Sen. Jay Rockefeller a Target?

Macsmind is reporting that Sen. Rockefeller may be the target of investigators examining the leak of classified information on the NSA surveillance program:

"I'm trying to confirm this information, but several sources are telling me today that some investigators working on the NSA leak probe believe that Senator Jay Rockefeller may have been a little more than "concerned" about NSA. In fact, he may just be the leaker of the program to the NY Times, and is now being considered a "significant person of interest" in the probe.

What I'm told that investigatiors have locked into is this fact that other pundits have identified, that Senator Rockefeller had stated that he went to to great lengths to lock away his memo of concern (in a safe) so that not even other close members of the Senate knew about it. Yet the NY Times, James Risen in fact revealed the letter's existance in his initial NSA "book excerpt".

The question being asked is if not even Senator Rockefeller's closest confidants, staffers, etc, knew of the letter's existance, how therefore did James Risen of the NY Times know about it?

If this incoming information is correct, it would not be the first time Senator Rockefeller – Vice Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee had been investigated for leaking classified information. In early 2005, the CIA asked the Justice Department to look into whether Democratic Senators Dick Durbin, Jay Rockefeller and Ron Wyden leaked details about a secret "black ops" CIA satellite program in December of 2004. That investigation is still on going, but I hear it may be wrapping up in the affirmative.

Moreover, it may be noted that Senator Rockefeller admitted back in November 2005, that he also made a trip to Syria in 2002 to discuss "The President's intentions" reference to the upcoming invasion of Iraq. A move which I understand didn't sit well with administration officials.

Of course Senator Rockefeller is the architect of the current Demorcatic game plan on Iraq as the infamous "Rockefeller Memo" showed.

If this information is acurate, it will also confirm the suspicions voiced here, and here after the NSA story broke that in fact Senator Rockefeller, along with recently 'resigned" FISA Judge James Robertson – an outspoken critic of the President and the NSA program.

Correcting myself AGAIN--the memo I was trying to remember had to do with the Democrats' ongoing effort to undermine Americans' support for the war on terror, in this case by preparing to launch an "independent investigation".

Here's the full text of Rockefeller's memo. Certainly shows that his latest and previous activities are consistent.

We have carefully reviewed our options under the rules and believe we have identified the best approach. Our plan is as follows:

1) Pull the majority along as far as we can on issues that may lead to major new disclosures regarding improper or questionable conduct by administration officials. We are having some success in that regard.

For example, in addition to the President's State of the Union speech, the chairman [Sen. Pat Roberts] has agreed to look at the activities of the office of the Secretary of Defense, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, as well as Secretary Bolton's office at the State Department.

The fact that the chairman supports our investigations into these offices and cosigns our requests for information is helpful and potentially crucial. We don't know what we will find but our prospects for getting the access we seek is far greater when we have the backing of the majority. [We can verbally mention some of the intriguing leads we are pursuing.]

2) Assiduously prepare Democratic 'additional views' to attach to any interim or final reports the committee may release. Committee rules provide this opportunity and we intend to take full advantage of it.

In that regard we may have already compiled all the public statements on Iraq made by senior administration officials. We will identify the most exaggerated claims. We will contrast them with the intelligence estimates that have since been declassified. Our additional views will also, among other things, castigate the majority for seeking to limit the scope of the inquiry.

The Democrats will then be in a strong position to reopen the question of establishing an Independent Commission [i.e., the Corzine Amendment.]

3) Prepare to launch an independent investigation when it becomes clear we have exhausted the opportunity to usefully collaborate with the 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 to do so will probably be next year, either:

A) After we have already released our additional views on an interim report, thereby providing as many as three opportunities to make our case to the public. Additional views on the interim report (1). The announcement of our independent investigation (2). And (3) additional views on the final investigation. Or:

B) Once we identify solid leads the majority does not want to pursue, we would attract more coverage and have greater credibility in that context than one in which we simply launch an independent investigation based on principled but vague notions regarding the use of intelligence.

In the meantime, even without a specifically authorized independent investigation, we continue to act independently when we encounter footdragging on the part of the majority. For example, the FBI Niger investigation was done solely at the request of the vice chairman. We have independently submitted written requests to the DOD and we are preparing further independent requests for information.

SUMMARY: Intelligence issues are clearly secondary to the public's concern regarding the insurgency in Iraq. 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 approach outlined above seems to offer the best prospect for exposing the administration's dubious motives.

RockefellerÂ’s Treachery
The Fifth Column/Joan Swirsky

November 29, 2005 - "I took a trip by myself in January of 2002 to Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Syria, and I told each of the heads of state that it was my view that George Bush had already made up his mind to go to war against Iraq Â— that that was a predetermined set course which had taken shape shortly after 9/11."

So spoke Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) on Â“Fox SundayÂ” on November 14, 2005, who at the time of his trip was chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and is now its vice chairman.

Please read the first paragraph once again, digest it (if your stomach can handle it), and consider its immense Â– if not treasonous Â– implications.

By himself and fully armed with AmericaÂ’s most sensitive intelligence, Sen. Rockefeller decided to go to three Arab countries Â– including Syria which is on the State DepartmentÂ’s list of terrorist regimes and a close ally of Saddam Hussein Â– and literally alert them to what (Â“in my viewÂ”) might befall a neighboring Arab state.

This was Sen. RockefellerÂ’s judgment only four months after September 11th and a full year before President Bush had expressed any intention to go to war!

By its very nature, Sen. RockefellerÂ’s solo trip, his lofty rank on one of the senateÂ’s most prestigious and sensitive committees, and most important his words were no doubt received for what they were Â– a clarion heads-up!

There is no doubt that even before he departed the palaces of his hosts, high officials from terrorist Syria, fair-weather-friend Saudi Arabia (that Sen. Rockefeller, with his Standard Oil inheritance, may feel very akin to), and even Â“moderateÂ” Jordan, were telegraphing the presidentÂ’s intentions to the Butcher of Baghdad: Â“Get ready! And whatever you have in the way of WMD, whatever can implicate us, get rid of them!Â”

What followed Sen. RockefellerÂ’s treachery was the lengthy and painstaking road to war and the prelude to ways that he and other leftists have tried to sabotage the president, compromise National Security and undermine our troops.

As author William J. Bennett has aptly asked: Â“What was Senator Rockefeller doing? What was he thinking? How about an investigation Â…into what exactly [he] told Syria and just what Syria might have done with the informationÂ…before it was made available to the U.N., the Senate, or the American people? Sen. Rockefeller may have seriously harmed, impeded, and hindered our war efforts, our troops, and the entire operation in the Middle East. This should be investigated immediately; and perhaps Senator Rockefeller should step down from the Intelligence Committee until an investigation is complete.Â”

What Happened Next Â– 2002

▪ January: the same month Sen. Rockefeller decided to give our enemies a heads-up, President Bush, in his State of the Union address, called Iraq part of the Â“axis of evil,Â” saying that the United States Â“will not permit the world's most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the world's most destructive weapons.Â”

▪ June: the president spoke at West Point, telling his audience that a policy of preemption was necessary in the war on terror, i.e., we have to get them before they get us Â– again!

▪ September: the president addressed the United Nations and challenged that terrorist-embracing body to enforce its own 17 resolutions against Iraq, which it had never done in the past.

▪ October: Congress overwhelmingly authorized an attack on Iraq (Senate 77-23; House 296-133). In fact, Sen. Rockefeller said that the threat from Iraq was "imminent," an adjective the president never used.

▪ November: the U.N. Security Council unanimously approved resolution 1441 that imposed Â“toughÂ” new arms inspections on Iraq and, the same month, U.N. weapons inspectors returned to Iraq for the first time in almost four years.

For all of this time, Security Council member France (among other obstructionists) strenuously resisted going to war against Iraq, significantly failing to acknowledge that they were deeply implicated in the Oil-for-Food scandal in which they took billions in SaddamÂ’s bribes. Thank you, Senator Rockefeller!

A full year elapsed and, with it, the grim first anniversary of the 3,000 innocent people who were murdered by Islamic terrorists on September 11th Â– also, a full year in which Iraq had both the means and opportunity to rid itself of its weapons of mass destruction. Thank you Senator Rockefeller!

COMPLETE ARTICLE HERE

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.