An Open Letter to Rush, Laura I., Michelle M., Mike Gallagher, Glenn Beck, and friends...

First, let me say thank you for your efforts to inject some spine into our public officials this week. You were all correct about this bailout, as were the vast majority of Freepers here on little ol FreeRepublic. We almost pulled off the upset. But as usual, the 'conservative' punditry was split along familiar lines.

The Fred Barneses, Hewitts, Medveds, and the National Review ladies were all pimping the bailout, providing much needed cover for some House Republicans (and democrats) to suddenly see the merits of adding another 150 Billion in pet projects to the $700B socialist card trick Secretary Paulson pulled out of his bloomers last week.

We were defeated, despite valiant efforts. I can hear the anger and frustration in your voices and read it in your written words. The scorn you are heaping onto Washington, dems and GOPers alike, is absolutely justified. I can't even write how I really feel about these traitors to capitalism. No website or forum would tolerate my crude remarks.

However, I would like you to take special note of one Duncan Hunter. Yes, you remember him. Retiring ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee; that deep voiced, serious conservative that coined the term "Kennedy Wing of the Republican party" - referring to several of his 2008 presidential primary rivals. Yes, that guy.

Anyway, I just wanted to point out that Mr. Hunter voted no monday, and once again today. Mr Hunter, in so doing pointed out what should have been obvious and determinant about the so called 'bailout'. Quote: “Instead of doing what is right, Congress pushed forward a plan that, at its core, is no different than what Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson initially proposed. Now, after already bailing out several financial institutions, costing taxpayers billions of dollars, Secretary Paulson will have access to a new and significantly larger line of credit to bailout more Wall Street investors. I believe this is the wrong approach to addressing the condition of our economy and the failures of our banking system."

Hunter also told the San Diego Union Tribune that the "sweeteners" only reinforced his opposition, adding that this boondoggle "brings us one step closer to a nationalized economy".

Now Congressman Hunter was not the only Republican to oppose this bill. There were quite a few. But those quite a few did not include Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson, Mitt Romney, Tom Tancredo or John McCain. Is it starting to flicker yet?

BTW, Hunter also voted NAY on the recent massive energy bill....the one with all the global warming nonsense and the ban of incandescent lightbulbs. The one that passed overwhelmingly.

And if you recall recent history, Hunter teamed with Jim Sensenbrenner to beat back the Kennedy wing of the party and the dems - led by John McCain - that tried mightily to close Gitmo and end the "torture" of waterboarding.

You may also have vague recollections of an utterly retarded and anti-American Amnesty bill. We all fought it tooth and nail from the outside. But no single politician was more responsible for its defeat than Duncan Hunter. And despite plenty of lip service given during our recently completed primary, only one man said what he meant, and did what he said, in the ongoing struggle to defeat the Republicrats illegal alien coddling for the past 25 years.

And I want to give you a friendly reminder, as you read all the recent and coming articles about China's malfeasance, espionage, dangerous military growth, advanced weapons systems made with US technology, and intellectual property piracy. Duncan Hunter has been calling China out by name and leader for the past 15 years, giving dire warnings of what was to come if we trusted them and sold them advanced technology. The story will only get hotter in the coming months. Too bad we didn't listen to the only rock ribbed anti-communist still in government.

And finally, there was only one candidate running in our primary who played a crucial role in the development of our Missile defense systems, only one that has advocated and actually built border fencing for the past 20 years, only one who wants to re-invigorate US manufacturing by eliminating ALL taxes on US firms who manufacture within our borders, only one who was against the Law of the Sea Treaty in Reagan's day and continues his virulent opposition today, only one whose military expertise even surpasses that of John McCain, only one who sees global warming as nothing but Algorian alramism, only one who has been absolutely convinced for 28 years in Congress that energy independence is a vital strategic necessity, only one who would would scare the bejesus not only out of the terror masters - but also out of the chicoms and Putineskas, and only one man who each of you would admit would make the best damn Commander in Chief available.

Toss in 100% conservative on the 2nd Amendment, on property rights, on the life of the unborn, on "political corrctness", and folks, we have a leader.

I only bring this up, because in 2012, it will be crucial for conservatives to get it right, for the survival of our Republic as we know it. We are going to barely hang on for the next 4 years no matter who wins. So please, guys, next time use your heads, and quit playing the impartial observer. Read up on the differences between the records. And for crap sake, read you emails from me telling you these things. Otherwise, we get what we get. And today is a prime example of the shit we can get when that happens.

>>>Anything that has to do with someone associated with producing “60 Minutes” is automatically a lie.

Fair enough.

Then how about a report from a high level Defense Intelligence Agency analyst, John F. McCreary?

May 3, 1992
Memorandum for: Vice Chairman, Senate Select Committee on Prisoners of War and Missing in Action

From: John F. McCreary

Subject: Possible Violations of Title 18, U.S.C., Section 2071, by the Select Committee and Possible Ethical Misconduct by Staff Attorneys.

1. Continuing analysis of relevant laws and further review of the events between 8 April and 16 April 1992 connected with the destruction of the Investigators' Intelligence Briefing Text strongly indicate that the order to destroy all copies of that briefing text on 9 April and the actual destruction of copies of the briefing texts plus the purging of computer files might constitute violations of Title 18, U.S.C., Section 2071, which imposes criminal penalties for unlawful document destruction. Even absent a finding of criminal misconduct, statements, actions, and failures to act by the senior Staff attorneys following the 9 April briefing might constitute serious breaches of ethical standards of conduct for attorneys, in addition to violations of Senate and Select Committee rules. The potential consequences of these possible misdeeds are such that they should be brought to the attention of all members of the Select Committee, plus all Designees and Staff members who were present at the 9 April briefing.

2. The relevant section of Title 18, U.S.C., states in pertinent part: Section 2071. Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally (a) Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined not more than $2,000 or imprisoned not more than three years, or both. (June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 795)

3. The facts as the undersigned and others present at the briefing recall them are presented in the attached Memorandum for the Record. A summary of those facts - and others that have been established since that Memorandum was written - follows.

a. On 8 April 1992, the Investigators' Intelligence Briefing Text was presented to Senior Staff members and Designees for whom copies were available prior to beginning the briefing. Objections to the text by the Designees prompted the Staff Director to order all persons present to leave their copies of the briefing text in Room SRB078. Subsequent events indicated that two copies had been removed without authorization.

b. On 9 April 1992, at the beginning of the meeting of the Select Committee and prior to the scheduled investigators' briefing, Senator McCain produced a copy of the intelligence briefing text, with whose contents he strongly disagreed. He charged that the briefing text had already been leaked to a POW/MIA activist, but was reassured by the Chairman that such was not the case. He replied that he was certain it would be leaked. Whereupon, the Chairman assured Senator McCain that there would be no leaks because all copies would be gathered and destroyed, and he gave orders to that effect. No senior staff member or attorney present cautioned against a possible violation of Title 18, U.S.C., Section 2071, or of Senate or Select Committee Rules.

c. Following the briefing on 9 April, the Staff Director, Ms. Frances Zwenig, restated to the intelligence investigators the order to destroy the intelligence briefing text and took measures to ensure execution of the destruction order. (See paragraph 3 of the attachment.) During one telephone conversation with the undersigned, she stated that she was "acting under orders."

d. The undersigned also was instructed to delete all computer files, which Mr. Barry Valentine witnessed on 9 April.

e. In a meeting on 15 April 1992, the Staff's Chief Counsel, J. William Codinha, was advised by intelligence investigators of their concerns about the possibility that they had committed a crime by participating in the destruction of the briefing text. Mr. Codinha minimized the significance of the documents and of their destruction. He admonished the investigators for "making a mountain out of a molehill."

f. When investigators repeated their concern that the order to destroy the documents might lead to criminal charges, Mr. Codinha replied "Who's the injured party." He was told, "The 2,494 families of the unaccounted for US Servicemen, among others." Mr. Codinha then said, "Who's gonna tell them. It's classified." At that point the meeting erupted. The undersigned stated that the measure of merit was the law and what's right, not avoidance of getting caught. To which Mr. Codinha made no reply. At no time during the meeting did Mr. Codinha give any indication that any copies of the intelligence briefing text existed.

g. Investigators, thereupon, repeatedly requested actions by the Committee to clear them of any wrongdoing, such as provision of legal counsel. Mr. Codinha admitted that he was not familiar with the law and promised to look into it. He invited a memorandum from the investigators stating what they wanted. Given Mr. Codinha's statements and reactions to the possibility of criminal liability, the investigators concluded they must request appointment of an independent counsel. A memorandum making such a request and signed by all six intelligence investigators was delivered to Mr. Codinha on 16 April.

h. At 2130 on 16 April, the Chairman of the Senate Select Committee, convened a meeting with the intelligence investigators, who told him personally of their concern that they might have committed a crime by participating in the destruction of the briefing texts at the order of the Staff Director. Senator Kerry stated that he gave the order to destroy the documents, not the Staff Director, and that none of the Senators present at the meeting had objected. He also stated that the issue of document destruction was "moot" because the original briefing text had been deposited with the Office of Senate Security "all along." Both the Staff Director and the Chief Counsel supported this assertion by the Chairman.

i. Senator Kerry's remarks prompted follow-up investigations (See paragraphs 4 through 9 of the attachment) and inquiries that established that a copy of the text was not deposited in the Office of Senate Security until the afternoon of 16 April. The Staff Director has admitted that on the afternoon of 16 April, after receiving a copy of a memorandum from Senator Bob Smith to Senator Kerry in which Senator Smith outlined his concerns about the destruction of documents, she obtained a copy of the intelligence briefing text from the office of Senator McCain and took it to the Office of Senate Security. Office of Senate Security personnel confirmed that the Staff Director gave them an envelope, marked "Eyes Only," to be placed in her personal file. The Staff Director has admitted that the envelope contained the copy of the intelligence briefing text that she obtained from the office of Senator McCain.

3. The facts of the destruction of the intelligence briefing text would seem to fall inside the prescriptions of the Statute, Title 18, U.S.C., Section 2071, so as to justify their referral for investigation to a competent law enforcement authority. The applicability of that Statute was debated in United States v. Poindexter, D.D.C. 1989, 725 F. Supp. 13, in connection with the Iran Contra investigation. The District Court ruled, inter alia, that the National Security Council is a public office within the meaning of the Statute and, thus, that its records and documents fell within the protection of the Statute. In light of that ruling, the Statute would seem to apply to this Senate Select Committee and its Staff. The continued existence of a "bootleg" copy of the intelligence briefing text - i.e., a copy that is not one of those made by the investigators for the purpose of briefing the Select Committee - would seem to be irrelevant to the issues of intent to destroy and willfulness; as well as to the issue of responsibility for the order to destroy all copies of the briefing text, for the attempt to carry out that order, and for the destruction that actually was accomplished in execution of that order.

4. As for the issue of misconduct by Staff attorneys, all member of the Bar swear to uphold the law. That oath may be violated by acts of omission and commission. Even without a violation of the Federal criminal statute, the actions and failures to act by senior Staff attorneys in the sequence of events connected with the destruction of the briefing text might constitute violations

of ethical standards for members of the Bar and of both Senate and Select Committee rules. The statements, actions and failures to act during and after the meeting on 15 April, when the investigators gave notice of their concern about possible criminal liability for document destruction, would seem to reflect disregard for the law and for the rules of the United States Senate.

John F. McCreary

And this is how McCain treated the POW Activist that had the leaked Live Sighting Reports

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.