Follow the e-mails
The discovery of a
previously unknown treasure chest of e-mails buried by
the Bush administration may prove to be as informative
as Nixon's secret White House tapes.
By Sidney Blumenthal
03/29/07 "Salon"
-- - - The rise and fall of the Bush presidency has had
four phases: the befuddled period of steady political
decline during the president's first nine months; the high
tide of hubris from Sept. 11, 2001, through the 2004
election; the self-destructive overreaching to consolidate a
one-party state from 2005 to 2006, culminating in the
repudiation of the Republican Congress; and, now, the
terminal stage, the great unraveling, as the Democratic
Congress works to uncover the abuses of the previous six
years.
Richard Nixon and George W.
Bush both invoked secrecy for national security. Both
insisted war -- the war in
Vietnam,
the war on terror -- justified impunity. And both offered
the reason of secrecy to cover political power grabs.
In Watergate, "Deep Throat"
counseled that the royal road to the scandal's source was to
"follow the money." In the proliferating scandals of the
Bush presidency, Congress is searching down a trail of
records that did not exist in the time of Nixon: Follow the
e-mails.
The discovery of a hitherto
unknown treasure-trove of e-mails buried by the Bush White
House may prove to be as informative as Nixon's secret White
House tapes. Last week the National Journal disclosed that
Karl Rove
does "about 95 percent" of his e-mails outside the White
House system, instead using a Republican National Committee
account. What's more, Rove doesn't tap most of his messages
on a White House computer, but rather on a BlackBerry
provided by the RNC. By this method, Rove and other White
House aides evade the legally required archiving of official
e-mails. The first glimmer of this dodge appeared in a small
item buried in a January 2004 issue of U.S. News & World
Report: "'I don't want my E-mail made public,' said one
insider. As a result, many aides have shifted to Internet
E-mail instead of the White House system. 'It's Yahoo!,
baby,' says a Bushie."
The offshoring of White House
records via RNC e-mails became apparent when an RNC domain,
gwb43.com (referring to George W. Bush, 43rd president),
turned up in a batch of e-mails the White House gave to
House and Senate committees earlier this month. Rove's
deputy, Scott Jennings, former Bush legal counsel Harriet
Miers and her deputies strangely had used gwb43.com as an
e-mail domain.
The production of these
e-mails to Congress was a kind of slip. In its tense
negotiations with lawmakers, the White House has steadfastly
refused to give Congress e-mails other than those between
the White House and the Justice Department or the White
House and Congress. E-mails among presidential aides have
been withheld under the claim of executive privilege.
When I worked in the Clinton
White House, people brought in their personal computers if
they were engaged in any campaign work, but all official
transactions had to be done within the White House system as
stipulated by the Presidential Records Act of 1978. (The PRA
requires that "the President shall take all such steps as
may be necessary to assure that the activities,
deliberations, decisions, and policies that reflect the
performance of his constitutional, statutory, or other
official or ceremonial duties are adequately documented and
that such records are maintained as Presidential records.")
Having forsaken the use of Executive Office of the President
e-mail, executive privilege has been sacrificed. Moreover,
Rove's and the others' practice may not be legal.
The revelation of the gwb43
e-mails illuminates the widespread exploitation of
nongovernmental e-mail by Bush White House officials, which
initially surfaced in the investigations and trial of
convicted Republican super-lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Susan
Ralston, Abramoff's former personal assistant and then
executive assistant to Rove, who served as the liaison
between the two men in their constant dealings, used
"georgewbush.com" and "rnchq.org" e-mail accounts to
communicate with Abramoff between 2001 and 2003. In one of
her e-mails, Ralston cautioned that "it is better to not put
this stuff in writing in [the White House] ... email system
because it might actually limit what they can do to help us,
especially since there could be lawsuits, etc." Abramoff
replied: "Dammit. It was sent to Susan on her rnc pager and
was not supposed to go into the WH system."
The Ralston e-mails were not
fully appreciated as a clue to the vast cache of hidden
e-mails at the time the Justice Department's inspector
general conducted a probe into whether Abramoff had been
involved in the firing of the U.S. attorney in Guam in 2002.
That prosecutor, Frederick Black, who had been appointed by
George H.W. Bush and served for 10 years, had opened an
investigation into the $324,000 in secret payments Abramoff
received from the Guam Superior Court to lobby in Washington
against court reform. The day after Black subpoenaed
Abramoff's contract, he was fired. In a 2006 report, the
I.G. found no criminal wrongdoing -- but he did not have
access to the nongovernmental e-mails (i.e., those sent
outside the official White House system). Now, the I.G. may
have cause to reopen his case.
Under the RNC's gwb43.com
domain a myriad of e-mail accounts flourish, including the
ones used by Rove's office to conduct his business with
Abramoff. Among these accounts are ones for Republican
Senate campaigns, for RepublicanVictoryTeam.com and the
like, and, curiously, for ScooterLibby.com. The latter
e-mail account serves the Web site of the defense fund of
Vice President Cheney's former chief of staff, convicted of
perjury and obstruction of justice. ScooterLibby.com amounts
to an in-kind contribution from the RNC.
On Monday, Rep. Henry Waxman,
D-Calif., chairman of the Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform, sent letters to RNC officials demanding
that they preserve the White House e-mails sent on RNC
accounts. "The e-mail exchanges reviewed by the Committee
provide evidence that in some instances, White House
officials were using the nongovernmental accounts
specifically to avoid creating a record of the
communications," he wrote. "What assurance can the RNC
provide the Committee," he asked, "that no e-mails involving
official White House business have been destroyed or
altered?"
Even as the Bush
administration withholds evidence that would allow Congress
to fulfill its obligation of oversight, administration
officials are having difficulty keeping their stories
straight. The release of each new batch of e-mails forces
them to scramble for new alibis.
On March 12, Attorney General
Alberto
Gonzales
testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee that he had
nothing to do with the dismissal of eight U.S. attorneys
late last year. How they happened to be removed remained a
mystery to him. "I was not involved in seeing any memos, was
not involved in any discussions about what was going on," he
said. But e-mails released last week show that he was
informed of the plan twice in late 2006. In fact, on Nov.
27, 2006, he met with at least five senior Justice
Department officials to finalize a "five-step plan for
carrying out the firings of the prosecutors." With the
appearance of the incriminating e-mails, Gonzales'
spokespeople have been sent out to tell the press that there
is "no inconsistency," a brazen assertion of the Groucho
Marx defense: Who are you going to believe, me or your lying
eyes?
Despite the resignation of
Gonzales' chief of staff and counselor, Kyle Sampson, on
March 12, another fall guy has emerged, Deputy Attorney
General
Paul McNulty.
On Jan. 18, Gonzales testified before the Senate Judiciary
Committee, presenting a public explanation that politics had
nothing to do with the U.S. attorney firings -- "we would
never, ever make a change in the U.S. attorney position for
political reasons" -- and private assurances to Republican
senators that they were dismissed for disagreements over
policy.
Three weeks later, McNulty
appeared before the committee, contradicting his boss,
explaining that the U.S. attorneys were fired for
"performance-related" reasons. Then he admitted that the
U.S. attorney for Arkansas, H.E. "Bud" Cummins, was being
replaced by a Rove prot駩, Tim Griffin. McNulty's testimony
incited the U.S. attorneys to defend their reputations,
agitated the Democrats to ferret out the underlying
political motives and forced the administration to react
with a spray of excuses.
On Monday, the administration
leaked an e-mail to ABC News in an attempt to blame the
entire scandal on McNulty. "McNulty's testimony directly
conflicted with the approach Miers advised, according to an
unreleased internal White House e-mail described to ABC
News," it reported. "According to that e-mail, sources said,
Miers said the administration should take the firm position
that it would not comment on personnel issues." The leak fit
the administration scenario that the U.S. attorneys scandal
was nothing but a P.R. mistake -- and now McNulty was the
one fingered as the culprit. But in trying to shift blame
the leaking of the e-mail would seem to undercut the White
House's claim of executive privilege that it cannot give
internal communications to Congress.
Also on Monday Gonzales'
senior counselor and White House liaison, Monica Goodling,
invoked the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination
in her refusal to testify before the Senate. (Goodling, who
graduated from law school in 1999, is one of the
highest-ranking officials in the Department of Justice. Her
doctor of jurisprudence degree comes from Regent University,
founded by the Rev. Pat Robertson. Its Web site boasts that
it has "150 graduates serving in the Bush Administration."
Perhaps not coincidentally, Kay Coles James, a former Regent
University dean, was director of the U.S. Office of
Personnel Management from 2001 to 2005.)
Goodling's lawyer's
extraordinarily argumentative letter explaining her silence
accused "certain members" of the committee of "already"
having "reached conclusions about the affair"; stated that
the inquiry is "being used to promote a political party" and
that it lacks a "legitimate reason ... basic fairness ...
objectivity"; and stated that an unnamed "senior Department
of Justice official" had told Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y.,
that he was "not entirely candid" to the committee because
"our client did not inform him of certain pertinent facts."
McNulty, of course, is that
official. As Goodling's lawyer's letter reveals, he is
refusing to go gently into that good night and declining to
cooperate with the latest cover story. Hence, she is taking
the Fifth, perhaps more because she doesn't know what story
to tell than because she might face a perjury trap before
the committee. So the fall gal blames the fall guy.
As Congress extends its
oversight, President Bush stiffens his resistance. He treats
the Democratic Congress as basically illegitimate. He reacts
to every assertion of oversight as an invasion of
presidential prerogative. Not only does he reject compromise
and negotiation, but he also transforms every point of
difference into a conflict over first principles, even as
every new disclosure reveals his purely political
motivation.
Bush's radicalism becomes
more fervent as he becomes more embattled, and separates him
from presidents past. Richard Nixon compromised regularly
with a Democratic Congress, even as he secretly laid the
foundation of an imperial presidency, his unfinished project
left in ruins after the Watergate scandal. Ronald Reagan,
the old union leader, president of the Screen Actors Guild,
stood resolutely on his convictions until the better part of
political valor led him to cut a deal, as he did when he
abandoned his long-held belief in privatizing Social
Security, conceding his supposedly inviolate ground to
Speaker Tip O'Neill, and happily proclaiming the pact
afterward. George H.W. Bush, a former congressman with many
friends across the aisle, famously jettisoned his tenuous
conservative bona fides as Reagan's heir, a credo he
embraced in his 1988 acceptance speech before the Republican
National Convention -- "Read my lips: no new taxes" -- when,
anxious about the expanding deficit, he cut a deal with the
Democratic leadership to lower it through tax increases.
The Republican right's
excoriation of the elder Bush's betrayal, rather than his
overriding sense of responsibility, was the lesson learned
by the son. His imperative to avoid making enemies on the
right is compounded into his larger notion of an unfettered
presidency.
For six years, Bush had a
Republican Congress whipped into obedience -- and it
provided him his only experience in legislative affairs. The
rise of the Democratic Congress, reviving the powers of
oversight and investigation, is a shock to his system. But
he is not without an understanding of his changed
circumstances. Bush sees the new Congress as the same beast
that ensnared his father in fatal compromise and as a
monstrous threat to the imperial presidency he has spent six
years carefully building.
As the return of oversight
suddenly exposes pervasive corruption throughout the
executive branch, Bush struggles against Congress as though
it were an alien force. Bush has no sense that the Framers,
wary of the concentration of power in the executive,
deliberately established the powers of the Congress in
Article I of the Constitution and those of the president in
Article II. Once again he straps on his armor and clasps his
shield. His defense of secrecy, executive fiat and one-party
rule has become his
battle of
Thermopylae.