Senator Leahy and the WH subpoenas

Sen. Leahy promised to fight the White House yesterday on Meet The Press (transcript):

The Senate Judiciary Committee chairman said Sunday he was ready to go to court if the White House resisted congressional subpoenas for information on the firing of federal prosecutors.

"If they don't cooperate, yes I'd go that far," said Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt. He was asked in a broadcast interview whether he would seek a congressional vote on contempt citations if President Bush did not comply. That move would push the matter to court.

"They've chosen confrontation rather than compromise or cooperation," Leahy said. "The bottom line on this U.S. attorneys' investigation is that we have people manipulating law enforcement. Law enforcement can't be partisan."

Amen to that! Also in motion are subpoenas issued to the WH and the OVP "for documents related to the administration's legal basis for conducting warrant-free eavesdropping on people in the United States."

Leahy and Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., who heads the House Judiciary Committee, have demanded a White House explanation by July 9 as to its grounds for claiming executive privilege in refusing to turn over additional documents.

The two lawmakers say that regardless of whether the White House meets the deadline, they would begin acting to enforce the subpoenas as appropriate under the law.

To spurn the congressional subpoenas -- conveying a "Nixonian attitude" that the WH is above the law -- could mean the House and Senate would vote to bring contempt charges. If Leahy is as serious as I believe he is, and without full cooperation from the Bush Administration, he will press for contempt citations on the basis that executive privilege in this instance has no legal merit:

Over the years, Congress and the White House have avoided a full-blown court test. Under federal rules, lawmakers could vote to cite witnesses for contempt and refer the matter to the local U.S. attorney to bring before a grand jury. Since 1975, 10 senior administration officials have been cited, but the disputes were all resolved before getting to court.

Leahy proposed a reasonable solution to avoid a fight: WH officials can provide sworn testimony recorded into transcripts behind closed doors. However, the information would be made available to the public. That's how transparency in government works, something the secretive, deceptive, and criminal Bush-Cheney regime regularly and intentionally subverts.

Over in the Wingnutosphere at RedState.com, Mark Kilmer on Sunday whined that Leahy's oversight efforts were "repeated public harassment" of the WH (Waah! Boo-hoo-hoo!) and added that Leahy is "doing this, he said, because the American people care a lot."

Yes, we do care a lot -- 68% of us wanted WH officials to answer "all questions" and thought Congress "should issue subpoenas to force White House officials to testify under oath." The Bushies have transformed the DOJ into the political partisan arm of the GOP using our tax dollars, an enterprise that's unethical and illegal. Back in mid-April, two thirds of Americans, including a narrow majority of Republicans, realized the USA firings were politically motivated. The public isn't fooled by Bushie WH shenanigans. And we're pissed.

Victor Gold, the former Deputy Press Secretary to Barry Goldwater, expressed his disgust over the current DOJ situation during an interview with Bill Moyers:

I think it's a corrupted justice department. When I say "corrupted," I don't mean dollars and cents. I mean corrupted in terms of... our constitutional values. And I think you've heard some of the prosecuting attorneys who were fired speak out and the-- some of the investigation-- the investigations bringing out exactly what's going on up there. And when you corrupt the justice system, the Justice Department, that's the most important department of government in terms of protecting our constitutional values. One of the reasons I wanted the Democrats to win [in November] was because I knew the yo-yo Republicans on the Hill were not going to investigate even [though] they-- we-- we claim we are the constitutionalists. We are the ones concerned about the Constitution. We want strict constructionist judges. We don't want ...overreaching federal government. The fact is... I knew there would be investigations. And I-- I-- I want these investigations to go on 'cause they weren't going on when the Republicans were in control of Congress.

Next question: When will Congress crank up Cheney's impeachment?

And regarding Bush... ITMFA!

UPDATE: Seriously, it's time to put impeachment back on the table. Are you listening, Madam Speaker?

There's more: "Senator Leahy and the WH subpoenas" >>

Tony Snow Is At It Again

Remember last week when Tony Snow said the Bush White House email policy was modeled on the Clinton email policy, when it wasn't. Well Tony's at it again. According to ThinkProgress at today's press briefing he was shocked, shocked I tell you, that the Senate Judiciary Committee would subpoena documents concerning the President's surveillance program. Tony said Senate's conduct was outrageous because Congress was kept “fully informed all along the route.”

Sadly, but not surprisingly, Tony's claim is false. For one Jay Rockefeller, one of the members who was briefed, said the briefings were inadequate.

Clearly, the activities we discussed raised profound oversight issues…I feel unable to evaluate, much less endorse, these activities…without more information…I simply cannot satisfy lingering concerns raised by the briefing…

ThinkProgress reports that the former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Bob Graham said his briefing was inadequate. From the Miami Herald:

…Graham recalled being summoned to a classified briefing by Vice President Dick Cheney in late 2001 or early 2002. He was informed about a presidential directive that let the National Security Agency eavesdrop on overseas calls that moved through U.S. communications lines — not people speaking on the phone inside the United States.

… [D]uring his chairmanship of the Intelligence Committee in 2001 and 2002, [Graham] said, “I was not notified that they were going to abandon the FISA process and utilize warrantless intercepts of conversations.”

Should we be surprised that Snow is lying on this topic. He is simply repeating the Fox News Network/ Republcian party line previously announced by his old running buddy, Brit Hume.

There's more: "Tony Snow Is At It Again" >>

Breaking--Senate Judiciary Comittee Votes 13-3 To Authorize Subpoenas for Warrentless Surveillance Documents

Thinkprogress is reporting

The Senate Judiciary Committee just voted 13-3 to authorize chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) to issue subpoenas for documents related to the NSA warrantless surveillance program. Sens. Arlen Specter (R-PA), Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Chuck Grassley (R-IA) voted with the Democrats on the committee to authorize the subpoenas for any legal opinions and advice the Bush administration has received regarding the NSA program.

According to the Center for Democracy and Technology the following are probably the 7 documents or document types most sought by the Judiciary Committee:

1. Memorandum prepared by former Deputy Attorney General James Comey which, according to Comey, was sent to the White House shortly after March 10, 2004. The memorandum followed a review of the classified surveillance program (to which Comey referred in his May 15, 2007 testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee) and it apparently explained why the Department of Justice in 2004 would not certify the surveillance program as lawful.

2. Memorandum from Department of Justice former Assistant Attorney General Jack Goldsmith, who participated in the DOJ’s review of the classified surveillance program. This memorandum was attached to the Comey memorandum and was prepared in the same time frame as that document.

3. Department of Justice Office of Intelligence Policy and Review legal memorandum discussing the classified surveillance program, and drafts of that document. The final document was probably prepared in early March, 2004.

4. Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) memorandum prepared in early 2004 -- by Comey's account -- laying out OLC’s legal concerns about the classified program.

5. Memorandum from then-White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales received by Comey shortly after March 10, 2004 that responded to the determination by the Department of Justice not to certify the lawfulness of the classified surveillance program.

6. January 10, 2007 orders of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court authorizing what the warrantless surveillance program the Administration calls the Terrorist Surveillance Program.

7. Court order applications related to the FISC authorization of the Terrorist Surveillance Program.

We said we wanted oversight. We are getting oversight. I am having a hard time keeping up with all the looming constitutional crises today.

There's more: "Breaking--Senate Judiciary Comittee Votes 13-3 To Authorize Subpoenas for Warrentless Surveillance Documents" >>

Representative Waxman is out of patience

Representative Waxman’s patience is at an end. Condoleeza Rice has blown him off and ignored his respectful requests that she appear before the Oversight Committee he chairs and answer questions about the false claims of a Niger-Iraq connection that was used as justification for a pre-emptive war against Iraq.

Now that Condoleeza Rice has officially blown off the Oversight Committee (Rep. Waxman sent a letter last month, in which he requested she appear on April 17^th) the full Oversight Committee will convene on Wednesday, 25 April to consider compelling testimony with subpoenas.

If subpoenaed, will Ms. Rice ignore that, too? Will it go that far? (I would pay to see it.) . Ignore a subpoena and the Capitol Police can arrest you and deliver you to the committee.

Next week is going to be very interesting indeed.

There's more: "Representative Waxman is out of patience" >>