home

Justice Dept. to Investigate Leakers, not Warrantless Surveillance?

By Jeralyn, Section War on Terror
Posted on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 05:55:39 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

So Alberto Gonzales has decided the Justice Department will probe the whistleblowers who leaked the information about Bush's warrantless NSA surveillance to the New York Times. Typical. What we need is a special counsel to investigate Bush's actions, not the whistleblowers.

The ACLU has issued this press release in response:

"President Bush broke the law and lied to the American people when he unilaterally authorized secret wiretaps of U.S. citizens. But rather than focus on this constitutional crisis, Attorney General Gonzales is cracking down on critics of his friend and boss. Our nation is strengthened, not weakened, by those whistleblowers who are courageous enough to speak out on violations of the law."

"To avoid further charges of cronyism, Attorney General Gonzales should call off the investigation. Better yet, Mr. Gonzales ought to fulfill his own oath of office and appoint a special counsel to determine whether federal laws were violated."

This sounds like a job for GAP, EPIC's Government Accountability Project.

The Government Accountability Project (GAP) is a public interest advocacy organization dedicated to the representation of courageous individuals who have "blown the whistle" on corrupt practices both in the federal government and in industry. The nuclear weapons industry, national security, environmental enforcement and safe food are the chief program areas of GAP's investigation.

Whistleblowers whom GAP attorneys currently represent include employees from the Rocky Flats Nuclear Weapons Facility in Colorado, the Hanford Nuclear Weapons Facility in Washington state and the Los Alamos National Labs in New Mexico. GAP not only represents individuals, but also works for policy change to protect the rights of millions of government and private employees who are threatened by "gag orders" issued by the Department of Justice and the triumvirate of intelligence agencies.

< Trump vs. Spitzer for NY Governor? | Hinckley to Be Allowed Overnights at Parents' Home >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Justice Dept. to Investigate Leakers, not Warrantless Surveillance? | 29 comments (29 topical)
    Re: Justice Dept. to Investigate Leakers, not War (none / 0) (#1)
    by scarshapedstar on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 06:37:16 PM EST
    Well, since the Bush Administration has nothing to hide, the leak didn't really matter much. Right?

    Re: Justice Dept. to Investigate Leakers, not War (none / 0) (#2)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 06:40:45 PM EST
    Hey, leakers of classified information must be punished, eh? Paybacks are hell, eh?

    Re: Justice Dept. to Investigate Leakers, not War (none / 0) (#3)
    by scarshapedstar on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 06:44:47 PM EST
    Hey, that's a brilliant notion; I wish more Republicans would have thought that way when the Plame scandal began. Funny thing is, though, this investigation should have started a year ago, since that's when the Administration knew the NYT was working on the story. For them to wait until they start getting bad press... gee whiz, it's a head scratcher. It's almost like this is somehow politically motivated! Help me out here, Jim. Show me how it's pure principle.

    Re: Justice Dept. to Investigate Leakers, not War (none / 0) (#4)
    by scarshapedstar on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 06:49:48 PM EST
    Oh, and, for the record: somehow I doubt history will judge the Plame leak (the powerful retaliating against the weak in an attempt to cover up the truth and generally be rotten scumbags) as being equally reprehensible as this one (the press revealing that the government was engaging in illegal behavior). Investigate 'em both, let the chips fall where they may, and you know damn well who will be able to sleep at night when it's all over.

    Re: Justice Dept. to Investigate Leakers, not War (none / 0) (#5)
    by Sailor on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 06:56:04 PM EST
    Uhh, whistleblowers are protected, retribution against whistleblowers isn't. Get it? Got it? Good.

    Re: Justice Dept. to Investigate Leakers, not War (none / 0) (#6)
    by soccerdad on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 07:08:31 PM EST
    yeh where were all the leaks are illegal yahoos when Bush was leaking stuff to support the war eg aluminum tubes.

    Re: Justice Dept. to Investigate Leakers, not War (none / 0) (#7)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 07:14:00 PM EST
    Hey scar, I said many times it was just pay back politics and should be ignored. Mrs. Wilson wasn't covert and no harm was done. This too is just politics. But it isn't being ignored because it actually caused damage to the national defense Biggggggg difference, don't you know? What out for falling chips!

    Re: Justice Dept. to Investigate Leakers, not War (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 07:17:49 PM EST
    GAP isn't a subsidiary of EPIC -- it's an independent nonprofit whistleblower protection agency, established in the '70s, considerably before EPIC's founding in 1994. You can find out more at http://www.whistleblower.org

    Re: Justice Dept. to Investigate Leakers, not War (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 07:46:17 PM EST
    Alberto Gonzales, singlehandedly responsible for boosting John Ashcroft's job approval rating.

    Re: Justice Dept. to Investigate Leakers, not War (none / 0) (#10)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 07:59:16 PM EST
    In this overcronyized govt., did anyone really expect Gonzalez to side with the bill of rights and US law? If the top lawman in the country won't enforce and protect constitutional protections, who will? Just like the Geneva Conv., the constitution is another cumbersome document to weasle around, not protect and respect. And whistleblowers are to be smeared...fired...blacklisted. Justice Department??? Looking and sounding more and more like the Ministry of Truth.

    Re: Justice Dept. to Investigate Leakers, not War (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 08:17:17 PM EST
    Just a question for all the Bush haters on here... If you really aren't "just playing politics", do you really believe that it's more important to protect the rights of American citizens to communicate with terrorist organizations, than it is to protect Americans from terrorists? Take Bush out of the equation. Substitute Clinton, or Carter for that matter, since they both authorized extralegal surveillance and interrogations...and consider the fact that these current wiretaps were for the very narrow purpose that they were. Do you really believe that you're all about protecting our rights? Considering that we're in the real world here, and that preventing terrorism means meeting a determined and ruthless force with at LEAST an equal and opposite force, and that there will be grey areas from time to time, are you willing to allow the terrorists an edge based on their taking advantage of our commitment to waging a "compassionate terror war"? Does your hatred of Bush really exceed your compassion for terror's future victims? www.liberallyspeaking.blogs.com

    Re: Justice Dept. to Investigate Leakers, not War (none / 0) (#12)
    by scarshapedstar on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 09:00:15 PM EST
    Hey scar, I said many times it was just pay back politics and should be ignored. Mrs. Wilson wasn't covert and no harm was done.
    ...you're saying that it being payback politics was a mitigating factor?! In my neck of the woods, that generally makes this kind of sh*t worse. She lost her job for no good reason save malice and the whims of some fat, balding, rotten bastard. That's not a defense. That's a travesty.
    This too is just politics. But it isn't being ignored because it actually caused damage to the national defense.
    Well... no. Either it's just politics, or it actually caused damage. I don't understand what your position is here. I do agree that it's a big difference, in that one action was perpetrated by the government whereas another was perpetrated by its citizens. Look which one the "right-winger" supports. Hmmmmmmmm.

    Re: Justice Dept. to Investigate Leakers, not War (none / 0) (#13)
    by scarshapedstar on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 09:05:53 PM EST
    I sure wish I had a Republican's insight on the curious timing, though. C'mon, somebody's gotta have a reason other than political expediency as to why the Administration deliberately delayed this investigation so long. (And if you need me to explain why you can't claim political expediency is a valid concern in a supposed matter of national security, uh... which party is supposed to be strong on this matter, again?)

    Re: Justice Dept. to Investigate Leakers, not War (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 09:40:07 PM EST
    This too is just politics. But it isn't being ignored because it actually caused damage to the national defense
    No one should overlook the fact that it could also cause damage to a sitting President and his staff... In other words, there is incentive and motive to cover up the truth while hiding behind the "it’s a matter of national security" argument.

    Re: Justice Dept. to Investigate Leakers, not War (none / 0) (#15)
    by jimcee on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 09:47:55 PM EST
    starshapescar, Treason is treason. Whether a CIA mom of two who has been out of the loop for a few years(and by the way was not driven from her job) has been outed or say a program that might actually have prevented another attack from some violent freaks has been exposed. So what is the difference? Seems to me exposure of clandestine sh*t is a bad thing. If there was a leak that exposed Ms Plame the leak of a secret NSA program is at least as treasonous if not moreso. Hipocracy is a funny thing. A leak of clandestine information is a bad thing and should be investigated unless of course it makes your side look bad. Give me a few reasons that there is a difference between the Plame leak and the recent NSA exposures. And please keep it rational.

    Re: Justice Dept. to Investigate Leakers, not War (none / 0) (#16)
    by glanton on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 09:58:17 PM EST
    Jimcee, I realize your question is aimed at scar, but I'll take a shot at it. What the he*&, I'm up too late tonight, I might was well blog a bit! The NSA leak served the nation's interests. The spying, the ever-expanding scope of the executive branch under the banner of "we're protecting you from ter'ists" is thoroughly unAmerican, not to mention unconstitutional. It is a slap in the face of this country, all this secret consolidation of power, these secret tribunals. Damn it all, "WOT" or not, we deserve better than to be ruled by figures shrouded in darkness. (The again, was anybody surprised that Dubya had authorized unwarranted spying on "suspected" American citizens?) And as for Plame, this was by no means an instance of whistleblowing. Plame had done nothing illegal, she had not subverted her nation, she had not even done anything wrong. She was a political target only, outed as a retributive act. To out a CIA Agent is a dangerous and reckless thing in any case--the thought that the White House would engage in such an act motivated by petty revenge is breathtakingly repugnant.

    Re: Justice Dept. to Investigate Leakers, not War (none / 0) (#17)
    by scarshapedstar on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 10:03:46 PM EST
    a program that might actually have prevented another attack from some violent freaks has been exposed.
    What program, exactly, would this be? There was already a system in place to execute warrantless wiretaps. You know that, right? The whole FISA court thing? It isn't going away anytime soon, nor was it a secret. All that was revealed was that the Bush Administration couldn't even be bothered with the "trouble" of going to a secret rubberstamp court after the fact. If their freedom to ignore this particular law is of vital importance to our national security, we must truly be in dire straits. Now, it seems the most likely reason for this apparent laziness on the part of our government was that they were engaging in a large-scale data mining operation, which goes beyond the scope of the kinds of investigations FISA allows. Which is, in case you're wondering, precisely the kind of abuse the law was intended to prevent. Got that? Of course, said data mining isn't necessarily unconstitutional, so there is absolutely no reason Congress couldn't authorize it in a closed-door session and avoid this whole cockup. But no. Like idiots, the Bush Administration chose to simply ignore the law. That's a fact. And that's where the blame ultimately lies. You can argue that this program could and should have been kept secret and illegal forever, but for christ's sake, there were easier and simpler ways. Why Bush chooses to act in this manner is a complete mystery to me, but shooting the messenger isn't going to fix the real problem here.

    Re: Justice Dept. to Investigate Leakers, not War (none / 0) (#18)
    by scarshapedstar on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 10:11:37 PM EST
    Oh, I guess I forgot. The situation behind the Plame leak was that Joe Wilson spoke truth to power and so in tandem with a smear campaign the most powerful people in the government decided to ruin his wife's career. The end. If you don't see any difference here, you need stronger glasses.

    Re: Justice Dept. to Investigate Leakers, not War (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 11:31:21 PM EST
    To Robert Kessler above: what makes you think the people in the US were talking to terrorists? That Bush thought they might be, doesn't make it so. Also, this may not be about wiretapping conversations, but other forms of electornic surveillance that are just as insidious. If Bush had pc to think a specific person or phone line in the US was being used to talk to terrorists, he should have gotten a FISA warrant, or invoked the 72 hour advance window. As an aside, TalkLeft comments cannot accomodate urls that are not in html format, please see the instructions in the commenting box. If you are linking to your own blog, please use the address line in the comments, rather than reprinting your url. URL's not in html format skew the site and get deleted. Thanks.

    Re: Justice Dept. to Investigate Leakers, not War (none / 0) (#20)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 12:19:59 AM EST
    kdog:
    In this overcronyized govt., did anyone really expect Gonzalez to side with the bill of rights and US law? If the top lawman in the country won't enforce and protect constitutional protections, who will?

    Just like the Geneva Conv., the constitution is another cumbersome document to weasle around, not protect and respect.

    And whistleblowers are to be smeared ... fired ... blacklisted.

    Justice Department??? Looking and sounding more and more like the Ministry of Truth.
    This is eerily reminiscent of John Mitchell (the first United States Attorney General ever to be convicted of illegal activities and imprisoned) who many of us remember only too well from the Watergate era:
    Wikipedia:

    As attorney general, Mitchell believed that the government's need for "law and order" justified restrictions on civil liberties. He advocated the use of wiretaps in national security cases without obtaining a court order and the right of police to employ the preventive detention of criminal suspects. He brought conspiracy charges against critics of the Vietnam War, and demonstrated a reluctance to involve the Justice Department in civil rights issues. "The Department of Justice is a law enforcement agency," he told reporters. "It is not the place to carry on a program aimed at curing the ills of society."
    It seems Gonzalez, like Bush and Cheney, is an admirer of Nixon and his approach to "law and order".

    Re: Justice Dept. to Investigate Leakers, not War (none / 0) (#21)
    by aw on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 06:11:53 AM EST
    Robert Kessler: What are you so afraid of that you would give up your civil rights for it?

    Re: Justice Dept. to Investigate Leakers, not War (none / 0) (#22)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 10:30:31 AM EST
    Charlie, this post should remove all doubts about Ms. Plames' status in the CIA, as it quotes from the Libby indictment:
    Go to page 5 of the indictment. Top of the page, item #9.

    On or about June 12, 2003, LIBBY was advised by the Vice President of the United States that Wilson's wife worked at the Central Intelligence Agency in the Counterproliferation Divison. LIBBY understood that the Vice President had learned this information from the CIA.

    This is a crucial piece of information. The Counterproliferation Division (CPD) is part of the CIA's Directorate of Operations, i.e., not the Directorate of Intelligence, the branch of the CIA where 'analysts' come from, but the DO, where the spies, the 'operatives', come from. Libby's a long time national security hand. He knows exactly what CPD is and where it is. So does Cheney. They both knew. It's right there in the indictment. Late Update: To be clear, there are of course support staff of various sorts in the DO. Not everyone is a field operative or a 'spy', certainly not in the colloquial sense of the term. But this is the essential difference between these two branches of the agency. These two guy had every reason to know what they were doing
    Link Oh, and PPJ, I am not worthy to correct the spelling error in the post, perhaps you could e-mail JMM about it like a good little boy.

    Re: Justice Dept. to Investigate Leakers, not War (none / 0) (#23)
    by Bill Arnett on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 12:11:38 PM EST
    I'm so sick of rethuglican "morality" and the preznit they support in shredding the Constitution. For jaycee and all those siding with Bushco, YOU DESERVE TO LOSE YOUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, but the rest of us who remember what America USED to stand for can no longer stand by and allow anyone, even W, to take away ANY of our rights, especially our rights to keep government out of our private lives. Before long, if permitted to happen, Amerika vill stand for, "Let me see your papers! Vat, no papers? You are under arrest. Ve haff vays of making you talk!" And you Rethuglicans are PROUD OF THIS? Sick, sick, poor pitiful and gullible people. Enjoy your life of involuntary servitude and submission to King George. I'm sure he can use more boot-lickers.

    Re: Justice Dept. to Investigate Leakers, not War (none / 0) (#24)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 05:16:45 PM EST
    Darkly - pick pick pick - And how long had Mrs. Wilson been in the US??? You somehow seem to forget that. Bill Arnett - Can you tell me what constitutional right you have lost? I'm serious. Which one? Come on Bill, we're waiting. Hodo - Gee, you seem to forget that Mrs. Wilson was not a covert agent. What cover? And since when did you start agreeing with the Feds? ;-) mac - There is the FISA law, the constitution and the fact that every administration said it was leagal. Now. Your point is????

    Re: Justice Dept. to Investigate Leakers, not War (none / 0) (#25)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 05:34:02 PM EST
    mac - There is the FISA law, the constitution and the fact that every administration said it was leagal. Now. Your point is????
    Just because the AG of the United States says it's legal doesn't make it so.

    Re: Justice Dept. to Investigate Leakers, not War (none / 0) (#27)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jan 01, 2006 at 08:07:06 AM EST
    Charlie - Did you ever consider that if th SP believed she was covert that he would have indicted Libby for that crime? That he didn't should show you something. Logic, charlie, logic. Or can you hit the slider? No.

    Re: Justice Dept. to Investigate Leakers, not War (none / 0) (#29)
    by Bill Arnett on Sun Jan 01, 2006 at 01:10:06 PM EST
    To JimakaPPJ: I thought your question to me as to what rights I have lost was so specious as to be unworthy of a response. What rights have I (and every American) lost under Bushco? The right to privacy in my papers and effects (NSA spying) (and it you think ONLY terrorists are monitored I have a little bridge in Falluja I could sell you). The right to have a president bound by the same laws as every other citizen. The right to have war declared only on the basis of truthful information honestly presented for Congress' consideration. The right to expect accountability, no, DEMAND accountability from government officials. The right to expect that a major American city will not die through the inaction of gov't. The right to have this nation protected by a military not torn asunder by engaging in a false War on Terror, lies of the worst kind, ineffective leadership, and serious damage by W's nation-building. I have the right to expect public officials who swear an oath to protect, uphold, and defend the Constitution against ALL enemies, foreign and domestic, instead of presidents and cohorts who view the Constitution as an impediment to be circumvented for purposes ill at all/any cost (Let's destroy the country to save it). I have the right to expect fiscal sanity in government, not budget-busting increases in debt such as never seen before in the history of man. I have the right to expect government to treat all its citizens fairly, without demonizing anyone with whom gov't disagrees. I have the right to expect government to be responsive to the needs of ALL, not just the rich. Should I continue? I think I'll stop here, for ignorant rethuglican boot-lickers are not capable of understanding even these rather obvious, basic rights to which every citizen is entitled. If you possess any sense of history and American democracy, why, I'll bet even you could think of dozens of ways in which our rights are being eroded under the leadership of Herr King George. If you can't, well, I can only offer my sympathy and pity. I noticed that you rethugs are always too ashamed to attach your TRUE NAMES to your incessant drivel. Unlike our current gov't, when I speak my mind, I tell the truth, and I am not afraid to sign my true name. Stuff it, JimakaPPJ.

    Re: Justice Dept. to Investigate Leakers, not War (none / 0) (#30)
    by soccerdad on Sun Jan 01, 2006 at 01:15:59 PM EST
    Norm Ornstein a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, not exactly the bastion of liberal thought said: I think if we’re going to be intellectually honest here, this really is the kind of thing that Alexander Hamilton was referring to when impeachment was discussed. link

    Re: Justice Dept. to Investigate Leakers, not War (none / 0) (#31)
    by Sailor on Sun Jan 01, 2006 at 02:01:32 PM EST
    Bill Arnett, perfect.

    Justice Dept. to Investigate Leakers, not Warrantless Surveillance? | 29 comments (29 topical)