Democrats force Senate into unusual closed session

[conjur]

And the GOP fracture widens ever more:


Dems win McCain?s backing
http://thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/112205/news3.html

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who has emerged as a leading opponent of the Bush administration?s policy on interrogating detainees in the war on terrorism, wants Senate investigators to interview senior administration officials about their statements regarding the threat posed by Saddam Hussein before the war.

McCain backed Democratic calls for interviews of top-level administration officials in an interview last week. But his position is at odds with many in his party, including Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, and Sen. George Allen (R-Va.), whom McCain may face in the 2008 GOP presidential primary.

...

McCain, who is a senior member of the Armed Services Committee but does not sit on the intelligence panel, said the interviews could give senators and the public a way to evaluate the officials? statements, but he also said he recognizes boundaries protecting the president and vice president.

?In general, I think everyone should be interviewed that was involved,? he said. ?The president of the United States and the vice president of the United States have a special status, and you?ve got to be concerned about the executive-congressional relationship.?

?I think certainly Cabinet secretaries who are confirmable by the Senate should be interviewed,? he said, acknowledging that he is not intimately familiar with the mechanics of the Senate probe. McCain said that the former national-security adviser should also be exempted from Senate interviews because of the sensitivity of that official?s communications with the president.

McCain?s parameters appear to include Douglas Feith, the former undersecretary of defense who played an important role in the months before the war in analyzing Iraqi intelligence for the White House. Democrats have accused Feith of overstepping legal boundaries and want to interview him about his activities.

So far at least one other Republican, Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R-R.I.), who is also facing a difficult race next year, is siding with McCain.

?Why not come in and defend what you say?? said Chafee. ?I agree with McCain.?

:thumbsup:

 

[ExpertNovice]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: irwincur
Even more funny is that most of these Dems voted for the war. They had access to the information. I guess the better question would be - who actually did their homework and READ the information before voting...

Have to agree on that point. Every leftist from Clinton (both) to Kerry had the same information (pre-war intelligence, for example) and came to the same conclusions that the Bush Administration did. You won't see the lefties admit that though.

Remember John "Sipping Coffee In France" Kerry and his infamous 'If you don't believe Saddam's weapons are a threat, don't vote for me'? :laugh: :laugh:

Take all the actions made to this date been done by Kerry instead of Bush evey action would be defended by the media and most liberals.

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Originally posted by: irwincur
The left falls further every day - funny thing is, they just don't see it at all. You cannot obstruct on a daily basis without offering any reasonable plan for anything. Just starts looking pathetic after a while.

Even more funny is that most of these Dems voted for the war. They had access to the information. I guess the better question would be - who actually did their homework and READ the information before voting...

More lies from Irwincur. The dems and the republicans voted to authorize the authority to use force to back diplomacy, not for war itself. The president should have that authority, but the president misused that authority, hence time for some truths to come out. Do you think that if you repeat the same lies over and over they will become the truth? I guess all that banging of the drums for a year made you deaf to the facts.

So, when Kerry says he voted for the war he meant it. Now that his polls say to be against the war we must change what he said before he changed his mind again.

Sorry, but I get so confused about when it is ok to change what someone said and when it is not.

 

[conjur]

Care to point out where Kerry said he "voted for the war"?

Link please.