Should a commission be formed to investigate pre-911 obstruction by Democratic Senators?

April 8, 2004 | Vanity

[syriacus]

Could 9/11 have been prevented if Schumer and the Democratic Senators hadn't manhandled Ashcroft's confirmation? Did their obsession with the single issue, abortion, divert the Senate's attention from national security? Did Schumer's "shot across the bow" contribute, at all, to the disaster?

Two weeks of acrimonious hearings delayed Ashcroft's confirmation. What if Ashcroft had been able to spend those two weeks, instead, as head of the DOJ and the FBI?

What other obstructions did the Democrats throw in front of Bush's attempts to establish his administration?

[syriacus]

Hard Feelings Remain After Ashcroft Vote

by Jim Burns February 1, 2001 [excerpt]

The Senate's leading liberal, Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) was Ashcroft's biggest critic during the confirmation hearings. And he didn't appear interested in reconciling the issue after the vote. "I hope that this vote sends a strong message to the president of the United States about the strength and the commitment of the Senate in protecting particular fundamental values."

Kennedy had argued that Ashcroft would fail to protect civil rights, the guarantee of "a woman's right to choose, and [the] guarantee also that we are going to have someone vigorous in trying to keep guns out of the hands of children."

Senator Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) called the 58-42 result an "historic vote" because the president's nomination was "divisive."

"I am, for one, heartened that there were 42 votes against him. It's a shot across the bow in terms of the Justice Department and how it conducts itself.It's a shot across the bow in terms of Supreme Court nominations. It's a shot across the bow in terms of the push and pull within the Bush administration, to be moderate and bipartisan or to play to hard right.

I'm proud of the job we did," Schumer said at a Capitol Hill news conference following the vote. Schumer called the 42 votes against Ashcroft real "profiles in courage."

BTW, Kennedy talked about protecting "fundamental values".

Isn't the National Defense a fundamental value?

[Support Free Republic]

Donate Here By Secure Server

[Voltage]

Actually the weaking of our intelengence capability goes all the way back to the Church Commission of the US Senate in the 70's which, as I recall, forbid the interchange of information between the internal (FBI) and external (CIA).

It was a Democrat idea of course! And a great assistance to terrorists.

[syriacus]

Schumer said

It's a shot across the bow in terms of the Justice Department and how it conducts itself.

What message was Schumer sending to the Justice Department?

Is Schumer supposed to tell a cabinet member how to behave?

Is Schumer saying he is Ashcroft's boss?

[syriacus]

Thanks.

Democratic contributions to 9/11

1. Church commission
2. Manhandling Ashcroft confirmation
3. Obsessiveness about abortion, to the detriment of National Security

[ReleaseTheHounds]

Excellent points, syriacus... An "honest" review of the failures in confronting the gathering threat of terrorism would put a major spotlight on all these incidents that undermined and isolated our intelligence gathering/sharing process and the "bigots" like Kennedy and Kerry in the Senate that reflexively are anti-Defense and anti-intelligence, usually tied to their fear that anything could come back to harm their abortion-supporting efforts (and other anti-American leanings).

The other spotlight would focus on the 8 years of feckless Clinton policies -- on all things related to defense but especially related to the acts of terrorism aimed at US targets that generated no response from Clinton. The liberal media doesn't like to dwell on it, but you can't walk away from the facts: Clinton's dalliance with an intern took precedence to his defending the homeland. He allowed that tawdry scandal to influence greatly his response to these attacks. And the public widows of 9-11 applaud the lynching of Condi Rice... I can only shake my head.

Ten years from now, when Social Security and Medicare are starting to "hit the wall" because of demographics and the Ponzi-Scheme nature of these plans, Senator Kennedy will be gone (hopefully) but his replacement will be blaming Bush (who tried to get this on the agenda in the early months of his first administration -- yet this will be another catastrophe that Clinton avoided (when it could have been addressed on a reasonable basis) because of his "personal" problems. The disasters Clinton left for future Administrations and generations are really something to behold.

[brothers4thID]

Something to consider:

Recommendations to strengthen cockpit doors were made prior to 2000. When the legislation to require this was being debated the airlines lobbied heavily against it.

Now go find out which Senator's wife was a lobbyist for the airlines.

Enjoy..........

[petitfour]

Well, it seems as if the overseers of the executive should be investigated during these hearings. But will that happen? Maybe a bunch of research should be done on this and the info could be used against incumbants in the elections for lawmakers over the next six years. Folks like Tom Daschle should be held accountable by the people. It is the only way to get rid of the corrupt, power-seekers who put power above their fellow citizens.

[syriacus]

but his replacement will be blaming Bush (who tried to get [social security] on the agenda in the early months of his first administration

I remember that.

I've made it through to C-Span's Washington Journal only one time.

I asked why Presidential Candidate G W Bush's plans to rescue Social Security weren't being discussed in the popular media. It seemed like an important topic to me.

I can't remember the answer. Perhaps it was a lousy answer.

[mewzilla]

Who's gonna investigate Congress? And didn't John Kerry sit on a Senate intell committee?

[sport]

It has my vote!

The Republicans need to push for that to happen.

[7thson]

Not just a great assistance to terrorists but to the soviets during the Cold War. Since the 1930's, the Soviets have worked within this country and our government creating multiple weak links. Even though the Cold War is over, the old enemy has done the work for the new enemy. No sharing of information, no profiling, PC bs, etc., it all helps the terrorists. But who listens? I tell this to people I know and either their eyes glaze over or they look at me like I am some sort of nut. It is extremely frustrating, especially when the watch dog - the press - has been stolen from you and retrained to work for the other side. The vast majority of information is out there. All people have to do is look for it. Freepers obtain great information on a daily basis. The new demonization is the internet. You tell people you got this from the net, they think it is made up. People do not know, realize, or want to know that the net gives you access to papers, think tanks, encyclopedias, etc. They just think of it as a gossip tank.

[syriacus]

Well, it seems as if the overseers of the executive should be investigated during these hearings.

Right. And Schumer felt the Senate should tell the DOJ how to behave. Schumer said, "It's a shot across the bow in terms of the Justice Department and how it conducts itself."

The more I think about it, the more it seems clear that the most outspoken Democrats in the Senate do think they are the overseers of the executive branch.

I know I seem to be tilting at windmills, but haven't the Democrats been overly intrusive?

Haven't they gone far beyond "Advice and Consent"?

They even have memos, detailing plans to obstruct judicial appointments.

Didn't Bush deserve to have some more conservative Justices , these past few years, as he fought terrorism?

[Ben Hecks]

"What if Ashcroft had been able to spend those two weeks, instead, as head of the DOJ and the FBI?"

Thanks to Democrat foot dragging, Mueller was not confirmed as Director of the FBI until August 2, 2001. We now realize how precious this lost time really was. It is impossible to calculate how much damage the Democrats in the Senate have done to the United States of America. I have nothing but contempt for Kennedy, Schumer, Leahy, Durbin, Kerry, Biden and all of the other losers that have worked so long to destroy this country.

[syriacus]

Now go find out which Senator's wife was a lobbyist for the airlines.

Hmmm...I seem to remember...someone from a great planes state, or was it a Great Plains State?

[petitfour]

Well, as Condi pointed out multiple times yesterday, a good portion of the problems that prohibited the sharing of information between agencies was due to LAWs passed by Congress. Bureaucratic red tape is attributable to Congress.

Then there's all the partisan failures to approve nominees for their positions.

The people should hold the Congress accountable.

[syriacus]

Who's gonna investigate Congress?

It looks like the Traditional Values coalition thinks Senators can call for an investigation of some Senate matters.

TAKE ACTION

"Contact your two U.S. Senators and demand that these Democrat memos be investigated for possible violation of federal law and for the unethical obstruction of justice."

[Liberty Valance]

Great idea...of course it'll never happen. Our only real means of dealing with this lopsided "commission" will come at the ballot box in Nov.

---

W'04 - :^)

---

[syriacus]

You tell people you got this from the net, they think it is made up.

I know. They should realize the web makes it possible to cross-check and verify facts. It also makes it possible to see if an idea is out-of-date.

A two year old book on the safety of hormone replacement therapy for women would be outdated.

[TheDon]

If you want the truth, just wait for Ann Coulter to write the sequel to "Treason".