Senate Agrees to Closed Session

[NewJerseyDem]

http://www.rollcall.com/issues/49_79/news/4394-1.html (subscription required)

For the first time since the impeachment trial of then-President Bill Clinton, the Senate is formally planning a closed-door session that will allow Senators to have a frank, off-the-record discussion about how intelligence was handled in the run-up to the war in Iraq.

Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) and Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) reached a final agreement on holding the executive session on intelligence Thursday night, after Democrats threatened to force the unusual procedure on their own.

“Daschle and Frist have come to an agreement that this is something they will do in the future, but no details have been agreed to,” said Amy Call, spokeswoman for Frist.

While no date and format have been agreed on, executive sessions of the Senate require that all staff save for a handful of key aides clear the chamber, and the galleries are emptied of spectators and press. C-SPAN cameras are turned off, and the few aides who remain in the chamber must sign a document swearing themselves to secrecy, punishable by contempt charges.

[Stuckinthebush]

1. Closed sessions and democracy don't go together

Just my humble opinion....

[Fla_Dem]

7. if we lived in a democracy

that would matter.

[mac2]

9. Closed meeting of our representatives is unconstituional

Closed and secret meetings are undemocratic and dangerous. They make deals behind our backs...like those middle of the night voice votes. It is not right. I am not humble about it at all. It stinks!!!

It is tyranny to keep us in the dark.

[CrownPrinceBandar]

25. I agree, this sounds fishy

My suggestion is to call or write your representatives and let them know this is wrong and the appearance of impropriety is as great (if not worse) than Scalia huntin' wit Cheney.

[KansDem]

2. I wonder who called for this?

I wonder who initially requested a closed-door hearing? And why?

[NewJerseyDem]

5. Democrats have been requesting it (n/t)

[duhneece]

19. I heard the Senate Intelligence Com'ee will investigate exagerations

A friend just told me that the Senate Intelligence Committee said Thursday that it planned to investigate whether White House officials exaggerated the Iraq threat or pressured analysts to tailor their assessments of Baghdad's weapons programs to bolster the case for war.
So I sort of feel it's a good thing, but also feel the internal conflict because I usually hate 'behind closed door' meetings.

[JohnOneillsMemory]

32. 2/16/04 Time mag. cover story-Sen. Intel. Com. will investigate OSP!!

Last week's Time magazine cover story about W's credibility gap reported that Senate Intelligence Committee co-chair Pat Robertson (R) had agreed to Jay Rockefeller's (D) request to expand the 'Iraq War Intel' inquiry to include whether the White House had 'mishandled' intelligence and will also look at the Office of Special Plans' role in justifying this illegal war with cooked data.

That's why it is a closed door session, something only done in the direst of national emergencies.

This is the beginning of the end for this administration. They've blown the cover of the corporateers and that isn't allowed.

Even the Republicans in Congress don't appreciate being lied to and made to look bad in front of an angry public. It gets in the way of being re-elected and looting the treasury for themselves.

Refer to the 11th Commandment: DON'T GET CAUGHT.

[Wickerman]

3. Let me guess, Cheney will helm it

:eyes: Sorry, this should be done under the scrutiny of the entire nation. They already proved they will do anything to win - last poignant example was the medicare "vote" - complete with threats and bribes and bizarre extended roll call.

[mn9driver]

4. The rationale is that they will be discussing classified

information and sources. Senators should be able to go public with any other part of the session, just not the classified part. If they pull a veil of secrecy over the entire thing, with no public statements allowed, you can bet on a cover-up.

[mac2]

11. They want to pass that S 89 IS Draft Bill....

They are trying to sneak it in? Have you read it? Search this site..I posted it. Go to the government Thomas directory to S89 IS. Along with the Smart Border Bill it is scary and not at all like other draft bills that I can remember. It's more than a draft bill. They give Bush unimited powers over who goes, how long, movement in and out of the country, etc.

I've complained to the ACLU...let's see what they do. I asked my Senators if they read it? Like the Patriot Act..I doubt it.

Citizens are getting angry about their lies, corruption,debt,etc. Public investigations of 9/11 by citizens will be held in San Francisco, etc.

They are up to no good...from what I can tell.

[goobergunch]

18. They can't pass legislation in closed session (n/t)

[LeftHander]

6. Dem are going to call out GOP...

SOunds like a good old shouting match. Dems are going to ream the GOP and tell them either you are "with us or against us" in outing Bush's lies. If the GOP leaders don't go along I think they will kiss there careers goodbye.

I'll put money on it that the Dems has several smoking guns and are going to give the GOP senators a chance to return to America and leave Bush's Amerika behind.

[ChompySnack]

8. Oh, how I hope you are right

I too think that something is afoot. This may also be in part to cover up some damaging information about the Republican theft of documents.

[TruthIsAll]

13. You are witnessing the birth of the impeachment process..

Bush will never make it to November..

[mobuto]

14. ???

Unless your understanding of the Constitutional process is different than mine, what are you talking about?

1. This is the Senate, not the House (which impeaches a President.

2. Why would Republicans impeach their own President? Maybe if he engaged in Donner-party cannibalism live on national television, but even then its somewhat doubtful.

[WyLoochka]

26. Read Watergate history, mobuto

The Senate's televised hearings, ramrodded by the late great Senator Sam Irvin, focused the light of day on the Nixon admin's crookedness and subversion of democracy.

The dirty details brought to light by the Senate hearings, as well as investigative journalists, gave the House no choice but to move to impeach Nixon. And it was a pub senator, Barry Goldwater, who went to tell the news to Nixon - resign or be impeached and driven out and then likely indicted, arrrested and convicted.

[Beam Me Up]

22. Why do you say this?

I think I hope you're right. I mean, I certainly want * out of office--and the sooner the better--but an impeachment would detract from the campaign and elections, for one thing. It seems to me that the elite's #1 aim is to distract and fragment with divisive issues the social forces that could confront it directly. Gay marriage is a perfect example. It has its own level of importance but compared to the real questions of who is in control of our government, what their aims are, what we're going to do about peak oil, etc., it barely registers on the 'importance' scale.

[kysrsoze]

29. I think the impeachment process would be great

* would be toast. I think it would open up the whole thing and even if the impeachment didn't succeed, members of his cabinet would, causing further ire about his lack of control over his own people.

Besides.....he's earned the impeachment.

[Gman]

24. Please, don't tease me!

That's too good to be true!

We can only wish.

[WyLoochka]

27. I have a libertarian friend

who has been saying this for months, "Bush will never make it to November.."

Hope you guys are right.

[Calico4000]

28. Oh christ

This reminds me of all the "Daschle has a secret plan! Don't worry! SECRET PLAN!" talk before the Iraq resolution. You put FAR too much credit in the senate, IMO.

[truth2power]

10. Dream on!

And pigs will fly....

[WyLoochka]

23. I think you may be right

and that is why the Dems requested an executive session. Perhaps they are going to give the pubs one final opportunity to understand that they HAVE to do the right thing and investigate the White House lies directly by means of a full public investigation - supoenas, televised hearings and all.

The pubs who do have grave concerns about BushCo will be able to express themselves candidly which they couldn't do with a live CSPAN feed - they'd be campaigning, politiking and bushgroveling in front of the cameras and on the record.

that is - IF Cheney is barred from attending. I wonder if the Senate can exclude the President of the Senate (the veep) from executive session, due to the fact that he is a prime suspect for the crimes of originating and orchestrating the traitorous lies constantly spewing forth from the squatters in our White House.

[Mari333]

12. the only deal they should agree to is to IMPEACH BUSH NOW

thats it. bastards .

[Gin]

16. they should ask all the Senators who voted NO....what they saw in the

Intel report that solidified their choice...instead of yes.

[leesa]

15. Ah yes, the foxes inspect the chicken house

I don't trust any of these people. It just gags me that Frist bought his position...waltz in without any experience and becomes the majority leader when he has millions invested in HCA, which will cash in to the tune of billions via the MediCare bill he was hired to force through.

[snippy]

17. This is a start. Next we need public committee hearings on Bush's war.

I expect the White House to try and stop this.

[nadinbrzezinski]

20. Go back 30 years to the hay days of watergate

a lot of what initially happened to move the country in that direction was behind closed doors

The Saturday Night massacre is near to use a term from the era

[Stephanie]

21. Maybe inspired by this bomblet on the Cheney Secret Energy Task Force?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=1125619&mesg_id=1125619">GD thread here

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?040216fa_fact

CONTRACT SPORT
by JANE MAYER
What did the Vice-President do for Halliburton?
Issue of 2004-02-16 and 23
Posted 2004-02-09

<snip>

For months there has been a debate in Washington about when the Bush Administration decided to go to war against Saddam. In Ron Suskind’s recent book “The Price of Loyalty,” former Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill charges that Cheney agitated for U.S. intervention well before the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Additional evidence that Cheney played an early planning role is contained in a previously undisclosed National Security Council document, dated February 3, 2001. The top-secret document, written by a high-level N.S.C. official, concerned Cheney’s newly formed Energy Task Force. It directed the N.S.C. staff to coöperate fully with the Energy Task Force as it considered the “melding” of two seemingly unrelated areas of policy: “the review of operational policies towards rogue states,” such as Iraq, and “actions regarding the capture of new and existing oil and gas fields.”

A source who worked at the N.S.C. at the time doubted that there were links between Cheney’s Energy Task Force and the overthrow of Saddam. But Mark Medish, who served as senior director for Russian, Ukrainian, and Eurasian affairs at the N.S.C. during the Clinton Administration, told me that he regards the document as potentially “huge.” He said, “People think Cheney’s Energy Task Force has been secretive about domestic issues,” referring to the fact that the Vice-President has been unwilling to reveal information about private task-force meetings that took place in 2001, when information was being gathered to help develop President Bush’s energy policy. “But if this little group was discussing geostrategic plans for oil, it puts the issue of war in the context of the captains of the oil industry sitting down with Cheney and laying grand, global plans.”

[nolabels]

31. Cheney’s Energy Task Force + Iraq + 9/11

http://tvnewslies.org/html/cheney_s_secrets.html
(snip)
Although we recognize the need for executive privilege, it is hard to imagine anything related to something as non-national-security related a topic as our an energy policy, that would be such a threat to national security as to declare it off limits to all. By US Law this is public information, but Mr. “Shred the Constitution” Cheney has used every ounce of executive power in order to keep the lid on his meeting notes.

What could they contain? Dealings with the Taliban; negotiating a pipeline perhaps? Enron deals? Does anyone remember that Bush used an Enron company jet to travel during his campaign and that one of his campaign platforms was to deal with the “energy crisis”, which turned out to be nothing more that an Enron scam on California? Could it be details parsing out Iraqi OIL? Hmm? Must be some important stuff in there, Dickey;-)

TVNL accusation: This is a little change up from the way we approach the world. Ordinarily we do not make accusation rather we raise questions where we do not have evidence to actually accuse anyone of anything. This is different. TVNL is going to right out say that we believe that the key to the 9/11 attacks, the war with Afghanistan, the invasion of Iraq and whatever military action we “select” to launch, resides in Dick Cheney’s secret energy policy meeting notes. The press ignores this; we do not. Get to the bottom of this and we will find the truth about all of these issues. TVNL - June 10, 2003.
(snip)
(snip)
How the public's business gets done out of the public eye - The Bush administration has removed from the public domain millions of pages of information on health, safety, and environmental matters, lowering a shroud of secrecy over many critical operations of the federal government. - The administration's efforts to shield the actions of, and the information held by, the executive branch are far more extensive than has been previously documented. And they reach well beyond security issues. - Important business and consumer information is increasingly being withheld from the public - New administrative initiatives have effectively placed off limits critical health and safety information potentially affecting millions of Americans. - Beyond the well-publicized cases involving terrorism suspects, the administration is aggressively pursuing secrecy claims in the federal courts in ways little understood--even by some in the legal system. - New administration policies have thwarted the ability of Congress to exercise its constitutional authority to monitor the executive branch and, in some cases, even to obtain basic information about its actions.
(snip)

[tom_paine]

30. Sounds like Imperial Amerika is transitioning apace

The Empire is now getting closer to beingthe Old Soviet Union. I'll leave it to historians to demaracte the date when Imperial Amerika actually became more like the Old Soviet Union that the Old American Republic from which it sprang.