October 26, 2007

The White House holds surveillance materials hostage

The ongoing White House push for retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies continues unabated, with the Bush gang using secret documents about the NSA warrantless-search program as a bargaining chip.

Except, when it comes to the House, the president’s team isn’t even negotiating.

Neither the House Intelligence Committee nor the House Judiciary Committee has been shown the documents. Mr. Fratto noted that a bill pending in the House contained no provision for immunity from lawsuits and suggested that unless that changed, the House committees would not see the documents.

“If the committees say they have no interest in legislating on the issue of liability protection, we have no reason to accommodate them,” he said.

The White House keeps saying that, and it astounds me every time.

The House Intelligence Committee and Judiciary Committee, both of which have oversight duties over the administration, have subpoenaed materials related to the legally-dubious surveillance program. The White House will ignore the subpoenas, unless House Dems agree in advance to take up a bill granting telecoms amnesty for laws they broke in 2001.

Marty Lederman’s take was spot-on.

In other words, there is no longer any real or even pretextual justification for denying the documents to the House — except that the Administration wishes to preserve their secrecy for use as leverage to secure immunity from wrongdoing.

Think about that for a second: The Administration is willing to let telecom officials and technicians in on these state secrets — as well as members of Congress who are open to the possibility of cutting a deal with the Administration — but refuses to allow even the House Intelligence committee to know what the nation’s operational “law” of surveillance has been for the past six years. And the only reason for such “selective” classification is to secure political advantage in a negotiation over possible immunizing legislation.

Yep, it’s that ridiculous.

As for the Senate, because retroactive telecom immunity is already moving in the upper chamber, the White House is willing to meet some of its disclosure obligations.

The White House on Thursday offered to share secret documents on the National Security Agency’s domestic surveillance program with the Senate Judiciary Committee, a step toward possible compromise on eavesdropping legislation.

Fred F. Fielding, the White House counsel, offered to show the documents to Senator Patrick J. Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, the committee’s chairman; Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, the ranking Republican on the committee; and staff members with the necessary security clearances, said Tony Fratto, a White House spokesman.

Mr. Fratto said that if Mr. Leahy and Mr. Specter so wished, other committee members would be granted clearances for the N.S.A. program and permitted to see the documents. A spokeswoman for Mr. Leahy, Erica Chabot, said he would make sure the entire committee had access.

Apparently all it takes to gain White House cooperation is four months of subpoenas and progress on a measure to let telecom companies off the hook for violating the law at the Bush administration’s behest. Good to know.

 
Discussion

What do you think? Leave a comment. Alternatively, write a post on your own weblog; this blog accepts trackbacks.

10 Comments
1.
On October 26th, 2007 at 2:35 pm, JKap said:

America’s been took.

9/11 is wielded by the NeoCons as the primary instrument of Tyranny. And the Democrats do nothing to stand in their way, despite a mandate, despite the will of the majority of the people.

“Government of the people, by the people, for the people…” is perishing from the Earth.

Yet the Democratic leadership equivocates –and there is some discernible difference between the two parties? Tyranny is Tyranny regardless of the ideology of the tyrant(s) –or of those who are complicit in its ascension.

But you shouldn’t listen to me. I voted for Ralph Nader. So this is all partly my fault.

2.
On October 26th, 2007 at 2:35 pm, BobPM said:

Senator Rockefeller apparently got access to the documents also and was convinced he should add the immunity provision. I wonder why if they are so convincing that the administration does not release the documents to everyone. The following is from a press release on Jay Rockefeller’s web site:

“One of the provisions included in the Senate Intelligence Committee’s FISA bill is retroactive telecommunications immunity which recognizes that private companies complied with requests for information that were certified as legal. The Senate Intelligence Committee received documents related to the telecommunications companies many months ago. Those documents helped Senator Rockefeller and other members of the committee determine that immunity is necessary and justified.”

3.
On October 26th, 2007 at 2:40 pm, Rambuncle said:

Those documents helped Senator Rockefeller and other members of the committee determine that immunity is necessary and justified.

In other words; the telecoms definitely broke the law, and a lot of contributions are on the line if they don’t get immunity.

4.
On October 26th, 2007 at 2:43 pm, kanopsis said:

Nancy FUCKING Pelosi, put impeachment back on the table! Impeach cheney and bush and send them to the Hague.

5.
On October 26th, 2007 at 2:47 pm, citizen_pain said:

So when the FUCK is the Sgt. At Arms, or whoever it is that enforces the rules of the legislatures, going to ARREST THESE MOTHERFUCKERS FOR CONTEMPT!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

6.
On October 26th, 2007 at 2:48 pm, Anne said:

Here’s what I don’t get: what is this business of the WH “offering” to share the information on the program – why aren’t they being required to provide the information? And why isn’t the Congress just telling the WH to pound sand – that until they get to see as much information as they think they need to, the WH can have all the temper tantrums it wants, but there will be no deals.

The WH wants to justify the retroactive immunity by saying that the telecoms were told that the surveillance program had been certified legal, but – important point, here – by whom? The WH’s OLC, and no outside deliberative body? Hey, do you think the legal departments of these telecoms just said, “oh, okay – if you say it’s legal, no problem?”

This is just not acceptable – not from the WH, not from the Congress, not from the telecoms that have already been found guilty of breaking the law and now want a way out.

This WH is a massive criminal operation, from top to bottom.

7.
On October 26th, 2007 at 4:32 pm, ROTF said:

The White House doth protest to much.

Obviously conclusion:
Corporate agents of the White House (telcos) have violated the Constitutional rights of 1000s of Americans. They desperately need retroactive immunity to whitewash the crimes.

My prediction is that the Dems will cave.
Here are three reasons why:

1) Dems don’t want to be seen as an “angry” party using their majority to play “politics.”
2) Some Dems actually believe the war-that-creates-more-terror trumps Constitutional rights.
3) Some Dems get lots of money from telco companies, both legally and in slush funds…

Because the Dems will cave the transgressions will go unpunished.
Because the transgressions go unpunished they will happen again.
Only worse.
Much worse.
That’s the way it always happens:

When you lower the standards of acceptable behavior you generate more unacceptable behavior.
(Any good schoolteacher knows this…)

You either stand tall and defend the Constitution or you don’t.
You either honor your oath or you don’t.

If the oaths to the Constitution by our elected representatives are just pieces of tissue…
Why should an oath made by anyone anywhere be any different?

You want a culture that lies and cheats with impunity?

Then:
1) Grant proactive immunity to folks found guilty by juries (Libby).
2) Grant retroactive immunity to folks not yet found guilty of crimes!

You can’t wag your finger “NO” at lawless behavior henceforward.
You have no moral authority.
You are a fraud, a failure, and a phony.

All this…
Seems fairly obvious to me.

8.
On October 26th, 2007 at 4:59 pm, OkieFromMuskogee said:

JKap: This is partly your fault if you voted for Ralph Nader in 2000 in Florida.

Some of my relatives in Connecticut voted for Nader in 2000. I don’t blame them a bit, because Gore carried Connecticut by a wide margin.

9.
On October 26th, 2007 at 8:29 pm, Jen Flowers said:

So have the FBI and CIA been spying on Congress? Why else would these pathetic little whimps be backing down?