The WaPo has a story today about how a $2 million DHS no-bid contract with Booz Allen awarded in May 2003 turned into $30 million by the end of 2004 and into a $48 million contract in June 2005 and into $73 million and finally $124 million. I’m going to return to the whole question of outsourcing after McCaffrey the MilleniaLab and I get back from our walk.
But I wanted to point out a few things.
Did I mention that it was thunderstorming something fierce here in SE Michigan? Yes, raining and pouring, too.
This morning, when I read the famous Executive Order that Cheney claims to have exempted himself from, I noticed a key paragraph:
The Attorney General, upon request by the head of an agency or the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office, shall render an interpretation of this order with respect to any question arising in the course of its administration. [my emphasis]
You see, I’m no lawyer, but I have written enough pretty hardcore business and government documents to know there’s a crucial difference between "shall" and "should." Shall is mandatory, with legal umph. Should is kind of wishy-washy, if you feel like it, ought to. So I was wondering when the Democrats were going to point out to Alberto Gonzales that he shall provide a response to Bill Leonard’s request for a ruling on whether or not Cheney is, indeed, exempt from this Executive Order.
Ask and you shall receive:
It has been kind of wrath of god-y over here for the last hour. Just as I heard that OVP, NSC, DOJ, and WH have been subpoenaed, a big (much needed) thunderstorm took out my Toobz. Let’s hope the wrath of god thing continues for the bad guys, as this is the move that will either give Anthony Kennedy the opportunity to roll up our Constitution … or begin (four months down the line, at the earliest) to shed some light on the Administration.
Here’s what SJC is looking for:
The subpoenas seek documents related to authorization and reauthorization of the program or programs; the legal analysis or opinions about the surveillance; orders, decisions, or opinions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) concerning the surveillance; agreements between the Executive Branch and telecommunications or other companies regarding liability for assisting with or participating in the surveillance; and documents concerning the shutting down of an investigation of the Department of Justiceâs Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) relating to the surveillance.
And if you care, the stated timeline (which is practically meaningless, since BushCO is sure to refuse this) is three weeks:
The deadline for providing the Committee the information is July 18.
Update: Indie Voter made an important point. Either this is a bipartisan action, or Orrin Hatch has snuck away and joined the Democratic Party, along with Chuck Grassley and Arlen Specter. Because those three Republicans voted along with all the Democrats on the Committee in favor of the subpoenas.
Update II: From TPMM, the subpoena requires the testimony of four people:
That’s nice, for several reasons. First, it gives us a chance to hold individual people in contempt, rather than just get cranky as we have been doing with the DOJ subpoena. And if they refuse to testify, it means we can hold people in contempt of court.
Plus, as I repeat all too often, David Addington was my favorite witness from the Libby trial. You think they’d be willing to invite Fitzgerald in to do the questioning? Because then you’d all get to see on CSPAN what I keep babbling about.
Though my best guess is they’ll come and repeat over and over and over and over "deliberations in the executive" and "classified program." Besides Bolten, of course, who will have the convenient excuse that most of the fun precedes his tenure at the position.
Update III: Kickass!! I just remembered something, as I looked at the subpoena. I was bemoaning the fact that David Addington could just invoke Attorney-Client privilege and say exactly nothing.
Except that he’s no longer Cheney’s Counsel (thanks to PatFitz for the indirect assist). As Cheney’s Chief of Staff, I’d imagine he’d have things to say about what he’s been up to for the last year and a half…
I get the feeling that someone in the White House told OVP that their claim to be a Fourth Branch of government carried some serious risk to the White House. After all, if Cheney now claims he’s not in the Executive Branch, then he’s got to hand over the Energy Task Force documents, right?
So now David Addington has revised his rationale, claiming that OVP is simply not an agency.
"Dear Senator Kerry," Addington writes. "The executive order onclassified national security information — Executive Order 12958 asamended in 2003 — makes clear that the Vice President is treated likethe President and distinguishes the two of them from ‘agencies.’"
No longer satisfied with the Vice President’s office’s claim thatCheney is actually an admixture between the legislative and executivebranch, Addington now posits that the Vice President’s office is not an"agency."
"The executive order gives the [Information Security OversightOffice], under the supervision of the Archivist of the United States,responsibility to oversee certain activities of ‘agencies,’ but not ofthe Vice President or the President."
Luckily, we can revert to Clinton for clear language as to what an "agency" is in the relevant Executive Order:
   (i) "Agency" means any "Executive agency," as defined in 5 U.S.C.105, and any other entity within the executive branch that comes intothe possession of classified information. [my emphasis]
Bush adds a bit to Clinton’s clear language when he amends the EO in 2003. But there’s still that funny clause encompassing any entity within the executive branch that comes into possession of classified information.
   (b) "Agency" means any "Executive agency," as defined in 5 U.S.C. 105; any "Military department" as defined in 5 U.S.C. 102; and any other entity within the executive branch that comes into the possession of classified information.[my emphasis]
So either Addington is still relying on the "not within the executive branch" gag, or he’s making an even more ridiculous argument than Clinton made about his blow job.
And I bet Clinton’s blow job was a lot more fun than the one Addington is giving us.
I did some coverage of the cynical games Steve Griles played to try to get the 5 months prison time turned into a bunch of community service for his own fake non-profit. I suspected such games would not go over well with Judge Huvelle–who, after all, is the one who tacked 3 months on top of Bob Ney’s plea agreement because of his violation of the trust of public service.
So I’m not surprised she went tough on the cynical Griles, doubling the prison time in his plea agreement.
"You held a position of trust as number two in the Department ofInterior and I will hold you to the highest standard," she told Griles."I find that even now you continue to minimize and try to excuse yourconduct and the nature of your misstatements."
Good for Huvelle–Griles not only lied to the Senate, but he sold away our nation’s resources to his closest friends, the resource industry.
I’m curious whether getting a harsh sentence might make Griles think seriously about cooperating on the other, more serious side of the affairs he’s involved in. He is surely a subject of interest in the investigation into the royalties games that DOI played, not least since he Read more →
The Family Jewels are online now, and page 27 confirms something that should have been obvious. Under the Celotex II program, Brit Hume came under CIA surveillance during the time he worked for Jack Anderson, who was often under surveillance.
So who will be the first enterprising Fox guest to ask Hume whether he believes, along with all the wingnuts of the world, that only bad people come under illegal government surveillance?
Or did the government surveillance find something, um, compromising, which is why Hume is such a favorite interviewer every time the Republican elite has something awkward to disclose?
Here’s the best part of Waxman’s latest letter to Fred Fielding.
I respectfully request that the interviews that the Committee has beenseeking be scheduled without further delay. If this cannot beaccomplished, I will recommend to the Committee the issuance ofsubpoenas at our next business meeting, which is currently scheduledfor June 28. [my emphasis]
It’s a nice touch. A two day deadline, at a time when the WH has ducked most of the scrutiny relating to Cheney’s latest power grab to be a Fourth Branch. Yeah, it sucks that the original deadling was sometime in early April. But Waxman’s use of the media cycle is definitely worthy of someone who represents Hollywood.
And here’s my second favorite part of Waxman’s letter:
I do not doubt your good faith in proposing that the Committee considerinterviews with other White House officials before seeking testimonyfrom Mr. Card. But it has now been over two months and the Committeestill has not been able to arrange an interview with Alan Swendiman,the Director of the Office of Administration; Mark Frownfelter, aformer White House security officer; and Jeff Thompson, the formerDirector of the White House Security Office. This continued delay isimpeding the Committee’s inquiry and is not in the nation’s interest.[my emphasis]
I’m Read more →
Because today, on the eve of the WaPo’s revelations about Cheney’s first-hand intervention in Department of Interior policies, such a Subcommittee met in secret (how else!!) for the first time. Who ever said these thugs don’t have a sense of irony?
The actual mandate is not–as it might seem, given the title–to fulfill Cheney’s every need. Rather, it’s supposed to study:
The extent to which existing procedures and processes for reporting and accounting for federal and Indian mineral revenues are sufficient to ensure that the Minerals Management Service receives the correct amount.
The audit, compliance and enforcement procedures and processes of the Minerals Management Service to determine if they are adequate to ensure that mineral companies are complying with existing statutes, lease terms, and regulations as they pertain to payment of royalties.
The operations of the Royalty in Kind program to ensure that adequate policies, procedures and controls are in place to ensure that decisions to take federal oil and gas royalties in kind result in net benefits to the American people.
In other words, it’s supposed to fix the processes that resulted in DOI giving away our oil resources to the lowest bidder. (Who ever said these thugs don’t have impeccable business sense?)
Given that the Subcommittee appears to be going to great lengths to avoid any kind of transparency, however, it’s not clear the Subcommittee will really find the best solution to the problem. Every time this Administration’s DOI has hidden its work, it has resulted in still more cronies walking away with our nation’s resource wealth. Which, if you think about it, is almost the same thing as fulfilling Cheney’s every need.
Paul Kiel has an important post on vote caging that raises one big question for me.
Kiel’s post quotes the RNC spokesperson as connecting the vote caging activities in Florida with allegations about ACORN registration drives.
In response to Palast’s story, the Republican spokeswoman denied ina statement that the list had been generated in order to challengevoters. But she went on to argue that Jacksonville “has been affectedby massive fraud efforts this year as a result of the work of ACORN, athird party organization supporting the Kerry campaign and theDemocrats.â€
One of the wonderful prevarications offered by Brad Schlozman is that the ACORN investigation–which in MO found almost nothing and was self-reported–is national.
You’ll recall that Brad Schlozman indicted 4 former ACORN workers (oneof whose name he got wrong) for submitting fraudulent voter reginformation. Well, he strongly suggested that the indictments were notpart of a national investigation (a few Senators hammered him on thispoint–suggesting that, since the investigation was not national, itshouldn’t have been filed before the election). But, at the same time,Schlozman indicated over and over again that the investigation is national.
Does anyone get the feeling that a specious investigation into ACORN is serving as the basis for caging nationwide? Anyone have details Read more →
David Shuster (and to a lesser degree Chris Matthews) is the one person in the MSM who recognized Dick Cheney for what he was early on. Which is why Shuster’s interview of Cheney-hack Ron Christie is so good. Shuster uses the Libby case to expose the problems with Cheney’s method of working around other cabinet members and he smacks Christie down, just as I would have done, by pointing out that Cheney probably ordered Libby to leak Plame’s identity.
But I’d like to highlight how Christie justified Cheney’s theories of the Fourth Branch of government.
The fact of the matter is that the Vice President of the United States is the one person who is in a position to give candid advice to the President of the United States. He wants to ensure that there are certain barriers that are not overcome by those who just want to poke around and look for the sake of looking. There needs to be a certain amount of candor that that individual can have when advising the President.
This is my transcription, so I could be wrong. But I’m pretty sure that Christie claimed that Cheney was the only one who could give Bush candid Read more →