The Briefing Dates
I find the list of briefings on the domestic wiretap program as instructive for what it tells us about the program itself (and Bush's dealings with Congress) as it is as proof that Gonzales is full of shit. In no particular order or structure, here are some thoughts:
Citizens and Voters Need Not Know
This document was declassified on May 17, 2006, before the midterm elections.
Turning Tides
I gotta say, this post yesterday from Josh Marshall,
As regular readers of this site know, I've always been against themovement to impeach President Bush. I take this position not because hehasn't done plenty to merit it. My reasons are practical. Minor reasonsare that it's late in the president's term and that I think impeachmentitself is toxic to our political system -- though it can be less toxicthan the high officials thrown
Have they done this sort of thing? Send an Amb to answer a question?, Part One
This is going to be a two part post. In this post, I'm going to show a key discrepancy between Libby's testimony about the questions he asked Addington on July 8, and Addington's. Addington's testimony suggests that (contrary to Libby's claims), Libby was looking for general details about the paperwork behind Wilson's trip, which would have exposed Valerie's role at the CIA, potentially her status, as well as prior trips Joe
No Longer Operative
It looks like we're approaching the point where some hack stands up and explains that the claim that any disagreements were not about the domestic wiretap program is no longer operative.
Documents indicate eight congressional leaderswere briefed about the Bush administration's terrorist surveillanceprogram on the eve of its expiration in 2004, contradicting swornSenate testimony this week by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.
[snip]A Gonzales spokesman maintained Wednesday that the attorney general stands by his
Did Harman Approve of the Illegal Domestic Wiretap Program?
Well, that was quick work. Yesterday I suggested that the Gang of Eight who purportedly attended the March 10, 2004 meeting at which Alberto Gonzales claims to have developed consensus that they should ignore James Comey's concerns and continue to tap American citizens anyway might have some enlightenment to offer about what went on at the meeting.
Cheney Got the Keys to DOJ ... But Did Rove?
One more detail about the Ashcroft and Gonzales guidelines on contacts between DOJ and the White House. While the latter explicitly gives Cheney the authority to communicate with DOJ about ongoing cases, I don't believe it gives Karl Rove--or any of the people who work in Office of Political Affairs save its head--that authority.
Cunningham, CIFA, and Cheney, a New Chronology
In light of the news that Alberto Gonzales granted Cheneypresidential powers to snoop into ongoing investigations in May 2006, I thoughtit was time to update my chronology of the CIFA side of the Cunningham scandal.September 2002, then Deputy Secretary of Defense for Counter-Intelligence Burtt establishes CIFA to oversee counterintelligence units of the armed services; consulting on the new agency was James King, recently retired director of National Imagery and Mapping Agency
Changing the Rules
DiFi has a habit of using hearings to introduce new allegations against DOJ and she has done so again today. Here's Christy's version of the interchange:
Read to you what has been dropped from the earlier addition of the DOJmanual. (1) restriction on bringing a voter fraud case close to anelection.
Time to Talk to the Gang of Eight
Alberto Gonzales gave a closed-door briefing to the House Intelligence Committee recently and offered an excuse for barging into ICU to try to get Ashcroft to override Jim Comey. Silvestre Reyes, at least, seems satisfied with Gonzales' explanation.
But Reyes said he was satisfied with Gonzales' explanation and cautioned against drawing conclusions.
"When there are issues of national security at stake, I thinkcertainly one should not question the motivation of individuals," Reyestold reporters.
Crappy Product, Crappy Marketing Company
As many of you know, I used to do work for the auto industry. And I can assure you, the single most important thing Ford could do to turn itself around would be to fire its long-time ad company, J Walter Thompson. Everyone knows it, too, in all parts of the world.
Judy Finally Gets Her Wingnut Welfare!!
A reader sent me the full text of this Judy Miller interview of Shimon Peres in Murdoch's newest plaything. The interview itself is nothing exciting. After all acting a stenographer of other people's thoughts is what Judy does best, which means her stenography is only ever as interesting as Judy's source.
Globalization and Terror and More Obstruction at DOJ
Kudos to Congressman Bill Delahunt. He seems to be on a lonely crusade to get the US Government to treat all kinds of terrorism the same. He has been criticizing DOJ for its sloppy treatment of the terrorist Luis Posada Carriles; DOJ botched its case of immigration violations and Posada effectively went free.
A Tale of Two NIEs
One good thing about the spectacular abuse of intelligence to get us into the Iraq war: the intelligence community is acquiring a habit of releasing key judgments from its NIEs (I understand we'll get an Iraq NIE in time for September's moving of the goal posts). And when I read the claim yesterday that half the content of last week's NIE on terrorism came from detainee interrogations ...
According to one senior
Bush's Cheney's Signing Statement on the Geneva Convention
It's really tough sorting out the new Executive Order on torture. But after a whole day of pondering the details, I think I'm finally getting it. It's yet another Bush signing statement, this time to record his own personal interpretation of the Geneva Convention. After all--that's where this new EO came from:
Eric Edelman, Leaker Extraordinaire
I've been waiting to see if Pat Lang weighed in on the Hillary letter controversy because he's the blogosphere's expert (indeed, an expert in any venue) on the hazards of supply lines and withdrawal. And his response is as good as I expected, starting with his citation of the constitutional basis for Hillary's inquiry.
Did Eric Edelman Steal Robert Gates' Mail?
I've been following the little squabble between Cheney hack Eric Edelman and Hillary. There was his nasty letter and Hillary's excellent response. Now Gates has entered the fray, embracing oversight and (backhandedly) slapping down the nasty Edelman.
I have long been a staunch advocate of Congressional oversight, firstat the CIA and now at the Defense Department.
Let the Sunshine In
I'm with David Kurtz. In addition to offering good reason to begin impeachment procedures, Bush's dangerous claims to executive and deliberative privilege really ought to invite us to reconsider the notion that Presidents need to hide their deliberations.
As long as we're going to be discussing the parameters of executiveprivilege in the weeks and months ahead, can we start by revisiting thenow commonly accepted notion that the President can only get free
The Jurisdiction of DOJ's Inspector General
This is a follow-up on my post on the loophole in the jurisdiction of DOJ's Inspector General, which appears to be preventing DOJ's IG from investigating the role of any lawyer in the USA Purge--which is, after all, just about everyone involved. Here's how Senator Leahy laid out the problem:
Other Inspectors General can investigate misconduct throughout their agencies.
Edelman Says: "Congressional Oversight Emboldens Our Enemies"
Okay, Hillary didn't adopt my recommended response to Eric Edelman's insubordination. Well, she kind of does, insofar as she notes that Edelman is alone in spouting Cheneyisms:
Other members of this Administration have not engaged in politicalattacks when the prospect of withdrawal planning has been raised.
And she demands that Gates choose whether he supports Edelman's insubordination.
I request that you describe whether Under Secretary Edelman's letteraccurately characterizes your views as Secretary of Defense.
This