Cheney and Libby forget? Not on your life. This tight-assed little administration forgets NOTHING.

Are we missing the proverbial elephant in the room?

Do we really want a VP and his Chief of Staff in their respective offices who can’t remember who they talked to about what, especially as it relates to classified information?

Let’s assume for the sake of argument that Libby actually forgot. What else is he prone to forget? Who Bin Laden is? How many troops we actually need (or have) in Iraq? In Afghanistan? Where are the WMDs?

Is Valerie Wilson the only person he forgot about during this time frame?

Sometimes i wish Fitz would take the ‘low road’ just to satify my twisted need for entertainment.

Tom – that’s absolutely wrong. It is the same kind of argument made by Nixon over having to respond to subpeona requests; by Nixon’s DOJ in the Keith Case; and by others. It presumes that in the area of certain delegations of discretion and privilege, there are no limits on the President’s power, and that is incorrect.

If Congress, by statute, has said a covert agent’s ident will be protected, on the pain of criminal penalties, then the President could not violate that law except in some pretty circumscribed situations. There is no Constitutional right for the President to classify and declassify in an arbitrary, capricious or abusive manner. In particular, classification or declassification to perpetrate a criminal violation of a statute just isn’t an allowed privilege or exercise of discretion. Go find your case that says it is – go find your case that says Nixon didn’t have to respond to subpeonas bc of Exec privilege – go find your case that says Nixon’s AG had the right to violate the 4th Amendment bc of Exec rights and privilege.

When you look at the cases, then go look up contra as a citation modifier. You’ll find that the Sup Ct holdings are “contra” to your statement.

cheers

Good point! Of course, if the President chooses to de-classify an agent, they are no longer “covert” under the statute, so no crime has been committed.

This would no more reach the Supreme Court than my next parking ticket would, if the President were at issue – as to the VP, one might wonder why the President would not choose to back him, and I agree it is not clear from the Executive Order that the President would have delegated that authority to the VP, but – declassification is clearly an Executive Branch function.

Now, if you want to go after someone for lying about whether a declassification had occurred, fine, Fitzgerald could try that.

And Congress could impeach because they don’t like the way the VP parts his hair (OK, not a great example). Or, more to the point, they could impeach for abuse of power, if they thought that the de-classification was to advance a political or personal agenda rather than to serve the national interest.

Nice to see folks are at least aware of the issue – the notion that Cheney had committed a crime needing covering up is pretty slim.

That last post should have included a link to a January DU thread, where I posted it originally. And that should have said “when I heard that Dick Cheney supposedly wrote that after the fact”.

Still, thanks. :)

Dick managing the message.
Edited on Wed Jan-31-07 03:05 PM by Patsy Stone

So, Addington tells Libby about Plame on June 11/12 (as that Waas article said and testimony confirmed). Libby (maybe) tells Judy on June 23, July 8, and July 12. Scooter supposedly doesn’t tell Cheney about Plame between June 11 and July 14th (until the Novak article — almost a month later), when Cheney then supposedly digs out the Wilson July 6th Op-Ed (a week later!) and writes those questions on it.

Thus, I think that Cheney’s scrawled questions to Scooter on the Op-Ed weren’t what he wanted to “know” (although Libby thought he could sell that story to Fitz) but were, in fact, the first time Cheney writes out exactly what he wants Libby to “get out” through reporters (probably on the very day the Op-Ed comes out). The story with Cathie Martin on AF2 was, then, (at least) the second time Cheney managed the message.
–

Well into Anatomy of Deceit and it’s wonderful.

Thanks for all the time and effort you (and all of the good folks at FDL) put into this story.

I think Fitz recognizes that the prosecuting Cheney for #2 (the leak) is legally ambiguous. It is leaking but SCOTUS will let it be “insta-declassify”.

I think Fitz has vastly more evidence than most people think that implicates Cheney in #3, conspiracy & Forgery. Prosecuting Deadeye for these crimes is not legally ambiguous. I think this is where Fitz is going. Cheney can be pinned on both the facts AND THE LAW!

FRUM UR LIPS 2 GODS EAR

What is the procedure to declassify information by the VP? When was it done??

The way I read the Executive Order signed by Bush on March 25, 2003 (Hmmm!) is that Cheney can classify or declassify materials WITHIN the Office of the Vice President (in his Executive status). He can also be given, in writing (as can anyone) the authority to declassify specific materials by an agency head (as defined by 5 USC 105) that was the originating classification authority. That power to have delegated declassification authority can also be derived from the immediate supervisor of the “originating classification authority”.

But the law is quite specific that there are a set of procedures and record-keeping that must be undertaken before a declassification request is acted upon.

Part III. “In some exceptional cases, however, the need to protect such information may be outweighed by the public interest in disclosure of the information, and in these cases the information should be declassified. When such questions arise, they shall be referred to the AGENCY HEAD or the SENIOR AGENCY OFFICIAL. That official will determine, as an exercise of discretion, whether the public interest in disclosure outweighs the damage to the national security that might reasonably be expected from disclosure.”

http://www.fas.org/sgp/bush/eoamend.html

But Cheney is not the “boss” of the CIA or any other agency. Technically, Bush is the “supervisor” of all the Executive Departments. But there is a “Mandatory declassification review” that must occur whenever there is request to declassify materials from an external agency or individual. Any such request for declassification must be referred to the original classification authority agency for review (3.6b), which can deny the request.

If there is an appeal, it would then go to the Interagency Security Classification Panel (reps from State, Defense, DOJ, CIA, National Archives., Asst. to President NSA, and the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office) for review if there is an objection on a mandatory declassification request (5.2b5). If the DCIA objects because of the risk to National Security (including intelligence sources and operations) continued classification can be appealed to the President, who can order declassification.

BTW there are lots of interesting things in this Executive Order about “Need-to-Know”, and responsibilities of record-holders and users to prevent dissemination of classified information. There’s also the statement as to invalid reasons to classify materials that are not related to National Security.

Lastly there is an important Statement at 6.2c that states quite firmly that some information may be protected by laws and statute that this Presidential Order is restricted from interfering with.

Radiofreewill, I just saw your post re the forgeries. Missed that earlier. Thanks for the step-by-step. But can you please go back before that first step and tell me what you think about the origin of the forgeries?

I haven’t been following this thread real close so forgive me if this is off base but..
Josh Marshall has done a LOT of research and reporting on the forgeries. TalkingPointsMemo archives would be the best palce to start, I would think.

TIP: try googling “forgeries site:talkingpointsmemo.com” Note that there must be no space between the colon and the site name

emptywheel @ 91

I’ve been thinking similar thoughts, too (and it explains the precise formulation I used in the last words of the book, pre-epilogue). There are two big constitutional hurdles to get Dick. A court of law isn’t going to do it, not with this SCOTUS.

But a Democratic Congress?

A newly emboldened American people?

We can hope.

Mmm. Peach. Mint.