Posted on 05/20/2002 8:57:19 AM PDT by Jean S
During his press briefing with Capitol Hill reporters on Thursday morning, Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle could barely contain the smile on his face as he discussed what he believed the Bush Administration knew about possible terrorist attacks prior to September 11.
"I wouldn't know," Daschle said with a smile, adding quickly that he was never briefed on those issues by the White House, nor did he ever ask.
Daschle should be smiling, and White House staffers know why. The initial leaks about the intelligence briefings President Bush received last August came from Democratic staffers on the Senate Intelligence Committee, not the FBI or the CIA as some on Capitol Hill would have us believe.
According to one knowledgeable Senate source, the Senate and House intelligence committees received some of the briefing material prepared by the CIA for the president's daily review about three weeks ago. This, as part of their ongoing review of the CIA's analysis of potential terrorism threats leading up to September 11.
"It wouldn't be the kind [of intelligence information] the committee staffers would normally see in the course of their work," says the source. "Those briefings are limited to the White House, the President, the Vice President, Condi Rice, senators and representatives don't get those briefings. I don't know if the CIA intended for that material to end up here or not. It might have been an oversight. No matter now, the cat is out of the bag."
According to a senior Democratic Senate aide, the word has been out for more than six weeks that "We have to get Bush," says the source. "Daschle is absolutely desperate. Gephardt, I guess is absolutely desperate. Bush's polling numbers weren't moving down, he was bulletproof. Everyone was under orders to keep their eyes and ears open for anything we could use."
It's not clear whether Daschle was aware of the potentially explosive information prior to its being put in the hands of Washington reporters. "I'd be surprised if he did," says a senior Democratic leadership aide. "It isn't the kind of thing he's want to really see or know about beforehand. But we know someone friendly to our side did the leaking. We knew if we could get something out there, the media wouldn't try to put the leak into political perspective for the public, just the potential for a 'Briefing-gate.' And, as usual, the press did our job for us."
LEATHER BOUND
Unlike the times when then President Bill Clinton had to go shopping for a university or a site for his presidential library -- remember the embarrassment when Georgetown and Yale turned him down? -- schools are already lining up to snatch up a library deal for George W. Bush.
But Baylor University is going about it the wrong way. Last month, as it prepares to make a formal pitch to the Big Guy in Washington, the Texas college school sent representatives to Little Rock to spend a few days with Clinton Library staffers and fundraisers.
"We talked to them about our fundraising problems, highlighted the amount of planning it takes to put a deal like this together, all the blood and sweat," says a Clinton Library source. "Baylor views this as a huge opportunity to raise its visibility. Hearing them talk made us realize we should have sought a tighter relationship with Mr. Clinton's schools."
But those schools didn't want the relationship or couldn't or wouldn't provide the cash the Clintons were asking for up front to grant them "library privileges." Instead, Clinton cut a deal for a slight association with the University of Arkansas in Little Rock, where he taught law part-time decades ago. The school is housing some of Clinton's papers and undertaking an "oral history" of his presidency. That's about it.
Bush has apparently expressed an interest in Baylor, as well as the University of Texas in Austin, where the library could become a cash cow for the state school if the legislature budgeted to cover some of its construction costs. "It would also help Mr. Bush avoid some of the embarrassing fundraising moments Mr. Clinton is going through right now," says a White House staffer.
Despite Baylor's eagerness to get its foot in the door at the White House, the president himself has told staff he's not interested in thinking about a library. "He says he has six more years to worry about that," says the White House aide.
Hehehe!
Loserman is the other Demmycrat that the DUmmies absolutely hate. BTW, there is no longer any enthusiastic posts on the DUmmy forum touting John Edwards as President or Vice-President. All such posts mostly ceased after Edwards' disastrous appearance over a week ago on Meet The Press. And it got even worse for Edwards following his appearance on Good Morning America last week when he couldn't even give a straight answer about what he knew about the terrorist warning that he received on the Senate Intelligence Committee.
It looks like maybe we should now count Daschle, Gephardt, and Edwards as 9-11 casualties.
Farm Pork Bills, I understand...........
Friday??? This hit the press on Thursday morning...
I mean it. I want a damn hearing. I want people subpoenaed. And whoever leaked that info can bloody well spend the rest of his or her treasonous life in Leavenworth!!!
The demoncrats had 3 long weeks to get an issue...and the media sat by patiently waiting for "something" to smear GW with...and when all they got was the campaign photo and the "Bush Knew" news they ran away with it until they hit the Cheney brick wall!
Bottom line is this...when you see the media on a NON political story for weeks...you can bet that it is a "pass" for the demoncrats to "dig up" an issue.
This comes as a surprise???? /shocker/
I've always said that most democrats would lie, steal or turn traitor just to rise in power.
Take the classic example of Bill Clinton and his evil protoge Al Whore and how they left their slimy trail of corruption, scandals & lies in their pursuit of power.
In the end (as always) they compromised & dismantled our National Security and made wholesale chaos by their radical social experiments.
Dont you see a pattern here as with the former soviet union??
It is my understanding that neither the POTUS nor members of congress go through a background check, officially. I believe we could be reasonably sure that anyone with serious security issues would be flagged by FBI/CIA/NSA prior to taking the oath. Adequate publicity could then prevent them from obtaining sensitive info. This, of course, does not prevent someone from becoming a security risk after taking office, which I'm afraid has and will happen, no matter the vigilance of our security agencies, or their public counterpart: "the Media".
texasbluebell, where did you get that HS picture of Dash Hole??? LOL,LOL, that is really good.
I am ashamed - ashamed - ashamed to have such people getting intelligence information. I expect this administration to remove leaks immediately because it is my security they are leaking.
This man is actively working against the interests of the United States. I can think of a few words for that.
With Clinton it was never, "we have to find some dirt on this guy". No clean spots were to be found! If we appeared to be "out to get Clinton", it was only that we wanted him held responsible for the crimes he was known to have committed. This defamation project is another matter, entirely.
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.