Democrats threaten national security with subpoena

NY Times:

Senior House Democrats threatened Thursday to issue subpoenas to obtain secret legal opinions and other documents from the Justice Department related to the National Security Agency’s domestic wiretapping program.

If the Democrats take that step, it would mark the most aggressive action yet by Congress in its oversight of the wiretapping program and could set the stage for a constitutional showdown over the separation of powers.

The subpoena threat came after a senior Justice Department official told a House judiciary subcommittee on Thursday that the department would not turn over the documents because of their confidential nature. But the official, Steven G. Bradbury, principal deputy assistant attorney general and head of the Justice Department’s office of legal counsel, did not assert executive privilege during the hearing.

The potential confrontation over the documents comes in the wake of gripping Senate testimony last month by a former deputy attorney general, James B. Comey, who described a confrontation in March 2004 between Justice Department and White House officials over the wiretapping program that took place in the hospital room of John Ashcroft, then attorney general. Mr. Comey’s testimony, disclosing the sharp disagreements in the Bush administration over the legality of some N.S.A. activities, has increased Congressional interest in scrutinizing the program.

At the same time, the Bush administration is seeking new legislation to expand its wiretapping powers under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Democratic lawmakers in both the House and the Senate have argued that they do not want to vote on the issue without first seeing the administration’s legal opinions on the wiretapping program.

...

I don't trust Democrats with this material anymore than I trust the NY Times with it and giving it to the Democrats is probably the equivalent of giving it to the Times, which has revealed national security information in pursuit of their terrorist rights agenda. When you have a party and a media that is more interested in protecting the "rights" of those trying to kill us, they should not be entitled to information that will help that enemy kill us.

It is absurd to argue that we should not be able to intercept enemy communications in a time of war without jumping through hoops. There is no justification for such nonsense and to provide further details on how we intercept those communications only gives aid and comfort to the enemy.