Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: geode00 who wrote (225603)	3/30/2007 5:06:30 AM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 281500

Rudy has problems... _____________________________________________________________ Giuliani faces questions about Sept. 11 By Larry McShane Associated Press Writer March 30, 2007 NEW YORK --Rudy Giuliani's White House aspirations are inescapably tied to Sept. 11, 2001 -- for better and for worse. While the former mayor of the nation's largest city was widely lionized for his post-9/11 leadership -- "Churchillian" was one adjective, "America's mayor" was Oprah Winfrey's assessment -- city firefighters and their families are renewing their attacks on him for his performance before and after the terrorist attack. "If Rudolph Giuliani was running on anything but 9/11, I would not speak out," said Sally Regenhard, whose firefighter son was among the 343 FDNY members killed in the terrorist attack. "If he ran on cleaning up Times Square, getting rid of squeegee men, lowering crime -- that's indisputable. "But when he runs on 9/11, I want the American people to know he was part of the problem." Such comments contradict Giuliani's post-Sept. 11 profile as a hero and symbol of the city's resilience -- the steadfast leader who calmed the nerves of a rattled nation. But as the presidential campaign intensifies, criticisms of his 2001 performance are resurfacing. Giuliani, the leader in polls of Republican voters for his party's nomination, has been faulted on two major issues: -- His administration's failure to provide the World Trade Center's first responders with adequate radios, a long-standing complaint from relatives of the firefighters killed when the twin towers collapsed. The Sept. 11 Commission noted the firefighters at the World Trade Center were using the same ineffective radios employed by the first responders to the 1993 terrorist attack on the trade center. Regenhard, at a 2004 commission hearing in Manhattan, screamed at Giuliani, "My son was murdered because of your incompetence!" The hearing was a perfect example of the 9/11 duality: Commission members universally praised Giuliani at the same event. -- A November 2001 decision to step up removal of the massive rubble pile at ground zero. The firefighters were angered when the then-mayor reduced their numbers among the group searching for remains of their lost "brothers," focusing instead on what they derided as a "scoop and dump" approach. Giuliani agreed to increase the number of firefighters at ground zero just days after ordering the cutback. More than 5 1/2 years later, body parts are still turning up in the trade center site. "We want America to know what this guy meant to New York City firefighters," said Peter Gorman, head of the Uniformed Fire Officers Association. "In our experiences with this man, he disrespected us in the most horrific way." The two-term mayor, in his appearance before the Sept. 11 Commission, said the blame for the death and destruction of Sept. 11 belonged solely with the terrorists. "There was not a problem of coordination on Sept. 11," he testified. Giuliani was also criticized for locating the city's emergency center in 7 World Trade Center, a building that contained thousands of gallons of diesel fuel when it collapsed after the terrorist attack. The lingering ill will between Giuliani and firefighters was resurrected when the International Association of Fire Fighters initially decided not to invite the former mayor to its March 14 candidates forum in Washington. Other prominent presidential hopefuls, including Republican John McCain and Democrats Barack Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton and John Edwards, addressed the nation's largest firefighters union. According to the Giuliani camp, the contretemps with the union dates to tough contract negotiations in his second term as mayor. His critics deny any political motivation. The IAFF drafted a membership letter -- it was never sent -- that excoriated Giuliani and promised to tell "the real story" about his role in handling the terrorist attack. The then-mayor's decision to change policy on the ground zero recovery effort was "an offensive and personal attack" on firefighters, the letter said, going on to say that Giuliani's "disrespect ... has not been forgotten or forgiven." Giuliani countered the attacks by releasing an open letter of support from retired firefighter Lee Ielpi, whose firefighter son was among the 2,749 victims on Sept. 11. "Firefighters have no greater friend and supporter than Rudy Giuliani," Ielpi said. A contingent of nearly 100 South Carolina firefighters also expressed their support for Giuliani and his White House hopes. Hank Sheinkopf, a veteran political consultant, predicted the 9/11 criticisms could resonate beyond New York during the presidential campaign. "These are very emotional people who will touch a responsive chord with a lot of the electorate," he said. "The things that the 9/11 families say will wind up in television commercials used against Rudy Giuliani." The issues also have forced Giuliani to try to strike a balance to avoid the perception that he's exploiting the attacks for his own personal gain. President Bush faced the same challenge in 2004 when he invoked the attacks to portray himself as a strong and steady leader in the face of terrorism. Some victims' relatives criticized Bush for using the ruins of the World Trade Center in his campaign commercials, while others defended him.

To: geode00 who wrote (225603)	3/30/2007 4:17:54 PM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Questions for Karl Rove – and President Bush ______________________________________________________________ by Elizabeth Holtzman and Cynthia L. Cooper Published on Friday, March 30, 2007 by The San Diego Union-Tribune The stealth dismissal of U.S. attorneys by the Bush administration carries echoes of the Nixon administration firing special prosecutor Archibald Cox in 1973. Now, as then, we may be witnessing criminal acts of obstruction of justice at the highest levels of government. If left to fester, they will poison our system. Cox was investigating White House misdeeds when Nixon told Attorney General Elliot Richardson to fire him. Richardson refused and resigned, as did Deputy Attorney General William Ruckelshaus. Third-in-charge, Robert Bork, complied, and the “Saturday Night Massacre,” as it was called, came to epitomize an imperial administration, acting above the law and using its power to interfere with legitimate processes of justice. Outrage among the American people triggered the impeachment inquiry against Nixon and his eventual resignation. In the current U.S. attorney massacre, the public outrage and the line of inquiry invited by these events feel eerily familiar: Why were these eight U.S. attorneys ousted? Why did the Justice Department misrepresent the reasons for the firings? Why were political aide Karl Rove and other top administration advisers involved in the decisions of whom to fire? Why is Attorney General Alberto Gonzales’ aide who helped coordinate the firings, Monica Goodling, invoking the Fifth Amendment to avoid testifying before Congress? And what did the president know and when did he know it? So far the press and Congress have followed evidence of two patterns of firing – for refusing to smear enemies and refusing to protect friends. Fired prosecutors David Iglesias of New Mexico and John McKay of Washington would not pursue criminal voter fraud charges against political opponents in the way the administration wanted. Fired U.S. Attorney Carol Lam of San Diego had prosecuted and was investigating Republicans. Removal of Frederick A. Black in Guam immediately after he began investigating lobbyist Jack Abramoff, a Bush friend, may be been a precursor to this. A third firing pattern may exist: using firings to influence election outcomes. E-mails suggest political strategist Rove’s involvement. Rove’s job is helping his wing of the GOP win future campaigns. What does that have to do with firing judicial appointees? Consider the districts they served in: Arkansas, site of Hillary Clinton’s first steps into politics as the state’s first lady; San Francisco, Democratic House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s district; Nevada, Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s state; New Mexico, presidential candidate Bill Richardson’s state. North Carolina, home of former senator and presidential hopeful John Edwards, was considered but passed over by the Bush administration’s ax. Arizona, where U.S. Attorney Paul Charleton, with a particular reputation for excellence, was fired, is home to presidential candidate and sometime Bush critic John McCain. Michigan, where the prosecutor was inexplicably fired, is home to chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee and a staunch Iraq war opponent, Carl Levin (up for re-election in 2008). Arizona and Michigan are both important swing states, where vote suppression or trumped up charges could tip the balance in an election. Let’s get to the bottom of this. Congress has many tough questions for Rove and others that need asking and answering now. How were the ousted prosecutors selected? What do the reported 16 to 18 days of missing e-mails say? President Nixon’s office managed to erase audiotapes with key evidence, which became one of the grounds for his impeachment. The current missing e-mails may present the same obstruction of justice. The president must be questioned, too, along the same precise lines as in Watergate: What did he know, and when did he know it? Federal prosecutors have extensive powers and substantial budgets. We need them to investigate mob racketeering, terrorists (homegrown and international), human trafficking, market manipulations, government fraud, environmental crimes, violations of civil liberties and other criminal activities. Deploying them to conduct witch-hunts of politicians of opposing views or to suppress votes is a blatant misuse of their important power. If Rove or President Bush tried to do this, it is they who need firing. A president must uphold the law, not to subvert it for political or partisan ends. As we learned in Watergate, our Constitution and our shared values are more important than any single officeholder. -Holtzman, former prosecutor and member of Congress who served on the House Judiciary Committee during the Nixon impeachment proceedings, and Cooper an attorney, are co-authors of “The Impeachment of George W. Bush” (Nation Books, 2006). signonsandiego.com