[OESY]

From any reasonably objective point of view, the Gorelick memo has to count as by far the biggest news so far out of the 9/11 hearings. The Mary Jo White prosecutions and the 2001 Moussaoui arrest were among our best chances to uncover and unravel the al Qaeda network before it struck the homeland. But thanks in part to the Clinton Administration's concern with appearances and in part to its legacy, these investigations were hamstrung.

Ms. Gorelick--an aspirant to Attorney General under a President Kerry--now sits in judgment of the current Administration. This is what, if the principle has any meaning at all, people call a conflict of interest. Henry Kissinger was hounded off the Commission for far less. It's such a big conflict of interest that the White House could hardly be blamed if it decided to cease cooperation with the 9/11 Commission pending Ms. Gorelick's resignation and her testimony under oath as a witness into the mind of the Reno Justice Department. What exactly was the purpose of the wall?

Former governor Kean has proved to be an ineffective commission chairman when he fails to maintain discipline in the hearing room, when he announces final judgments have been made before all testimony is heard in public including testimony from the FBI and CIA, and when he continues to give members of the Clinton administration a free pass.

Why was Al Gore's testimony regarding airport security and immigrantion shortcuts not taken in public? Why has Jamie Gorelick not been called to testify as to why it was necessary to erect a "wall" to separate counterintelligence from other FBI activites and the FBI from the CIA? Why when she says she will recuse herself on matters she was involved in is she asking questions of FBI Chief Mueller, as she did yesterday? How can she participate in the judgments of the Commission when by all appearances she's is the single most culpable individual in the whole tragic 9/11 story? In allowing her participation yesterday, Kean broke trust with the American people seeking honest answers.

Why is Kean defending Gorelick without a formal inquiry? The NY Times likes to rail against Republicans for an "appearance" of a conflict of interest after they've circulated unfounded rumors, but Gorelick is the poster child for an ACTUAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST.

It now looks like Kean can no longer preserve any semblance of objectivity or competence on the 9/11 Panel. Kean says we the public should stay out of the Commission's business, but it was convened after an outcry from the public and it is the public they are supposed to be serving. In other words, it is very much our business.

Both Kean and Gorelick should resign. They have utterly lost the confidence of the public.

[maica]

One thought on the conundrum of Kean and Lehman appearing everywhere to defend Gorelick's placement on the commission.

They have panels of inquiry set for May, June and July. They say they will have a report out by July (to stay within the extension granted them.)

Perhaps they think that to focus now on Gorelick will delay the deadline, and extend the attention paid to the commission. Its actions and its report will drag on through the entire campaign months up to November.

I think this is a weak argument and wrong decision but it may be something that is being considered behind closed doors.

[OESY]

Isn't this use of a commission to strike at Bush in an election year (and, incidentally, weaken national security to satisfy the ALCU and hate-filled Democrats) exactly what the Rockefeller memo called for?

[Brian Allen]

<< Both Kean and Gorelick should resign. >>

Via our Representatives, we the people should deprive them of that option by Repealing P.L. 107-306 t. VI -- and thus abolishing the Commission.

To do otherwise is for every one of us to be a party to and responsible for the commission's obscene charades.

And to deny every one of its corrupt buffoons -- and the parade of other cli'tinista crime-family members it calls -- the dignity of the consequences of his own actions.