ROCKEFELLER SEDITION: WHO IS CALLING THE SHOTS?"

Rockefeller memo, Sen. Evan Bayh, FoxNews | 01.14.06 | Mia T

[Mia T]

ROCKEFELLER SEDITION:
WHO IS CALLING THE SHOTS?"

Mia T, 01.14.06 

 

MEMOgate: democrat party treason
Secret Democrat manifesto detailing the undermining of President Bush in wartime
by the seditious misuse of classified intelligence data from the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.

 

 

Saturday, November 08, 2003

If what has happened here is not treason, it is its first cousin. The ones responsible - be they staff or elected or both - should be dealt with quickly and severely sending a lesson to all that this kind of action will not be tolerated, ignored or excused.

 

Sen. Zell Miller, D-Ga.

Raw Data: Dem Memo on Politicizing Intelligence
Fox News | 11-5-03

Wednesday, November 05, 2003

Following is the text of a memo written by a Democrat on the staff of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence that suggests how to make the greatest gain off of intelligence data leading to the war against Iraq. The memo was obtained by Fox News.

Transcript of a memo written by a Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee staff suggesting how to make the greatest gain off of intelligence data leading to the war against Iraq.

We have carefully reviewed our options under the rules and believe we have identified the best approach. Our plan is as follows:

1) Pull the majority along as far as we can on issues that may lead to major new disclosures regarding improper or questionable conduct by administration officials. We are having some success in that regard. For example, in addition to the president's State of the Union speech, the chairman has agreed to look at the activities of the Office of the Secretary of Defense as well as Secretary Bolton's office at the State Department. The fact that the chairman supports our investigations into these offices and co-signs our requests for information is helpful and potentially crucial. We don't know what we will find but our prospects for getting the access we seek is far greater when we have the backing of the majority. (Note: we can verbally mention some of the intriguing leads we are pursuing.)

2) Assiduously prepare Democratic "additional views" to attach to any interim or final reports the committee may release. Committee rules provide this opportunity and we intend to take full advantage of it. In that regard, we have already compiled all the public statements on Iraq made by senior administration officials. We will identify the most exaggerated claims and contrast them with the intelligence estimates that have since been declassified. Our additional views will also, among other things, castigate the majority for seeking to limit the scope of the inquiry. The Democrats will then be in a strong position to reopen the question of establishing an independent commission (i.e. the Corzine amendment).

3) Prepare to launch an independent investigation when it becomes clear we have exhausted the opportunity to usefully collaborate with the majority. We can pull the trigger on an independent investigation at any time-- but we can only do so once. The best time to do so will probably be next year either:

A) After we have already released our additional views on an interim report -- thereby providing as many as three opportunities to make our case to the public: 1) additional views on the interim report; 2) announcement of our independent investigation; and 3) additional views on the final investigation; or

B) Once we identify solid leads the majority does not want to pursue. We could attract more coverage and have greater credibility in that context than one in which we simply launch an independent investigation based on principled but vague notions regarding the "use" of intelligence.

In the meantime, even without a specifically authorized independent investigation, we continue to act independently when we encounter foot-dragging on the part of the majority. For example, the FBI Niger investigation was done solely at the request of the vice chairman; we have independently submitted written questions to DoD; and we are preparing further independent requests for information.

Summary

Intelligence issues are clearly secondary to the public's concern regarding the insurgency in Iraq. Yet, we have an important role to play in the revealing the misleading -- if not flagrantly dishonest methods and motives -- of the senior administration officials who made the case for a unilateral, preemptive war. The approach outline above seems to offer the best prospect for exposing the administration's dubious motives and methods.

A former member of the Clinton administration is being linked to a bombshell Senate Intelligence Committee memo outlining a strategy to use information gathered by the committee to help drive President Bush from office in 2004.

In an editorial Friday, the Wall Street Journal reports:

"[Senate Intelligence Committee Vice Chairman Jay Rockefeller, D-WV] refuses to denounce the memo, which he says was unauthorized and written by staffers. If that's the case, at the very least, some heads ought to roll. A good place to start would be minority staffer Christopher Mellon, who serves as deputy assistant secretary of defense for intelligence in the Clinton administration."

One of Mellon's former bosses, former first lady Hillary Clinton, has been sharply critical of the Bush administration's policy in Iraq. Last week she accused the White House of trying cover-up battlefield casualties and said Bush's decision to invade Iraq was "the antithesis of the rule of law."

The Journal recommended that, until those responsible for Democrats' decision to politicize intelligence are fired, the Intelligence Committee should be "shut down, cleaned out and reconstituted later, preferably after the next election."

Clinton Appointee Linked to Bombshell Anti-Bush Intel Memo
NewsMax.com ^ | 11/07/03 | Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff

 

ROCKEFELLER LIKELY NOT MEMOGATE PRIME MOVER
Put Jay Rockefeller & minority staffer and clintonite, Christopher Mellon, under oath
MEMOgate reeks of the clintons

 

by Mia T, 11-10-03

 

"Rockefeller under intense pressure by others...."

(Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN)
commenting on MEMOgate)

e have been arguing on this site that MEMOgate reeks of the clintons, that MEMOgate's prime mover could not have been Jay Rockefeller.

U.S. Senator Evan Bayh (D-IN) confirmed as much this week on the floor of the Senate when he disclosed that Sen. Rockefeller had been "under intense pressure -- intense pressure -- by some others to pursue a much more partisan line of inquiry, to be much more confrontational."

It is critical that Sen. Rockefeller and minority staffer Christopher Mellon, who served as deputy assistant secretary of defense for intelligence in the clinton administration, be put under oath. They must be asked to identify MEMOgate's prime mover(s).

Would they do "a Hubbell," ( "roll over one more time for Hillary")?

I don't think so. Not with the potential downside here.

The American Thinker
Sen. Jay Rockefeller a Target?

 

Macsmind is reporting that Sen. Rockefeller may be the target of investigators examining the leak of classified information on the NSA surveillance program.

I'm trying to confirm this information, but several sources are telling me today that some investigators working on the NSA leak probe believe that Senator Jay Rockefeller may have been a little more than “concerned” about NSA. In fact, he may just be the leaker of the program to the NY Times, and is now being considered a “significant person of interest” in the probe.

What I’m told that investigatiors have locked into is this fact that other pundits have identified, that Senator Rockefeller had stated that he went to to great lengths to lock away his memo of concern (in a safe) so that not even other close members of the Senate knew about it. Yet the NY Times, James Risen in fact revealed the letter’s existance in his initial NSA “book excerpt”. The question being asked is if not even Senator Rockefeller’s closest confidants, staffers, etc, knew of the letter’s existance, how therefore did James Risen of the NY Times know about it?

If this incoming information is correct, it would not be the first time Senator Rockefeller – Vice Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee had been investigated for leaking classified information. In early 2005, the CIA asked the Justice Department to look into whether Democratic Senators Dick Durbin, Jay Rockefeller and Ron Wyden leaked details about a secret “black ops” CIA satellite program in December of 2004. That investigation is still on going, but I hear it may be wrapping up in the affirmative.

Moreover, it may be noted that Senator Rockefeller admitted back in November 2005, that he also made a trip to Syria in 2002 to discuss “The President’s intentions” reference to the upcoming invasion of Iraq. A move which I understand didn’t sit well with administration officials.

Of course Senator Rockefeller is the architect of the current Demorcatic game plan on Iraq as the infamous “Rockefeller Memo” showed.

If this information is acurate, it will also confirm the suspicions voiced here, and here after the NSA story broke that in fact Senator Rockefeller, along with recently ‘resigned” FISA Judge James Robertson – an outspoken critic of the President and the NSA program.

Stay tuned.

Clarice  Feldman   1 09 06

December 7, 1941+64

AN OPEN LETTER TO TIM ROBBINS, DAVID GEFFEN, CHRIS MATTHEWS, MAUREEN DOWD + JEANINE PIRRO

RE: a not-so-modest proposal concerning hillary clinton

Dear Concerned Americans,

Hillary Clinton's revisionist tome notwithstanding, 'living history' begets a certain symmetry. It is in that light that I make this not-so-modest proposal on this day, exactly 64 years after the attack on Pearl Harbor.

The context of our concern today--regardless of political affiliation--is Iraq and The War on Terror, but the larger fear is that our democracy may not survive.

We have the requisite machines, power and know-how to defeat the enemy in Iraq and elsewhere, but do we have the will?

In particular, do we have the will to identify and defeat the enemy in our midst?

Answerable to no one, heir apparent in her own mind, self-serving in the extreme, Hillary Clinton incarnates this insidious new threat to our survival.

What we decide to do about Missus Clinton will tell us much about what awaits us in these perilous new times.

COMPLETE LETTER

December 7, 1941+64
Mia T
AN OPEN LETTER TO TIM ROBBINS, DAVID GEFFEN, CHRIS MATTHEWS, MAUREEN DOWD + JEANINE PIRRO
RE: a not-so-modest proposal concerning hillary clinton

COPYRIGHT MIA T 2006

[wagglebee]

Bookmark for later.

[Mia T]

ping

[p23185]

ROCKEFELLER SEDITION:

democrat party treason

If what has happened here is not treason, it is its first cousin. The ones responsible - be they staff or elected or both - should be dealt with quickly and severely sending a lesson to all that this kind of action will not be tolerated, ignored or excused. Sen. Zell Miller, D-Ga.

Fairly well sums it up. But unlike Zell's November 08, 2003 advice, it has NOT been dealt with, at least not that we can see. Repub need to find their spine and censor this guy, kick him off the intelligence committee and/or expel him from Congress and try him for "the first cousin of treason".

[Mia T]

bump

[Mia T]

bump

[Mia T]

thx wagglebee :)

[Mia T]

bump

[Mia T]

bump

[Zacs Mom]

"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious.

But it cannot survive treason from within.



An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known, and he carries his banners openly.

But the traitor moves among those within the gates freely,
his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys,
heard in the very hall of government itself.

For the traitor appears no traitor.

He speaks in the accents familiar to his victims,
and he wears their face and their garments,
and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in hearts of men.

He rots the soul of a nation.

He works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city.

He infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist.

A Murderer Is Less To Be Feared."

Cicero, 43 B.C.

From the LA Times article "Democrats' War Opposition Not a United Front ":

"Many Democratic political strategists and foreign policy analysts
have long believed the party can benefit more from criticizing Bush's handling of the war than from specifying an alternative."

PS ~ FYI, in cased any of you missed reading the thread which featured this
U.S.News & World Report article: The (Very) Big Lie ...
(it's a damn fine read!)

[Mia T]

You've nailed it.
Enemy in our midst bump

[Mia T]

fyi

[twntaipan]

BTTT. Exceptionally well done!

[sure_fine]

pong

[stockpirate]

Tongue in cheek.

Nothing here.

[Mia T]

An example of "defining deviancy down."--Daniel Patrick Moynihan. American Scholar (Winter 1993)

For more info, see:

Moynihan Myths
Mia T
March 26, 2003

[Mia T]

Indeed!

[Mia T]

;)

[Mia T]

bump