![]() |
By Professor Emeritus Peter Bagnolo (about the author) Page 1 of 2 page(s)
For OpEdNews: Professor Emeritus Peter Bagnolo - Writer A Follow-up To Ashcroft's Heroics, Comey Fills in The Gaps
In a lifetime in which began for me in Camelot revisited, and heroes were grown in large bunches and cut down by dogs, to a latter period where money and all it can buy are more important than souls and those who say they are Christians or Muslims abuse the privilege of such honorable institutions as easily as those in government, sycophants, cowards and sneak-thieves and murderers. Attorney General John David Ashcroft and former Deputy Attorney General James B. Comey are the heroes of the day.
The Truth Outs Again in More Detail
Below I excerpt from a newly posted speech by former Deputy Attorney General James B. Comey at a meeting of the National Security Agency on May 3, 2007. Interspersed within are details of the wider story.
In 2004, Comey and other Justice Department lawyers went to battle with the White House over the legality of NSA's warrantless surveillance program. However, his audience in May was unaware of the dispute.
If you recall I reported the underlying story of the battle, which included an attempt by Alberto Gonzalez to take advantage of a seriously ill man after major surgery. Gonzales was sent by the White House to overrule Comey, who had said a resounding NO to their attempts to have him sign a statement that would destroy the system of habeas corpus by gaining the approval of then-Attorney General John D. Ashcroft. At that time, although under siege by the left for his Right Wing politics and his apparent attachment to Fundamentalist Religious Principles, as it turned out Mr. John David Ashcroft's principles, strong religious and ethical beliefs showed him to indeed, be a man, who, although he was frequently at odds with the Left, stood against Bush even and in spite a few of his thugs arriving to Mr. Ashcroft's room to try, it appeared to get him to sign off on the continued use of illegal surveillance.
Quoted from my story:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_professo_070821_ashcroft_s_principle.htm
August 21, 2007 at 00:25:52 "To his undying credit, the man who I at times lampooned and criticized, although right out of surgery and barely in control of his senses, fought off the unprincipled attempt to get an anesthetized man to sign-off on something despicable. John David Ashcroft refused to sign-off on the escalation of wiretapping even while seriously ill and not quite able to function. While still dazed and overcome from surgery and the aftermath drugs, assisted by his deputy, James Comey, snuffed out the most unbelievable whoring, slime balling, cowardly action, by what passes in an era of nefarious, and despicable, misbehavior, as by what degrading pestilence, to anyone with an ounce of integrity would agree, is unmatched in American history.
It was said by John the Baptist that he was not worthy to unlatch even Jesus sandals, I will say that regardless of what many may hold against John D. Ashcroft, in this case, at least, he was a man of honor and principles, it is a modest matter to say, and I do not mention his name, not wishing to sully the name of Ashcroft by association in the same line, the current Attorney General is not worthy even to clean the outhouse if only perhaps used once by his predescessor."
Gathered from TV, Radio and News Stories
It was only after Comey and a number of other DoJ lawyers threatened to resign, did President Bush agree amend his changes to the program.
Green Bag a legal affairs journal, in its summer issue, published Comey's speech, which is excerpted below.
He explains that it is extremely difficult "...for a conscientious attorney to work in the intelligence community, particularly for those whose work touches on war and counter-terrorism. It is not because we don't work with great people. We do. We work with people who have dedicated their lives to protecting this great country and all it stands for."
He goes on to say that the rational, is that the DoJ doesn't do this or that, people will die It can be hard, ... extraordinarily difficult to be the attorney standing in front of the freight train that is the need for this. Because we don't want people to die . . .."
He goes on to intimate that things may seem simple to some people, but it is not that simple to place honor and patriotism against each other in conflicting pressures...
To some requests, which place one's personal integrity but then also, work against the Constitution "...No is much, much harder. No must be spoken into a storm of crisis, with loud voices all around, with lives being uncertain. No is often the undoing of a career. And often, No must be spoken in competition with the voices of other lawyers who do not have the courage to echo it."
'For all those reasons, it takes far more than a sharp legal mind to say "no" when it matters most. It takes moral character. It takes an ability to see the future. It takes an appreciation of the damage that will flow from an unjustified "yes." It takes an understanding that, in the long-run, intelligence under law is the only sustainable intelligence in this country . . .."
1 | 2
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Contact Author |
Contact Editor |
View Authors' Articles |
| 6 comments |
Want to post your own comment on this Article?
|
||||
Tell a Friend:
|
Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews |