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

Skip to comments.

Gorelick Memo Exposes 'Feckless' Clinton Policy
insightmag.com ^

Posted on 04/13/2004 5:39:38 PM PDT by Sub-Driver

Gorelick Memo Exposes 'Feckless' Clinton Policy Posted April 13, 2004 By Kenneth R. Timmerman

In a dramatic moment of his testimony before the 9/11 commission this afternoon, Attorney General John Ashcroft released a previously classified memo from 1995 that instructed the FBI and U.S. Attorneys around the country to ensure they had "walled off" overseas intelligence information from domestic crime-fighters. The separation between overseas intelligence gathering and domestic criminal prosecution has been widely criticized by both Democrats and Republicans on the committee for having helped make the 9/11 attacks possible.

"[T]he simple fact of Sept. 11 is this," Ashcroft testified: "We did not know an attack was coming because for nearly a decade our government had blinded itself to its enemies. Our agents were isolated by government-imposed walls, handcuffed by government-imposed restrictions, and starved for basic information technology. The old national intelligence system in place on Sept. 11 was destined to fail."

Ashcroft went on to explain the "wall" that had been erected between criminal investigators and intelligence agents was "the single greatest structural cause for Sept. 11 [successes by al-Qaeda]." He said, "Government erected this wall. Government buttressed this wall. And before Sept. 11, government was blinded by this wall."

Ashcroft then described the 1995 memo that initially established the wall, which later impeded the investigations of the 9/11 hijackers and their accomplices. When frustrated field agents complained to headquarters about it in August 2001, Justice replied: "'These are the rules.' ... But somebody did make these rules," Ashcroft said. "Someone built this wall."

Then the attorney general dropped his bombshell: "Although you understand the debilitating impact of the wall, I cannot imagine that the commission knew about this memorandum, so I have declassified it for you and the public to review. Full disclosure compels me to inform you that its author is a member of this commission."

The 1995 memo by then Deputy Attorney General Jamie S. Gorelick - now a member of the 9/11 commission - explains that the new rules dictated by the Clinton administration to separate criminal investigations from intelligence gathering "go beyond what is legally required." The Gorelick rules were meant to ensure that "no 'proactive' investigative efforts or technical coverages" of terrorist suspects be carried out on U.S. soil.

The result of the 1995 Gorelick rules, Ashcroft said, were devastating, and hampered the ability of U.S. intelligence agencies to communicate the identify of two of the 9/11 hijackers to law-enforcement agencies, even after they had entered the United States. That failure specifically contributed to 9/11.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 1995; 911commission; aschcrofttestimony; ashcroft; ccrm; gorelick; gorelickmemo; jamiegorelick; jamiesgorelick; johnashcroft; memo; memos; september11; thewall; wall
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-62 next last
To: Mike Bates; Sub-Driver
We can expect this to be buried real, real deep in the press.

They already did it.

I was listening to ABC-BS & C-BS radio news (on the road). The only part I heard was "We did not know an attack was coming because for nearly a decade our government had blinded itself to its enemies"

Take it out of context, and it makes Ashcroft appear to be a sniveling weenie.

Wonder why they didn't mention Gorelick's spanking? ;-)

41 posted on 04/13/2004 8:17:12 PM PDT by an amused spectator (FR: Leaving the burning dog poop bag of Truth on the front door step of the liberal media since 1996)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver; Timesink; *CCRM; governsleastgovernsbest; martin_fierro; reformed_democrat; Loyalist; ..
Media Shenanigans/Post-NewsMedia Conservative History ping - Major Media Manipulation - Alphabet Fraudworks Omit Ommissioner's Gorelick's Memo; Paint Ashcroft As Hand-Wringing Weenie

On, Off, or grab it for a Media Shenanigans/Schadenfreude/PNMCH ping:
http://www.freerepublic.com/~anamusedspectator/

42 posted on 04/13/2004 8:40:18 PM PDT by an amused spectator (FR: Leaving the burning dog poop bag of Truth on the front door step of the liberal media since 1996)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Izzy Dunne; All
Well .. they can say that all they want .. but the public was watching - and too many of them heard what Ashcroft said.

It was the dems who wanted this PUBLIC - they should have known better.

And .. speaking of PUBLIC - the commission has now decided to interview Monsoor Ijaz IN PRIVATE. I guess that's because they don't want Monsoor telling the public that Clinton allowed Osama to slip through his fingers 3 times.

I have written to the commission complaining - you can join if you like by emailing them info@9-11commission.gov
43 posted on 04/13/2004 9:18:27 PM PDT by CyberAnt (The 2004 Election is for the SOUL of AMERICA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Maigrey
I know you've been watching the 9/11 hearings and wanted to make sure you saw this.
44 posted on 04/13/2004 10:04:03 PM PDT by azGOPgal (Bush '04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hillarys Gate Cult
Hope you noticed the new Newsmax story about Bob Kerry saying that Clinton's testimony to the Commission differs substantially from the speech he made at the fund raiser and that this discrepancy will need to be fully investigated. But he wasn't under oath, but that wouldn't have mattered. Let's see if the lamestream media picks that up.
45 posted on 04/13/2004 10:38:47 PM PDT by airedale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: All
Tomorrow, please call the President and let him know we the American people back him 100%. What better way than to go direct to the man himself so our intentions can not be misled by the media nor the polls. Inform a love one or friend to call also and ask them to pass it on. The President has been there for us now it is time for us to be there for him..The numbers are as follows:
Comments: 202-456-1111 Switchboard: 202-456-1414 FAX: 202-456-2461


46 posted on 04/13/2004 10:41:19 PM PDT by Two-Bits (I still am amazed at the stupidity of the media...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: fatrat; Sub-Driver
I was half-watching/listening to Ashcroft when the camera did pan to Gorlick's face. She was leaning forward, her eyes wide open, and she looked like a deer in headlights. I remember thinking she doesn't photograph well if she always looks so scared.

A few minutes later, I knew why.

We should also remember the country was filled with Gorlick, Esquires, since Clinton fired every U.S. Attorney in the country when he took office, something no President had ever come close to doing.

47 posted on 04/14/2004 12:26:35 AM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg (There are very few shades of gray.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: CyberCowboy777
I contacted the commission, and will spread the word
48 posted on 04/14/2004 2:02:55 AM PDT by M1911A1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Mike Bates
We can expect this to be buried real, real deep in the press.

Just read the print version of the Washington Post -- there wasn't a "positive" (GOP side) headline or story on the front page. Instead: articles featuring Pickard's rabid critique of Bush/Ashcroft... and certainly not a mention (certainly not a headline, I did find a reference buried several paragraphs deep in the Pickard article) of the Gorelick "wall" memo. The mainstream media isn't even making a pretense at not being partisan.

49 posted on 04/14/2004 3:29:14 AM PDT by ReleaseTheHounds
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Don't you LOVE the title of this article? "Feckless."

The next edition of Websters will HAVE to add the pictures of Bubba, Reno, Gorelick and a whole raft of Clintonistas under the definition of "feckless."

50 posted on 04/14/2004 3:36:37 AM PDT by ReleaseTheHounds
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts
Jamie S. Gorelick sits on the wrong side of the table!

This is Jamie Gorelick of the Attorney General's office, now if I don't come out with my hands up, I'm coming in after me."

51 posted on 04/14/2004 3:51:49 AM PDT by wayoverontheright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
bookmark- save this thread!
52 posted on 04/14/2004 4:04:56 AM PDT by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CyberAnt
Email sent:

Dear Commission members,

I was quite dismayed to learn that Monsoor Ijaz is going to testify in private. This man knows a lot about what went on behind the scenes - he should be made to testify in public!! Please reconsider and have Monsoor Ijaz testify in public.

Further, after John Ashcroft's testimony yesterday, I am left wondering why Ms. Gorelick is on the commission instead of testifying before it. Why isn't she testifying in public about the wall she built between the FBI & the CIA that is one of the main causes for us failing to discover the 911 attack before it happened?

53 posted on 04/14/2004 5:00:35 AM PDT by SW6906
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: SW6906
Canned reply received:

Thank you for your email to the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States. Due to the volume of correspondence and our available resources, we regret that it is not possible to respond to each piece individually and personally. Please be assured that your correspondence will be forwarded to the appropriate staff members for further study. We appreciate your taking the time to share information with the Commission as well as your thoughts, concerns, and opinions and encourage you to continue to follow its work. Information about past and future Commission activities is available on our website at www.9-11commission.gov.

54 posted on 04/14/2004 5:02:28 AM PDT by SW6906
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: ReleaseTheHounds
feck·less [ fék;less ] adjective 1. ineffective: unable or unwilling to do anything useful 2. unlikely to be successful: lacking the thought or organization necessary to succeed feckless attempts at starting a business [Late 16th century. From obsolete feck “value, efficacy,” a shortening of effect.] feck·less·ly adverb feck·less·ness noun

I like the word choice too!

55 posted on 04/14/2004 9:08:21 AM PDT by shamusotoole
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: M1911A1
Great!

The commission and the pres must be pressured to full disclosure.

The apparent "misstatements" of Clinton and the separation policies put in place by the Clinton Justice Dept are at least important, if not damning.
56 posted on 04/14/2004 9:38:31 AM PDT by CyberCowboy777 (We should never ever apologize for who we are, what we believe in, and what we stand for.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Waco
"The only committee Gorelick should be on, is the one deciding if she sits in Levenworth or Marion."

Oh, Gorelick has wronged America, but, I want this to go higher, and higher, and higher.

57 posted on 04/14/2004 10:11:55 AM PDT by malia (BUSH/CHENEY '04 NEVER FORGET!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: SW6906
Great letter! Thanks for sharing it. Hopefully it will inspire others to emulate it.
58 posted on 04/14/2004 11:54:28 AM PDT by CyberAnt (The 2004 Election is for the SOUL of AMERICA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: CyberAnt
btt
59 posted on 04/14/2004 7:00:09 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
bttt
60 posted on 04/24/2004 3:46:41 PM PDT by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-62 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