I can feel the spin coming that the administration took seriously the threat of Al Qaida that was at the forefront of Clinton’s exiting warnings. However, they couldn’t say anything about it in all this time, and all the questions and hearings, because it would pose a threat to “national security.”
To place this in perspective, the February 2001 date means that one month after entering office, Bush had found the FISA laws and the Constitution to be burdensome. One is left to assume that the implementation of the overthrow of the government was started almost immediately upon Bush taking the oath of office. This too is no surprise given the overlap between the Bush administration and the Project for a New American Century.
John Conyers (D-Michigan), who is the Chair of the House Judiciary Committee, is following up on the claims of Nacchio with requests to the Justice Department and Mike McConnell (head of the NSA) for release of information relating to the NSA surveillance orders.
Another Congressional request for information has brought for letters from AT&T and Verizon regarding NSA surveillance requests in 2005. The response from the telecom giants shows significant requests (88,000 for Verizon alone), but the White House has told the telecoms to not respond to Congressional demands for information citing “national security” (see previous link). Meanwhile, the FCC has also refused to investigate the scope and timing of the information provided by the telecom companies - also citing national security.
Related to, but separate from the telecom response to NSA and FBI requests is the FBI running National Security Letters (NSLs) for the Pentagon. This from Agence French Presse:
The Pentagon has misled Congress and the US public by conniving with the FBI to obtain hundreds of financial, telephone and Internet records without court approval, civil-rights campaigners said Sunday.
This information gotten by the ACLU shows that the Pentagon has moved well outside the scope of its powers by engaging in domestic spying. Such activity would likely fall afoul of the Posse Comitatus Act:
… generally prohibits Federal military personnel and units of the United States National Guard under Federal authority from acting in a law enforcement capacity within the United States, except where expressly authorized by the Constitution or Congress. The Posse Comitatus Act and the Insurrection Act substantially limit the powers of the Federal government to use the military for law enforcement.
So that blows a huge hole in Dick Cheney’s defense of the Department of Defense engaging in domestic surveillance and intelligence gathering:
Vice President Dick Cheney has defended the practice as a “perfectly legitimate activity” used to investigate possible acts of terrorism and espionage.
Just more trivia to add to the ever-growing list of abuses and illegalities engaged in by the Bush administration. Abuses for which, apparently, they will never be held accountable. But for those of you who think those of us concerned about these issues are “partisan” or “paranoid,” guess what? The next president (who may well be a Democrat) gets to inherit the “Unitary Executive” with all the extensions of power and surveillance and no oversight or accountability either. Personally, I find no comfort in that thought - nor in the ongoing dismantling of our Constitution.
Note: Nacchio is serving a six year prison term for insider trading. The information was part of recently unsealed testimony in his case. He stated that Qwest refused to comply with the NSA requests, and was retaliated against with the loss of contracts from the NSA.
Authors Website: www.bestcyrano.org/avenger212/
Authors Bio: Rowan Wolf is an activist and sociologist living in Oregon. She is the founder and principle author of Uncommon Thought Journal, and a Senior Editor for Cyrano’s Journal Online with her own page being CJO’s Avenger. LINK TO ARTICLE
I suggest following the link and reading the original article on Op-Ed News, as there are many links that substantiate the author’s facts and allegations. This one matter exposes that Bush and Cheney began their terms in office with total disregard for our Constitution and the Rule of Law, and even worse, lied to Congress and the American people when the NSA Wiretapping Program was exposed by the New York Times. (I still haven’t forgiven them for not releasing this information prior to the 2004 elections, which would have effectively ended the criminal regime of Bush and Cheney. Calling the fire department after the house has already burned-down is absurd and negligent, and it’s hard for me to fathom that we could have been rid of these tyrants if someone at the Times had shown some patriotism and courage when it would have really made a difference!)
The rationale and need for impeachment should not be an argument between Democrats and Republicans. If they believe in the Constitution and the Rule of Law, then impeachment is their duty, not a “choice” as they try to justify their actions to the public. Are we to allow another President to be elected, Democrat, Republican, or Independent - to step into the White House with the ability to declare they are the “Decider” - and again, ignore our Constitution, Rule of Law, and the Bill of Rights? If we do not impeach Bush and Cheney, what message are we sending to future Presidential candidates, and how do we “spread democracy” when we refuse to follow our own laws?
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
