SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Impeach George W. Bush -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: MSI who wrote (12684)5/26/2002 4:24:39 PM
From: Tadsamillionaire  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 93284
 
Daschle: No Conflict, Won't Release Tax Returns
At a May 14 press briefing, Daschle told a reporter it would be "a very serious ethical violation" if the Republican Party used a White House photographer or government property in offering contributors a photo of President Bush taken on September 11. Immediately after Daschle gave this answer, Human Events Assistant Editor David Freddoso asked him if it was a conflict of interest for his wife to lobby for major government contractors and whether he would release the joint tax return he and his wife file detailing the income she receives from that lobbying. Here is a transcript of the exchange:

Reporter: Sir, do you think it’s appropriate that Republicans are selling photographs of President Bush fielding calls on September 11 in—as a fundraising technique?

Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D.-S.D.): Well, I don’t have all the information yet. As you know this story just broke this morning. But I think that, clearly, there would be a very serious ethical violation were White House photographers or any government property involved in this affair. We’ll have to get more information before we comment more publicly on that.

Human Events: Sir, Sen. McCain [R.-Ariz.] has criticized a proposal for the Air Force to lease Boeing 767s. Isn’t it a conflict of interest for Mrs. Daschle, the wife of the man who sets up every vote in the Senate, to lobby for major government contractors like Boeing?

Daschle: Well, my wife doesn’t lobby in the Senate at all. So—she has limited her activities to the House, and I think that’s appropriate.

Human Events: Senator, did you and your wife file a joint tax return this year? And if so, will you release it?

Daschle: Yes, we did. We always do.

Human Events: Would you release it, sir?

Daschle: No, we don’t.

Human Events: Will you?

Daschle: No.

Human Events: Thank you.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Thursday, May 16, Human Events Editor Terence P. Jeffrey and Assistant Editor David Freddoso left a set of questions on the voicemail of Linda Hall Daschle, wife of Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D.-S.D.). The questions pertained to her lobbying activities. (See cover story.) Jeffrey and Freddoso also sent the questions to her directly via e-mail. Later that day, Human Events received an e-mail response made on Mrs. Daschle’s behalf by Bob Bauer.

Here is the e-mail exchange between Human Events and Mrs. Daschle and her representative:

Dear Mrs. Daschle,

We just left a message on your voice mail asking questions relevant to stories we are working on (deadline this afternoon) about your lobbying activities. For your convenience here are our questions in writing:

1) Isn’t it a conflict of interest for you to represent and derive income from government contractors when your husband is responsible for scheduling votes relevant to their government business?

2) Do you consider it a conflict of interest for you to represent companies who received contracts from the FAA under your watch as Deputy and Acting Administrator?

3) How did you secure Intelli-Check as a client? Did you approach them? Or vice versa?

4) What did you do for Intelli-Check? Did you set up meetings on their behalf with any government agency or official in the Administration or the legislature? Did you make any contacts with such people on their behalf? If so, whom did you meet with, or contact?

5) Would it be a conflict of interest for First Lady Laura Bush or for the Vice President’s wife, Lynne Cheney, to lobby for government contractors?

6) Would it have been appropriate for Laura Bush or Lynne Cheney to lobby the federal government, after September 11, on behalf of a company marketing an "anti-terrorism" device?

Our deadline is this afternoon. Thank you for your consideration.

—David Freddoso and Terry Jeffrey

I am replying on behalf of Linda Hall Daschle to your questions.

Your questions assume generally that Linda Hall Daschle’s independent professional life has generated some ongoing "conflict of interest," because her husband is a member of the United States Senate and its Majority Leader.

Mrs. Daschle does not accept any suggestion that she cannot pursue this independent career, which preceded her marriage to Senator Daschle.

Mrs. Daschle has, however, addressed any potential conflict by adopting a policy, which exceeds the requirements of conflict-of-interest rules or requirements, of not representing clients in the United States Senate. In other words, rather than avoiding any lobbying of her husband and his office, she will also not lobby any other Senator, their staffs or Committees. This policy is noted on each of the reports she files pursuant to the Lobbying Disclosure Act. Moreover, you should be aware that unlike other Republican spouses of high-level office holders, such as Rebecca Cox [wife of Rep. Chris Cox], Ms. Daschle signed a pledge not to lobby for [sic] her former agency for four years. [Editor’s note: The Clinton Administration had a five-year ban on lobbying one’s former agency. Then-Rebecca Range left the Department of Transportation in 1987, not to lobby but to join the Reagan White House.]

Spouses and even children of both Democratic and Republican elected officials have been recognized to have the right to pursue independent professional careers, as Lynne Cheney has. We note, for example, Mrs. Phil Graham’s [sic] service on the board of Enron following her tenure on the CFTC, which had regulated the company, and while her husband served as Chair and Ranking Member of the Senate Banking Committee. Elizabeth Dole directed the Red Cross, which receives substantial federal assistance, while her husband served in the Senate as Majority Leader, and Elaine Chao headed the United Way while her husband [Sen. Mitch McConnell] served as Chair of the Rules Committee.

In some cases, spouses have seen fit to adopt some limitations to avoid actual or perceived conflicts, as Linda Hall Daschle has done in declining to represent clients before the United States Senate and pledging to avoid any lobbying of her former agency, the FAA, for four years. Other spouses have not addressed the issue at all or have declined to adopt such measures.

These facts do not appear to have informed or influenced your questions. Perhaps your reporting will now take on this broader perspective. If it does not, then the suggestion of partisan bias—rather than objective "newsgathering"—will be inescapable.

As for Intellicheck [sic], Ms. Daschle was approached by the company and pleased to assist in their desire to demonstrate their identity verification technology to the aviation industry and the federal government.

humaneventsonline.com



To: MSI who wrote (12684)5/26/2002 4:35:06 PM
From: Tadsamillionaire  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 93284
 
Graham: We Had Same Info As Bush
By David Freddoso
Sen. Bob Graham (D.-Fla.), chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, told Human Events May 21 that his committee had received all the same terrorism intelligence prior to September 11 as the Bush administration.

"Yes, we had seen all the information," said Graham. "But we didn’t see it on a single piece of paper, the way the President did." (A transcript of his remarks.)

Graham added that threats of hijacking in an August 6 memo to President Bush were based on very old intelligence that the committee had seen earlier. "The particular report that was in the President’s Daily Briefing that day was about three years old," Graham said. "It was not a contemporary piece of information."

Graham’s comments contradicted combative statements made recently by the Democratic congressional leadership, and confirmed White House assertions that the only specific threats of al Qaeda hijackings known to the President before September 11 came from a memo dating back to the Clinton Administration.

‘Not Surprised’

A leak to CBS News of some pre-September-11 warnings given to the President in August occasioned fierce political attacks on Bush beginning May 16—even though the basic content of the leaks had long been known. As early as September 18, CNN had already reported that administration officials admitted to being aware of vague threats against U.S. targets before September 11. Also, a publicly available 1995 government report had even warned that terrorists could use airplanes in suicide attacks.

Still, Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D.-S.D.) and House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt (D.-Mo.) both made public statements attempting to stoke a scandal on the supposition that Bush withheld vital intelligence from Congress both before and after September 11. Both Democrats strongly implied that Bush sat on information that could possibly have been used to prevent the terrorist attacks of September 11.

"I’m gravely concerned that the President received a warning in August about the threat of hijackers by Osama bin Laden and his organization," said Daschle. "Why was it not provided to us, and why was it not shared with the general public for the last eight months?"

Daschle also asserted that Congress did not have the same information as the White House—implying that the White House alone was to blame for not acting on the information. "I think it is important to emphasize we did not have identical information," he said in a May 16 news conference, in clear contradiction with Graham’s statements to Human Events.

On May 22, Daschle again accused Bush of hoarding information, even trying to blame him for the FBI’s intelligence failure of September 11. "There is an increasing pattern that I find in this administration that reflects an unwillingness to share information not only with us but within their own administration," he told reporters.

Gephardt also implied that the administration was blameworthy for its handling of the intelligence reports. "The reports are disturbing that we are finding this out now," he said. Invoking language of the Watergate era, he continued, "I think what we have to do now is to find out what the President, what the White House knew about the events leading up to 9-11, when they knew it and, most importantly, what was done about it at that time." Gephardt also stated that Congress had not received the same intelligence as the White House.

Asked by Human Events on May 22 whether Sen. Graham’s statement changed his view, Gephardt responded with a simple "No" before retreating into the House chamber. Again, the following day, Kori Bernards, a spokeswoman for Gephardt, declined to comment for the record on Graham’s statement.

Other Democrats sensed a political opportunity and went on the attack. Sen. Hillary Clinton (D.-N.Y.) addressed the Senate waving a copy of the New York Post with a characteristically large and sensational headline, "Bush Knew." "The President knew what?" she asked.

Others, including Sen. Dick Durbin (D.-Ill.), Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D.-N.Y.) and Rep. Robert Wexler (D.-Fla.) strongly denounced the President’s conduct in public spoken or written statements.

But as early as May 16, it had already emerged that most of the information in Bush’s August 6 Presidential Daily Briefing—an official intelligence document—had in fact been given to the congressional committees in the form of the Senior Executive Intelligence Digest (SEID), a more widely published classified document.

"Mr. Gephardt said that we didn’t have information," said Rep. Porter Goss (R.-Fla.), chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, on May 16. "In fact we do have it. And it’s just apparently that Mr. Gephardt didn’t know about it."

At that point, Democrats claimed that Bush’s intelligence report had information warning of possible hijackings by Osama bin Laden’s al Qaeda network, and that Congress did not receive that particular information.

But the Democrats’ criticism appeared to be further undercut by Graham’s confirmation to Human Events that the committee did have the same intelligence. Administration officials had earlier said the hijack warnings in Bush’s August 6 briefing were merely an analysis based on old intelligence from 1998.

The committees were indeed aware before September 11 that a major attack could come soon, so much so, that Sen. Graham told CNN’s Kate Snow–on the afternoon of September 11– that he was not suprised.

"I was not surprised that there was an attack, was surprised at the specificity of this one," Graham said in the interview, hours after the attacks.

Expected Backlash

As Democrats appeared to back away from the attacks on Bush over the weekend, Republicans went on the offensive to capitalize on an expected backlash. The Republican Study Committee, a group of about 75 conservative Republicans, released a memo detailing House Democrats’ overwhelming opposition to intelligence funding since 1996. According to the memo, 154 House Democrats voted to cut the U.S. intelligence budget in 1996, while 158 Democrats did the same in 1997. Although fewer Democrats voted to cut the intelligence budget in 1999 (only 61), almost all opposition to intelligence spending came from Democrats.

The memo also quotes several Democrats opposing intelligence spending, including Rep. Maxine Waters (D.-Calif.), who advocated the abolition of the CIA on the House floor in March 1997.

In addition, a Human Events survey of lawmakers found that few—even among Republicans—would have been willing to act decisively on threats of hijacking by Muslim extremists (see page 3). Not one Democrat surveyed would countenance the idea that President Bush, upon learning of the al Qaeda hijacking threat, should have suspended the visas of young men visiting from nations that are al Qaeda hotbeds—even though this measure would likely have prevented the attacks of September 11.

Few support that action even now, after September 11, when new warnings of attacks by al Qaeda have been issued by FBI director Robert Mueller and Vice President Cheney.

humaneventsonline.com