(Conyers blog)Letter to Bush on Secret Spying Program

[cal04]

Was Christine Amanapour's phone really bugged? Will Bush bother to respond?

Today more than 20 Members (Democrats and an Independent) wrote to the President expressing concern with his warrantless surveillance program. Rawstory and numerous blogs have a copy of the letter. Much of the interest relates to the apparent disclosure by NBC News yesterday that CNN Reporter Christine Amanpour may have gotten tied up in the surveillance -- a story broken by AmericaBLOG who first disclosed that this question posed by Andrea Mitchell to the Time's Risen was deleted from the transcript, which only elevated the story.

Several observations:

First, I note that many individuals who have commented on this story at Rawstory's and AmericaBLOG's sites ask why we Democrats bother writing these letters if we're unlikely to get answers. As I have noted previously, there are several reasons. First, you never know if you might get an answer -- even if its evasive, it can help to flush them out. Second, the Administration's failure to answer is revealing unto itself, and can help build a public case for obstruction and lack of accountabililty. That is what the Downing Street Minutes were all about, and unless I'm mistaken, accountability and checks and balanaces (not to mention corruption and incompetence) will be what the 06 midterms will be about. Third, the mere fact of our asking can help shed light on the problem. The major print and broadcast media may pick it up (I note Kos is asking we not call it the mainstream media), public debate maybe stirred, thoughts may be refined etc. Fourth, many of our requests necessitate some sort of action -- our Resolutions of Inquiry force a vote in the Committee, again even if we lose, we create accountability through public votes and debate. Moreover, our requests to Inspector Generals and the GAO are statutorily required to be reviewed. Fifth, it shows that at least we Democrats are willing to speak up and stand for something, and that we will not lie down while the Constitution is tramelled.

Second, others have asked why I asked Bush to provide proposed statutory language on the program. I did not do so because I support the warrantless surveillance being conducted by the present Administration. I did so so that we could at least be on record as asking the President to show his hand. If he thinks the program is so important to national security, he should be obligated to detail how it works and justify it so that Congress can make the final determination. I believe we have a better chance debating this program in the light of day rather than Ashcroft's Hospital Room. Again, we may not receive an answer, but it would be somewhat telling that the President of the United States would not even send a proposed statute to us.

Third, I note that both NBC and CNN are denying any knowledge of Ms. Amanapour (who is married to former Clinton official Jamie Rubin) was bugged. That is all well and good, but really begs the question as to why Andrea Mitchell asked the question and why NBC deleted the passage from their transcript. The only one who would know for sure is the Administration, and that is why I asked. If freedom of the press still means anything in this country, I hope we get an honest answer.

http://www.conyersblog.us/
I love this man