Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Waxman: State Department Gags Analyst Who Warned Of Niger Forgery

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-04-07 02:11 PM
Original message
Waxman: State Department Gags Analyst Who Warned Of Niger Forgery
It does not pay to make Mr. Waxman angry, and he appears to be..

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/05/04/rice-waxman-letter/

Waxman: State Department Gags Analyst Who Warned Of Niger Forgery

Three months before President Bush uttered his infamous 16 words, claiming there was evidence that Saddam Hussein was building a nuclear weapon, a State Department analyst named Simon Dodge had determined that the evidence for the claim was likely fraudulent.

Dodge emailed his assessment to fellow intelligence analysts in October 2002, and then again in January 2003 (two weeks before Bush’s State of the Union), saying the documents supposedly from Niger were “probably a hoax” and “clearly a forgery.”

According to Oversight and Goverment Reform Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA), the State Department is now refusing to let Dodge speak to Waxman’s staff, despite the fact that Dodge has indicated he is “willing to cooperate fully” with the investigation.

In a letter to Condoleezza Rice today, Waxman charges that the State Department is “imped the Committee’s investigation into why President Bush and other senior Administration officials, including yourself, cited forged evidence in building a case for war against lraq.”

member of your legislative office informed Committee staff that you were prohibiting Mr. Dodge from meeting with Committee investigators. This official claimed that allowing Mr. Dodge to speak with Committee staff would be “inappropriate” because the Committee voted to issue a subpoena to compel your attendance at a hearing on your knowledge of the fabricated evidence.

I assume that your legislative staff was acting without your authorization in this matter. It would be a matter of great concern - as well as an obvious conflict of interest - if you had directed your staff to impede a congressional investigation into matter that may implicate your conduct as National Security Advisor.

The key question, Waxman writes, is whether Rice or any other senior officials “were aware of, or should have been aware of, Mr. Dodge’s assessment.” Apparently Rice doesn’t want us to know the answer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
fooj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-04-07 02:48 PM
Response to Original message
1. KandR!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
formercia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-04-07 02:59 PM
Response to Original message
2. Yowsa!
Sen. Waxman didn't mince any words.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indepat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-04-07 03:08 PM
Response to Original message
3. Waxman is getting ready to send a few rockets up someones' asses
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Supersedeas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-04-07 03:28 PM
Response to Original message
4. but but but the President needs free and unvarnished advice from his lapdogs
that truthiness varnish is a problem
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalFighter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-04-07 03:33 PM
Response to Original message
5. It's time for the committee to respond UNdiplomatically towards Rice
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 08:37 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC