|
 Catalysis
EtherealEngineer
Registered: 04/23/02
Posts: 1,742
Last seen: 15 years, 9 months
|
 The Rockefeller Memo 
#5090680 - 12/21/05 04:58 PM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Does anyone remember this leaked memo? Do you think they have finally "pulled the trigger"? Rockefeller says it can only be done once so I am wondering if the latest political workup is a part of this plan.
Furthermore, do you think it is possible that Rockefeller is the leak on the security council?
Rockefeller Memo
We have carefully reviewed our options under the rules and believe we have identified the best approach. Our plan is as follows:
1) Pull the majority along as far as we can on issues that may lead to major new disclosures regarding improper or questionable conduct by administration officials. We are having some success in that regard.
For example, in addition to the President's State of the Union speech, the chairman [Sen. Pat Roberts] has agreed to look at the activities of the office of the Secretary of Defense, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, as well as Secretary Bolton's office at the State Department.
The fact that the chairman supports our investigations into these offices and cosigns our requests for information is helpful and potentially crucial. We don't know what we will find but our prospects for getting the access we seek is far greater when we have the backing of the majority. [We can verbally mention some of the intriguing leads we are pursuing.]
2) Assiduously prepare Democratic 'additional views' to attach to any interim or final reports the committee may release. Committee rules provide this opportunity and we intend to take full advantage of it.
In that regard we may have already compiled all the public statements on Iraq made by senior administration officials. We will identify the most exaggerated claims. We will contrast them with the intelligence estimates that have since been declassified. Our additional views will also, among other things, castigate the majority for seeking to limit the scope of the inquiry.
The Democrats will then be in a strong position to reopen the question of establishing an Independent Commission [i.e., the Corzine Amendment.]
3) Prepare to launch an independent investigation when it becomes clear we have exhausted the opportunity to usefully collaborate with the majority. We can pull the trigger on an independent investigation of the administration's use of intelligence at any time. But we can only do so once.
The best time to do so will probably be next year, either:
A) After we have already released our additional views on an interim report, thereby providing as many as three opportunities to make our case to the public. Additional views on the interim report (1). The announcement of our independent investigation (2). And (3) additional views on the final investigation. Or:
B) Once we identify solid leads the majority does not want to pursue, we would attract more coverage and have greater credibility in that context than one in which we simply launch an independent investigation based on principled but vague notions regarding the use of intelligence.
In the meantime, even without a specifically authorized independent investigation, we continue to act independently when we encounter footdragging on the part of the majority. For example, the FBI Niger investigation was done solely at the request of the vice chairman. We have independently submitted written requests to the DOD and we are preparing further independent requests for information.
SUMMARY: Intelligence issues are clearly secondary to the public's concern regarding the insurgency in Iraq. Yet we have an important role to play in revealing the misleading, if not flagrantly dishonest, methods and motives of senior administration officials who made the case for unilateral preemptive war.
The approach outlined above seems to offer the best prospect for exposing the administration's dubious motives.
|
kotik
fuckingsuperhero
Registered: 06/29/04
Posts: 3,531
Last seen: 4 years, 3 months
|
Re: The Rockefeller Memo [Re: Catalysis]
#5092936 - 12/22/05 07:38 AM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
all of those for examples seem a little over the top
--------------------
No statements made in any post or message by myself should be construed to mean that I am now, or have ever been, participating in or considering participation in any activities in violation of any local, state, or federal laws. All posts are works of fiction.
|
Catalysis
EtherealEngineer
Registered: 04/23/02
Posts: 1,742
Last seen: 15 years, 9 months
|
Re: The Rockefeller Memo [Re: kotik]
#5094767 - 12/22/05 05:19 PM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
kotik said:
all of those for examples seem a little over the top
What do you mean? This was a memo written by Rockefeller (D-WVa) shortly before the 2004 elections outlining the democrat's strategy for the next year.
|
kotik
fuckingsuperhero
Registered: 06/29/04
Posts: 3,531
Last seen: 4 years, 3 months
|
Re: The Rockefeller Memo [Re: Catalysis]
#5097043 - 12/23/05 06:59 AM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
not debating its authenticity, its just odd to me that these politicians would not be able to figure out the meaning on their own, and would require an example for each step, much like a 6th grade algebra test.
--------------------
No statements made in any post or message by myself should be construed to mean that I am now, or have ever been, participating in or considering participation in any activities in violation of any local, state, or federal laws. All posts are works of fiction.
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Edit 
Reply 
exclusive58
1 2 all )
Xochitl
ekomstop
usefulidiot
lonestar2004
monoamine
Learyfan
