Scott Lehigh column in BGlobe today (9/13/05)

[TayTay]

This is odd. I don't remember that letter being made public. Perhaps mymemory is faulty and someone with a better one remembers.

Lehigh Globe Story

Yes, the Senate Intelligence Committee did issue an initial report on prewar intelligence failures. The preelection agreement, however, was that after the election the committee would turn its attention to the way senior policy makers used that intelligence in the run-up to the war.

It has since become blindingly apparent that Senator Pat Roberts, the committee chairman, intends to retreat on that commitment. In a July 20 letter to US Senator John Kerry, the Kansas Republican made it clear that he doesn't see that as an important priority, and that even if his committee completes phase II, the results may not be made public.

Okay, in context. This was back in the midst of the Plame revelations of early summer. But it also harkens back to June and the Downing Street Minutes letter that Kerry sent to the Senate Intel Comm. I had no idea that Roberts had reported and said, definitely, no to Kerry.

Doies anyone have a copy of this letter from Sen. Roberts to Sen. KErry? It's very interesting and goes to the point that Rethugs refuse to provide accountability and responsibility in any actions they take.

[whometense]

1. I haven't found a copy of the letter.

Did find this Boston Globe article by Rick Klein, dated July 27, 2005.

No link, as it's a news search, but here's a bit:

. . . .Some Democrats merely want to call attention to the statements to embarrass Bush and his top aides, Roberts said, and he sees no use in treading that ground when the committee could better concentrate its resources on future threats.

"So what do you do with that?" Robers asked. "What have we gained other than the political objective of saying this administration issued the intelligence? Look in the front window. Don't look in the back and pick off somebody's comment that some senator or somebody in the administration said and say, `Gee, had that person known, he wouldn't have said that.' "

But Rockefeller and other Democrats say that differing opinions on how to handle public statements is not a legitimate reason to hold up the investigation. Senator John F. Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, said the fact that there has been no investigation of the misuse of intelligence means US policy may still be based on mistaken conclusions.

"A year and a half later, there's still no report, no conclusions, no accountability for the mistakes, and no way to be sure they won't be repeated," said Kerry. "This is just further evidence of a pattern by this White House and the Republicans in Congress to stop at nothing to discredit their critics and silence the tough questions before they get asked." . . . .

On edit: found a link to the whole article here: http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/1068

[TayTay]

2. Wow, this could be lifted verbatim and used for FEMA

"A year and a half later, there's still no report, no conclusions, no accountability for the mistakes, and no way to be sure they won't be repeated," said Kerry. "This is just further evidence of a pattern by this White House and the Republicans in Congress to stop at nothing to discredit their critics and silence the tough questions before they get asked." . . . .

Well, I said it was a consistent line of attack and it is.

[whometense]

3. Sure is.

And here's another with lots of quotes from Kerry. Again, no link, but it was written by Alexander Bolton for The Hill, and dated July 14. I don't think I ever saw this before.

"What we have seen from Kerry since the election is that he's more aggressive and more pugnacious," said Norm Ornstein, a congressional scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.

Darrell West, a professor of political science at Brown University, said "Kerry has been among the most vociferous critics of the Bush administration since the election.

West noted that Kerry grilled Condoleezza Rice during her Senate confirmation and "voted against several Bush administration initiatives."

But while Kerry has had the support of Clinton and many other Democrats on the Rove issue, his colleagues have left him out on a limb as he has championed other causes of the liberal wing of the party.

<snip>

Kerry urged Roberts and Rockefeller to complete "phase two" of the committee's probe on prewar intelligence. Roberts and Rockefeller had agreed to break the investigation into two parts: phase one, which focused on the intelligence community's information gathering, and phase two, which is to target the Bush administration's use of intelligence and the pressure the administration may have exerted on analysts.

As a concession to Republicans, Rockefeller agreed to conduct the more politically sensitive second phase after last year's election.

Citing the Downing Street memo, Kerry exhorted his colleagues not to let the second half of the probe languish.

"The committee's efforts have taken on renewed urgency, given recent revelations in the United Kingdom regarding the apparent minutes of a July 23, 2002, meeting between Prime Minister Tony Blair and his senior national security advisors," Kerry wrote. "These minutes - known as the 'Downing Street Memo' - raise troubling questions about the use of intelligence by American policy makers.". . . .

[TayTay]

5. Oh no, I feel another MA noticed thingee

that other people wil disagree on, but yeah, I think he is more his own self since last year. I think he is more aggressive and partisan and willing to lay it on the line for what he believes in. I like that.

[karynnj]

13. It may be that last year

he was more cautious especially after winning the nomination because (except for September) he was always within striking distance of Bush. Taking a controversial stand could cause a loss. Without the Bin Laden tape, biased media, Republican cheating or a weak Democratic party, this would have been a winning strategy.

Being cautious now will not lead to the nomination this year. Not having followed Kerry before last year, I am blown away by how much he does and how creative he is. As far as I know, no one else has succeeded in copying the way he uses email to the extent he has. He said (in Morristown) that he really wanted to keep the energy from last year - especially among the young people who got involved. I wonder if this goes with the idea of not having to start at zero every 4 years.

[karynnj]

9. But he's still not a liberal to DU

These articles you and TAY TAY posted are incredible. I hope Katrina brings enough of a sea change to blow this open. What's sick is that ROBERTS, who was in on the data fix appears to have control over whether it's investigated! Somehow this is NOT what I learned about how the government works in high school.

Why are only 9 Democrats standing behind Kerry on this? But I guess that's 8 more than he had on BCCI and more than he had on the contra investigation.

[TayTay]

22. The REthugs outplayed Congress on Iran-Contra

And the committee investigating it handed out all these immunitie from presecution.

Sen. Kerry allowed all his investigative files (and his chief investigator, JAck Blum) to go to NY State DA. (Critical read: http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/102604B.shtml. PS. PErry knows his shit on this cold.)

BCCI is worse. Did you see in the papers today that IQ Khan (Remember his name from Condi's nom hearing) sold 12 nukes to Iran. And the Bushies let him go. (Maybe you posted this before, but damn, it's not like we didn't know Pakistan was a flea market for nukes. Pakistan had cornered the market in money laundering and all that. We knew, god damn it. WE knew.)

[karynnj]

27. Yep! I remember that Rice said are needs were beings met

and she didn't look happy when Kerry asked very sceptically "adequately?" It stinks that Kerry likely knew so much that he couldn't say. It explains his comment when he voted "no".

I was even angrier when I saw BLM's post of Kerry's list of items that couldn't be done at the end of his committee's life and the first one dealt with investigating whether Khan was selling technology or devices. Wasn't that over 10 years ago! Who was looking out for our country's or the world's safety?

[TayTay]

4. Oh, on a different topic

was watching the 'suspending the EPA mercury rule' vote on C-Span 2 and saw Kerry engaged in some animated discussion with Sen. Mary Landreiu. Wonder what they are talking about for so long?

WHAT? How can Sen. Clinton vote No? That's it, she's off my Christmas card list.

[Mass]

6. Did Clinton vote NO? I am surprised.

Also surprised by the total disinterest of this issue on DU.

When will the Dems understand that environmental issues are important, as important as Iraq.

[whometense]

7. Are you joking?

Clinton voted no?????? WTF? Is it going to pass or go down in flames? How did McCain vote, did you notice?

And I totally agree about the increased aggressiveness. I know we've all gone around on that subject before, but as a seasoned Kerry watcher I think I'm pretty sensitive to changes. It's a pretty subtle shift, but that's our guy - subtle.

[TayTay]

8. McCain vote Aye

And Ms. Hillary voted NAY. The people of her home state are choking on this stuff; you can't eat the fish from the waters of NY and rates of sickness from this stuff are rising and she votes NO?

I mean it, she;s off my Christmas card list. No money for her, ever.

[whometense]

10. Not liking her anyway,

this is sort of meaningless coming from me, but she's off my list too. I can't imagine what she is thinking to vote that way. Cozying up to big business? Did it pass?

Edited to add, okay, just to be clear, a nay vote was to keep the mercury rules in place?

[Mass]

11. A Nay vote is to accept the new EPA rules

changing the date for limiting mercury emissions from 2008 to 2018.

I am waiting for Thomas to update to see who voted NO among the democrats. I heard Dorgan, Conrad, Pryor. There were plenty of Republicans voting YES (including a few fairly conservative), so we could at least have won the Senate vote, and who knows what would have happened in the House.

But big interests are clearly more important to some.

On edit, here is the title of the bill that was voted: ; A joint resolution disapproving a rule promulgated by the Adminstrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to delist coal and oil-direct utility units from the source category list under the Clean Air Act.

[Noisy Democrat]

12. So Nay is good?

I'm confused. Which way did Kerry vote?

[Mass]

14. NO Nay is bad - the bill is to disapprove the Bush EPA.

which once again, relaxes the rules (EPA rule would allow coal-energy plants to continue mercury emissions in the atmosphere for 10 more years, not good at all).

Sorry if it is not clear.

[karynnj]

16. Why would she do this?

I can't imagine that it helps her in NY (or the nation) for that matter.

[whometense]

15. I'm confused too.

Don't tell me I have to put Clinton back on my list? :-(

I won't, anyway. ;-)

[Mass]

17. NO, the NO vote was wrong, but Clinton voted YES

Sorry that I was not clear.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00225

Democrats voting NO:

Baucus (D-MT)
Byrd (D-WV)
Conrad (D-ND)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Lugar (R-IN)
Nelson (D-NE)
Pryor (D-AR)

[TayTay]

19. Nope, she must have corrected her vote

Clinton voted Yeah as did Sen. Schumer. As did both MA Sens.

She's back on my Christmas card list. (I heard them call her and say nay. She must have corrected later.)

[blm]

18. You need to put this up at GD. And please add the other articles, too.

People need to learn what the media has been downplaying...not just from Kerry but from all the Dems who were working with him.

[TayTay]

20. Mea Culpa, btw Sen. Clinton voted on the side of the angels n/t

[whometense]

21. If you want to put your original post up in GD

and put up the link here, I'll go and add in my articles.

[TayTay]

24. No can do, meeting right now. n/t

[blm]

23. No mea culpa necessary. I always encourage the sharing of important

articles with the rabid crowd - Just so they know we care about their education. ;)

[TayTay]

25. Let me rework it. I can put it up tonight

We know what this refers to, but I want to back it up with the fact that this refers to the DSM before I post to GD. DSM stuff was all the rage in DU a few months ago, but memories are short.

Thanks for the prod to to do this. I will.

[blm]

26. Heheh...don't forget to inoculate for rabies first.

.