Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Bush Won't Turn Over Emails Until White House 'Reviews' Them
WASHINGTON - President Bush's lawyers told the Republican National Committee on Tuesday not to turn over to Congress any e-mails related to the firings last year of eight U.S. attorneys before showing them to the White House.Democrats and Republican critics of the administration said the move suggests that the White House is seeking to develop a strategy to block the release of the non-government e-mails to congressional investigators by arguing that they're covered by executive privilege and not subject to review.
Scott M. Stanzel, deputy White House press secretary, called the action "reasonable" and said that any review of the e-mails would "be conducted in a timely fashion, to balance the committee's need for the information with the extreme over breadth of their requests." Party officials declined comment, but a GOP aide familiar with the negotiations said the RNC would comply with the White House request.
In a related development, the House Judiciary Committee plans to grant immunity to a former Justice Department liaison to the White House to force her to tell Congress what she knew about the firings. A vote to grant Monica Goodling "use immunity" could come as early as Thursday. Goodling had refused to testify and said she would invoke the Fifth Amendment against self-incrimination.
Judiciary Chairman John Conyers, D-Mich., who'd asked the RNC to turn over any applicable e-mails by week's end, characterized the White House's stance as an "extreme and unnecessary" effort to block or slow the release of the e-mails.
Bruce Fein, a former Reagan administration Justice Department official who's been critical of the administration and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, said the existence of the RNC e-mails is worrisome for the White House.
"The situation is very awkward for the administration because they don't know exactly what e-mails are there. What does seem very clear is that the e-mails did concern government business, which would include firing U.S. attorneys. Otherwise there would be no plausible claim," he said.
Fein said the administration might be considering seeking an injunction to prevent the Republican Party from releasing the e-mails to Congress.
Citing the leaking of the Vietnam-era Pentagon Papers as an example, Fein said, "It's always more difficult to claim privilege after it's leaked out of your hands - or if it's never in your hands in the first place."
At the same time, Fein said, the White House is putting the Republican Party in a bind. "If you're the RNC, you're making yourself vulnerable to a claim you're impeding or endeavoring to impede a congressional investigation," he said.
Sen. Mel Martinez, R-Fla., general chairman of the Republican Party, said he wasn't involved in those discussions and referred legal questions to the RNC. "I'm sure they're going to try to do the right thing, but what that is I don't know. I'm sure they're burning the midnight oil with lawyers over there figuring it out."
The letter from special counsel Emmet T. Flood to the RNC's lawyer, Robert Kelner, said the White House must have an opportunity to review the documents to learn whether they must be preserved as part of the Presidential Records Act, but also to determine "whether the executive branch may need to take measures necessary to protect its other legal interests."
It's not known how many applicable e-mails exist dating back to at least 2005. The White House and RNC last week suggested some might have been lost, although experts say they likely can be retrieved.
But investigators know from documents already released by the Justice Department in the U.S. attorneys probe that some of the 50 current and former White House officials who had separate Republican Party e-mail accounts did send or receive e-mails related to the U.S. attorneys through their non-government accounts.
That includes Bush's deputy chief of staff and political adviser Karl Rove and a deputy of his.
The White House has yet to turn over internal documents and e-mails requested by Congress and has reserved the option of asserting executive privilege to protect internal communications. But Democrats say executive privilege doesn't apply to e-mails sent on non-government accounts. Some also have charged that White House aides might have purposely used non-government e-mail accounts for such communications in order to avoid scrutiny.
If the House Judiciary Committee authorizes immunity for Goodling, it would be the first granted in the congressional investigation into whether politics improperly influenced the firings of the eight U.S. attorneys.
Goodling, through her lawyer, declined to comment on the House panel's plans. Her lawyer previously suggested that if Goodling testified, former colleagues under scrutiny might turn against her, or Democrats seeking political gain might twist her words.
Conyers said Tuesday that Goodling "clearly has much to contribute" to the investigation.
But Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, a member of the Senate's judiciary panel, said of the Democrats, "This is taking on the attributes not of a fishing expedition but a witch hunt. I just think it's driven by politics, and we ought to get serious."
Gonzales is scheduled to testify before the Senate's panel on Thursday as to his role in the firings.
He and Bush have maintained that the nation's 93 U.S. attorneys serve at the pleasure of the president and that there was nothing improper about the decisions to bring in some new top prosecutors. But they haven't offered consistent explanations about the reasons for the firings.
© 2007 McClatchy Washington Bureau and wire service sources.
23 Comments so far
Show AllRemember the White House Travel Office? Didn't those people serve at the pleasure of the president? Why did the Republicans investigate those firings? What did they find? How many of the ones who made a big deal out of THAT are taking the opposite tack, now?
Nixon to Congress: We've decided we need more time to edit the tapes of passages that would be of no interest to your investigation.
Why certainly Mr. President. You take all the time you need. No sense in us listening to all that nonsensical stuff, we have other more important things to do.
Better get Washington decked out for a little summer entertainment. www.stepfour.com/guillotine
Aaaaaaah, yes. Transparency in government--what a concept.
"But, cough, only after we decide what we ALLOW you to see."
www.kucinich.us
Clearly this is a surprise to no one. My only question is when is a total general strike appropriate? It seems elections are no longer a threat... who knew? (heavily sarcastic) Maybe we need to go back to public hangings?
When both houses of congress were controlled by the Republicans, these hearings might not have even started. And furthermore, all investigations that I am aware of were stymied by the Executive Branch – even investigations into 9/11. Throughout any investigation during this period, information was handed over only after protracted time periods or simply was refused to be released. More often than not, executive privilege was the justification. This is an Imperial Presidency with no regard for the system of checks and balance written in to the constitution.
Now that the Democratic Party holds a slim majority, some long over due investigations are being carried out, however, the various comities continue to encounter resistance. Naturally, any sane person would conclude that there is something to hide, but of course the White House won't say that.
To dismiss these various investigations as mere witch hunts is almost laughable. What's at stake is finally getting some answers out of our very secretive current government. As to why impeachment is still not "on the table" is beyond me. It is so clear that many high crimes and misdemeanors have been committed by the president and vice president and many others. Some were left out to "fall on their swords" in order to stop the investigation from proceeding any further.
Essentially, the refusal to hand over all the e-mails immediately is an admission of guilt. I usually don't pray over such matters but right now I am. I pay that these various investigations follow the leads to their true beginnings.
John Cornyn may well replace Jesse Helms as the most dishonest, indecent, despicable enemy of the US people in the senate. When he was Texas Attorney General, with the duty of protecting the people of the state of Texas, he took the side of the insurance companies in a suit the state had initiated, because of deceptive practices, against the insurance companies that offered homeowners insurance. He obtained a good settlement for his fellow criminal vermin and the insurance companies then helped fund his senate run.
I do not think there is any pond scum in Congress, now that Tom DeLay is gone, that can compete with this slimy, disgusting slug in the capacity for pure evil.
Review--Is that a new word for destroy?
Bush and the RNC should be immediately sued. There are no sustainable Executive Privelage arguments here: the emails were already sent over a NON-GOVERNMENTAL email system. In other words, if sensitive/classified information was sent over this system it would be a felony and impeachable. Any official information sent over this RNC email system would also be a violation of the Presidential Records Act.
Time to nail the bastards.
"Kivals" is right. Cornyn is a fascist pig.
I work in Texas in the legal field doing legal research and documents writing. I have had much experience with reading his "opinions" when he afflicted the Texas Supreme Court with his presence.
Unbelievable. I have never seen an opinion he wrote yet which couldn't have come from an insurance-pig lobbyist.
But I'll tell you what: He is not unusually slimy; he is typical of the thieves and traitors who have usurped the Presidency and are attempting to destroy the Congress.
It seems to me that we should have a class-action impeachment: Impeach all of the swine, and "extraordinarily render" them to Egypt or Poland for "questioning". Then, perhaps, public hangings would be a good idea...
How long does it take to rewrite five million emails?
Trickie Dick used a deaf senator to review his tapes. Will this one use the Whitehouse for the Blind?
alamac,
I agree with all you wrote except that you do not believe that Cornyn stands out as especially corrupt and dangerous. I still feel that he is, even though the Republicans in Washington, particularly in the Bush administration, have been rewriting the standards to such a degree that it takes extraordinary effort now to stand out.
I know a woman who worked in the Texas AG's office when Cornyn was there and she told me that the most senior attorneys there came close to physical altercations with Cornyn because of his determination to protect the insurance companies, when his duty was to protect the people of Texas against the insurance companies.
We can only thank our lucky stars that LBJ and GWBush have made it virtually impossible for another Texan to win the White House for a long, long time.
But Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, a member of the Senate's judiciary panel, said of the Democrats, "This is taking on the attributes not of a fishing expedition but a witch hunt. I just think it's driven by politics, and we ought to get serious."
Perhaps someone should tell Sen. Cornyn that if he doesn't want to be driven by politics maybe he shouldn't be a politician.
Who do you think you are George? YOU work for US. If that sounds naive then that very characterization is precisely the problem with this country.
Sounds like they're determined to get away with their coverup. And by not impounding the administration hard drives, but just politely asking them not to destroy emails, they are being enabled. Someone commented that it's not easy to erase hard drives. No, it isn't, but it's not impossible, and there is no question they can find people to do that, and probably already have.
The Congressional committees should immediately order the RNC hard drives impounded, unless, of course, they only want to look serious about getting to the bottom of this scandal. Maybe they just want to look busy.
I'm not gonna say this is the end of these guys - wish I had a dollar for every time I read that in the last couple of years. You have to admit though looks like the RNC, Rove and all the kings men have their collective tit in a wringer. Not only do they have to hand over frank discussions about head chopping, they have to face the bigger issue of dereliction of duty.
I'm sure everything is a perfect muddle, the rest of their tenure has been, and they've been conducting the nation's business on devices meant to avoid the public record. The nation's business must be on the public record, or the lonsome cowboy and the head up their ass gang will just have to declare that "aint no law anywhere that means a hoot to us. We da gummint, BY God."
The worst part is that, NOTHING WILL GET DONE. They won't hand them over and Congress will go meakly on their way. Surprise me - please!
Note to Hillary and Obama: now would be a good time to lead.
Who am I kidding?
Saying to Bush, Hey you work for us, is like the hen in the henhouse, with her neck ready to be severed in the farm dog's jaws saying, Hey, aren't you supposed to be the watchdog around here?
Unfortunately times have changed and though most of us think they're supposed to be on our side and working for the betterment of the country, that's pretty quaint these days. We're just the little engines that put in the hours to make the money that pays for their grand plans and misadventures.
HEY GEORGE YOU CAN RUN BUT YOU CAN'T HIDE!IT'S YOU AND OSAMA NOW MY little boy!
"They won't hand them over and Congress will go meakly on their way."
I'm not so sure, Vince. The executive department cannot claim jurisdiction over non-governmental e-mails. I don't believe the courts will grant the Bushies legal standing in this. So it'll be between Congress and the RNC.
There'll be blood in the water.
Does anyone remember the presentation to the UN by Iraq on their weapon's program? Of course the White House had to 'review' the material first, deleting anything that pointed to their own involvement and deleting what would have cleared Iraq... if the Administration is doing this to an UN-report, what are we expecting they would do to their own material? We won't even know the truth after the 20 years disclosure period, why are we hoping that accountability and honesty is possible now? Alexandra
How strange that history is repeating itself! The White House went through similar contortions of law under Nixon. It is said a person is crazy when repeating the same mistakes but expecting different results, so I guess the USA is crazy for allowing this war-and-White-House-cover-up to happen again, as it did in Vietnam. Wierd!
Hey remember when GW violated the Geneva Convention but then made a RETROACTIVE law that made it all "okay"?