1
   

Hoekstra Confirms Letter That Gave 'NYT' Another Bush Scoop

 
 
Reply Mon 10 Jul, 2006 08:05 am
Hoekstra Confirms Letter That Gave 'NYT' Another Scoop
By E&P Staff
Published: July 09, 2006 1:05 AM ET updated Sunday

In another story that may not make the White House happy, The New York Times on Sunday reported that it had obtained what it calls "a sharply worded letter" by a top Republican sent to President Bush on May 18, which charged that the administration "might have violated the law by failing to inform Congress of some secret intelligence programs." It also warned that he risked losing his party's support on national security matters.

This was tantalizing, but the four-page letter from Rep. Pete Hoekstra of Michigan, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, did not identify the intelligence activities hidden from Congress. Hoekstra confirmed the story later on Sunday.

The reporters, Eric Lichtblau and Scott Shane, observed: "Recently, after the harsh criticism from Mr. Hoekstra, intelligence officials have appeared at two closed committee briefings to answer questions from the chairman and other members. The briefings appear to have eased but not erased the concerns of Mr. Hoekstra and other lawmakers about whether the administration is sharing information on all of its intelligence operations."

In the letter, according to the Times, Hoekstra wrote: "I have learned of some alleged intelligence community activities about which our committee has not been briefed. If these allegations are true, they may represent a breach of responsibility by the administration, a violation of the law, and, just as importantly, a direct affront to me and the members of this committee who have so ardently supported efforts to collect information on our enemies."

He added: "The U.S. Congress simply should not have to play Twenty Questions to get the information that it deserves under our Constitution."

Hokestra confirmed the story later Sunday, saying, "I take it very, very seriously otherwise I would not have written the letter to the president.

"This is actually a case where the whistle-blower process was working appropriately and people within the intelligence community brought to my attention some programs that they believed we had not been briefed on. They were right," said Hoekstra.

Frederick Jones, a White House spokesman, declined to comment.

Hoekstra's views on oversight appear to be shared by some other Intelligence Committee members, the Times notes.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 124 • Replies: 2
No top replies

 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jul, 2006 08:12 am
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jul, 2006 08:29 am
Has power corrupted Bush? Absolutely
Has power corrupted Bush? Absolutely
http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/
7/5/06

A poll this week finds that anti-Americanism in Britain is unprecedentedly high. An alarming number even "hate" Uncle Sam. This is worrying but not surprising, since it is not unreasonable to fear - and fear engenders hate - the powerful, and America is supremely powerful.

Defenders of America deny this. American power, they say, is on the side of the Angels, a force to be welcomed rather than feared. Rubbish. In this context we would be wise to recall the words of the great 19th-century historian Lord Acton: "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." Lord Acton had emperors, tsars, kings, popes and aristocrats in mind, since in those days they were the wielders of power.

But today it is the democratic and liberal US President. His illegal decision to invade Iraq is pretty conclusive evidence of a judgment corrupted who, at any rate for the time being, is in that corrupting position, and his illegal decision to invade Iraq is pretty conclusive evidence of a judgment corrupted. Much of his administration's rhetoric about seizing this post-Cold War window of opportunity to spread democracy to all mankind - even if this does involve acts of aggression - evokes the same damning conclusion.

Absolute power tends to corrupt absolutely. No exceptions. In the case of 20th-century tyrants like Stalin and Hitler, it certainly did. So far in the 21st century, however, there is only one name to which these words might seem to apply and it is not Osama bin Laden's. This is not being anti-American, it is being anti-power, even liberal and democratic power.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Hoekstra Confirms Letter That Gave 'NYT' Another Bush Scoop
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/02/2024 at 04:18:15