Posted on 04/29/2004 7:33:53 PM PDT by Leroy S. Mort
WASHINGTON (AP) - In his meeting Thursday with the Sept. 11 commission, President Bush expressed strong disapproval of his Justice Department for releasing documents that Republicans are using to criticize a Democrat on the commission.
On Wednesday, some congressional Republicans declared that newly released material posted on the Justice Department Web site shows that panel member Jamie Gorelick was involved in action that may have weakened the nation's defenses against terrorism. Gorelick was the No. 2 official at the Justice Department during the Clinton administration.
``The president was disappointed'' over the release of the documents on the department Web site and ``we were not involved in that,'' said White House spokesman Scott McClellan.
Bush's disapproval was relayed to the department, and ``the president does not believe we ought to be pointing fingers. ... We ought to be working together to help the commission complete its work,'' McClellan said.
Department spokesman Mark Corallo declined to comment.
Some congressional Republicans who requested the documents say Gorelick helped develop 1995 guidelines that made it difficult for FBI counterintelligence agents to share information with prosecutors and criminal investigators.
Former New York U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White, a Democrat who prosecuted several high-profile terrorism cases, wrote former Attorney General Janet Reno that ``it is hard to be totally comfortable'' with the legal guidelines because ``the most effective way to combat terrorism is with as few labels and walls as possible.''
While the White House first weighed in on the Justice Department's dispute with Gorelick on Thursday, Attorney General John Ashcroft kicked off the criticism two weeks ago by releasing a 1995 Gorelick memo that he said laid the groundwork for the wall separating criminal and intelligence investigations.
After Ashcroft released the first memo two weeks ago, House Judiciary Committee chairman James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., called on Gorelick to resign from the commission, saying that the document presents a conflict of interest with her current duties.
Republican members of Congress, who requested the documents, have been calling for Gorelick herself to testify before the commission about the wall, which has been blamed for delays and communication breakdowns before the Sept. 11 attacks.
Gorelick and Thomas Kean, the Republican chairman of the Sept. 11 commission, have said there is no need for Gorelick to step down or testify. They have noted that Ashcroft's department issued a memo in August 2001 that kept in place the wall despite his criticism that it was the main structural impediment contributing to the attacks.
The Justice Department began erecting the legal wall during the 1980s, interpreting a 1978 statute governing clandestine wiretaps.
Sensenbrenner says Gorelick's memo put in place a ``heightened wall'' prohibiting information sharing.
Eleven senators are seeking Gorelick's public testimony and 21 Republican House members are calling for her to step aside. Seventy-five House members signed a letter circulated by Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, questioning Gorelick's impartiality and calling on her to help provide a fuller account of her role in shaping how intelligence was shared.
Jesus said to him, "I do not say to you seven times, but seventy times seven.
I know a lot of people grow impatient with President Bush's efforts to deal with the democrats. I myself keep being reminded of Lucy holding the football for Charlie Brown.
But the scripture above (Matthew 18:21-22) is how he behaves. Unlike our last Bible-toting president, President Bush actually believes what he reads in the Bible.
That's not true. They cooperate with Dubya on a lot of things, just not so much on judicial nominees. The confusing part is that while they're cooperating with Dubya, they're dissing him in the press.
(Just as does the 'turn the other cheek' advice.)
But this is not an issue between individuals, this is an issue of the obligations of leaders, of government and authority, and so, officials are different from unencumbered individuals in that they are granted the authority of the sword and law OVER each individual, at least so long as they abide by the limits of their authority. The sword spoken of in Romans, the authority granted to government by God, is not merely the officials' to throw away in acts of unlimited forgiveness. As officials, they are obligated to use the sword of authority to protect what they are there to serve. They can use the sword officially and still personally forgive the person they are using it on, after all, but they are obligated to lead, not allow evil to take the bit between its teeth and so define the direction of government. But officials cannot forgive AND fail to enforce, they cannot overlook injustice done to others or ignore evildoers in the interests of 'forgiveness' - as if forgiveness somehow means the same thing as letting people continue being evil without some form of just punishment.
It is the government's - and by extension, its executive officials' duty and obligation to avenge, to enforce- it would be sinful to do otherwise. And it is morally wrong to undercut honorable officials or let them be struck or destroyed by evil simply because you as a leader confused the act of forgiveness with the less noble act of overlooking. In the process you might discover your 'divine right leader license' had been revoked because you defaulted on the agreement. It's happened before...
When officials- presidents or Senators or DOJ appointees and run of the mill bureaucrats- fail to do their jobs, or commit crimes or violate ethical standards, they must be brought to justice, and SOMEONE must do that job. In our sytem that responsibility falls on the executive branch in every case except when a President errs, in which case the responsibility lies with Congress, and when all of it fails, it's the people's job to give the culprits or their supporters the boot. No official is granted the right to 'forget' his duties and overlook ethical or criminal offenses in the name of forgiveness or any other reason- not unless God is in the habit of handing out swords just for decoration.
The 9/11 commission has forsaken its duty, if indeed some of them ever intended to carry it out in the first place. this is nothing new; the Senate Intelligence committee has also forsaken their duty, and also the Judiciary committee, and all those leakers out there whoever they are.
It's the Justice Department's job to seek justice, not to help insulate evil from exposure, not to help the President convince us to believe an illusion that the 911 commission is helping us in the WOT or 'doing its work.' It's not their job to paper over conflicts of interest, or protect officials from being held accountable for poor decisions so they can continue to be in positions that enable them to make more bad decisions. The department should not be slapped down for revealing the truth or for uncovering ethical failings and corruption, particularly in cases where national security is involved.
Unfortunately, not only have the rats been 'forgiven,' they have also enjoyed the pleasure of being granted a free pass from the avenger's sword for years and years now, and that is terribly and dangerously wrong. The stench of corruption is overwhelming but no one sems willing to clean it up, not even the buzzards. We might *gasp* offend someone if we point out that they stink...
Then Peter came up and said to him, "Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? As many as seven times?" Jesus said to him, "I do not say to you seven times, but seventy times seven.
He said that to the individual Peter, not to the governor Pontius Pilate. The job of the first was to spread the good news, the job of the latter was to govern.
; )
* I am not a theologian. I couldn't even play one on TV.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.