by Pa Rock
Citizen Journalist
The main story out of our nation's capital this past week has involved a secret report that was filed by a "whistleblower" with Michael Atkinson, the Inspector General of the U.S. intelligence community, on August 12th. Mr. Atkinson reviewed the report and determined that it was "credible" and a matter of "urgent" concern.
In accordance with provisions of the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act, Atkinson transmitted the report to Joseph Maguire, the acting Director of National Intelligence, for his review and transmittal on to Congress - as required by the same law.
DNI Maguire had seven days to send the report to the appropriate committees of Congress, but he failed to do that - or to even inform them of the report's existence. Congress learned of the report one week after the deadline for notification and transmittal had passed.
The DNI now says that he refused to transmit the report to Congress because it concerned conduct by someone outside of the Intelligence Community and because the complaint involved confidential and potentially privileged communications."
There is some speculation that U.S. Attorney General William Barr has interceded in the process and advised DNI Maguire not to comply with the statute - a matter in which Barr has no statutory role at all.
There has been much speculation over the past two weeks as to what is actually contained in the whistleblower's report. The most current thinking is that it involves a phone call between Trump and the leader of the Ukraine, a call in which Trump threatened to withhold support and funding already approved by Congress for Ukraine - unless the government of Ukraine helped to dig up or produce political dirt on Joe Biden's son who once had business dealings in that former Soviet state.
Trump has reacted by calling the report "partisan," while claiming not to know who wrote it. And he also said that the report has now been read by "everyone in the White House."
A report, one filed in secret and presumably at great personal risk to the writer, has not only been withheld from Congress in direct violation of law, but it has also been read by the presumed subject of the complaint as well as various staff members who work directly for the target of the report. Trump has had time to prepare his defense strategy, threaten potential witnesses, and hide evidence - and Congress hasn't even been granted its right by law to know the specifics of the report.
Yesterday Senator Dianne Feinstein, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, sent a letter to Attorney General Barr reminding of the specifics of the Whistleblower Protection Act and of the Direction of National Intelligence's legal requirement to turn the report over to Congress. Some news reports labeled Senator Feinstein's letter as a prelude to an impeachment inquiry, but this is not Barr's first rodeo when it comes to stonewalling Congress.
It now looks as though senators and representatives who want to know the exact content of the whistleblower's complaint would get the information quicker by taking a White House staffer out for drinks.
The letters from Congress are piling up, and the Trump administration keeps ignoring them. Those mangy old dogs in Congress don't bite, and Trump knows it.
The House leadership either needs to stand up to this Executive Branch outrage, or it needs to step aside and let a new generation take over leadership of the House of Representatives. Get to work or get out of the way!
Citizen Journalist
The main story out of our nation's capital this past week has involved a secret report that was filed by a "whistleblower" with Michael Atkinson, the Inspector General of the U.S. intelligence community, on August 12th. Mr. Atkinson reviewed the report and determined that it was "credible" and a matter of "urgent" concern.
In accordance with provisions of the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act, Atkinson transmitted the report to Joseph Maguire, the acting Director of National Intelligence, for his review and transmittal on to Congress - as required by the same law.
DNI Maguire had seven days to send the report to the appropriate committees of Congress, but he failed to do that - or to even inform them of the report's existence. Congress learned of the report one week after the deadline for notification and transmittal had passed.
The DNI now says that he refused to transmit the report to Congress because it concerned conduct by someone outside of the Intelligence Community and because the complaint involved confidential and potentially privileged communications."
There is some speculation that U.S. Attorney General William Barr has interceded in the process and advised DNI Maguire not to comply with the statute - a matter in which Barr has no statutory role at all.
There has been much speculation over the past two weeks as to what is actually contained in the whistleblower's report. The most current thinking is that it involves a phone call between Trump and the leader of the Ukraine, a call in which Trump threatened to withhold support and funding already approved by Congress for Ukraine - unless the government of Ukraine helped to dig up or produce political dirt on Joe Biden's son who once had business dealings in that former Soviet state.
Trump has reacted by calling the report "partisan," while claiming not to know who wrote it. And he also said that the report has now been read by "everyone in the White House."
A report, one filed in secret and presumably at great personal risk to the writer, has not only been withheld from Congress in direct violation of law, but it has also been read by the presumed subject of the complaint as well as various staff members who work directly for the target of the report. Trump has had time to prepare his defense strategy, threaten potential witnesses, and hide evidence - and Congress hasn't even been granted its right by law to know the specifics of the report.
Yesterday Senator Dianne Feinstein, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, sent a letter to Attorney General Barr reminding of the specifics of the Whistleblower Protection Act and of the Direction of National Intelligence's legal requirement to turn the report over to Congress. Some news reports labeled Senator Feinstein's letter as a prelude to an impeachment inquiry, but this is not Barr's first rodeo when it comes to stonewalling Congress.
It now looks as though senators and representatives who want to know the exact content of the whistleblower's complaint would get the information quicker by taking a White House staffer out for drinks.
The letters from Congress are piling up, and the Trump administration keeps ignoring them. Those mangy old dogs in Congress don't bite, and Trump knows it.
The House leadership either needs to stand up to this Executive Branch outrage, or it needs to step aside and let a new generation take over leadership of the House of Representatives. Get to work or get out of the way!
1 comment:
From a plain reading of the statute it appears to me that the nature of the complaint is rooted either in a violation of a law or a rule (See, Code of Federal Regulations) or an abuse of authority or a substantial and specific threat to public safety.
5 U.S. Code § 2302 (b)...
(D)“disclosure” means a formal or informal communication or transmission, but does not include a communication concerning policy decisions that lawfully exercise discretionary authority unless the employee or applicant providing the disclosure reasonably believes that the disclosure evidences—
(i)any violation of any law, rule, or regulation; or
(ii)gross mismanagement, a gross waste of funds, an abuse of authority, or a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety.
Professor Lawrence Tribe says, and I wholeheartedly agree, that a court of competent jurisdiction can issue a writ of mandamus requiring the Acting Director of National Intelligence to forward the whistleblower complaint to Congress as required by law. Mandamus is an extraordinary writ where the judge literally commands the performance of an official. It is rarely employed, and for good reason we don't want the judiciary running the government. But extraordinary circumstances, such as treason, conspiracy to commit fraud, conspiracy to violate campaign laws rise to extraordinary levels when committed by the President and his henchmen.
Post a Comment