[ovrtaxt]

Very good historical perspective in your post. I agree with the context of history in which you set your comments, until you get to 1993.

The problem occurs when Gorlick sits up there and tries to capitalize on the whole perceived 911/ Iraq disconnect, with an attempt to score political points by blaming Bush Admin officials for the whole thing, when in reality she personally had plenty to do with the situation, even after a series of ME terrorist attacks, including WTC'92, OKC, TWA800, and finally, 911.

The Wall, and in fact the whole foreign vs. domestic info gathering procedure, which was legitimately enacted to protect us from a police state, shoould have been reworked long ago, before 911. But the Dems and the media continually downplayed it, and in fact blamed conservatives in the case of OKC.

And there's a history of the FBI manipulating 302 statements and physical evidence in these previous attacks. So, yes, Gorlick was somewhat justified in her approach, preoviding that all these other incidents didn't happen. But they did. And in fact, it seems that the DOJ actively worked against the people of the US in pursuit of their goals.

[An.American.Expatriate]

The problem occurs when Gorlick sits up there and tries to capitalize on the whole perceived 911/ Iraq disconnect, with an attempt to score political points by blaming Bush Admin officials for the whole thing, when in reality she personally had plenty to do with the situation, even after a series of ME terrorist attacks, including WTC'92, OKC, TWA800, and finally, 911.

I too have a lot of trouble with her sitting as a "judge" on this commission since she was NOT just a "soldier" in the DoJ - she was a policy maker and leader. For her to know be sitting in judgement over her own actions is insanity.