Skip to comments.Roberts Rakes Rockefeller
Posted on 12/20/2005 10:58:25 AM PST by slowhand520
Roberts Rakes Rockefeller - Tuesday, December 20, 2005 @ 12:53:30 PM
Yesterday, Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), co-chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee (and probable source of many leaks of secret information) released a hand-scrawled letter he had written to VP Cheney two years ago after being briefed on the NSA domestic intel effort. Rockefeller, trying to score political points, raised the letter as proof of his doubts about the NSA program, and that his hands were tied, unable to do anything about it. This morning, Intel Committee Chair Pat Roberts (R-KS) released this statement which blows Rockefeller out of the water:
"I am puzzled by the release yesterday of a July 2003 letter from Senator Rockefeller to the Vice President regarding the recently exposed intelligence collection program, which was authorized by the President shortly after September 11, 2001.
In his letter and accompanying press statement, Senator Rockefeller asserts that he had lingering concerns about the program designed to protect the American people from another attack, but was prohibited from doing anything about it.
A United States Senator has significant tools with which to wield power and influence over the executive branch. Feigning helplessness is not one of those tools.
If Senator Rockefeller truly had the concerns he claimed to have had in his two and a half year old letter, he could have pursued a number of options to have those concerns addressed:
1. First, he could have discussed his concerns with me or other Members of Congress who had been briefed on the program. He never asked me or the Committee to take any action consistent with the concerns raised in his letter.
2. Second, he could have raised objections with the Vice President during one of the many briefings we received. I have no recollection of Senator Rockefeller objecting to the program at the many briefings he and I attended together. In fact, it is my recollection that on many occasions Senator Rockefeller expressed to the Vice President his vocal support for the program. His most recent expression of support was only two weeks ago.
3. Finally, he could have pursued any number of legislative remedies. He chose to pursue none.
Senator Rockefeller could have taken any of these approaches to adress his lingering concerns. He did not. He chose instead to write a letter to the Vice President and for two and a half years, keep a copy of the letter in the Intelligence Committee vault and say nothing to anyone.
For the nearly three years Senator Rockefeller has served as Vice Chairman, I have heard no objection from him about this valuable program. Now, when it appears to be politically advantageous, Senator Rockefeller has chosen to release his two and a half year old letter. Forgive me if I find this to be inconsistent and a bit disingenuous.
So do we, Sen. Roberts. So do we.
Posted By: Jed Babbin
I suppose Rockefeller was too petrified to use a typewriter to write this note. ;-)
1) He never sent the letter.
2) He Just wrote it a few days ago.
3) He sent it, but made no effort to make sure it got special notice. If this last scenario is accurate, it was plotted 2-3 years in advance.
Any could be true.
What is key, though, is that Roberts states Rockefeller praised the program only two weeks ago. That nukes the letter, real, plotted or imagined.
As I have always said, Jay Rockefeller is dumber than West Virginia coal bucket.
I think its the wrong press release, sorry.
I think its the wrong press release, sorry.
Use a bat with a lead bar core too. Make Murtha, Schumer,Pelosi, Leahy and Kerry watch and assure them their fate will be the same. There will be no more leaks.
Covering the bases?
Good luck. :-)
You might even call Senator Robert's office to verify as well. They may have a link to a documented source on their own hard drives.
Side by side to Robert's statement is Stevens playing hardball with Dems/McCain/RINO's over ANWR. It is pretty amazing, isn't it? I'm a bit pleased with them today. It's an unusual condition. LOL
And on a side note, it must be fact because the WP says it is. Could that story be more emotional and sympathetic? Good Lord, it's so obvious that it is an insult to the itelligence of the reader.
I am going to wait until I get Alan Colmes and Juan Williams analysis of this story. (/off)
I'm more convinced today than ever that he is the mole who blabbed to the NYslimes. He should be removed from the committee post-haste. If I remember correctly added to the secret communication from his staff to undermine the President before the '04 election?
I really need to preview, geez.
Sensitive is right. It's probably not good to let your staffers know that you can't tie your own shoes without their help. Poor Rock-head-fellar.
What a big old steaming pile of ....
The Washington Post article also said, "...In hindsight, the letter seemed a rejoinder to President Bush's assertions that key congressional leaders were adequately briefed on the expanded NSA program and to his intimation that they did not seriously object."
The last paragraph of that article is the kicker. Bush has been vindicated from these charges that the Democrats say all this stuff has been done under total secrecy. Which is untrue. Both Republicans and Democrats have been briefed on a regular and routine basis since day one of his administration.
One would assume.....under any circumstances...that he would want to get his reservations "on the record".
I noticed something in the letter where it begins "I am retaining this copy" (or something like that) .....etc.. The "I" is different from all others (I think). That would make me think he stopped...and began again and that this was done under duress. I think someone in his own party has something on him.....like maybe a woman in a stinkn' pantsuit.
I hope someone will post the letter again.
thank you.....I asked not because I question validity, but am curious to see if this is only a portion of what Roberts stated, if there was anything else mentioned in the release.
Rockefeller probably hasn't gone near one since Manuel Miranda found his other memos.
"Good to see some Pubbies playing hard ball for a change."
Not hard enough. When are they going to stand up and start calling these RAT politicians what they really are --TRAITORS -- and call for THEIR resignations, impeachment, censure, etc. like the RATs are doing to President Bush??!!
Senator Roberts sounds like he has had enough of Democrats showboating for the cameras. I wish Frist would get the message.
It's starting to resemble Foster.....
He's Vice Chairman...not Co-Chairman. He shouldn't even have that distinction.
Frist has been very disappointing as leader. The Republicans, under his leadership are squandering the majority. We may lose this opportunity and not get it back for a while.
Is McCain opposing ANWR? Last I heard, he was for it.
They were adequately briefed. Rockfellar was too damn dumb to understand what he was being told and did absolutely nothing to fix that position. As for not seriously objecting. Yeah whatever, if you call someone who complains that they don't have a clue about what they were just briefed on, objecting.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - December 13, 2005
CONTACT: Sarah Ross Little(202) 224-4774
I have just been made aware of a letter sent to the Republican Leader and Assistant Leader signed by the Democrat Leader and Assistant Leader.
The letter is basically a partisan allegation about Phase II of the Intelligence Committees Review of Pre War Intelligence on Iraq. It alleges incorrectly that critical questions remain about the committees progress on its investigation, its timeline for completing that investigation, and what remaining steps need to be taken to ensure a prompt, thorough, and complete review.
As an ex officio member of the Committee, Senator Reid is welcome to participate in any Committee activity including Phase II. He has yet to do so.
If the Democrat Leader has critical questions he should pick up the phone and call me, or better yet, attend the business meeting scheduled for this Thursday when we will discuss all facets of our progress on Phase II. I think he would be pleasantly surprised.
It is the Democrats who have sought to undermine our effort in Iraq by continually questioning the wisdom of of initiating that enterprise and falsely claiming that the President lied.
Democrats sought to weaken the President by claiming that the Afghan campaign was a quagmire until even they could no longer do so with a straight face.
Democrats in the Clinton administration believed our conflict with violent Islamic fundamentalism was a law enforcement matter and so erected the Gorelick Wall between the Justice Department (including the FBI) and other national security agencies and refused Sudan's offer to turn over bin Laden.
Democrats in the media have, for partisan purposes, sought to weaken our will to continue our effort in Iraq by the most one-sided coverage of any event that I can recall.
Democrats hurt our efforts throughout the Islamic world by continually harping on the isolated and insignificant abuses at Abu Ghraib long after the Army had taken steps to remedy them. And they did so for partisan purposes.
Howard Dean, presumably speaking for most Democrats, has emboldened our enemies by falsely claiming that we have lost in Iraq.
Many other Democrats, including the leader of the Democrats in the House, have lent comfort to our enemies by demanding a timetable for surrender . . . er, I mean withdrawal from Iraq.
Democrats turned the 9-11 Commission hearings into a partisan witch hunt against the Bush Administration.
Democrats advocated that the protections of the Geneva Convention be extended to terrorists in American custody, even though the Convention by its terms specifically excludes nonuniformed, stateless combatants.
Democrats have advocated that terrorists in American custody be treated as criminal defendants, rather than as prisoners of war.
Democrats and some Republicans would grant prisoners of the war on terror access to American courts to challenge the circumstances of their captivity and interrogation.
Democrats disclosed the existence of CIA detention facilities in foreign countries.
Democrats, in the words of Harry Reid, "killed the Patriot Act."
And now Democrats attack the President and speak of impeachment because of the NSA surveillance program the existence of which was leaked presumably by a Democrat.
Democrats leaked the information that we could intercept bin Laden's satellite telephone calls, which caused him to stop using that phone.
Democrats gutted the ability of the CIA to collect human intelligence and now seem intent on doing the same thing to the ability of the NSA to collect signals intelligence.
In short, for partisan purposes the Democrats have opposed and sought to undermine pretty much everything the administration as tried to do in the war on violent Islamic fundamentalism.
I have two questions for the Democrats:
1. Which side are you on, boys, which side are you on?
2. Why should the Democrats ever again be trusted with the national security of the United States?
I don't think he was necessarily dumb. Partisan? Absolutely.
You are so busted, Senator.
My belief is that all of these things are building momentum for Impeachment proceedings. They are trying to gather ammo and will eventually call for impeachment.
Good luck with that, dimwits.
That's the whole thing in a nutshell, right there, isn't it?
Where did you hear that?
To my knowledge he's been against it consistently.
Yes, he's opposing ANWR and whining to the press that he dislikes the tactics of Stevens to impose ANWR on him. Even though Stevens merely copied mcCain's moves to get his torture bill added to the Defense Appropriations Bill.
Now Mccain is being forced to either vote down the bill funding the troops that contains his precious rights for terrorists, or vote for a bill supporting Artic Drilling that Soros will not be happy with him about. I'm enjoying McCain's predicament. I wouldn't mind a filibuster that defeated McCain's torture bill, but if it passes, we'll at least get ANWR. Either way Mccain is screwed and I love that after the way he blackmailed the President.
The question now is whether McCain wants his terrorist protections badly enough to bring the RINO's along with him to prevent a filibuster of the bill. It's quite a nice bit of side entertainment.
There's clearly a pattern, that's for sure.
I would say that the Democrats erected the wall to keep investigators from finding out the extent of Chinese campaign funding of the Clintons, and violent Islamic fundamentalism just got caught up in the wall as a side effect.
(It seems like a stupid question, but remember who we're dealing with.)
The last thing I heard, McCain was torqued at Stevens for attaching the ANWR bill to the same defense appropriations bill McCain attached his hideous torture bill (Al-Qaeda Bill Of Rights) to.
McCain has no core beliefs besides believing in himself.
Send that message to Reid and Pelosi, too!
Michael Medved is talking about this now!
Jay Rockefeller is a carpetbagging leach who decided to ride the West Virginia train to government priviledge. That is, he got on the train after his family raped the state of as much of its natural resources and exploited its citizens for all that they could.
Rockefeller is yet another politician who survives because dueling was made illegal.
That's the way I see it too. McCain was the only one really raising a ruckus, and he's been blackballed by Stevens in an effort to make McCain choose his vote wisely. Either way, as you said, McCain is screwed. But, we're also forgetting that the Democrats don't want us drilling in ANWR either, and they'll be forced to vote the entire bill down.