Cheney Taunts, Democrats Can Disclose

Over the weekend, Fourthbranch Cheney tried to make it sound like he was very worried about needing Congressional authorization for the illegal wiretapping program, but top Congressional leaders, Republicans and Democrats, talked him down.

CHENEY: We briefed them on the program and what we’d achieved and how it worked and asked them should we continue the program. They were unanimous, Republican and Democrat alike. All agreed: Absolutely essential to continue the program. I then said, Do we need to come to the Congress and get additional legislating authorization to continue what we’re doing? They said absolutely not. Don’t do it.

This just doesn't make a lot of sense, just purely in terms of Congress giving up its own power. But that's happened before, of course. What really calls this into question is that it came out of the mouth of Dick Cheney. In fact, Nancy Pelosi, Jay Rockefeller, Jane Harman and Bob Graham have all denied this, claiming in fairly common language that the Administration gave only the barest outlines of the plan and not the details that these wiretaps would be used against Americans.

Nevertheless, it's pretty clear that Democrats Congressional leaders have been less than forthcoming about what they heard from the Administration on this issue. I agree with Spackerman - there's one way to clear up all the confusion, and that's with a full investigation by a commission outside of politics.

If there’s ever a solid argument for an independent commission into the illegal surveillance and torture programs, here it is: the public is owed a thorough accounting of what the administration did; what it told Congress; and what Congress approved.

But still still. Cheney might not be acting in good faith, but he’s nevertheless pointing to something barometrically significant. In Washington, the phrase “bipartisan” is supposed to cash out to something like “legal” or “wise” or “no longer controversial” or “kosher.” The Germans probably have a word that’s a more acceptable translation. In any event, that’s self-evidently foolish: lots of people can make mistakes and lots of people can make venal decisions, and it’s not a function of belonging to one political party or the other. Cheney doesn’t get off the hook if Nancy Pelosi is on it with him. Naturally, what I imagine Cheney’s doing is warning the Democrats off creating an independent commission into the abuses of the administration, lest it go after them too, but that’s all the more reason one should be created.

Absolutely. What we know right now is troubling enough - Rockefeller, Harman and the rest offered extremely weak resistance to the Administration, and didn't want the extent of the program to be disclosed. As Glenn Greenwald notes, the best way not to be seen as complicit in this and other perversions of justice pulled off by Cheney and company is to allow for full disclosure of all the activities. I'm not particularly concerned about the results - the chips can fall where they may.

The reason the law requires that Congressional leaders be briefed on intelligence programs is not because it's nice in the abstract for someone to know. It's because Congressional leaders have the right and the obligation to take action to stop illegal intelligence programs -- something all briefed Democrats clearly failed to do. Cheney, on his way out the door, is answering questions about what he knew and approved. It's way past time for Pelosi, Harman and Rockefeller, at the very least, to do the same.

Let's get an independent prosecutor.