Text of Fox News story on Demo Senate Intelligence Committee memo

Status
Not open for further replies.

emc

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
371
Location
Central Indiana
Pretty sickening, but not surprising, considering the source..... Of course, this leads us back to the eternal question - When are the Republicans going to act like men and fight back, rather than tut-tut like elderly ladies at some afternoon tea? :fire:

**************************************************************

Wednesday, November 05, 2003

WASHINGTON — Fox News has obtained a document believed to have been written by the Democratic staff of the Senate Intelligence Committee (search) that outlines a strategy for exposing what it calls "the administration's dubious motives" in the lead-up to the war in Iraq.


The memo, provided late Tuesday by a source on the Committee and reported by Fox News' Sean Hannity, discusses the timing of a possible investigation into pre-war Iraq (search) intelligence in such a way that it could bring maximum embarrassment to President Bush in his re-election campaign.

Among other things, the memo recommends that Democrats "prepare to launch an investigation when it becomes clear we have exhausted the opportunity to usefully collaborate with the [Senate] majority. We can pull the trigger on an independent investigation of the administration's use of intelligence at any time — but we can only do so once ... the best time would probably be next year."

The last paragraph of the memo reads, "Intelligence issues are clearly secondary to the public's concern regarding the insurgency in Iraq."

Committee Chairman Pat Roberts (search), R-Kan., appeared clearly shocked by the memo, which Sen. Jay Rockefeller (search), D-W. Va., ranking member on the Intelligence Committee, acknowledged was written in draft form and not meant for distribution.

Roberts said Tuesday a leaked strategy memo from Rockefeller's staff "exposes politics in its most raw form."

The memo discusses strategy for "revealing the misleading, if not flagrantly dishonest, methods and motives of senior administration officials who made the case for unilateral pre-emptive war." It discussed how Democrats could press for an independent investigation that has already been
rejected by the Republican-led Congress or launch their own investigation.

In a statement, Roberts said that the memo "appears to be a road map for how the Democrats intend to politicize what should be a bipartisan, objective review of prewar intelligence."

Rockefeller did not say who wrote the memo.

"The draft memo was not approved nor was it shared with any member of the Senate Intelligence Committee or anyone else," he said. "It was likely taken from a waste basket or through unauthorized computer access."

Rockefeller added, "The memo clearly reflects staff frustration with the conduct of the Senate Intelligence Committee investigation and the difficulties of obtaining information from the administration."

Roberts said he believes the strategy outlined in the memo may constitute a violation of Senate ethics rules, an issue he may pursue with the ethics committee.

"I have no idea how this became public. I am a little stunned. You can't politicize the Intelligence Committee. The memo is blatantly partisan. Members of the committee on the Republican side are frustrated, outraged and indignant. I hope we can get past this," Roberts said.

While the memo does not appear to be written as a straight political strategy piece, the memo does suggest using Roberts, who is described as helpful and willing to make concessions to Democrats. The memo advises continuing to seek favors from Roberts until and as long as it is useful.

Despite the memo's backhanded praise of Roberts, Rockefeller said Democrats are frustrated with the cooperation they are receiving from the chairman.

"Exploring or asserting the rights of the minority under the intelligence committee rules in no way amounts to politicizing intelligence. The American people deserve a full accounting of why we sent our sons and daughters into war," he said.

Members of the Senate Intelligence Committee have complained about the slowness of the Bush administration to provide requested materials and set last Friday as the response deadline. The senators said three federal agencies have complied with their request. But the White House, while saying it would work with the committee, has not agreed to comply.

On Sunday, Roberts announced during a televised interview that the White House had agreed to supply the requested documents and the interviews.

"I probably spoke too hastily," Roberts said Tuesday. "When you are dealing with the White House, they want to make sure they are not getting into a precedent in regard to various documents used by the executive."

He said a White House official, whom he declined to identify, left him with the impression last weekend the material would be provided. Asked if there was further communication after his remarks Sunday, he said, "Yeah -- in the Monday Washington Post."

He said White House comments in the newspaper distancing it from Roberts' statements "prompted meaningful dialogue between me and the White House."

But he said he was satisfied with the outcome of the conversations. "I think we'll have a positive relationship, and I think the documents will be provided. And the interviews," he said.

Rockefeller wasn't as confident.

"It's very hard for me to come to believe that the White House is going to cooperate on things which potentially could put them in a different light," he said, speaking separately to reporters.

Rockefeller said if the committee doesn't receive the material it seeks, the leaders will call the department heads, "and the next step after that one considers very, very carefully the subpoena option."

"This is not a game," he said. "This is a question of how did we get into this war."

Roberts said subpoenas would be a last resort. "I think we can work this out without any subpoenas," he said.

Fox News' Brian Wilson and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
 
"Pretty sickening, but not surprising, considering the source..... "

And you are surprised by this? The only thing that surprises me is that someone let this memo get out. One of the oldest tricks in the political book is to time "events" so as to provide the maximum damage to your opponent.
 
"And you are surprised by this? "

No, what I said was that I was NOT surprised. That doesn't make it any more palatable, however.

"Shocking?!? Maybe in Kansas but not the bigs, Senator Roberts."

Good comment, El-T! It makes me think of the sound bite from "Frazier", when the actor playing his brother Niles says in his unique way "I'm shocked! Just shocked!" Sen. Roberts is either very naive, or playing as if he didn't know what these people were doing.

My question still stands, however. Sen. Roberts (and Senators/Representatives in the Republican party), when are you going to FIGHT back?

FWIW,

emc
 
Bush 'skewed facts to justify attack on Iraq'

A growing number of US national security professionals are accusing the Bush Administration of slanting the facts and hijacking the intelligence apparatus to justify its rush to war in Iraq.

A key target is a four-person Pentagon team that reviewed material gathered by other intelligence outfits for any missed bits that might have tied Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein to banned weapons or terror groups.

This team, self-mockingly called the cabal, “cherry-picked the intelligence stream†in a bid to portray Iraq as an imminent threat, said Patrick Lang, a former head of worldwide human intelligence gathering for the Defence Intelligence Agency, which coordinates military intelligence.
…
The INC, which brought together groups opposed to Saddam, worked closely with the Pentagon to build a case against Iraq. “There are current intelligence officials who believe it is a scandal,†Mr Cannistraro said.
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/05/31/1054177765483.html

Cheney Investigated Forged Niger Uranuium Document

As though this were normal! I mean the repeated visits Vice President Dick Cheney made to the CIA before the war in Iraq. The visits were, in fact, unprecedented. During my 27-year career at the Central Intelligence Agency, no vice president ever came to us for a working visit.

During the '80s, it was my privilege to brief Vice President George H.W. Bush, and other very senior policy makers every other morning. I went either to the vice president's office or (on weekends) to his home. I am sure it never occurred to him to come to CIA headquarters.

The morning briefings gave us an excellent window on what was uppermost in the minds of those senior officials and helped us refine our tasks of collection and analysis. Thus, there was never any need for policy makers to visit us. And the very thought of a vice president dropping by to help us with our analysis is extraordinary. We preferred to do that work without the pressure that inevitably comes from policy makers at the table.

Cheney got into the operational side of intelligence as well. Reports in late 2001 that Iraq had tried to acquire uranium from Niger stirred such intense interest that his office let it be known he wanted them checked out. So, with the CIA as facilitator, a retired U.S. ambassador was dispatched to Niger in February 2002 to investigate. He found nothing to substantiate the report and lots to call it into question. There the matter rested – until last summer, after the Bush administration made the decision for war in Iraq.
…
http://feeds.bignewsnetwork.com/?sid=6e9d5502599dc6a2
http://www.democraticunderground.co...ic&forum=102&topic_id=5858&mesg_id=5858&page=

Plans For Iraq Attack Began On 9/11

(CBS) CBS News has learned that barely five hours after American Airlines Flight 77 plowed into the Pentagon, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld was telling his aides to come up with plans for striking Iraq — even though there was no evidence linking Saddam Hussein to the attacks.

That's according to notes taken by aides who were with Rumsfeld in the National Military Command Center on Sept. 11 – notes that show exactly where the road toward war with Iraq began, reports CBS News National Security Correspondent David Martin.
…
Now, nearly one year later, there is still very little evidence Iraq was involved in the Sept. 11 attacks. But if these notes are accurate, that didn't matter to Rumsfeld.

“Go massive,†the notes quote him as saying. “Sweep it all up. Things related and not.†(Sec. of Defense Donald Rumsfeld hours after 9/11 attack)
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/09/04/september11/main520830.shtml
http://www.democraticunderground.co...&forum=104&topic_id=53315&mesg_id=53315&page=

A call to maintain CIA independence.

As the White House searches for every possible excuse to go to war with Iraq, pressure has been building on the intelligence agencies to deliberately slant estimates to fit a political agenda. In this case, the agencies are being pressed to find a casus belli for war, whether or not one exists.

“Basically, cooked information is working its way into high-level pronouncements, and there's a lot of unhappiness about it in intelligence, especially among analysts at the CIA,†Vince Cannistraro, the agency's former head of counterterrorism, told The Guardian, a London newspaper.

This confirms what Knight-Ridder reporters found: “A growing number of military officers, intelligence professionals and diplomats privately have deep misgivings about the administration's double-time march toward war,†the news service reported recently. “They charge that the administration squelches dissenting views and that intelligence analysts are under intense pressure to produce reports supporting the White House's argument that Saddam poses such an immediate threat to the United States that pre-emptive military action is necessary.â€
…
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/2002-10-24-oped-bamford_x.htm

U.S. Insiders Say Iraq Intel Deliberately Skewed
…
The DIA was “exploited and abused and bypassed in the process of making the case for war in Iraq based on the presence of WMD,†or weapons of mass destruction, he added in a phone interview. He said the CIA had “no guts at all†to resist the allegedly deliberate skewing of intelligence by a Pentagon that he said was now dominating U.S. foreign policy.

Vince Cannistraro, a former chief of Central Intelligence Agency counterterrorist operations, said he knew of serving intelligence officers who blame the Pentagon for playing up “fraudulent†intelligence, “a lot of it sourced from the Iraqi National Congress of Ahmad Chalabi.â€
…
They believe the administration, before going to war, had a “moral obligation to use the best information available, not just information that fits your preconceived ideas.â€

CHEMICAL WEAPONS REPORT 'SIMPLY WRONG'

The top Marine Corps officer in Iraq, Lt. Gen. James Conway, said on Friday U.S. intelligence was “simply wrong†in leading military commanders to fear troops were likely to be attacked with chemical weapons in the March invasion of Iraq that ousted Saddam.

Richard Perle, a Chalabi backer and member of the Defense Policy Board that advises Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, defended the four-person unit in a television interview.
…
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...e=2&u=/nm/20030530/ts_nm/iraq_intelligence_dc

CIA had doubts on Iraq link to al-Qaida

The debunking of the Bush administration's pre-war certainties on Iraq gathered pace yesterday when it emerged that the CIA knew for months that a connection between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida was highly unlikely.

As President George Bush was forced for the second time in days to defend the decision to go to war, a new set of leaks from CIA officials suggested a tendency in the White House to suppress or ignore intelligence findings which did not shore up the case for war.
…
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,974182,00.html

Ex-CIA Officers Questioning Iraq Data

A small group composed mostly of retired CIA officers is appealing to colleagues still inside to go public with any evidence the Bush administration is slanting intelligence to support its case for war with Iraq.

Members of the group contend the Bush administration has released information on Iraq that meets only its ends -- while ignoring or withholding contrary reporting.

They also say the administration's public evidence about the immediacy of Iraq's threat to the United States and its alleged ties to al-Qaida is unconvincing, and accuse policy-makers of pushing out some information that does not meet an intelligence professional's standards of proof.

“It's been cooked to a recipe, and the recipe is high policy,†said Ray McGovern, a 27-year CIA veteran who briefed top Reagan administration security officials before retiring in 1990. “That's why a lot of my former colleagues are holding their noses these days.†---
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030314/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_iraq_intelligence_4
http://www.democraticunderground.com/duforum/DCForumID61/18413.html

Public was misled, claim ex-CIA men

A GROUP of former US intelligence officials has written to President Bush claiming that the US Congress and the American public were misled about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction before the war.

The group’s members, most of them former CIA analysts, say that they have close contacts withsenior officials working inside the US intelligence agencies, who have told them that intelligence was“cooked†to persuade Congress to authorise the war.

The manipulation of intelligence has, they say, produced “a policy and intelligence fiasco of monumental proportionsâ€. They write in the letter to Mr Bush: “While there have been occasions in the past when intelligence has been deliberately warped for political purposes, never before has such warping been used in such a systematic way to mislead our elected representatives into voting to authorise launching a war.

“You may not realise the extent of the current ferment within the intelligence community and particularly the CIA. In intelligence, there is one unpardonable sin — cooking intelligence to the recipe of high policy. There is ample indication that this has been done in Iraq.â€
…
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,5944-698028,00.html

MEMORANDUM FOR: The President
FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0207-04.htm

U.S. diplomats also tried to stop this invasion:

U.S. Diplomat's Letter of Resignation
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/27/international/27WEB-TNAT.html

Letter of Resignation (Mary Wright)
http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/marywright.asp

U.S. Mongolian Diplomat Resigns Over Iraq (Fourth U.S. Diplomat)
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...0327/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/war_diplomat_resigns_2

Third U.S. Diplomat Resigns Over Iraq Policy
http://truthout.org/docs_03/032303G.shtml

Second US Diplomat Resigns in Protest
http://www.wagingpeace.org/articles/03.03/0314krieger_diplo_resign.htm
U.S. diplomat resigns over Iraq war plans
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N10105063.htm

Niger-Uranium Timeline
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=niger_timeline

THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION AND WMDs: THEN AND NOW
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=bush_wmd_summary
 
CIA seeks probe of White House

WASHINGTON, Sept. 26 — The CIA has asked the Justice Department to investigate allegations that the White House broke federal laws by revealing the identity of one of its undercover employees in retaliation against the woman’s husband, a former ambassador who publicly criticized President Bush’s since-discredited claim that Iraq had sought weapons-grade uranium from Africa, NBC News has learned.
…
http://www.msnbc.com/news/937524.asp?0cv=CB10
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=135657

Leak of Agent's Name Causes Exposure of CIA Front Firm

The leak of a CIA operative's name has also exposed the identity of a CIA front company, potentially expanding the damage caused by the original disclosure, Bush administration officials said yesterday.

The company's identity, Brewster-Jennings & Associates, became public because it appeared in Federal Election Commission records on a form filled out in 1999 by Valerie Plame, the case officer at the center of the controversy, when she contributed $1,000 to Al Gore's presidential primary campaign.

After the name of the company was broadcast yesterday, administration officials confirmed that it was a CIA front. They said the obscure and possibly defunct firm was listed as Plame's employer on her W-2 tax forms in 1999 when she was working undercover for the CIA. Plame's name was first published July 14 in a newspaper column by Robert D. Novak that quoted two senior administration officials. They were critical of her husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, for his handling of a CIA mission that undercut President Bush's claim that Iraq had sought uranium from the African nation of Niger for possible use in developing nuclear weapons.

The Justice Department began a formal criminal investigation of the leak Sept. 26.

The inadvertent disclosure of the name of a business affiliated with the CIA underscores the potential damage to the agency and its operatives caused by the leak of Plame's identity. Intelligence officials have said that once Plame's job as an undercover operative was revealed, other agency secrets could be unraveled and her sources might be compromised or endangered.

A former diplomat who spoke on condition of anonymity said yesterday that every foreign intelligence service would run Plame's name through its databases within hours of its publication to determine if she had visited their country and to reconstruct her activities.

"That's why the agency is so sensitive about just publishing her name," the former diplomat said.
…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40012-2003Oct3.html
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=147987

Democrats seek assessment of damage caused by outing of US intelligence agent

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Leading Democrats sent a letter to the US agency tasked with safeguarding America's intelligence capability, seeking an immediate assessment of the damage caused by the outing of a CIA agent's identity.

Top Democrats in the US Senate, including Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, asked the National Counterintelligence Executive headed by Michelle Van Cleave to undertake an immediate review of whether US intelligence has been compromised by the leak.

"The exposure of one of America's undercover intelligence officers by an official of the US government constitutes the most egregious form of betrayal," read the letter by Daschle, and fellow Senate Democrats Carl Levin, Joseph Biden, and John Rockefeller.

"Since this case involves the publication of classified information and the extent of the material disclosed is known, we believe that a damage assessment can and should be undertaken immediately," the lawmakers wrote.

"Swift action is needed to protect the individuals whose lives may be at risk," they said, requesting a copy of the findings within 30 days.
…
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...l_afp/us_cia_iraq_politics&cid=1521&ncid=1480
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=539395

Rice 'Knew Nothing' About CIA Agent Leak

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. national security adviser Condoleezza Rice said on Sunday she knew "nothing of any" White House effort to leak the identity of an undercover CIA officer in July, a charge now under review at the Justice Department.

On the "Fox News Sunday" program, the top aide to President Bush said, "This has been referred to the Justice Department. I think that is the appropriate place for it."

Rice said the White House would cooperate should the Justice Department, headed by Attorney General John Ashcroft, decide to proceed with a criminal investigation of the matter, which centers on the alleged public disclosure of the wife of former U.S. Ambassador Joseph Wilson.

Wilson was sent by the CIA to Niger in 2002 to investigate a report that Iraq was trying to obtain uranium from Niger, but returned to say it was highly doubtful.
…
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm.../iraq_intelligence_probe_dc&cid=564&ncid=1480
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=136932

A White House smear

Did senior Bush officials blow the cover of a US intelligence officer working covertly in a field of vital importance to national security—and break the law—in order to strike at a Bush administration critic and intimidate others?

It sure looks that way, if conservative journalist Bob Novak can be trusted.
…
The sources for Novak’s assertion about Wilson’s wife appear to be “two senior administration officials.†If so, a pair of top Bush officials told a reporter the name of a CIA operative who apparently has worked under what’s known as “nonofficial cover†and who has had the dicey and difficult mission of tracking parties trying to buy or sell weapons of mass destruction or WMD material. If Wilson’s wife is such a person—and the CIA is unlikely to have many employees like her—her career has been destroyed by the Bush administration. (Assuming she did not tell friends and family about her real job, these Bush officials have also damaged her personal life.) Without acknowledging whether she is a deep-cover CIA employee, Wilson says, “Naming her this way would have compromised every operation, every relationship, every network with which she had been associated in her entire career. This is the stuff of Kim Philby and Aldrich Ames.†If she is not a CIA employee and Novak is reporting accurately, then the White House has wrongly branded a woman known to friends as an energy analyst for a private firm as a CIA officer. That would not likely do her much good.

This is not only a possible breach of national security; it is a potential violation of law. Under the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982, it is a crime for anyone who has access to classified information to disclose intentionally information identifying a covert agent. The punishment for such an offense is a fine of up to $50,000 and/or up to ten years in prison. Journalists are protected from prosecution, unless they engage in a “pattern of activities†to name agents in order to impair US intelligence activities. So Novak need not worry.

Novak tells me that he was indeed tipped off by government officials about Wilson’s wife and had no reluctance about naming her. “I figured if they gave it to me,†he says. “They’d give it to others....I’m a reporter. Somebody gives me information and it’s accurate. I generally use it.†And Wilson says Novak told him that his sources were administration officials.
…
http://thenation.com/capitalgames/index.mhtml?bid=3&pid=823
http://www.arbiteronline.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2003/07/23/3f1f5fa79c206
http://www.democraticunderground.co...&forum=102&topic_id=18072&mesg_id=18072&page=
http://www.democraticunderground.co...ic&forum=108&topic_id=5913&mesg_id=5913&page=

…
Novak, in an interview, said his sources had come to him with the information. “I didn't dig it out, it was given to me,†he said. “They thought it was significant, they gave me the name and I used it.â€

Wilson and others said such a disclosure would be a violation of the law by the officials, not the columnist.

Novak reported that his “two senior administration officials†told him that it was Plame who suggested sending her husband, Wilson, to Niger.
…
http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-uscia0722,0,2346857.story?coll=ny-top-headlines
http://www.democraticunderground.co...ic&forum=103&topic_id=2326&mesg_id=2326&page=

A War on Wilson?
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,465270,00.html
http://www.democraticunderground.co...&forum=102&topic_id=18113&mesg_id=18113&page=

White House striking back?
http://www.msnbc.com/news/942095.asp?0cv=CA01

Schumer Urges FBI Probe Into Iraq Leaks
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030724/ap_on_go_ot/schumer_agent_1

Probes Expected in ID of CIA Officer
http://www.newsday.com/news/nationw...23,0,5461415.story?coll=ny-nationalnews-print

The Bush Administration Adopts a Worse-than-Nixonian Tactic: The Deadly Serious Crime Of Naming CIA Operatives by John W. Dean
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20030815.html
 
"the memo discusses strategy for "revealing the misleading, if not flagrantly dishonest, methods and motives of senior administration officials who made the case for unilateral pre-emptive war." It discussed how Democrats could press for an independent investigation that has already been
rejected by the Republican-led Congress or launch their own investigation."





So you would have the Democrats participate in stonewalling any investigation into 9/11?? 9/11 hasn't already been politized to death??


You love the federal government so much you want both party's working together to mislead the public?

Are you one of those people who think the political class knows better than average Americans and are comfortable letting them do your thinking for you?


Damn, emc- do you burn American flags too or just use them for toilet paper?
 
I think it is shameful that the White House and the Pentagon covered up all the good things that were going on in Iraq:rolleyes:
 
LA Times Article on the same subject.

Anyone who thinks that the Democratic Party care about anything but regaining power should learn from this. This proves that to the national party leadership, dead soldiers are good for business.

These people are not fit to clean porta potties for our soldiers in Iraq. :fire:

BTW Did Rockerfeller vote to authorize use of force in Iraq? If he did, I wonder about his motives. As a member of the select intelligence committee he would have access to information that could cause further American casualties. He should be removed from the committee at once and not allowed to see any classified information.

Los Angeles Times
November 5, 2003

Democrats' Iraq Inquiry Plan Is Leaked

By Greg Miller, Times Staff Writer

WASHINGTON — A simmering political struggle behind the Senate inquiry into prewar intelligence on Iraq boiled over publicly Tuesday with the disclosure of a Democratic memo outlining strategies for "exposing the administration's dubious motives" behind the war.

The leaked memo, which was prepared by the staff of Sen. John D. "Jay" Rockefeller IV (D-W. Va.), the vice chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, discusses ways that Democrats can steer the existing inquiry toward taking a more critical look at the White House.

It also indicates that Democrats intend to launch a separate independent investigation of the administration's use of intelligence as the parties head into the height of the presidential election season next year.

"Intelligence issues are clearly secondary to the public's concern regarding the insurgency in Iraq," the memo says. "Yet we have an important role to play in revealing the misleading, if not flagrantly dishonest, methods and motives of senior administration officials who made the case for unilateral preemptive war."

The tone of the memo could be embarrassing to Democrats and provides new ammunition for Republican complaints that Democrats are seeking to use the inquiry for political gain.

Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), the chairman of the intelligence committee, described the memo as a "slap in the face" to the committee's bipartisan traditions and called the plan an effort to undercut the panel's inquiry.

"It's an attack plan," Roberts said late Tuesday in an interview on Fox News Channel.

In a statement released by his press office, Roberts said the memo "exposes politics in its most raw form…. It's a purely partisan document that appears to be a road map for how the Democrats intend to politicize what should be a bipartisan objective review of prewar intelligence."

Rockefeller also released a statement, acknowledging that the memo was written by his staff, but saying that it had not been approved "nor was it shared with any member of the Senate Intelligence Committee or anyone else."

"Having said that," Rockefeller added, "the memo clearly reflects staff frustration with the conduct of the … investigation and the difficulties of obtaining information from the administration."

Rockefeller also took a swipe at those behind the leak of the memo, saying it "was likely taken from a wastebasket or through unauthorized computer access."

The disclosure is the latest sign of discord and partisan maneuvering on the committee, which began its investigation of the prewar intelligence on Iraq this summer.

Roberts has repeatedly indicated that he would like to limit the investigation to examining the performance of the CIA and other agencies. He has angered Democrats by making comments to the media suggesting that the probe is "90 [%] to 95%" finished and that certain conclusions have already been reached.

Democrats have argued that the probe should not be confined to the performance of the intelligence agencies, but should also examine whether the administration pressured analysts to reach certain conclusions or misrepresented intelligence findings to the public.

The memo was first reported Tuesday by conservative radio and television commentator Sean Hannity. Fox News Channel, on which Hannity is co-host of a talk show, said it was provided by a source on the committee. A spokeswoman for Roberts denied that he or his staff was behind the leak.

The plans proposed in the memo have for the most part been known and discussed by sources on the committee for some time. Indeed, Democrats had already proposed an independent investigation in a measure that was defeated on the Senate floor. Rockefeller was among those voting against it.

Still, the memo provides a rare glimpse into the workings of the secretive committee. The document advises Democrats to "pull the majority along as far as we can" in focusing the inquiry on the use of intelligence by the White House. It notes that Democrats have already compiled "all the public statements on Iraq made by senior administration officials" leading up to the war.

"We will identify the most exaggerated claims," it says. "We will contrast them with the intelligence estimates that have since been declassified." Democrats should "assiduously prepare" additional views to attach to the final report, which is now expected to be completed sometime next year.

Finally, it maps out a plan to "pull the trigger" on an independent investigation "when it becomes clear we have exhausted the opportunity to usefully collaborate with the majority …. The best time to do so will probably be next year."
 
Pretty sickening, but not surprising, considering the source..
Yeah, Fox really sucks.

If the dems are finally showing a little spine in taking on the Bush admin's lies and deceptions, I say more power to them. But I think a wish list probably written by some low-level staffer probably doesn't rise to a real challenge. Especially after this revelation, expect them to crawl back under their rock. these jokers can't do anything right.
 
So you would have the Democrats participate in stonewalling any investigation into 9/11?? 9/11 hasn't already been politized to death??

You love the federal government so much you want both party's working together to mislead the public?

Are you one of those people who think the political class knows better than average Americans and are comfortable letting them do your thinking for you?

Damn, emc- do you burn American flags too or just use them for toilet paper?

Have you read the article, Jonesy9?? It has nothing to do with whether we need to investigate the intellegence used before the war. The committee (including both Repubs and Dems) has already begun an investigation into that.

The article describes a memo detailing the how the Democrats on the committee plan to abuse their investigative powers to further their politics.

"Abuse" is the most appropriate term to use here. The purpose of the Dem's "investigation" is not to uncover facts or learn anything new. Rather, the stated purpose to embarass the President and score a political gain.

The Dems want to tie up the resources of the CIA with this "investigation" for no purpose other than partisan politics. I find it reprehensible that you would call someone "un-American" for thinking such a things is wrong.
 
I just want to hear/see one of these Democrat Monday Morning Quarterbacks come out and suggest returning Sadaam to power.

You now...a do over....sorry for the mess...go back to pursuing your humanitarian policies and objectives!

That reminds me...how are things in Kosovo???
 
I JUST LOVE FOX NEWS. News fair and balanced, news not afraid!

If you want to know who wrote the memo, I think I know. Maybe it could be EX president Clinton? What does HE do in that office in New York?

Anyway, I knew that the Dems. were doing these things. They all say the same things. How can all the Democrats have all the same thoughts and say the same things over and over again, if someone wasn't feeding it to them in memos. The Clinton's have destroyed the democratic party. They will not recover until they get the Clintons, OUT.

By the way I still want to know who killed Vince Foster. Vince Foster and Hillary Clinton were especially close. They had lunch together almost every day. Friends say one would start a sentence and the other could finish it. On special occasions, when the families of the firm got together and the men were off to the golf courses, Vince and Hillary always stayed behind to "talk." When Bill Clinton became president of the United States, Vince Foster moved to Washington, D.C. to become associate attorney general and deputy White House counsel respectively. Now Why would a man who had that much power kill himself? Just wondered. I don't believe they made a memo about that.

Mrs. Toro


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Malachi 3:5,6
And I will come near to you to judgment: and I will be a swift witness against the sorcerers, and against the adulterers, and against false swearers, and against those that oppress the hireling in his wages, the widow, and the fatherless, and that turn aside the stranger from his right, and fear not me, saith the Lord of hosts. For I am the Lord, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.
 
oh, I read the article alright. it's pretty clear the Dems are responding to the stonewalling of the investigation by Roberts and the WH by planning to exert political pressure. But I suspect that LaVeigh is right and by being exposed (wonder how the government obtained that memo) they likely will be afraid to challenge the GOP now.


My apologies for going overboard with the insults. Too many people I know who once had a healthy distrust of the federal bureacracy now suck down the GOP's kool aid with nary a thought. The Bush WH is still center left and run exclusively for the elites.
 
GWB set the rules for this dung slinging contest at the first bell: anybody who disagreed with anything he said was labeled a terror-lover and a traitor. He steamrollered all opposition into silence using that technique and thought he was very clever. The dems let him have all the rope he needed to hang himself with, and now they are tightening the noose. This is just politics as usual.

I don't have any problem with a strategy that puts the administrations lies about the reasons we went to war at the front of the next election. IMO, leaders should be forced to answer for their actions, even if the motives behind getting the truth out is the other party's desire to dump them from office.
 
By the way I still want to know who killed Vince Foster.

Me too. They have proven conclusively that the third gunmen in the grassy knoll could not have gotten him because of the angle of trajectory. All evidence points to a KGB agent based in Cuba who came to the USA to kill Kennedy who accidentally got caught in a time warp.
 
Would you feel better If the administration came clean???

And told you they lied.....


Sadaam was/is a great and benevolent leader of his people and a great friend to the US.

He wants the arms inspectors back and will give them free rein.

There you go...all better now....we can run home with our tail between our legs now.



Look...the UN set the rules...Iraq broke them.......we (US, Britain, Aus) just delivered the punishment for breaking them. we could have all grown old waiting for the UN to actually do something.

They don't like confrontation....

:barf:
 
Me too. They have proven conclusively that the third gunmen in the grassy knoll could not have gotten him because of the angle of trajectory. All evidence points to a KGB agent based in Cuba who came to the USA to kill Kennedy who accidentally got caught in a time warp.
Ha. As if he's really dead and not plotting with Elvis and the gray aliens to subjugate the world.
 
When are the Republicans going to act like men and fight back, rather than tut-tut like elderly ladies at some afternoon tea?

Heard Newt Gingrich on Sean Hannity today saying Jay Rockefeller should resign.

I'd like to see the Republicans stand up and force him into it instead of wimping out like they have on the judicial nominations.

You know if it were the Democrats they'd be screaming for blood.

:cuss:
 
Maybe Bush and Cheney did abuse intelligence to trump up the case against Iraq. Maybe an investigation is warranted. If it is, they should pull the trigger now, and be held accountable for not pulling it weeks or months ago. But just because the intelligence was trumped up doesn't mean the fault - if it is a fault - of getting into a protracted conflict in Iraq was a result of that abuse. IMO, there was justification to go to war anyway, based on violations of many UN resolutions. I think there's little doubt that Bush wanted to go to war for selfish reasons. The war itself may be justified, but Bush ought to be punished to the degree he let his personal opinions push toward war.

If war was justified, Bush should have invaded Iraq immediately, without pre-conditioning the american people with unreliable intelligence, and without letting Saddam hide WMD (if he had them). If that would have cost him the election in 2004, that's life. Being president is not about getting reelected.

I suppose I've misused "war" above, at least in one sense, since Congress hasn't declared war in quite a while... :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top