Homeland Security Committee Denied Access To White House Continuity Plans

jpeyton

Moderator in SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones
Moderator
Aug 23, 2003
25,375
142
116
Text

By JEFF KOSSEFF

WASHINGTON -- Oregonians called Peter DeFazio's office, worried there was a conspiracy buried in the classified portion of a White House plan for operating the government after a terrorist attack.

As a member of the U.S. House on the Homeland Security Committee, DeFazio, D-Ore., is permitted to enter a secure "bubbleroom" in the Capitol and examine classified material. So he asked the White House to see the secret documents.

On Wednesday, DeFazio got his answer: DENIED.

"I just can't believe they're going to deny a member of Congress the right of reviewing how they plan to conduct the government of the United States after a significant terrorist attack," DeFazio says.

Homeland Security Committee staffers told his office that the White House initially approved his request, but it was later quashed. DeFazio doesn't know who did it or why.

"We're talking about the continuity of the government of the United States of America," DeFazio says. "I would think that would be relevant to any member of Congress, let alone a member of the Homeland Security Committee."

Bush administration spokesman Trey Bohn declined to say why DeFazio was denied access: "We do not comment through the press on the process that this access entails. It is important to keep in mind that much of the information related to the continuity of government is highly sensitive."

Norm Ornstein, a legal scholar who studies government continuity at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, said he "cannot think of one good reason" to deny access to a member of Congress who serves on the Homeland Security Committee.

"I find it inexplicable and probably reflective of the usual, knee-jerk overextension of executive power that we see from this White House," Ornstein said.

This is the first time DeFazio has been denied access to documents. DeFazio has asked Homeland Security Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., to help him access the documents.

"Maybe the people who think there's a conspiracy out there are right," DeFazio said.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We've heard a great deal about the sweeping power Bush is capable of holding through his various executive orders and continuity plans, and that's only the portion available to the public. It boggles my mind the length at which the Bush White House will go towards absolute secrecy, and it should alarm all Americans that a member of Congress charged with the duty of being on the Homeland Security Committee would be denied access to information regarding continuity of government.
 

babylon5

Golden Member
Dec 11, 2000
1,363
1
0
Cheney and Bush have been 'exercising' their Executive Privilege, no one really objects, not American people. This is part of the expansion of their power.
 

jpeyton

Moderator in SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones
Moderator
Aug 23, 2003
25,375
142
116
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
repost.... doubt you found it because no one responded to it last time.
That thread had links and a one sentence response; surprised it didn't get locked for lack of original commentary. Nice smear campaign in that thread, BTW.

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
I wonder if this guy has a history of leaks or if that is what they are thinking.
 

Kwaipie

Golden Member
Nov 30, 2005
1,326
0
0
The very word 'secrecy' is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings.
John F. Kennedy
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
"Maybe the people who think there's a conspiracy out there are right," DeFazio said.

Since this is the second time this thread has come up---on further reflection---it does make sense to assume that this may be an effort to hide what amounts to an already
well blueprinted GWB takeover of the American Government---it was only during the Justice Department hearing on the Attorney firings that we learned of the provision tucked into homeland security to allow new attorneys to be appointed---and then to by pass the Senate confirmation process---a weird provision that defies logic. And what else is there is now the question that BEGS AN ANSWER.

But in the event of a major terrorist attack---or a GWB engineered provocation that appears like one---could be used as something that allows GWB&co. to say this is just normal operating procedure while they establish their own dictatorship---and by the time anyone realizes its a fake---all normal governmental checks and balances might well have become non-existent.

I know this sounds like paranoia and a conspiracy theory---but just to put everyone's mind at ease---lets make sure its baseless by not blocking DeFavio access ILLEGALLY.
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
20
81
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Text

By JEFF KOSSEFF

WASHINGTON -- Oregonians called Peter DeFazio's office, worried there was a conspiracy buried in the classified portion of a White House plan for operating the government after a terrorist attack.

[Read in John Stewart's Bush voice]
#1. Round up all them muslims and other browishly tinted bearded people. hehehe.
#2. Watch Fox News on new 100" plasma installed in underground bunker. hehe.
#3. Finish reading chapter in whatever childrens book I'm currently reading. hehehe.
#4. Blame the democrat congress.
#5. Knight dick cheney.
#6. Go on vacation
 

Darthvoy

Golden Member
Aug 3, 2004
1,825
1
0
Originally posted by: sirjonk
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Text

By JEFF KOSSEFF

WASHINGTON -- Oregonians called Peter DeFazio's office, worried there was a conspiracy buried in the classified portion of a White House plan for operating the government after a terrorist attack.

[Read in John Stewart's Bush voice]
#1. Round up all them muslims and other browishly tinted bearded people. hehehe.
#2. Watch Fox News on new 100" plasma installed in underground bunker. hehe.
#3. Finish reading chapter in whatever childrens book I'm currently reading. hehehe.
#4. Blame the democrat congress.
#5. Knight dick cheney.
#6. Go on vacation

don't forget. Bush wrote that on a napkin using crayons.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
Homeland Security Committee Denied Access To White House Continuity Plans

What's he need it for?

If you're worried about the legalities of the plan, it outta be the Judiciary Committe looking at it, not Homeland Security.

Meh, he's just trolling for publicity.

Fern
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
20
81
Originally posted by: Fern
Homeland Security Committee Denied Access To White House Continuity Plans

What's he need it for?

If you're worried about the legalities of the plan, it outta be the Judiciary Committe looking at it, not Homeland Security.

Meh, he's just trolling for publicity.

Fern

Agreed. I have no idea why the department created in response to 9/11 and charged with coordinating a national response to future terrorist attacks would be interested in the executive branch's plans for after the next 9/11.
 

thraashman

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
11,112
1,585
126
If I were him I think I'd respond with something like "Um, denied? No. Hi there, Homeland security committee. It's my JOB to have access to information like this. Now shut yer trap and get me the documents I asked for NOW! .... Thanks."
 

Kwaipie

Golden Member
Nov 30, 2005
1,326
0
0
Originally posted by: thraashman
If I were him I think I'd respond with something like "Um, denied? No. Hi there, Homeland security committee. It's my JOB to have access to information like this. Now shut yer trap and get me the documents I asked for NOW! .... Thanks."

And then he can call the attorney general to arrest um, oh yeah, Alberto Gonzalez. Nevermind.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,682
136
How lame, Fern. I've come to expect better of you. It's the "Homeland Security Plan", remember? Claiming that the Homeland Security Committee has no jurisdiction is worse than silly.

It's not as if the Bushistas are the only people capable of constructive input, that's for sure... or that the security of the current Admin is synonymous with the security of the nation and our freedoms, either...
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,902
2,359
126
Originally posted by: babylon5
Cheney and Bush have been 'exercising' their Executive Privilege, no one really objects, not American people. This is part of the expansion of their power.

And powers, pre tell, are they expanding that hasnt already been given him by the Senate or law already in place?

Thats what I thought. God the whining is getting annoying.
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,057
67
91
Originally posted by: jpeyton
"Maybe the people who think there's a conspiracy out there are right," DeFazio said.

Maybe? Make that unquestionably.

Originally posted by: blackangst1
Thats what I thought. God the whining is getting annoying.

And most annoying of that whining is coming from the lying POS morons still trying to defend their Traitor In Chief and his criminal gang. :thumbsdown: :frown: :thumbsdown:
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
Originally posted by: Jhhnn
How lame, Fern. I've come to expect better of you. It's the "Homeland Security Plan", remember? Claiming that the Homeland Security Committee has no jurisdiction is worse than silly.

It's not as if the Bushistas are the only people capable of constructive input, that's for sure... or that the security of the current Admin is synonymous with the security of the nation and our freedoms, either...

Sorry to disapoint you ;)

Quite likely my error is assuming that HS is tasked with the prevention of another attack, and improved response performance in the event of one (radios that actually work etc).

Since the WH's plan is so secret I obviously can't know much, if anything, about it. However, since it's secret I must assume it does not include provisions for Congress, merely the WH. After all, how could the plan include Congress if they don't know about it?

(If it includes plans to redeploy Congress to another location in the event of an attack on Capital Hill I think it may be better to keep it confidential. Congress has demonstarted a lack of ability in maintaining confidentiality. In light of that possibility I see no reason Congress cannot be briefed on the generalities of such a plan, but details? No.)

So, pardon my ignorance but I still don't understand what his valid purpose is reviewing it. Is it to much to ask for an explanation?

Until I hear one I'll continue to assume he's just whoring for attention.

Finally, I do think there is a need to keep it secret, and I do think there is a need for oversight to verify the legality of whatever the plan is. However, the latter is the domain of the Judiciary Committee.

Fern

EDIT: I checked this Link about Homeland Security, while they have an awful lot their plate (prolly too much, 22 diff bureaus consolidated) this guy seem to be roaming a bit far afield. I see that they are responsible for border security and immigration. One might reasonable ask why these people can't focus on such needed tasks.