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 : Bush-The Mastermind behind 9/11? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Rock_nj who wrote (3265)10/2/2003 9:41:56 PM
From: Skywatcher  Respond to of 20039
 
This should make for a real independent investigation....HA!
Attorney General Is Closely Linked to Inquiry Figures
By Elisabeth Bumiller and Eric Lichtblau
The New York Times

Thursday 02 October 2003

WASHINGTON - Deep political ties between top White House aides and Attorney General John
Ashcroft have put him into a delicate position as the Justice Department begins a full investigation into
whether administration officials illegally disclosed the name of an undercover C.I.A. officer.

Karl Rove, Mr. Bush's top political adviser, whose possible role in the case has raised questions, was
a paid consultant to three of Mr. Ashcroft's campaigns in Missouri, twice for governor and for United
States senator, in the 1980's and 1990's, an associate of Mr. Rove said on Wednesday.

Karl Rove, President Bush's top political adviser, whose possible role in the case has raised
questions, was a paid consultant to three of Mr. Ashcroft's campaigns in Missouri, twice for governor
and for United States senator, in the 1980's and 1990's, an associate of Mr. Rove said on Wednesday.

Jack Oliver, the deputy finance chairman of Mr. Bush's 2004 re-election campaign, was the director of
Mr. Ashcroft's 1994 Senate campaign, and later worked as Mr. Ashcroft's deputy chief of staff.

Those connections led Democrats on Wednesday to assert that Mr. Rove's connections to Mr.
Ashcroft amounted to a clear conflict of interest and undermined the integrity of the investigation. The
disclosures have also emboldened Democrats who have called for the appointment of an outside
counsel.

On Wednesday the administration worked to ensure that no Republicans in Congress broke ranks
and called for an independent inquiry, and it sought to portray the former diplomat at the center of the
case as a partisan Democrat.

Mr. Ashcroft's predicament over whether to bring in a special counsel is reminiscent of the exchanges
between President Bill Clinton and his attorney general, Janet Reno. Ms. Reno's appointments of
numerous independent counsels to investigate ethics accusations against the Clinton administration
fueled tensions between her and the president, and by the end of his second term, associates said,
the two were said to be barely on speaking terms.

In contrast, the president has voiced strong public support for Mr. Ashcroft in recent months, the two
meet almost daily, and the ties between their political aides go back a decade or more.

At the very least, the relationships have given new grist to the Democrats. "This is not like, `Oh,
yeah, they're both Republicans, they've been in the same room together,' " said Roy Temple, the
former executive director of the Missouri Democratic Party and the former deputy chief of staff to Gov.
Mel Carnahan of Missouri. "Karl Rove was once part of John Ashcroft's political strategic team. You
have both the actual conflict, and the appearance of conflict. It doesn't matter what's in the deep, dark
recesses of their hearts. It stinks."

Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the House Democratic leader, said she was particularly
concerned about the past campaign work that Mr. Rove did for Mr. Ashcroft. "Given allegations about
the involvement of senior White House officials and the past close association between the attorney
general and those officials, the investigation should be headed by a person independent of the
administration," Ms. Pelosi said.

On Wednesday, Justice Department officials would not rule out the possibility of Mr. Ashcroft's
appointing a special counsel, or recusing himself from the inquiry.

"We're leaving all legal options open," said Mark Corallo, a department spokesman.

And the associate of Mr. Rove said of the attorney general, "He's going to have to recuse himself,
don't you think?"

Mr. Bush himself salvaged Mr. Ashcroft's political career by selecting him as attorney general after
Mr. Ashcroft lost his Senate race in 2000 to Mr. Carnahan, who was killed in a plane crash just before
the election.

In 2001, Mr. Ashcroft recused himself from an investigation into accusations against Senator Robert
G. Torricelli of New Jersey because Mr. Torricelli had campaigned against him in Missouri. Mr.
Torricelli withdrew from his re-election race.

Mr. Bush and Mr. Ashcroft say that the Justice Department will be fair and thorough, and Justice
officials say that the investigation will be handled independently by attorneys in the criminal division's
counterespionage section. "Career professionals with decades of experience in these kinds of cases
are fully capable of conducting a thorough and complete investigation," said a senior Justice
Department official.

On Monday, the White House dismissed as "ridiculous" the suggestion that Mr. Rove had illegally
disclosed the identity of the Central Intelligence Agency officer to journalists to intimidate the officer's
husband, Joseph C. Wilson IV, a former diplomat who has been critical of the administration's use of
intelligence to justify the war in Iraq. Mr. Wilson initially charged that Mr. Rove was behind the leak,
but he has since backtracked, saying that he only suspects Mr. Rove is the source.

Justice Department officials said that it was too early to say which administration officials would be
subjects of their investigation, but they are likely to seek information from many senior advisers at the
White House, including Mr. Rove.

An associate said Mr. Rove had been hired by Mr. Ashcroft in 1984, in Mr. Ashcroft's first successful
race for governor of Missouri, to handle the campaign's mail solicitations for political contributions. The
associate said Mr. Rove also handled Mr. Ashcroft's direct-mail solicitations for his 1988 re-election
campaign and his 1994 Senate campaign, both of them successful.

By 1998, Mr. Rove had sold his direct-mail operation, Karl Rove and Company of Austin, Tex., at the
request of Mr. Bush, who was considering a run for president and wanted his political aide
unencumbered. In 2000, Mr. Rove worked for Mr. Bush and played no official role in Mr. Ashcroft's
losing Senate race.

On Wednesday, Mr. Rove referred calls about his work for Mr. Ashcroft to Claire Buchan, a White
House spokeswoman. Ms. Buchan said Mr. Rove recalled handling direct mail solicitations for two of
Mr. Ashcroft's campaigns, not three.

"That was his recollection," Ms. Buchan said. "He wasn't sure on the dates. He said yes on '94 and
maybe another race as well."

Even some Republicans, while united in their belief that there is no need for an outside counsel, say
Mr. Ashcroft will be hit hard by his political detractors if the investigation drags on.

"All of these so-called scandals can snowball and every new crumb of information turns into a
front-page story above the fold," a Senate Republican aide said. "The Democrats are going to make of
this what they will, but the reality is you could have the pope do the investigation and they'd still be
screaming bias."

The furor over the case finds Republicans and Democrats reversing their roles from the final years of
the Clinton administration. Then, Attorney General Reno was dogged by calls from Republicans to
appoint an outside counsel to investigate accusations of campaign finance abuses by Mr. Clinton and
Vice President Al Gore.

-------CC



To: Rock_nj who wrote (3265)10/3/2003 8:08:55 AM
From: LPS5  Respond to of 20039
 
One thing that has been frustrating for Libertarians is the way the Green party took the country by storm in the 2000 election cycle.

Oh, has it been "frustrating" for us? LOL.

The Libertarians have been around in the U.S. for at least a decade longer than the Greens (I believe the Libertarians came into being in 1972)...

That's about right, although other parties held essentially the same platform as the Libertarian Party under different names prior to that ("Constitutionals," etc.).

...but they never mounted a Presidential campaign as successful as the Greens in 2000.

That's true. They take issue with, among other things, Libertarian gun ownership, anti-affirmative action, and anti-welfare platforms. In my analysis, the Greens are slightly more socialist than Democrats and more apt to be found following Phish or Dave Matthew on tour.

Perhaps they need a higher profile Libertarian candidate to bring in the votes.

Definitely. But that takes money, and once you've alienated those interests who stand to lose...or, at least, not gain...from eliminating wasteful layers of the government, from making markets freer and from flushing New Deal-era socialism away...there aren't a lot of funding sources left.

Also, the Greens have made more gains on the local level than the Libertarians have.

Completely untrue. Almost all elected offices held by Libertarians - over 300, at last count, which is more than any other party outside the Demorepublicrat circuit - were in local and municipal offices.

lp.org

You're right, there really isn't much reason to vote Democratic or Republican anymore. They're both in service to the wealthy elites. Both institutionalized corruption.

That certainly characterizes Republican politics, one of whom recently referred to Libertarians as "anarchists." ROFL!

Both don't have the common man's interest in mind.

I think that is the problem with the Democrats. The private property rights guaranteed by the Constitution effectively prohibit state redistribution where the benefit of other social or economic classes are concerned, but that doesn't stop our fearless funnelers on the Beltway.

It's finally time that people defected to third parties and voted their concience [sic].

You belong in the Green Party, LOL. ;-)

I have been a registered Democrat all of my life. I have sympathy for some of the Libertarian positions, especially drug legalization (I have to commend them for coming out in favor of drug legalization before anyone dare mention it) and other civil liberties positions. But, I think I'm more of a Greenie on social issues and economic issues. I'm way too much of a collectivist to vote Libertarian, and the Greens support drug legalization too. So, perhaps I'll be voting Green this time around, unless the Dems put forward a really progressive ticket with Dean at the top.

Good luck. I think we're headed for four more years of Bush, personally.

LPS5