Comments (29)

Freewheelin' Freddie wrote on December 14, 2007 5:38 PM:

Mukasey: The Right Man for the Job.

Bob wrote on December 14, 2007 5:58 PM:

This is a clear indication of a coverup being orchestrated by the White House. It's the same hidden hand that obstructed the Justice Department Inspector General'sinvestigation of illegal wiretapping. Congress should add an Office of Independent Counsel to the Justice Department's budget. They should be required to investigate all matters referred to them by Congress and report back to Congress on what they found. If they're unwilling to provide evidence, then Congress should be unwilling to pay for them to keep their doors open or employees paid.

davdinnc wrote on December 14, 2007 6:00 PM:

And this latest round of stonewalling and potentially contempt surprises us because?

phred wrote on December 14, 2007 6:00 PM:

Why do we even have Democrats if it takes a Republican to give us any hope whatsoever that something will be done? Not that I believe Hoekstra will actually DO anything. But really, what have we come to?

Anonymous wrote on December 14, 2007 6:12 PM:

Glad we have a new AG to ensure things get investigated.

Glad we have a new DNC leadership in power that will investigate things.

Glad that . . . .oh, I'm sorry: It's 2006, we still have another excuses, I mean election to wait for.

Bob C. wrote on December 14, 2007 6:50 PM:

When is enough enough and impeachment is the preferred response. Seems to me that this administration has reached that point and then some. These jokers have made and mockery of our constitution and now we have a dictatorship in this country. What is to prevent the Shrubs with the backing of Justice and the Supreme Court to suspend the elections and stay in the White House forever. This is really scary stuff. We all need to jump all over our elected representatives regardless of what our political party is.

Anonymous wrote on December 14, 2007 7:01 PM:

"What is to prevent the Shrubs with the backing of Justice and the Supreme Court to suspend the elections and stay in the White House forever."

Please tell me why suspending elections is necessary. The American public has been betrayed by BOTH parties, not just one. It will not matter whether we vote for Republicans or Democarats. They have been proving themselves to be just two factions of the same mob.
Even if we DO actually vote in a couple of "honest" Democrats, they will not be allowed to shake up the status quo.

Both parties' goals are:
1. Protect their own leadership
2. Protect their's and their opponents' status quo

Sorry... there is no 3rd goal...IMHO

wagonjak wrote on December 14, 2007 7:03 PM:

I wouldn't count on this...Republicans and Dems alike usually express copious amounts of faux outrage at the latest scandal and then nothing EVER happens...

We in the Dem base will wait for some real action before we get excited at the latest "showdown"!

Look at the latest FISA capitulation by Reid. We'll all believe the Dems when they actually stand up to this criminal president and his minions in Congress.

We all hope Dodd will actually be there Monday to filibuster the FISA bill with the Telecom immunity, and that the Dem candidates will stand behind him as they promised...

We're still waiting Dems!

chisholm wrote on December 14, 2007 7:14 PM:

I say bully for Mukasey: if you have power, use it.

little d wrote on December 14, 2007 7:34 PM:

Thanks chisholm, i needed a laugh.

Not so fast wrote on December 14, 2007 7:38 PM:

If Hoekstra could think for himself they wouldn't let him be on the House intelligence committee. He's always represented the right wing of the Cheney admin - his stance here doesn't conflict with that history

On the plus side it helps him in his re-election as he appears to show distance between himself and Bush

P*ssed Off wrote on December 14, 2007 8:06 PM:

Thanks Dianne Feinstein for giving us Michael Mukasey! Spinelss worthless dems.

Ethan wrote on December 14, 2007 8:22 PM:

P*ssed Off, think of it this way. If the Dems are SO chicken-shit politically to get anything done and it would be a major brou-ha-ha politically for the Dems to REALLY do something (impeach, force our way out of iraq), then maybe it's BETTER that people like Mukasey and Bush just continue to screw up. Jeebus knows that the American electorate is easily swayed, is entirely forgetful, and is desperately in need of leadership. The closer we get to the election, having these clowns still in charge helps us more and more.

Joe Monster wrote on December 14, 2007 8:52 PM:

Another shot, dead on, direct to the foot. Democrats are inventing new ways to spell 'ninny'.

This was a non-starter from before the ... start.

It could have been a signpost on the high road, it could have been something we all knew but didn't say: Bush and company are out of control. We need to know whether justice was impeded, but we're not going to string up another generation of spooks because they have an evil leader.

They're OUR spooks, being run by a stupid, cynical, half-assed and impotent bunch of tutu-wearing should-be circus freaks. But we keep showing them new ways to stymie and humiliate us.

Choose your battles better.

phil james wrote on December 14, 2007 9:08 PM:

Au contraire my good man Monster, Bush and his mob are as thoroughly in control as Capone was of Chicago. They will not answer to anyone for anything at anytime. Period. Got that. Now everyone should just forget this whole oversight, accountability thing which Lord knows you would have thought the Dems might have actually done something about by now and go back to your Xmas shopping and dream of you're a NASCAR winner.

budfox wrote on December 14, 2007 10:36 PM:

It's getting to be to obvious.....it all goes back to 9/11.
Somethings pretty rotten.

Teaeopy wrote on December 14, 2007 11:36 PM:

There should be bipartisan outrage that yet again the White House is playing Congress as if it were an inferior branch of government. GWBush must have decided that the Framers messed up with Article I of the Constitution, and that he and Cheney-Addison will make every effort to create a hierarchy where a balance of powers should be. We know which branch of government is at the top of their desired hierarchy—while a Republican occupies the presidency, that is.

What would George Washington say?

Jim wrote on December 15, 2007 1:36 AM:

Feinstein and Schummer put him there - what say they now??

parrot wrote on December 15, 2007 3:55 AM:

When will we be rid of the Pelosi patsy dance?! We need to de-Pelosi-ize this debate and get on with the f-ing impeachment hearings! But, are the Dems still the spineless idiots who let all those thugs pass on Iran-Contra? Of course they are...

flibbertygibbit wrote on December 15, 2007 7:10 AM:

RECALL pelosi anyone ???? flbgbt

drew wrote on December 15, 2007 8:15 AM:

As someone has said before, the Lucy-Charlie Brown co-dependency dance continues unabated. DemoBrown - if we approve of this candidate, you sure he'll be fair and impartial? ReLucycan - absolutely!
Next frame: complete unaccountability appears in the form of a pulled football as DemoBrown attempts the kick.

How can the dems be so fudging stupid so many times? Mind numbing - I have outrage fatigue yet again. Where's the fainting couch?

Recall Pelosi. Impeach everyone else. Reid is a loser.

The Skeptical Cynic wrote on December 15, 2007 6:28 PM:

Let's put things in their proper perspective.

The eely spines of leading beltway Dems are slipping out their ani blocking their voices.

Andrew wrote on December 15, 2007 9:54 PM:

Makes no difference whehter Democrat or Republican. Both parties continue to pay lip service to the masses that elected them while covering their own asses. We are long past the need for a well entrenched third party giving the people the voice they require in putting an end to this madness. Why Pelosi would ever say that impeachment is off the table is a slap in the face to all and Rieds contorted view regarding FISA yesterday left it hard for lunch to stay down.
As they say, when the head of the fish stinks, so does the rest of it. Either we the people take back our own government as stated in the Constitution, or this country will perish. Aaron Russo had it right as we are fast becoming a fascist state.

Prosecution Outside Impeachment wrote on December 15, 2007 11:03 PM:

TPM Readers,

I'm flabberghasted. We used to have a government. Now, we have excuses. We used to have leadership, now we have pawns.

Enough. I urge you to consider: "If there were a way to force the US government to react, would you favor that?" I cannot promise results or victory. NOr can I promise you success. But I can promise you that there is a fight worth fighting: That of the Constitution.

Our nation has stood since 1776 to stand against abuse, tyranny, and arrogance at home and abroad. The fight today isn't new: It's the same has any other fight in history: The fight to stand up, and compel others to meet their obligations.

We as people can expect the leaders to lead. BUt these leaders refuse to lead. BUt we are not stuck with the leaderless; we, as leaders, can make these people respond. How? There is a way. It's not something you have to imagine as new. Nor is it novel. It's simply doing what the States did originally when they stood up, and voted for the Constititution: They decided to put tyranny behind the rule of law.

Today's Congress refuses to do that. Let's accept that. It's doesn't make it right. But waiting for 2008 isn't the only answer. We can at the State level work with the Stage AGs and local prosecutors to prosecute a sitting President and VP, outside impeachment outside Congress.

Stop listening to the media when they say we're stuck or that nothing can be done' stop listening to the blogs who are whining that we've been betrayed. Indeed, we have, but that's not a reason to lament, but rejoice: It's time to take our mandate of 2006, and challenge the State AGs to do what this Congress -- despite our mandate -- refuses to dod: Enforce the Constitution against the President and Vice President.

SOme say We should wait, that after it's over, after they've left office, then we can do something. But why wait? Why not put the pressure on them: Put pressure on Congress to act. SOme suggest that Congerss has "more important" things to do; but they refuse to do them: No legislation, no solutions to pass legislawtion, just a plan to assent to tyranny, roadblocks, logjams, and vetos.

Things aren't getting done because we're incorrectly beliving that there are no other options. There are. Please hit the link: ["Proseuction Outside Impeachment"] to read more of what needs to be discussed; and the real option -- oustide COngress, outside impeachment -- that needs to be considered.

We don't have to wait for the CIA or Congress to "get around" to agreeing. We can directly prosecute this President and VP outside COngress, outside impeachment. Please stop asking Congress to cooperate; it's time to tell them: They've failed, and We the People demand the President and VP cooperate with these prosecutions against them at the State level. Thank you for your consideration.

Anonymous wrote on December 16, 2007 3:36 AM:

I hate to say "I told you so".

Anonymous wrote on December 16, 2007 1:34 PM:

TPM Readers and Staff,

I've been a long time reader of the blog-site, and and glad you have open many threads available for comment. Indeed, the staff spends many hours without necessarily direct financial support from readers. The free service is valued.

My understanding of the TPM website is that it isn't like the MSM. On the narrow issue of the CIA tapers, I have a very general concern: If TPM -- as a "muckraker" -- is going to mean something, in my view, that means more than simply talking about the script-agenda-song of the US goverrnment, and not narrowly reacting to the latest excuses.

Specifically, the issue is this: I'm questioning whether or not my continued posting, commenting, and rading of this site is going to be of any value. "Value" isn't simply taking the MSM-government agenda, and reacting to it, but turning the tables and forcing the MSM-government to ract to the public-bloggers-muckrakers.

Perahsp I'm missing something obvious. My concern on the CIA tapes is simple: The apparent "concern" is the Justice Department isn't going to cooperate with the Congress; and the Congress, despite the power to investigate and/or impeachment, appears not inclined to start the former out of defernce to the President on the latter.

My simple questoin is this: Why is anyone bothering to follow these issues, comment on them, or be "concerned" when there are viable options -- outside Congress, outside impeachment -- to force oversight of DoJ and the CIA; and to do what Congress refuses: Start an investigation.

More baffling is the MSM and blogging community which seem to have embraced the apparent non-sense that "nothing can be done outside Congress." Specifically, Georgetown Law Prof Jonathan Turley recognizes the roadblock and unresponsivenses of Congress on investigations and impeachment issues. Yet, what is most baffling is this is the same law professor in 2000 who wrote a scholarly law journal article on how to prosecute a sitting President, outside Congress, outside impeachment: "Pillar to Post".

As I see it, there are several problem on the CIA tapes, not the "destruction" but the activity recorded on the tapes:
- There have been alleged war crimes, which the President refuses to prosecute and the Congress is getting blocked
- The issue has changed from whether there have or have not been "war crimes" (by way of prisoner abuse) to whether [a] the tapes do or do not exist; [b] whether the tapes were or were not improperly handled.

One of the objectives of "impeachment/investigations for impeachment" is to give the Congress -- as a separate branch of govenrment -- tools to intervene when the President -- as Executive -- refuses to prosecute. In so many words, impeachment is a method of the Congress to prosecute when the Executive refuses to timely punish-remove those offending Executive Branch agents. But with this President-Congress, they've chosen niether, and We the People are stuck with the offensive behavior.

Perhaps someone can explain to me, comment on, or let this sing in, in terms of the CIA tapes:

- If it is the "position" of the American community that "this is a problem", yet the DOJ refuses to "permit" Congress access to data, what is stopping the States -- as Turley proposed -- from doing what COngress refuses to do: Open a separte inquiry for purposes of prosecution?

Turley has had a chance to publicly comment on requests -- in 2007, in response to the current COngressional inaction on impeachment, and the apparent "roadblock" or "logjam" on oversight -- to explain his views on his 2000 article, and comment on whether he views this as a viable option. Only he can explain his silence.

My reason for posting this publicly is to encourage the TPM readers to take a step back from these day-to-day "tid bits" of information -- more reminders that Congress isn't doing their job, and the President continues to violte the law with impugnity -- to ask: "What are we going to do about this?" My view is simple: If Congress will not impeach or investigate and it does assent to DoJ requests to do nothing, let's accept that as their position. BUt we don't have to agree with it.

Rather, let's openly discuss a parallel option to work with the STate AGs, get an investigation going, and prosecute this President outside Congress, outside impeachment. If the Congress attempts to block, or the STates refuse to rise to the occiations, fine: Let them take that position. But let's not -- through silence -- allow the MSM-Congressional assent to non-sense dictate our silence.

Rather, let's encourage the TPM community to put the opion on the table in re CIA teape destruction: Dierect prosecution of a sitting president through the STate AGs. Thank you.

Kate Henry wrote on December 16, 2007 1:58 PM:

There is a solution to this problem and all the others that Bush has thrown in the way of investigations, but the Democrats need the courage to use it.

Subpoenas and then Inherent Contempt.

But, I'm not holding my breath. The Democratic leaders, Pelosi and Reid, have proven time and time again that they do not have the courage to do the right thing. One has to wonder what the Republiscums have on them to ensure this level of compliance.

Anonymous wrote on December 16, 2007 2:20 PM:

Kate Henry wrote on December 16, 2007 1:58 PM

I agree that this is an option, and it could be used. However, I'm not satisified the DNC in Congress will timely move on this. Yet, this doesn't mean "not to push for it", but the opposite: Push for it, but expand the options to include other things.

It appearse the FEderal government is not effectively investigating or checking abuses of power. My view is the States -- outside Congress, beyond the US government, and on their own -- need to discuss what they can do to challenge the US government officials, as individuals. I would hope this discussion include not only direct prosecutions -- now, outside the election cycle -- but also investigations at the State level to disbar counsel who are allegedly complicit with this illegal activity at the Federal level.

Congress refuses to respond. It's time to let the States get challenged and see whether they will or will not respond. This is important information which all voters will need to consider: Beyond the apparent failure of leadership in DC at the FEdearl level, does the leadership failure also extent to our State?

The States are not obliged nor beyolden to the new Attorney GEneral in DC; nor are the States required to "wait around" until the DoJ "decides" what it plans to do. The States -- all 50 of them -- can discuss and decide indpendently to move. On this CIA tape destruction: The US governmen needs to hear a simple message: "The public no longer has confidence in any branch of government to timely address this issue; and the States will assert their power to challenge those in the US government who have defied their oath of office, have failed to fully enforce Geneva, and will move to enforce the law through direct prosecutions of the President, Vice President, and other Members of Congress where appropriate.

Some in the legal community have got it recklessly wrong. They pretend that the "US Constitution does not protect the rights of prisoners of war." This is convoluted non-sense, for the following reasons:

A. The US Constitution, as the Supreme Law, expressly includes all "treaties";

B. The oath of office isn't just to the Constitution, but to the SUpreme Law -- including all treaty obligations;

C. Geneva -- as a treaty, which all Members of Congress have swron to uphold -- is not just an affirmation of rights to POWs; but a leash on the detaining power: the US. Whether the POWs do or do not have rights misses the key issue: There are legal obligations on the US to do things.

WE the People since 2001 have been fed a load of non-sense to "justify" NLs; then forced to assent to illegal warfare; then told to put up with FISA violations. These are not civil issues, but matters of international criminal law. Congress -- both parties -- had the duty to enforce teh law, investigate, and independently gather facts to conduct oversight: All to defend the Constitution and all treaty obligations. It would appear this late in the game that someone "might" be interested in looking at the solutions: What is to be done when the US government refuses to enforce the law, does not investigate, and all branches of government refuse to independentnly defend the Constitution?

It's outrageous as a reader of this site not to see some leadership from the TPM on the narrow issue of "What is to be done now that Congress refuses to impeach, investigate, pass bills to end the war?" I realize there are voting "options" but those are not new cards, but the old deck which the DNC and GOP have thrown back at us.

Time to start dealing the US government new cards. Time for the TPM community to create a new deck:

- The State AGs will be contacted to ask their position on direct prosecutions of the President, VP, and Members of Congress;

- The TPM Community will transition itself from merely commenting on the non-sense, to throwing the non-sense back at the US government;

- The TPM Community will challenge the DNC -GOPleadership for their joint agreement to not block these illegal bills, and failure to assert all lawful options including an impeachment investigation;

- The TPM COmmunity will challenge lawyers like Jonathan Turley: TO use his public standing to raise the issue of direct prosecutions of President, VP, and Members of Congress.

- The TPM Community will move from merely commenting on the news, MSM bungling, or US government problems, to commenting on and advocating for _solutions_ to these well discussed problems: Direct roscution of the US government leadership at the State level; and direct challenges to the US Congressional leadership, now before the 2008 election to remove them from leadershi positions in Congress, and make way for new leadership.

Time for the TPM Community to stop worrying about inaction, and mobilize to solve these problems outside Congress.

Publius wrote on December 16, 2007 8:53 PM:

As usual, I seem to take the middle route, and I am sure it will draw the wrath, perhaps contempt, of some writing here. Let me begin by saying I share the frustration, and the sense that something is not right.

With that said, I would again urge an approach to the tape issue that is self-consciously, and explicitely, "rule-focused." By this I mean, move slowly, conduct whatever investigations need to be done in a careful manner.

Here, General Mukasey may have a point -- as we saw with U.S. v. Oliver North, the Congress proceeds at the risk of an eventual criminal prosecution. I concede that the risk may be worth it -- in fact, it may be more important to find out the truth than determine if a specific individual is guilty of a crime. But it is appropriate to consider whether it is worth plunging in a bit hysterically.

I would recommend that the Congress, rather than focus on the destruction of the tapes, focus on the real issue: whether, and if so, under what circumstances, the U.S. engages is "torture," which I put in quotes in recognition that the definition is part of the controversy.

The Congress is not the best body to conduct investigations in the criminal sense; rather, they should do what they have not been doing. Conducting oversight, and based on that oversight, making law.

I would recommend the following first steps:

(1) Publicly, and clearly, set out the guidelines for what will, and what will not, be revealed to Congress by the Executive Branch.
(2) Push that decision, in a careful, well-documented, and very calm manner (I would recommend a quick read of any of the many letters demanding information sent by Chairman Waxman.
(3) Move slowly; document everything, make as few emotional statements as possible.

This administration has built its well-deserved reputation for simultaneously being both power-mad and incompetent by a willingness to ignore rules in the face of deeply felt, often emotional, views. Democrats should not fall into the same trap. Cold, hard and deliberate should be the motto.