Sensenbrenner Calls on Gorelick to Resign From Sept. 11 Commission

Tampa Bay on line (AP) ^ | 04-14-04 | The Associated Press

[F.J. Mitchell]

It is doubtful that Ms Gorelick will resign because it is the honorable thing to do. Maybe enough pressure can move her, but there will likely be no help from the media.

[Delta 21]

There should be no resignation. Her walking papers need to be delivered to her the same time as her subpoena.

The only way the commision can save any face is for her to be out of there and fast!

[Robert_Paulson2]

funny.
every time I see it, I think: Hillary's Homesexual Carpet Muncher.

[Howlin]

[Army Air Corps]

Yes, he is a Republican, but he has been doing a fine impression of a paperweight.

[ravingnutter]

All I can find in a quick search is that Bodine was the Ambassador to Yemin when the Cole was attacked:

Until he retired from the FBI in August, John O'Neill, 49, was America's pit bull on terrorism. As head of the bureau's national-security operations in New York City, he oversaw investigations into the 1998 embassy bombings in Africa and the 2000 attack on the U.S.S. Cole in Yemen, both believed to be the work of groups linked to Osama bin Laden. Two weeks ago, O'Neill began a new job: chief of security at the World Trade Center.

The Yemenite government nicknamed O'Neill "Rambo." It did not use the name fondly. O'Neill didn't just request access and information from officials in Yemen; he demanded them. He insisted that his agents be allowed to carry automatic rifles for protection. Ultimately, O'Neill was barred from Yemen by U.S. Ambassador Barbara Bodine for irritating his hosts.

Time Magazine

O'Neill was also leading the search for Ramzi Yousef and Osama according to this article. He died in the 2001 WTC attack.

But I did find this, which is strange:

WASHINGTON (UPI) – U.S. intelligence officials said Tuesday that it was only "by coincidence" that U.S. Ambassador to Yemen Barbara Bodine was aboard a Yemeni flight hijacked to Djibouti by a pro-Iraq gunman.

Newsmax

Her name popped up again recently...

Reports are circulating that President Bush intends to divide a post-Saddam Iraq into three sectors: north, south and central. Two retired U.S. generals would separately administer the north and south while the central sector, including Baghdad, would be overseen by a woman: Barbara Bodine, a former ambassador to Yemen.

Fox News

[EODGUY]

This may be a slight bit off topic, but with all due respect to the Honorable Henry Hyde, I recall very vividly (I was recovering from surgery, so I watched the Congressional Impeachment Hearings constantly) how the aura of the House changed dramatically when Congressman Hyde would step out of the hearing and the Honorable James Sensenbrenner took over the duties of the Chair.

The democrats knew instantly that their infantile posturing, namecalling etc. would not be tolerated in the least.

Ms. Gorelick has no business being a member of the 9-11 panel (sham though it is !) She should be removed and be questioned, under oath and in public.

[GoLightly]

Nevermind. I see someone else read the name as Steinbrenner too. ;o)

[My2Cents]

How in the heck did Gore-Lick get on the Commission in the first place?

[My2Cents]

I thought the same thing, W-S. Looks like ol' Slade is doing his darnest to stay awake.

[ravingnutter]

This came off a blog, but it's interesting and worth checking out

I posted that info here on the 12th...there is really not much to check out, the links embedded in the story at the blog back the allegations.

[My2Cents]

Not so much Colonel Klink...More like Sgt. Schultz: "I know nothing!..."

[AuntB]

" there will likely be no help from the media." Ah, ya think? LOL!! Check this out:

---

9-11 Commission stonewalls TWA 800 author

---

http://www.twa800.com/news/wnd-3-16-04.htm
Posted: March 16, 2004
1:00 a.m. Eastern

© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com
Dear Chairman Kean,

Al Salzenberg of the 9-11 staff suggested I write you a letter to express my dissatisfaction with the progress of the 9-11 Commission.

On or about Feb. 20, I talked to Mr. Salzenberg at some length about one very specific concern I had with the commission. I was impressed with the time he gave me and the fact that he seemed, at least, to take my information seriously.

My concern was with the presence of former Clinton Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick on the commission. Immediately after the crash of TWA Flight 800 in July 1996, Justice Department attorney Valerie Caproni fully ignored existing statutes and gave the FBI power over the National Transportation Safety Board in the management of the investigation.

In a stroke, as I explained to Mr. Salzenberg, the Clinton Justice Department hermetically sealed the investigation and silenced the independent voices of the NTSB. Ms. Caproni could not have acted on her own authority. As the "political officer" equivalent in the Justice Department, Ms. Gorelick likely orchestrated this takeover – one that all parties now acknowledge to have been illegal.

On Aug. 22, 1996, just a few days before the start of the Democratic National Convention, Ms. Gorelick oversaw a critical Justice Department meeting with the FBI. Immediately after this meeting, as it happened, all serious inquiry into the fate of TWA 800 came to an end.

On the next day, for instance, the FAA began to inquire whether any dog-training exercises had ever taken place on the plane that would become TWA 800. On the same day, as CNN reported, the FBI now claimed publicly for the first time that the explosive residue found along the right wing "could have been brought on the plane by a passenger and was not part of a bomb." Likewise, after the meeting, the FBI would do no more eyewitness interviews, at least not for the next two months. The Bureau only did a handful after that – and all of those for the wrong reasons.

The search was now on for a rationale to explain away both the explosive residue and the stunningly specific testimony of 270 eyewitnesses. This fully misdirected inquiry would result in the two most egregious corruptions of the investigation.

The first was the FBI's claim that a dog-training exercise in St. Louis six weeks before the crash resulted in the spilling of the explosive residue found on the plane. The second was the CIA's claim that a 3,200-foot climb by a nose-less TWA 800 fooled the eyewitnesses into thinking they had seen a missile.

The CIA based its theory on an eyewitness interview that never took place. This can be easily proved. The FBI based its theory on a dog-training exercise that never took place. This, too, can be easily proved. Both fabrications were conscious.

As I explained to Mr. Salzenberg, mine was not a crank call. I had written a book on TWA Flight 800. I had just the day before undergone a smart three-hour interview by the History Channel on the subject. I understand the political dynamics of the investigation better than anyone who was not actively complicit. As I explained, too, there is excellent reason to believe that Gorelick's dubious role in the TWA 800 investigation contributed to New York's vulnerability in the days leading up to Sept. 11.

I suggested that Gorelick may have been appointed to the panel to discourage any connections from being made between July 1996 and September 2001. I could see no other reason why she would leave her cushy gig as vice chairman of Fannie Mae to serve as one of only five Democrats on the commission.

Mr. Salzenberg promised that he would look into the Gorelick issue and get back to me. Three weeks later, on March 10, I called him. I explained again who I was and what my concern was.

"I have talked to 400 people since then," he said gruffly. He did not remember the call. I explained in more detail.

"Oh, you're that freelancer," he added dismissively.

"If it matters," I said, "I'm the executive editor of a respectable Midwest business magazine, and I've written a book on the subject at hand."

Mr. Salzenberg asked me what I wanted. It struck me that he did not even take notes on the last call or any call. I told him I wanted to share my information with the panel, and if need be, I would be happy to testify.

"Lots of people like to testify," he groused. "We can't handle them all."

"I know this subject better than anyone," I responded.

"If you want to make charges," he said, "you are free to use the public air waves or write books or letters to the editor."

"I'm trying to do my good citizen thing," I said. "I am trying to go through established channels."

"Well, we are trying to wrap up and get out our report," he said curtly, implying there would be no time, regardless of the quality of my information.

"Do I have any other official recourse?" I asked.

"Write a letter to the chairman," he snapped.

And so Chairman Kean, I write this letter. As a Garden State native myself, and the son of a Newark cop, I appeal to your sense of justice. If you refuse to even look at the fate of TWA Flight 800, you will have done your country a disservice. You will have justified the cynicism that now plagues the nation – and especially the aviation community. And you will have lost your own shot at greatness.

It is not too late. If you're game, I'll buy my own plane ticket.

Sincerely,

Jack Cashill

[My2Cents]

As an aside, allow me to add to your insight...

In 1992, the Democrats won not because of ideology, nor because of issues. They won because they offered up a sociopath and were able to cobble together a winning plurality of dysfunctional voters willing to enter into a codependent relationship with their candidate. Throughout the next eight years, dysfunctional Americans bent over backwards to justify their vote in ’92, and acted like an emotionally abused wife, overlooking or forgiving Clinton’s personal failings.

In 2000, the Democrats tried the same winning formula, but instead of nominating a slick sociopath, they put forth a delusional psychotic, and while the election was much closer than in ’92, God had mercy on the nation and spared us another four years of psychological drama in the White House.

Hoping that America’s voters have only gotten emotionally and mentally sicker over the past four years, the Democrats are trying the same strategy again in 2004. And to make sure voters are dysfunctional enough to vote for their candidate, they are attempting to drive voters further into the abyss of insanity by churning up hatred, fear, and personal irresponsibility, all founded on a denial of truth. The question isn’t whether Americans will shake off the siren temptation of madness offered by the Democrats, but whether God’s mercy still shines upon this country.

[My2Cents]

For months, Republican staffers have been warning the White House and Senate leadership about the Democratic political operatives on the 9-11 Commission, and their plans for election-year games with the fact-finding on the terrorist attacks. Yet the White House has been seemingly surprised by how politically charged the hearings have been.

If this is true, it is disturbing. In observing Bush, he tends to operate from the premise that if he does what is right, the consequences will take care of themselves (in other words, the public will be behind him). But in politics, it doesn't work that way. One needs to do what is right, but also sharpen the knives while you're doing it.

There probably isn't a bigger "Bushbot" on FR than me, but I'm picking up dangerous signals that either the White House isn't adequately prepared for this re-election campaign, or deep in his heart, Bush isn't all that interested in winning a second term. Maybe he doesn't want to show-up is dad.

[onyx]

Put away the tinfoil.
Bush is determined to win
and he's already in "fight mode."
His press conference last night PROVED it.

[My2Cents]

I'm musing aloud, when I probably should be keeping my thoughts to myself. But considering the context of the muse, while the honorable thing was to approach the 9-11 Commission hearings in a non-partisan way, the White House and Congressional Republicans should have been prepared that the Democrats would approach the hearings in a partisan way. Why is it our side always seems surprised when the other side behaves in its consistently dishonorable way?

[Mogollon]

You know this could be a great campaign ad for Dubya.

Show a montage of the partisan left-wing press asking 4 times whether 'W' made mistakes and why he hasn't apologized.

Then show Gorelick's picture and what her memo did to help cause 9/11.

[blue-duncan]

Are you talking about the girly-man to the left or the manly-girl to the right?

[dirtboy]

The dyke, not the dink.