Posted on 10/01/2007 8:38:34 AM PDT by Dukes Travels
Lincoln Chafee, the man who less than a year ago served as the Republican Senator from Rhode Island, is apparently no longer a Republican today. That’s right, he recently dropped his affiliation with the party to become an independent. “It’s not my party anymore,” he says.
“Anymore?” When exactly was it ever your party?
It is extremely tempting to point at Chafee’s official change of affiliation and remind President Bush, Karl Rove and the rest of the Republican establishment just how wrong they were. You see, although they all knew how liberal Chafee was, they poured money, effort and endorsements into his 2006 primary election against a true conservative, Cranston Mayor Steve Laffey.
Chafee won the primary, but lost the general election to the Democrats anyway. After his November loss, conservative voices aimed a collective “I told you so” at the Republican establishment that betrayed principle for supposed electability. And now, Chafee’s not even a registered Republican. So here comes “I told you so,” Part 2.
(Excerpt) Read more at northstarwriters.com ...
I didn’t say it was a win.
We punished a traitor. Best we could do.
No RI senator or congresscreep will ever score less than a hundred per cent commie until after the next war.
although they all knew how liberal Chafee was, they poured money, effort and endorsements into his 2006 primary election against a true conservative, Cranston Mayor Steve Laffey.
***Sounds like a lot of the RINOs in charge today, carrying water for aRINOld and even tootyFruityRudy.
OK...so when will you start looking back fondly (well,*kind* of fondly at least) to the day when one of your Senators only got an 80% rating from that Communist organization? I'll tell you that I'd sell my soul to have even one of our twelve "representatives" in DC have a rating of less than 100% from them.
Chafee lost the 20% from them simply because he called himself a republican.
When he finds his way back into office he’ll get a hundred because he’ll be a damnocrat.
The 20% is a meaningless number.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1815832/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1815111/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1902842/posts
Nope,wrong.The ratings were based on how a Senator voted on 20 different bills.Chafee voted with the Communists at the ADA on 16 out of 20 votes...thus the 80% rating.Landrieu (RAT-LA) got 13 out of 20....65%.Clinton (RAT-Ft Marcey Park) got 19 out of 20....95%.Bayh (RAT-IN) got 17 out of 20....85%.
RNC is indeed BFU. Tried to hit me up for $ today too. This is exactly why we give to individual candidates...not the Party machinery controlled by W and his RINO minions.
RNC is indeed BFU. Tried to hit me up for $ today too. This is exactly why we give to individual candidates...not the Party machinery controlled by W and his RINO minions.
You may be the first person on FR to post a Linc Link.
Chafee is a member of Fred’s Council, along with Jack Reed.
Laffey was not.
I’m sure Whitehouse has been brought aboard.
"There are a lot of reasons I support Linc. We agree on most issues, disagree on some...In the kind of times we live in, we need people of integrity who do what they think is right. I served with Linc's father who, as far as I was concerned, was the most respected man in the Senate, and Linc is in the same tradition."Yes, thanks a lot Fred!
- Fred Thompson, April 2006
With friends like you...who needs enemies?
It's pretty clear from my view here in California. :-(
“When it comes to personal courage and integrity, and the courage to do what he thinks is right, regardless whether or not it is particularly popular at the moment, John McCain has shown the characteristics of leadership like no one else I’ve ever seen.”
– Fred Thompson, August 1999
– Fred Thompson, August 1999<<<
Like selling out our military?
---------------------------------------------------------
May 3, 1992
Memorandum for: Vice Chairman, Senate Select Committee on Prisoners of War and Missing in Action
From: John F. McCreary
Subject: Possible Violations of Title 18, U.S.C., Section 2071, by the Select Committee and Possible Ethical Misconduct by Staff Attorneys.
1. Continuing analysis of relevant laws and further review of the events between 8 April and 16 April 1992 connected with the destruction of the Investigators' Intelligence Briefing Text strongly indicate that the order to destroy all copies of that briefing text on 9 April and the actual destruction of copies of the briefing texts plus the purging of computer files might constitute violations of Title 18, U.S.C., Section 2071, which imposes criminal penalties for unlawful document destruction. Even absent a finding of criminal misconduct, statements, actions, and failures to act by the senior Staff attorneys following the 9 April briefing might constitute serious breaches of ethical standards of conduct for attorneys, in addition to violations of Senate and Select Committee rules. The potential consequences of these possible misdeeds are such that they should be brought to the attention of all members of the Select Committee, plus all Designees and Staff members who were present at the 9 April briefing.
2. The relevant section of Title 18, U.S.C., states in pertinent part: Section 2071. Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally (a) Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined not more than $2,000 or imprisoned not more than three years, or both. (June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 795)
3. The facts as the undersigned and others present at the briefing recall them are presented in the attached Memorandum for the Record. A summary of those facts - and others that have been established since that Memorandum was written - follows.
a. On 8 April 1992, the Investigators' Intelligence Briefing Text was presented to Senior Staff members and Designees for whom copies were available prior to beginning the briefing. Objections to the text by the Designees prompted the Staff Director to order all persons present to leave their copies of the briefing text in Room SRB078. Subsequent events indicated that two copies had been removed without authorization.
b. On 9 April 1992, at the beginning of the meeting of the Select Committee and prior to the scheduled investigators' briefing, Senator McCain produced a copy of the intelligence briefing text, with whose contents he strongly disagreed. He charged that the briefing text had already been leaked to a POW/MIA activist, but was reassured by the Chairman that such was not the case. He replied that he was certain it would be leaked. Whereupon, the Chairman assured Senator McCain that there would be no leaks because all copies would be gathered and destroyed, and he gave orders to that effect. No senior staff member or attorney present cautioned against a possible violation of Title 18, U.S.C., Section 2071, or of Senate or Select Committee Rules.
c. Following the briefing on 9 April, the Staff Director, Ms. Frances Zwenig, restated to the intelligence investigators the order to destroy the intelligence briefing text and took measures to ensure execution of the destruction order. (See paragraph 3 of the attachment.) During one telephone conversation with the undersigned, she stated that she was "acting under orders."
d. The undersigned also was instructed to delete all computer files, which Mr. Barry Valentine witnessed on 9 April.
e. In a meeting on 15 April 1992, the Staff's Chief Counsel, J. William Codinha, was advised by intelligence investigators of their concerns about the possibility that they had committed a crime by participating in the destruction of the briefing text. Mr. Codinha minimized the significance of the documents and of their destruction. He admonished the investigators for "making a mountain out of a molehill."
f. When investigators repeated their concern that the order to destroy the documents might lead to criminal charges, Mr. Codinha replied "Who's the injured party." He was told, "The 2,494 families of the unaccounted for US Servicemen, among others." Mr. Codinha then said, "Who's gonna tell them. It's classified." At that point the meeting erupted. The undersigned stated that the measure of merit was the law and what's right, not avoidance of getting caught. To which Mr. Codinha made no reply. At no time during the meeting did Mr. Codinha give any indication that any copies of the intelligence briefing text existed.
g. Investigators, thereupon, repeatedly requested actions by the Committee to clear them of any wrongdoing, such as provision of legal counsel. Mr. Codinha admitted that he was not familiar with the law and promised to look into it. He invited a memorandum from the investigators stating what they wanted. Given Mr. Codinha's statements and reactions to the possibility of criminal liability, the investigators concluded they must request appointment of an independent counsel. A memorandum making such a request and signed by all six intelligence investigators was delivered to Mr. Codinha on 16 April.
h. At 2130 on 16 April, the Chairman of the Senate Select Committee, convened a meeting with the intelligence investigators, who told him personally of their concern that they might have committed a crime by participating in the destruction of the briefing texts at the order of the Staff Director. Senator Kerry stated that he gave the order to destroy the documents, not the Staff Director, and that none of the Senators present at the meeting had objected. He also stated that the issue of document destruction was "moot" because the original briefing text had been deposited with the Office of Senate Security "all along." Both the Staff Director and the Chief Counsel supported this assertion by the Chairman.
i. Senator Kerry's remarks prompted follow-up investigations (See paragraphs 4 through 9 of the attachment) and inquiries that established that a copy of the text was not deposited in the Office of Senate Security until the afternoon of 16 April. The Staff Director has admitted that on the afternoon of 16 April, after receiving a copy of a memorandum from Senator Bob Smith to Senator Kerry in which Senator Smith outlined his concerns about the destruction of documents, she obtained a copy of the intelligence briefing text from the office of Senator McCain and took it to the Office of Senate Security. Office of Senate Security personnel confirmed that the Staff Director gave them an envelope, marked "Eyes Only," to be placed in her personal file. The Staff Director has admitted that the envelope contained the copy of the intelligence briefing text that she obtained from the office of Senator McCain.
3. The facts of the destruction of the intelligence briefing text would seem to fall inside the prescriptions of the Statute, Title 18, U.S.C., Section 2071, so as to justify their referral for investigation to a competent law enforcement authority. The applicability of that Statute was debated in United States v. Poindexter, D.D.C. 1989, 725 F. Supp. 13, in connection with the Iran Contra investigation. The District Court ruled, inter alia, that the National Security Council is a public office within the meaning of the Statute and, thus, that its records and documents fell within the protection of the Statute. In light of that ruling, the Statute would seem to apply to this Senate Select Committee and its Staff. The continued existence of a "bootleg" copy of the intelligence briefing text - i.e., a copy that is not one of those made by the investigators for the purpose of briefing the Select Committee - would seem to be irrelevant to the issues of intent to destroy and willfulness; as well as to the issue of responsibility for the order to destroy all copies of the briefing text, for the attempt to carry out that order, and for the destruction that actually was accomplished in execution of that order.
4. As for the issue of misconduct by Staff attorneys, all member of the Bar swear to uphold the law. That oath may be violated by acts of omission and commission. Even without a violation of the Federal criminal statute, the actions and failures to act by senior Staff attorneys in the sequence of events connected with the destruction of the briefing text might constitute violations
of ethical standards for members of the Bar and of both Senate and Select Committee rules. The statements, actions and failures to act during and after the meeting on 15 April, when the investigators gave notice of their concern about possible criminal liability for document destruction, would seem to reflect disregard for the law and for the rules of the United States Senate.
John F. McCreary
---------------------------------------------------------
About the infiltration of the RNC:
Posts start here on this thread:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1829933/posts?page=27#27
Times archives excerpt - PRE Moran - Nicholson meeting
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,985970-2,00.html
Members of Team 100, an elite group of Republicans who have given more than $100,000 to the party, received an extraordinary letter this week from John Moran, finance chairman of Bob Dole’s presidential campaign and former finance chairman of the Republican National Committee. As first reported in the Washington Post, Moran charges that the R.N.C. has been hijacked by the Christian Coalition “and others who are adamantly opposed to a moderate agenda”; that these forces (led by Coalition executive director Ralph Reed) engineered the election as R.N.C. chairman of Jim Nicholson, who “will now be beholden to the far right for their support”; and that as a result, the members of Team 100 ought to be “giving consideration to throwing our financial support to a committee or organization that has a more moderate Republican political philosophy.” Saying the Coalition is at a point where it is “exercising significant control” over the R.N.C., Moran suggests that the G.O.P.’s future “is in jeopardy.”
During this same timeframe, the Federal Election Commission was suing the Christian Coalition for illegally supporting the Republican party.
John Moran told the party’s wealthiest donors to give their money to someone else, because the Republican National Committee is under control by religious extremists.
Virginian-Pilot
DATE: Tuesday, March 4, 1997 TAG: 9703040005
SECTION: LOCAL PAGE: B11 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: FRANK RICH
DATELINE: NEW YORK LENGTH: 75 lines
SOME BIG DONORS REFUSE TO FINANCE CHRISTIAN CONSERVATIVE AGENDAA POST-ELECTION SURVEY FOUND THAT CHRISTIAN COALITION SUPPORT MADE VOTERS LESS LIKELY TO VOTE FOR DOLE-KEMP EVERYWHERE EXCEPT THE SOUTH.
Sample list of PARTY SWITCHING Nicholson had a hand in bringing over to the ‘republican’ party after the Moran meeting. These people that came in are all Log Cabin and Main Streeters.
January 20, 1999
G.O.P. Urged to Quit Group Called Racist
The chairman of the Republican National Committee called on his fellow party members today to resign from the Council of Conservative Citizens, saying ‘’it appears that this group does hold racist views.’’
‘’A member of the party of Lincoln should not belong to such an organization,’’ said the chairman, Jim Nicholson.
>>>But as long as candidates such as former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke, now campaigning for Congress in Louisiana, feel at home in the GOP, the “party of Lincoln” is going to be viewed with suspicion by minorities. <<<
http://www.lcrga.com/archive/99021401.shtml
Log Cabin Republicans, Inc.
Excerpt:
RNC Chairman Jim Nicholson insisted there is “a cause for optimism” about GOP relations with minorities. He said their “shared legacy,” dating back to the party’s founding on an anti-slavery platform in 1854, is “a foundation on which to build” better relations.
In addition, the party’s next presidential nominee could help it overcome the legacy of Nixon’s “Southern Strategy” with a more moderate message such as “compassionate conservatism,” a favorite term of Gov. George W. Bush of Texas.
But as long as candidates such as former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke, now campaigning for Congress in Louisiana, feel at home in the GOP, the “ party of Lincoln” is going to be viewed with suspicion by minorities.
(”party of Lincoln” is code for Log Cabin Republican within the LCR)
Thanks no doubt to mel martinez. Thanks, pal--for nothing.
This sums up a major part of what is wrong with the ruling elite--they act as an insiders' club against the people. Fred was just keeping his membership credentials validated.
He’s a leader alright. A real leader.
It’s that Gang of 14 mentality that is worrisome.
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.