Blame Gorelick?

Washington Times ^ | April 15, 2004 | By Jennifer Harper

[joinedafterattack]

September 11 commission member Jamie Gorelick, as deputy attorney general for three years beginning in 1994, "was an architect of the government's self-imposed procedural wall, intentionally erected to prevent intelligence agents from pooling information with their law-enforcement counterparts," writes Andrew C. McCarthy, a former chief assistant U.S. attorney who led the 1995 terrorism prosecution against Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman and 11 others. "That is not partisan carping. That is a matter of objective fact. That wall was not only a deliberate and unnecessary impediment to information sharing; it bred a culture of intelligence dysfunction. It told national security agents in the field that there were other values, higher interests, that transcended connecting the dots and getting it right. It set them up to fail," Mr. McCarthy said in an opinion piece at National Review Online (www.nationalreview.com). "To hear Gorelick lecture witnesses about intelligence lapses is breathtaking," he added.

[joinedafterattack]

Why not blame Gorelick.

[MamaLucci]

"To hear Gorelick lecture witnesses about intelligence lapses is breathtaking," he added.

Galling, as well.

[Jim Robinson]

Clinton NSC Attacks "Losing bin Laden" Author
The Washington Times ^ | September 23, 2003 | Roger Cressey and Gayle Smith, Clinton NSC

"After September 11, some Clinton officials admitted their mistakes. Jamie Gorelick, a deputy attorney general in the Clinton Justice Department, told the Boston Globe: "Clearly, not enough was done. We should have caught this. Why this happened, I don't know . . . We should have prevented this." Nancy Soderberg, a member of Clinton's National Security Council, added: "In hindsight, it wasn't enough, and anyone involved in policy would have to admit that."

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/987857/posts



Clinton Assigns Blame [What did they know and when did they know it? Pre-GWB]
National Review ^ | Originally published: November 8, 2001 | Kevin M. Cherry

"In 1996, President Clinton charged Al Gore with improving airline security. But the commission he led "focused on civil liberties" and "not effectiveness," according to the Boston Globe. The commission concluded that "no profile [of passengers] should contain or be based on... race, religion, or national origin." The FAA also decided, in 1999, to seal its passenger screening system from law-enforcement databases — thus preventing the FBI from notifying airlines that suspected terrorists were on board."

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/918622/posts

[Smartass]

GORELICK, THE EARLY YEARS

[Graymatter]

I'd fault her for bad judgment, incompetence, hypocrisy, and the rest of the Democratic line of goods, but let it go at that. The President got it right, bin Laden is responsible. That way has clarity. Scapegoating always gets messy, like a food fight, every participant winds up with splatter.

That said, she should resign, and indeed the commission should disband altogether. It's a disgrace in itself.

[swilhelm73]

Next to her boss Clinton, and perhaps Clarke, she does seem to have been the most responsible for the failure of American national security.

The Dems asked, right after 9/11, that we ignore the failings of the Clinton administration that had encouraged and allowed AQ to pull off the attack for the good of the nation and the good of the WoT. The press obliged, obviously, but so did most of the Reps.

I think their hypocritical attempt to play the blame game should mean the gloves are off now. We will see if the Reps step up to the plate. Lord onlys know what it will take for them to see playing the nice guys is never going to work with the current incarnation of the left.

[boop]

No, the republicans shouldn't pursue the Gorelick controversy. If history is any guide, they will cave in when the media complains that they are "picking" on her. I have yet to see the republicans stand up to the media.In fact, they should simply accept the lies from the 9/11 commission. Since they won't defend themselves, the only conclusion I can draw is that they are guilty of everything said about them. If I was accused of something I was innocent of, I would all but use nuclear bombs to defend myself.

[swilhelm73]

Well, IMO, there is no question that going after Gorelick is a good idea. The smoking gun is there. The press won't push the angle willingly, so the Reps have to.

True, they probably won't out of any number of (flawed) reasons - but to do so would be good morally, historically, and politically.

[Ben Chad]

GORE.....
LICK.....
GORE.....
LICK.....

A name never to be forgotten.

[beaversmom]

If there's one thing the Dems never lack, it's gall!

[backhoe]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1117579/posts
GORELICK GATE: Developing...
various FR links | 04-14-04 | The Heavy Equipment Guy

[samtheman]

By the standards of this commission, Julius Streicher should have been a judge at the Nuremberg trials, not a defendent.