Replies

In 1993, we had fewer than 600 special agents and 500 support positions funded for CT [Counter-Terrorism]. By 1999, we'd more than doubled our personnel and trebled the FBI's CT budget to $301 million. We knew it wasn't enough. For Fiscal Years 2000, 2001 and 2002 the FBI asked for 1,895 special agents, analysts and linguists to enhance our CT program. We got 76 people for those three critical years. FY 2000 was typical: 864 CT positions at a cost of $380.8 million requested--five people funded for $7.4 million.

This comes from this morning's op-ed piece by Louis Free in the Wall Street Journal... This paragraph sums up the Clintonoids (and the Janet Reno Justice Department that Gorelick was a part of) feckless response to the terrorism threats that were gathering and taking place in the 1990's. The years mentioned above were when record surpluses were being reported and projected -- and even then the Clintonoids couldn't press for more $ for counter-terrorism that would help stave-off something like 9-11.

This factoid should be shoved back at Jamie Gorelick and Bob Kerrey with the question: why weren't YOU pressing for more resources like this to support the Counter-Terrorism effort... Maybe if the FBI had the needed resources, those 70 field investigations mentioned in the 8/6/2001 daily briefing would have had some meat and generated some better leads in advance of the attack. Hey *sshold Kerrey... Why weren't you leading the charge for these kinds of investments requested by the FBI Director? Remember that Bubba didn't exactly like Freeh and was looking for a way to dump him but he had a Monica problem at the time... Just another example of the President's dalliance with a young girl coming before protecting the country from the gathering and growing threat of terrorism... But let's just have a nice conversation with the great Bubba, right all you Demo partisan *ssholes on the Commission???????

"In 1993, we had fewer than 600 special agents and 500 support positions funded for CT [Counter-Terrorism]. By 1999, we'd more than doubled our personnel and trebled the FBI's CT budget to $301 million. We knew it wasn't enough. For Fiscal Years 2000, 2001 and 2002 the FBI asked for 1,895 special agents, analysts and linguists to enhance our CT program. We got 76 people for those three critical years. FY 2000 was typical: 864 CT positions at a cost of $380.8 million requested--five people funded for $7.4 million.
This comes from this morning's op-ed piece by Louis Free in the Wall Street Journal... This paragraph sums up the Clintonoids (and the Janet Reno Justice Department that Gorelick was a part of) feckless response to the terrorism threats that were gathering and taking place in the 1990's. The years mentioned above were when record surpluses were being reported and projected -- and even then the Clintonoids couldn't press for more $ for counter-terrorism that would help stave-off something like 9-11.

This factoid should be shoved back at Jamie Gorelick and Bob Kerrey with the question: why weren't YOU pressing for more resources like this to support the Counter-Terrorism effort... Maybe if the FBI had the needed resources, those 70 field investigations mentioned in the 8/6/2001 daily briefing would have had some meat and generated some better leads in advance of the attack. Hey *sshold Kerrey... Why weren't you leading the charge for these kinds of investments requested by the FBI Director? Remember that Bubba didn't exactly like Freeh and was looking for a way to dump him but he had a Monica problem at the time... Just another example of the President's dalliance with a young girl coming before protecting the country from the gathering and growing threat of terrorism... But let's just have a nice conversation with the great Bubba, right all you Demo partisan *ssholes on the Commission???????"

Rockey's LEAKED memo should be the required "Preface" to anything that "The Commission" puts forth.

But let's just have a nice conversation with the great Bubba, right all you Demo partisan *ssholes on the Commission???????

Very good question. Slick is no longer the Executive. He's just another citizen now. Let's get him in there and answer some tough questions for a change. Of course, it wouldn't be fair to him to let either Hillary or Monica sit behind him -- and cruel and unusual to seat both of them back there. Come to think of it, it might turn into an episode of "Jerry Springer", right there during a hard-news, gavel-to-gavel event.