Go Back to the B3 Home Page
Complaints, compliments, arguments? Email me.
[<< "I thought he was talking about home ownership..."] [Archive Index] [>>"Breslin."]
03/26/2004 Archived Entry: "Race to the bottom..."
Race to the bottom....
These bastards are truly desperate. This is your proof.
In a highly unusual move, key Republicans in Congress are seeking to declassify testimony that former White House terrorism adviser Richard Clarke gave in 2002 about the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attack, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said Friday.Frist said the intent was to determine whether Clarke lied under oath — either in 2002 or this week — when he appeared before a bipartisan Sept. 11 commission and sharply criticized President Bush's handling of the war on terror.
"Until you have him under oath both times you don't know," Frist said.
One Republican aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the request had come from House Speaker Dennis Hastert and Rep. Porter Goss, the chairman of the House intelligence committee.
The request was the latest evidence of a counterattack against Clarke, who has criticized Bush both in a new book and in his appearance before the bipartisan commission on Wednesday.
Go ahead and try it, you assholes. Don't you think the public will see what you're trying to do?
Update: There's a school of opinion throughout the blogosphere that Frist doesn't really want to de-classify congressional testimony, that it's just a head-fake to plant a seed of doubt in people's heads about Clarke.
To which I say - Clarke should join with Frist in calling for the de-classification of the testimony. If Frist is bluffing, I urge Clarke to call that bluff.
Replies: 16 people speak up
The assholes figure that the public won't see what they are doing. And the assholes probably have that right. Everyone's too busy getting theri Starbucks latte and supersized fries to give a damn.
Posted by Mike @ 03/26/2004 01:51 PM NY
Wouldn't this be setting a pretty dangerous precedent?
I suppose I shouldn't hold my breath for them to include the August 2001 Presidental briefings in this declassification.
Posted by cameron @ 03/26/2004 02:38 PM NY
i personally would like to see some of the conversations between the CIA and the Pakistani ISI declassified. that would shed some real light on the actual causes of the riechstag fire... er um, i mean 9/11.
by the way, on a completely, um , unrelated note, what do you think the legal repurcussions would be if a sitting president were to stage a terrorist attack on his own people? would that be treason, murder, or something else?
certainly grounds for impeachment... just a thought, ill just tightn my tinfoil hat and sit here and wait for the men in black ski masks to bust down my door... god bless america
Posted by justin @ 03/26/2004 03:00 PM NY
The Republicans don't really want to go there. A Congressional hearing would be great. The Gang That Can't Stop Lying trying to prove Clarke committed perjury. I know who I would bet on.
Posted by George Johnston @ 03/26/2004 04:27 PM NY
I heard from CNN that one Democrat who knows what was said, claims that it isn't doubble speak that it is inline with what was said to the committee. It was also said release it all don't cherry pick the testomony.
Posted by JD Linx @ 03/26/2004 11:23 PM NY
Clarke also said under oath, even if ALL of his recommendations were followed that 911 would not have been prevented !! Everyone likes to tell a story , usually just the parts they like, not the whole thing
Posted by Robin Hacker @ 03/27/2004 06:59 AM NY
Robin, do you have a link to prove that, or are you just talking out of your ass?
Posted by None @ 03/27/2004 10:26 AM NY
GORTON: Now, since my yellow light is on, at this point my final question will be this: Assuming that the recommendations that you made on January 25th of 2001, based on Delenda, based on Blue Sky, including aid to the Northern Alliance, which had been an agenda item at this point for two and a half years without any action, assuming that there had been more Predator reconnaissance missions, assuming that that had all been adopted say on January 26th, year 2001, is there the remotest chance that it would have prevented 9/11?
CLARKE: No.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A20349-2004Mar24.html
Anything else dumbass ? !!!!
Posted by Robin Hacker @ 03/27/2004 11:21 AM NY
My, my, but we're testy! I just wanted to know if you could back up your words. And you're right-- people DO like to tell stories, but usually just the parts they liked. For example, I noticed you didn't quote this (from the same link):
ROEMER: Let me ask you, with my yellow light on, a question about the summer 2000 alert. You were saying, the CIA was saying, everybody was saying something spectacular is about to happen. Spiking in intelligence, something terrible is about to happen. You've told us in some of our interviews you only wish you would have known at that time in that summer what the FBI knew with regard to Moussaoui, the Phoenix memo, and terrorists in the United States.
What could you have done with some of that information, with the spiked alerts, with the spectacular attack on the horizon in the summer of 2001?
CLARKE: Congressman, it is very easy in retrospect to say that I would have done this or I would have done that. And we'll never know. I would like to think that had I been informed by the FBI that two senior Al Qaida operatives who had been in a planning meeting earlier in Kuala Lumpur were now in the United States and we knew that and we knew their names. And I think we even had their pictures.
I would like to think that I would have released, or would have had the FBI release, a press release with their names, with their descriptions, held a press conference, tried to get their names and pictures on the front page of every paper, "America's Most Wanted," the evening news, and caused a successful nationwide manhunt for those two of the 19 hijackers, but I don't know because you're asking me a hypothetical and I have the benefit now of 20/20 hindsight.
Well! In one instance it seems Clarke is able to speak with absolute certainty that something wouldn't have happened, but he *also* gives caveats about hypothetical situations. So it's entirely within the realm of possibility that following his recommendations *would* have prevented 9-11.
None of this changes the fact that Bush ignored the recommendations in the first place, though. "Dumbass"?? Such hate!
Posted by None @ 03/27/2004 07:00 PM NY
tsk tsk
You didnt ask for more info ;-)
it's hypocritical not hypothetical, talking out of both sides of his face.
coulda, woulda, shoulda,bottom line. Clinton had 8 years to deal with it and Bush had 18 months. Im sure in your mind and others like yours it wont matter what is said about the subject,your right and everybody else is wrong. I simply pointed out Mr. Clarke didn't say just what the press is spouting. On one hand Mr. Clarke is the absolute god of truth but then when he says something like no it wouldnt have mattered, how can he have it both ways?
I could go on about how the framers of the country said dont rely on government totally, but that would screw up your welfare checks ....
Posted by Robin Hacker @ 03/27/2004 08:56 PM NY
And now, we go to the typical rightwinger response: rudeness, incivility, innuendo. Welfare checks indeed. I'm done with you.
Hey editor-- why is it that whenever there's a major story in the news that makes the Bushies look bad, you get invaded by the obnoxious?
Posted by None @ 03/27/2004 11:52 PM NY
And now, we go to the typical rightwinger response: rudeness, incivility, innuendo. Welfare checks indeed. I'm done with you.
Hey editor-- why is it that whenever there's a major story in the news that makes the Bushies look bad, you get invaded by the obnoxious?
Posted by None @ 03/28/2004 12:24 AM NY
Actually you started with the rude part with the ,did I have proof or just pull it out of my ass part
Then you said i didnt tell the whole story. Now if you re read my comment i simply said Mr. Clarke said even if all his recmmondations were followed, including a time line of over 2-1/2 years, that 9/11 would still have happened. That time line includes Mr. Clinton. Why you ask did Mr. Clarke make such a big splash, he had a book to promote
Lastly Im a dem, i beleive abortion is between a womans choice,( it's between her and her God if she has one), I believe Gays have rights, ( just not a fruitless marriage ), I believe the super rich have enough and should be taxed like they are super rich, I beleive in welfare for the poor, ( just not being able to make it a life's accounting of him or her self, i.e. mandatory birth control, mandatory education.)Lastly and sadly Ive seen dems and reps both promise the world and still not much changes, So ,you go girl.
Posted by Robin Hacker @ 03/28/2004 04:22 AM NY
Robin-- you're a dem? Couldn't tell with all the right-wing talking points you're spewing so handily. You didn't by any chance forget to add "life-long" in that description of your political beliefs, did you? You're a dem like I'm a Log Cabin Republican.
*Now* I'm done.
Posted by None @ 03/28/2004 12:39 PM NY
Your just further left than I am, One of these days you will get it ! ! !!
Posted by Robin Hacker @ 03/29/2004 08:23 AM NY
you were done before you opened your mouth, at least on this issue
Posted by Robin Hacker @ 03/31/2004 11:14 AM NY
