1 Boring Old Man

David Addington?
By: emptywheel

Really, really doesn’t want to be deposed by CREW…

Cheney’s office seeks "extraordinary remedy" to prevent deposition of David Addington
Posted: October 1, 2008

Last week, the judge in CREW’s lawsuit against Vice President Dick Cheney approved our request to take the depositions of David Addington, Vice President Cheney’s chief of staff.

On the eve of that deposition, Vice President Cheney and the other defendants filed an emergency petition for a writ of mandamus with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy and defendants seek it here to have the D.C. Circuit intrude directly into the district court litigation by demanding that the district court judge vacate her discovery orders. The petition is based on a claim that the discovery authorized by the district court raises serious separation of powers concerns merely because the deponent is David Addington.

Anne Weismann, CREW’s chief counsel, said:

The White House, having failed to convince the Court that it is saving all that the Presidential Records Act required, is now attempting to stop any further fact-finding in order to prevent the plaintiffs, the court, and the American people from learning the truth.

CREW will depose Cheney’s Chief of Staff:
"There is now nowhere for the White House to duck and hide."
Posted: September 24, 2008

Today, the judge hearing our case against Vice President Dick Cheney granted CREW’s request to take the depositions of David Addington, Vice President Cheney’s chief of staff, and Nancy Smith, the National Archives and Records Administration official responsible for presidential papers under the Presidential Records Act.

The court rejected the government’s arguments that no discovery is warranted because they have demonstrated full compliance with the Presidential Records Act. Based on three White house declarations, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly questioned whether the vice president is preserving all vice presidential records, or only two subsets of records. The depositions must take place by October 6, 2008.

Anne Weismann, CREW’s chief counsel said:

With this decision, there is now nowhere for the White House to duck and hide. We are hopeful that these depositions will allow us to finally uncover whether these important records are being preserved or deliberately lost to future generations.

On the face of things, this CREW suit is absurd. They are suing to see if the second highest official in our government is going to abide by the laws of the country. That should be a given. But, with these guys, such questions must be asked. Now the Vice President and his contentious Chief of Staff are saying that they can’t even be asked whether they are going to abide by the laws of the country because "the discovery authorized by the district court raises serious separation of powers concerns merely because the deponent is David Addington." This is the most arrogant assertion to date – they cannot even be asked in a deposition if they are going to abide by the law? I fail to see how this has to do with the separation of powers. It sounds like they are claiming that, rather than there being a separation of powers, there is a consolidation of powers – in their office. They can do what they want to do. I notice that in their selective reading of the Constitution, they just don’t see the part about Checks and Balances. And why bother to depose David Addington anyway? He’ll just be an arrogant jerk like he’s been every time before.