Phone Jamming in NH

Okay, I hadn't even realized that republicans have been accused of jamming phone lines on election day 2002 democtratic get out the vote phone drives. The Post apparently did a story on this on April 11th. Worse, new court documents show that the ring leader of that operation in New Hampshire made several calls to the White House. So far, the White House will not disclose who was on the receiving end of that line. They claim it was normal election day correspondence. I guess we're supposed to take their word for it (innocent until proven guilty, right?).

Here's a letter from Howard Dean, DNC Chairman, to the RNC Chairman, Ken Mehlmer (I hate this guy) on this subject:

April 11, 2006

Ken Mehlman Chairman

Republican National Committee

310 First Street, SE

Washington DC, 20003

Dear Ken,

Yesterday, the AP ran a story entitled "Phone Jamming Records Point to White House." This story provides new details about the role of the New Hampshire Republican Party in the phone-jamming scandal and raises serious questions as to whether the RNC and the White House were actively involved.

As you know, on Election Day, a telemarketer hired by the New Hampshire GOP jammed telephone lines at five state Democratic and one firefighters union get-out-the-vote phone banks. The AP noted yesterday that the "records show that Bush campaign operative James Tobin, who recently was convicted in the case, made two dozen calls to the White House within a three-day period around Election Day 2002 -- as the phone jamming operation was finalized, carried out and then abruptly shut down."

The AP story also stated that virtually all the calls to the White House went to the same number (202-456-6173) which currently rings inside the political affairs office. Although the White House declined today to say which staffer was assigned that phone number in 2002, you may be able to shed some light on the subject, as you were the White House Political Director during that time.

You have often spoken of the importance of making sure that every vote counts. In that spirit, we hope that you will take the necessary steps to clear up the lingering confusion surrounding the RNC and the White House's role in this scandal by answering these questions:

-- James Tobin called the White House two dozen times in three days. Whom was he calling? With whom did he speak? Whom did he work with in the office of political affairs?

-- Tobin worked directly with Terry Nelson, who was then political director at the RNC. When will Mr. Nelson answer questions about his role in the scandal? Whom else at the RNC did Tobin work with?

-- Did the White House authorize this phone jamming scheme and, if so, who specifically did so? Or was the phone jamming authorized by the RNC?

-- Was anyone on the White House staff or at the RNC involved in concocting, authorizing, implementing or concealing this scheme?

The overt effort by the New Hampshire Republican Party to suppress the vote on Election Day in 2002 is unconscionable. The people of New Hampshire deserve an apology. And America deserves to know exactly how deeply the White House and the RNC were involved in the planning and execution of this scheme. We hope you will provide the answers we need so we can move forward together.

Sincerely,

Governor Howard Dean, MD Chairman

New evidence

An article in the Washington Post this morning reports on a secret investigation of Iraq’s mobile weapons labs cited in Powell’s presentation to the UN and in multiple statements made by the administration after the invasion. The unequivocal conclusion of the investigation was that those labs could not have been intended for producing WMD. The revelation is the timing of a report previously unknown to the public—not the knowledge that these trailers were not used for weapon manufacturing.

The secret investigation’s conclusions discredited Bush’s major evidence for going to war prior to CIA reports to Congress and prior to President Bush’s claim on May 24^th, 2003 that two small trailers captured by U.S. and Kurdish troops had turned out to be long-sought mobile "biological laboratories" and that “we have found the weapons of mass destruction." I said prior. Worse, it appears that members of the secret investigation team were asked if they could soften their conclusions to leave open the possibility that the trailers could be used for weapon manufacturing, even though one member of the Iraqi Survey Group is on record for saying that “it would be easier to start all over with just a bucket.”

In a previous topic on this blog, I said I would wait until Congress finished investigating before emphasizing that Bush intentionally misled Americans about the case for war. I couldn’t have been more naïve. It appears no thorough investigation by Congress on this matter will happen anytime soon. But what I didn’t count on was the freedom of speech exercised by the secret investigating team. Clearly someone on the team was upset that the report was ignored by the administration and couldn’t live with the fact that it was setting on a shelf marked classified. Kudos to our brave investigators for using the press as an alternative for truth telling.

The article ran this morning and has yet to be picked up by the major news bodies. I saw a quick clip on CNN summarizing the article, but it was buried. I’ll give it a day before I complain too much about news coverage. I’m not optimistic though. There’s too much going on (the Moussaoui Trial, immigration, and Iran to name a few). If it gets enough coverage, I believe this may be the last straw for many.

Let’s be clear: Bush’s people knew experts opposed using these trailers as evidence prior to making multiple statements to the public that these labs supported invading Iraq. Prior.

Scary News

On Iran: I’m watching Seymour Hersh, investigative reporter from the New Yorker, telling Wolf Blitzer that his sources in the Pentagon are working with Bush to develop a plan to take military action against Iran. Hersh says that Bush believes that he’s the only one who will do anything against Iran. Plans are focused and operational. They’re beyond contingency planning. Hersh has gone as far as to suggest that the White House has given the option of using a tactical nuclear weapon against Iran to the Joint Chiefs. Some senior Pentagon officials want to take it out as an option, but the White House has refused and insists on keeping it on the table. The option is so controversial that some senior Pentagon officials are apparently considering resigning if the option remains on the table. Hersh emphasizes that this doesn’t suggest the nuclear option is inevitable, but it that the White House insists on keeping it as an option. He also says that regular military forces are already in Iran and that the Iranian government already knows this.

On naming sources, Hersh says that many in the military are really getting “edgy” about Bush and Cheney, and for that reason he will not reveal sources in fear of Bush’s “punitive government”. Here’s Hersh’s article. Bottom line is that Bush is not asking for bilateral talks with Iran and keeping nuclear weapons as an option only inflames the situation. Watch for the White House’s attacks on Hersh for revealing the information and blaming him for inflaming the situation.

On the NSA: On other scary news, I think we’ve only scratched the surface in terms of the reach of the NSA surveillance program. Check out this article about AT&T’s involvement:

"AT&T provided National Security Agency eavesdroppers with full access to its customers' phone calls, and shunted its customers' internet traffic to data-mining equipment installed in a secret room in its San Francisco switching center, according to a former AT&T worker cooperating in the Electronic Frontier Foundation's lawsuit against the company."

On the CIA Leak: Finally, this morning I read what I think is the most accessible and well-written article on the CIA leak case and the revelation that Bush and Cheney were in fact actively involved in leaking. The problem here is clearly stated by the article: Bush and Cheney selectively authorized the release of information from the National Intelligence Estimate to credit evidence about Iraq that had been discredited by the intelligence community months before. If true, and to date no evidence has been presented to the contrary, this shows that Bush and Co. are in the business of grossly misleading Americans in order to get what they want, which is what many of us have been saying all along.

I’m disappointed that much of the TV news coverage has focused on Bush’s hypocrisy. That sounds way too benign. The focus should not be on his insistence that his government prevent leaks while he was clearly engaging in leaking. Like many have pointed out already (especially Bob Woodward), this administration has leaked like no other since coming into power. I wish instead they would focus on the deliberate use of bad intelligence. This aspect of the story is far more important. It isn’t a partisan issue; it’s an issue about the role of honest government in public debate.