discuss the program and an array of other matters — including the prosecutor firings — that have cost a half-dozen top Justice Department officials their jobs.

Leahy, D-Vt., the committee's chairman, raised questions Wednesday about previous testimony by one of Bush's appeals court nominees and said he wouldn't let such matters pass.

"If there have been lies told to us, we'll refer it to the Department of Justice and the U.S. attorney for whatever legal action they think is appropriate," Leahy told reporters. He did just that Wednesday, referring questions about testimony by former White House aide Brett Kavanaugh, who now sits on the urt of Appeals for the District of Columbia.

In the latest showdown, the Judiciary panels also subpoenaed the National Security Council. Leahy added that, like House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, D-Mich., he would consider pursuing contempt citations against those who refuse.

The Judiciary committees have issued the subpoenas as part of a look at how much influence the White House exerts over the Justice Department and its chief, Gonzales.

The probe, in its sixth month, began with an investigation into whether administration officials ordered the firings of eight federal prosecutors for political reasons. The Judiciary committees subpoenaed Miers, one-time White House legal counsel, and Taylor, a former political director, though they have yet to testify.

Now, with senators of both parties concerned about the constitutionality of the administration's efforts to root out terrorism suspects in the United States, the committee has shifted to the broader question of Gonzales' stewardship of Justice.

IMPEACH the Bahstids.

[seeker007nmss]

Originally Posted by irishgrl

I cant believe this administration has gotten away with the crap it has and yet all Clinton did was have an affair (ack dont get me started)....and he had to go thru the impeachment process and the whole thing gave our country a black eye all for what????? and now this? it makes no sense to me...

Why do people think it was an affair that got him impeached? He LIED about it. All he had to say was *insert Clinton voice here* "Yes, I had sexual relations with this women, so what?" and it would have blown over. It wasn't the affair, it was the LIES about it that got him into trouble.

But yes, it was ridiculous, don't even bring up what JFK had done. But it was the LIES not the affair. (Are you started yet?)

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by irishgrl

No surprise here I guess:



IMPEACH the Bahstids.

This could get ugly.

[irishgrl]

its weird but I just got a mass email from Ted Kennedy that Cheney isnt claiming executive privilege any more???? guess Im gonna have to scan the headlines...

[irishgrl]

Originally Posted by seeker007nmss

Why do people think it was an affair that got him impeached? He LIED about it. All he had to say was *insert Clinton voice here* "Yes, I had sexual relations with this women, so what?" and it would have blown over. It wasn't the affair, it was the LIES about it that got him into trouble.

But yes, it was ridiculous, don't even bring up what JFK had done. But it was the LIES not the affair. (Are you started yet?)

you dont seem to push my buttons quite the same way ol Jason does.......



of course, he and I do button pushing for fun and profit so I guess there's a bit of history there

[Sarah]

am i the only person who just doesn't give a damn anymore? from here on out, we are completely ****ed. there is no potential for a decent administration in this country at all. all the current politicians need to GO, and we need some term limits on these senators and congress people.

i blame the idiot box tv and all the cheeto eating fatties who are glued to it constantly, so they think they're getting the real deal on every story. this is the part where we remember that murrow really is turning over in his grave.

oddly enough, my life as an american hasn't changed much over the course of the clinton/bush years (excepting the obvious shock that an attack on US soil brought) ... the only difference to me is the pressure to feel negatively about the country as a whole all the time and the fact that people seem to bitch more.

[irishgrl]

Originally Posted by Sarah

am i the only person who just doesn't give a damn anymore? from here on out, we are completely ****ed. there is no potential for a decent administration in this country at all. all the current politicians need to GO, and we need some term limits on these senators and congress people.

i blame the idiot box tv and all the cheeto eating fatties who are glued to it constantly, so they think they're getting the real deal on every story. this is the part where we remember that murrow really is turning over in his grave.

oddly enough, my life as an american hasn't changed much over the course of the clinton/bush years (excepting the obvious shock that an attack on US soil brought) ... the only difference to me is the pressure to feel negatively about the country as a whole all the time and the fact that people seem to bitch more.

I see its raining in your part of Hell's half acre dearie........my condolences.
I'd like to think that some people SOMEWHERE are paying attention so this sort of thing doesnt happen again. Especially the young generations, they've got to deal with the mess the old farts left behind, and hopefully make things better......yes?

[Sarah]

Originally Posted by irishgrl

I see its raining in your part of Hell's half acre dearie........my condolences.
I'd like to think that some people SOMEWHERE are paying attention so this sort of thing doesnt happen again. Especially the young generations, they've got to deal with the mess the old farts left behind, and hopefully make things better......yes?

i'm thinking nuclear holocaust will happen before they get a chance to.

[irishgrl]

Originally Posted by Sarah

i'm thinking nuclear holocaust will happen before they get a chance to.

(prays you're wrong....)