Printer Friendly
June
Don’t get caught flat-footed in front of the press! Below is a quick rundown of today’s “must reads.” – John T. Doolittle, House Republican Conference Secretary
The Morning Murmur – Tuesday, June 13, 2006
1. Rove Won't Be Charged in CIA Leak Case - Associated Press
Top White House aide Karl Rove has been told by prosecutors he won't be
charged with any crimes in the investigation into the leak of a CIA
officer's identity.
2. The Gitmo Suicides - New York Post Op-ed
Given the extensive records of the three detainees who committed suicide,
there is little reason to doubt that such people would be more than willing
to lay down their lives to further the jihadi cause.
3. Jefferson Showdown Hurts Only Democrats - USA Today Op-ed
It wasn't long ago that Democrats seemed to have Republicans on the ropes with
charges that the Republican Party had created a "culture of corruption." But
the looming showdown between the CBC and the Democratic Caucus could hurt
the chances of a political revival.
4. Liberal Conference Out of Touch, Stale - Human Events
The opening session of the liberal "Take Back America" conference was behind
schedule and off-topic.
5. Zarqawi connections - Washington Times Op-ed
While the full extent of
Zarqawi's connections with Baghdad are still a matter of debate, it is false
to assert, as AP and others have done since Zarqawi's death, that talk about
the connection is little more than "myth-making" on the part of the Bush
administration.
For previous issues of the Morning Murmur, go to www.GOPsecretary.gov
FULL ARTICLES BELOW:
1. Rove Won't Be Charged in CIA Leak
Case - Associated Press
By JOHN SOLOMON
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Top White House aide Karl Rove has been told by
prosecutors he won't be charged with any crimes in the investigation into
the leak of a CIA officer's identity, his lawyer said Tuesday.
Attorney Robert Luskin said that special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald
informed him of the decision on Monday, ending months of speculation about
the fate of one of President Bush's closest advisers. Rove testified five
times before a grand jury.
Fitzgerald has already secured a criminal indictment against Vice President
Dick Cheney's former chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby.
"On June 12, 2006, Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald formally advised us
that he does not anticipate seeking charges against Karl Rove," Luskin said
in a statement.
"In deference to the pending case, we will not make any further public
statements about the subject matter of the investigation," Luskin said. "We
believe the special counsel's decision should put an end to the baseless
speculation about Mr. Rove's conduct."
Fitzgerald has been investigating whether senior administration officials
intentionally leaked the identity of CIA undercover operative Valerie Plame
in retribution because her husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, sharply
criticized the administration's pursuit of war in Iraq.
Rove, who most recently appeared before a grand jury in April, has admitted
he spoke with columnist Robert Novak and Time magazine reporter Matt Cooper
in the days before they published Plame's name in July 2003.
Rove, however, did not originally tell prosecutors about his conversation
with Cooper, only revealing it after his lawyer discovered a White House
e-mail that referred to it.
Fitzgerald was investigating whether Rove lied or obstructed justice in
failing to initially disclose the conversation. The presidential aide blamed
a faulty memory and sought to testify before the grand jury after finding
the e-mail to correct his testimony.
The threat of indictment had hung over Rove, the man President Bush dubbed
"the architect" of his re-election, even as Rove was focusing on the arduous
task of halting Bush's popularity spiral and keeping Democrats from
capturing the House or Senate in November elections.
Fitzgerald's investigation has been underway since the start of the 2004
election, and the decision not to indict Rove is certain to cheer
Republicans concerned about Bush's low approval ratings and the prospects of
a difficult 2006 congressional election.
"The fact is this, I thought it was wrong when you had people like Howard
Dean and (Sen.) Harry Reid presuming that he was guilty," Republican Party
Chairman Ken Mehlman told Fox News Channel's "Fox and Friends" show Tuesday
morning.
Democrats, on the other hand, had no reason to cheer the development.
"Good news for the White House, not so good news for America," Dean, the
Democratic Party chairman, said Tuesday on NBC's "Today" show.
Rove has been at Bush's sides since his days as Texas governor and was the
architect of Bush's two presidential election victory. A political
strategist, Rove assumed new policy responsibilities inside the White House
in 2005 as deputy chief of staff.
However, as part of the shake-up brought by new White House chief of staff
Joshua Bolton, Rove shed those policymaking duties earlier this year to
return to full time politics.
Fitzgerald's case against Libby is moving toward trial, as the two sides
work through pretrial issues such as access to classified documents.
Libby, 55, was charged last October with lying to the FBI and a federal
grand jury about how he learned and when he subsequently told three
reporters about CIA officer Valerie Plame. He faces five counts of perjury,
false statements and obstruction of justice.
Plame's identity was exposed eight days after her husband, Bush
administration critic and former U.S. Ambassador Joseph Wilson, alleged that
the U.S. government had manipulated prewar intelligence to exaggerate an
Iraqi nuclear threat.
With Rove's fate now decided, other unfinished business in Fitzgerald's
probe focuses on the source who provided Washington Post reporter Bob
Woodwind information about Plame.
Woodwind says his source, who he has not publicly identified, provided the
information about Wilson's wife, several weeks before Novak learned of
Plame's identity. The Post reporter, who never wrote a story, was
interviewed by Fitzgerald late last year.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/C/CIA_LEAK_ROVE?SITE=NCCON&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&SECTION=HOME
2. The Gitmo Suicides - New York Post
Op-ed
June 13, 2006 -- The State Department yesterday distanced itself from an
assistant secretary's weekend assertion that the three detainee suicides at
Guantanamo Bay constituted "a great PR move." OK, that assessment may seem
callous - but why is it so difficult to believe?
Longtime critics of the U.S. prison facility on Gitmo - which is to say,
reflexive foes of the War on Terror - claim the suicides were the inevitable
result of "despair," due to prolonged detention under harsh conditions.
But other factors are at work here. As Rear Adm. Harry Harris, the Gitmo
commander, noted, we're talking about people who "have no regard for human
life, neither ours nor their own."
People who comprise the ranks of suicide bombers, willing joyfully to
sacrifice their own young lives, or take thousands of innocent lives, as
they did on 9/11, to further their warped ideology.
Indeed, the three dead detainees all have serious links to terrorism,
according to the Pentagon.
To wit:
Ali Abdullah Achmed, a Yemeni, was a "mid- to high-level al Qaeda operative"
with close ties to terrorist honcho Abu al-Zubaydah, who has since been
captured.
Turki al-Habardi, a Saudi, was a member of a splinter group that recruits
for al Qaeda.
Yasser Talal Abdullah Yahya al-Zahrani, another Saudi, was "a frontline
Taliban fighter" who took part in a notorious prison uprising in Afghanistan
during which a CIA officer was murdered.
Given their extensive records, there is little reason to doubt that such
people would be more than willing to lay down their lives to further the
jihadi cause.
As Adm. Harris put it: "I believe this was not an act of desperation, but an
act of asymmetric warfare against us" by would-be martyrs who have almost no
weapons left with which to wage war against America.
So how does this help the jihadists, besides giving America another
potential black eye abroad?
For one thing, Gitmo prisoners reportedly had been spreading rumors of a
vision in which the facility would be closed down after three detainees
killed themselves, which would explain the three simultaneous suicides.
After all, we are talking about religious fanatics here.
Or the suicides may have been timed to influence a U.S. Supreme Court
decision, expected later this month, on a lawsuit challenging the lengthy
detentions without trial.
"This may be an attempt to influence the judicial proceedings," said Gen.
Bantz Craddock, who oversees Gitmo as commander of the U.S. Southern
Command.
And with good reason: For all the complaints by self-styled human-rights
watchdogs, Guantanamo is still vital in effectively waging an unconventional
war against a non-traditional enemy.
Sure, conditions there are tough. But those tough conditions have produced
information leading to the capture of other wanted terrorists. Besides,
Daniel Pearl and Nicholas Berg, among others, should have been so lucky as
to suffer no worse than Gitmo-like conditions.
To close the facility down, as the administration's foes demand, is to
endanger America's security.
A dozen or so terrorists set loose from Gitmo quickly returned to the
jihadist war. (For example, Abdullah Mehsud, freed two years ago, proceeded
to engineer the kidnapping of two Chinese workers on the Afghan/Pakistan
border.)
Frankly, we're not going to lose any sleep over such people hanging
themselves with bedsheets.
The world is infinitely better off without them.
http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/editorial/the_gitmo_suicides_editorial_.htm
3. Jefferson Showdown Hurts Only
Democrats - USA Today Op-ed
Posted 6/12/2006 9:58 PM ET
By DeWayne Wickham
This is a fight that shouldn't happen. When the House Democratic Caucus
meets Thursday to decide whether Louisiana's Rep. William Jefferson should
be stripped of his seat on the powerful Ways and Means Committee, members of
the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) are expected to mount a bruising
defense of their colleague.
Last week, the steering committee of the Democratic Caucus voted to
temporarily remove Jefferson from the Ways and Means Committee while federal
investigators determine whether he broke the law while trying to help a
Kentucky company launch a high-tech business in Africa.
"We're asking him to take leave (from the committee) until he clears up this
matter," House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi told me. "He can return with
full seniority" if he's cleared.
While Jefferson has yet to be charged with any wrongdoing, the Kentucky
business owner and a former congressional aide have pleaded guilty to
bribing him. In an affidavit it used to get a warrant to search his
congressional office, the FBI said it videotaped Jefferson taking $100,000
in marked bills from a businesswoman-turned-informant. The G-men later found
$90,000 of that money hidden in the freezer of Jefferson's Washington home.
On Thursday, the CBC denounced the effort to oust Jefferson from the
committee, saying such a move against an unindicted member of Congress is
unprecedented.
Feeble defense
As defenses go, that's a pretty weak one. Sure, Pelosi might be hard pressed
to point to another case in which a Democrat was forced to give up a
committee assignment before being indicted. But every precedent has a
beginning. And when it comes to the kind of ethical and criminal violations
Jefferson is accused of, a beginning is just what's needed if Democrats want
to claim the ethical high ground in Washington.
It wasn't long ago that Democrats seemed to have Republicans, who control
both houses of Congress, on the ropes with charges that the Republican Party
had created a "culture of corruption."
One bribe-taking Republican, former representative Randy "Duke" Cunningham
of California, has landed in jail, and Tom DeLay of Texas, the once-dreaded
majority leader of the House of Representatives, quit Congress on Friday as
another corruption investigation - involving former lobbyist Jack Abramoff -
nips at his heels. Before Abramoff's case runs its course, several other
Republicans might have to fall on their swords.
Lost opportunity
Democrats had hoped the GOP's problems would help them pick up enough voter
support in November to retake control of Congress. But the looming showdown
between the CBC and the Democratic Caucus, which threatens to pit black and
white Democrats against each other, could hurt the chances of a political
revival.
CBC's chairman, Rep. Mel Watt, D-N.C., said blacks might view the Democratic
Caucus' move against Jefferson in racial terms. "You've got a whole base of
people out there who believe that the Democratic Party takes them for
granted already," Watt said last week.
He's right. But in this case it is Jefferson who appears to be taking blacks
for granted. By clinging to his committee seat, Jefferson has sparked a
rupture among House Democrats that threatens to inflict lasting wounds. The
only beneficiary would be the GOP, which black voters have roundly rejected
in virtually every recent federal election.
Jefferson's problems - captured by FBI video and audio recordings - are of
his own making. Maybe the investigation will conclude that they amount only
to bad judgment. Maybe he's simply guilty of being in the wrong place at the
wrong time. Or, maybe the legal trouble he faces is much more serious.
Whatever the case, Jefferson should acquiesce to Pelosi's demand that he
step down from the committee whose membership he is accused of abusing. If
such a request is unprecedented, it is also long overdue.
DeWayne Wickham writes weekly for USA TODAY.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/columnist/wickham/2006-06-12-jefferson-democrats_x.htm
4. Liberal Conference Out of Touch, Stale
- Human Events
by Amanda B. Carpenter
Today the liberal Campaign for America's Future kicked off their Take Back
America 3-day conference with a slew of politicians scheduled to speak under
the theme "The Common Good."
I had the chance to attend the conference for a short session this afternoon
and wanted to share with you what seemed to be on the minds of our liberal
(although they label themselves "progressive") friends.
I arrived at the conference in time to listen to Rep. Barbara Lee (D.-Calif.)
give a speech she called "First Step: Iraq: Out of the Morass," but her
panel was running 45 minutes behind schedule.
Instead, I walked into a break-out session titled "Building Power: People of
Color & the Progressive movement" where the moderator spent the first ten
minutes thanking various groups, like the Hip-Hop Caucus, for being present.
The moderator's thanks promoted the mentioned groups to respond with lengthy
whoops and cheers.
After this cycled on for four or five groups, I quietly walked out.
I took a walk around the bottom floor where political vendors peddle their
t-shirts, subscriptions and ideology, except no one seemed to be peddling
anything. Most of the booths were unmanned and simply left their leaflets
sitting lonely on folding tables.
While walking through the area I picked up a subscription of Ms. Magazine,
the Nation and American Prospect. I also took a few of the Nation's buttons
that said "Secrecy Promotes Tyranny" "Leave No CEO Behind" and "Dissent
Promotes Democracy."
One young man did call out to me to ask me if I was interested in learning
about how to protect Social Security. Normally, I would have engaged him,
but it just seemed too lonely down there to stay. I smiled and said no.
Stationed around the conference were several signs promoting the anti-Tom
DeLay film by Robert Greenwald "The Big Buy: Tom DeLay's Stolen Congress,"
one of the featured films this evening. One sign called it a "sexy film
about corruption in Congress." I wondered if many of the attendees were
aware DeLay had officially left Congress last week.
I made my way back into the main conference room to find it was still behind
schedule. It seemed I had missed most of the excitement of the day when
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D.-Nev.)was shouted over when he told the
audience what he thought the President should do about Iraq. According to
conference goers several people yelled at Reid "End the war now!"
The audience was appeared to be mostly white, elderly and middle to upper
class (except for the group I encountered in the break out room). Many were
taking notes and were most energized by Rep. Jan Schakowsky's (D.-Ill.)
speech on healthcare and how government should increase access to low-cost
drugs.
Other topics that seemed to be hot with attendees and highly featured on the
agenda besides the war and healthcare were: organizing unions, grooming
local candidates and winning local races and CEO pay.
I did not see or hear any mention of immigration issues in my short visit to
the conference, but I plan on making a trip there to hear speeches from Sen.
Hillary Clinton, Rep. Nancy Pelosi and Sen. John Kerry in the morning so
that may change.
http://www.humaneventsonline.com/rightangle/index.php?title=liberal
5. Zarqawi connections - Washington Times
Op-ed
Published June 13, 2006
In the wake of Abu Musab Zarqawi's death, mainstream media organs like the
New York Times and Newsweek have run chronologies of the archterrorist's
life that omit mention of his stay in Baghdad in 2002, while others,
including the Associated Press, have attempted to discredit the Bush
administration's claims that Zarqawi was a link between Iraq and al Qaeda.
As Stephen Hayes shows in the Weekly Standard, the AP account is wrong.
While the full extent of Zarqawi's connections with Baghdad are still a
matter of debate, it is false to assert, as AP and others have done since
Zarqawi's death, that talk about the connection is little more than
"myth-making" on the part of the Bush administration.
According to AP reporter Patrick Quinn's account, then-Secretary of State
Colin Powell's Feb. 5, 2003, presentation to the U.N. Security Council, in
which he cited Zarqawi's presence in northern Iraq as proof of Saddam
Hussein's links with al Qaeda, was "later debunked by U.S. intelligence
officials." Mr. Quinn was wrong, as Mr. Powell's statement was actually
confirmed by the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report. In his
remarks before the Security Council, Mr. Powell, (who is not known for
pro-war bombast) bluntly informed the council that there was a "sinister
nexus between Iraq and the al Qaeda terrorist network, a nexus that combines
classic terrorist organizations and modern methods of murder. Iraq today
harbors a deadly terrorist network headed by Abu Musab al Zarqawi, an
associate and collaborator of Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda lieutenants."
The secretary of state mentioned Zarqawi's terrorist training in
Afghanistan, and the fact that he had set up a chemical weapons facility in
Kurdish-controlled northern Iraq. But in addition, Mr. Powell noted that in
May 2002, Zarqawi traveled to Baghdad for medical treatment and spent two
months recuperating there: "During this stay, nearly two dozen extremists
converged on Baghdad and established a base of operations there. These al
Qaeda affiliates, based in Baghdad, now coordinate the movement of people,
money and supplies into and throughout Iraq for his network, and they've now
been operating freely in the capital for more than eight months." Saddam
Hussein's aides denied any link with al Qaeda, but this was demonstrably
false, Mr. Powell said: "We know these affiliates are connected to Zarqawi
because they remain even today in regular contact with his direct
subordinates, including his poison cell plotters, and they are involved in
moving more than money and material."
According to the AP story, Mr. Powell's statement was "debunked." This is
untrue. As noted by the intelligence committee's July 9, 2004, report on
prewar intelligence, the U.N. speech "was carefully vetted" by U.S.
officials, and none of the information in the speech "differed in any
significant way" from earlier CIA assessments. Indeed, a careful reading of
the section of the report dealing with prewar intelligence (much of it
blacked out for intelligence reasons) suggests that the Zarqawi connection
was just one of many reports of links between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda
that U.S. intelligence devoted considerable time to investigating in the
years leading up to the war.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20060612-093253-7816r.htm
### |
