Congress, Constitutional Law, Criminal law, Politics, Society

Report: Cheney Ordered Concealment of Secret Program From Congress

225px-richard_cheney_2005_official_portraitIt goes without saying that, where there is a story of constitutional or human rights abuse, Dick Cheney cannot be far behind. It is therefore little surprise to learn this week that, according to sources in the recent disclosure of a hidden counterterrorism program, the prior concealment from Congress was allegedly ordered by Cheney.

The Central Intelligence Agency reportedly withheld information about program for eight years on orders from Cheney, who continually fought any disclosures on a host of subjects to either Congress or the courts.

As I discussed on this segment of MSNBC Countdown, it is a crime to withhold such information from Congress — yet another crime that is not being investigated by the Obama Administration.

While covert operations can be limited to disclosures to the Gang of Eight, the National Security Act of 1947 requires such disclosure.

It was previously known that Cheney’s legal adviser, David S. Addington, (another dark character in these scandals) was involved in this matter as well.

Once again, it is astonishing that Attorney General Eric Holder continues to refuse to appoint a special prosecutor to deal with the mounting allegations of criminal acts by the Bush Administration. The blocking of such investigations by the Obama Administration reaffirms the view that our intelligence services live beyond the reach of the law and that our leaders are unaccountable under the criminal laws that they apply to average citizens. While Obama insists that no one is above the law, he has ensured that we have two separate systems of justice for the powerful and the plebes.

In another story, Gen. Michael Hayden who carried out many of the presumptively unlawful programs during the Bush Administration insists that Congress was informed of this particular program, here.

For the full story, click here

235 thoughts on “Report: Cheney Ordered Concealment of Secret Program From Congress”

  1. “The fact is we have no real records on Prof. Obama who taught constitutional law for ten years. I have yet to read an article from students at the law school and student is plural in case you were to direct me to one person.” -daman

    What is this stuff?

    Everyone, read about his teaching in the New York Times:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/30/us/politics/30law.html

  2. Jim, pull your head out of the toilet. I can post what I plaese, comprende?

  4. Patriot,

    If you want to refute something stated by Mike Appleton, you are welcome to do so. However, attacking the man, and not his opinion, is uncalled for.

    Please add something of value, or go away.

  6. Mike Appleton has posted with Turley from the very first month, under his own name, and is a practicing lawyer who has linked to his law practice, the Appleton Law Firm, in Florida.

    He speaks with authority.

  8. Don’t be faked out by Appleton. He isn’t the sharpest tool in the shed. I read his earlier blogs and he was worked over by a zealous catholic who was posting on the church. The guy was solid and was spot on. Appleton is pretty weak and got punked hard…..

  9. Yes Vince I honestly agree with Mike you have done a great job as I pointed out in one of my earlier post, it was not a joke. However I am entitled like so many on both sides of the issue to my opinion. The fact is we have no real records on Prof. Obama who taught constitutional law for ten years. I have yet to read an article from students at the law school and student is plural in case you were to direct me to one person. When Gibbs told Helen Thomas she was incorect in thinking he taught constitutional law it created more doubt on that issue. I’d like to see some cases or clients he represented but we have no stories about them. The list goes on and on. This matter won’t ever be settled until the day there is a trial and an outcome to that trial. During that trial I’m sure the COLB will be able to be introduced as evidence where it can be properly examined instead of pointed out on the internet. You your self in earlier post want to talk about myths in the day of the internet, but when someone else wants to point to a possible myth you want to dismiss it because it’s not how you view it. See Flat earther, Piltdown Man Gay Gene as great myths that were perpetrated and the fact that myths can be created. You and many others are satisfied that your right and myself and others would like to see more proof. So you can point to Dr. Conspiracy over and over again and I can point to the moon, the issue will stay divided until a court of law settles it.

  10. bdaman, I don’t think you quite get the procedure here. Valid service is a condition of the court’s acquisition of jurisdiction to rule in an action. Service of process is not difficult if one follows the statutes. The court did Taitz a favor so that it can get on with it. A motion to dismiss will be filed, at which point the court will undoubtedly enter a final order of dismissal. Ms. Taitz may then proceed with an appeal if she chooses to. That will be a useless effort, but she will undoubtedly proceed anyway. If this woman was actually being paid by a client to pursue this, she would be risking a malpractice action.

    Donofrio was wrong before because he didn’t have standing. He is right now because he recognizes that Taitz is placing people at risk in order to pursue her own nutty agenda.

  11. Vince,

    Quoting Leo “I suggested hypothetically that active military might have standing to bring a class action to question Obama’s POTUS eligibility.”

    I concur with Leo’s decision to not recruit active duty military personnel. –Active duty personnel take their orders from their direct superior. While it would be reasonable to question the fitness of your direct superior, it would be up to that superior officer to question the fitness of his or her superior.

    Major Cook, though still doing so at his own peril, is in a unique position. As a reservist, he can only be activated by order of the POTUS. This should give him standing to challenge the fitness of the President directly.

  12. Vince,
    Regarding bdaman and bvm: In the words of one of the 20th Century’s greatest philosophers, Yogi Berra:”It’s deja vue all over again.” One of the lasting tendencies of ignorance is its’
    persistence. You’ve done a spectacular job thus far, but in my opinion these clowns aren’t worth your great talents and noble efforts.

  13. I like how in your view Donofrio was wrong wrong wrong but now all of a sudden in your view he’s right.

    These service men are probably seen as troublemakers. This nation was built by troublemakers. If we had kept on following people above or beyond the law we wouldn’t have Obama anyway, we’d have stuck with George III and have Queen Elizabeth II today.

  14. The link above is to an article in Ledger Enquirer about a Reserve Major who is refusing deployment and relying on the lawsuit by Orly Taitz. Leo Donofrio has a take on this:

    http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2009/02/25/military-potus-eligibility-madness/

    QUOTE A few weeks ago, I suggested hypothetically that active military might have standing to bring a class action to question Obama’s POTUS eligibility. After reviewing various sections of the Uniform Code of Military Justice pointed out to me by various readers, I came to the conclusion that such a law suit would probably not only fail, but would also subject soldiers to potential court martial.

    I decided to have nothing to do with any such law suit involving military plaintiffs. Their burden is already so large. This is our burden.

    Then, after seeing a consent form issued by Orly Taitz within which active military were being asked to state that they might disobey orders from President Obama, I realized that these men were truly being put in serious jeopardy. I responded with a blog which suggested that any soldiers who had a problem with Obama’s eligibility should consult a JAG lawyer or their personal attorney rather than going to the internet for advice.UNQUOTE

    Leo goes on to describe his opposition to the online recruitment of military personnel.

    Good for Leo.

  15. Vince other than Dr. Conspiracy where can I verify this statemnet

    She never served him, at the White House or at the Department of Justioe. She was ignorant of the requirement for serving Obama. Instructed by the court, she has now served him through the U.S. Attorney, and the case can proceed.

  16. So it appears that Atty Dejute heard the Judges comments, relayed them to Thom Mrozek, a spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office and he commented on the hearing on how it was given to him by Dejute.

  18. What did the U.S. Attorney say,

    Quote: That’s not quite the way Asst. U.S. Atty. David DeJute heard the judge’s comments. Thom Mrozek, a spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office, said that “the judge did make a bunch of comments about having the matter correctly and thoroughly aired, once and if they got to the merits of the actual lawsuit, which was not the subject of today’s discussion.” Unquote

    So we know the Judge said that, apparently the Judge also said IF they got to the merits of the actual lawsuit. As I told BVM I would like to see the official transcripts to the hearing before anymore quotes are quoted.

Comments are closed.