Author Topic: Signature moment  (Read 693 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Lanya

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3300
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Signature moment
« on: May 19, 2007, 01:07:43 AM »
Gonzales's Signature Moment
__

By Eugene Robinson
Saturday, May 19, 2007; Page A17

It just gets worse and worse. We already knew that Alberto Gonzales -- who, unbelievably, remains our attorney general -- was willing to construe the Constitution and the Geneva Conventions however George W. Bush and Dick Cheney wanted. We knew he was willing to politicize the Justice Department, if that was what the White House wanted. Now we learn that Gonzales also was willing to accost a seriously ill man in his hospital room to get his signature on a dodgy justification for unprecedented domestic surveillance.

The man Gonzales harried on his sickbed was his predecessor as attorney general, John Ashcroft. The episode-- recounted this week in congressional testimony by Ashcroft's former deputy, James Comey -- sounds like something from Hollywood, not Washington. It's hard not to think of that scene in "The Godfather" when Don Corleone is left alone in his hospital bed, vulnerable to his enemies, and Michael has to save him.
   

Douglas W. Kmiec:
Testimony in a Teacup

Michael Gerson:
Tony Blair's Unshaken Logic

Charles Krauthammer:
Prelude to the Six Days

Sebastian Mallaby:
Finishing What Wolfowitz Started

E. J. Dionne Jr.:
The GOP's Crisis of Faith

Today's Editorials

Think Tank Town | On Faith | PostGlobal
Who's Blogging?
Read what bloggers are saying about this article.

    * The Spencerian


Full List of Blogs (1 links) »

Most Blogged About Articles
On washingtonpost.com | On the web

Save & Share Article   What's This?
Digg
Google

del.icio.us
Yahoo!

Reddit
Facebook

It was the night of March 10, 2004. Several days earlier, Ashcroft had been stricken with a severe case of pancreatitis and was rushed to George Washington University Hospital, where his gallbladder was removed and he was placed in intensive care. Ashcroft's wife had banned all visitors and phone calls.

Ashcroft's illness came amid a fight between the White House and the Justice Department over the program of warrantless domestic electronic surveillance that Bush had authorized after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Justice had reviewed the program and expressed doubts about its legality.

Comey, serving as acting attorney general because of Ashcroft's illness, refused to sign off on a reauthorization of the program until changes were made. The night before the current authorization was to expire, Comey said, he was being driven home when he got a call from Ashcroft's chief of staff, who had just heard from Ashcroft's wife that Gonzales, then serving as White House counsel, and White House chief of staff Andrew Card were on their way to the hospital. They wanted to get the ailing Ashcroft to overrule Comey and sign the reauthorization.

Comey ordered his driver to turn around and managed to get to the hospital first. Rather than wait for the elevator, he ran up the stairs. "And Mrs. Ashcroft was standing by the hospital bed," he testified, "Mr. Ashcroft was lying down in the bed, the room was darkened. And I immediately began speaking to him, trying to orient him as to time and place, and try to see if he could focus on what was happening, and it wasn't clear to me that he could. He seemed pretty bad off."

Gonzales was carrying an envelope when he and Card arrived. Gonzales told Ashcroft they were there "to seek his approval for a matter," Comey recalled. Ashcroft refused to sign anything, told them why and said that, in any event, Comey was the acting attorney general with the full powers of the office.

"I was very upset," Comey said. "I was angry. I thought I just witnessed an effort to take advantage of a very sick man."

Now let's fast-forward a couple of years -- to February 2006, after the secret surveillance program had become public. Gonzales, testifying before Congress, said there had been no serious disagreement within the administration about the legality of conducting such widespread electronic eavesdropping without seeking court warrants.

In fact, there was nearly an insurrection. Comey and other high-ranking Justice Department officials threatened to resign if the White House continued the surveillance program as it then was constituted. "Mr. Ashcroft's chief of staff asked me something that meant a great deal to him," Comey testified this week, "and that is that I not resign until Mr. Ashcroft was well enough to resign with me." Ultimately, Bush and Cheney agreed to modifications that addressed Justice's concerns.

Gonzales's testimony in 2006 was that officials expressed no reservations that "dealt with the program that we are talking about today." Presumably he was being extraordinarily careful with his words -- "the program that we are talking about today" had already been modified, two years earlier, to avoid what threatened to become a Wednesday Night Massacre. Before those changes, the attorney general neglected to tell Congress, the program had caused a legal riot.

That must be the umpteenth time we know of that Gonzales blatantly misled Congress and the American people. If, as expected, the Senate passes a resolution next week expressing no confidence in Gonzales, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for Bush to do the right thing. After all, Gonzales is just following the president's orders.

The image I can't get out of my head is of Alberto Gonzales carrying a document for Ashcroft's signature into the man's hospital room, attempting a sneaky end-run around the deputy whom Ashcroft left in charge of the department, knowing full well that Ashcroft was seriously ill and almost certainly medicated. What did he intend to do, guide the man's hand?

This is the attorney general of the United States, ladies and gentlemen. Heaven help us.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/18/AR2007051801394.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
Planned Parenthood is America’s most trusted provider of reproductive health care.

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16143
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Signature moment
« Reply #1 on: May 19, 2007, 11:29:28 AM »
Counterpoint:

Both editorials would be more accurate (if less forceful) if they noted that the Office of Legal Counsel of the DoJ had, for the previous two and a half years, endorsed the NSA program - it was a change in the lawyers (from Yoo to Goldsmith at OLC) that precipitated this mini-drama, not a change in the program.


I will propose two thought experiments:

1.  A Wall Street firm has a reasonably complicated financing structure requiring legal opinions; a typical deal takes about two months to come together, and the firm has done twenty such deals with the blessing of their outside counsel.

Now comes the twenty-first deal, and the law firm informs the Wall Street financiers, forty-eight hours before the scheduled close, that they can't sign the legal opinion.  Has the relevant law changed?  Nooo.  Has the financing structure changed?  Nooo.  But a new partner at the law firm has looked at the structure and wants the deal tweaked slightly before he can sign off on it.

Take my word for it - there would be Hades to pay for this, and serious questions would be raised about the professionalism and timing of the law firm.  Bring the problem sooner, or bring it for the twenty-second deal, but being obstructive at the last minute is not acceptable.

Or let's try an example closer to home for the Times and WaPo editors here - suppose their law firms came to them and informed them that, although no laws had changed, a new partner was worried about some privacy issues, so the Times would have to suspend its website in 48 hours or face dire legal risks.

I promise you - blood would flow at the Times, or wherever it was they finally found tracked down the new lawyer with the new problem.

For my money, Comey's behavior was a joke - he was warned on a Thursday a week ahead of time of a problem with DoJ recertifying the NSA program, sat on the bad news for five days, then sprang it on Gonzalez on Tuesday for a recertification expected on Thursday.

OK, I'll grant that Ashcroft's unexpected illness may have muddled the process - Ashcroft may have planned to meet with Gonzalez on Friday and instead woke up in a hospital.  However, nothing in Comey's story suggested he alerted Gonzalez over the weekend or on Monday, and there is a mysterious void in the Wednesday timeline - per Comey, nothing happened all day and then that night Gonzalez rushed to the hospital.  Puzzling at best, derelict at worst.

http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2007/05/gonzalez_no_dis.html

Lanya

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3300
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Signature moment
« Reply #2 on: May 19, 2007, 03:21:23 PM »
We don't know for sure which program all the to-do was over, do we?

From Laura Rozen:
Check out Anonymous Liberal on a little noticed 2006 US News & World Report story on FBI Director Mueller's role in allegedly pushing back against the administration on warrantless domestic spying and searches on Americans. I've also speculated that Mueller's presence with Comey in the Ashcroft hospital room drama possibly signals that the component of the program that troubled Comey was not the NSA run Terrorism Surveillance Program per se, but FBI run, in other words, that it was about systematically spying on Americans without warrants, as an outgrowth of the Terrorist Surveillance Program.

Update: A friend sends this along from a chat with Post reporter Dana Priest yesterday:

    Brookline, Mass.: Why is it that the FBI, rather than the NSA, figures so prominently in the wiretap testimony?

        Dana Priest: Because it's the FBI that requests wiretaps.
       The NSA carried those requests out. It's the justification for the wiretaps that
       has been under scrutiny lately and those came from the FBI.

But my sense is that it was the NSA surveillance itself that identified targets for further surveillance. In other words, the calls from targets abroad - non US persons who enjoy no protection under US law from NSA surveillance -- to US persons (who ordinarily under the FISA law would enjoy protection from warrantless surveillance) that identified the US persons to target for further surveillance. And then, who those US persons communicated with, and who those people communicated with. ... It was the communications themselves -- the fact that X called Y, Y called A, B, C; A called D, E, F; D called etc. etc. -- that identified who to target. If the FBI knew who to target before the NSA surveillance spit out tens of thousands of phone numbers, it would be easy enough to get a warrant, right?
http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/006141.html
Planned Parenthood is America’s most trusted provider of reproductive health care.

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16143
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Signature moment
« Reply #3 on: May 19, 2007, 05:47:21 PM »
One would think the questioners of Comey would have been a bit more specific about which program was being discussed. We do know that whatever program it was was up for reauthorization on the Thursday after Ashcroft was hospitalized. and we know it was the program that Bush ordered Comey and Mueller to incorporate whatever objections were into the newly authorized program.

Not sure where they get that Bush broke the law as the Wapo editorial speculated.