- Current Issue
SIGN IN to access Harper’s Magazine
1. Sign in to Customer Care using your account number or postal address.
2. Select Email/Password Information.
3. Enter your new information and click on Save My Changes.
Subscribers can find additional help here. Not a subscriber? Subscribe today!
The Obama Justice Department has demonstrated few things more clearly than its commitment to keep the dirtiest secrets of its predecessors. One absurd example is the controversy over the notes from Dick Cheney’s fateful interview with FBI agents about his role in the outing of Valerie Plame, a covert CIA agent—an exercise that carried him to the brink of being indicted. The Obama Justice team is convinced that America is better off not knowing what Dick Cheney told the G-men. In support of this view, it advances some dubious propositions.
Consider this passage from the Justice Department’s brief:
“These privileges belong to the government. The presidential communications privilege belongs to the President; the deliberative process privilege asserted here belongs to the White House; and the law enforcement privilege asserted here belongs to DOJ. A government official, even one as senior as the Vice President cannot implicitly waive these governmental privileges by individually submitting to an interview.”
This passage has the cadence and breathlessness of Gollum of the Lord of the Rings talking about “my precious.” The ring made its wearer secret and brought him into communion with the Dark Forces. The deeper we reach, the more disturbing these claims of privilege become. What is the motive behind them? Not the protection of vital state secrets of any sort. The Justice Department representations to the court suggest the basest possible purpose: to shield a public figure from public ridicule over his inappropriate, indeed possibly criminal, conduct in high office.
[Justice Department spokesman Jeffrey] Smith said the documents could be released years later for “historical purposes,” but shouldn’t be released now because they would be used in the “political fray.”
This is to be added to the other explanation they advance, namely that senior elected officials will abusively invoke privilege claims to block legitimate criminal investigations unless their cooperation with law enforcement is kept secret. This is an argument made by a law enforcement agency? Working our way through the Justice Department’s claims, we come down to this proposition: ensuring that the public has a distorted view of what transpired by suppressing the truth is a legitimate policy objective. Judge Emmett Sullivan expressed appropriate skepticism in the face of the Justice Department’s stream of increasingly unhinged rationalizations for its fixation on secrecy. Now it’s time to fill in the historical record by disclosing another of Dick Cheney’s dirty secrets.
More from Scott Horton:
No Comment — November 4, 2013, 5:17 pm
An expert panel concludes that the Pentagon and the CIA ordered physicians to violate the Hippocratic Oath
No Comment — August 12, 2013, 7:55 am
How will the Obama Administration handle Edward Snowden’s case in the long term?
No Comment — July 29, 2013, 11:36 am
Is it possible to simply disband the partisan FISA court?
Estimated acres of forest Henry David Thoreau burned down in 1844 trying to cook fish he had caught for dinner:
The bombardier beetle, which can fire liquid at its enemies from its rear end at up to 300 squirts per second, was being scrutinized in the hope of building a better airplane engine.
London Fire Brigade investigators blamed a building fire in South London on a bird that carried a lit cigarette to its rooftop nest. “Smokers,” said neighborhood baker Richard Scroggs. “What can you say?”
Subscribe to the Weekly Review newsletter. Don’t worry, we won’t sell your email address!
“American politics has often been an arena for angry minds.”