posted on June 27, 2007 12:08:14 PM new
White House, Cheney's Office, Subpoenaed
Updated 2:39 PM ET June 27, 2007
By LAURIE KELLMAN
WASHINGTON (AP) - 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.
Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
posted on June 27, 2007 04:55:12 PM new
Lamest of lame excuses for not giving up information. Even some of the Republicans are upset now.
_____________________
There is more to life than increasing its speed. --Mahatma Gandhi
posted on June 28, 2007 07:55:55 AM new
bushit puts himself above the law so he is are free to commit any crimes he chooses kinda like the MAFIA.....what utter corruption, what utter disdain for America and Americans...a moral vacuum
in the presidency:
Bush Won't Supply Subpoenaed Documents
Updated 10:14 AM ET June 28, 2007
By TERENCE HUNT
WASHINGTON (AP) - 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.
In reaction, Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy accused the administration of shifting "into Nixonian stonewalling" and revealing "disdain for our system of checks and balances."
"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 Leahy and the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. "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.
"Increasingly, the president and vice president feel they are above the law," said Leahy, D-Vt., after getting the news from Fielding in an early-morning phone call. "In America no one is above law."
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.
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.
___
Associated Press Writer Deb Riechmann contributed to this story.
Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
posted on June 28, 2007 10:02:15 AM new
No wonder the democratic congress has a rating of 14%. ROFLOL
They continue wasting their time going on and on about those fired. Which clinton also did, which they are allowed to do and which the 'get them' democrats are still seeking anyway they can to NOT do the jobs they were elected to do. LOL LOL LOL
The voters are noticing NOTHING is getting accomplished....but the wacko dems are STILL more interested in 'getting' anyone that they can't concentrate on much else.
And that they're working towards giving themselves ANOTHER pay raise for doing nothing.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
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.
Leahy and Conyers rejected that offer. Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah, a member of the Judiciary Committee, said the Democrats should have accepted it.
"We would be much farther ahead in finding out whether there's any real impropriety here or not," said Hatch, a former chairman of the committee. He also said presidents have legitimate reasons to protect the confidentiality of the advice they get.
In his letter, Fielding explained Bush's position on executive privilege this way: "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."
This "bedrock presidential prerogative" exists, in part, to protect the president from being compelled to disclose such communications to Congress, Fielding argued. And he questioned whether the documents and testimony the committees seeking are critically important to their investigations.
===================
democrats didn't want to accept what the WH was willing to do. lol figures. now they'll have a court battle on their hands.
They'll have to actually WIN the WH before they can take the executive branches powers away. lol. But then, they'll most likely be arguing the opposite position - separation of powers between the three branches of government.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
Ann Coulter
[ edited by Linda_K on Jun 28, 2007 11:02 AM ]
posted on July 8, 2007 05:43:05 AM new
Cheney Fatigue Settles Over Some in GOP
Updated 3:10 AM ET July 8, 2007
By TOM RAUM
WASHINGTON (AP) - Dick Cheney, who thrives on secrecy while pulling the levers of power, is getting caught in the glare of an unwelcome spotlight. Once viewed as a sage and mentor to President Bush, Cheney has approval ratings now that are as low as _ or lower _ than the president's. Recent national polls have put them both in the high 20s.
Bush's decision to spare former Cheney aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby from a 2 1/2-year prison sentence has focused new attention on the vice president and his possible role in the commutation.
Cheney's relentless advocacy of the Iraq war, his push to expand presidential authority and his hard-line rhetoric toward North Korea and Iran are raising concerns even among former loyalists now worried about the GOP's chances in 2008.
It seems Cheney fatigue is settling in some Republican circles.
Republican strategist Rich Galen, who worked for both Bush and Bush's father, said he is finding less interest or enthusiasm for Cheney. "Republicans have, in essence, moved on and focused on who to get behind in 2008," Galen said.
Cheney has drawn criticism and ridicule from Democrats for his close ties to Libby and for his contention _ later modified _ that his office is not "an entity within the executive branch."
Bush last week commuted Libby's sentence for his conviction of lying to investigators about his role in leaking the identity of a CIA operative, Valerie Plame. Plame's husband, retired diplomat Joseph Wilson, was a prominent critic of the administration's case for invading Iraq over weapons of mass destruction.
Bush said the sentence was excessive. The president kept the issue alive by saying he would not rule out an eventual full pardon for Libby.
Wilson said he would not be surprised if Cheney were "pulling the strings here, too" in sparing Libby prison time.
White House officials said they did not know exactly what role Cheney may have played in Bush's decision.
GOP strategist Mary Matalin, once Cheney's top political and public affairs assistant, suggested detractors are "score-settling or agenda-seeking."
"As the effectiveness of Bush-bashing winds down as a `vision' for their future, Cheney-bashing is their last breath as a substitute for principles upon which to forge an agenda to lead the country," she said.
Things have not gone well of late for the vice president. Courts have ruled against efforts he championed to broaden presidential authority and accord special treatment to suspected terrorists.
Cheney's position on Iran and North Korea has been tempered partly part by Bush, who recently authorized tentative diplomatic overtures to both countries. Bush also bowed to mounting bipartisan pressure and agreed to put the National Security Agency's warrantless domestic surveillance program under the auspices of a special court.
In addition, the White House confirmed it is considering closing the U.S. prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Cheney long has said the facility is needed.
On top of that, the Supreme Court has reversed its own April decision and agreed to hear challenges by Guantanamo detainees in their fall term.
Is anyone listening to Cheney any more?
The vice president shuffled alone and in silence out of a luncheon of Republican senators last week amid defections on Iraq by GOP senators and as the administration's immigration overhaul went down to defeat.
Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, the senior Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, branded as "unfounded" Cheney's claim to extra protections for his office because of his constitutional powers to preside over the Senate and break ties.
"I don't think he handles too many documents in that capacity. He handles a gavel. That's about all he handles," Specter said in an interview.
Added Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah: "I don't know what he meant by that. I think he understands what his role is."
Still, Hatch said, Cheney continues to be valuable to the president. "Everybody knows he's a straight shooter. I know that he and the president work very closely together. And I think there's a good reason for it."
Democrats have not passed many opportunities to bash Cheney. "Who died and left him boss?" asked Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del.
Cheney has seen his influence wane with rank-and-file Republicans and even conservatives, once his most ardent supporters. They are uneasy about Cheney's signing onto Bush's attempt to liberalize immigration law; spread democracy in the Middle East, which they deride as "nation building"; the amassing of record budget deficits; and even Cheney's support for certain gay rights (a daughter, Mary, is openly lesbian).
"We don't feel we're invested in Cheney, because he hasn't _ in any way we're aware of _ carried any of our water in these 6 1/2 years," conservative activist Richard Viguerie said.
Most of Cheney's hard-line colleagues are gone: Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, World Bank President Paul Wolfowitz, U.N. Ambassador John Bolton.
More moderate players now command Bush's attention and oversee the national agenda: Robert Gates at the Pentagon, Condoleezza Rice at the State Department, Stephen Hadley as national security adviser.
Bush clearly still values Cheney's advice and the vice president is at Bush's side in major policy meetings.
"He must be an awfully bruised guy at this point. I think his star has set," said Thomas E. Cronin, a political science professor at Colorado College, where Cheney's wife, Lynne, and their daughters, Elizabeth and Mary, went to college.
"People who knew Cheney, whether they speak on or off the record, feel something changed with him. And they don't know when. Obviously, post-Watergate reforms of Congress and weakening the executive branch have affected him. He speaks a lot about that. Haliburton probably changed him. Maybe his (four) heart attacks changed him," Cronin said.
Cheney, 66, was chief of staff to Ford, represented Wyoming in Congress in the 1980s, was defense secretary under the first President Bush and chief executive officer of Haliburton, the oil-services company, in the 1990s.
He has a history of heart problems, including four heart attacks, quadruple bypass surgery, two artery-clearing angioplasties and an operation to implant a pacemaker-defibrillator.
Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
