For the record, this is a VERY cursory look at the document. I don't have the time or the gumption to nit-pick the thing.
We have carefully reviewed our options under the rules and believe we have identified the best approach. Our plan is as follows:
In English: They say here that they are going to abide by the rules of the committee.
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.
Here it says that they will use the committee to see if there was any negligence on the part of the Bush Administration. So? That's supposed to be a surprise? Isn't that what this committee is for? They are SUPPOSED to look for shortfalls!
I'll even go a step further...if there are any short-comings, Senator Hatch will be the first to point it out so that it can be corrected. Isn't that what this committee is all about?
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.
Here it says that if anything suspicious comes out of the committee, they will make sure the other Democratic members of congress know about it.
So? Isn't that what an opposition party is supposed to do? Why are we worried about this? It's not like the Dems are saying they are going to make-up evidence to nail the President. Furthermore, most thinking people don't trust what the Libs say anyhow.
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.
Yawn! If they can't find anything in the committee what the hell do they expect to find with an independant investigation? And even if they had one, the Dems don't have the power to subpoena jack-shit.
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.
In English this means that the Dems KNOW that most Americans don't care about this issue and that all this scheming isn't going to lead to much. At best they might score "prove" that the Bush Administration is not forthright.
I'm open to comments...but I don't see the big deal about this memo. It's unsigned and looks like a very crude strategy-plan...but nothing that our side wouldn't do if the shoe was on the other foot. I seriously doubt this has legs.
Every one of your points is correct, but you fail to see the motivation behind what the Democrats are doing. The information is not the point, it is the PERCEPTION behind the information, that they hope to generate, because although the information does not hurt Bush, they can spin it that it MIGHT, except that they cannot bring it to the public, without an Independent Counsel, with his power to subpoena and declassify information on his own. It doesn’t matter that there is nothing there.
The goal is give the Republicans a Hobson’s choice, either deny Democrats their Independent Counsel, and let the Dems and the Media spin it as evidence that something is wrong inside the administration, or DENY them their IC, and have the Dems and Media spin it as the Republicans trying to COVER UP something wrong inside the Administration.
What makes me suspect of your status - and your comments - is your use of language. Generally, FReepers get their point across without inserting profanity and understand it is not welcomed.
In other words, are you a FReeper or is there some other motivation at play in your dismissal of the significance of the memo Sean is reading from?
Your wrote: the Dems don't have the power to subpoena jack-Shit
FMCDH