The "Trust Me" Approach To US Policy Continues

Defense Reluctant To Share Data On Iraqi Troop Readiness

The Defense Department has resisted auditors' efforts to obtain data on the military readiness of U.S.-trained Iraqi troops, according to a senior government official.

Comptroller General David M. Walker told audience members at a Government Executive breakfast Wednesday that Defense has not complied with repeated Government Accountability Office requests for evaluations of Iraqi troop preparedness, known as transitional readiness assessments. The Pentagon develops those evaluations for Iraqi and U.S. forces, Walker said, and has a statutory obligation to release them to GAO.

Every time we turn a corner we are being told that the executive branch is not forthcoming about some piece of information. The "shadow government"--that is to say the government that operates in the shadows--of the Bush administration seems to believe that only those anointed by President Bush directly are allowed to have any real access to information, unless of course it is leaked to the press to embarrass a former ambassador and put his CIA operative wife in danger. Bush is also on the attack in regard to the leaks to the press, except when they come from his team and have his imprimatur.

On this past Thursday, AG Gonzalez refused to divulge requested information to a senate hearing panel on the grounds that Gonzalez didn't think they could understand all that was involved. While not claiming executive privilege, because he can't, Gonzalez deferred answering basic questions about surveillance programs, legal principles and constitutional rights. He also deflected--or should I say failed to answer--questions about his recent statements regarding the role of the judiciary and its inability to understand national security issues and how the executive branch should not suffer judicial oversight on this and other matters.

The overall pattern of not sharing information by the Bush administration, as well as filtering information so that it only reflects the view expected, desired or consistent with the administration's stance, seems to be the Bush administration's own downfall... and they do not even acknowledge the fact.

Attorney General Grilled Over Domestic Spying Changes

The Bush administration's top lawyer took heat from the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday about the federal government's domestic electronic eavesdropping program and the Pentagon's use of an anti-terrorism law to collect financial records of U.S. citizens....

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales remained guarded throughout the hearing and refused to answer a number of questions asked by committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., ranking Republican Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania and others.

Specter said he wanted to know "why it took so long" for the administration to agree to let the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court review electronic spying requests. The Justice Department said it had been negotiating a review process with the court since summer 2005.

What Gonzalez has said in his testimony was that it took a while for DOJ to "negotiate" terms with the FISA Court.

How does a prosecutor negotiate terms with the court? Isn't the court there to assure that the Constitution--and its principles--are adhered to and that the laws of the United States are followed in letter and spirit? What is there to be negotiated?

There are "far too many unanswered questions to say this issue has been resolved," added Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. He worried aloud that the administration could "turn [court review] off at will, particularly if you got a decision that you didn't want."

Given the stance of "negotiation" that Gonzalez offered, Schumer's concerns may be a bit late. I believe that the horse has not only left the barn, but set that barn on fire and then left the paddock as well.

Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis., said he was pleased that the administration decided to "return to the law" after more than five years of what he described as illegal wiretapping. The turnabout was a "stunning" and "long overdue change in direction," Feingold said.

It would appear that Bush and his gang are still up to their old tricks. They have agreed to adhere to a law that they should have been adherent to ab initio now that there is a change of the guard in congress and that it would be politically expedient to make it look like compliance is taking place. However, the Bush gang have become masterful at misdirecting our attention from the real issues and actions. We are once again being lulled into a slumber while we are being duped. Unless we start a rigorous process of holding these bastards directly accountable, they will continue to break the law, ignore the Constitution and operated with apparent immunity from any oversight or legitimate process of governance.

On the issue of collecting bank and credit-card data, Specter said "there's a very basic, distinct role" of the FBI, which pursues domestic matters, and for the CIA, whose role is international. "I'm at a loss to see what the CIA is doing on domestic investigations," Specter said, noting that the Defense Department "has no authority to investigate American citizens."

"There is not a constitutional issue here," Gonzales insisted. He said Congress authorized law enforcement agencies to collect business records but not for criminal investigations or domestic terrorism cases. The files can only be used in espionage and overseas incidents, he said.

For a lawyer, and a former justice of the Texas Supreme Court, Gonzalez is pretty damn ignorant regarding the Constitution. I know 7th grade students that have a more comprehensive and straight-forward understanding of our Constitution than our esteemed attorney general. Does he actually believe he can fool Leahy, Schumer, Specter and the entire nation that there isn't a constitutional issue present when an agency of the executive branch fails to adhere to a law passed in congress and signed into law is ignored? The CIA is prohibited, in fact and in principle, from domestic spying and operations by at least three laws any politically aware US citizen can name. So, what Gonzalez is really saying is that his--and the Bush gang's--efforts to skate around the law is still the name of the game.

Government lawyers are slated to appear before the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in two weeks to challenge a lawsuit filed by the ACLU over the NSA program. The ACLU said a ruling remains important because the president still believes in his "inherent authority to engage in wiretapping without the oversight of the [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act] court."

Absent more details about what the secret FISA court has authorized, there is no way to determine whether the NSA's current activities are lawful, the ACLU said. "The legality of this unprecedented surveillance program should not be decided by a secret court in one-sided proceedings," ACLU lawyer Ann Beeson said.

I am hoping that the court has the wisdom to review some of these "secrets" in camera to assess whether or not there is a genuine need for secrecy, or, as we all suspect, the Bush administration is so accustomed to operating under the assumption that if they say we can trust their judgment, we will take their word on it. Well, the mid-term elections was a mandate that this sort of in the shadows government is not what the majority of Americans want. I am pretty sure that once all the sins of the Bush administration are made known, most of the hard line Bush supporters won't want it either.