White House, Cheney's office subpoenaed for papers in wiretapping probe (Update From AP)

[kpete]

White House, Cheney's office subpoenaed for papers in wiretapping probe

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19113455

and just now on CNN

Senate committee issues subpoenas for NSA spying documents. AP reports:

The Senate Judiciary Committee subpoenaed the White House and Vice President Dick Cheney’s office Wednesday for documents relating to President Bush’s warrant-free eavesdropping program.

Also named in subpoenas signed by committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., were the Justice Department and the National Security Council.

The committee wants documents that might shed light on internal squabbles within the administration over the legality of the program, said a congressional official speaking on condition of anonymity because the subpoenas had not been made public.

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/06/27/senate-committee-issues-subpoenas-for-nsa-spying-documents/

[WCGreen]

1. IF they refuse the subpoena...

That could be grounds for starting impeachment proceedings...

[Tara_NM]

15. I hope they refuse it so...

...that we can get these fuckers impeached once and for all! Get Bush and Cheney out of there and lets have Nancy Pelosi run things until the 2008 election.

[garybeck]

17. I don't think so, it would just send it to the courts which are stacked.

Impeachment hearings requires congress which seems set on NOT having them.

[Raven]

2. Fine, now they better be ready to enforce those orders or

the whole exercise is useless, for show.

[Individualist]

5. Exactly!

[MiniMe]

10. The only thing they can do is hold them in contempt

And the justice department would have to enforce it. And the Dems would be accused of going on another fishing expedition, that if they could get the answers, would reveal a whopper of a fish.

I think they should issue the subpeona, but there isn't much they can do to enforce it.

[ljm2002]

18. There are two kinds of Contempt of Congress...

...the usual one is enforced by DOJ and the other one (sorry not up on the exact terms) is enforced by Congress's own Sergeant At Arms. Unfortunately, it also limits any potential incarceration to expire at the end of the Congressional term. But hey, that's still 18 months or so -- point being, there is something they can do to enforce that does not involve DOJ.

[Ganja Ninja]

3. If only he could claim executive privilege.

:rofl:

[MiniMe]

11. He decided that he really was part of the executive branch after Rahm

threatened to cut off funding, and scheduled a vote on it.

[acmavm]

4. Got this article when I clicked on the link...

The list: Journalists who wrote political checks
And their explanations, from ‘Yikes!’ to ‘They’re all in somebody’s pocket’

Investigative reporter
MSNBC
Updated: 4:21 p.m. CT June 25, 2007

A correction has been added to this article.


MSNBC.com investigative reporter Bill Dedman
Bill Dedman
Investigative reporter
• Profile
• E-mail

The following 143 journalists made campaign contributions from 2004 through the first quarter of 2007, according to Federal Election Commission records studied by MSNBC.com.

Key:

(D) contributed to Democrats or liberal causes.

(R) to Republicans and conservative causes.

Click on "details" next to each name to see the amounts and what the journalists have to say.

[ellenfl]

7. is that the same list of unknowns and/or sports

reporters from last week? i want to see the list of the big talking heads, not some home and garden columnist from east shebeebee.

i just went back and scanned the list. not only are there lots of arts/sports/food editors listed but i bet they could do another check and come up with a list that is slanted to the right. do we know if that list shows every 'journalist' who has contributed to a campaign?

ellen fl

[acmavm]

8. Nah. Joe Scarbarough is on there. Don't know who else, haven't

had time to read it.

[originalpckelly]

6. I just want to ask one question:

When was the last time that someone claimed executive privilege, whether a Democratic or Republican president, and wasn't up to something dirty?

You know they'll do it.

[guitar man]

9. If he refuses to comply with the subponea

Then they need to send the Sgt At Arms and company over there to clap the cuffs on and haul his ass in. Enough of this shit!! :grr:

[zabet]

12. Trucks like these are probably working

overtime right now.

[BlueStater]

13. Now the bastard will reject the subpoena and that's the last we'll ever hear of it

I hope they prove me wrong but I'm not optimistic.

[corkhead]

14. I don't believe the BFEE is going to announce to us all that we now live in a dictatorship,

How this plays out is going to help us connect the dots, one way or another.

[originalpckelly]

16. Interesting.

I think we're getting closer to the time when they will have to play their hand. The 2008 elections and these subpoenas are crucial to them staying in power and have their secrecy. They will have to be more public in their abuse of power and law breaking to keep this.

Either they will hand over the material, signifying their willingness to play by the rules, or they will hide it, and as the challenges to that progress up the legal ladder, they will come closer and closer to the time when they have to do something overt to stop it.

[wicket]

19. K & R

:kick:

[L. Coyote]

20. Statement from Leahy's Website = Press Release and PDFs Subpooena Packets

Senate Judiciary Committee Issues Subpoenas
For Legal Basis Of Bush Administration’s
Domestic Surveillance Program
http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200706/062707a.html


WASHINGTON (Wednesday, June 27) – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), in consultation with Ranking Member Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), issued subpoenas Wednesday for documents relating to the authorization and legal justification for the Administration's warrantless wiretapping program.

Chairman Leahy issued subpoenas to the Department of Justice, the Office of the White House, the Office of the Vice President and the National Security Council for documents relating to the Committee’s inquiry into the warrantless electronic surveillance program. 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 Justice’s Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) relating to the surveillance.

“Over the past 18 months, this Committee has made no fewer than nine formal requests to the Department of Justice and to the White House, seeking information and documents about the authorization of and legal justification for this program,” Chairman Leahy wrote in letters accompanying the subpoenas to Bush Administration officials. “All requests have been rebuffed. Our attempts to obtain information through testimony of Administration witnesses have been met with a consistent pattern of evasion and misdirection.”

“There is no legitimate argument for withholding the requested materials from this Committee,” Leahy wrote. “The Administration cannot thwart the Congress’s conduct of its constitutional duties with sweeping assertions of secrecy and privilege. The Committee seeks no intimate operational facts and we are willing to accommodate legitimate redactions of the documents we seek to eliminate reference to these details.”

Last week the Committee, in a bipartisan vote of 13-3, authorized Chairman Leahy to issue subpoenas for documents and information related to the domestic surveillance program. The Committee has requested the legal justification for the program several times since it was first revealed in December 2005. The deadline for providing the Committee the information is July 18.

# # # # #

Subpoena packet for documents from the White House, sent via Fred Fielding, Esq.
http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200706/6-27-07%20WH%20Subpoena%20Packet.pdf

Subpoena packet for documents from the Office of the Vice President, sent via Shannen Coffin, Esq.
http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200706/6-27-07%20VP%20Subpoena%20Packet.pdf

Subpoena packet for documents from the Department of Justice, sent via A.G. Alberto Gonzales
http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200706/6-27-07%20DOJ%20Subpoena%20Packet.pdf

Subpoena packet for documents from the National Security Council, sent via Richard Klingler, Esq.
http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200706/6-27-07%20NSC%20Subpoena%20Packet.pdf