Sean Hannity has a scoop on dem party corruption (Vanity)

Sean Hannity radio show ^ | 11/04/03 | Unknown Democrat (via Sean Hannity)

[prairiebreeze]

Figures. They'll wait as long as they can, hoping to not have to say one word about it. Of course if the situation were reversed, it would be the lead story every 15 minutes...

Prairie

[prairiebreeze]

Ack! Elenor Clift guest on FOX whining that CBS has been censored in the Reagan mini-series.

Prairie

[Dog]

Check your pings.

[nicmarlo]

Darn....I missed it, except for the 30 seconds before the commercial!

[Protect the Bill of Rights]

"They have no backbone.
They have no balls.
They have no convictions."

I forget who it was, but on one of the talk shows last weekend, someone was talking about the "growing" [yeah, right, can it grow any larger?] perception among the public that the GOP has no balls (my noun, not his).

Given the state of the juducial nominations and the "can't we all get along" mentality in the Senate, I do believe the best way to get action is for this point to be hammered in by us again & again & again.

Every phone call, every letter, every conversation should stress this point. We do not expect any change in the state of affairs on Capital Hill until the GOP grows some.

We did not elect these people just to have a Republican in the position. We elected them to represent us, to fight for us.

If they do not fight for us, we will look elsewhere.

I compare the GOP to a rape victim choosing to lay back and take it to avoid getting hurt. The dems screw them again and again and the GOP (not all--but most) lay back with their legs spread wide open.

Zell Miller is my Senator. I did not vote for him in the election. I have disagreed with him in the past on many, many issues and have used the name "Zig-Zag Zell" many times in the past. He has always been considered very liberal in the state of Georgia. Hearing the call for him to switch parties my response was always "be careful what you wish for, you might get it."

I believed Senator Miller would be much more effective as a Democrat than as a Republican. Time has proven me right on that one. Had he switched, he would have been perceived by most as someone no better than Jeffords. He would be seen as someone willing to play the switch game just for political power. He stayed with his party. Do not discount the effect this has on many conservative democrats. He is saying the exact things many of us have been saying for years. No one listens to us. After all, we are Republicans, part of the VRWC. They will tend to listen to Senator Miller because he is one of their own.

I have always considered him to be a good man. Case in point: Someone bucking the system in such a public and effective way would be neutralized by the dems using whatever ammunition they have. It is standard operating procedure for the dems. We saw it in California. We saw it when the President Bush's DUI was made public right before the election. I am convinced this was the motivating factor for the National Enquirer. Not true with Senator Miller. The worst I have heard is he has nothing to lose, he is retiring. If that is the worst they have, then he has led a pretty clean life.

There are many voters in Georgia who would not vote for him, but for the most part, he holds a place of honor. As I have also said in the past, Zell could run against Jesus Christ in the State of Georgia and Zell would win by a landslide.

When appointed to fill the seat of the late Paul Coverdell, he promised to serve all Georgians, not just the dems. He has kept that promise and has served Georgia well while in the Senate. Because of this, if running for re-election, I would vote for him. I was saying this before the release of his book, so I am not a Johnny come lately to the "We love Zell" bandwagon.

I also think that when we bring the issue of the castrated GOP to the front burner where it belongs, if we constrast that to the willingness of Zell Miller to buck the dem leadership, they might just listen. Especially when we make it 100% clear, our votes will be cast for someone willing to fight for us.

We will begin at home. All politics are local and home is where we will take this issue. Incumbency will mean nothing. Our nominees will be the ones willing to fight, who will take one for the team. Maybe then, they will grow balls.

[sonsofliberty2000]

**** Here is where the story is going in the capable hands of bipartisanship! ***

Roberts says memo undermines inquiry

Note discusses creating an independent commission to study Iraq prewar intelligence

By Libby Quaid

The Associated Press

WASHINGTON -- Republican Sen. Pat Roberts said Democrats have undermined the inquiry he is leading into Iraq prewar intelligence by drafting a memo aimed at discrediting the Senate Intelligence Committee's work.

The Kansan is chairman of the committee. The memo was written by Democratic committee staff and wasn't finalized or circulated among members of the committee, said the panel's senior Democrat, West Virginia Sen. Jay Rockefeller.

Rockefeller acknowledged the document after news reports quoted excerpts from it. The memo spells out steps to make the committee's inquiry irrelevant by setting up an independent commission, and in the process attempt to "castigate" majority Republicans. It suggested "pulling the trigger" on the plan "probably next year."

Roberts said the memo stunned him.

"It's like a personal slap in the face," he said. "I'm very frustrated by it."

"We cannot politicize the committee," he said. "No member of the intelligence community wants to come up and testify before a committee that is whipsawed by politics. In addition, once this becomes public, or more public, every intelligence agency in the world will take note of it."

"And quite frankly, I think this will give some comfort to terrorists," he told The Associated Press in a telephone interview Tuesday evening. "We have to put back together some semblance of a bipartisan committee."

Roberts and Rockefeller have been overseeing an often rocky review of intelligence on weapons of mass destruction that the White House used to justify the war on Iraq.

The two men met Tuesday after Roberts learned of the memo. In a statement he issued afterward, Rockefeller dismissed the memo as "likely taken from a waste basket or through unauthorized computer access."

He added: "The draft memo was not approved, nor was it shared with any member of the Senate Intelligence Committee or anyone else.

"Having said that, the memo clearly reflects staff frustration with the conduct of the Senate Intelligence Committee investigation and the difficulties of obtaining information from the administration."

He said that exploring or asserting the rights of the committee's Democratic minority doesn't politicize the process.

"The American people deserve a full accounting of why we sent our sons and daughters into war," Rockefeller said.

Democrats and Republicans alike have complained the White House, the CIA, the Pentagon and the State Department have been slow to respond to requests for interviews and documents.

The White House missed a Friday deadline for complying, and while Roberts announced over the weekend the White House agreed to cooperate, he subsequently backed away and said he spoke too hastily.

Roberts called on committee Democrats to repudiate the strategy outlined in the memo.

"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 pre-war intelligence," he said. "Instead, we should be focusing on how to make our country safer and how to improve our intelligence capabilities."

[sonsofliberty2000]

Democrats Mull Politicizing Iraq War Intelligence

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.

Patriot Paradox

[prairiebreeze]

Roberts is a putz. More interested in maintaining his committee relationships than in confronting the treachery of the Dims.

Just watch. Nothing will really happen on this. Probably not even a slap on the hands to anybody. And the issue will die....until next year when the memo's all forgotten about and the Dims actually launch their attacks.

I don't want a SEMBLANCE of a bipartisan committee Senator. I want an effective committee who's invested in working for the good of the country. Is that SO MUCH to ask for? Evidently, it just might be.

Prairie

[sonsofliberty2000]

I'm listening to the radio today waiting for SOMEONE ANYONE to talk about it and keep it alive.

Patriot Paradox

[b4its2late]

I know. He kept saying to Hannity he wanted to "rebuild the bridge" so the committee can get on with its work.

Doesn't anything the dems do get the pubbies in an uproar? Typical Republican......

[sonsofliberty2000]

We can't get any work done when wekeep building the bridge and the Democrats keep burning the bridges we build. Time to build a house on our side of the river and hope they decide to take a boat across the river and help us. If not let them do what they want on their side.

Patriot Paradox

[onyx]

Disgusting display of cowardice, all in the same of bi-partisanship and "bridge-building."

Thank God, for the patriotic staffer who had the intellect to choose Sean. And thankfully, Sean is not about to let the GOP senators slither into the democrat snake pit.

Thanks for posting the articles.

[prairiebreeze]

Trent Lott just on FNC.m FNC has been following it pretty well. Showed Durbin in the senate floor trying to dress up pigs.

I'm going to delude that senate RAT of mine with smailmail and phone calls and faxes. I already called the DC office

Prairie

[sonsofliberty2000]

Who is hosting Rush's show today? Any chance they will follow this?

Patriot Paradox

[OXENinFLA]

Could someone please link me to a word for word copy of this memo?

I've been away from FR since 10-30 (death in the family) and neeed to get up to speed on this.


Thanks..........

[sonsofliberty2000]

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2003/11/4/165925.shtml

Dem Intel Committee Memo Reveals Anti-Bush Plot

A memo circulated among Democrats on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence shows the committee's minority plotting to use classified information against the White House in next year's presidential campaign.

The document, obtained and disclosed by nationally syndicated radio host Sean Hannity Tuesday afternoon, suggests that the top priority among senior Democrats entrusted with guarding the nation's security is instead driving the Bush administration from power based on claims it exaggerated intelligence on the threat posed by Iraq.

The memo as reported by Hannity reads as follows:

"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." [End of Memo Excerpt.]

The revelation that Democrats are using the intelligence committee to conduct opposition research for the coming presidential campaign demands an investigation by the Senate Ethics Committee, Hannity said.

Patriot Paradox

[sonsofliberty2000]

Also I'm sorry to hear about the death in your family. May God be with you.

Patriot Paradox

[prairiebreeze]

I'm not sure about Rush's show host. I rarely get to listen to talk radio (darn work). My local ABC noon news had not one word about this topic, surprise, surprise.

Is the story getting much press anywhere but FOX? Anybody?

thanks, Prairie

[sonsofliberty2000]

Don't know; I'm listening to the Hannity show feed right now and waiting to see what he says.

Patriot Paradox

[sonsofliberty2000]

On Hannity:

memo came from Rockerfellers desk

Patriot Paradox