Posted on 11/19/2007 7:23:36 AM PST by stevie_d_64
WASHINGTON - Fran Townsend, the leading White House-based terrorism adviser who gave public updates on the extent of the threat to U.S. security, is stepping down after 4 1/2 years.
President Bush said in a statement Monday morning that Townsend, 45, "has ably guided the Homeland Security Council. She has played an integral role in the formation of the key strategies and policies my administration has used to combat terror and protect Americans."
Her departure continues an exodus of key Bush aides and confidants, with his two-term presidency in the final 15 months. Top aide Karl Rove, along with press secretary Tony Snow and senior presidential adviser Dan Bartlett, left earlier this year.
Bush in his statement early Monday noted that Townsend had served in the position for more than 4 1/2 years.
"Fran always has provided wise counsel on how best to protect the American people from the threat of terrorism," the president said. "She has been a steady leader in the effort to prevent and disrupt attacks and to better respond to natural disasters."
In her resignation to Bush, Townsend indicating she was returning to the private sector, saying in a handwritten letter, "As you know, it is with a profound sense of gratitude that I have decided to take a respite from public service."
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
I think Fran Townsend is a DEMOCRAT.
Of course not. A basic, fundamental problem with our government today.
Stating the obvious, no entitlement programs have been left to die either.
I’m not gonna say it...
Brilliant! Steve Emerson would be another.
All the rats are deserting the ship..........NOT!
The fact is that with the Surge having worked, its a slack time, and a good time for a changing of the guard.
And what do you think the departed are doing? ( workin on campaigns and fund raising)
Smart planning is not something the liberal socialist press recognizes very easily.
Let them keep on, until we have, " We can't believe it, the Pubbies won again!"
I’ll second that.
I read her background and I wonder why she isn’t running for office. She’s a wonderful person and I bet a wonderful mother.
Clinton administration holdover?
Not really. She was essentially the founder / creator and administrator of the Office of International Programs and probably the only expert on international crime law in DOJ when Reno was there, so she was dort of a holdover from GHW Bush administration. There is a reason why she was considered “controlversial” when she was there and why she was “promoted” by Reno from the department that was her creation, just around the time when Levinski scandal was getting hot.
http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/1998/March/092.htm.html
Her political donations history:
http://www.newsmeat.com/fec/bystate_detail.php?st=FL&last=Townsend&first=Frances
http://www.newsmeat.com/fec/bystate_detail.php?st=DC&last=Townsend&first=Frances
Can someone explain to me why when someone resigns from the Bush administration it makes the headlines and when someone from the Clinton administration turned up dead somewhere, it never made the news??
/ultra mega sarc
Now we only have Dana to look at.....
assistant district attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y., 1985-1988.
fur shure !
from your interesting post:
“Columnist Robert D. Novak wrote that Reno’s onetime protege could turn out to be an “enemy within.””
I too do not trust her and some others hanging around the WH. These people are not fully aware of the dangers to this nation.
> I do not believe a Fed. Department has ever been abolished.
The Cabinet positions of the Navy, and the Postmaster General, were removed. The current single Cabinet position of HEW used to be two; Education and HHS.
None of these decisions actually removed the department they represented, of course.
I read this as gettin while the gettin is good ...........;o)
2nd Amendment......the original homeland security !
Please, read the post #48. She was not particularly close to Reno or her “protege”, and she was “reassigned” in 1998 by Reno from department she created, when things got hot in DC around “Lewinsky scandal”.
As we know Jamie Gorelick, who was her superior, instituted and enforced the policies of “The Wall”. All I see in the link is that she “has been criticized by several” former Reno associates (mostly, by Mark Flessner) who tried to shift the blame on Townsend for mistakes in that case. Why should we believe them, when she denies making a statement, and that’s the only thing that they can hang on her? That’s pretty thin. Townsend was not in charge of the FBI during investigations.
BTW, if you notice, the investigations and prosecutions that are described in Tribune all happened in Chicago, (as mentioned in the article, only one of several cases that “fell apart”) all were handled by none other than Patrick Fitzgerald of “Plamegate investigation”. Mark Flessner was Assistant US Attorney and in charge of Vulgar Betrayal case, Patrick Fitzgerald was (and still is) US Attorney in the Chicago area.
Here’s the full story, from which snippets, critical of Townsend were taken:
“At a news conference in Chicago, U.S. Atty. Patrick Fitzgerald declined to comment on why the investigation took so long or whether charges could have been filed years ago.
“We’re not going to comment on the autobiography of the investigation,” said Fitzgerald, who came to Chicago shortly before the Sept. 11 attacks. “I’m not going to address hypotheticals in the past.”
Mostly, at DoJ, Townsend was outside of general Reno’s DoJ domestic-related activities, particularly not related to foreign intelligence which were constrained by the Gorelick’s “Wall”. She didn’t run FBI or supervised these investigations, so it sounds like a case of someone trying to find a Republican scapegoat for their own failures.
Ditto and nothing more.
Fair enough.
But if you are interested to see a bit more about what was going on in Chicago at the time (and with connection to New York, and Fitzgerald’s tenure there as well) here is a pretty good resource with timeline. Keep in mind, the site leans left and it shows, which you will see immediately, and littered with references to Tribune, NY Times and Washington Post and their “unnamed sources”, but that’s even more instructive and better testimonial as the only “case” against Townsend are Mark Flessner’s claims - even though it’s not backed up by anything in the text, and specifically contradicts earlier references (by Flessner himself and his partners at Chicago FBI office) that their efforts were hampered by higher-ups at FBI and federal judges, and had nothing to do with Townsend.
Also, what some members of Chicago group were doing and what it had done to their “investigations” in Chicago (apparently the beginnings of “Fitzgerald’s school of investigations”), which is why Fitzgerald is having so much trouble convicting people on main charges, at best “getting” them mostly on obstruction of justice (sounds familiar?). And why Clinton’s “efforts” against bin Laden “fizzled”.
FISA, “Wall” and its history [somewhat embellished, to protect Gorelick et al] and exception for US Attorney of Southern New York Mary Jo White’s office, Squad I-49 (Fitzgerald), Alec Station (CIA), Wilson’s trip are also discussed (again, keep in mind the sympathies of the site).
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?entity=us_department_of_justice
Can search the page using “Flessner”, “Vulgar Betrayal”, “Wright”, “Townsend”, “Fitzgerald” etc., but it really is better to read sequentially.
Enjoy!
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.