White House and Cheney's Office subpoenaed Options

[cmac]

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/27/wir...s.ap/index.html

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Senate Judiciary Committee subpoenaed the White House and Vice President Dick Cheney's office Wednesday for documents relating to President Bush's warrant-free eavesdropping program.

Also named in subpoenas signed by committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, were the Justice Department and the National Security Council.

The committee wants documents that might shed light on internal disputes within the administration over the legality of the program.

"Our attempts to obtain information through testimony of administration witnesses have been met with a consistent pattern of evasion and misdirection," Leahy said in his cover letters for the subpoenas. "There is no legitimate argument for withholding the requested materials from this committee."

Echoing its response to previous congressional subpoenas to former administration officials Harriet Miers and Sara Taylor, the White House gave no indication that it would comply.

"We're aware of the committee's action and will respond appropriately," White House spokesman Tony Fratto said.

"It's unfortunate that congressional Democrats continue to choose the route of confrontation."

The showdown between the White House and Congress could land in federal court.

Leahy's committee and its counterpart in the House have issued the subpoenas as part of a sweeping look at how much influence the White House exerts over the Justice Department and its chief, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

The probe, in its sixth month, began with an investigation into whether administration officials ordered the firings of eight federal prosecutors, for political reasons.

But with senators of both parties already concerned about the constitutionality of the administration's efforts to root out terrorism suspects in the United States, the committee shifted to the broader question of Gonzales' stewardship of Justice and, in particular, his willingness to permit the wiretapping program.

Piquing the committee's interest was vivid testimony last month by former Deputy Attorney General James Comey about the extent of the White House's effort to override the Justice Department's objections to the program in 2004. (Full Story)

Comey told the Judiciary Committee that Gonzales, then-White House counsel, tried to get Attorney General John Ashcroft to reverse course and recertify the program. At the time, Ashcroft lay in intensive care, recovering form gall bladder surgery.

Ashcroft refused, as did Comey, to whom Ashcroft had temporarily shifted the power of his office during his illness.

The White House recertified the program unilaterally. Ashcroft, Comey, FBI Director Robert Mueller and their staffs prepared to resign. Bush ultimately relented and made changes to the classified program that the Justice officials had demanded, and the agency eventually recertified it.

The fight was one of the most bitter disputes of the Bush presidency and questions remain over whether the program tramples people's civil rights. The administration says the program is crucial to preventing more terrorist attacks.

[Testm0nkey]

i know its will be coming so ill just highlight these two points

internal disputes WITHIN the administration

But with senators of BOTH parties already concerned about the constitutionality of the administration's efforts

"Our attempts to obtain information through testimony of administration witnesses have been met with a consistent pattern of evasion and misdirection," Leahy said in his cover letters for the subpoenas. "There is no legitimate argument for withholding the requested materials from this committee."

[James]

Thread over. Next!

[Testm0nkey]

and i baffle over how stuff like this doesnt outright scare many conservatives or republicans

[James]

As someone that fits both of those descriptions, I'll comment. I'm more afraid of the people they're listening to than them listening to me. I know I have nothing to hide, and if I did, you can be sure I wouldn't discuss it over a phone or the Internet, so it wouldn't apply to me still. Some sacrifices must be made in the name of security. I choose to put my faith in their ability to make good decisions about who to eavesdrop on.