|
Banned
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dc_dux
Host...the House passed an amendment (245-178) in the Intel Appropriations bill last week that prohibits wiretapping without a FISA warrant:
If the Senate includes a similar amendment, which is likely, Bush will have to veto the entire Intel funding bill. |
Thank you dc_dux, I wasn't aware of that. If Bush vetoes the final bill that comes out of the conference committee and gets sent to the White House, and....even if he doesn't....in view of what Comey testified, my question from the OP remains unanswered:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by host
......If what Comey testified is a true account of what happened, do we continue to do nothing, take to the streets in a huge demonstration of protest and peaceful civil disobedience, followed by an overwhelming wave of popular sentiment that results in impeachment hearings against Bush.....or....yawn...what channel is the game on, honey?......
|
Or, is this a sign of the beginning of protests that will restore accountability, and end the assault on our Consitutional Bill of Rights?
Quote:
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2...cize-gonzales/
May 14, 2007, 6:14 pm
Law School Classmates Criticize Gonzales
By David Stout
Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, who has been under fire from politicians in both parties, was assailed today by several dozen of his classmates at Harvard Law School, Class of 1982.
“As lawyers, and as a matter of principle, we can no longer be silent about this administration’s consistent disdain for the liberties we hold dear,” those classmates said in a letter to Mr. Gonzales today. “Your failure to stand for the rule of law, particularly when faced with a president who makes the aggrandized claim of being a unitary executive, takes this country down a dangerous path.”
The letter urged President Bush and Mr. Gonzales “to relent from this reckless path, and begin to restore respect for the rule of law we all learned to love many years ago.” But it stopped short of explicitly calling on Mr. Gonzales to step down.
The letter was delivered on the eve of another hearing by the Senate Judiciary Committee on the dismissals of eight United States attorneys. (Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty announced today that he would resign. He cited family reasons, but he also had delivered controversial testimony earlier this year that one federal prosecutor had been let go to make way for a protege of Karl Rove, fueling Democratic charges of cronyism.)
Democrats have said the dismissals may have been for cynical political reasons, while Mr. Gonzales and his defenders have said they were proper. But whatever the reasons for the firings, Mr. Gonzales has acknowledged that they were handled badly.
President Bush has repeatedly expressed faith in the attorney general, who has vowed to stay on as long as he thinks he can be effective.
It was clear from the letter that his classmates’ unhappiness with Mr. Gonzales predated the controversy over the fired prosecutors. They accused him, for instance, of “sweeping aside the Geneva Conventions to justify torture” and generally trampling on civil liberties.
Republicans often complain that the majority of lawyers have Democratic sympathies, and one of the signers, Eric Schneiderman, is a Democratic state senator from New York City. But David M. Abromowitz, a Boston lawyer and one of the signers, and another Boston lawyer who signed the letter, Matthew E. Epstein, said the lawyers who signed the letter were a varied bunch.
Mr. Gonzales’s Harvard classmate critics are to further express their dissatisfaction on Tuesday in a quarter-page advertisement in The Washington Post.
Mr. Abromowitz said there was “a range of views” among the critics on whether the letter should call on Mr. Gonzales to step aside. As for why it did not, Mr. Abromowitz said, “If he left, it wouldn’t solve the problem.”
The letter was the result of a spontaneous, unorganized effort that arose at the class’s recent reunion, Mr. Abromowitz said. He said about 75 of the approximately 500 members of the class were contacted, and that more than 50 signed the letter.
Quote:
http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/...ssma.html#more
Originally posted: May 15, 2007
Harvard classmates diss Gonzales
Posted by Andrew Zajac at 12:40 p.m. CDT
Sometimes that old school tie chafes.
More than 50 of Alberto Gonzales' Harvard Law School classmates have <b>taken the unusual step of buying a quarter page ad in today's Washington Post to publicly woodshed him for "your cavalier handling of our freedoms time and again" as White House counsel and AG.</b>
The ad lists Gonzales authorship of memos questioning the relevance of the Geneva Conventions, support for warrantless domestic spying and limits on habeas corpus protections and the politicized firings of U.S. attorneys as evidence of a dismissive approach to the rule of law.
Chicago attorney and Harvard Law Class of '82 secretary Jeff Smith offered some details of the effort in a statement_and_followon_email.
|
|
Grounds for Impeachment?
Quote:
http://thinkprogress.org/comey-testimony/
Former Deputy Attorney General James Comey, 5/15/07, Senate Judiciary Committee
COMEY: In the early part of 2004, the Department of Justice was engaged — the Office of Legal Counsel, under my supervision — in a reevaluation both factually and legally of a particular classified program. And it was a program that was renewed on a regular basis, and required signature by the attorney general certifying to its legality.
And the — and I remember the precise date. The program had to be renewed by March the 11th, which was a Thursday, of 2004. And we were engaged in a very intensive reevaluation of the matter.
And a week before that March 11th deadline, I had a private meeting with the attorney general for an hour, just the two of us, and I laid out for him what we had learned and what our analysis was in this particular matter.
And at the end of that hour-long private session, he and I agreed on a course of action. And within hours he was stricken and taken very, very ill…
SCHUMER: (inaudible) You thought something was wrong with how it was being operated or administered or overseen.
COMEY: We had — yes. We had concerns as to our ability to certify its legality, which was our obligation for the program to be renewed.
The attorney general was taken that very afternoon to George Washington Hospital, where he went into intensive care and remained there for over a week. And I became the acting attorney general.
And over the next week — particularly the following week, on Tuesday — we communicated to the relevant parties at the White House and elsewhere our decision that as acting attorney general I would not certify the program as to its legality and explained our reasoning in detail, which I will not go into here. Nor am I confirming it’s any particular program. That was Tuesday that we communicated that.
The next day was Wednesday, March the 10th, the night of the hospital incident. And I was headed home at about 8 o’clock that evening, my security detail was driving me. And I remember exactly where I was — on Constitution Avenue — and got a call from Attorney General Ashcroft’s chief of staff telling me that he had gotten a call…
SCHUMER: What’s his name?
COMEY: David Ayers.
That he had gotten a call from Mrs. Ashcroft from the hospital. She had banned all visitors and all phone calls. So I hadn’t seen him or talked to him because he was very ill.
And Mrs. Ashcroft reported that a call had come through, and that as a result of that call Mr. Card and Mr. Gonzales were on their way to the hospital to see Mr. Ashcroft.
SCHUMER: Do you have any idea who that call was from?
COMEY: I have some recollection that the call was from the president himself, but I don’t know that for sure. It came from the White House. And it came through and the call was taken in the hospital.
So I hung up the phone, immediately called my chief of staff, told him to get as many of my people as possible to the hospital immediately. I hung up, called Director Mueller and — with whom I’d been discussing this particular matter and had been a great help to me over that week — and told him what was happening. He said, I’ll meet you at the hospital right now.
Told my security detail that I needed to get to George Washington Hospital immediately. They turned on the emergency equipment and drove very quickly to the hospital.
I got out of the car and ran up — literally ran up the stairs with my security detail.
SCHUMER: What was your concern? You were in obviously a huge hurry.
COMEY: I was concerned that, given how ill I knew the attorney general was, that there might be an effort to ask him to overrule me when he was in no condition to that.
SCHUMER: Right, OK.
COMEY: I was worried about him, frankly.
And so I raced to the hospital room, entered. And Mrs. Ashcroft was standing by the hospital bed, 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.
SCHUMER: At that point it was you, Mrs. Ashcroft and the attorney general and maybe medical personnel in the room. No other Justice Department or government officials.
COMEY: Just the three of us at that point.
I tried to see if I could help him get oriented. As I said, it wasn’t clear that I had succeeded.
<h3>
I went out in the hallway. Spoke to Director Mueller by phone. He was on his way. I handed the phone to the head of the security detail and Director Mueller instructed the FBI agents present not to allow me to be removed from the room under any circumstances. And I went back in the room.</h3>
I was shortly joined by the head of the Office of Legal Counsel assistant attorney general, Jack Goldsmith, and a senior staffer of mine who had worked on this matter, an associate deputy attorney general.
So the three of us Justice Department people went in the room. I sat down…
SCHUMER: Just give us the names of the two other people.
COMEY: Jack Goldsmith, who was the assistant attorney general, and Patrick Philbin, who was associate deputy attorney general.
I sat down in an armchair by the head of the attorney general’s bed. The two other Justice Department people stood behind me. And Mrs. Ashcroft stood by the bed holding her husband’s arm. And we waited.
And it was only a matter of minutes that the door opened and in walked Mr. Gonzales, carrying an envelope, and Mr. Card. They came over and stood by the bed. <b>They greeted the attorney general very briefly. And then Mr. Gonzales began to discuss why they were there — to seek his approval for a matter, and explained what the matter was — which I will not do.
And Attorney General Ashcroft then stunned me. He lifted his head off the pillow and in very strong terms expressed his view of the matter, rich in both substance and fact, which stunned me — drawn from the hour-long meeting we’d had a week earlier — and in very strong terms expressed himself, and then laid his head back down on the pillow, seemed spent, and said to them, But that doesn’t matter, because I’m not the attorney general.
SCHUMER: But he expressed his reluctance or he would not sign the statement that they — give the authorization that they had asked, is that right?
COMEY: Yes.
And as he laid back down, he said, But that doesn’t matter, because I’m not the attorney general. There is the attorney general, and he pointed to me, and I was just to his left.
The two men did not acknowledge me. They turned and walked from the room. And within just a few moments after that, Director Mueller arrived. I told him quickly what had happened. </b>He had a brief — a memorable brief exchange with the attorney general and then we went outside in the hallway.
SCHUMER: OK.
Now, just a few more points on that meeting.
First, am I correct that it was Mr. Gonzales who did just about all of the talking, Mr. Card said very little?
COMEY: Yes, sir.
SCHUMER: OK.
And they made it clear that there was in this envelope an authorization that they hoped Mr. Ashcroft — Attorney General Ashcroft would sign.
COMEY: In substance. I don’t know exactly the words, but it was clear that’s what the envelope was.
<b>SCHUMER: And the attorney general was — what was his condition? I mean, he had — as I understand it, he had pancreatitis. He was very, very ill; in critical condition, in fact.
COMEY: He was very ill. I don’t know how the doctors graded his condition. This was — this would have been his sixth day in intensive care. And as I said, I was shocked when I walked in the room and very concerned as I tried to get him to focus.</b>
SCHUMER: Right.
OK. Let’s continue. What happened after Mr. Gonzales and Card left? Did you have any contact with them in the next little while?
COMEY: While I was talking to Director Mueller, an agent came up to us and said that I had an urgent call in the command center, which was right next door. They had Attorney General Ashcroft in a hallway by himself and there was an empty room next door that was the command center.
<b>And he said it was Mr. Card wanting to speak to me. I took the call. And Mr. Card was very upset and demanded that I come to the White House immediately.
I responded that, after the conduct I had just witnessed, I would not meet with him without a witness present.
He replied, What conduct? We were just there to wish him well.
And I said again, After what I just witnessed, I will not meet with you without a witness. And I intend that witness to be the solicitor general of the United States.</b>
SCHUMER: That would be Mr. Olson.
COMEY: Yes, sir. Ted Olson.
Until I can connect with Mr. Olson, I’m not going to meet with you.
<b>He asked whether I was refusing to come to the White House. I said, No, sir, I’m not. I’ll be there. I need to go back to the Department of Justice first.</b>
And then I reached out through the command center for Mr. Olson, who was at a dinner party. And Mr. Olson and the other leadership of the Department of Justice immediately went to the department, where we sat down together in a conference room and talked about what we were going to do.
And about 11 o’clock that night — this evening had started at about 8 o’clock, when I was on my way home. At 11 o’clock that night, Mr. Olson and I went to the White House together.
SCHUMER: Just before you get there, you told Mr. Card that you were very troubled by the conduct from the White House room (ph), and that’s why you wanted Mr. Olson to accompany you.
Without giving any of the details — which we totally respect in terms of substance — just tell me why. What did you tell him that so upset you? Or if you didn’t tell him just tell us.
COMEY: I was very upset. I was angry. I thought I just witnessed an effort to take advantage of a very sick man, who did not have the powers of the attorney general because they had been transferred to me. I thought he had conducted himself, and I said to the attorney general, in a way that demonstrated a strength I had never seen before. But still I thought it was improper.
And it was for that reason that I thought there ought to be somebody with me if I’m going to meet with Mr. Card.
SCHUMER: Can you tell us a little bit about the discussion at the Justice Department when all of you convened? I guess it was that night.
COMEY: I don’t think it’s appropriate for me to go into the substance of it. We discussed what to do. I recall the associate attorney general being there, the solicitor general, the assistant attorney general in charge of the Office of Legal Counsel, senior staff from the attorney general, senior staff of mine. And we just — I don’t want to reveal the substances of those…
SCHUMER: I don’t want you to reveal the substance.
They all thought what you did — what you were doing was the right thing, I presume.
COMEY: I presume. I didn’t ask people. But I felt like we were a team, we all understood what was going on, and we were trying to do what was best for the country and the Department of Justice. But it was a very hard night.
SCHUMER: OK.
And then did you meet with Mr. Card?
COMEY: I did. I went with Mr. Olson driving — my security detail drove us to the White House. We went into the West Wing. Mr. Card would not allow Mr. Olson to enter his office. He asked Mr. Olson to please sit outside in his sitting area. I relented and went in to meet with Mr. Card alone. We met, had a discussion, which was much more — much calmer than the discussion on the telephone.
After — I don’t remember how long, 10 or 15 minutes — Mr. Gonzales arrived and brought Mr. Olson into the room. And the four of us had a discussion.
SCHUMER: OK.
And was Mr. — were you and Mr. Card still in a state of anger at one another at that meeting, or is it a little calmer, and why?
COMEY: Not that we showed.
SCHUMER: Right.
COMEY: It was much more civil than our phone conversation, much calmer.
SCHUMER: Why? Why do you think?
COMEY: I don’t know. I mean, I had calmed down a little bit. I’d had a chance to talk to the people I respected. Ted Olson I respect enormously.
SCHUMER: Right. OK.
Was there any discussion of resignations with Mr. Card?
COMEY: Mr. Card was concerned that he had heard reports that there were to be a large number of resignations at the Department of Justice.
SCHUMER: OK. OK.
And the conversations, the issue, whatever it was, was not resolved.
COMEY: Correct. We communicated about it. I communicated again the Department of Justice’s view on the matter. And that was it.
SCHUMER: Right.
And you stated that the next day, Thursday, was the deadline for reauthorization of the program, is that right?
COMEY: Yes, sir.
<b>SCHUMER: OK.
Can you tell us what happened the next day?
COMEY: The program was reauthorized without us and without a signature from the Department of Justice attesting as to its legality. And I prepared a letter of resignation, intending to resign the next day, Friday, March the 12th.
SCHUMER: OK.</b>
And that was the day, as I understand it, of the Madrid train bombings.
COMEY: Thursday, March 11th, was the morning of the Madrid train bombings.
SCHUMER: And so, obviously, people were very concerned with all of that.
COMEY: Yes. It was a very busy day in the counterterrorism aspect.
SCHUMER: Yet, even in light of that, you still felt so strongly that you drafted a letter of resignation.
COMEY: Yes.
SCHUMER: OK.
And why did you decide to resign? COMEY: I just believed…
SCHUMER: Or to offer your resignation, is a better way to put it?
<b>COMEY: I believed that I couldn’t — I couldn’t stay, if the administration was going to engage in conduct that the Department of Justice had said had no legal basis. I just simply couldn’t stay.</b>
SCHUMER: Right. OK.
Now, let me just ask you this. And this obviously is all troubling.
As I understand it, you believed that others were also prepared to resign, not just you, is that correct?
COMEY: Yes.
SCHUMER: OK.
Was one of those Director Mueller?
COMEY: I believe so. You’d have to ask him, but I believe so.
SCHUMER: You had conversations with him about it.
COMEY: Yes.
SCHUMER: OK.
How about the associate attorney general, Robert McCallum?
COMEY: I don’t know. We didn’t discuss it.
SCHUMER: How about your chief of staff?
COMEY: Yes. He was certainly going to go when I went.
SCHUMER: Right.
How about Mr. Ashcroft’s chief of staff?
COMEY: My understanding was that he would go as well.
SCHUMER: And how…
COMEY: I should say…
SCHUMER: Please.
COMEY: … to make sure I’m accurate, I…
SCHUMER: This is your surmise, not…
COMEY: Yes.
I ended up agreeing — Mr. Ashcroft’s chief of staff asked me something that meant a great deal to him, and that is that I not resign until Mr. Ashcroft was well enough to resign with me. He was very concerned that Mr. Ashcroft was not well enough to understand fully what was going on. And he begged me to wait until — this was Thursday that I was making this decision — to wait til Monday to give him the weekend to get oriented enough so that I wouldn’t leave him behind, was his concern.
SCHUMER: And it was his view that Mr. Ashcroft was likely to resign as well?
COMEY: Yes.
SCHUMER: So what did you do when you heard that?
COMEY: I agreed to wait. I said that what I would do is — that Friday would be last day. And Monday morning I would resign.
SCHUMER: OK.
Anything else of significance relevant to this line of questioning occur on Thursday the 11th, that you can recall?
COMEY: No, not that I recall.
SCHUMER: Thank you.
Now, let’s go to the next day, which was March 12. Can you tell us what happened then?
COMEY: I went to the Oval Office — as I did every morning as acting attorney general — with Director Mueller to brief the president and the vice president on what was going on on Justice Department’s counterterrorism work.
We had the briefing. And as I was leaving, the president asked to speak to me, took me in his study and we had a one-on-one meeting for about 15 minutes — again, which I will not go into the substance of. It was a very full exchange. And at the end of that meeting, at my urging, he met with Director Mueller, who was waiting for me downstairs.
He met with Director Mueller again privately, just the two of them. And then after those two sessions, we had his direction to do the right thing, to do what we…
SCHUMER: Had the president’s direction to do the right thing?
COMEY: Right.
We had the president’s direction to do what we believed, what the Justice Department believed was necessary to put this matter on a footing where we could certify to its legality.
And so we then set out to do that. And we did that.
SCHUMER: OK.
So let me just (inaudible) — this is an amazing story, has an amazing pattern of fact that you recall. […] So in sum, it was your belief that Mr. Gonzales and Mr. Card were trying to take advantage of an ill and maybe disoriented man to try and get him to do something that many, at least in the Justice Department, thought was against the law? Was that a correct summation?
COMEY: I was concerned that this was an effort to do an end-run around the acting attorney general and to get a very sick man to approve something that the Department of Justice had already concluded — the department as a whole — was unable to be certified as to its legality. And that was my concern.
SCHUMER: OK.
And you also believe — and you had later conversations with Attorney General Ashcroft when he recuperated, and he backed your view?
COMEY: Yes, sir.
SCHUMER: Did you ever ask him explicitly if he would have resigned had it come to that?
COMEY: No.
SCHUMER: OK.
But he backed your view over that what was being done, or what was attempting to being done, going around what you had recommended, was wrong, against the law?
COMEY: Yes.
And I already knew his view from the hour we had spent together going over it in great detail a week before the hospital incident.
SCHUMER: Yes.
And the FBI director, Mueller, backed your view over that of Mr. Gonzales as well — is that right? — in terms of whether the program could continue to be implemented the way Counsel Gonzales wanted it to be. The only reason I hesitate is it was never Director Mueller’s job or position to be drawing a legal conclusion about the program; that he was very supportive to me personally. He’s one of the finest people I’ve ever met and was a great help to me when I felt a tremendous amount of pressure and felt a bit alone at the Department of Justice.
But it was not his role to opine on the legality.
SCHUMER: How about Jack Goldsmith, the head of the Office of Legal Counsel? Did he opine on the legality?
COMEY: Yes. He had done a substantial amount of work on that issue. And it was largely OLC, the Office of Legal Counsel’s work, that I was relying upon in drawing my — in making my decision.
SCHUMER: OK. Just two other questions.
Have you ever had the opportunity to recall these events on the record in any other forum?
COMEY: No.
SCHUMER: OK. And…
COMEY: I should…
SCHUMER: Go ahead.
COMEY: I was interviewed by the FBI and discussed these events in connection with a leak investigation the FBI was conducting.
SCHUMER: And you gave them these details then.
COMEY: Yes.
SCHUMER: Thank you.
COMEY: But not — by forum I’ve never testified about it.
SCHUMER: And after you stood your ground in March of 2004, did you suffer any recriminations or other problems at the department?
COMEY: I didn’t. Not that I’m aware of.
|
....so loquitur, you suggest that we should all calm down....not over react, when we have the testimony of the man who was acting Attorney General of the US, on a night in 2004, when he was so intimidated by the president's "men", Gonzales and Card, that...anticipating their imminent arrival to the critically ill John Ashcroft's room that he was standing in, with Ahscroft's wife, he found it necessary to do this:
Quote:
|
........"...I went out in the hallway. Spoke to Director Mueller by phone. He was on his way. I handed the phone to the head of the security detail and Director Mueller instructed the FBI agents present not to allow me to be removed from the room under any circumstances. And I went back in the room."........
|
...as he anticipated that Gonzales and Andrew Card were coming, on behalf of Bush, to demand that Ashcroft sign an opinion that was contradicting a provision of our constitutional Bill of Rights, in the opinion of both Ashcroft and Comey, and that Gonzales and Card were potentially determined enough to physically remove Comey from Ashcroft's hospital intensive care unit room, if he tried to prevent their coercion of Ashcroft.
Then, a little later, when Comey refused to meet alone with Card, Comey said that Card lied, disputing what Comey himself had just witnessed Gonzales and Card attempting to do in Ashcroft's room, in front of Comey.
Comey is better acquainted with these thuggish enemies of the state than I am, and they initimidated him.....<h3>did he over react?</h3> He kept his mouth shut about this for nearly three years, and discussed what happened only when he was under oath, being questioned in a senate committee hearing, today.
Last edited by host; 05-15-2007 at 11:37 AM..
Reason: Automerged Doublepost
|