Ex-staffer holds ground as 'Memogate' unfolds

Washington Times ^ | 3/04/04 | Charles Hurt

[MamaLucci]

The content of other memos is so incendiary, he said, "I may go to my grave with it because it would so damage the trust of the American people in their judicial system. I wouldn't reveal it, no matter what the partisan advantage

THIS is what Hatch is trying to cover up....criminal activity on the judiciary
committee. Trouble is, they are ALL compromised.
These crooks have been playing a game of mutually assured
destruction since the days of Monica and and her boy, BJ

[Travis McGee]

Only sometimes? I wonder ALL the time!

Have a good one, hasta manana.

[Howlin]

Have a good one, hasta manana.

"Don't call me that again until I look that up."
Peter Sellers, What's New, Pussycat

[Travis McGee]

No worries. "Until tomorrow."

[cricket]

"The content of other memos is so incendiary, he said, "I may go to my grave with it because it would so damage the trust of the American people in their judicial system. I wouldn't reveal it, no matter what the partisan advantage."

Well, I hope those contents have been shared with more than a few people. And hope as well, that Miranda remains safe. . .

Truth is; we can imagine worse; so why not just tell the truth and let us start from there. I suspect the 'partisan advantage' would surely serve in the end, the good of the Country.

[endthematrix]

"Truth is; we can imagine worse; so why not just tell the truth and let us start from there. I suspect the 'partisan advantage' would surely serve in the end, the good of the Country."

The best post on FR I've seen in a long time!

[MEG33]

Scorched earth approach..like the memos reveal the dems have?

[freekitty]

"Democrats he views as duplicitous and Republicans he sees as wimpy and unprincipled."

Ain't that the truth.

[Triple]

"The content of other memos is so incendiary, he said, "I may go to my grave with it because it would so damage the trust of the American people in their judicial system." - article

So why does this guy what Americans to have a false trust in the judicial system?

I don't care how bad the illness is - we still need to know what it is to be able to cure it.

IMO - this guy is brave - but he still dosen't really get it.

[Triple]

- oops "what Americans" - --> "want Americans"

[cricket]

Thanks and a bump - with hope that the Repubs will rise to the challenge of truth; where, so far, they have made a very poor showing.

Think I saw on another post that they meet today re this matter, to make some determinations.

[endthematrix]

But he just might be right. Could you imagine when people have such a fit over $3 ATM charges would happen when everything you think is right is wrong? He imagines an unprecedented public outcry. I just think the masses would just shrug their shoulders.

[kimosabe31]

The content of other memos is so incendiary, he said, "I may go to my grave with it because it would so damage the trust of the American people in their judicial system. I wouldn't reveal it, no matter what the partisan advantage."

The spinless chairman Hatch is the one that should be releasing these memos to the public. He's got the spine of a chocolate eclair and is guilty of concealing criminal activity and treason for assisting in the "whitewash" of anti-american activities by the democrats. They (the demos) could not get away with a fraction of their crimes against America, if it were not for collaboraters like Hatch. I'm guessing he's (it's) gay and they're blackmailing him.

[Eva]

From the WSJ:

ON THE HILL

Memogate
Why won't the Senate GOP stand up to Democratic Judiciary Committee shenaningans?

BY MELANIE KIRKPATRICK
Friday, March 5, 2004 12:01 a.m. EST

This page's scoop last November--revealing Senate Democratic strategy memos on how to defeat President Bush's judicial nominees--created quite a kerfuffle. The excerpts appeared in an editorial on a Friday. On Monday, the Capitol Police swooped down on the offices of the Senate Judiciary Committee in search of evidence of who leaked the documents. Now, nearly four months later, the Senate Sergeant-at-Arms has delivered a report confirming that 4,700 files were downloaded and that security was extremely lax on the Judiciary computers.

The facts point to the existence of an environment in which routine political advantage could be pursued by anyone with an ounce of chutzpah; but you wouldn't know that from the Democrats who cry "partisan spying," "Watergate," and even "Nazi Germany." As for Republicans, most would just like to get the story behind them--and get on with confirming judges. Yet it's hard to see how Democrats will let them when GOP Chairman Orrin Hatch professes himself to be "mortified that this improper, unethical and simply unacceptable breach of confidential files occurred."

The man at the center of the story takes a different view. Manuel Miranda avers that he committed no wrongdoing--no hacking, no ethical lapses. Until his resignation last month, he served as counsel on judicial nominations in the office of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist. Before that he worked for Sen. Hatch. Mr. Miranda says he did not leak the memos to the Journal. He says he read some Democratic memos, passed along by a colleague, but vigorously denies any wrongdoing. The memos fell into his hands as a result of Democratic negligence, he says--the computer-age equivalent of "leaving sensitive materials on the table of the lunchroom used by both sides."





This began in June 2001, when Sen. Jim Jeffords's defection from the GOP put control of Judiciary back into the hands of the Democrats, under the chairmanship of Sen. Leahy. Mr. Leahy promptly fired the Hatch IT staff and hired his own computer techies, who neglected to erect a firewall between GOP and Democratic users of the shared Judiciary server. This made it possible, Mr. Miranda says, for any staffer to click on the "My Network Places" icon on any Judiciary computer and call up documents stored on the shared drive. Some staffers stored nothing on the shared drive; others took the precaution of setting up passwords for their files. All were advised to keep sensitive documents on their hard drives. Classified material was stored on discs and kept under lock and key.
The key point here is that Mr. Miranda wasn't the only one who knew about the computer glitch. He found out about it in June 2002, when a co-worker handed him a stack of Democratic memos. The young staffer, who has since resigned, had discovered in March or April that he could read many Democratic files on the shared drive. The Hatch IT staffer was also aware of the problem--at one point hosting a lunchtime demo for colleagues. A computer-savvy intern for GOP Sen. Charles Grassley had made the same discovery in the fall of 2001. At some point, the Leahy IT staff learned about the glitch, too, but didn't bother to fix it.

Democratic Staff Strategy Memos From the Senate Judiciary Committee

Nov. 6, 2001/To: Senator Dick Durbin
"You are scheduled to meet with leaders of several civil rights organizations to discuss their serious concerns with the judicial nomination process. The leaders will likely include: Ralph Neas (People For the American Way), Nan Aron (Alliance for Justice), Wade Henderson (Leadership Conference on Civil Rights), Leslie Proll (NAACP Legal Defense & Education Fund, Nancy Zirkin (American Association of University Women), Marcia Greenberger (National Women's Law Center), and Judy Lichtman (National Partnership). . . .

". . . The primary focus will be on identifying the most controversial and/or vulnerable judicial nominees. The groups would like to postpone action on these nominees until next year, when (presumably) the public will be more tolerant of partisan dissent."

Nov. 7, 2001/To: Senator Durbin
"The groups singled out three--Jeffrey Sutton (6th Circuit); Priscilla Owen (5th Circuit); and Caroline [sic] Kuhl (9th Circuit)--as a potential nominee for a contentious hearing early next year, with a [sic] eye toward voting him or her down in Committee. They also identified Miguel Estrada (D.C. Circuit) as especially dangerous, because he has a minimal paper trail, he is Latino, and the White House seems to be grooming him for a Supreme Court appointment. They want to hold Estrada off as long as possible."

April 17, 2002/To: Senator [Ted Kennedy]
"Elaine Jones of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund tried to call you today. . . . Elaine would like the committee to hold off on any 6th Circuit nominees until the University of Michigan case regarding the constitutionality of affirmative action is decided by the 6th Circuit. . . . The thinking is that the current 6th Circuit will sustain the affirmative action program, but if a new judge with conservative views is confirmed before the case is decided, that new judge will be able, under 6th Circuit rules, to review the case and vote on it."



Mr. Miranda maintains there was nothing wrong with reading the memos. The documents were neither classified nor confidential. Sen. Ted Kennedy--who compared the leaks to Watergate--once shared this view. Two more Democratic memos surfaced yesterday--Mr. Miranda said he found them Wednesday night--including talking points for Mr. Kennedy on a Hatch staff memo that had inadvertently been e-mailed to a Kennedy staffer. "There was no impropriety as the information sent to her was not confidential or privileged information," the memo reads.

Mr. Miranda scanned the memos looking for "information about when confirmation hearings would be held." Democrats, he says, would sometimes tell liberal interest groups weeks or even months before they informed the Republicans, to whom they usually gave one week's notice. If he had extra time to prepare, so much the better. "I wouldn't read everything," he says. "I had little time or the memos were not current. I was looking for dates. I wasn't looking for a problem." He says the memos confirmed what he already knew about the collusion between the Democrats on Judiciary and liberal interest groups such as NARAL and the NAACP.





It wasn't until the 2002 election, he says, that he began to think there was more to the memos. The first thing he noticed was that Fourth Circuit nominee Dennis Shedd's vote "was being delayed because of the North Carolina election." Then "they decided not to bring Shedd up" before the senatorial runoff election for Mary Landrieu in Lousiana. "She had run out of money and depended on the NAACP and People for the American Way. That's the first time I told myself that this goes beyond what might be viewed as normal lobbying." He began to think that the Democrats on Judiciary might be offering "a promise of campaign funding and campaign get-out-the-vote support in exchange for withholding a confirmation vote on a nominee."
The April 17, 2002, memo on the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals (see excerpts nearby) is an example of a possible legal or ethical violation, he says. The memo explains that Elaine Jones of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund wants Sen. Kennedy to "hold off" on any nominee until the Sixth Circuit had voted on the University of Michigan affirmative action case. "Had I seen that memo I certainly would have given it to the House Judiciary Committee," which was investigating alleged judicial impropriety in the Sixth Circuit decision. "I didn't see it until you pointed it out in the Journal."

Mr. Miranda's sin here seems to be at most a misdemeanor. The Democrats, by contrast, are trampling on the Constitution with their filibuster of appeals-court nominees. Isn't that worse--by far?

Ms. Kirkpatrick is The Wall Street Journal's associate editorial page editor.

[Elkiejg]

Send emails of support to krdaly@fairjudiciary.com.

Ms. Daly:
I’ve been following the stories of the Judiciary Committee memogate and the brave actions of Mr. Miranda. I know that Fair Judiciary is supporting him and many American patriots thank you. For your information there are many who support what Mr. Miranda has done and continues to say. You will find such support posted on threads about this subject on FreeRepublic.com. We would like Mr. Miranda to know that we stand with him. We would like to know from both of you what we can do to help. We’ve posted the phone numbers of Senators to call, we’ve signed petitions, written to our local media.

Please pass our offer of support to Mr. Miranda and encourage him to visit FreeRepublic.com. If he’s inclined to post comments or ask for our help, there are many who will jump at the chance. We see the acts of the Democrats on the Judicial Committee as extremely dangerous to this country…bordering on criminal. Through activists judges, the fabric of our country is being weakened every day. We need judges who follow the Constitution and Rule of Law – not write law from the bench.

We are here to help, please let us know how.

[familyofman]

"He catches the 'rats in treason..."

If that were true there would be outrage from a lot of people. The sad fact is - there was no treason - only political positioning (done by both sides). The overuse of the term treason is really getting on my nerves. It's overuse only lessens it when the term fits & here it sure doesn't.