Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Text of the Democrat Memo
Fox News ^ | 11-05-03 | Some Dem!

Posted on 11/05/2003 12:42:05 PM PST by jmstein7

Edited on 04/22/2004 12:37:42 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

2) Assiduously prepare Democratic "additional views" to attach to any interim or final reports the committee may release. Committee rules provide this opportunity and we intend to take full advantage of it. In that regard, we have already compiled all the public statements on Iraq made by senior administration officials. We will identify the most exaggerated claims and contrast them with the intelligence estimates that have since been declassified. Our additional views will also, among other things, castigate the majority for seeking to limit the scope of the inquiry. The Democrats will then be in a strong position to reopen the question of establishing an independent commission (i.e. the Corzine amendment).


(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Front Page News; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2004memo; crime; dems; elections; frontpage; government; intelligence; rockefeller
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-98 next last

1 posted on 11/05/2003 12:42:05 PM PST by jmstein7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: jmstein7
Good post!

Makes you wonder what else they've been doing.
2 posted on 11/05/2003 12:45:15 PM PST by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: <1/1,000,000th%
Their 'war room' is still operational - just moved to NY. They really aren't concerned about the WOT, just their WOBush.
3 posted on 11/05/2003 12:46:56 PM PST by anniegetyourgun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: anniegetyourgun
You're right!
4 posted on 11/05/2003 12:48:12 PM PST by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: jmstein7
Bob Graham?

Head of Senate Intelligence Committee on Iraq.
Leaked information to the press in an attempt to discredit GW this past year.
Claimed to have dirt on GW that would hurt his re-elect bid.
Quit his re-elect Senate bid recently.


He's vacating his senate seat in Florida. The memo said an independant investigator...Has Bob teamed up with Klayman, who is running for Florida Senate?
5 posted on 11/05/2003 12:54:11 PM PST by RedBloodedAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jmstein7
Why is anyone wasting time on who leaked the name of the CIA wife of the Clintonoid sent to Niger.

Let's find out who drafted this memo and who it was sent to!
6 posted on 11/05/2003 1:07:57 PM PST by TC Rider (The United States Constitution 1791. All Rights Reserved.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jmstein7
"We don't know what we will find but our prospects for getting the access we seek is far greater when we have the backing of the majority"
7 posted on 11/05/2003 1:18:33 PM PST by jonatron (For Great Justice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TC Rider
"Why is anyone wasting time on who leaked the name of the CIA wife of the Clintonoid sent to Niger.

Let's find out who drafted this memo and who it was sent to!"

Maybe it's the same person.
8 posted on 11/05/2003 1:21:10 PM PST by Ben Hecks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: jmstein7
Intelligence issues are clearly secondary to the public's concern regarding the insurgency in Iraq. Yet, we have an important role to play in the revealing the misleading -- if not flagrantly dishonest methods and motives -- of the senior administration officials who made the case for a unilateral, preemptive war. The approach outline above seems to offer the best prospect for exposing the administration's dubious motives and methods.

I'm pretty sure the word insurgency is used incorrectly here. There is no uprising or revolt against the standing government. There has been a total annialiation of the previous, corrupt government and liberation of the oppressed people of Iraq. The author of the memo is talking out of his league and knowledge.

9 posted on 11/05/2003 1:23:09 PM PST by in the Arena (Richard Thomas Kastner - KIA - Phuoc Long, South Vietnam - 15 November 1969))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jmstein7
Summary

Intelligence issues are clearly secondary to the public's concern regarding the insurgency in Iraq. Yet, we have an important role to play in the revealing the misleading -- if not flagrantly dishonest methods and motives -- of the senior administration officials who made the case for a unilateral, preemptive war. The approach outline above seems to offer the best prospect for exposing the administration's dubious motives and methods.

I'm betting the National Media will use this closing statement to show that the Democrats are simply trying to bring Bush's bad decision to light. It will not be seen for what Sean Hannity feels is high treason.

10 posted on 11/05/2003 1:24:20 PM PST by khenrich
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jmstein7
Great post! Does anyone else feel that the stilted, almost "communistic" cadence to this memo sounds like it was authored by the Dims' favorite little socialist, HRC? Read some of Shrillary's earlier manifesto's and they are indistinguishable from Marx or Lenin. This memo has the same "feel" to me. JMHO.
11 posted on 11/05/2003 1:36:41 PM PST by alwaysconservative (Democrats recycle: bad ideas, bad policies, bad people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: khenrich
It will not be seen for what Sean Hannity feels is high treason.

Why does Hannity think that congressional oversight motivated by partisanship is treason?

12 posted on 11/05/2003 1:41:18 PM PST by GoGophers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: jmstein7
I'm hardly an expert and could certainly be missing some of the subtleties here, but this memo doesn't look especially damning to me. It doesn't prove anything more than that the Democrats are playing hardball and that they have a strategy.

It also looks like some of the allegations made during yesterday's hype regarding the content of the memo were off-target.

For instance, it has been alleged that the memo recommended the contrasting of administration claims with *classified* intelligence estimates, but the memo actually recommends that *declassified* intelligence be used for this purpose. That's a world of difference.

Also, this line,

Intelligence issues are clearly secondary to the public's concern regarding the insurgency in Iraq.

has been interpreted as showing Democrat willingness to subordinate "intelligence issues" to the possibility of scoring political points -- as though they were saying "screw the intelligence concerns, we have political hay to make!". But this interepretation doesn't make sense given the line that follows it,

Yet, we have an important role to play in revealing the misleading -- if not flagrantly dishonest methods and motives -- of the senior administration officials who made the case for a unilateral, preemptive war.

The key is in how the term "intelligence issues" is interpreted. Hannity and others are interpreting this to mean the possible harm that will be done if certain intelligence is brought into the open and used against the administration. But if you read carefully, you'll see that that's not how it is used in the memo. Instead, whoever wrote the memo uses "intelligence issues" to mean the administration's overestimations of Iraqi WMD's and other flawed intelligence leading to a hasty move towards war etc, etc.

With this in mind, you can see that what the memo is actually saying is "Even though the intelligence issues (i.e. the overestimation of the WMD threat, etc) aren't weighing on the public's mind as heavily as the present situation on the ground in Iraq, still we have a role to play in revealing these issues..."

And this doesn't add up to the Dems playing dirty ball, IMO. I think this is much ado about not much.

13 posted on 11/05/2003 1:53:36 PM PST by Yardstick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jmstein7
We don't know what we will find but our prospects for getting the access we seek is far greater when we have the backing of the majority.

Translation: We're on a fishing expedition.

14 posted on 11/05/2003 1:54:10 PM PST by Mike Darancette (Proud member - Neo-Conservative Power Vortex)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Yardstick
Exactly what I thought after reading the memo
15 posted on 11/05/2003 1:56:15 PM PST by GoGophers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: GoGophers
Yeah, I was pretty disappointed when I read it. I thought it was going to be a nuclear bomb.
16 posted on 11/05/2003 2:01:11 PM PST by Yardstick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican
"Has Bob teamed up with Klayman, who is running for Florida Senate?"

Personally, I think Bob Graham saw this coming and headed for the hills.

I called his DC office and also Nelson's DC office. I told them point blank that if one single American is killed from here on out, it would be because they jeopardized US---the ones that PAY THEM--to play partisan politics. I had 100 copies of this memo printed out and I just got back walking from door to door until I ran out of them with a simple message:

"This "memo" isn't about being a Democrat or a Republican. This memo is all about being an American---whose security and safety we now know is secondary to the very people that are "supposed" to be looking out for our best interests but instead are planning what the best plan would be to undercut our President while we are at war. Read this memo, then call the 800 # for our two Senators, Bob Graham and Bill Nelson and tell them you want a stop put to this partisan politicking that might just cost us another 3,000 or more lives. After you've done that, than call everyone you know and show them this memo. "

Amazingly enough, when people actually read the memo, they were livid. I walked for 2 hours, but it was worth every second. 100 more people know about this memo than did at 2:15pm this afternoon.

If you wanna talk the talk, you gotta walk the walk.

I'm tired of this BS in Washington and I think that many people--a lot more many---are angrier than the Dems think they are. They are completely underestimating the power and patriotism of United States citizens. Sure, we may disagree on different issues, but when the lawmakers of our country start putting us in jeapordy, than it's time for "heads to roll".

As far as Bob Graham and Larry Klayman heading this up, I don't think that will ever happen because I think it would difficult for the two of them to take an Oreo Cookie apart and put it back together again. As far as the leak of the woman's name who works for the CIA is concerned, I think the media is overlooking who really put that woman in danger by naming her: ROBERT NOVAK.

17 posted on 11/05/2003 2:01:54 PM PST by DJ88 (Some Things in Life You Can't Buy; For Everything Else, There's Democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Yardstick
I think the most important point is that the majority has been suckered into assisting these creeps. HEY GOP don't cooperate with these RATS in ANY way. If they want the answer to a question tell 'em to go pound sand. Or ignore it altogether. Or run them around in circles.
18 posted on 11/05/2003 2:16:30 PM PST by justshutupandtakeit (America's Enemies foreign and domestic agree: Bush must be destroyed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: DJ88
NO ONE put that woman in danger. Her only danger is tripping and falling while walking in the bowels of the bureacracy.

Don't fall for the mythology. She was not/is not/never shall be any kind of secret operative. This is just another RATmedia LIE.
19 posted on 11/05/2003 2:19:32 PM PST by justshutupandtakeit (America's Enemies foreign and domestic agree: Bush must be destroyed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: DJ88
You did good. Thanks.
20 posted on 11/05/2003 2:25:31 PM PST by snopercod (My Indian name is "Runs With Chainsaw".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: justshutupandtakeit
I think the most important point is that the majority has been suckered into assisting these creeps. HEY GOP don't cooperate with these RATS in ANY way. If they want the answer to a question tell 'em to go pound sand. Or ignore it altogether. Or run them around in circles.

If the White House has nothing to hide, which is most likely the case, then why shouldn't the House and Senate Republicans ask the tough questions?

21 posted on 11/05/2003 2:49:44 PM PST by GoGophers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: DJ88
You obviously feel very strongly on this issue (100 people in two hours). I would like to hear your response to Yardstick (#13).
22 posted on 11/05/2003 2:51:14 PM PST by GoGophers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: GoGophers
They already have been given intelligence(they are the Intelligence Committee). The problem is that this memo states that they have no reason other than, to try and bring down a president durning a time of war, to go searching for wrong doing. They political motivation behind a witch hunt (not any obvious wrong doing) to try and bring a sitting president down during a time of war is treason (aiding and abetting an enemy).
23 posted on 11/05/2003 3:01:20 PM PST by Lady Heron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Lady Heron
The problem is that this memo states that they have no reason other than, to try and bring down a president durning a time of war, to go searching for wrong doing. They political motivation behind a witch hunt (not any obvious wrong doing) to try and bring a sitting president down during a time of war is treason (aiding and abetting an enemy).

What they are doing is engaging in highly partisan congressional oversight, which is not treason. If Bush did not commit an impeachable offense, then they can not throw him out of office.

24 posted on 11/05/2003 3:04:31 PM PST by GoGophers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: DJ88
Thank you!
25 posted on 11/05/2003 3:05:08 PM PST by Lady Heron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: GoGophers
What they are doing is engaging in highly partisan congressional oversight, which is not treason.

Not on the Senate Intelligence Committee, it is suppose to be non-partisan. It is suppose to have America's intrest at hand not a political party's intrest. I am very sorry that democrats (which my family a have been and even run for office) have sunk so low, but this is Treason.

Zell Miller, the last of the old democrat party even thinks heads should roll over this, and he is right!

26 posted on 11/05/2003 3:11:32 PM PST by Lady Heron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Lady Heron
Not on the Senate Intelligence Committee, it is suppose to be non-partisan. It is suppose to have America's intrest at hand not a political party's intrest. I am very sorry that democrats (which my family a have been and even run for office) have sunk so low, but this is Treason.

Investigating the possibility that the White House may have deliberately mislead the nation, which I do not think is the case, is not treason.

27 posted on 11/05/2003 3:13:01 PM PST by GoGophers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Lady Heron
Not on the Senate Intelligence Committee, it is suppose to be non-partisan. It is suppose to have America's intrest at hand not a political party's intrest.

America's interest IS served by one party being suspicious of the other's motives. If they think they can prove Bush lied about our intel, I say "bring it." I suspect Bush would agree. Since these Dem committee members saw the same intel reports the White House did, it'll be hard to prove Bush pulled a fast one on them without also proving they were asleep at the wheel all through the buildup to war.

28 posted on 11/05/2003 3:24:21 PM PST by xlib
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: xlib
America's interest IS served by one party being suspicious of the other's motives. If they think they can prove Bush lied about our intel, I say "bring it."

Agreed

Since these Dem committee members saw the same intel reports the White House did, it'll be hard to prove Bush pulled a fast one on them without also proving they were asleep at the wheel all through the buildup to war.

This is not a winnable issue for the Democrats

29 posted on 11/05/2003 3:31:30 PM PST by GoGophers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: GoGophers
Investigating the possibility that the White House may have deliberately mislead the nation, which I do not think is the case, is not treason.

THey're not investigating the possibility that the WH may have misled the nation. They're trying to gin up the appearance that the WH misled the nation, and they're abusing their positions on the committee to do it.

What they're doing is EXACTLY what they've falsely accused the president of doing: Manipulating intelligence to further their political goals.

30 posted on 11/05/2003 3:32:18 PM PST by alnick (Pray that God will grant wisdom to American voters.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

placemarker bump
31 posted on 11/05/2003 3:34:34 PM PST by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: xlib
Since these Dem committee members saw the same intel reports the White House did, it'll be hard to prove Bush pulled a fast one on them without also proving they were asleep at the wheel all through the buildup to war.

This memo proves that this is not what they are after. They want to be given access into other areas to search for anything they think they could possibly use against the administration, going beyond they intellegence they have been given to not help America and their soldiers but to bring down a sitting president for no other reason other than political gain.

That goes beyond the scope of the intellegence committee without any evidence of wrong doing, but just a political mission on their part that happens to coincide with our enemies. That is aiding and abetting an enemy (because there is no cause but their getting their power back and not any pursuit of known wrong doing), thus it is treason or as Zell said its close cousin.

32 posted on 11/05/2003 3:35:32 PM PST by Lady Heron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: alnick
THey're not investigating the possibility that the WH may have misled the nation. They're trying to gin up the appearance that the WH misled the nation, and they're abusing their positions on the committee to do it.

How do you differentiate between the two perspectives (investigation versus witchhunt)?

33 posted on 11/05/2003 3:38:03 PM PST by GoGophers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: xlib
America's interest IS served by one party being suspicious of the other's motives. If they think they can prove Bush lied about our intel, I say "bring it."

The democrats on that committee aren't the slightest bit interested in getting at the truth. Their plan is to twist the truth.

34 posted on 11/05/2003 3:38:17 PM PST by alnick (Pray that God will grant wisdom to American voters.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: GoGophers
Welcome to FR, member of 6 weeks.
35 posted on 11/05/2003 3:38:23 PM PST by MonroeDNA (Please become a monthly donor!!! Just $3 a month--you won't miss it, and will feel proud!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: MonroeDNA
Welcome to FR, member of 6 weeks.

And ?

36 posted on 11/05/2003 3:39:06 PM PST by GoGophers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: jmstein7
Have any of the lamestream news anchors reported on this memo tonight? So far Peter Jennings hasn't BUT he led off with a report about an obscure Lebanese businessman who claims that an Iraqi bigwig agreed to disarm if we didn't invade Iraq. The emphasis given to this report and the fact that Petah led off with it was almost like he was trying to deflect attention AWAY from this memo.
37 posted on 11/05/2003 3:43:04 PM PST by PJ-Comix (The Early Bird Gets The Early Worm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GoGophers
They've already made the accusations. They've stated the conclusions that they wish to reach and laid out their plans to try to come up with dirt on the president.

If they were trying to do the jobs with which they've been entrusted, they would go through the intelligence with an open mind, rather than going through it for the sole purpose of finding something to use as a weapon against the Commander in Chief.
38 posted on 11/05/2003 3:44:22 PM PST by alnick (Pray that God will grant wisdom to American voters.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: jmstein7
"collaborate"

The essence of a Communist front group!

39 posted on 11/05/2003 3:45:25 PM PST by F-117A
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GoGophers
GoGophers, Since Sep 20, 2003

Investigating the possibility that the White House may have deliberately mislead the nation, which I do not think is the case, is not treason.

It is when there is no cause to question the White House in the intellegence they have been given. So far they can see no wrong doing.

As they stated in the memo they are on witch hunt (which happens to help our enemies). This goes beyond the scope of the commitee. They want access to other areas beyond their normal reach for only one reason, to dig up dirt on the administration to bring it down only so they can have their power back.

That goes beyond what this committee was designed for. This committee was never to be used for politics, but defending our country. When this commitee starts being used for politics then you can kiss any classified intellegence goodbye and our enemys have won.

Treason.

40 posted on 11/05/2003 3:54:55 PM PST by Lady Heron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: alwaysconservative
Would it not be a wonderful thing to find that hillary was behind this memo?

The memo is so insightful, but it's simply what has always been going on, we all knew that to be true, but it's great to see it in writing. "We could attract more coverage" is a great line from the potitical left.
41 posted on 11/05/2003 3:55:21 PM PST by grist for the mill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: GoGophers
Welcome to FR, member of 6 weeks.

And ?

Oh, he is just wondering what we all are beginning to wonder, are you a troll, or not.

42 posted on 11/05/2003 3:57:06 PM PST by Lady Heron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: GoGophers
How do you differentiate between the two perspectives (investigation versus witchhunt)?

The interim report has not even been written at this point, and yet the staff member is writing about how to present "our case" as "additional views" on the interim report and the final report. Also, note that the author considers it a foregone conclusion that there will be a split with the majority at some point that will prevent further cooperation on the committee.

43 posted on 11/05/2003 3:57:57 PM PST by AzJohn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: DJ88
You are easy to fool if you think Valerie Plame was put in danger...now about that bridge I have to sell.
44 posted on 11/05/2003 4:02:30 PM PST by Ann Archy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: khenrich
He also had Saxby Chambliss on as well. Saxby pretty clearly indicated this came from the top, from Dasshole, whether or not Rockerfella authorized the penning of the memo itself.

What irked me was the seeming lack of righteous indignation from Chambliss.

Can you imagine if this had been a Republican????
45 posted on 11/05/2003 4:03:05 PM PST by Freemeorkillme
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: jmstein7
For example, the FBI Niger investigation was done solely at the request of the vice chairman; we have independently submitted written questions to DoD; and we are preparing further independent requests for information.

WHY...WHY did Senator Pat Roberts ALLOW the VICE Chairman, Rockefeller or Graham (?) to run their own investigation????? Investigations are the pervue of the CHAIRMAN...not the VICE Chairman. What a wus.

46 posted on 11/05/2003 4:07:45 PM PST by Ann Archy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: in the Arena
I'm pretty sure the word insurgency is used incorrectly here.

LOL. You expect people who don't know what the meaning of "is" is to understand "insurgency"?

47 posted on 11/05/2003 4:08:57 PM PST by Samwise (There are other forces at work in this world, Frodo, besides the will of evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Lady Heron
Oh, he is just wondering what we all are beginning to wonder, are you a troll, or not.

I have repeatedly said that I believe that the allegations are most likely false. However, blocking an investigation is not in the best interests of our country.

48 posted on 11/05/2003 4:16:21 PM PST by GoGophers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: GoGophers
How do you differentiate between the two perspectives (investigation versus witchhunt)?

It's really quite simple, you consider what facts you know about the individuals involved.

It would appear from your postings on this thread that you believe that the democrats are only after the truth.

I guess you're drawing upon past events, you know, like when the democrats really, really, really wanted to dig out the truth about Clinton during his impeachment (they did support full impeachment "investigations" didn't they?).

IMHO, the democrats have absolutely no past reputation for truth, or sufficient morality to act first as Americans, and second as political partisans.

I'm still trying to figure out whether you're a TROLL or just an anti-Bush poster.

49 posted on 11/05/2003 5:17:01 PM PST by Col Freeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: jmstein7
This borders on treason. I am still angered everytime I read or hear that Bush lied in the State of the Union address. He absolutely did not, yet because it is repeated over and over that he did, it has become fact.

The heads need to roll, and the administration needs to express outrage and refuse to cooperate with this investigation any longer. The rats would were it the other way around, although pubbies would never sink this low.
50 posted on 11/05/2003 7:20:03 PM PST by ladyinred (Talk about a revolution, look at California!!! We dumped Davis!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-98 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson