Posted on 03/22/2007 9:40:54 AM PDT by quidnunc
In a March 3 memo, the Senior Minority Counsel on the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee outlines for Sen. John Glenn (Ohio) what he hopes will be the ranking Democrat's contribution to the Asiagate investigation — 11 subpoenas on conservative activist groups. The list, since forwarded to committee chairman Fred Thompson (R., Tenn.), reads like a "Who's Who" of the conservative movement, including Citizens for a Sound Economy, the Christian Coalition, and Grover Norquist's Americans for Tax Reform.
In mid March, Senate Republicans agreed to open the door to this potential harassment of their allies after a high-stakes battle over the scope of Sen. Thompson's investigation. Thompson, the hulking 54-year-old former actor who looks the part of a President and wants to play one in real life, laid the predicate for this in February by acceding to the demands of Democrats for an investigation broad enough to include a hunt for GOP wrongdoing.
This set off alarm bells among his Republican colleagues, who fear he will keep stoking his amazing media hype by playing the bi-partisan reformer at their expense. So, privately, they discussed shutting Thompson down and, instead, hoping for an independent counsel.
Majority Leader Trent Lott avoided the fantastic spectacle of Republicans scrapping their own investigation with a deal passed through the Senate Rules Committee. Thompson would get his high-profile investigation, but his committee's mandate would be confined to "illegal" activities, ensuring that he would spend time investigating Al Gore, not Grover Norquist. The situation seemed saved — except that Lott didn't have his votes nailed down, including that of Fred Thompson.
From the start, Senate leadership aides have bristled at what they characterize as Thompson's arrogance and "free-lancing." They complain that he didn't consult the leadership when he first ran into trouble with Democrats on his committee and wasn't forthright about the depth of his opposition to the Lott-brokered compromise. It's unclear to what extent Thompson and his ally John McCain (R., Ariz.) worked against the Lott language among their colleagues, but leadership aides fume over the pair's efforts to spike the deal.
The question came to a head at the weekly Tuesday Republican policy committee lunch in the Capitol. McCain first spoke up for broadening Thompson's inquiry to include "illegal and improper" activities. An angry discussion ensued in which it became increasingly clear that an eclectic collection of senators would hand Thompson a key victory. The usual weak sisters, like Arlen Specter (Pa.), wanted a broader inquiry. But so did others.
Republicans who serve on Thompson's committee, like Susan Collins (Me.) and freshman Sam Brownback (Kan.), had voted in favor of Thompson's original broad language in committee and felt they couldn't reverse themselves, especially with Thompson characterizing such a move as a hypocritical flip-flop. The opposition of the conservative Brownback in particular signaled the end for the Lott deal.
Thompson says he will devote the first phase of his investigation to Democratic wrongdoing anyway, but many Republicans won't believe it until they see it. One longtime Senate aide warns that the Democrats are "too smart, too clever, too everything for Thompson." They've certainly enjoyed manhandling him so far. At a Rules Committee hearing a few weeks ago, Democrats signaled they wouldn't question Thompson about Asiagate when he testified — then piled into the room to berate him over the investigation.
Thompson can expect more of the same. Thompson has said he hopes the Clinton scandals will produce the equivalent of a Watergate-era Howard Baker, a senator willing to turn on his own party. But Democrats typically don't behave that way. Indeed, the only party-defying "Howard Baker" to emerge from the scandals may yet prove to be Fred Thompson himself.
If Thompson couldn't stand up to John Glenn — John Glenn for Pete's sake! — then how could he hope to stand up to the likes of CAIR and the other Muslim crazies, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Hugo Chavez, Vladimir Putin, Kim Jong Il et al?
Nonsense!
Thompson was the committee chair, he has the final say about what goes on there.
The fact that he was willing to pander to the media by doing a McCain and playing the part of the maverick in addition to allowing John Glenn to walk all over him speaks to his lack of both leadership and judgement.
I can recall a few Chinagate items for you: 1) Al Gore's fundraising at a Chinese Buddhist temple in Los Angeles. 2) Clinton moved the approval mechanism from the State Dept. to the Commerce Dept.(run by Bill's now-dead buddy, Ron Brown) so that companies like Loral (big Clinton donor) could sell high level technology to China. Now China has the capability to fire missiles that could hit California. 3) Clinton also allowed the sale to the Chinese govt. of the naval base in LOng Beach, California. Many foreign nationals serving China were indicted and found guilty of providing money illegally to the Democrats/Clinton.
For me it was never about Monica. It was always about Bill & Hill selling out our country with the aid of a criminal Congress (omission and commission). Fred Thompson was the chairman of one of the committees that was supposed to investigate all that. He closed shop in just a few months. I'm sorry, but he just isn't Presidential material. However, who is?
Then who the hell does? McCain will never get the nomination. Newt and Hunter have next to no chance in the general election. Rudy is far too socially liberal for the Christian right (and even for my own libertarian instincts). And Romney is a flip-flopper (the same label we used to destroy Kerry in the last election), as well as being utterly uninspiring.
There you go again. Show us the proof. There is nothing to tie Hunter to Cunningham. Cunningham is in jail. Hunter was cleared.
DUNCAN HUNTER (R-CA) Personal Financial Disclosures Summary: 2005 Agreements for Future Employment: 0
Compensation: 0
Gifts Received: 0 (Amount: $0)
Payments to Charitable Organizations in lieu of Honoraria: 0 (Amount: $0)
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/pfds.asp?CID=N00006983
This is what the article said about Thompson and the media. If you think this is a claim that Thompson "pandered to the media", you could use a remedial reading course.
"Thompson held some off-the-record meetings with reporters, "and I said, 'Look, guys: Pay attention. I don't have John Dean and a taping system, but there's some very interesting stuff here. This was the most corrupt political campaign we've ever seen. You need to keep up with it, even if it doesn't seem blockbuster.' And they all nodded, said they understood. Bullsh**: They didn't. I should have saved my breath. The name of the game is the president: Are you going to get him or not?"
I dunno about Fred, but that is indeed the case with Gingrich and Keyes.
As an Ohioan I'll say this John Glenn hides his rotten soulessness under the kind facade of an old hero, unlike those dictators you mention.
Following is the statement of Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) 1998:
"Evidence of a transfer of ballistic missile technology to China during President Clinton's Administration, by one of the President's major campaign contributors, itself justifies inquiry into possible grounds for impeachment of the President.
"The potential findings of perjury and obstruction of justice also mandate that we follow the Constitution and proceed with a further investigation by the House of Representatives." http://www.house.gov/hunter/news_prior_2006/impch-inq.htm
Like the republicans really have ANY horse in this race. Rudy? puhleez; McCain - he's got immigration issues; Romney - he's still positioning himself from his previous flipflopping on abortion and there's that issue of 1 year supply of food in his basement waiting for....whatever; Gingrich? hahhahahahhahahah. So that leaves Duncan Hunter, whom I really don't know that well, and a Presidential actor. Holy friggin cow. The conservatives need to start their own party because the GOP well just went dryyyyyyyyyy. You don't wait for someone to step forward to throw their hat in the ring. You go grab them and push them in the ring. Just like the republic did Washington. They are out there. We just got to go get them. So, Go!
Thompson is light years ahead of Rudy in every category!
My bet is that if he announces, he will lead the Republican field shortly thereafter and will go on to win the Presidency. He is the only Republican running that can garner support from the full spectrum of Republicans while also capturing independents and moderates. He has far fewer negatives that Rudy or Romney while having more positives.
My only concern at this point is that he may not run. I am confident that if he does run, the nomination is his. Like I said, we shall see.
Like I mentioned to you earlier in the other thread, it ain't the "true conservatives" trashing Thompson. This thread is a perfect case in point.
His media blitz is sucking all the conservativce oxygen out to the campaign for any other prospective conservative candidate.
Thompson won't be able to raise enough money to mount a credible campaign.
I like Thompson better and his postions a whole lot better than those of the guy you mentioned and this might surprise you, but I think Rudy Guiliani would make a great Commander in Chief, but he doesn't thrill me on several other issues.
you equate the politics involved of being Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities counsel for the minority, and campaign manager for Howard Baker...
with the the everyday politics of being a new US Senator ?
you really are tough.
No on on the republican side can stand up to your muster.
So let's nominate a pro-abortion gun-grabber! That makes a whole lot of sense.
Yep, they do seem to be squeeling quit a bit, me do thinks they are scared.
"Many on the right remain angry he supported the campaign finance law sponsored by his friend John McCain. "There are problems with people giving politicians large sums of money and then asking them to pass legislation," Mr. Thompson says. Still, he notes he proposed the amendment to raise the $1,000 per person "hard money" federal contribution limit.
Conceding that McCain-Feingold hasn't worked as intended, and is being riddled with new loopholes, he throws his hands open in exasperation. "I'm not prepared to go there yet, but I wonder if we shouldn't just take off the limits and have full disclosure with harsh penalties for not reporting everything on the Internet immediately."
http://www.opinionjournal.com/forms/printThis.html?id=110009798
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.