Posted on 08/12/2005 6:57:45 AM PDT by Carling
Friday, Aug. 12, 2005 9:47 a.m. EDT 9/11 Commission Covered-up Gorelick Warning
A 1995 memo from a top terrorism prosecutor warning that a directive by Clinton administration Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick "could cost lives" is being concealed by the 9/11 Commission.
Compounding the cover-up - Gorelick herself was a prominent member of the Commission and refused to recuse herself from parts of the 9/11 investigation that covered the now notorious "wall" she erected that prevented intelligence and law enforcement agencies from cooperating in the war on terror.
In June 1995, U.S. Attorney for New York's Southern District Mary Jo White warned the Justice Department that Gorelick's prohibition against intelligence sharing would hamper U.S. counterterrorism efforts. "It is hard to be totally comfortable with instructions to the FBI prohibiting contact with the United States Attorney's Offices when such prohibitions are not legally required," White wrote on June 13, 1995 in a memo reported Friday by the New York Post's Deborah Orin.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
Here's the facts - the Gorelick wall was erected to shield the Clintons from investigations into illegal Chinese campaign donations to the Democrat party. The Clintonoids deliberately sacrificed thousands of innocent lives on the altar of political power.
I LoVE YOU!
Yeah...and I'm glad to hear Rush hammering all these themes home today.
I wish to the depth of my soul that you were right, but I believe otherwise. There is such a rot in the heart of the government that I no longer have confidence that justice will ever be visited on people at the high level of the Clintons and their cronies. A perfect case in point is the pathetic slap on the wrist that Sandy Burglar got for the pants-stuffing job at the National Archives. Another case in point is how the Clintons themselves have evaded so many credible scandals, crimes and abuses of power time and time again. Look at it this way: it will take an act of political will in Congress and nothing less to bring these people to justice. Bush, as much as I like him and a lot that he's done, has been mister kissy kissy with the Clinton bunch. So we are left with Congress. Even though the House found the spine to vote impeachment, the Senate, the ultimate club of sychopants and media suck-ups cannot be relied on to back real accountability. It sucks. But I think that's the way it is. Lord knows, I want to see Billary, Burglar, Reno, Gorelick and others in handcuffs, but I am not holding my breath.
So the wall was Gorelick's misplaced loyalty to stifle the investigation of the Chi-Com donations to Clinton-Gore, and probably a factor in the dead-end Thompson hearings where the connection was promised. The puzzle is fall9ng into place, all without the need of a tinfoil headpiece.
This case brings into sharp focus the dereliction of the 911 commision when they did not disqualify Gorelick once the whole "wall" issue came into play. The commision's own rules on conflict of interest says:
"2. Conflicts Arising from Prior Government Service
Commissioners and staff will recuse themselves from investigating work they performed in prior government service."
http://www.9-11commission.gov/about/recusals.htm
Could it have been any clearer? Perfect case in point for why there are rules for recusal so a total political hack like Gorelick cannot undermine the investigative process.
The Clinton Administration was a lethal mixture of incompetence and corruption. We have already paid a steep price in lives and treasure, in addition to an enormous decrease in our national security. We will be paying for this for decades. In the end, Clinton may actually have succeeded in carrying out his masters' goal -- the destruction of the United States of America.
I don't think it was misplaced loyalty. I think she was told flat out to shut the door between FBI, CIA, NSA, DoJ, and DoD so that certain things could be hidden, and other projects allowed to run smoothly.
Gorlick is a friend of Hillary's. This should be as good a reason as any to not elect that awful beast for president!
"But even despite this, what Gorelick did was build an even bigger wall, making it impossible to get critical information to those who needed it."
That is the essence of her complicity. She took a host of rules and regulations about the handling of classified info between departments, procedures actually, and combined them into a single iron clad rule. Prior to her 'wall' it WAS possible to share information if one jumped through all the hoops necessary. Afterward, it was simply not possible.
....and it should have been obvious to ANYONE with an IQ above room temperature that all kinds of vital info about terrorists cells and networks might be obtained in myriad different investigations and prosecutions. Anyone who knows anything about bureaucracy, never mind counter-terrorism, understands that Gorelick made it virtually impossible for the vast and clunky federal government to work intelligently on counter-terrorism. If anything, the concern should have been how to FACILITATE communication between different agencies and investigations, not how to 'wall' them all off from each other!!!
I agree. Gorelick was the fix for the Clinton Administration and she was "in".
Copyright 1997 Daily News, L.P.
Daily News (New York)
April 24, 1997, Thursday
SECTION: Editorial; Pg. 50
LENGTH: 798 words
HEADLINE: TERROR ON TRIAL IN U.S., TOO
>>>snip<<<
Two years after 168 people were killed in the nation's worst terrorist act, and on the eve of the trial of the accused bomber, Timothy McVeigh, Congress still resolutely refuses to comprehend the disorganized dangers of the post-Cold War world. It had a chance to offer the citizenry some protection last summer, when it voted on an anti-terrorism bill.
The House passed it by a rousing 389-to-22 vote making those 389 look like tough guys to their constituents. Except the bill was a whole lot of nothing, a worthless sound-and-fury measure that had been emasculated at the behest of the National Rifle Association and others with phobic tendencies. Gone was President Clinton's proposed requirement that gunpowder manufacturers put tracer particles in their products, making it easier to track bombers. Gone was the proposal to let the Pentagon help local police. And authorization of greater wiretapping was killed off too. So frightened were the pols of federal crimefighters, it's surprising they didn't form their own militia to defend against an invasion of black helicopters.
BTTT
More on the enemy within...?
Excerpt from the Congressional Record: April 28, 2004:
So it is clear Ms. Gorelick was intimately involved with consideration of the arguments, both pro and con, on establishing this policy which, according to her own memo, went well beyond what the law required. Thus, it becomes even more clear she is a person with knowledge of facts that are relevant and indeed essential to the decisionmaking process of the 9/11 Commission.
I wish it stopped there, but it does not. Indeed, it appears these new documents contradict or at least require clarification by Ms. Gorelick of subsequent statements that she has made on the 9/11 Commission. For example, in a broadcast on CNN's Wolf Blitzer Reports, Wolf Blitzer asked her: Did you write this memorandum in 1995 . . .
By reference, this was the one that was declassified by Attorney General Ashcroft that established these procedures building the wall and blinding America to this terrible threat. He asked: Did you write this memorandum in 1995 that helped establish the so-called walls between the FBI and CIA?
Ms. Gorelick said: No. And again, I would refer you back to what others on the commission have said. The wall was a creature of statute. It existed since the mid-1980s. And while it is too lengthy to go into, basically the policy that was put out in the mid 1990s, which I didn't sign, wasn't my policy in any way. It was the Attorney General's policy, was ratified by Attorney General Ashcroft's deputy as well on August of 2001.
In other words, Ms. Gorelick, notwithstanding the fact that her initials as Deputy Attorney General appear on the very memos considering recommendations, both pro and con, with regard to establishing these procedures, in spite of the fact she appears by these documents to have been intimately involved in the adoption and establishment of these procedures, said: I didn't sign this memorandum and it wasn't my policy.
Well, at the very least it is clear that it was the policy of the Attorney General, based on her explicit recommendation, and that she consciously adopted in some cases and rejected in others the recommendation of the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York with regard to sharing of information between law enforcement and counterintelligence authorities.
Finally, another example of an apparent contradiction, and maybe one that Ms. Gorelick could explain if she would testify in public, as I and others have requested, before the Commission, she said in an op-ed that appeared in the Washington Post, April 18, 2004, entitled ``The Truth About the Wall,'' in giving the various reasons for her side of the story in response to the testimony of Attorney General Ashcroft and the revelation of this previously classified document:
Nothing in the 1995 guidelines prevented the sharing of information between criminal and intelligence investigators.That appears to directly contradict what is contained in these documents. I would imagine if asked to provide her own testimony, Mary Jo White, the now retired former U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, would beg to differ.
The primary purpose of this is not to cast blame. We know where the blame lies. But it is important the 9/11 Commission get an accurate record, a historical record of the events leading up to September 11. If, in fact, there is a way for Ms. Gorelick to shed some light on this subject, indeed, if there is a way for her to clarify or reconcile the apparent contradictions between what these newly released records demonstrate and her public statements and writings, then she ought to be given a chance to do so. If she does not avail herself of that opportunity, if the Commission refuses to hear from this person in public and to give the American people the benefit of this testimony in public in a way that they have done with Attorney General Janet Reno and former FBI Director Louis Freeh, current FBI Director Robert Mueller, George Tenet, Director of Central Intelligence, and Attorney General John Ashcroft, if they refuse, if they continue to refuse to avail themselves of this public testimony and the opportunity for questions to be asked about these apparent contradictions, they will have administered a self-inflicted wound. The public will be left, at the conclusion of the 9/11 Commission, with grave doubts about the impartiality and the judgment of the Commissioners who have refused to allow the American people the benefit of this relevant and important testimony.
In summary, Gorelick lied...and so here we are again...looking at Gorelick as the culprit.
Good find. Now we just need to find out who stripped the bill, looks like they tried to blame it on the right.
That is an excellent idea. Let's start the drumbeat for an investigation on why this ultra-important information was hidden from the public.
Please, please... get pull your head out... Your game was well exposed long time ago. It just won't work anymore.
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.