Posted on 11/14/2005 11:13:59 AM PST by Stultis
WALLACE: ...in October of 2002 in which you authorized the use of force, you went further than the president ever did. Let's watch:
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ROCKEFELLER: I do believe that Iraq poses an imminent threat, but I also believe that after September 11th that question is increasingly outdated.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: Now, the president never said that Saddam Hussein was an imminent threat. As you saw, you did say that. If anyone hyped the intelligence, isn't it Jay Rockefeller?
ROCKEFELLER: No. I mean, this question is asked a thousand times and I'll be happy to answer it a thousand times. I took a trip by myself in January of 2002 to Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Syria, and I told each of the heads of state that it was my view that George Bush had already made up his mind to go to war against Iraq, that that was a predetermined set course which had taken shape shortly after 9/11.
Now, the intelligence that they had and the intelligence that we had were probably different. We didn't get the presidential daily briefs. We got only a finished product, a finished product, a consensual view of the intelligence community, which does not allow for agencies like in the case of the aluminum tubes, the Department of Energy said these aren't thick enough to handle nuclear power.
They left that out and went ahead with, "They have aluminum tubes and they're going to develop nuclear power."
WALLACE: Senator, you're quite right. You didn't get the presidential daily brief or the senior executive intelligence brief. You got the national intelligence estimate.
But the Silberman commission, a presidential commission that looked into this, did get copies of those briefs, and they say that they were, if anything, even more alarmist, even less nuanced, than the intelligence you saw...
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Oh, I'm so glad you told me. That sounds right. I'll just keep trying to phone Sen. Roberts office; it's been busy.
Of course he was, he's a Republican.
Too busy trying to get along with his "friends on the other side of the aisle".
Imagine if the tables were turned. Do you think the Democrat would have sat there passively while such outrageous remarks were being made?
Good points.
When I get through to Roberts office, I'm going to ask if he was sent there on a mission. If not, I want an explanation.
You made good points also on another thread about snail mail not being terribly effective because of the very long lag time while mail is checked for anthrax.
So I will compose a letter to Roberts asking for an investigation and will fax it to him.
For more detail see this:
******************************************************
A Must Read:
Unholy Alliance :
Radical Islam and the American Left (Hardcover)
by David Horowitz
**************************************
Vastly Illuminating, September 25, 2004
Reviewer: | Kat Bakhu (Albuquerque, NM United States) - See all my reviews![]() |
<**************************************
I saw Jay speak at West Liberty State College's commencement back in the late 70's. He was about 10 points dumber than a WV coal bucket.
He has not changed to this date and only his name and the Dem corruption keeps getting him reelected.
His latest interview only serves to confirm that he has learned nothing in the last 30 years and if anything is the poster boy for Dumb and Dumber, being now 50 ponts dumber.
I love that! Must be what the Democrats would have said...
~SNORRFLE!~
'fraid not. If a Republican mentions this at all, all Rockerfeller has to do is say "Are you questioning my Patriotism?" and tell the Republican he won't be invited to his next cocktail party and the Republican will apologize
I believe it was the two guards that stopped him and made him take off his boots, revealing the "plan" on paper was the convincing argument for treason. Washington WOULD NOT give him clemency.
submitted it to Drudge.
Well put, they do hate traditional America and their goals have never changed, just their methodology.
See Bill Bennett's article:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1521956/posts
That it won't happen is true, a shame, and all because of the over bloviating media that exists in this country...and, that Bush & Co. will wilt under the pressure.
Besides, even with the most legitimate case of treason (an open-shut case), the demoCREEPs would only cry out for Bush's impeachment and/or counter treason charges.
Investigations, investigations, all around. The Equivalency will be staggering and compare the most egregious actions from demoSCUM to the most benign for Pubbies. Rockefeller giving a clear signal that we're coming will be compared to Rove take a restroom break at an important conference. Sure, the result of Rockefeller's actions was 1) ample warning to Syria and by extension Saddam to "hide the nukes" and 2) treasonous, but Rove 1) broke protocol by dismissing himself to urinate and 2) he hit the lid once! Oh, the shame!
It's a f'ing circus.
It's tough because there is something to "if you get into an argument with an idiot...". Unfortunately, we don't have a fair medium reporting the story...rather, they are embroiled into the story. And, with their last gasping breath, as the Internet bears down on their near-lifeless bodies, the MSM is lashing out with a biased violence that has to be unmatched in its history.
You can't read/watch 1 news segment without (at least) 2-3 stories that are just dripping with leftist biases.
It's remarkable.
So, whether its a Senator (i.e., Rockfeller) or a reporter (i.e., like Judith Miller), if you have sold this country out, you should be held accountable and suffer the consequences.
Good job, Chris Wallace!
Just called Roberts Office and explained that in the old days this kind conduct was illegal and I'm not sure what it's called today other than conduct that most Americans don't consider appropriate if not illegal.
***
Oh, I believe it IS illegal.
TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 45 > § 953 Prev | Next
§ 953. Private correspondence with foreign governments
Release date: 2005-08-03
Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply, himself or his agent, to any foreign government or the agents thereof for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00000953----000-.html
What a piece of garbage. I would expect better from WVa than Byrd and Rockefeller.
"Are you questioning my Patriotism?"
The discussion-stopping question!
How does this sound for a response (instead of OH, NO, I'm not doing that!!!)
"I believe that you love your country, but I also believe that you do not see your country as the model or guide for other countries to imitate. You do not seem comfortable with the idea that America has more power and influence than other countries. You would rather have the United Nations keep American power in check. Isn't that how you feel?"
And then we wonder why there were no WMD in Iraq...
We have a satirical cartoon writer on FR. I can't remember her screen name but it is something Iowa.
if we lived in another time he would hanged or shot for treason.
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.