Bush delay tactics in CIA Leak case

WASHINGTON (AP)--Constitutional experts say the White House's decision to screen documents before shipping them to the FBI for its CIA leak investigation gives the Bush administration room to withhold information under the guise of public or national security interests.
www.libertyforum.org... mber=937276&t=-1

Does anyone actually think this administration can be trusted investigating itself? As a life-long (now former)Republican who supported the Independent Counsel investigating Klinton, I have to say, this administration is no more trustworthy than the last. Justice is justice. Partisan politics must be set aside for the truth to emerge. Outting a CIA officer and endangering all of those lives is a crime that must be punished to the fullest extent!!!!

Yes and anything that endangers the future of the US is a good idea too!

Every little principle in the books must be followed because every critic of the white house is perfect and does exactly the right thing at all times.

How dare they do anything wrong when the entire rest of the world is so clean and perfect. We have standards you know and ours are the highest in the world.

The white house must have by far the highest standards in the world even when there is not one other country in the world that does. We must be an example to the universe.

This is why I slam them all day long because I too am perfect and damn it they must be!

Wrong on so many levels, this White House is. ( OK, I was going for Yoda speak but failed)

But compromising an Agent for political retribution? Nothing even remotely tied to them covering this up under National Security. Another farce with no shame in wrapping themselves in the flag while #ting on it via their action.

The letter concerned Senators sent to the 'president'.
(Please refute any or all of it with sound argument based in fact and NOT ideology, if you're so inclined0


October 9, 2003
The President
The White House
Washington, DC 20500



Dear Mr. President:



We write to express our continuing concerns regarding the manner in which your Administration is conducting the investigation into the apparently criminal leaking of a covert CIA operative's identity. You have personally pledged the White House's full cooperation in this investigation and you have stated your desire to see any culprits identified and prosecuted, but the Administration's actions are inconsistent with your words.

Already, just 14 days into this investigation, there have been at least five serious missteps.

First, although the Department of Justice commenced its investigation on Friday, September 26, the Justice Department did not ask the White House to order employees to preserve all relevant evidence until Monday, September 29. Every former prosecutor with whom we have spoken has said that the first step in such an investigation would be to ensure all potentially relevant evidence is preserved, yet the Justice Department waited four days before making a formal request for such documents.

Second, when the Justice Department finally asked the White House to order employees to preserve documents, White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales asked for permission to delay transmitting the order to preserve evidence until morning. That request for delay was granted. Again, every former prosecutor with whom we have spoken has said that such a delay is a significant departure from standard practice.

Third, instead of immediately seeking the preservation of evidence at the two other Executive Branch departments from which the leak might have originated, i.e., State and Defense, such a request was not made until Thursday, October 1. Perhaps even more troubling, the request to State and Defense Department employees to preserve evidence was telegraphed in advance not only by the request to White House employees earlier in the week, but also by the October 1st Wall Street Journal report that such a request was "forthcoming" from the Justice Department. It is, of course, extremely unusual to tip off potential witnesses in this manner that a preservation request is forthcoming.

Fourth, on October 7, White House spokesperson Scott McClellan stated that he had personally determined three White House officials, Karl Rove, Lewis Libby and Elliot Abrams, had not disclosed classified information. According to press reports, Mr. McClellan said, "I've spoken with each of them individually. They were not involved in leaking classified information, nor did they condone it." Clearly, a media spokesperson does not have the legal expertise to be questioning possible suspects or evaluating or reaching conclusions about the legality of their conduct. In addition, by making this statement, the White House has now put the Justice Department in the position of having to determine not only what happened, but also whether to contradict the publicly stated position of the White House.

Fifth, and perhaps most importantly, the investigation continues to be directly overseen by Attorney General Ashcroft who has well-documented conflicts of interest in any investigation of the White House. Mr. Ashcroft's personal relationship and political alliance with you, his close professional relationships with Karl Rove and Mr. Gonzales, and his seat on the National Security Council all tie him so tightly to this White House that the results may not be trusted by the American people. Even if the case is being handled in the first instance by professional career prosecutors, the integrity of the inquiry may be called into question if individuals with a vested interest in protecting the White House are still involved in any matter related to the investigation.

We are at risk of seeing this investigation so compromised that those responsible for this national security breach will never be identified and prosecuted. Public confidence in the integrity of this investigation would be substantially bolstered by the appointment of a special counsel. The criteria in the Justice Department regulations that created the authority to appoint a Special Counsel have been met in the current case. Namely, there is a criminal investigation that presents a conflict of interest for the Justice Department, and it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside special counsel to assume responsibility for the matter. In the meantime, we urge you to ask Attorney General Ashcroft to recuse himself from this investigation and do everything within your power to ensure the remainder of this investigation is conducted in a way that engenders public confidence.




Sincerely,



Tom Daschle
Joseph R. Biden
Carl Levin
Charles E. Schumer