« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Wiretapping Probe, Shut Down by Bush, Reopens
A new day at DoJ?
In February 2006, the Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility launched an internal investigation to see if the Department had properly reviewed the Bush Administration's warrantless wiretapping program. But President Bush made the unprecedented decision to deny investigators the necessary security clearances, and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales meekly assented.
But in a letter to Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) today, OPR chief Marshall Jarrett said that "we recently received the necessary security clearances and are now able to proceed with our investigation." You can see the letter here.
Attorney General Michael Mukasey, of course, was only sworn in Friday. It's not immediately clear if he's behind the reversal, but one assumes the two events must be related. Somehow the administration changed its position. (See update below.)
The investigation had been dead since the spring of 2006. The probe aims to determine whether Department officials (including both attorney generals) acted properly in approving and overseeing the program, and there was never a very good excuse for Bush shutting it down. OPR investigators were not seeking new documents from the National Security Agency, but only seeking to review documents already in the Justice Department's possession. Bush, arbitrarily, shut them down.
The move might actually be good news for Steve Bradbury, the acting head of the Department's Office of Legal Counsel; Democrats had been blocking his nomination until the OPR probe was completed, because Bradbury played a key role in reviewing the warrantless wiretapping program. Bradbury's nomination is sure to encounter other problems, of course, even if the OPR investigation clears him. He also authored still-secret memos in 2005 that, according to The New York Times, allowed interrogators to use a variety of "enhanced interrogation techniques" on detainees.
Update: ThinkProgress notes that Mukasey said two weeks ago in a written answer (pdf, see p. 126) to the Senate Judiciary Committee about the investigation that “It is my understanding this issue has already been decided. I have committed, however, to reviewing the over-all circumstances of this matter.”
There are two ways to read that. One is that Mukasey is referring to Bush's original decision to block the probe. The other is that Mukasey is saying that the decision had already been made to reverse that earlier decision. Which one is right? We're not sure.
Comments (27)
JMOHR wrote on November 13, 2007 5:28 PM:Want to bet on the qualifications that made these attorneys acceptable security risks for Bush?
boe wrote on November 13, 2007 5:31 PM:More sound and fury, signifying nothing.
Let the charade continue...
chisholm wrote on November 13, 2007 5:35 PM:Mukasey is a smarter Gonzales, and is going to "investigate" very thoroughly and find absolutely nothing. It's going to take a long time and when it's done it will give everyone cover.
Bush and Cheney aren't fools. They're not going to give security clearances to anyone who is actually serious about justice.
If you were them, would you? Of course not.
SocraticGadfly wrote on November 13, 2007 5:43 PM:Maybe Bush knows he's going to get a Democratic cave on telco immunity in the FISA renewal, and so this investigation will wind up going nowhere anyway.
jolly ranchero wrote on November 13, 2007 5:54 PM:Smoke, meet mirrors.
John wrote on November 13, 2007 5:56 PM:Is Cheney still allowed to look into these independent investigations? Regardless, this will take at least 15 months to conclude, which is one month too long to matter. Independent, my ass.
theWalrus wrote on November 13, 2007 5:59 PM:Yes, I've heard they've put Laurita Doan in charge of the investigation...
At this point, after so much blatant lawlessness, does anyone really think the BushCo crime syndicate will be held accountable in any way?
some dude named steevo wrote on November 13, 2007 6:16 PM:They have to get all the investigations done before the next inauguration. That way they can be sure to pardon all the right people before they leave office...
Joe Bonham wrote on November 13, 2007 6:59 PM:Da fix is in.
Anonymous wrote on November 13, 2007 7:04 PM:boe:
Let's hope it's not a charade, but I won't hold my breath.
Ryan Vela wrote on November 13, 2007 7:51 PM:Sisyphus
This hiatus has undoubtedly given Bush and Company enough time to cover their asses. Investigations will conclude and nothing new will be uncovered. Regardless of what the investigations find, however, they will conclude long after the next inauguration. The Bush administration will continue to get away with the multitude of lies it continues to espouse.
If we are really concerned with indicting Bush we should turn our attention to his job approval ratings. Currently, most Americans feel that Bush and Cheney have committed impeachable offenses during their time in the Whitehouse. Unfortunately, many of those in Congress feel otherwise. I guess those in power do not see killing thousands of Americans and millions of Iraquis, as well as throwing trillions of dollars down the drain, as a big deal. I guess the festering lies Bush preaches to the American public are something that most Congressmen and women can simply brush under the rug.
anonymouse wrote on November 13, 2007 7:57 PM:"The Office of Professional Responsibility was created to ensure that Justice Department lawyers do not violate any ethical rules. It is not authorized to investigate activities of the National Security Agency."
Will someone more knowledgeable than I please tell us if an ethical investigation concerning JD attorneys will show illegal actions by the administration? Aren't they two separate issues?
moondancer wrote on November 13, 2007 8:35 PM:Thanks
This may lead to a furious round of strongly worded letters.
Bill T. wrote on November 13, 2007 8:36 PM:Give 'em the Old Razzle Dazzle.
Dennis wrote on November 13, 2007 8:57 PM:If there are investigations the result will be nothing after all is said and done.
It will be reasoned that "for reason(s) of national security" these wiretappings were all done in this manner because of a needed haste to stop terrorists from carrying out plots yet unknown to Americans.
Bush will blame Gonzales and the Department of Justice for giving him bad advice, and Gonzales and the DOJ will say that it was all the ideas of the Bush administration.
At best, Gonzales 'could' be a fall guy, but it's not likely.
Whatever happens, there is a presidential pardon for all as the sun sets on the last days of this administration.
The Republicans aren't going to cave in during this last year, and the Democrats, should they prevail in the next elections, are going to take the position that all of this should be put behind us, it will cost too much of the nations time and energy to investigate and prosecute, we should all just forgive and forget and move forward into whatever else that political party has planned for the country.
And now and forever, whatever Americans do via the telecom industry, they can be assured that they are being heard, watched, read, and it's all recorded somewhere.
You don't have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.
markg8 wrote on November 13, 2007 10:01 PM:Be my guess Mukasey was brought in to prosecute a bunch of low level flunkies for crimes that are blatantly obvious and should be pinned on the real perps over the next year. All the Bernie Keriks, Charles Graners and Lyndie Englands will take the fall for any Republican current or hopeful White House occupant.
db wrote on November 13, 2007 10:04 PM:The proof of intent will be in the results, or lack thereof. Given his testimony, I fully expect the DoJ to find the administration acted within its right.
Anonymous wrote on November 13, 2007 10:12 PM:Gum to death . . .
docholliday wrote on November 13, 2007 11:48 PM:Gonzales Lite will jump on it with all the vigor of George Bush flhying his F-102 out of Alabama.
What A crock!
anon wrote on November 14, 2007 12:12 AM:My bet's already in but I think we'll know very quickly if Mukasey is sincere by the paperwork he releases. If, say, the DoJ files on Don Siegelman and torture and wiretapping are released in the next few weeks, then I'd say there's a chance that Mukasey is for real. If, however, we hit, say, the new year and the files aren't released or clearly redacted, then I'd say Schumer has Nadered us.
Michael Stevens wrote on November 14, 2007 12:24 AM:I think this means one of two things.
A. It could me that Mukasey really IS a straight shooter and wants to fix the problems Gonzo created. The White House didn't dare block a request in Mukasey's first week on the job because it would have leaked to the press and immediately proved that the Mukasey has no independence.
Or
B. The Bush administration ok'd (perhaps even suggested) a reopening of this investigation because they're trying to make Mukasey APPEAR independent. Perhaps they figure this is small potatoes compared to some of the other stuff which could be investigated. After all, this investigation was pointing towards Gonzo more than anyone else, and Gonzo is Gone... so...
So when they shut down or stonewall on some future investigation that has real consequences for Friends of Bush, the White House will point to this as proof of Mukasey's 'independence" and as evidence that the White House doesn't block investigations.
I know it's tempting to assume option B, but I'll give Mukasey a month or two before I make my decision.
Michael Stevens wrote on November 14, 2007 12:27 AM:I think this means one of two things.
A. It could me that Mukasey really IS a straight shooter and wants to fix the problems Gonzo created. The White House didn't dare block a request in Mukasey's first week on the job because it would have leaked to the press and immediately proved that the Mukasey has no independence.
Or
B. The Bush administration ok'd (perhaps even suggested) a reopening of this investigation because they're trying to make Mukasey APPEAR independent. Perhaps they figure this is small potatoes compared to some of the other stuff which could be investigated. After all, this investigation was pointing towards Gonzo more than anyone else, and Gonzo is Gone... so...
So when they shut down or stonewall on some future investigation that has real consequences for Friends of Bush, the White House will point to this as proof of Mukasey's 'independence" and as evidence that the White House doesn't block investigations.
I know it's tempting to assume option B, but I'll give Mukasey a month or two before I make my decision.
liberalminded wrote on November 14, 2007 1:19 AM:attorneys general, not attorney generals
siren wrote on November 14, 2007 2:10 AM:Did Feinstein get assurances from Mukasey that he would reopen this investigation,and that he would go after those involved minus the telecoms(whom she thinks should get immunity for theeir role in spying on us all. He gets the help of telecoms in prosecuting the big fish, she looks business friendly to AT&T etc.
Tom In Maine wrote on November 14, 2007 7:59 AM:Everybody seems to be making a big deal of Mukasey's move but give me a break, this is nothing more than smoke and mirrors to divert attention away from the real crimes committed by this administration.
Mukasey's confirmation hearings proved that he is just another admin lackey. One day he abhors torture, the next day he is not so sure. That kind of turn around showed that he won't and can't stand up to the Bush and Cheney White House enforcement team.
Nell wrote on November 14, 2007 9:37 AM:“It is my understanding this issue has already been decided. I have committed, however, to reviewing the over-all circumstances of this matter.”
The sentence is unambiguous. The key word is "however".
John Patterson (JEP) wrote on November 14, 2007 1:15 PM:If Mukasey has managed to shake up the spice-bucket and loosened some of the salt and pepper that was caked into neocon clumps were, I'm already impressed.
I'm one for cutting them all a breakin order to get to the thruth, so it cannever happen again. DOn' send them to prison, but create some new bad-boys list of proplr who canno loner be involved in politics, just like the younk computer hackers of old were denied acces to the web.
Take the creeps out of politics by forcing thm to admit they lied (so many lies, so few confessions) and then take them out of he future political game.
Do some sort of political UA on all of them, if their urine samples show signs of Republican kool-aid, toss em in solitary confinement until they are free of their neocon addictions.
Speaking of hypocrisy, why not put cocaine and crank detectors on the Senate and House urinals... (stop harassing the potheads, they don't deserve the same treatent for obvious reasons(.. not to mention the White House stalls, use a different bell for each stall, then we'd be able to have a regular cacaphonic urinal symphony every time the Republicans used the toitey en masse.
The song would probably sound something like "Pleased to meet you, hope you guessed my name."