NATIONAL DISGRACE

Back to the Democrat Sheeple Who Hate Freedom Page
Back to the Clinton Criminal Page
Back to the 9-11/Blow Job Clinton Causality Page

April 14, 2004 -- The national 9/11 commission has been hijacked by political shills -- men and women eager to subordinate truth to partisan advantage; who hold a transitory victory on Election Day more dear than American victory in the war on terror.

Tawdry ambition has eclipsed sacred duty; all Americans are diminished, but none more than the families of the 9/11 victims -- who expect better from the commission, and certainly deserve it.

Unless it is the thousands of young Americans now under arms in Iraq and elsewhere; their bravery and devotion to duty is inspirational. How shameful that the commission attack dogs hold their sacrifices so cheaply.

And John F. Kerry, who presumes to the presidency, acquiesces. What a disgrace.

Yesterday, Democratic shills Richard Ben-Veniste and Bob Kerrey hectored Attorney General John Ashcroft. They implied he was a coward for travelling on government aircraft at a time of heightened pre-9/11 security - if not, in fact, a scoundrel in possession of advance notice of the attack.

Last week, it was National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice in the Democrats' dock; she was a fool, a filibusterer, a liar.

"Isn't it a fact, Dr. Rice, that [President Bush was] warned against possible attacks in this country?" demanded Ben-Veniste.

Funny thing about that warning. Ben-Veniste was speaking of the now-famous Aug. 6, 2001, presidential daily briefing paper - suggesting that it proved the White House had failed to comprehend al Qaeda's threat to America.

Yesterday, it came out that someone had indeed gotten it right.

George W. Bush, who had directed that the briefing paper be prepared.

In a 13-page report titled "Threats and Responses in 2001," the commission staff paints a picture of alarm bells going off throughout Washington in the months before 9/11 about an imminent "spectacular" terror attack by Osama bin Laden.

But the intelligence reports all talked about attacks occurring against targets overseas.

And the fevered reports, in the summer of 2001, of possible threats "seemed to be focused on Saudi Arabia, Israel, Bahrain, Kuwait, Yemen and possibly Rome, but the danger could be anywhere . . . "

So the CIA prepared the Aug. 6 memo, "summarizing its understanding of the danger."

In sum: The briefing paper was written specifically for the president in direct response to an order from the president!

Obviously, the CIA's "understanding of the danger" was deficient.

But it clearly was not "a fact" that Bush was "warned against possible attacks in this country."

It is clear, now, that the entire briefing-memo "scandal" was sewn from whole cloth. But will there be an apology from Ben-Veniste, Kerrey & Co.?

Not a chance.

Why not.

Because, to the Democrats, the enemy is not just al Qaeda.

It is also the George W. Bush White House.

So they cross the bounds of acceptable political discourse, twisting the truth and bending the facts to produce a product that will advance their political ambitions.

To hell with the 9/11 families.

And to hell with eight young Americans reported killed in action in Iraq just yesterday; to the 65 who died over the past week - and to the hundreds who have laid down their lives for peace and freedom since 9/11.

All to defeat Bush.

John Kerry could shut it down in a heartbeat, simply by saying: "Stop it!"

Kerry needs to do just that. He must state the obvious: that 9/11 was the work of Islamist fanatics, and that the danger will not have passed until those who make war on America are either killed or in captivity.

It is simply disgraceful that he hasn't already done so.

NEW YORK POST is a registered trademark of NYP Holdings, Inc.
NYPOST.COM, NYPOSTONLINE.COM, and NEWYORKPOST.COM
are trademarks of NYP Holdings, Inc.
Copyright 2003 NYP Holdings, Inc.

NATIONAL DISGRACE, CONT'D

April 15, 2004 -- House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner has demanded the resignation of Jamie Gore-lick as a member of the federal 9/11 Commission.

Frankly, given her blatant conflicts of interest, she should never have been appointed in the first place.

One stunning Gore-lick conflict emerged at Tuesday's public commission hearing: Attorney General John Ashcroft disclosed that in 1995, Gore-lick - while deputy attorney general under Bill Clinton - wrote a memo ordering the FBI to separate counterintelligence work from criminal investigations.

As Ashcroft put it, this memo - which went beyond what federal law required - erected a legal wall between the FBI and CIA, creating "the single greatest structural cause for September 11."

So. How can someone who played a key role in the events under investigation possibly sit as one of the investigators?

Indeed, Gore-lick has a proper role to play with the commission - as a witness, grilled under oath about her own actions.

And what was Commission Chairman Tom Kean's response to calls for Gorelick's dismissal or resignation?

"People ought to stay out of our business," he huffed.

Funny, but isn't the commission meant to be conducting the people's business?

As it turns out, the memo is just the tip of the iceberg concerning Gore-lick's questionable fitness as a member of the panel.

That's because she's a litigation partner in one of Washington's most high-powered Democratic law firms - Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering.

And that firm represents Prince Mohammed al-Faisal al-Saud, a member of the Saudi royal family and director of a key Saudi financial agency, against a lawsuit filed by a coalition of 600 Sept. 11 families.

The lawsuit, filed by Families United to Bankrupt Terrorism, seeks "to cut off the pipeline that fueled the al Qaeda terrorists" - a pipeline in which the high-paying client represented by Gore-lick's law firm reportedly played a central part.

The prince is chairman of Dar al-Maal al-Islami (DMI), which boasts $1 billion in assets.

One of its subsidiaries is the Al-Shamil Islamic Bank, whose directors include Osama bin Laden's half-brother and his brother-in-law.

According to congressional testimony last October by Jean-Charles Brisard, an international expert on terrorism financing, the Swiss-based DMI "is one of the central structures in Saudi Arabia's financing of international Islam," and is rooted in the House of Saud's "support for the radical Islamic cause."

DMI, according to published reports, was a major shareholder of a Bahamian Islamic bank that was shut down after Washington tabbed it a centerpiece of Osama bin Laden's financial network.

Though Gore-lick may not be litigating the lawsuit, as a partner she profits from her firm's work for the Saudi prince.

Gore-lick, who might have become attorney general in an Al Gore administration, could get that same job if John Kerry wins in November.

If all of this is not intolerable for a 9/11 commissioner, then there's no such thing as conflict of interest.

The blatant anti-Bush partisanship demonstrated by Richard Ben-Veniste and Bob Kerrey long ago brought disgrace upon the commission.

Now this.

What a sick, sad joke.

NEW YORK POST is a registered trademark of NYP Holdings, Inc.
NYPOST.COM, NYPOSTONLINE.COM, and NEWYORKPOST.COM
are trademarks of NYP Holdings, Inc.
Copyright 2003 NYP Holdings, Inc.

Reply 1 - Posted by: kelcom, 4/15/2004 4:09:25 AM House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner has demanded the resignation of Jamie Gorelick. And once more Ms. Gorelick arrogantly refused defining 'herself' as above it all. PIAPS, TuhRayZa and Martha Stewart called to offer their support.

Reply 2 - Posted by: Ida Lil , 4/15/2004 4:10:53 AM Could it be that the gloves are coming off? Gorelick is guilty by association with terror supporters. No wonder she wrote a memo binding the FBI and CIA's hands behind their backs. Witness oh no -- this one needs a criminal investigation of her own followed by one for terror ties.

Reply 3 - Posted by: rockinqsranch, 4/15/2004 4:48:15 AM The Supreme and Most Arrogant one, Jamie Gorelick (whadda name at this point in history) MUST resign, or have her butt kicked off the commission post haste. If not, the "Commission" isn't valid, and becomes a liability, but then with Ben Venistewhatzit, and Roemer and... is it anyway?

Reply 4 - Posted by: Stars-stripes, 4/15/2004 4:56:31 AM Ms. Gorelick, tear down that Wall.

Reply 5 - Posted by: capecodfox, 4/15/2004 4:57:17 AM Why is Kean defending her?

Reply 6 - Posted by: janjan, 4/15/2004 5:35:38 AM This plays into the fantasy world that the Democrats live in where they are 'speaking for the American People'. Don't we all love and respect anyone who came out of the Clinton Administration?

Reply 7 - Posted by: hillarymckinney, 4/15/2004 5:55:05 AM Good one, #4!

Reply 8 - Posted by: nota bene , 4/15/2004 6:01:42 AM Where's the rest of our Republican stalwarts on this? Not just on Gorelick, but on the entire sham travesty that is this commission. Kean is a joke; the entire lot, except perhaps for Fred Fielding, are a bunch of kleig light junkies.

Reply 9 - Posted by: Maybeth, 4/15/2004 6:02:25 AM Kean defends her because he is ALSO part of 'The Commission' fraud. Don't let his GOP designation fool you. 'People ought to stay out of our business,' he said. This outrageous group of gods who sit in 'the business' of judgement against President Bush and his administration should ALL be exposed for their treachery. They have 'created' accusations to cover the a$$es of the ex~presidents Clinton and the demokrat party which kisses their hooves.

Reply 10 - Posted by: grey gent, 4/15/2004 6:04:03 AM You can add your outrage by e-mailing to www.info@9-11commission.gov

Reply 11 - Posted by: lbeam, 4/15/2004 6:04:27 AM She issued this memo when the 1996 Democrat camaign contributions from foreigners were being given attention. She did not want the CIA and FBI figuring out how corrupt donations from the ChiComs and Rich in Switzerland were done. She should be indidted.

Reply 12 - Posted by: lasvegaslou, 4/15/2004 6:20:43 AM Where were our elected Republican officials when this outrage (Commission) was selected? As usual, our spineless Republicans were rolled by the Dems. They put at least 2 of the most partisan Dems around on the Commission. Who did we get? We got ex NJ Gov Tom Kean, RINO to the bone. Great job, as usual, fellas.

Reply 13 - Posted by: lonetown, 4/15/2004 6:22:40 AM This commission has been outed as the fraud it is. They've been used to pimp book sales, had Democrat members all over news shows spinning and auditioning for VP, and now have exposed the fact that one of the members is actually a significant part of the problem who will not resign even though shown to be in direct conflict with the rules establishing the commission. This panel was done from the beginning when the Democrat brain trust saw to staff its side with partisan hacks out to defend the sink Emperor.

Reply 14 - Posted by: MsCharlotteVale, 4/15/2004 6:29:21 AM "That's because she's a litigation partner in one of Washington's most high-powered Democratic law firms - Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering. And that firm represents Prince Mohammed al-Faisal al-Saud, a member of the Saudi royal family and director of a key Saudi financial agency, against a lawsuit filed by a coalition of 600 Sept. 11 families." This gets deeper and deeper. Remember who stacked DOJ to get the required results. This commission is a sham and a travesty.

Reply 15 - Posted by: LEPhunt, 4/15/2004 6:37:35 AM Anyone who is from New Jersey is well aware of Tom Kean...the man who singlehandedly weakened the Republican Party in NJ and handed things over to Christy Todd Witless to destroy it...TOM KEAN IS NO REPUBLICAN, he is as much a Republican as Michael Bloomberg in NY...

Reply 16 - Posted by: dragonlearner, 4/15/2004 6:39:56 AM All in all, she's just another brick in the wall.

Reply 17 - Posted by: MHR, 4/15/2004 6:40:53 AM Time for Jamie to go and I agree with everyone's assessment of Mr. Kean, not impressed with him at all! Who selected the commissioners? Anyone know??? Were they personally picked by Bill and Hill? Seems like it

Reply 18 - Posted by: FOURPMFOX, 4/15/2004 6:52:00 AM Thanks, #10

Reply 19 - Posted by: zek, 4/15/2004 6:52:20 AM Tom Kean, what a fool. Why waste time with this committee. They could all just go on TV and give their opinion today. They are leaking it day by day anyway in their daily apperances.

Reply 20 - Posted by: trotter, 4/15/2004 6:53:32 AM Sorry gang, but after Kean's and Hamilton's pathetic "progress report" yesterday afternoon that was nothing more than a trumped up defense of her, Gorelick ain't going nowhere. But, that is actually good news because it further exposes the sham that this commission is.

Reply 21 - Posted by: Rob Roy, 4/15/2004 6:53:53 AM The typical liberal take on this will be that Gorelick, EVEN THOUGH SHE WAS A KEY PLAYER IN THE EVENTS THAT TOOK PLACE, HAS A DEFINITE POINT OF VIEW TO PUSH AND ACTIONS SHE MUST DEFEND, can be counted upon to be "objective" and to "separate her own views from the Commision's work." Of course, if any conservative were in a similar position, the libs would be screaming "conflict of interest!" and demanding his or her head on a plate. By the same token, liberals grandly brush aside the Roper poll survey finding that 89% of the Washington press corps voted for Bill Clinton and other data, both anecdotal (stories of slanted reporting) and statistical (i.e., other, similar survey results) in INSISTING that liberals in the media are NOT biased and can be trusted to "put aside their own views" and report "objectively", while "conservative zealots" cannot be. Yeah. Sure.

Reply 22 - Posted by: InGodWeTrust, 4/15/2004 6:57:48 AM This is so blatently wrong, it's pathetic. Can you imagine the uproar if she was from the Bush administration? What's next...Germain Jackson on Michael's jury?

Reply 23 - Posted by: LEPhunt, 4/15/2004 7:01:57 AM I'm kinda leanin toward Rush's assessment...the American People are smart...this Public Display has already made DemonRATS look more Partisan than usual, makes the Media look even more Bias than Usual, and shows the DemonRATS as people incapable of following the rules....THIS WILL BACKFIRE

Reply 24 - Posted by: Betty Jean, 4/15/2004 7:06:32 AM Just think of the public "caning" Newt Gingrich and Trent Lott got for doing NOTHING. When will the sheeple wake up?

Reply 25 - Posted by: bryk, 4/15/2004 7:17:12 AM Thanks for connecting the dots, 11. If true, covering BJ's backside once again meant disaster for us all.

Reply 26 - Posted by: Bald-E, 4/15/2004 7:20:04 AM I think I am even more outraged at T. Kean for not listening to the screaming of a fed-up public. The NERVE of him to say WE ought to stay out of THEIR business !!! . Excuse me Mr. Kean, but I think this is OUR business. . Me thinks someone has FBI info on all the Republicans serving on this joke of a committee.

Reply 27 - Posted by: dches, 4/15/2004 7:22:52 AM This Democratic campaign group calling itself the 9/11 commission is bogus in every respect. No clear thinking, patriotic American is taking it seriously. This woman is also a joke and should be removed immediately.

Reply 28 - Posted by: shards, 4/15/2004 7:27:26 AM Don't let Sensenbrenner try to distract you with his poison politics style. He's just trying to get into the 'act' and will go to any extreme to do so.

Reply 29 - Posted by: Dolley Madison, 4/15/2004 7:27:34 AM Kean defends her because he knows that if you dig a little deeper, the truth shall set you free, and his "commission" will be disbanded. It is a mockery, and should never have been given credibility in the first place. Let the investigation of the 9/11 commission being in earnest. Time to shine the light of truth on America.

Reply 30 - Posted by: Maybeth, 4/15/2004 7:36:33 AM Well, if this 'thing' called 'The Commission' is nothing more than a joke, I dare to suggest it has been a VERY expensive one, costing taxpayers millions.

Reply 31 - Posted by: hillarymckinney, 4/15/2004 7:38:20 AM I listened to Bob Kerrey on Imus this morning. I couldn't believe my ears. He said that he was nervous over some of the testimony and wished that James L. Pavitt, CIA Deputy Director for Operations, had not been called because the Director's testimony revealed strategy! Why didn't he say something yesterday at the hearing??

Reply 32 - Posted by: berserker, 4/15/2004 7:38:35 AM Why are we paying for these losers and this commission, its nothing but a Democratic\Communist coverup of the previous adminstration.

Reply 33 - Posted by: gwennie, 4/15/2004 7:40:09 AM Good for Committee Chairman Sensenbrenner for demanding her,Gorelick's, resignation. As for Tom Kean's statement that the people ought to stay out of our business. The last time I checked this is a government of the people, by the people and for the people. Kean's statement reflects the attitude of the far left politicians in this country. I have heard Ted Kennedy make similar statements. Only Kennedy says *The American people just have to understand.....*. Now is there anything there that indicates they understand that the people of this country are at least half-way intelligent? Or do you sense the leftists think we are all idiot children? Am I the only American who hears the patronizing and insulting innuendos here? We continue to allow these jerks to insult and humiliate this country and do not call them to task. WHY?

Reply 34 - Posted by: FlyRight, 4/15/2004 7:47:52 AM Gore.....lick? I'm sorry. I just have to chuckle.

Reply 35 - Posted by: LEPhunt, 4/15/2004 7:50:08 AM I not only demand GORElick's Resignation, but Osama Ben Veniste and Tom " I am not in control" Kean gotta go...

Reply 36 - Posted by: steveW, 4/15/2004 7:57:21 AM Just lie back, relax, and see why this commission is doing what it's doing right at this time: had there been any other motive than helping the Democratic nominee score points, the whole shebang would've been postponed until after the war, not in the middle, and at least half the commisars sitting there would never in a million years even have been considered. It's perhaps too much to believe that the poker-playing Texan knew the charade would backfire on them all along, but we can always imagine.

Reply 37 - Posted by: Sazedog, 4/15/2004 8:01:40 AM Because the 9/11 Commission is so bias and obviously loaded against the Bush administration, its report, issued right before the election, will hardly be a surprise. The report will find that the Clinton administration, for eight years, did everything possible to avert 9/11, but when Bush got in the White House everything connected to terrorism was forgotten and ignored.

Reply 38 - Posted by: Scout Finch, 4/15/2004 8:05:40 AM So, let me see—if Jamie Gorelick was responsible for erecting the "wall" between the FBI and the CIA, leaving us hamstrung to uncover intel on Muslim terrorism—I guess one could say that Gorelick is in large part responsible for 9/11. And she sits on the board in judgement of President Bush. Unbelievable.

Reply 39 - Posted by: smiling, 4/15/2004 8:08:23 AM I love this. The enemy thinks they could divide the country over 911, but in doing so, because we do still have a free press (thanks to the Internet and conservative press), the TRUTH comes out, sooner or later. What was great about Rush yesterday is he mentioned that BJ was with Monica and a friend of hers when he should have been accepting Bin Laden's head on a silver platter. I guess his "mind" was otherwise occupied at the time. While Rome burns...

Reply 40 - Posted by: MMC, 4/15/2004 8:11:05 AM Continuing the National disgrace theme, in a very small, but national obituary, a Clinton pardoned felon died. Ed Gregory, Jr. died of 'pulmonary disease." This man's pardon struck a congressional investigation. Mr. Gregory seems to have had 240,000 worth of undocumented consulting fees paid to Tony Rodham- Mrs. Clinon's brother.

Reply 41 - Posted by: chatham, 4/15/2004 8:18:28 AM This commission is without a shred of credibility. All you need do is look at the antics of Roemer, Kerry,B., Ben dover, and Jamie Garolick. These people are no more Than Leftist Fifth Column democrat Hacks and Rumpswabs.

Reply 42 - Posted by: Halfgenius, 4/15/2004 8:28:06 AM I think, even at the extreme cost, this fiasco in the making needs to continue. The exposure of the fecal incompetetance of the Democrat party is floating all over the news channels and even onto the editorial pages of some newspapers. That the Democrats were in charge of security of theis country for the preceding 8 years is not lost on the people of this country even though it seems to be lost on the kommissar's-in-charge at this partisan inquisition. Let the game continue to it's final sordid chapter.

Reply 43 - Posted by: kelcom, 4/15/2004 8:36:59 AM r.e. -#10 When addressing email don't include the www. string at the beginning. email address should read: info@9-11commission.gov

Reply 44 - Posted by: dlentz10, 4/15/2004 8:50:14 AM Unless Jamie Gorelick resigns, do what ever it takes to shut down the commission. Gorelick's conflict of interest is blatant. The commission's credibility can not be trusted. Shut thie commission down now. David

Reply 45 - Posted by: gjunginger, 4/15/2004 8:50:34 AM This sham is nothing short of a kangaroo court. It's funny that Kean says that the public should stay out of their business. Wasn't it just yesterday that he was defending the right of commissioners to right columns and speak on television shows? What a country club, hypocritical person!

Reply 46 - Posted by: Larz, 4/15/2004 8:54:31 AM Watching these arrogant commissioners, I feel the same kind of outrage that I felt during the Paul Wellstone memorial/pep rally. This bovine excrement will work against the Dems.

Reply 47 - Posted by: paiso, 4/15/2004 8:56:49 AM Until John Ashcroft zinged her with the memo, the Republicans had no solid base to challenge Gorelick's appointment. The memo she wrote is the smoking gun. And for doubting Thomas's, it is possible that Sensenbrenner's actions result from the same outrage that many here feel. Suggesting he just wants camera time is ridiculous in this case. If she were Republican she would have been dumped in a NY minute with less documented justification than they have.

Reply 48 - Posted by: mabelkitty, 4/15/2004 9:02:09 AM Kean's son is angling for a publicly funded life job - he's either running for something or looking to be appointed to something. Wish I could remember the details, but apparently it hinges on making DNC party bosses happy.

Reply 49 - Posted by: kennowen, 4/15/2004 9:03:09 AM I was opposed to the Inquisition from the beginning, based on the fact that it ignores the salient fact that we were attacked by Islamosterrorists, the only ones given a pass by the 9/11Mafia. BUT, since it exists, GoreLick should take her rightful place on the other side of the table, and Keene needs to rethink just whose business this is.

Reply 50 - Posted by: nofreelunch, 4/15/2004 9:03:49 AM It would appear that Jamie has changed her name to Keanlick.

Reply 51 - Posted by: Coopers Hawk, 4/15/2004 9:07:52 AM Anybody know when Gorelick's book will come out? Maybe she'll explain things to us in her book. After all, if you're in Washington and you want to set things straight, you've gotta write a book.

Reply 52 - Posted by: Akuhead, 4/15/2004 9:14:52 AM #43 - thanks for the email address. I just sent in a message. It would be great if all Ldotters did the same.

Reply 53 - Posted by: gwennie, 4/15/2004 9:20:09 AM Are you sure her true name is not Hindlicker?

Reply 54 - Posted by: gop_guys, 4/15/2004 9:32:57 AM I too want to know who was responsible for picking these ''so called'' commissioners. I'm emailing the 9-11 commission right now and encourage all ldotter brothers and sisters to do the same. Remove Gorelick!

Reply 55 - Posted by: crlealsr, 4/15/2004 9:33:31 AM Her phone number at her Washington Law office is 1 (202) 663-6500 and her email at same is Jamie.Gorelick@wilmer.com. Why not let the female dog know how you feel.

Reply 56 - Posted by: LEPhunt, 4/15/2004 9:36:28 AM Kean's Son is an Assemblyman from the 11th District in NJ...a Coastal District...another RINO, tree hugger GORElick was appointed by Daschole & Gasphart, that in itself speaks volumes

Reply 57 - Posted by: hillarymustbestopped, 4/15/2004 9:44:48 AM Thanks, #10, they just got an earful from me. So did my local newspaper opinion columns.

Reply 58 - Posted by: RU4us, 4/15/2004 9:47:28 AM Chairman (so-called) kean was just shown on Fox saying the committee is non-partisan and people aught to stay out of our business. Oh contrare, this is The People's business you elitist piece of trash!

Reply 59 - Posted by: Julianne, 4/15/2004 9:49:56 AM The Republicans simply do not have a mean streak. They do not know how to fight back because they are always cut down so unmercifully by the left with lies that I wonder if they think it is not worth it. It is mean viscious politics and I am sorry that other countries hate us because of the arrogance they see in the ugly Americans fighting among themselves.

Reply 60 - Posted by: 49 ford, 4/15/2004 9:56:41 AM I just sent them my critical e-mail, but I'll bet they're deleting 'em as fast as they come in. Our side needs to go on the offensive here. We need to have prominent GOP Reps and Senators barrage the media with denunciations of this entire travesty. It's not enough to whine about Gorelick - party leaders should openly, and repeatedly, tag this kangaroo court for what it is. Oh well, I guess they can't do that. It would upset the Dems, and the NYT and WAPO would run critical editorials. So much for standing up for the country and their President.

Reply 61 - Posted by: browneyes, 4/15/2004 9:59:38 AM I may be way off here, but, there is a possibilty that this Commission was formulated to 1: satisfy the 4 widows 2: an opportunity for the Dems to begin a process whereby the Legistratrive Branch will gain more POWER over the EXECUTIVE branch, or 3: .merely a diversion. This commission is charged with making recommendations I assume, to the American people, not the President, or the Congress. The questions to Tenet, Mueller, RIDGE, et al suggested the Commission's mission is revamping, changing or otherwise interfering with THIS ADMINISTRATION'S goals.

Reply 62 - Posted by: dainbred, 4/15/2004 10:07:43 AM "Birds of a feather... destroy this nation TOGETHER"........

Reply 63 - Posted by: diehard, 4/15/2004 10:14:26 AM I can imagine the howls of protest if they tried to seat Janet Reno on the Commission, but what is the difference between her and her Deputy as far as conflict of interests go?

Reply 64 - Posted by: recallhillary.com, 4/15/2004 10:26:30 AM Kudos to #11 for isolating a very important point in the lead editorial in today's issue of "The Wall Street Journal." Per #47, Ashcroft did something very smart and heroic by revealing Gorelick's disgraceful memo. Per #55, the best way to let Gorelick know what you think about her is to call her law firm at night, after it's closed. During business hours, I'm sure the operator will refuse to conntect. The night switchboard will be on voicemail and you'll be able to get to her voicemail with the telephone key pad. I did this to Hillary shill Susan Tomases at Willkie Farr Gallagher after Tomases's disgraceful "I don't recall " testmony at the D'Amato hearings.

Reply 65 - Posted by: pepperblue, 4/15/2004 10:28:59 AM My faith in prayer is very strong. I have been praying for this Commission to either help this Country, or be exposed. Seems the Holy Spirit is working on the latter. Kean supporting Gorelick is going to be downfall of this entire Commission. I'm with Rush. The American people are smart and they don't like what they see in the obviously partisan Commission. God is at work. Prayers continue...

Reply 66 - Posted by: texaslass3, 4/15/2004 10:30:06 AM Its hard to get into this conversation. Why? Because Sensenbrenner will not be joined by head Republicans on the Hill in order to get this resignation appeal much attention! I don't see Hatch, Frist or any of the others standing behind this good Congressman in order to put some ooph behind the request, do you? God bless Sensenbrenner! Repubs are such weenies. Gorelick has such an obvious conflict of interest but DEMOCRATS HAVE NO INTENTION OF HAVING HER RESIGN. Realize that. Nothing done again because our side won't fight!!!!!!!!!!!!

Reply 67 - Posted by: berlin, 4/15/2004 10:33:25 AM Let me get this straight: A key player in preventing relevant agencies from communicating with each other concerning terrorists is sitting on a commission investigating why relevant agencies were prevented from communicating with each other. How much more crazy can it get? Even firing that woman off the commission would restore lost credibility. I guess that is considered bi-partisanship when the fox is guarding the henhouse. Why do we even listen to these nut cases?

Reply 68 - Posted by: gjunginger, 4/15/2004 10:34:42 AM This from the commission's website: "The Commission's eleventh public hearing on "Emergency Response" and "The 9-11 Plot" will be held May 18-19, 2004, at New School University in New York city." Bob Kerry is president of the new school. How interesting.

Reply 69 - Posted by: artlover, 4/15/2004 10:36:03 AM I hope this guy succeeds in getting this woman off the panel. There are a few more on the panel that are so mean about the whole thing (when it is supposed to be not partisan), that they should also be sent packing. It just amazes me when the Republicans do anything, they get booted. Gingrich, Lott, and many more, but the democrats get away with anything. I guess it IS the weak Republicans to blame.

Reply 70 - Posted by: weejun, 4/15/2004 10:43:59 AM Just sent the commission an email (but I suspect they've got a filter in place: wouldn't want to actually HEAR from the People they are supposedly representing in these investigations). I cannot adequately express my outrage at the blatant hypocrisy of this whole mess and the slimeballs that make up the commission (and I blame Republicans once again for having no stones - the Dims beat them every time no matter what the game is). It reminds me of "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington." Won't SOMEBODY please expose this shameful sham? When are the American people going to rise up and cry "enough"??? It literally makes me sick...

Reply 71 - Posted by: ForNow, 4/15/2004 10:44:25 AM Dick Morris also said that Jamie Gorelick is bad news, that she ran the Justice Dept. for three years, & that Reno was just a figurehead during that period. Gorelick is up to her ears in ramifying scandal.

Reply 72 - Posted by: wrw90, 4/15/2004 10:45:48 AM Rep. Sensenbrenner deserves our thanks for taking a stand on Gorelick's obvious conflice of interest and Kean's blatant disregard for the Commission's published policy on conflicts of interest. At least one Pubbie inside the beltway has the guts to tell it like it is.

Reply 73 - Posted by: weejun, 4/15/2004 10:49:08 AM As I suspected ("bedbug Letter" reply from the commission): "Thank you for your email to the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States. Due to the volume of correspondence and our available resources, we regret that it is not possible to respond to each piece individually and personally. Please be assured that your correspondence will be forwarded to the appropriate staff members for further study. We appreciate your taking the time to share information with the Commission as well as your thoughts, concerns, and opinions and encourage you to continue to follow its work. Information about past and future Commission activities is available on our website at www.9-11commission.gov. " And I am the Duke of Earl...it's time for vigilante action. Anybody got a good rope???

Reply 74 - Posted by: Judith1, 4/15/2004 11:03:02 AM #31 "I listened to Bob Kerrey on Imus this morning. I couldn't believe my ears. He said that he was nervous over some of the testimony and wished that James L. Pavitt, CIA Deputy Director for Operations, had not been called because the Director's testimony revealed strategy!" If he is really worried then I suggest that THEY HAVE NO MORE PUBLIC SESSIONS BUT DO IT ALL BEHIND CLOSED DOORS Of course that would mean among others he would lose his face time on national tv. I think that is the reason for the public hearings in the first place. Ben Veniste is a jerk and so is Kerry.(Kerrey?)

Reply 75 - Posted by: Jammer2, 4/15/2004 11:03:10 AM I'm outraged that the 9-11 Commission is spending millions of dollars to provide Al Queda with an after-action report. We're serving intelligence and strategy to our sworn enemies on a taxpayer-provided silver platter....

Reply 76 - Posted by: Allegra, 4/15/2004 11:05:31 AM My email was returned to me as failed.

Reply 77 - Posted by: 49 ford, 4/15/2004 11:09:30 AM # 74, no matter how you spell it they're both jerks.

Reply 78 - Posted by: No Left Turns, 4/15/2004 11:10:36 AM The more events play out the more I'm convinced that Bush understands how to play the leftist media game. No straight on assault would ever succeed as the left would blitz it just like they do most news they don't want to report. But when something hemorrages it seeps out a little at a time to where the left is caught, like the sink emperor, with their pants down around their ankles. This whole commission is a perfect example. Bush was against it but the left howled and pressed. So once again he gave them what they thought they wanted. I know he knows that they never fail to under-estimate how out of touch they are and where the line was they crossed over.

Reply 79 - Posted by: recallhillary.com, 4/15/2004 11:13:27 AM Per #55, please send Ms. Gorelick an e-mail at her firm. AND, I'll suggest a way to flummox her: Don't title the e-mail with something like "Please Resign." She'll just delete. Rather, title it with something that will make her think it's law firm business, as with an issue related to corporate litigation, using the name of a partner or a "Fortune 500" corporation. I did that with mine.

Reply 80 - Posted by: LadyVet, 4/15/2004 11:26:00 AM Ditto #75 on the free after-action report for ObL and aQ. RE #40 and the pardon-for-money program administered by Huge Rodman, did he every REALLY repay the $200,000. I think he spent it all at McDonalds. This is the same way the Democrats ''repay'' all their loans. They book it as a payable, then when everyone has forgotten, they write the debt off and take it back. There is NEVER a credit to cash.

Reply 81 - Posted by: recallhillary.com, 4/15/2004 11:29:46 AM Also, Ms. Gorelick's FAX # is 202-663-6363. If she's married and her husband's name is David, there's a home phone # opportunity.

Reply 82 - Posted by: sunflower, 4/15/2004 11:31:44 AM Mr. Fielding is the only honest memeber of the Commission. jamie horelick should definitely be a witness, not questioning the people who followed her disgusting Memo, which protected our enemies, and tied the hands of the FBI/CIA. What a POS is jamie horelick. The rest of the panel, excluding Mr. Fielding, should all be dismissed, and the Commission should be made up of private citizens, with no axe to grind on either side. It could be done, but the deemonkRATS on this panel definitely are trying to nail President Bush in the name/disguise of the DNC.

Reply 83 - Posted by: MargaretM., 4/15/2004 11:44:42 AM I sent my remarks to the 9-11 Commission and this to Jamie: Ms. Gorelick: It is clear to anyone hearing John Ashcroft's testimony that you are on the wrong side of the table in the 9-11 Commission hearings. Your efforts to hamstring intelligence sharing between government agencies led directly to 9-11. You should be ashamed of your actions, and denunciations of the Bush team, which has to pick up the pieces of the Clinton Administration's dereliction of duty. If I were you, I would resign from the Commission. But, then, I have a conscience.

Reply 84 - Posted by: proudconservative, 4/15/2004 11:50:00 AM I sent my email to the commission, got the auto answer reply... I suggest we all send one a day, one of them is bound to get thru to someone. I can't imagine someone just sitting there hitting delete everytime an email comes thru, or am I just too naive?

Reply 85 - Posted by: ForNow, 4/15/2004 11:50:35 AM Kean pulls a mask off & underneath it’s—Hans Blix.

Reply 86 - Posted by: Yorkiemom, 4/15/2004 11:57:07 AM When exactly did all of this "trial by television" begin? I cannot believe these commissioners are constantly on TV blabbing about everything. They should shut their mouths until it is completed. But, since they haven't, if people don't see them for the preening, ego-driven, partisans they are, they haven't been paying attention. I also believe the "widows" are in cahoots with Gorelick because I heard one of them screeching about her having memos, etc. Kean is a total fool and disgrace.

Reply 87 - Posted by: Ratt, 4/15/2004 11:58:01 AM Well, that convinced me . The DNC is being funded by the Arabs.

Reply 88 - Posted by: ForNow, 4/15/2004 12:15:43 PM Gorelick was a triggerperson & planner of the Wall. This was part of Gorelick’s lawyerly jihad against US intel capability. Now she prospers & thrives on money from Saudi terrorism funders. Sure the funders are in court & deserve represntation & somebody has to do it, why not the firm to which Gorelick belongs? But the American people deserve a 9/11 commission untainted by such conflicts of interest. Gorelick should have recused herself on multiple grounds. Why didn’t she?? There’s a word for Jamie Gorelick: Treasonheart.

Reply 89 - Posted by: veritas4ever, 4/15/2004 12:16:18 PM I'm amazed that the commission sends auto-replies. I have written 8 times without a reply. Thanks for Gorelick's e-mail. One that I sent to commission laying blame for 9-11 on her, Reno and Clinton will go to her office.

Reply 90 - Posted by: arikari, 4/15/2004 12:21:05 PM Have you seen Thomans Vain and Slight Gorton on TV (!!) defending Gorelicker? Moderate Republicans, worthless as usual.

Reply 91 - Posted by: Jackie, 4/15/2004 12:32:04 PM I emailed Kean and told how I felt about his remark about people staying out of their business. I said she should resign and that I personally was sick of the dog and pony show that they were running. And THEY should apologize to us for wasting our money and the time of the good people that are trying to protect us. I wish all hell would break loose with the repubs..but then I might as well wish in one hand.......well...won't finish that thought.

Reply 92 - Posted by: ForNow, 4/15/2004 12:33:53 PM On the other Gorelick thread, somebody said that Republican commissioner John Lehman (former Navy secretary under President Reagan) is defending Gorelick. Don’t Republicans get it after all these years that you can’t trust Clintonistas? Not every person who worked in the Clinton administration was unscrupulous. But Jamie Gorelick was & is a Clintonista. Smiling faces, sometimes. Beware of the handshake. Or: They smile in your face, all the time they want to take your place, the backstabbers.

Reply 93 - Posted by: Margo-Weston, 4/15/2004 12:41:27 PM OK, What do we need to do to get Jamie Gore Lick off? Do we write or call and if so, to whom? I like what one poster said...".Jamie, take down that wall." Who would be the best Republican leader to call?

Reply 94 - Posted by: Christie, 4/15/2004 12:41:58 PM Why is Kean defending GoreLick? I think that there was at least one phone call from a Clinton handiwipe to remind him that he is in grave danger if he takes Jamie Wormouth Gorelick off the commission. She is the embedded Clintonista that has her finger in the Clintonian dike, and I don't just mean Janet Shake & Bake Reno. How do i contact Kean?

Reply 95 - Posted by: bla bla, 4/15/2004 12:43:33 PM I, for one, have not forgotten that then-1st Lady (sic) Mrs. William Jefferson (Hillary) Clinton HUGGED & KISSED Mrs. Yasser Arafat when she came here speaking for Arabs/Muslims. I know the DNC has benefitted greatly from Arab $$$$, and I pray evidence of it will squeak out of all this political wrangling called the 9/11 Commission.

Reply 96 - Posted by: shilohsharps, 4/15/2004 12:46:29 PM Jamie Gorlick must be held accountable - brought on charges of Treason and sued relentlessly by 3,000 familes from New York and hundreds of families from the Pentagon and airline flights of 9/11. She must be personally hounded into the heat-death of total shame and retribution. Then we go after the Beast and Bill.

Reply 97 - Posted by: Burger, 4/15/2004 12:49:45 PM The Old 911 Clinton Legacy Rehabilitation Commision is having trouble.

Reply 98 - Posted by: Primal Screamer, 4/15/2004 12:50:54 PM Her law firm is defending the Suadi against the 9/11 families trying to dry up terrorist funds, and we had 9/11 families in the commission gallery applauding the partisan remarks that Gorelick supports. Amazing.

Reply 99 - Posted by: Cherokee Bill, 4/15/2004 12:55:03 PM Suggest you all email Senator Zell Miller (D-GA) who yesterday called for Gorelick's resignation or the Committee to issue an apology for wasting millions of taxpayer dollars and time and disband. Send Senator Zell an email thanking him for him stance and copy your own Senators. Maybe even copy Senator Zell on your emails to the Committee. I did.

Reply 100 - Posted by: MMC, 4/15/2004 1:03:52 PM On Drudge's website, there is an article about the Counter Clinton Library. It is now an official non profit, tax exempt entity. The Clinton's 160 million dollar 'library' will be used to sanitize the 8 years of fraud and deceit called the Clinton years. There is nothing too low for the Clinton team in reaquisition of power.

Reply 101 - Posted by: Boattail, 4/15/2004 1:07:08 PM Sent the 9-11 an e-mail stating that Mr. Keane is wrong when he says to stay out of their business..Since they were the ones who chose to put this dog and pony show on Television for all the world to see..it has become America's Business. What an embarrassment watching them try to lay this big lying mess at the feet of our President Bush when infact The Clinton Administration including Janet Reno and her sidekick/partner in Crime Mz. GORE-LICK spent years in their DERELICTION OF DUTIES there by allowing the terrorists to fester for years ..We need to stay on them like a duck on a beetle and insist that Gorelick be removed.

Reply 102 - Posted by: GreatPlains, 4/15/2004 1:20:37 PM #50- Jamie Keanlicker is a terrific name !! The Commission is an insult to all Americans. They have turned a day of national tragedy into a Democrat photo op and sound bite exposition. The Commissioners should not be spending time on tv and radio.Don't they have a job to do-like reading and understanding thousands of pages of information ? To show how low many of the Commissioners have sunk, Imus is now a must stop on the preening,vanity tour. Bob Kerrey may as well go on Howard Stern's show and spray whipped cream on lesbians.

Reply 103 - Posted by: white ringer, 4/15/2004 1:41:30 PM I tried to send a message to info@911-commisssion.gov and it was rejected by the recipient. The must have a Gorelick kill-file set up.

Reply 104 - Posted by: ketchuplover, 4/15/2004 1:50:46 PM Take away a "C" for credibility. And take away an "M" for masquerading as impartial and what you have left is the 911 Omission.

Reply 105 - Posted by: walcb, 4/15/2004 1:51:23 PM If the committee wants the people to stay out of "their" business, why are most of the hearings public? I was led to believe it is done so that the general public can participate in some way. Silly me!

Reply 106 - Posted by: LComStaff10, 4/15/2004 1:56:46 PM