Posted on 11/02/2005 4:06:22 AM PST by RobFromGa
Mr. Reid:
Thank you very much, Mr. President. Just a couple of days ago, my son Lief called me and indicated that his lovely wife Amber was going to have another baby. That will be my --? our 16th grandchild. Mr. President, I have thought about that, and I have to say that I've been in public service a long time.
Never have I been so concerned about our country. We have gas prices that are really unbelievable. This year they've been over $3 in the state of Nevada. Diesel fuel is still over $3 a gallon in Nevada. The majority leader of the House of Representatives is under indictment. The man in charge of contracting for the federal government under indictment.
Deficits, Mr. President, so far you can't see them. The deficits have been basically run up by President Bush's Administration these last five years. We're the wealthiest nation in the world but we are very poor as it relates to health care. We have an intractable war in Iraq. Is it any wonder that I'm concerned about my family, my grandchildren
This past weekend, we witnessed the indictment of L. Lewis Libby, the Vice President's chief of staff, also on the President's staff, a senior advisor to the President. Mr. Libby is the first sitting white House staffer to be indicted in 135 years. Is it any wonder, Mr. President, that i'm concerned about my grandchildren?
This indictment raises very serious charges. It asserts this Administration engaged in actions that both harmed our national security and were morally repugnant. The decision made to place united states soldiers, our military into harm's way I believe is the most significant responsibility the constitution vests in the Congress and in the President. 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 and attempted to destroy those who dared to challenge its actions.
Mr. President, these are not just words from Harry Reid. Larry Wilkerson, Colonel Larry Wilkerson, Colin Powell's former chief of staff -- Colin Powell, of course, was Secretary of State. This man was his chief of staff for four years. Here's what he said about the war in Iraq.
"In President Bush's first term, some of the most important decisions about U.S. National security, including vital decisions about post-war Iraq, were made by a secretive, little-known cabal, was made up of a very small group of people led by Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. But the secret process was ultimately a failure. It produced a series of disastrous decisions."
That's what I'm here to talk about today, Mr. President. As a result of its improper conduct, a cloud now hangs over this Administration. This cloud is further darkened by the Administration's mistakes in prisoner abuse, hurricane Katrina, and the cronyism and corruption in numerous agencies throughout this Administration.
And unfortunately, it must be that said a cloud also hangs over this Republican-controlled Congress for its unwillingness to hold this Republican Administration accountable for its misdeeds on these issues. During the time that we had a Democratic President, eight years, and when the Democrats were in charge of the Committees, we were in the majority, oversight hearings were held covering the gamut of what went on in this Administration -- that Administration. Today there is not an oversight hearing held on anything.
Let's take a look at back how we got here with respect to Iraq. The record will show that within hours of the terrorist acts of 9/11, senior officials in this Administration recognized those attacks could be used as a pretext to invade Iraq. The record will also show that in the months and years after 9/11, the Administration engaged in a pattern of manipulation of the facts and retribution against anyone who got in its way as it made its case for attacking, for invading Iraq.
There are numerous examples of how the Administration misstated and manipulated the facts as it made the case for war. The Administration’s statements on Saddam's alleged nuclear weapons capabilities and ties with Al Qaeda represent the best examples how it consistently and repeatedly manipulated the facts. The America people were warned time and time again by the President, the Vice President, the current Secretary of State and their other capacities about Saddam's nuclear weapons capabilities. The Vice President said -- and I quote --
"Iraq has reconstituted its nuclear programs,"
Obviously we know now that their nuclear claims were wholly inaccurate. But more troubling is the fact that a lot of Intelligence experts were telling the Administration then that its claims about Saddam's nuclear capabilities were false. The situation is very similar with respect to Saddam's links to Al Qaeda. The Vice President told the America people -- I quote again –
"...we know he's out trying once again to produce nuclear weapons and we know he has a long-standing relationship with various terrorist groups, including the al qaeda organization."
These assertions have been totally discredited, not a little bit, totally discredited. But again, the Administration went ahead with these assertions in spite of the fact that the government's top experts did not agree with these claims.
Again, Wilkerson is a person in point. What has been the response of this Republican-controlled Congress to the Administration's manipulation of Intelligence that led to this protracted war in Iraq nothing. Did the Republican-controlled Congress carry out its constitutional obligations to conduct oversight no. Did it support our troops and their families by providing them the answers to many important questions No. Did it even attempt to force this Administration to answer the most basic questions about its behavior? No.
Unfortunately, the unwillingness of the Republican-controlled Congress to exercise its oversight responsibilities is not is not limited to just Iraq. We see it with respect to the prison abuse scandal. We see it with respect to Katrina, and we see it with respect to the cronyism and corruption that permeates this Administration.
Time and time again, this Republican-controlled Congress has consistently chosen to put its political interests ahead of our national security. They have repeatedly chosen to protect the Republican Administration rather than to get to the bottom of what happened and why it happened.
There's also another disturbing pattern, namely, about how this Administration responded to those who challenged its assertions. Often this Administration has actively sought to attack and undercut those who dared to raise questions about its preferred course. For example, when General Shinseki indicated several hundred thousand troops would be needed in Iraq, his military career was ended -- fired, relieved of duty when he out its inspectors.
When Nobel prize winner and head of the IAEA raised questions about the Administration's claims of Saddam's nuclear capabilities, the Administration attempted to remove him from his post.
When ambassador Joe Wilson stated that there was an attempt by Saddam -- no attempt by Saddam to acquire weapons from Niger, the Administration not only went after him to discredit him, they launched a vicious and coordinated campaign, going so far as to expose the fact that his wife worked as a C.I.A. spy.
These people are now having 24-hour protection fearing for their own safety.
Given this Administration's pattern of squashing those who challenge its misstatements, and I've only mentioned a few, what has been the response of the Republican-controlled Congress?
Absolutely nothing. And where with their inactions they provide political cover for this Administration at the same time they keep the truth from our troops who continue to make large sacrifices in Iraq. Now everyone may think that the troops in Iraq are 100% Republican.
I've made a friend. He's a Marine. He was over in Iraq when the elections were held ten months ago. He said where he was and he never even went to the bathroom without a rifle, wherever he was in his duty all over this area, he said he couldn't find anyone that was happy with the way the elections turned out.
They, the Republicans, do anything they can to keep the truth from people like my Marine friend. This behavior -- I would give you his name -- this behavior is unacceptable. The toll in Iraq is as staggering as it is solemn. More than 2,000 -- 2,025 now -- Americans have lost their lives. Over 90 Americans have paid the ultimate sacrifice in the month of October alone, the fourth deadliest month in this going-on-three-year war. More than 15,000 have been wounded. More than 150,000 remain over there in harm's way. Enormous sacrifices have been made and continue to be made.
Mr. President, we've had soldiers and Marines from Nevada killed, from Eli, from Las Vegas, from Henderson, from Boulder City, from Tonapaw. Every time one of these deaths occur, it's a dagger in the heart of that community. This behavior is unacceptable.
I'm a patient man, Mr. President. I'm a legislator and I know things don't happen over night. I'm a patient man but the call from my son has put this in perspective. I'm worried about my family. The toll in Iraq is as staggering as, I repeat, it is solemn.
The troops have a right to expect answers and accountability worthy of that sacrifice. For example, more than 40 Democrats wrote a substantive and detailed letter to the President canning -- asking four basic questions about this Administration's Iraq policy, and we received, Mr. President, -- we received a four-sentence fence that is response:
"Thank you for your letter to the President expressing your concerns with Iraq. I've shared your letter with the appropriate Administration officials."--Remember we wrote it to the President --
"and agencies responsible in this area. Please be assured your letter is receiving the attention it deserves. Thank you for your compliments, Candy Wolf."
That's the letter the Senators of the United States wrote to the President of the its body and we get a letter from Candy Wolf saying,
“Thanks, we're working on it.”
~~How did the Bush Administration assemble its case for war against Iraq? We heard what Colonel Wilkerson said.
~~Who did the Bush Administration officials listen to and ignore?
How did the senior Bush Administration officials manipulate or manufacture Intelligence presented to the Congress or the American people?
~~What was the role of the White House Iraq Group, a group of senior White House officials, tasked with marketing the war and taking down its critics? We know what Colonel Wilkerson says.
~~How did the Administration coordinate its efforts to attack individuals who dared to challenge the Administration's assertions? We know what happened to them. I listed a few.
~~Why has this Administration failed to provide Congress with the documents that would shed light on their misconduct and the misstatements?
Unfortunately, the Senate Committee that should be taking the lead in providing these answers is not.
Despite the fact that the Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee publicly committed to examine these questions more than a year and a half ago, he has chosen not to keep that commitment.
Despite the fact that he's restated the commitment earlier this year on national television, he has still done nothing except assemble a few quotes from Democratic and Republican Senators going back to the first Iraq war.
We need a thorough investigation that that Committee is capable and tasked to do. At this point, we can only conclude he will continue to put politics ahead of our national security. If he does anything at this point, I suspect it will be playing political games by producing an analysis that files any of these important questions.
Instead, if history is any guide, this analysis will attempt to disperse and deflect blame away from this Administration. Key facts about the Intelligence --
a Senator: Would the Senator yield for a question.
Mr. Reid:
February 12, 2004, Intelligence Committee commits to Phase 2, an investigation looking at five areas including whether the Administration exaggerate and manipulated [unintelligible].
July 9, 2004, Committee publishes phase one report on the Intelligence agencies mistakes on Iraq. Senator Rockefeller says publicly that phase two is as yet unbegun. Republican Chairman Roberts says it is one of my top priorities.
July 11 on Meet the Press, Republican Chairman Roberts says, “Even as I'm speaking our staff is working on phase two and we'll get it done.”
Fall of 2004, House Intelligence Committee, after no follow through on the Iraq w.m.d. Investigation, the House announced on May 2003, “No final report.”
Republican Committee Chairman Peter Goss is selected to C.I.A. Director. Regarding the question of vetting the Valerie Plame leak, Goss said,
“Show me a blue dress and some DNA and I'll give you an investigation.”
End of quote.
November, 2004, we had the Presidential election.
March 2005, President's hand-picked w.m.d. Intelligence Committee says the Intelligence agencies got the Intelligence dead wrong, but says that under the President's terms of reference we are not authorized to investigate how policy-makers used the Intelligence assessments they received from the Intelligence community.
March 31, 2005, Senator Roberts says it would be monumental waste of time to replow this ground any further replow
April 10, 2005, "Meet the Press" Senator Roberts commits to Tim Russert that the review will get done.
September 2005, Committee Democrats file additional views to their authorization bill blasting the Committee for failing to conduct phase two. There have been letters written to the Committee, a press release was issued even saying that they were going to go forward with this. Mr. President, enough Time has gone by. I demand on behalf of the America people that we understand why these investigations aren't being conducted, and in accordance with rule 21, i now move that senate go into closed session.
Mr. Durbin: Mr. President, I second the motion.
The presiding officer: The motion has been made to closed session. The chair pursuant to rule 21 directs the sergeant at arms to clear all galleries, clear all doors of the Senate Chamber and exclude from the chamber and its immediate corridors all employees and officials of this senate who under the rule are not eligible to attend the closed session and are not sworn to secrecy. The question is nondebatable.
WTF??????
Anyone want to take a shot at what this truly bizarre statement means, signifies, or a guess as to why Searchlight would say it?
Reid excerpt...
There are numerous examples of how the Administration misstated and manipulated the facts as it made the case for war. The Administration’s statements on Saddam's alleged nuclear weapons capabilities and ties with Al Qaeda represent the best examples how it consistently and repeatedly manipulated the facts. The America people were warned time and time again by the President, the Vice President, the current Secretary of State and their other capacities about Saddam's nuclear weapons capabilities. The Vice President said -- and I quote --
"Iraq has reconstituted its nuclear programs,"
Playing upon the fears of Americas after September 11, these officials and others raised the specter that left unchecked, Saddam could soon attack America with nuclear weapons.
Obviously we know now that their nuclear claims were wholly inaccurate. But more troubling is the fact that a lot of Intelligence experts were telling the Administration then that its claims about Saddam's nuclear capabilities were false. The situation is very similar with respect to Saddam's links to Al Qaeda. The Vice President told the America people -- I quote again –
"...we know he's out trying once again to produce nuclear weapons and we know he has a long-standing relationship with various terrorist groups, including the al qaeda organization."
These assertions have been totally discredited, not a little bit, totally discredited. But again, the Administration went ahead with these assertions in spite of the fact that the government's top experts did not agree with these claims.
THESE ALLEGATIONS BY REID ARE BALDERDASH AND NEED TO BE FORCEFULLY REBUTTED BY THE ADMINISTRATION. THE LIBERALS HAVE GOT AWAY WITH THESE LIES TOO LONG:
1. we found WMDs (just not stockpiles)
2. AQ and Saddam were very linked (just not 9-11)
3. Clinton and most of the Dem leadership is on record re: the threat posed by Saddam
4. They voted for the Iraq War
What a tool.
It would be so easy for the president or Vice President or Secretary of State or Defense to say any one of those things.
He starts out with gas prices being too high, for which his solution is to evicerate the US presence in the MidEast and turn Iraq over to Al Queda. Brilliant.
Peach has an excellent rubuttal of all that, that I've bookmarked on my homepage links. Here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1513665/posts#2
Oh, and you're absolutely right.
"Republican Committee Chairman Peter Goss is selected to C.I.A. Director. Regarding the question of vetting the Valerie Plame leak, Goss said,
“Show me a blue dress and some DNA and I'll give you an investigation.”
End of quote. "
Well said, Porter Goss!
Thanks for remembering that list, Freedom Poster. When I heard Dick Durban (traitor) say yesterday there was no connection between AQ and Iraq, I thought, well now the Republicans will counter that particular lie.
1. Remind the left that every single Democrat of note said in 1998 that Iraq's WMD posed a danger to the United States.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/972389/posts
2. Remind the left that Clinton's Justice Department obtained a federal indictment of Osama bin Laden which stated that AQ had a deal with Iraq. They agreed not to attack Iraq in exchange for weapons development.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/985906/posts
3. 9/11 Commission reaffirms Bush administration view of Iraq/AQ ties.
June 21, 2004. RNC.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1157478/posts
4. Long List of Clinton Administration Officials who Believed There was an AQ/Iraq connection.
July 12, 2004. NewsMax.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1169397/posts
5. List of CIA and various Reports regarding Iraq's support for terrorists, terrorism and AQ.
September 16, 2004. The Weekly Standard.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/631slkle.asp
6. Osama bin Laden was considered an Iraqi Intelligence asset.
October 14, 2004. National Review.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1246505/posts
Funny how in the 90's the world was concerned about the growing relationship between OBL and Saddam and now the left is revising history.
Saddam reaching out to OBL
January 1, 1999. Newsweek
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1158277/posts
ABC news reports on the Osama/Saddam connections
January 14, 1999. ABC News
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1229608/posts?page=1
Osama and Saddam Work Together
January 27, 1999. Laurie Mylroie interview. She is a former Clinton terrorism czar.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1158482/posts
A Much Shunned Terrorist Takes Refuge In Iraq (Abu Nidal)
New York Times. January 1999.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1433610/posts
Western Nightmare: Saddam and OBL versus the World. Iraq recruited OBL.
February 6, 1999. The Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/alqaida/story/0,12469,798270,00.html
Saddam's Link to OBL
February 6, 1999. The Guardian
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/866105/posts
Saddam offered asylum to bin Laden
February 13, 1999. AP
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1158274/posts
Son of Saddam coordinates with OBL.
Iraqi Special Ops coordinates with Bin Laden's terrorist activities.
August 6, 1999. Yossef Bodansky, National Press Club
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/951911/posts
That and more here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1327993/posts?page=184#184
Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
Just Harry spouting the SOS-----Same old S---.
Reid is playing pure politics on this and the very nature of the attack on the WH AND the WOT, his characterization of the deficiencies of the Bush Administration is tacit testament to the fact that the Dems don't "get it" and are desperate for attention.
I think that as soon as the average Dem dim bulb understands that the same intelligence that Bush used to justify the war in Iraq was the same intelligence touted by President Bubba, Senator Teddy (*hick*)"The Tubinator" Kennedy, Senator John F'n "Did You Know I Was In Vietnam?" Kerry, Senator Barbara "I've Got An Assualt Weapon And You Don't" Boxer and others on the extreme left, they may demand that the Dems stop the showboating (ok, that's wishful thinking on MY part). These people are so despicably dishonest and morally repugnant as to offend the senses to merely say their name.
However, what rankles me above the political circus in Washington is that we, the taxpayers, are paying for this nonsense. I think we are owed a refund on our money. We sent these people to Washington to address and resolve the issues of the United States of America, NOT to engage in politcal theatrics.
There is, however, a simple cure for this problem (besides completely voting the Dems out of every political office possible): Given the advanced communications technologies available today, there really is no need for them to gather in Washington to play up to the cameras on our dime. Keep'em home, make them live where their constituents live, make them more accessible to their constituents and reduce their collective "face time" meeting on Capitol Hill to less than two months per year. Perhaps living among their constituents 90% of the year will force them to focus on the issues most important to the country and substantially reduce the political theater.
Frankly, for my money (and they get a lot of it!) if they have nothing better to do than engage in these little partisan circus attractions, send'em home and reduce the amount they force us to over pay them.
This speech and the juvenile stunt which accompanies it can be equated with the wails of a drowning man, coming up for the third time, arms flailing, gulping for air; he exhibits the desperation and exasperation at the sure knowledge that he will soon be consumed by the deep.
I hope yesterday was the "9-11 wakeup call" to the Administration and the GOP leadership that the Rats are not worried about taking the country down the tubes if that is what it will take to keep them in power, the time has come to expose their continuous lies and destroy them.
Repeating lies doesn't make it turn into the truth!
Wilson told the 911 commission an Iraqi delegation met with Niger officials in 1999, I believe, to discuss 'business'.
Anyone here ever been to Searchlight?
What a joke..its a ghost town. There wouldnt be a dam thing there if it wasnt for cusinos..and there is where Harry the Canary got his start. He's a mob guy and got where he is from mob support.
It just makes the lies seem like the truth to an important percentage of the population who can't understand why you wouldn't defend yourself when the lies are repeated OVER and OVER and OVER and...
President Bush needs to go on the offensive to shut this thing down. The Senate Minority leader is a big enough target that a forceful response is required to point out the LIES in the Reid speech on the Senate floor.
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.