Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Donkey's Inn -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mephisto who wrote (5551)	12/11/2002 3:41:16 PM
From: Kenneth E. Phillipps	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 15516

The public's right to know is the big loser in that case.

To: Mephisto who wrote (5551)	3/4/2003 3:02:27 AM
From: Mephisto	Respond to of 15516

GAO Denies Dropping Cheney Suit Due to Threats The New York Times February 25, 2003 nytimes.com By REUTERS The following is an excerpt: WASHINGTON (Reuters) - "The head of Congress' investigative arm denied on Tuesday that he had dropped a lawsuit against Vice President Dick Cheney because of Republican threats to cut his office's budget. But U.S. Comptroller General David Walker said there was one such ``thinly veiled threat'' last year by a lawmaker he wouldn't identify. In an interview with Reuters, Walker also criticized the federal judge in the case, saying U.S. District Judge John Bates had ``made up'' some facts in his December ruling that the General Accounting Office was not entitled to see documents from Cheney's 2001 task force on energy policy. Walker decided earlier this month not to appeal Bates' ruling, giving up a long battle between two branches of government and handing victory to the White House, which had argued that releasing the papers would harm its ability to get confidential advice." Copyright 2003 Reuters Ltd.

To: Mephisto who wrote (5551)	12/19/2003 12:54:33 AM
From: Mephisto	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 15516

Supreme Court to Hear Cheney Energy Task Force Case Mon Dec 15,10:37 AM ET story.news.yahoo.com By Susan Cornwell WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court said on Monday it would hear Vice President Dick Cheney case for keeping his energy task force papers secret. The high court said Cheney's Justice Department lawyers could present detailed arguments on why he should not have to comply with a judge's order to hand over details of White House contacts with the energy industry. Two groups, the Sierra Club and Judicial Watch, sued in 2001 to find out the names and positions of members of the energy task force headed by the vice president that year. They allege that as Cheney drafted energy policy, he consulted industry executives such as Enron Corp.'s Ken Lay, making them effective members of his energy task force while leaving environmentalists out in the cold. Cheney was chief executive of energy and construction company Halliburton Co . from 1995 to 2000. His 2001 energy task force produced a policy paper calling for more oil and gas drilling and a revived nuclear power program. Cheney has acknowledged meeting Lay, but his lawyers say the energy task force was comprised of government officials, not corporate chieftains. Over a year ago, U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan ordered the White House to either produce documents about the energy task force or provide a detailed list of the documents it was withholding, and why. But the Bush administration resisted and appealed the order, even though the case was not completed. The White House said it was immune from having to produce the information on constitutional grounds. By accepting the case, the Supreme Court agreed to review the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals, which earlier this year refused to step in, saying Cheney did not have legal standing to refuse the judge's order. The Supreme Court will hear arguments in the case in the spring next year, with a decision due by the end of June. The Energy Department, the Environmental Protection Agency (news - web sites) and other agencies have turned over thousands of pages of documents in the case, but none have come from the White House. Justice Department lawyers representing Cheney argued that judicial power cannot extend to ordering the vice president to disclose details about the way the president gets advice -- in this case, advice on energy policy. In papers recently filed with the Supreme Court, Judicial Watch countered that Cheney's claims to immunity were laughable after a 1997 Supreme Court decision that discovery could proceed against then-President Bill Clinton (news - web sites) in a case brought by sexual-harassment accuser Paula Jones. The Sierra Club accused the Bush administration of trying to stall release of the information beyond the 2004 presidential election.