home

Justice Dept. to Investigate Leakers, not Warrantless Surveillance?

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:
    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!

    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

    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.

    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?)

    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 su