Wow. A stunt, but wow.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20051101/D8DJU0K80.html

Democrats Force Senate Into Iraq Meeting
Email this Story

Nov 1, 4:37 PM (ET)

By LIZ SIDOTI

WASHINGTON (AP) - Democrats forced the Republican-controlled Senate into an unusual closed session Tuesday, questioning intelligence that President Bush used in the run-up to the war in Iraq and accusing Republicans of ignoring the issue.

"They have repeatedly chosen to protect the Republican administration rather than get to the bottom of what happened and why," Democratic leader Harry Reid said.

Taken by surprise, Republicans derided the move as a political stunt.

"The United States Senate has been hijacked by the Democratic leadership," said Majority Leader Bill Frist. "They have no convictions, they have no principles, they have no ideas," the Republican leader said.

(AP) Senate Majority Leader Bill First, R-Tenn., talks to reporters on Capitol Hill Tuesday, Nov. 1,...
Full Image
In a speech on the Senate floor, Reid demanded the Senate go into closed session. The public was ordered out of the chamber, the lights were dimmed, and the doors were closed. No vote is required in such circumstances.

Reid's move shone a spotlight on the continuing controversy over intelligence that President Bush cited in the run-up to the war in Iraq. Despite prewar claims, no weapons of mass destruction have been found in Iraq, and some Democrats have accused the administration of manipulating the information that was in their possession.

Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, was indicted last Friday in an investigation that touched on the war, the leak of the identity of a CIA official married to a critic of the administration's Iraq policy.

"The Libby indictment provides a window into what this is really all about, how this administration manufactured and manipulated intelligence in order to sell the war in Iraq and attempted to destroy those who dared to challenge its actions," Reid said before invoking Senate rules that led to the closed session.

Libby resigned from his White House post after being indicted on charges of obstruction of justice, making false statements and perjury.

Democrats contend that the unmasking of Valerie Plame was retribution for her husband, Joseph Wilson, publicly challenging the Bush administration's contention that Iraq was seeking to purchase uranium from Africa. That claim was part of the White House's justification for going to war.

Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss., said Reid was making "some sort of stink about Scooter Libby and the CIA leak."

A former majority leader, Lott said a closed session was appropriate for such overarching matters as impeachment and chemical weapons - the two topics that last sent the senators into such sessions.

In addition, Lott said, Reid's move violated the Senate's tradition of courtesy and consent. But there was nothing in Senate rules enabling Republicans to thwart Reid's effort.

As Reid spoke, Frist met in the back of the chamber with a half-dozen senior GOP senators, including Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts of Kansas, who bore the brunt of Reid's criticism. Reid said Roberts reneged on a promise to fully investigate whether the administration exaggerated and manipulated intelligence leading up to the war.

Inside the Senate, Democrats sought assurances that Roberts would hold hearings into prewar intelligence. The Senate had been considering a budget bill when it went into closed session.

a completely justified, commendable stunt

Originally posted by wally
Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss., said Reid was making "some sort of stink about Scooter Libby and the CIA leak."

....

In addition, Lott said, Reid's move violated the Senate's tradition of courtesy and consent. But there was nothing in Senate rules enabling Republicans to thwart Reid's effort.
i though we killed those courtesy laws a few years back?

Originally posted by patrick
a complete waste of taxpayer time and money as it was only a stunt for political gain
Repaired.

Originally posted by Nimrod's Son

Repaired.
most things that go on in washington are

Originally posted by Nimrod's Son

Repaired. i'd say our meritless war/quagmire is a bigger waste of taxpayer dollars in the grand scheme of things, hm

Originally posted by patrick
a completely justified, commendable stunt

We have a winner

Originally posted by patrick
i'd say our meritless war/quagmire is a bigger waste of taxpayer dollars in the grand scheme of things, hm

Non sequitors are fun.

Good. It's about time the Democrats step up and play hardball.

This is no worse than Newt's actions (repeated, might I add) and I'm glad someone had the nuts to say, "You know what? Fuck it. This war is fucking wrong and unwinnable and we're going to fight it."

It's too latle - but the GOP is downright awful at the moment and the Democrats have a few shots at regaining some sort of importance in D.C. .. this is one of those ways.

Originally posted by sppunk
Good. It's about time the Democrats step up and play hardball.

This is no worse than Newt's actions (repeated, might I add) and I'm glad someone had the nuts to say, "You know what? Fuck it. This war is fucking wrong and unwinnable and we're going to fight it."

It's too latle - but the GOP is downright awful at the moment and the Democrats have a few shots at regaining some sort of importance in D.C. .. this is one of those ways.
So what you're saying is good for them putting political stunts for their own careers and party ahead of doing the work we pay them to do.

Originally posted by Nimrod's Son

So what you're saying is good for them putting political stunts for their own careers and party ahead of doing the work we pay them to do. I don't think a two-hour closed door session is awful.

If you are attacking this, please condemn every Republican who flew back to D.C. and opened a session on a holiday FOR A FUCKING BRAINDEAD LADY IN FLORIDA.

Seriously, you can't complain about wasting taxpayers dollars over a private session bid, it's retarded. Complain about the billions wasted by the military, NASA, IRS, White House, government no-bid contracts, etc. but not a question/answer session by elected lawmakers.

Originally posted by wally
"They have no convictions, they have no principles, they have no ideas," the Republican leader said.

This whole thing would seem a lot less bloated with disingenuousness had the Democrats not praised the war for the past three years and not nominated a presidential candidate who boasted that he would have supported the war even had he known there were no WMDs.

So I guess that means that I agree with Frist. :(

didn't the republican congress pull the same thing 6 times to have a private discussion on Clinton's sex life?

Originally posted by Ghetto_Squirrel
...nominated a presidential candidate who boasted that he would have supported the war even had he known there were no WMDs.


source, please.

Originally posted by Debaser


source, please.

http://news.myway.com/top/article/id/381249|top|08-09-2004::17:46|reuters.html

Originally posted by Nimrod's Son


Non sequitors are fun.

For a second there I thought you were gonna mention something Clinton did.

Cause you know, all of that is pertinent.

Originally posted by Debaser
didn't the republican congress pull the same thing 6 times to have a private discussion on Clinton's sex life?



But, that was on the technicality of perjury, not a blow job.

Originally posted by sppunk
I don't think a two-hour closed door session is awful.

If you are attacking this, please condemn every Republican who flew back to D.C. and opened a session on a holiday FOR A FUCKING BRAINDEAD LADY IN FLORIDA.
Thank you, someone needed to say that.

Originally posted by sppunk
Good. It's about time the Democrats step up and play hardball.

Hardball? Please. This was about as safe a political stunt as they could have picked. I doubt those balls of steel will hold up when it comes to issues where the public is not so in tune to the Democrats' way of thinking. Let's see how much hardball the Dems wanna play if they start thinking about using the filibuster on Alito's confirmation. (which I think is highly unlikely given this stunt. It seems to me that this move was calculated to knock the GOP down a peg after the nomination. If they thought they could get away with defeating Alito, they wouldn't change the subject so quickly).

Originally posted by Corganist

Hardball? Please. This was about as safe a political stunt as they could have picked. I doubt those balls of steel will hold up when it comes to issues where the public is not so in tune to the Democrats' way of thinking. Let's see how much hardball the Dems wanna play if they start thinking about using the filibuster on Alito's confirmation. (which I think is highly unlikely given this stunt. It seems to me that this move was calculated to knock the GOP down a peg after the nomination. If they thought they could get away with defeating Alito, they wouldn't change the subject so quickly).

What do you think happens if the Dems filibuster Alito and the Gang of 14 dissolves and somehow Frist show a miraculous bout of leadership (which you and I have not seen yet) and pulls off the nuclear option? The GOP effectively neuters themselves the next time their the minority (could be in 13 months) and they get a judge on the court who couldn't get on without a change of the Senate rules.

Frist is a dipshit. He should have never started talking about a nuclear option. The stunt today is his fault. The inmates are running the asylum.

Originally posted by wally

What do you think happens if the Dems filibuster Alito and the Gang of 14 dissolves and somehow Frist show a miraculous bout of leadership (which you and I have not seen yet) and pulls off the nuclear option? The GOP effectively neuters themselves the next time their the minority (could be in 13 months) and they get a judge on the court who couldn't get on without a change of the Senate rules.
That may well be, but I think that the Dems take a big chance in playing such games on the issue of judges. The war, not so much. The public sentiment isn't against them on that. But political gamesmanship holding a supremely qualified judge off of the Supreme Court? I don't think the PR will be on the Dems side at all on that, and if anything might make the nuclear option more favorable. If the Dems piss people off through obstructionist tactics on issues the public deems important, they're not likely to challenge the GOP majority.

Originally posted by Ghetto_Squirrel


http://news.myway.com/top/article/id/381249|top|08-09-2004::17:46|reuters.html

I know that Kerry makes a distinction between the vote for authorizing force (which he would've used as leverage to get the inspectors in and NOT invade) and actually invading like bush did. In his mind, voting yes for authorization did not equal invading iraq.

But since Kerry is such a damn doofus, he never was able to articulate this clearly to the masses.

Originally posted by Debaser
But since Kerry is the worst politician in the world and couldn't connect with Cindy Sheehan on a good day, he never was able to articulate this clearly to the masses.

Originally posted by wally


still better than bush.

Originally posted by Debaser


still better than bush.

I wholeheartedly agree, although admittedly it's not saying much

Originally posted by Debaser


still better than bush. so am I

Originally posted by wally
so am I

that's not saying much either

Originally posted by talk show host


that's not saying much either

I know

Originally posted by Debaser


still better than bush. Four years of Bush > Eight years of Kerry

Originally posted by sppunk
I don't think a two-hour closed door session is awful.

If you are attacking this, please condemn every Republican who flew back to D.C. and opened a session on a holiday FOR A FUCKING BRAINDEAD LADY IN FLORIDA.

Seriously, you can't complain about wasting taxpayers dollars over a private session bid, it's retarded. Complain about the billions wasted by the military, NASA, IRS, White House, government no-bid contracts, etc. but not a question/answer session by elected lawmakers.
I've already made it clear I thought Congress should have stayed out of Shiavo.
I have blasted Bush a number of times on his wasteful spending. I ESPECIALLY can't believe you're calling me on the IRS which I want to DISSOLVE. As for NASA it's usually money well spent but too much of it spent - in that there are huge rewards but we over spend and private industry could do it better if contracted.

If there's one major issue you can't get on me for supporting this administration, it's spending.

Originally posted by Future Boy




But, that was on the technicality of perjury, not a blow job.
Since when is federal perjury a "technicality"?

Originally posted by Corganist

Hardball? Please. This was about as safe a political stunt as they could have picked. I doubt those balls of steel will hold up when it comes to issues where the public is not so in tune to the Democrats' way of thinking. Let's see how much hardball the Dems wanna play if they start thinking about using the filibuster on Alito's confirmation. (which I think is highly unlikely given this stunt. It seems to me that this move was calculated to knock the GOP down a peg after the nomination. If they thought they could get away with defeating Alito, they wouldn't change the subject so quickly).
you're arguing semantics

Originally posted by Nimrod's Son

Since when is federal perjury a "technicality"?


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/24/politics/24leak.html?ex=1287806400&en=6cb9607ccd79f4fd&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
The first defender of treason is Republican Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas.

On Sunday, Republicans appeared to be preparing to blunt the impact of any charges. Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, Republican of Texas, speaking on the NBC news program "Meet the Press," compared the leak investigation with the case of Martha Stewart and her stock sale, "where they couldn't find a crime and they indict on something that she said about something that wasn't a crime."

Ms. Hutchison said she hoped "that if there is going to be an indictment that says something happened, that it is an indictment on a crime and not some perjury technicality where they couldn't indict on the crime and so they go to something just to show that their two years of investigation was not a waste of time and taxpayer dollars."

Originally posted by Future Boy



http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/24/politics/24leak.html?ex=1287806400&en=6cb9607ccd79f4fd&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
The first defender of treason is Republican Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas.

On Sunday, Republicans appeared to be preparing to blunt the impact of any charges. Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, Republican of Texas, speaking on the NBC news program "Meet the Press," compared the leak investigation with the case of Martha Stewart and her stock sale, "where they couldn't find a crime and they indict on something that she said about something that wasn't a crime."

Ms. Hutchison said she hoped "that if there is going to be an indictment that says something happened, that it is an indictment on a crime and not some perjury technicality where they couldn't indict on the crime and so they go to something just to show that their two years of investigation was not a waste of time and taxpayer dollars." So you're saying you agree with Hutchison? Because if not you haven't answered the question.

No see, the smiley implies that I was mocking the bitch.

I thhought you hadnt heard/read what she said, so I posted that.

Originally posted by Future Boy
No see, the smiley implies that I was mocking the bitch.

I thhought you hadnt heard/read what she said, so I posted that.
Hutchinson is dead wrong. Please answer the question.

I have.

Originally posted by Future Boy



No see, the smiley implies that I was mocking the bitch.