Andrew Sullivan captured the dynamic perfectly: “The task of American democracy tackling the kind of issues that were once the province of South American countries has now begun. The authorization of war crimes, torture, and illegal wire-tapping by this administration needs to be thoroughly investigated in order to hold more than a few scapegoat grunts responsible. The definitive proof is in the hands of the administration – and they have a constitutional duty to hand it over to the Congress.”
That’s right, Bush gang, for the first time in six years, the co-equal branch of government at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue is going to start flexing its oversight muscles. Not only is national security on the table, for a lot of lawmakers, it’s going to be Question #1.
Seeking information about detention of terrorism suspects, abuse of detainees and government secrecy, Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee are reviving dozens of demands for classified documents that until now have been rebuffed or ignored by the Justice Department and other agencies.
“I expect real answers, or we’ll have testimony under oath until we get them,” Senator Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, who will head the committee beginning in January, said in an interview this week. “We’re entitled to know these answers, and in many instances we don’t get them because people are hiding their mistakes. And that’s no excuse.”
Mr. Leahy, who has said little about his plans for the committee, expressed hope for greater cooperation from the Bush administration, which he described as having been “obsessively secretive.” His aides have identified more than 65 requests he has made to the Justice Department or other agencies in recent years that have been rejected or permitted to languish without reply.
And why would Rove & Co. respond? As a courtesy? A professional, responsible approach to resolving inquiries from lawmakers? Of course not. Dems were in the minority — the White House could ignore them with impunity.
It’s made for some very awkward lawmaking. Congress has been asked to tackle issues such as warrantless searches, torture, suspension of habeas corpus, etc., without the incidental facts that would help them know what they were talking about. When shaping policy, congressional Republicans would write legislation blindly — or, more accurately, would ask the White House to do it for them.
The president could get away with saying, “I’m doing everything right; take my word for it.” The answer officially became unacceptable around midnight on Nov. 8.
One document is a directive, signed by President Bush shortly after the September 2001 attacks, that granted the C.I.A. authority to set up detention centers outside the United States and outlined allowable interrogation procedures.
The second is a memorandum, written by the Office of Legal Counsel at the Justice Department in 2002, that is thought to have given the C.I.A. specific legal advice about interrogation methods that would not violate a federal statute on torture.
With Democrats in control, it will be harder for executive branch agencies to sidestep requests for documents. Behind each request will be the possibility of Democrats’ voting to issue subpoenas that would compel documents or testimony, although Senate aides said they hoped to avoid conflict.
If the Bush gang refuses to provide information, they’ll be subpoenaed. Any chance they’ll ignore the subpoenas? Perhaps it’s better to ask, any chance that they won’t?
One thing’s for sure, Leahy isn’t bluffing. As he told Alberto Gonzales recently in a letter, “The American people deserve to have detailed and accurate information about the role of the Bush administration in developing the interrogation policies and practices that have engendered such deep criticism around the world.”
He’s not likely to take “it’s a secret” as a legitimate answer.