Interesting WSJ article about how Harry Reid and the Dems are pulling a political stunt regarding the closed Senate session and basically being dishonest. Hmmmm.......
The Clare Luce Democrats
How they're lying about "he lied us into war."
Thursday, November 3, 2005 12:01 a.m. EST
Harry Reid pulled the Senate into closed session Tuesday, claiming that "The Libby indictment provides a window into what this is really all about, how this Administration manufactured and manipulated intelligence in order to sell the war in Iraq." But the Minority Leader's statement was as demonstrably false as his stunt was transparently political.
What Mr. Reid's pose is "really all about" is the emergence of the Clare Boothe Luce Democrats. We're referring to the 20th-century playwright, and wife of Time magazine founder Henry Luce, who was most famous for declaring that Franklin D. Roosevelt had "lied us into war" with the Nazis and Tojo. So intense was the hatred of FDR among some Republicans that they held fast to this slander for years, with many taking their paranoia to their graves.
We are now seeing the spectacle of Bush-hating Democrats adopting a similar slander against the current President regarding the Iraq War. The indictment by Patrick Fitzgerald of Vice Presidential aide I. Lewis Libby has become their latest opening to promote this fiction, notwithstanding the mountains of contrary evidence. To wit: "¢ In July 2004, the Senate Intelligence Committee released a bipartisan 500-page report that found numerous failures of intelligence gathering and analysis. As for the Bush Administration's role, "The Committee did not find any evidence that Administration officials attempted to coerce, influence or pressure analysts to change their judgments related to Iraq's weapons of mass destruction," (our emphasis).
"¢ The Butler Report, published by the British in July 2004, similarly found no evidence of "deliberate distortion," although it too found much to criticize in the quality of prewar intelligence.
"¢ The March 2005 Robb-Silberman report on WMD intelligence was equally categorical, finding "no evidence of political pressure to influence the Intelligence Community's pre-war assessments of Iraq's weapons programs....analysts universally asserted that in no instance did political pressure cause them to skew or alter any of their analytical judgments. We conclude that it was the paucity of intelligence and poor analytical tradecraft, rather than political pressure, that produced the inaccurate pre-war intelligence assessments."
"¢ Finally, last Friday, there was Mr. Fitzgerald: "This indictment's not about the propriety of the war, and people who believe fervently in the war effort, people who oppose it, people who are--have mixed feelings about it should not look to this indictment for any resolution of how they feel or any vindication of how they feel."
In short, everyone who has looked into the question of whether the Bush Administration lied about intelligence, distorted intelligence, or pressured intelligence agencies to produce assessments that would support a supposedly pre-baked decision to invade Iraq has come up with the same answer: No, no, no and no.
Everyone, that is, except Joseph Wilson IV. He first became the Democrats' darling in July 2003, when he published an op-ed claiming he'd debunked Mr. Bush's "16 words" on Iraqi attempts to purchase African yellowcake and that the Administration had distorted the evidence about Saddam's weapons programs to fit its agenda. This Wilson tale fit the "lied us into war" narrative so well that he was adopted by the John Kerry presidential campaign.
Only to be dropped faster than a Paris Hilton boyfriend after the Senate Intelligence and Butler reports were published. Those reports clearly showed that, while Saddam had probably not purchased yellowcake from Niger, the dictator had almost certainly tried--and that Mr. Wilson's own briefing of the CIA after his mission supported that conclusion. Mr. Wilson somehow omitted that fact from his public accounts at the time.
He also omitted to explain why the CIA had sent him to Niger: His wife, who worked at the CIA, had suggested his name for the trip, a fact Mr. Wilson also denied, but which has also since been proven. In other words, the only real support there has ever been for the "Bush lied" storyline came from a man who is himself a demonstrable liar. If we were Nick Kristof and the other writers who reported Mr. Wilson's facts as gospel, we'd be apologizing to our readers.
Yet, incredibly, Mr. Wilson has once again become the Democrats' favorite mascot because they want him as a prop for their "lied us into war" revival campaign. They must think the media are stupid, because so many Democrats are themselves on the record in the pre-Iraq War period as declaring that Saddam had WMD. Here is Al Gore from September 23, 2002, amid the Congressional debate over going to war: "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." Or Hillary Rodham Clinton, from October 10, 2002: "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members...."
Or Senator Jay Rockefeller, the Democratic Vice Chairman of the Intelligence Committee, who is now leading the "Bush lied" brigades (from October 10, 2002): "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years....We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." If Mr. Bush is a liar, what does the use of the phrase "unmistakable evidence" make Mr. Rockefeller? A fool?
The scandal here isn't what happened before the war. The scandal is that the same Democrats who saw the same intelligence that Mr. Bush saw, who drew the same conclusions, and who voted to go to war are now using the difficulties we've encountered in that conflict as an excuse to rewrite history. Are Republicans really going to let them get away with it?
__________________
Jesus Christ--The reason for the season!
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read this in English, thank a veteran.
If you're certain you know everything, there's little opportunity to learn anything.
I've been disappointed in Dem leadership and political tactics for some time. It seems the leadership of the Dem party has been hijacked by the ultra-left. With no power in government and an inability to attract voters, they began a legislative policy of obstruction. Recently that appears to have changed to a policy of destruction.
They are targeting key Bush Admn. officials for smear campaigns in an effort to their ultimate goal of 'killing the king.' Never mind if it tears down the country in the process. This process of vicious politics is not good for government or the Dem party. More and more qualified people are going to opt not to serve and as a result, we will have more ego-driven idealogues elected.
Reads like propaganda and amounts to an excuse for the lies Bush told to sell the war to the people. The analogywith FDR and WWII paranoia from a few nutty reps. is WAY out in left field.
Notice that nowhere in the propaganda piece does the "author" make an attempt to explain the indictments or excuse them, because he can't.
Ken starr spent $60 million over 6 years and had to abandon whitewater all together since it was a baseless claim wrt to clinton.
Fitzgerald has spent $720,000 in about 2 years and has produced true indictments on the issue he set out to investigate.
Ken starr spent $60 million over 6 years and had to abandon whitewater all together since it was a baseless claim.
Fitzgerald has spent $720,000 in about 2 years and has produced true indictments on the issue he set out to investigate.
Maybe I'm wrong but didn't several people end up in jail from Rose Law firm as a result of theWhitewater investigation?
And didnt Fitzgerald indict Libby not on outing an agent but for lying to the grand jury? Which is a crime and if he is found guilty should suffer the consequences.
Maybe I'm not remembering correctly help me out here guys.
Maybe I'm wrong but didn't several people end up in jail from Rose Law firm as a result of theWhitewater investigation?
No actively serving federal gov. officials were indicted and convicted which was the whole purpose of needing Ken Starr as a special prosecutor. A local DA could have dealt with the Rose Law Firm.
Fitzgerald was empowered to investigate serving gov. officials and hebrought some true indictments relatively quickly and cheaply in comparison to Starr who had no real whitewater case against any serving gov. official. In regard to gov. officials and the pres. whitwater was effectively abandoned after milking the cash cow to the extreme.
$60 million vs $270,000 what a bargain.
Frost, are we just not aware of the results of the Starr investigation or are we playing with words to obfuscate.
For a little perspective.
Here are the indictments that Starr got:
- Number of Starr-Ray investigation convictions or guilty pleas (including one governor, one associate attorney general and two Clinton business partners): 14
- Number of Clinton Cabinet members who came under criminal investigation: 5
- Number of Reagan cabinet members who came under criminal investigation: 4
- Number of top officials jailed in the Teapot Dome Scandal: 3
CRIME STATS
- Number of individuals and businesses associated with the Clinton machine who have been convicted of or pleaded guilty to crimes: 47
- Number of these convictions during Clinton's presidency: 33
- Number of indictments/misdemeanor charges: 61
- Number of congressional witnesses who have pleaded the Fifth Amendment, fled the country to avoid testifying, or (in the case of foreign witnesses) refused to be interviewed: 122
Let's not forget the 170 or so pardons Clinton gave on his last day in office. In the news recently is Marc Rich who wouldn't have made millions in the Oil for Food scam if he was still in prison like he should be. I'm currently reading My FBI by Louis Freeh. He commented that Clinton's pardons were rumored, but that he didn't consult Justice or the FBI on any of them. I guess they were already bought and paid for.
No actively serving federal gov. officials (like libby) were indicted and convicted which was the whole purpose of needing Ken Starr as a special prosecutor. A local DA could have dealt with the Rose Law Firm.
Quote:
In regard to (fed.) gov. officials and the pres. whitewater was effectively abandoned after milking the cash cow to the extreme.
You're talking around my post but suit yourself.
No arguments here, just drawing general comparisons.
How many actively serving Clinton admin. officials (federal employees)were indicted on Whitewater charges during Clinton's terms in office?
How many were at or above the "powerlevel" of Libby?
I might point out that Libby has been charged, but remains unconvicted for allegedly lying about a crime that didn't happen.
Last Dec. Fitzgerald issued a letter stating that he had found no evidence of a crime involving leaking secret information. Now he could have closed the investigation there. But instead he kept in open for 10 more months looking for peripheral charges and he came up with ONE.
For the Dems to claim that the current admn is a 'culture of corruption' is the height of hypocrisy considering the previous admn.
If he lied about something that didn't happen, then he must need a psychiatrist
Quote:
lying about a crime that didn't happen.
WTF?
Maybe if Fitzgerald hangs around for 6 years total he'll come up with some more indictments? He's only been on the trail for 2 years so far, not nearly long enough to see if impeachment is on the table. Who knows? Anything is possible given enough time and tax dollars.
Maybe I'm wrong but didn't several people end up in jail from Rose Law firm as a result of the Whitewater investigation?
No actively serving federal gov. officials were indicted and convicted which was the whole purpose of needing Ken Starr as a special prosecutor. A local DA could have dealt with the Rose Law Firm.
Frost
I must be remembering this stuff incorrectly also. Did Patrick Fitzgerald already CONVICT an actively serving federal official????
__________________
Jesus Christ--The reason for the season!
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read this in English, thank a veteran.
If you're certain you know everything, there's little opportunity to learn anything.
Clare Luce Democrats
