Addington wrote in Gonzales’ signature line while re-authorizing Bush’s warrantless wiretapping program.
Addington wrote in Gonzales’ signature line while re-authorizing Bush’s warrantless wiretapping program.
In 2004, after top Justice Department lawyers refused to re-certify the legality of President Bush’s warrantless wiretapping program, the Bush administration re-authorized the program anyway without the Justice Department’s approval. Previous accounts of the program’s re-authorization reported that the “line for the attorney general’s signature remained blank.” But in the Washington Post today, Barton Gellman reports that Vice President Cheney’s lawyer, David Addington, actually signed then-White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales’s name to the document’s signature line:
Addington opened the code-word-classified file on his computer. He had a presidential directive to rewrite.
It has been widely reported that Bush executed the March 11 order with a blank space over the attorney general’s signature line. That is not correct [15]. For reasons both symbolic and practical, the vice president’s lawyer could not tolerate an empty spot where a mutinous subordinate should have signed. Addington typed a substitute signature line: “Alberto R. Gonzales.”
Gellman writes that “Only Richard M. Nixon, in an interview after leaving the White House in disgrace, claimed authority so nearly unlimited” as the authority Addington claimed for the president in the document he signed with Gonzales’ name.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
78 Responses to “Addington wrote in Gonzales’ signature line while re-authorizing Bush’s warrantless wiretapping program.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
WOW, this is a simply astonishing display of lawlessness. The hubris of this administation is apparantly limitless
September 15th, 2008 at 3:49 pmGosh, out here in the reality-based community, we call that "forgery" - and you get prison time for it....
I expect Addington will be awarded the Medal of Freedom any day now.
September 15th, 2008 at 3:49 pmAddington signed Gonzales’ name to re-authorize warrantless wiretapping program.
Add fraud and forgery to the mountainous list of transgressions this sorry administration has committed .....
September 15th, 2008 at 3:50 pmEvery last member of the Bush gangster regime is a worthless, lying, fascist, neo-con traitor. Traitor to our America. Traitor to our Constitution. Traitor to our Bill of Rights.
September 15th, 2008 at 3:51 pmWait, they called AGAG a mutinous subordinate?
Sounds like they are running a pirate ship and not a government.
September 15th, 2008 at 3:52 pmWhat has happened to our democracy?
September 15th, 2008 at 3:53 pmNancy....? Hello?
Look! It's a table!
Nancy.....?
September 15th, 2008 at 3:54 pmAddington signed Gonzales’ name...
but, that's, like, illegal...
hoo boy... somebody's gonna PAY...
September 15th, 2008 at 3:56 pmIf this episode doen't get nancy to bring in the freakin table, then we have no democracy - only imperial leaders.
Pelosi must go, no question about it. Someone draft up a recall vote and I'll bankroll it 100%.
We need our government back, and I fear we are going to have to fight to get it back.
September 15th, 2008 at 3:59 pmThat's a crime, isn't it?
Now if we had an opposition party in Washington they might, you know, say something. but they're busy rolling over on offshore drilling.
September 15th, 2008 at 3:59 pmI cannot believe that what Addington did was not a crime. My only question is: What is the statute of limitations on this particular one? And if the Attorney General refuses to prosecute known wrong-doing in the administration, then why is he still Attorney General? Sen Schumer? Care to keep sticking up for that scumwad? Or do I have to vote you out the next chance I get?
THIS MUST STOP NOW!
September 15th, 2008 at 3:59 pmDang.
What do you tell yourself while doing something like that? Would you even attempt to justify your actions, put it on some kind of moral ground? Or do simply put it down to "just following orders", with the air of GWB and Cheney's non-culpability pushing the pen along in your hand...
Signing someone else's name just feels wrong, icky. Doing it while slapping the entire American public in the face is even worse.
Does Addington not understand what those spying computers must be doing? Is it just us techies who really get it? Well, just in case, let me spell it out. ALL traffic flowing thorough the fiber optics in at least one known AT&T building (and probably a lot of other facilities) is being filtered by government computers, and some of that information is captured and stored.
The difference between a communication that triggers data storage and agent spying and a benign communication is very small. Every piece of information is examined. If some unknown trigger fires when you speak on the internet, your conversation is subject to inspection by an agent. Even the communications that trigger no action *are still a violation of the law* because they were inspected - searched - by a government facility.
This is wrong on so many levels...
September 15th, 2008 at 3:59 pmHey, this is the Bush administration you're talking about. Two chances of the Bush Justice Company, er sorry, Department ever prosecuting in this situation, slim and none. And Slim just left town. There's No end to this slow-motion train wreck, there is No bottom to this cesspool.
September 15th, 2008 at 4:01 pmImpeach Pelosi, Cheney and Bush and Save the Constitution!
katy Says:
Addington signed Gonzales’ name…
but, that’s, like, illegal…
hoo boy… somebody’s gonna PAY…
September 15th, 2008 at 3:56 pm
______
Yes - let's pray that David Addington's reign of forgery terror does not go unpunished. Since his reign of actual, torture-authorizing terror is apparently immune from any type of prosecution. At least he can get nailed for this.
September 15th, 2008 at 4:02 pmBack up the paddy wagon and haul them ALL away.
Remember that crap that Dubya spewed back in 2000 that he was "going to change the way Washington did business?"
He was obviously thinking something different that what I was thinking.
They should all be charged, subpoenaed, arrested, tried, convicted, sentenced, and locked up for a very long time. They have failed miserably to uphold the constitution and the trust placed in them, benefiting only themselves and their warped right-wing philosophies.
September 15th, 2008 at 4:05 pmAlphaLiberal Says:
That’s a crime, isn’t it?
September 15th, 2008 at 3:59 pm
_______
Yup, in the same way that the head of a murderous mafia syndicate commits a crime while jaywalking.
September 15th, 2008 at 4:05 pmPicklee Says: What has happened to our democracy?
Well, I would say its become an empire. Late empire where corruption and strawmen occupy high offices.
September 15th, 2008 at 4:07 pmI think I better understand the sneering, dripping contempt Addington showed when he appeared before congress.
What he was saying was "You don't know the half of it, and I'm not telling you jackshit."
Arrest this man, and the VP he serves.
I agree that Pelosi should not be Speaker come the next congress. She folded today on off-shore drilling and has done nothing to advance the agenda the Dems promised leading up to the 2006 election. Oust her, I say.
PEACE
September 15th, 2008 at 4:09 pmWow.
Did anyone read Doonsbury yesterday? His timeliness to this topic is too freaky for words. Check it out.
September 15th, 2008 at 4:12 pm.. and we can expect an indictment of Addington in ... five ... four ... three ... two ... hold the countdown, we have a problem (or two)....
Cheers,
September 15th, 2008 at 4:13 pmI know some of you will say my suggestions are extreme, but dire situations require dire solutions, and this case, it seems to me, calls for the "Chinese Civil Justice"...
September 15th, 2008 at 4:16 pmLessee, in plain english, layman's term thats
FORGERY
September 15th, 2008 at 4:19 pmYeah, that may have been influenced by this.
I watched a bit of it, and that was the general consensus. The international community may make a move after this administration leaves office. Will it happen? who knows.
It seems Addington is one slippery sumb*tch. He's been lurking in the shadows doing all sorts of nasty for quite sometime. He's an intimidating SOB too boot.
Here is another blurb from that linked Post article that mentions the possibility of prosecution after the Bush gang leaves office.
September 15th, 2008 at 4:22 pm
Unfortunately, even if the forger is prosecuted, the harm has been done and will continue. The act is law now.
They got what they wanted.
September 15th, 2008 at 4:24 pmI realize that the Bush gang has established that they can commit crimes while thumbing their nose at the rest of government, knowing they will never see the inside of a jail cell.
But can somebody tell me why Addington hasn't been disbarred, at least?
September 15th, 2008 at 4:24 pmI have to say, for a political party that rails against lawyers so much, they sure seem to justify all of their illegal activities based on what lawyers told them was okay. Unfortunately, they hired lawyers who should be disbarred.
September 15th, 2008 at 4:28 pmThe exception to the writ of habeas corpus was written in the Constitution for this very person.
September 15th, 2008 at 4:28 pm“I’m sure when we leave office we’re all going to be hauled up before congressional committees and grand juries,” Addington told one colleague in disgust.
Just be grateful you'll be wearing an expensive suit when you do, instead of an orange jumper. At least, the first time. :)
September 15th, 2008 at 4:30 pmWell, misshusseinmolly, in a nutshell, he's a thug. A thug who knows his law and isn't afraid to "go to the mat."
And, as you can see, he has access to a whole bunch of info on a whole bunch of people.
September 15th, 2008 at 4:32 pmGee, I wonder how poor Alberto feels, being set up as the fall guy for this BS, and looking like a chump now...
September 15th, 2008 at 4:32 pmSo, if that's not grounds for impeachment of Cheney, what is?
If Nancy Pelosi doesn't get off her lazy ass real soon, then Ms. Pelosi should be impeached.
September 15th, 2008 at 4:33 pmNo it isn't. What they were doing was not getting a judge to sign off on it. The new law makes sure they do. It's not the same as the crimes they were committing.
September 15th, 2008 at 4:34 pmWasn't Pelosi one of the "Gang og Eight"? If she was, she's complicit in all of this and it's easy to see why she said no to impeachment.
September 15th, 2008 at 4:39 pmAnd the witless and gutless Pelosi and Reid will continue to abrogate their Constitutional and legal oversight responsibilities and do nothing. They should be impeached with these others who continue to commit crimes against the American people!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
September 15th, 2008 at 4:40 pmcompletely O/T but on the previous Ike/Media thread I just dumped a longish deconstruction of a Fox/AP Ike update that I found surprisingly informative, so I invite you all to have a look--not to promote myself but because as I read the original article and thought about it I was surprised by what it did and didn't contain.
September 15th, 2008 at 4:40 pmDid he SIGN it, or TYPE it? If he typed it, how can anyone Prove it was him?
And what if he claims "Power of Attorney"???
This is One Slippery Fish we're dealing with.
September 15th, 2008 at 4:47 pmWayne A. Schneider Says:
I have to say, for a political party that rails against lawyers so much, they sure seem to justify all of their illegal activities based on what lawyers told them was okay. Unfortunately, they hired lawyers who should be disbarred.
September 15th, 2008 at 4:28 pm
_______
This may be the most lawyery administration in the history of this country. This American Life did a show a few months back on the legal lengths this administration will go to to win even really insignificant disputes.
September 15th, 2008 at 4:47 pmThe system grows increasingly unstable as the Bush Executive's misdeed feedback on one another. Not even strict father model George W. can control it now.
But he can offer a diversion. I know another corrupt leader who would welcome eyes going another direction, Israeli P.M. Ehud Olmert.
Prepare for a whacked out Cheney inspired, bunker busting attack on Iran. It's 3:00 am in the Bush Presidency and George has a RISK game to win.
September 15th, 2008 at 4:48 pmSome years ago as a Navy Enlisted Recruiter, I had a volunteer sign someone else's name on a financial document representing seventeen dollars. That volunteer was charged with a felony and was permanently ineligible for military service.
September 15th, 2008 at 4:49 pmbkarasek Says:
Some years ago as a Navy Enlisted Recruiter, I had a volunteer sign someone else’s name
does that mean that you ORDERED someone to do so?
are YOU not responsible al all?
September 15th, 2008 at 4:53 pmAddington doing the perp walk...priceless!!
September 15th, 2008 at 4:58 pmYou should hold the msm to such a high standard. This is a blog, not a news site.
bottom line, the real attorney general never signed off on it and they used it anyway.....ok with you?
September 15th, 2008 at 5:01 pmWOW! WOW! They have no regard for the law, in fact they are contemptuous of the law.
September 15th, 2008 at 5:03 pmWhen will they go to prison?
Why are we having this conversation....He lied, forged documents, lied...
Why is he not in jail!
September 15th, 2008 at 5:03 pmSo did he forge Gonzales' written signature, or did he type in the forgery? In either case, I think forgery is a felony.
September 15th, 2008 at 5:04 pmOk everyone take a deep breath.
Think Progress, you do good and important work but you've got this one wrong. Go back and read the WaPo article again, slowly. The author does not say that Addington signed Gonzales name to the directive. It says that he "typed a substitute signature line" that's the line and the typed version of the signatory's name and position above which the actual signature is made. He didn't forge Gonazles' signature he added him to the directive as the legal counsel for it, since no one at Justice would sign it.
September 15th, 2008 at 5:05 pmYou should hold the msm to such a high standard. This is a blog, not a news site.
bottom line, the real attorney general never signed off on it and they used it anyway…..ok with you?
September 15th, 2008 at 5:08 pm#25 MapleStreet:
Unfortunately, even if the forger is prosecuted, the harm has been done and will continue. The act is law now.
They got what they wanted.
Maybe. Maybe not. If there was no authorisation as specified in the FISA amendments for that week or so (i.e., one signed by the AG or a national intelligence department head), then the telcos may still be on the hook for any surveillances made during that period.
Cheers,
September 15th, 2008 at 5:10 pmhcoppola Says:
Ok everyone take a deep breath.
Think Progress, you do good and important work but you’ve got this one wrong. Go back and read the WaPo article again, slowly. The author does not say that Addington signed Gonzales name to the directive. It says that he “typed a substitute signature line” that’s the line and the typed version of the signatory’s name and position above which the actual signature is made. He didn’t forge Gonazles’ signature he added him to the directive as the legal counsel for it, since no one at Justice would sign it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yes but A) he ADDED his name as legal counsel when that should have been GONZALES choice as to whether he wanted his name on it. Maybe not forgery but STILL a misrepresentation, I mean there is a REASON that no one at Justice wanted to sign it and he made it SEEM like Gonzo WAS ON BOARD and B) It has been being reported that there was NO SIGNITURE, that now seems to be incorrect, setting the record straight on both counts is a GOOD THING.
September 15th, 2008 at 5:11 pmI understand reboot but all of the readers here are able to understand what you have pointed out and the gop are going to lie no matter what we say or do. Do you really need for me to cite instances to back that up?
September 15th, 2008 at 5:13 pmOur only hope is that foriegn countries will grab these thugs and put them before war crimes tribunals the way they say they will. If the American people elect another four years of the same, we can kiss this country goodbye. They are fighting for their crooked lives right now and in four years they will have pulled it off.
September 15th, 2008 at 5:14 pmhcoppola Says:
Ok everyone take a deep breath.
Yes, the question isn't of him forging Gonzales name, but the act was one that shows the arrogance of Addington, why wouldn't he forward it to Gonzales and let Beto sign it properly?
September 15th, 2008 at 5:17 pmY'all, read the rest of the story in the article if you have time..
September 15th, 2008 at 5:18 pmfascinating..Bush blinked!
Ruc, I don't think legally that alberto could sign it....that's why they said there was no signature. The only person who could legally authorize it refused to sign it.
September 15th, 2008 at 5:20 pmThanks for the explain fred, so if Beto couldn't legally sign it, wouldn't it also be illegal for The Adder to put Gonzales signature line on it?
And to think I almost went to law school...!
September 15th, 2008 at 5:25 pmI think that Bush and Cheney are going for -
"The Most Crimes Committed by a President and his VP Ever"
Their number one, Their number one, Their number one, Their number one.
But of course if McGonnaDie and Bushinaskirt are elected that record won't hold very long.
September 15th, 2008 at 5:26 pmI think so RUC but as has been pointed out, who is going to prosecute it?
I recall gonzo going to the hospital to try to get the attorney general to sign it and he said he wouldn't and had given his authority to his deputy who also would not sign it.
This is about as criminal as you can get in my opinion but without an attorney general who will prosecute it then it's like it didn't happen. Kinda like mafia guys committing crimes but the police won't arrest them because they are on the take.
the bush crime family......aren't we proud.
September 15th, 2008 at 5:30 pmFred @44 et al:
September 15th, 2008 at 5:30 pmAddington does not have signature authority. He is an advisor, and as such, has no authority. None. Zip. Nadda. Kein.
You can try to snow some bloggers with your BS but you're still like your heroes - Bush, Cheney, McSame, et al - liars all! So are you!
They're number one, They're number one, They're number one, They're number one.
I shouldn't type while working on something else I guess...
;-)
September 15th, 2008 at 5:33 pmmarkusmarkus Says:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I dare you to quote where I said he did. Be careful calling people liars when you don't really know what you are saying.
September 15th, 2008 at 5:35 pmFred - I misread what you'd written. What I wrote above I now retract fully with my full apologies! Sorry....
September 15th, 2008 at 5:35 pmMatt, Clearly they were abusing their authority in this whole thing, but typing a signature line for Gonzales' signature is not the same thing as "signing Gonzales' name", which would be forgery. The article does not say that he signed Gonzales' name.
September 15th, 2008 at 5:36 pmmarkusmarkus Says:
No problem markus, let's keep it aimed at the damned righties....peace.
September 15th, 2008 at 5:40 pmReboot says:
You have to read what is actually reported. He did not sign on behalf of Abu Gonzales, he added an alternate signature line that allowed the white house counsel to certify the program instead of the Attorney General.
Well that changes things. Isn't that like instead of forging the loan officer's signature for a loan, you just get me to sign off on approving the loan?
September 15th, 2008 at 5:42 pmforgery is the least of the problems I have with this. they used it to commit actual crimes, that they admit to. That is the whole point.
blank or with gonzo's sig it was still just a god damned piece of paper only this time....literally. It is worthless and it authorizes nothing and yet they used it as if it were real.....can we say easter bunny?
September 15th, 2008 at 5:43 pmFred - 10-4!
September 15th, 2008 at 5:50 pmMark
If Democrats have the power and opportunity next year to investigate federal crimes and war crimes, I'm hopping Addington is high on the list. This guy deserves to be perp-walked into federal court and forced to stand trial for war crimes.
September 15th, 2008 at 5:56 pm----
Addington signed Gonzales’ name to re-authorize warrantless wiretapping program.
----
I'm a little confused. Did Addington type Gonzo's name in or did he forge/handwrite Gonzo's signature? Or is simply typing in his name considered signing?
- Tom
September 15th, 2008 at 7:18 pmXisithrus said:
No, AG was only White House Council at the time. Addington put his name their in place of Ashcroft's.
Just as egregious to be sure.
September 15th, 2008 at 9:00 pmPerhaps others have pointed this out:
The article doesn't say Addington *signed* the document for Fredo.
It says he *typed* Fredo's name in the "signature block" in the place of the AG/AAG.
A signature block isn't a signature. It's a place where you sign. Part of it typically is a typed indication of who the signature is, and their title.
That's almost certainly what Addington did. Then they got Fredo to sign it, since we know Fredo would sign/approve anything.
I don't think this is a good article for TP. What Addington, Fredo, Cheney and Bush did was bad enough - they cut the DOJ out of an area where they have authority, and instead simply had the President sign it with White House Counsel approval. But it's not good to mischaracterize even what an evil bastard like Addington did.
John
September 15th, 2008 at 10:27 pm33 Fred and 51 Zuch
I sincerely hope that you two are right. I hope that this may open a loophole that exposes the involved parties to legal prosecution.
September 15th, 2008 at 11:01 pmSounds like it's time for another sternly worded letter from the Judiciary Committee!
September 15th, 2008 at 11:18 pmDavid Addington may be the leading Zionist traitor in the United States.
September 16th, 2008 at 3:32 amAlthough I sincerely doubt that he will do anything about it, I would still love to hear from Mukasey how he would feel if someone overstepped HIS authority and added a signature line of authorization to a document that required Dept of Justices ok. How can he NOT prosecute such an aggregious overstep of authority?
September 16th, 2008 at 9:27 amMatt, you appear to have changed the title of the post to be more accurate, but you still claim that Addington signed Gonzales' name to the document. That is not what the Gelman article in WaPo says. Addington is the worst of the worst, but there is no point in charging him with something that can be easily refuted by the actual content of the WaPo article.
September 16th, 2008 at 6:30 pm.
Could this be why 'Berty couldn't recall?
.
September 17th, 2008 at 5:03 amFrom the Article:
September 17th, 2008 at 5:19 am
Yeah??!! -And what are the Dems' gonna do about it??
September 17th, 2008 at 9:04 pm