Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Salon: Conason on Ashcroft & 9/11 Commission

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
kskiska Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-15-04 10:34 PM
Original message
Salon: Conason on Ashcroft & 9/11 Commission
(snip

What the attempt to blame Gorelick for the manifest failures of the FBI and the CIA really exposed, however, was the reflexive ideological desire to find scapegoats associated with former President Clinton, the right's great Satan. Only Osama bin Laden is responsible for the tragic destruction wreaked on 9/11, conservatives solemnly declare -- but whenever the opportunity arises, they rush to hang Clinton on the same scaffold.

That old impulse may backfire, as it did on Ashcroft. In his opening remarks -- after pompously reminding his audience that he had sworn to tell the truth -- the attorney general made a startling assertion that turned out to be false. He insisted that the Clinton administration had never ordered the assassination of bin Laden. In fact, he claimed to have reviewed the previous administration's authorizations against bin Laden almost as soon as he took office in February 2001.

"Let me be clear," said Ashcroft. "My thorough review revealed no covert action program to kill bin Laden." In other words, all the former Clinton officials who had sworn otherwise, including Clarke, must be lying.

A few minutes later, members of the commission dryly informed Ashcroft that he was badly mistaken. Without saying so directly as to compromise classified material, Richard Ben-Veniste and Fred Fielding both indicated that the commission had obtained a 1998 Clinton "memorandum of notification" specifically targeting the al-Qaida chieftain. Evidently the commission staff found this important document among the Clinton papers withheld by the White House until very recently (and disgorged only after a public complaint by Clinton attorney Bruce Lindsey). It would be interesting to find out why that particular item was held back from the commission by White House lawyers. After being told that the "MON" contradicted his accusation, Ashcroft was forced to swallow his words. He ended up promising that "we'll work to understand that more thoroughly."

more…
http://salon.com/opinion/conason/2004/04/16/911comm/index.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Fridays Child Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-15-04 10:56 PM
Response to Original message
1. The neocons have figured out that they can lie with impunity.
Even if a few in the media call them out on their crap, the majority of the press remains silent or, worse, runs with their lies. For that slimeball Dick Morris to blame Gorelick for 9-11 is a perfect example. As the Salon article points out, Ashcroft's own deputy signed off on the same restrictions a few days before the attacks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tellurian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-15-04 11:00 PM
Response to Original message
2. Turning the screw...
And the final summary in Mr. Conason's article:

"The fact is, the bipartisan commission has been remarkably united on its core issues. Republican commissioners have stood with their Democratic counterparts on many of the most fundamental questions and concerns. It was Chairman Thomas Kean, a lifelong Republican and friend of the president's father, who sharply rejected the charges of partisanship and the calls for Gorelick's resignation. It was Commissioner Slade Gorton, a hard-line conservative and former Republican senator, who reminded Ashcroft of the facts about the Gorelick memo. It was Commissioner Fielding, a former Republican White House counsel, who questioned Ashcroft closely about his ignorance of Clinton's order to kill bin Laden."

"The truth is that conservative critics of the commission aren't concerned about partisanship or conflict of interest. They are voicing the fears of political strategists in the White House. They seek to undermine the commission precisely because it is too bipartisan, too independent -- and too far beyond the reach of Karl Rove. But the commission just keeps on doing its work, and given the scope of what it's finding, the disinformation campaign about it doesn't seem likely to work."


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
0007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-15-04 11:22 PM
Response to Original message
3. I hate having to jump through all those tricky hoops
to read something that should be out for all of us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
librechik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-04 01:07 AM
Response to Original message
4. wow, are we about to learn that democracy actually works?
uhoh, I'm starting to hope. Kill me now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Democat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-04 04:50 AM
Response to Original message
5. Ashcroft lied under oath!
Where is the impeachment?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JawJaw Donating Member (574 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-04 05:04 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. er...


no, he um... "mis-spoke" *cough*
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nlighten1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-04 07:04 AM
Response to Original message
7. Mistaken?
How about perjured?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DinahMoeHum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-04 01:37 PM
Response to Original message
8. Piss poor leadership. . .one trait of this is passing the buck.
* and AG Asswipe have this trait mastered to a T.

:evilfrown:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 13th 2024, 10:26 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC