Where is the memo? - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Ustwo · 11-08-2003, 12:58 AM

Anyone here who follows US politics must have heard about the memo which was leaked to Sean Hannity, about the Democrats planning to use of the senate intelligence committee as a way to hurt Bush in 2004. I saw it a day or so ago, but now can't find it, and I heard that Sen. Rockefeller, the leading Democrat of the committee even talking about legal action against Sean Hannity for releasing the memo.

I thought it would be a good topic to talk about, but I can't find the whole memo anywhere now. I can only find 2nd hand references in other stories and I wonder if they original was pulled until the legal aspects were worked out but that seems unlikely.

If anyone has a link to the memo please post it.

Phaenx · 11-08-2003, 01:42 AM

http://www.gopusa.com/news/2003/nove...em_memop.shtml

Quote:

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.

seretogis · 11-08-2003, 03:32 AM

Please put the above in [ quote ] tags.

JamesS · 11-08-2003, 10:22 AM

Interestingly, in response to things like this, Bush has unveiled a new policy of only considering senate requests when they go through the chairmen of the committees - which are, of course, all republican.

This means that it will be even more difficult for the opposition to get the Administration to answer even the most basic of questions regarding its own dubious actions.

2wolves · 11-08-2003, 06:11 PM

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2003Nov7.html

No matter, it's all shut down for the duration now. Curious if this same policy will apply to the White House which leaked the Plame affair.

2Wolves

Superbelt · 11-10-2003, 06:53 AM

Turns out that this "memo" by senate democrats to use republicans to open an investigation (See the "memo" quoted in Phaenx's post, it's all a hoax. It's a complete set-up, providing cover for the Republicans to cancel the investigation.

That's why we haven't heard a word about it from anybody since the venerable, honest, and never partisan Hannity broke this story.

Hell, if this was relevant, Hannity would NOT be the first to get this story. Some news org that was CREDIBLE would. Then after him it filters down to the right wing news orgs like Newsmax, Worldnetdaily, Washington Times. Noone else. The story is bogus.

Also, Friday was the deadline for the WH to turn over documents to the committee, but they refused. Awesome coincidence.

Ustwo · 11-10-2003, 07:39 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Superbelt
Turns out that this "memo" by senate democrats to use republicans to open an investigation (See the "memo" quoted in Phaenx's post, it's all a hoax. It's a complete set-up, providing cover for the Republicans to cancel the investigation.

That's why we haven't heard a word about it from anybody since the venerable, honest, and never partisan Hannity broke this story.

Hell, if this was relevant, Hannity would NOT be the first to get this story. Some news org that was CREDIBLE would. Then after him it filters down to the right wing news orgs like Newsmax, Worldnetdaily, Washington Times. Noone else. The story is bogus.

Also, Friday was the deadline for the WH to turn over documents to the committee, but they refused. Awesome coincidence.

Actually Senator Rockefeller said acknowledged it as from his office but said it was never approved and was just written by some staffer. No thinking man would assume that it wasn't written with his approval, but regardless he didn't deny from whence it came.

mml · 11-10-2003, 10:39 AM

I have no idea as to the origin of this "memo", but it really does not suprise or bother me. It has always been SOP to use issues to knock down the other party. It is commonplace for both the Republicans and the Democrats to plan out strategies. Have you ever noticed that when some big issue comes out, eveyone from a specific party say basically the same thing? This is because they have been provided "talking points" which are usually planned, written and distributed by party officials.

Frankly, I would be dissapointed if the Democrats were not at least exploring all the possibilites available to them. What I wish was, that the Republicans were not so much better at this than the Democrats, who used to be better at it.

Ustwo · 11-10-2003, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by mml
I have no idea as to the origin of this "memo", but it really does not suprise or bother me. It has always been SOP to use issues to knock down the other party.

Not in the senate intelligence committee. It has always been on of those places where the good of the country came before the good of the party. It worked pretty well over the years.

mml · 11-10-2003, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ustwo
Not in the senate intelligence committee. It has always been on of those places where the good of the country came before the good of the party. It worked pretty well over the years.

I used to work in the Senate, don't be so naive. For better or for worse, everything is politics in Washington.

nirol · 11-11-2003, 05:00 PM

The White House is refusing to turn over the requested documents under the guise of "executive privilege". I understand these doc.s have always been seen this way. There should be a way to allow the examination of these without creating a precedent. I know that the opponents will use this "stone walling" to argue that the White House is covering up, but they will say that anyway. Why give ammunition to your opponents?

DukeLeto · 11-12-2003, 07:17 AM

If you agree that the credibility of our intelligence agencies is important, it follows that you must be supportive of any inquiry designed to expose and correct possible failures of the intelligence-gathering agencies.

If you believe that the credibility of the Presidency and of American leadership overseas is important, you ought to support any investigation of possible wrongdoing by the President and his staff related to such grave issues as WMD and war.

If you believe that the opposition party, when presented with overwhelming evidence that the Administration has something to hide, will refrain from using it as a point of contention, you have departed the world of reason.

captain · 11-15-2003, 07:00 AM

ustwo is correct. The Senate intelligence committee has usually been above politics. That is why the other committees have a "ranking member" as the lead minority and in the Senate Intelligence committee that person is "vice-Chairman". The Senate has tried to keep it non-partisan.

Sen. Leahy was removed fronm the committee several years ago for leaking information. He was removed by his own colleagues.

This memo is a new low.

onetime2 · 11-15-2003, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by DukeLeto
If you agree that the credibility of our intelligence agencies is important, it follows that you must be supportive of any inquiry designed to expose and correct possible failures of the intelligence-gathering agencies.

If you believe that the credibility of the Presidency and of American leadership overseas is important, you ought to support any investigation of possible wrongdoing by the President and his staff related to such grave issues as WMD and war.

If you believe that the opposition party, when presented with overwhelming evidence that the Administration has something to hide, will refrain from using it as a point of contention, you have departed the world of reason.

If you think the credibility of our intelligence agencies is important then you should have the opposite opinion. If the intelligence agencies have to fear that their actions, analysis, and methods will be used as political fodder then they will either be rendered ineffective or they simply will not report ANYTHING useful to the committee.

11-08-2003, 12:58 AM	#1 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	Where is the memo? Anyone here who follows US politics must have heard about the memo which was leaked to Sean Hannity, about the Democrats planning to use of the senate intelligence committee as a way to hurt Bush in 2004. I saw it a day or so ago, but now can't find it, and I heard that Sen. Rockefeller, the leading Democrat of the committee even talking about legal action against Sean Hannity for releasing the memo. I thought it would be a good topic to talk about, but I can't find the whole memo anywhere now. I can only find 2nd hand references in other stories and I wonder if they original was pulled until the legal aspects were worked out but that seems unlikely. If anyone has a link to the memo please post it. __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

11-08-2003, 03:32 AM	#3 (permalink)
seretogis Huggles, sir? Location: Seattle	Please put the above in [ quote ] tags. __________________ seretogis - sieg heil perfect little dream the kind that hurts the most, forgot how it feels well almost no one to blame always the same, open my eyes wake up in flames

11-08-2003, 10:22 AM	#4 (permalink)
JamesS Crazy Location: Land of the Hanging Chad	Interestingly, in response to things like this, Bush has unveiled a new policy of only considering senate requests when they go through the chairmen of the committees - which are, of course, all republican. This means that it will be even more difficult for the opposition to get the Administration to answer even the most basic of questions regarding its own dubious actions. __________________ The tragedy of life is what dies inside a man while he lives. -- Albert Schweitzer

11-10-2003, 06:53 AM	#6 (permalink)
Superbelt This vexes me. I am terribly vexed. Location: Grantville, Pa	Turns out that this "memo" by senate democrats to use republicans to open an investigation (See the "memo" quoted in Phaenx's post, it's all a hoax. It's a complete set-up, providing cover for the Republicans to cancel the investigation. That's why we haven't heard a word about it from anybody since the venerable, honest, and never partisan Hannity broke this story. Hell, if this was relevant, Hannity would NOT be the first to get this story. Some news org that was CREDIBLE would. Then after him it filters down to the right wing news orgs like Newsmax, Worldnetdaily, Washington Times. Noone else. The story is bogus. Also, Friday was the deadline for the WH to turn over documents to the committee, but they refused. Awesome coincidence. Last edited by Superbelt; 11-10-2003 at 07:04 AM..

11-10-2003, 10:39 AM	#8 (permalink)
mml Adrift Location: Wandering in the Desert of Life	I have no idea as to the origin of this "memo", but it really does not suprise or bother me. It has always been SOP to use issues to knock down the other party. It is commonplace for both the Republicans and the Democrats to plan out strategies. Have you ever noticed that when some big issue comes out, eveyone from a specific party say basically the same thing? This is because they have been provided "talking points" which are usually planned, written and distributed by party officials. Frankly, I would be dissapointed if the Democrats were not at least exploring all the possibilites available to them. What I wish was, that the Republicans were not so much better at this than the Democrats, who used to be better at it. __________________ Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so." -Douglas Adams

11-08-2003, 06:11 PM	#5 (permalink)
2wolves Psycho Location: Just outside the D.C. belt	http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2003Nov7.html No matter, it's all shut down for the duration now. Curious if this same policy will apply to the White House which leaked the Plame affair. 2Wolves

11-11-2003, 05:00 PM	#11 (permalink)
nirol Crazy Location: South East US	The White House is refusing to turn over the requested documents under the guise of "executive privilege". I understand these doc.s have always been seen this way. There should be a way to allow the examination of these without creating a precedent. I know that the opponents will use this "stone walling" to argue that the White House is covering up, but they will say that anyway. Why give ammunition to your opponents? __________________ 'Tis better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than open one's mouth and remove all doubt. Samuel Johnson (1709 - 1784)

11-12-2003, 07:17 AM	#12 (permalink)
DukeLeto Upright Location: Minneapolis	If you agree that the credibility of our intelligence agencies is important, it follows that you must be supportive of any inquiry designed to expose and correct possible failures of the intelligence-gathering agencies. If you believe that the credibility of the Presidency and of American leadership overseas is important, you ought to support any investigation of possible wrongdoing by the President and his staff related to such grave issues as WMD and war. If you believe that the opposition party, when presented with overwhelming evidence that the Administration has something to hide, will refrain from using it as a point of contention, you have departed the world of reason. __________________ "I would not dare to so dishonor my Creator God by attaching His name to that book (the Bible)." -- Thomas Paine

11-15-2003, 07:00 AM	#13 (permalink)
captain Crazy	ustwo is correct. The Senate intelligence committee has usually been above politics. That is why the other committees have a "ranking member" as the lead minority and in the Senate Intelligence committee that person is "vice-Chairman". The Senate has tried to keep it non-partisan. Sen. Leahy was removed fronm the committee several years ago for leaking information. He was removed by his own colleagues. This memo is a new low. __________________ captain