Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Michael Chertoff - New HomeLand Security Secretary per Fox News
crushelits | Jan. 11, 2004 | crushelits

Posted on 01/11/2005 6:41:46 AM PST by crushelits

Michael Chertnof - New HomeLand Security Secretary per Fox News


TOPICS: Breaking News; Government; US: New Jersey; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: chertnof; chertoff; dhs; fox; homeland; immigrantlist; michael; michaelchertoff; new; news; secretary; security; term2
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 181-188 next last
To: gitmogrunt

Sounds like an excellent choice in spite of your preference for Sheriff Andy or Barney.

Critics who whine about him being a right wing ideologe convince me that he is EXACTLY what is needed there. His enemies are my enemies.

None of the prerequisites you note him lacking are relevent to administering a huge bureaucracy. J. Edgar Hoover was just another lawyer when he was named head of the FBI. I doubt that any experienced lawman could have done as well as he.


61 posted on 01/11/2005 7:39:40 AM PST by justshutupandtakeit (Public Enemy #1, the RATmedia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: angkor

I remember some of his questioning and he was like a pit bull. If anybody but Damato had been chairman of that committee, he might have found out something. Damato was a usful idiot for the dems. Instead the entire hearing became a farce and set the stage for all the coverups that followed and lent victim status to the Clintons and their henchmen. IMHO


62 posted on 01/11/2005 7:40:52 AM PST by SwatTeam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: justshutupandtakeit

This is a phenomenal pick. Chertoff is TOP DRAWER. Brilliant, engaging, has worked the press in the past, good conservative credentials, but not an ideologue. Bush could not have made a better pick for this post.


63 posted on 01/11/2005 7:43:07 AM PST by fromunda
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: SwatTeam

I remember this as clearly as I'm sitting here right now. The following doesn't really convey it, but the Senate hearing went into complete meltdown. Sarbanes and D'Amato were both yelling at Chertoff.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/967rwskg.asp?pg=2

On February 7, 1996, majority counsel Michael Chertoff posed a series of eerily prescient questions to Webster Hubbell in a televised hearing before the Senate Whitewater committee. Chertoff asked Hubbell, who had been brought up from prison in Maryland to testify, about his employment prospects following his release from prison.

"Are you familiar with a group called the Lippo Group?" Chertoff asked. This was the first public inquiry into a matter that would, seven months later, break out into the Clinton campaign-finance scandal. In February 1996, no one outside the financial community knew much about the Indonesian conglomerate run by Mochtar Riady and his son James. And no one outside the
Clinton Arkansas circle knew much about the many, many connections between Lippo and the Clinton crowd--connections apparently based on the flow of Lippo-linked cash into Democratic political operations and rewards for it from the Clinton team in the form of access and influence.

Hubbell responded that an affiliate of the Lippo Group had been a client of his between his resignation from Justice and his guilty plea.

"Did you have other clients?" Chertoff asked.

"Yes," Hubbell replied.

When Democratic senator Paul Sarbanes asked Chertoff what the relevance of all this might be, Chertoff said he was interested in knowing whether the money Hubbell received "may have had an impact on your degree of cooperation with the independent counsel or with us." (At Hubbell's sentencing after his plea agreement, Whitewater independent counsel Kenneth Starr had asked for no leniency--a clear signal that Starr didn't believe Hubbell was cooperating fully with his investigation.)

Hubbell protested vigorously, and committee chairman Alfonse D'Amato ruled that any further questions along these lines would be addressed in private depositions.


64 posted on 01/11/2005 7:43:16 AM PST by angkor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: SwatTeam

Do you remember he was smirking when he asked Hubbell the questions?

As the above-referenced Weekly Standard says, he didn't know what exectly it was, but Chertoff knew he was on to something.


65 posted on 01/11/2005 7:46:40 AM PST by angkor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: crushelits

Time will tell of course, but I believe he's an excellent choice.


66 posted on 01/11/2005 7:52:24 AM PST by iconoclast (Conservative, not partisan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau
That means, his appointment will p*** her off.

I think so. :-)

67 posted on 01/11/2005 7:52:25 AM PST by syriacus (Was Margaret Hassan murdered because she could have testified about the oil for food corruption?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: angkor

My memory is rather fuzzy but I do remember that. And I was really frustrated when Damato called a halt to it. My husband and I both at the same time said, "The fix is in." That particular incident set the stage for all hearings after that, don't you think?


68 posted on 01/11/2005 7:59:00 AM PST by SwatTeam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: ClintonBeGone

Are you series? What's your point?


69 posted on 01/11/2005 7:59:04 AM PST by iconoclast (Conservative, not partisan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau; syriacus

I hope so. She will be having bad dreams for a while.


70 posted on 01/11/2005 8:00:48 AM PST by crushelits
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: crushelits

This guy does know where alllllll the liberals bury their skeletons, who is who and what is what.

I can't imagine what Richard Ben-Veniste and the wall builder Gorelick must be thinking.


71 posted on 01/11/2005 8:03:34 AM PST by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClintonBeGone

Wouldn't the fact that they produced fraudulent documents to obtain legal entry to this country, be considered illegal entry, therefore illegal aliens??


72 posted on 01/11/2005 8:03:45 AM PST by JesseJane (CBS - The Greatest Snow(job) on Earth......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: prairiebreeze

Just got home; thanks for the ping on this guy. Looks like a good pick.


73 posted on 01/11/2005 8:05:37 AM PST by Peach (The Cl intons pardoned more terrorists than they ever captured or killed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: crushelits
I hope so. [Hillary] will be having bad dreams for a while.

I wonder if Bill will have time to "counsel" Hillary.

74 posted on 01/11/2005 8:05:51 AM PST by syriacus (Was Margaret Hassan murdered because she could have testified about the oil for food corruption?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: crushelits
"I am referring to the man behind the criminal prosecution of terrorists, Michael Chertoff. Chertoff, former chief of the Justice Department's criminal division, and a scary looking guy if ever there was one"

WOW!
I love this guy already.
If he looks "scary" to the loony, left crazies, he's just gotta be a great guy for the job.
75 posted on 01/11/2005 8:07:43 AM PST by KwasiOwusu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: iconoclast
Are you series? What's your point?

My point is simply that the immigration status of the 9/11 hijackers had nothing to do with the homeland security of this country.

76 posted on 01/11/2005 8:11:29 AM PST by ClintonBeGone (In politics, sometimes it's OK for even a Wolverine to root for a Buckeye win.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: MEG33; txrangerette

Sorry, the initial posts made it sound like he was still holding a post in the AG's office. Apologize for my confusion.


77 posted on 01/11/2005 8:12:44 AM PST by Steelerfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: JesseJane
Wouldn't the fact that they produced fraudulent documents to obtain legal entry to this country, be considered illegal entry, therefore illegal aliens??

What is your definition of fraudulent documents? I stand by my point - not one of the hijackers originally entered this country illegally.

78 posted on 01/11/2005 8:13:01 AM PST by ClintonBeGone (In politics, sometimes it's OK for even a Wolverine to root for a Buckeye win.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: KwasiOwusu

Still. Quite a stretch to go from a cop to a Harvard Law Review Editor. What a change in philosophy.


79 posted on 01/11/2005 8:15:24 AM PST by TFine80
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: crushelits
Michael Chertoff received a "well qualified" rating from the American Bar Association.

That alone is a scary thing but since I don't know him I will yield to the jubilation of FReepers more informed about his qualities....for now.

80 posted on 01/11/2005 8:15:34 AM PST by evad (DUmmie FUnnies and Pookie Toons-the start of a nice day)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 181-188 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson