May 15, 2007

Making Ashcroft look like an ACLU member by comparison

As part of the NSA’s warrantless-search program, which allowed domestic surveillance without court approval, the Justice Department had to sign off on the program every 45 days. Over a year ago, the NYT reported on a fascinating development that occurred in early 2004 — then-Attorney General John Ashcroft was in the hospital with pancreatitis and his power had been transferred to his deputy, James Comey. When it came time to sign off on the warrantless searches, Comey balked, insisting that they were illegal.

Andy Card, then-WH Chief of Staff, and Alberto Gonzales, then-WH Counsel, literally went to Ashcroft’s hospital room, shortly after his surgery, to get him to approve the program and override Comey’s decision. As Paul Kiel explained, we learned some stunning details about what transpired this morning, when Comey testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The deadline for the Justice Department’s providing its sign-off of the program was March 11th (the program required reauthorization every 45 days). On that day, Comey, then the acting AG, informed the White House that he “would not certify the legality” of the program.

According to Comey, he was on his way home when he got a call from Ashcroft’s wife that Alberto Gonzales and Andrew Card were on their way to the hospital [according to Comey, the call to Ashcroft’s wife that Gonzales and Card were on their way to the hospital came from the president himself]. Comey then rushed to the hospital (sirens blaring) to beat them there and thwart “an effort to overrule me.”

After Comey arrived at the hospital with a group of senior Justice Department officials, Gonzales and Card arrived and walked up to Ashcroft, who was lying barely conscious on his hospital bed. “Gonzales began to explain why he was there, to seek his approval for a matter,” Comey testified.

Ashcroft, still weak from surgery, rebuffed Card and Gonzales, saying they’d have to deal with Comey because, at that moment, he had all the power of the Attorney General.

Card then called Comey to the principal’s office the White House.

After meeting with Justice Department officials at the Justice Department, Comey went to the White House with Ted Olson, then the Solicitor General to the White House. He brought Olson along, Comey said, because he wanted a witness for the meeting.

But Card didn’t let Olson enter and Comey had a private discussion with Card. This discussion, Comey testified, was much “calmer.” According to Comey, Card was concerned about reports that there were to be large numbers of resignations at Justice Department. Gonzales entered with Olson and the four had an apparently not very fruitful discussion.

The program was reauthorized without the signature of the attorney general. Because of that, Comey said, he prepared a letter of resignation. “I believed that I couldn’t stay if the administration was going to engage in conduct that Justice Department said had no legal basis.”

Got that? The surveillance was already underway without court approval, and then the White House decided it didn’t need the Justice Department either. The NSA program, at that point, was operating purely because the president said it could, despite the objections of the acting Attorney General.

Two other thoughts to consider:

1. I never thought I’d say it, but Gonzales has managed to make Ashcroft look like a man of integrity and principle.

2. Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) responded to Comey’s story by asking again how how Gonzales could remain as the AG, since he evidently had so little respect for the rule of law.

 
Discussion

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

16 Comments
1.
On May 15th, 2007 at 3:05 pm, just bill said:

it’s too bad this information didn’t come out when gonzo was being confirmed for a.g.

2.
On May 15th, 2007 at 3:07 pm, Racerx said:

Impeach them.

NOW.

3.
On May 15th, 2007 at 3:12 pm, Bugboy said:

I’m gonna go out on a limb here. At the time this all happened, wasn’t Fitz’s investigation well underway, hadn’t Ashcroft recused himself, hadn’t Ashcroft already been chomping on Goodling’s “brownies” and thus had plenty to be feeling guilty about without the WH from piling more demands on him to fudge the lines of legality?

I say “hogwash” to Ashcroft suddenly finding his conscience, I think he was trying to keep from getting buried any deeper than he was. The whole crew ought to be indicted for pulling a back door on Comey. And Ashcroft should have been there filing it, had he any conscience.

4.
On May 15th, 2007 at 3:14 pm, Edo said:

Impeach them.

Certainly Gonzalez. Why not?

5.
On May 15th, 2007 at 3:30 pm, TuiMel said:

I read somewhere that Bush gave Comey the nickname “Cuomo” to demonstrate his derision for Comey’s unwillingness to simply fall in line with all the Boy King wanted.

I’m guessing Dubya is not a happy camper today. There seems to be nothing that these despicable jerks find to be beneath them.

6.
On May 15th, 2007 at 3:40 pm, bjobotts said:

Doesn’t this mean the WH was acting in violation of the law and isn’t that a criminal offense. Am I missing something here or did Comey’s testimony just incriminate Bush and Gonzales? Can charges be brought for these incidents. If so this is a great day…Bush and Gonzales can be indicted finally and Falwell is dead and joins his maker. Accountability all around.

7.
On May 15th, 2007 at 3:46 pm, ROTFLMLiberalAO said:

Schumer responded to Comey’s story by asking again how Gonzales could remain as the AG, since he evidently had so little respect for the rule of law.

Gonzo hangs on because Bush has so little respect for the law…

You might as well ask:

How can Wolfie remain as the World Bank president, since he evidently had so little respect for the rule of law?

Same answer:
Wolfie hangs on because Bush has so little respect for the law…

The corruption ALL traces upwards.
It begins with Bush.
It ends with Bush.
There is no other way to parse it.

You say you don’t want to impeach Bush?
Fine.
Then enjoy the corruption.
Seep in it.
Sleep in it.
Sex with it.
Watch your country drown in it.

The hard truth is just this:
The nation has only two choices,
Continued corruption or Impeachment.

And it looks to me like it has decided on 16 more months of corruption…

8.
On May 15th, 2007 at 4:29 pm, PW said:

Man! I’ve just been reading the transcript at Salon and it was chilling.

A busy morning kept me in my car much of the time, tied to AM radiio and particularly to a local talk show. Rick Smith was interviewed about his research into current NSA data-mining and, well, speaking of chilling! The program he’s produced for Frontline comes on tonight, on PBS. At one point either he or the host said (my paraphrase), “We’re closer to losing both our privacy and our legal protections…” and “Yes, there will be innocent Americans caught by this…”

9.
On May 15th, 2007 at 4:34 pm, Bugboy said:

And it looks to me like it has decided on 16 more months of corruption…

Comment by ROTFLMLiberalAO — 5/15/2007 @ 3:46 pm

Followed by who knows how many years of corruption by whatever party wins the WH in 2008, because the riches piled up by the Bush Administration are just too good to pass up. Hence, impeachment is off the table, because that would mean the toybox would have to go away.

10.
On May 15th, 2007 at 5:52 pm, Racerx said:

OK, here’s a weird news item:

The Bush administration is keeping a tight hold on Donald Rumsfeld’s resignation letter nearly five months after the former defense secretary and Iraq war manager stepped down.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070515/ts_nm/usa_rumsfeld_letter_dc_1

Smells fishy, but WTF could possibly be the issue? Did he resign because he was a DC madam client?

11.
On May 15th, 2007 at 6:16 pm, Gene said:

I’ve followed politics for over 40 years and I’ve never seen such baldfaced ineptitude and corruption, in any administration…ever.

These people make the Nixon gang look like rank amateurs, and make the impeachment of Clinton even more of a joke than it was in the first place.

How they’ll ever make it until 2008 without somebody being impeached or doing time is beyond my comprehension.

12.
On May 15th, 2007 at 6:54 pm, beckya57 said:

I’m not a fan of impeaching Bush or Cheney, for a number of reasons, but I think there’s real value in considering impeaching Gonzales and Rove. There would be a lot more pressure on the WH to cooperate than there is now, and we might have some hope of getting to the bottom of all these messes. The status quo makes it pretty likely that they’ll be able to run out the clock, and get away scot-free (apologies for the excessive metaphors there).

13.
On May 15th, 2007 at 6:55 pm, beckya57 said:

Racerx: I think it’s just force of habit. These guys hide and lie as a way of life. They just don’t know any other way of being.

14.
On May 15th, 2007 at 7:56 pm, republicansscareme said:

We need to spread the Word that the Republican Party has become the Nazi Party.

15.
On May 15th, 2007 at 10:46 pm, Al B Tross said:

RacerX , I think impeachment is too easy for these traitors. But lets give them their due process, more than they give a Gitmo detainee, and then prosecute the rat bastards for Treason and War Crimes.
The Republican party has turned , technicaly, Fascist. Corporate Fascism is the greatest threat facing us, it is fueling the West-V-East conflict, profiting all the way. All our current woes, global warming, perpetual war, vanishing resources and overpopulation can be directly attributed to the Corporate mindset.
We must relenquish our bonds to rampant Capitalism , if we want the human democratic endeavor to survive.

Leave a Reply

The following tags are allowed in comments: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>

Commenters should familiarize themselves with this site's commenting policies.