Gorelick role raised early

Washington Times ^ | 4/19/04 | Charles Hurt

[Lancey Howard]

It was just a few weeks ago that the din grew louder and louder every day for Condi Rice to testify publicly before the commission. Finally, Bush made the extraordinary decision to find a way to let Condi Rice testify publicly (even though she had already testified privately for over four hours).

Bush had decided that the work of the commission to gather all the facts in its efforts to identify national security inadequacies and improve our nation's security warranted this bold and unprecedented action.

Move ahead to last week.

It has now turned out that commission member Jamie Gorelick was very likely the one person in government who was most culpable for the abominable security conditions which allowed the terrorist attacks of 9-11-01 and the murder of over 3,000 American citizens. Clearly, Gorelick must testify publicly. The only thing which could possibly resuscitate the credibility of this sick charade that is the "9-11 Commission" would be Gorelick's resignation and public testimony.

Will it happen? The next few days will determine whether the commission has been a complete waste of time and taxpayers' money, or a serious investigation. Of course, it may be too late to save the commission anyway because who on the commission would have the spine to question Gorelick the way, say, Ben-Veniste questioned Rice and Ashcroft? I fear it would end up being another whitewash, with the Democrats taking care of the spin and the namby-pamby Republicans looking on sheepishly with their thumbs up their butts.

Ahh, forget it.
SHUT DOWN THE COMMISSION NOW!!!

[Stultis]

According to a summary of that interview obtained by The Washington Times

"Obtained," eh? Despite the passive voice, clearly someone on the Commission, or staff, provided this to the WT, precisely because it would be damaging to Gorelick. There have been reports that Kean asked Gorelick to step down, and that she refused. Is this leak, then, possibly part of Kean's own campaign to force her off, or has someone else with more testicular fortitude done this? (Lehman?) Is there more damaging information yet to come if Gorelick remains intransigent?

[RobFromGa]

Everyone should write a letter to the 9-11 Commission and send it today. Here's mine from yesterday: (sorry I've posted this a few times elsewhere on FR but I hope to move others to action).

April 18, 2004

National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States
Washington Office: Tel: (202) 331-4060 Fax: (202) 296-5545
New York Office: Tel: (212) 264-1505 Fax: (212) 264-1595

To: The Commission Leadership
CC: Ms. Jamie Gorelick, Commission Member (also high-ranking member of previous Administration)

Dear Commissioners:

I have been disturbed by the revelations of this past week that Ms. Gorelick deliberately withheld specific information about her past responsibilities from the people that appointed the people to this commission.

Her job title alone should have been enough to disqualify her, it is apparent that she was in a position of very high power within the Administration just previous to the present one. It is also readily apparent that she is tightly related to many members of the previous Administration—many of whom were held over by the Bush Administration to maintain a level of continuity on these important tasks.

Her letter in the Washington Post this morning raises more questions than it resolves, making it obvious why Ms. Gorelick must not remain on this Commission and must be a Witness. It is readily apparent that:

Ms. Gorelick is unable to impartially judge people that she knew closely and worked with.

Ms. Gorelick will be unable to impartially judge people she worked for.

Ms. Gorelick never belonged on this Commission and does not belong on this commission now.

The fact that she had to write her letter for the Washington Post to defend herself is proof that the Commission is tainted beyond repair by her continued presence. It is also proof that she is under great pressure to do the right thing.

This is not a witch-hunt that is bringing her demise even though that is what will be reported by the partisan press. This is a basic question of fairness and conflict of interest. When she is removed, I hope that Commission leaders will keep this in mind as they announce this to the world. To suggest that this was in any way partisan or a political witch hunt or McCarthyism will only serve to further taint the Commission.

Did Ms. Gorelick disclose to any of you that she was so tightly involved in the “Wall” or that she prepared and signed the memo adding to it, or did you find that out from Mr. Ashcroft like the rest of us? Was she forthcoming that she might be an important witness before the Commission? Did she ever object to being named and have to be talked into it?

It is past time for Ms. Gorelick to do the right thing and resign. She should have refused service when asked but she didn’t so now it up to her to fix the situation or have it fixed for her.

Ms. Gorelick is knowledgeable about Conflicts of Interest. It is my understanding that she wrote a book on this very subject. Her continued presence can only mean that she is trying to make sure that the previous Administration is not examined fairly. Or she is afraid of being a witness and this is her best defense.

With her biased perspective removed, maybe the Commission can continue your work to help prevent the next 9-11. That is the important reason to be doing this now (while we are still fighting this War)—isn’t it?

If your purpose is instead to provide political ammunition for campaigning, then I can see why multiple TV appearances on cable and network news and opinion shows by all the members of the Commission would be a wise strategy. But, if you are trying to prevent the next 9-11, as charged, then you should stay away from the TV cameras and the easy sound-bites.

Once Ms. Gorelick resigns, or is forcibly removed from this Commission if she refuses to do the honorable thing, then she needs to be called as a Witness. I would also like to see her explain why she hid her previous activities from the people who appointed her.

All across America, people have seen what a partisan circus many aspects of this Commission have become. In this one area, you need to take steps to reduce this perception—remove Ms. Gorelick and call her to testify.

Sincerely,
A concerned American


Rob Northrup
Norcross, GA

[RobFromGa]

The notes show that concerns about Ms. Gorelick's impartiality on the commission were raised months before House Judiciary Committee Chairman F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., Wisconsin Republican, called for her resignation last week.

It seems so obvious that Gorelick was in a high position and would have a conflict of interest. It certainly doesn't take an investigative journalist to look at a resume that shows Gorelick was a high level official in the Clinton admin. And that Janet Reno would be a witness, someone that she worked for directly.

Of all the people they could have picked, how did she end up on the panel. Someone from the GOP should have been raising concerns about this from Day One.

[patj]

Libs, want answers on 911? Ask Clinton why he met with Monica more than with his CIA director.) or his cabinet.

This story also means that the commission knew about her involvement sooner than we thought. There wasn't any surprise when Ashcroft released the memo, unless the surprise was that he did release the memo. This whold damn commission is tainted. As if you didn't know that already.

[MeekOneGOP]

Ms. Gorelick has defended her impartiality to sit on the panel and judge U.S. counterterrorism efforts even as she has strenuously defended her own actions in the past on some of those very efforts. She appeared last week on several TV programs to say she won't step down from the board and has the support of the Republican chairman of the panel.

Thomas Kean says I am the most non-partisan, bi-partisan member of the 911 Commission. Well, ain't I SPECIAL !?

[MeekOneGOP]

Colmes: You like pointing fingers, huh.

I can't stand this jerk ...

Alan Colmes

[Jimmy Valentine]

"Gore Lick (should be called Clint Lick) is Bilk Linton's plant on the commish"

I will suggest to you that she is HILLARY'S creature, not Bubba's.

Regards,

[Jimmy Valentine]

Mama, if your blood is boiling now, wait until Gorelick's work at the Pentagon comes out into the public record.

She was a busy little bee over there also.

Regards,

[chambley1]

The only wall Gore-Lick ever bulldozed down was Janet Reno's virginity.

[Timeout]

From reading the article, I'd say the "leak" came from someone who accompanied Pickard at his testimony.
_______________________________________________________

Re: Her op-ed in the WashPost yesterday.

Someone at NRO The Corner pointed out that it IS testimony! She's trying to put her spin on record without oath or cross examination. Since she opened that box, she should be forced to testify.

Kean must call her as a witness...whether she resigns or not.

[gunnedah]

The name itself should have given ger away- Gore- Lick!
Hell I am beginning to think the Republicans in Washington are against Bush.
I guess the old saying of no honor among thieves is really correct.
This commission has been a waste of American resources and has show our system for what it is.

[Diogenesis]

"We love Gorelick. She is both aptly named, you know
and one of the best liars we both have EVER met.
Also, she taught us how to lie.
And you know what?
If WE had a copy of her book "Destruction of Evidence"
we NEVER NEVER could have gotten fired."

[Stretch]

Hey Rob: This is Stretch from Cumming... The Old Geezer..
Seen you on many times but never got around to answering any of your posts.

This was a good letter. I wrote a long one to the Commission last week. Got my two cents in...

If you are active in any Freeping and demonsdtrations around this area, let me know if I can help in any way. I've been on this site since it first started. I don't post too much At least I could show up at one and carry placards. Wife and I drove to Alabama to help protest the removal of the Ten commandments. Shoot me an e-mail at sychet1942@aol.com Be glad to hear from you. Dick

[Liz]

Gorelick is now adopting the standard Clinton scam used to bail themselves out of trouble......reinventing themselves as "victims."

When libs smell trouble, the regular routine is to stoop down, start sobbing, and assume the position of "victim."

Gorelick's been on the news crying about getting harrasing phone calls.....and said she'd had death threats. Claiming death threats is surefire victimization.

Ashcroft is supposedly investigating the threats.....same guy who revealed her image-damaging memo. Guess where that'll lead?

[ovrtaxt]

Don't sweat it. If she stays on the Commission, it will just discredit anything and everything that they conclude.

If their purpose is to harm the Bush Admin. for the election, all they have to do in defense is refer to the presence of Gorlik.

If the Commission's purpose is to protect Clinton, my question is 'from what'? Bush's 'new tone' isn't going to result in justice being done anyway.

[RobFromGa]

Gorelick's been on the news crying about getting harrasing phone calls.....and said she'd had death threats.

Have you seen this anywhere in print? Did you personally see her say these things in an interview on TV? Do you remember the show?

It seems like a play they will make, but it seems too early to be making it. Unless we are close to having her removed and this is the endgame for Gorelick.

[RobFromGa]

Hey Rob: This is Stretch from Cumming...If you are active in any Freeping and demonstrations around this area, let me know if I can help in any way. I've been on this site since it first started. I don't post too much At least I could show up at one and carry placards.

Hi Stretch,

Good to hear from you. I'll let you know if I hear of any events in the Atlanta area. I'd love to meet ya'll.

I'm pinging a few other active Atlanta-area Freepers to let them know you want to help.

RobFromGA

[ovrtaxt]

Gorelick gets 'death threats'

[Just mythoughts]

"According to the commission guidelines on recusals: "Commissioners and staff will recuse themselves from investigating work they performed in prior government service."
The rules also state: "Where a commissioner or staff member has a close personal relationship with an individual, or either supervised or was supervised by an individual, the commissioner or staff member should not play a primary role in the Commission interview of that person." "


Well well, another case of situation ethics. MZ. Gorelick has hoodwinked "The Commission", The Congress, and attempted to seduce a whole nation.

Gorelick once again breaking rules, not one word this Clintonite says can be believed. "The Commission" is a hoax and is making no attempts to hide their purpose.