Who knows what the Federal Communications Commission will do with John Dingell's petition for an investigation of the Pentagon's fake news spree, as revealed by the New York Times. We're talking about the Times' expose revealing that dozens of military retirees functioned as Pentagon trained TV news flacks on behalf of the Iraq war. Pretty disturbing stuff.

Word has it that the FCC has already agreed to look into the matter, although its unclear whether that will result in much more than some agency spokesperson announcing that "we've looked into the matter, and there is nothing we can do."

On the other hand, it might go differently this time, because Dingell's House Committee on Energy and Commerce is conducting an extensive investigation of the FCC. The Committee wants written records on dozens of proceedings, including any directives involving "limitations or restrictions imposed on FCC employees' ability to communicate with each other concerning official agency business"; records that illuminate the Commission's policies on "communications between FCC personnel and outside entities"; documents that explain how the agency decided who would go to the recent World Radio communication Conference in Switzerland; a list of all new FCC employee hires and reassignments from March 2005 to the present; and the individual meeting schedules of all Commissioners and all Bureau Chiefs and the FCC's Inspector General since January 2005.

This probe gives Dingell a lot more leverage over FCC Chair Kevin Martin than Congress has had in the past, so maybe the FCC will actually do something about the Pentagon problem, or at least act like it is for a while.

Then again maybe not. Several years ago Massachusetts Congressmember Edward Markey was furious when Martin ducked out on investigating the National Security Agency for buying millions of phone records of AT&T and Verizon customers. The Massachusetts Congressmember denounced the Federal Communications Commission for "taking a pass" on the issue.

"If the oversight body that monitors our nation's communications is stepping aside then Congress must step in," Representative Edward Markey, a Democrat, declared on his Web site in May of 2006. Commissioner Michael Copps, a Democrat too, also called for an FCC investigation.

Martin had just sent Markey a letter explaining that the FCC could not comply with the request. He cited warnings by White House Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte and NSA Lieutenant General Keith B. Alexander that disclosing information about the alleged relationship between AT&T and the NSA could hurt national security.

These statements, Martin told Markey, "make clear that it would not be possible for us to investigate the activities in your letter without examining highly sensitive classified information. The Commission has no power to order the production of classified information." Both companies denied charges that they had worked with the NSA.

So it's anyone's guess what Martin will do now, even with a Congressional investigation of him underway. He's a pretty tough figure to call.

BTW: I put together a timeline of the FCC/NSA controversy. Here it is:

May 10, 2006: USA Today reports that "NSA has massive database of Americans' phone calls." The story cites "people with direct knowledge of the arrangement" as sources, one of whom is quoted as calling it "the largest database ever assembled in the world." The article says that the database uses records provided by AT&T, Verizon, and BellSouth. QWest declined to cooperate with the project.

May 12, 2006: Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte files a declaration on behalf of AT&T, which is being sued by the Electronic Frontier Foundation in Federal District Court for its alleged cooperation with the NSA's warrantless wiretapping program. Negroponte invokes the "states secrets privilege," stating that he has "determined that the disclosure of certain information implicated by Plaintiffs' claims . . . could reasonably be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security of the United States and, thus, must be protected from disclosure and excluded from this case."

National Security Agency Director Keith Alexander files a similar statement with the court.

May 15, 2006: Congressmember Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts writes a letter to FCC Chair Kevin Martin asking the FCC to investigate the controversy. "Please provide me with a response which outlines the Commission's plan, in detail, for investigating and resolving these allegedly violations of consumer privacy," Markey writes.

May 15, 2006: FCC Commissioner Michael Copps calls on the FCC to "get to the bottom of this situation" by opening an inquiry into whether the phone companies violated Section 222 of the Communications Act:

"Every telecommunications carrier has a duty to protect the confidentiality of proprietary information of, and relating to, other telecommunication carriers, equipment manufacturers, and customers, including telecommunication carriers reselling telecommunications services provided by a telecommunications carrier."

May 15, 2006: BellSouth issues statement on the controversy: "Based on our review to date, we have confirmed no such contract exists and we have not provided bulk customer calling records to the NSA."

May 16, 2006: Verizon issues statement on the controversy: "Verizon will provide customer information to a government agency only where authorized by law for appropriately-defined and focused purposes. When information is provided, Verizon seeks to ensure it is properly used for that purpose and is subject to appropriate safeguards against improper use. Verizon does not, and will not, provide any government agency unfettered access to our customer records or provide information to the government under circumstances that would allow a fishing expedition."

May 22, 2006: FCC Chair Kevin Martin replies to Congressmember Edward Markey, declining to open an FCC investigation on the matter, and citing Negroponte and Alexander's court statements:

"The representations of Director Negroponte and General Alexander make clear that it would not be possible for us to investigate the activities addressed in your letter without examining highly classified sensitive information. The Commission has no power to order the production of classified information."

May 24, 2006: Markey discloses Martin's letter on his Web site, declares that the FCC is "taking a pass" on the issue, and calls on Congress to initiate an investigation of the matter.