From the Washington Post’s Dana Milbank
In the Capitol basement yesterday, long-suffering House Democrats took a trip to the land of make-believe.
They pretended a small conference room was the Judiciary Committee hearing room, draping white linens over folding tables to make them look like witness tables and bringing in cardboard name tags and extra flags to make the whole thing look official.
Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.) banged a large wooden gavel and got the other lawmakers to call him “Mr. Chairman.” He liked that so much that he started calling himself “the chairman” and spouted other chairmanly phrases, such as “unanimous consent” and “without objection so ordered.” The dress-up game looked realistic enough on C-SPAN, so two dozen more Democrats came downstairs to play along.
The session was a mock impeachment inquiry over the Iraq war. As luck would have it, all four of the witnesses agreed that President Bush lied to the nation and was guilty of high crimes—and that a British memo on “fixed” intelligence that surfaced last month was the smoking gun equivalent to the Watergate tapes. Conyers was having so much fun that he ignored aides’ entreaties to end the session.
[…] The hearing was only nominally about the Downing Street Memo and its assertion that in the summer of 2002 Bush was already determined to go to war and was making the intelligence fit his case. Joseph C. Wilson IV, a former ambassador whose wife was outed as a CIA operative, barely mentioned the memo in his opening statement. Cindy Sheehan, who lost a son in Iraq, said the memo “only confirms what I already suspected.”
No matter: The lawmakers and the witnesses saw this as a chance to rally against the war. Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) proclaimed it “one of the biggest scandals in the history of this country.” Conyers said the memos “establish a prima facie case of going to war under false pretenses.” Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) concluded that “the time has come to get out” of Iraq.
The session took an awkward turn when witness Ray McGovern, a former intelligence analyst, declared that the United States went to war in Iraq for oil, Israel and military bases craved by administration “neocons” so “the United States and Israel could dominate that part of the world.” He said that Israel should not be considered an ally and that Bush was doing the bidding of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.
“Israel is not allowed to be brought up in polite conversation,” McGovern said. “The last time I did this, the previous director of Central Intelligence called me anti-Semitic.”
Rep. James P. Moran Jr. (D-Va.), who prompted the question by wondering whether the true war motive was Iraq’s threat to Israel, thanked McGovern for his “candid answer.”
At Democratic headquarters, where an overflow crowd watched the hearing on television, activists handed out documents repeating two accusations—that an Israeli company had warning of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and that there was an “insider trading scam” on 9/11—that previously has been used to suggest Israel was behind the attacks.
[…] Conyers’s firm hand on the gavel could not prevent something of a free-for-all; at one point, a former State Department worker rose from the audience to propose criminal charges against Bush officials. Early in the hearing, somebody accidentally turned off the lights; later, a witness knocked down a flag. Matters were even worse at Democratic headquarters, where the C-SPAN feed ended after just an hour, causing the activists to groan and one to shout “Conspiracy!”
The glitches and the antiwar theatrics proved something of a distraction from the message the organizers aimed to deliver: that for the Bush White House, as lawyer John C. Bonifaz put it, the British memo is “the equivalent to the revelation that there was a taping system in the Nixon White House.”
Of course, Democrats controlled the real committees back then—though Conyers was not deterred. “We have a lot of work to do as a result of this first panel,” he told his colleagues. “ ‘Tis the beginning of our work.”
Somewhere, Justin Raimondo and Pat Buchanan moon at each other over a root beer float and smile at the irony that today’s Democratic base shares with them the dream of an isolationist America that harbors a healthy distrust of Jews and their Jew designs on world domination.
(h/t Kyle; more here)
****
update: THEY WANT TO TAKE THE LEAVENING RIGHT OUT OF OUR BREAD!
Yep, the anti-semitic character of the Democratic Party’s core loons just can’t be hidden long.
Bunch of juveniles playing pretend adults.
Unless the Democrats are able to dial down the craziness, I don’t see how they’ll ever become the majority again. Every time the Republicans go far enough to begin offending people (the Schiavo case, etc.), the Democrats one-up them, usually multiple times.
Amen, Robert. Every time I start to feel fed up with the Republicans, the Democrats prove themselves too loony to be trusted.
And in other News John Kerry set up a mock Oval Office in is DC townhome and had his French butler play Chirac and the two of them called back all the troops from Iraq.
Wow, moonbat make-believe hearings.
OMG. Can’t say more.
Some are more open about what they think about the “Crudadersa and Jews.”—
here
That would “Crusaders.” *
Never type after 2 beers.
Five…is right out!
SB: suddenly
Frankie had a gun.
Mr. Michael Abramowitz, National Editor
Mr. Michael Getler, Ombudsman
Mr. Dana Milbank
The Washington Post
1150 15th Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20071
Dear Sirs:
I write to express my profound disappointment with Dana Milbank’s June 17 report, “Democrats Play House to Rally Against the War,” which purports to describe a Democratic hearing I chaired in the Capitol yesterday. In sum, the piece cherry-picks some facts, manufactures others out of whole cloth, and does a disservice to some 30 members of Congress who persevered under difficult circumstances, not of our own making, to examine a very serious subject: whether the American people were deliberately misled in the lead up to war. The fact that this was the Post’s only coverage of this event makes the journalistic shortcomings in this piece even more egregious.
In an inaccurate piece of reporting that typifies the article, Milbank implies that one of the obstacles the Members in the meeting have is that “only one” member has mentioned the Downing Street Minutes on the floor of either the House or Senate. This is not only incorrect but misleading. In fact, just yesterday, the Senate Democratic Leader, Harry Reid, mentioned it on the Senate floor. Senator Boxer talked at some length about it at the recent confirmation hearing for the Ambassador to Iraq. The House Democratic Leader, Nancy Pelosi, recently signed on to my letter, along with 121 other Democrats asking for answers about the memo. This information is not difficult to find either. For example, the Reid speech was the subject of an AP wire service report posted on the Washington Post website with the headline “Democrats Cite Downing Street Memo in Bolton Fight”. Other similar mistakes, mischaracterizations and cheap shots are littered throughout the article.
The article begins with an especially mean and nasty tone, claiming that House Democrats “pretended” a small conference was the Judiciary Committee hearing room and deriding the decor of the room. Milbank fails to share with his readers one essential fact: the reason the hearing was held in that room, an important piece of context. Despite the fact that a number of other suitable rooms were available in the Capitol and House office buildings, Republicans declined my request for each and every one of them. Milbank could have written about the perseverance of many of my colleagues in the face of such adverse circumstances, but declined to do so. Milbank also ignores the critical fact picked up by the AP, CNN and other newsletters that at the very moment the hearing was scheduled to begin, the Republican Leadership scheduled an almost unprecedented number of 11 consecutive floor votes, making it next to impossible for most Members to participate in the first hour and one half of the hearing.
In what can only be described as a deliberate effort to discredit the entire hearing, Milbank quotes one of the witnesses as making an anti-semitic assertion and further describes anti-semitic literature that was being handed out in the overflow room for the event. First, let me be clear: I consider myself to be friend and supporter of Israel and there were a number of other staunchly pro-Israel members who were in attendance at the hearing. I do not agree with, support, or condone any comments asserting Israeli control over U.S. policy, and I find any allegation that Israel is trying to dominate the world or had anything to do with the September 11 tragedy disgusting and offensive.
That said, to give such emphasis to 100 seconds of a 3 hour and five minute hearing that included the powerful and sad testimony (hardly mentioned by Milbank) of a woman who lost her son in the Iraq war and now feels lied to as a result of the Downing Street Minutes, is incredibly misleading. Many, many different pamphlets were being passed out at the overflow room, including pamphlets about getting out of the Iraq war and anti-Central American Free Trade Agreement, and it is puzzling why Milbank saw fit to only mention the one he did.
In a typically derisive and uninformed passage, Milbank makes much of other lawmakers calling me “Mr. Chairman” and says I liked it so much that I used “chairmanly phrases.” Milbank may not know that I was the Chairman of the House Government Operations Committee from 1988 to 1994. By protocol and tradition in the House, once you have been a Chairman you are always referred to as such. Thus, there was nothing unusual about my being referred to as Mr. Chairman.
To administer his coup-de-grace, Milbank literally makes up another cheap shot that I “was having so much fun that [I] ignored aides’ entreaties to end the session.” This did not occur. None of my aides offered entreaties to end the session and I have no idea where Milbank gets that information. The hearing certainly ran longer than expected, but that was because so many Members of Congress persevered under very difficult circumstances to attend, and I thought – given that – the least I could do was allow them to say their piece. That is called courtesy, not “fun.”
By the way, the “Downing Street Memo” is actually the minutes of a British cabinet meeting. In the meeting, British officials – having just met with their American counterparts – describe their discussions with such counterparts. I mention this because that basic piece of context, a simple description of the memo, is found nowhere in Milbank’s article.
The fact that I and my fellow Democrats had to stuff a hearing into a room the size of a large closet to hold a hearing on an important issue shouldn’t make us the object of ridicule. In my opinion, the ridicule should be placed in two places: first, at the feet of Republicans who are so afraid to discuss ideas and facts that they try to sabotage our efforts to do so; and second, on Dana Milbank and the Washington Post, who do not feel the need to give serious coverage on a serious hearing about a serious matter-whether more than 1700 Americans have died because of a deliberate lie. Milbank may disagree, but the Post certainly owed its readers some coverage of that viewpoint.
Sincerely,
John Conyers, Jr.
Damn Sparky! Drankin’, dropping the F-bomb.
Who’s turning you out, Ma?
Not content to have Dana Milbank write an article that merely makes him look loony, Conyers has to pen his own letter that proves he’s loony. I love it.
Put up or shut up. What’s looney about Conyer’s letter to the ombudsman?
Hey THINGS—here
All of Conyer’s letter is “looney”. Just as all of Conyers is loony.
Conyer’s little stunt should have gotten him a 72 hour hold in a mental hospital for observation.
Curse that Dana Milbank, always shilling for Karl Rove!
Okay, I’ll put up or shut up:
Dana Milbanks: “Here’s how I saw it.”
Conyers: “Liar! Conspiracy! We are the victims—of a neocon plot to keep the Truth hidden! Wait, is Milbank a Jew name?”
I eagerly await Milbank’s response.
That was basically incoherent and little better than a snotty nose 12 year old could produce. Maybe not, as they may be a bit more sophisticated in their name calling. It’s quite telling that the best you can muster against all this is just sheer adolescent scorn – little better than childish name calling.
Anyone can muster up clever scorn. But it’s telling that this is *all* you can muster. Nothing of substance. Nothing of value. Merely name calling and abuse.
And I thought the democrats were the party of no ideas, loons and the rude.
Things that make you go hmmmmm –
Teach us the ways of your maturity!
Please?
PS – I especially like your novel use of short declaratives to emphasize the heft of your points. I mean, like, “wow!”
I meant. Like, you know. Wow. Like that.
Right. Incoherent. Try as you might, you just couldn’t make heads or tails out of it. Of course, that didn’t stop you from passing judgment on the content or the author.
Which, that’s pretty arrogant of you, don’t you think?—to make such assured pronouncements about a comment you’ve just admitted you don’t understand?
Let me make it simple for you: Why would you offer Conyer’s response as if it were objective proof rebutting Milbank’s version of events?
And I thought the democrats were the party of no ideas, loons and the rude.
And, in thinking that, you were correct.
Incoherent and snotty 12 year old … that’s exactly what I was thinking when I saw Conyers’ circus on CSPAN.
Um, yeah it’s nice that he’s a friend of Israel and that there were other “staunchly pro-Isreal members” there (like Jim Moran?), but notice at no point does Conyers deny that anti-semitic propaganda was being passed around at the Dems’ headquarters.
Does that count as something of substance?
I saw parts of it and had to turn it off.
Tom Hayden, or a Tom Hayden’s mummy, magisterially behind the “chairman.”
Wilson and his fellow “witnesses” raising their hands to take the oath…to destroy their country in order to save it from Bush.
Maxine Waters at the conclusion with the glazed over look of an ecstasy-crazed raver who is just hitting her groove.
Sick.
Hey Things, here’s some ideas for you:
Tell Conyers to stop with his loony “hearings” and Jew-hating “witnesses.”
Ask Durbin to tone it down a bit.
Suggest to Dean that he should concentrate on party-building.
Maybe throw out to the rest of your party the thought that holding back from the over-the-top comparisons and name-calling might slow down the spread of the increasingly prevalent belief that the Democratic Party cares more about taking down Pres. Bush and winning elections than winning the war or solving any of the other problems this country has.
We have more ideas, come back for them when you finish with these.
Um, gee. Does he have to deny it? All he’s saying is that a) it was a hearsay remark and b) it happened in the overflow room. Now, I guess if the republicans had bothered to give them an actual room instead of a closet, and allowed them to actually hold a real hearing, perhaps this could have been taken care of before hand by the appropriate protocols.
It’s pretty telling, though, that the only thing you have to wave around like a bully in a school yard is something that someone might have said who wasn’t even part of the hearings and some pamphlets some loon was passing out.
I guess we’re going to have to start holding the republicans to the same standards. So I guess all the Judge Moore supporters with their crazy pamphlets, the crazy Schiavo right to lifers, not to mention the McVeigh types will be the touchstone of the republican party from now on.
Glad we got that cleared up.
Yea, Michael, we’ll get right on that. After all, look at how successful the Republicans were with their wacky theories of Vince Foster, sexual predation – heck, even rape fantasies.
As they say in the old country, lay down your weapons first. The very fact that you are all flapping around like dodos in heat is a tribute to how good an issue this is.
Lord, it’s going to be so sweet to see another president Clinton and watch the right’s reaction.
Keep up the great work. The Republican pollsters love ya.
These issues have all been explored in “real” hearings and guess what, “Things…”, the charges have already been shown to be false. The intel leading up to the Iraq war has been gone over with a fine tooth comb by the select committee and by the silly 9/11 commission. Conyers and his fellow schizophrenics attempt to revisit this is pathetic.
Conyers clown show deserves to be ridiculed and will be ridiculed from now until we are bored with ridiculing it because it was an example of the inmates pretending to be in charge of the asylum.
Ah yes, Robin. Because we all know you’re the daddy party. And you need to take out the belt and beat the shit out of them uppity democrats.
My lord. It’s just a bad high school domination dance.
With stunts like this, and Durbin’s, the Democrats are definitely the juvenile party, “Things…”
No doubt about it.
Just as bad. And I think I know who never got asked.
Spelling out my above link for THINGS because I can’t say it better than the link’s author ShrinkWrapped already has.
Now they’ve begun to act out their fantasies. Which fantasy will be acted out next? How far will this break from reality drive them? I don’t know. Nor does anyone. But the trendline is alarming.
Yeah, Things, I guess Ray McGovern’s testimony about how our foreign policy is being controlled by Joooooos (prompted by a question from the “staunchly pro-Israel” Rep. Jim Moran) was a “hearsay remark,” too.
Were Timothy McVeigh (nice jab, there) alive today, I think he’d be a lot more welcome at Democrat HQ, passing out copies of The Turner Diaries than he would be among members of the GOP. But I guess that’s because we’re all controlled by them sinister [wink] neo-cons [wink], right?
Glad we got that cleared up.
Exactly, Sean.
And by the way, “Things”, we don’t intend to politely ignore the anti-semites among the Democrat’s core any longer.
And once they’ve taken the leavening out of our bread, they want to saw our doors in half and kill all our elm trees. No wait, that’s the Dutch.
And, not to belabor the obvious, but, ummmm…. there is a war on, and some might question the wisdom of staging such an absurd bit of political theater under such circumstances, if not the motives of those involved.
ROFL! Projection! The last defense of a weenie. You mine as well say “I’m rubber and you’re glue”. Jeez.
Nope, I don’t think you’re controlled by neo-cons. I think you’re all just a bunch of jackanapes. Y’all have a real good “Lord of the Flies” thing going on. Can’t wait for the burning of the island part.
Let’s stop feeding the troll. He’s here simply to argue for the sake of arguing. He won’t concede a single point, because he has no interest in having a substantive debate. You point out an anti-semitic Democrat, his response is to raise the specter of Timothy McVeigh, or to try tethering all conservatives to the very fringe elements in the Republican party that I’ve already excoriated in this very post. It’s a game of partisan gotcha. And it’s boring.
Go away, “Things.” Or don’t. Stay and tell yourself that we are all afraid of your “truths,” if it helps you live with yourself. Me, I know what I know, and I’m comfortable with it.
I find it amusing that Conyers is ticked that they didn’t get a bigger room. I mean imagine that conversation with Republicans.
Conyers: “Yes, This is John Conyers. We democrats were wondering if we could have a rather LARGE room in which to discuss how Pres. Bush lied to the American people, starts an illegal war, and how we can impeach his ass. Could we get that from you?”
Republican in charge of rooms: “Ummm…that would be no.”
Conyers played this same game a couple weeks ago, with Al Franken, Eric Alterman, Randi Rhodes, and other lefty luminaries. Got drowned out by the runaway bride. Anyway, it seems like a perfectly dignified thing to do, I remember that after being rejected by the Senate, Robert Bork set up a television kangaroo court.
Let’s stop feeding the troll.
Agreed. And hey, it’s Friday! Shouldn’t we be hearing excuses about why a certain drug-addicted armor-clad animal won’t be dancing for out amusement?
It always comes back to the Joooooooooooooooooooos!!
I keep waiting for McKinney take that final step off the ledge and become a splodeydope. I think she was close when she lost that election, and her father blamed You-Know-Who.
Shit. I thought that’s what this whole post was about.
. . . the unnamed plated one, that is.
Okay, substance. It’s telling that merely saying that Israel shouldn’t be considered an ally is considered to be anti-Semite. I mean, the guy may well be a loon, but it’s really bizarre that the guy is labeled anti-Semite. Let the guy have an opinion about a country, for pete’s sake. You’re simply blowing it up into a scary monster to frighten your little un’s. I know you’ve got the whole Jewish martyr thing going on, and any criticism equates to anti-Semitism… but jeez.
Give it a rest. It’s really old.
But it does work wonders to shut down debate you don’t want to hear.
BTW, Ray McGovern’s bio is far more impressive than yours, I should add. Looks like he’s served in far more than just democrat’s regimes.
Did you just hear something?
Huh. I guess it was just the wind.
Jewish martyr. That’s me.
Yea, so I accept the challenge and they’re all now too busy to play.
Just like in high school.
Right. High school. You win. Now declare victory and go whack yourself off to thoughts of a naked Eugene McCarthy.
How else would you describe someone who conflates a comment about a country with a people? How else would you describe someone who picks up 100 seconds out of 3 hours and uses it as a club to characterize the entire proceedings.
The whole shtick is played. So very, very played.
Right. Played. High school. Conflating. You win. Congrats!
Must. Resist. Temptation…
Ahhh. I see that we’ve been rewarded for our patience. And now that we find out that the li’l fella is a Son of Abraham, I guess we can excuse him for not working on Friday evenings.
Nope, just putting markers on my adolescent insult bingo card.
Adolescent Bingo card, check. Right. Good one.
This thing culd really put the Dems over the top on the Mock Elections. I’m sure they’ll be warmly welcomed at the Mock UN where they can issue pretend resolutions that have no power and do nothing. Come to think of it… oh it’s too easy.
Bingo!
I see that fantasy about a naked Eugene McCarthy worked for you.
Tall Dave, Mock UN? You’re describing the real UN!
Next, some troll will start giving the next marker of an anti-semite, that of arguing about the word itself. You know, the old “but Arabs are semitic people too” crap.
Cause I can smell ‘em. Anti-semites that is.
Well, joos too but that’s another story.
The “ROFL” gives him away – it’s our pal Monty again. You know, the 13-year-old girl from SDA?
What makes me go “hmm” is that it was possible to mock an intelligent poster like Alpha Baboon when he said something stupid but there’s so little to TTHYGH that a parody would be as tedious and annoying as the original.
…something about the nature of humor.
why is my turing word love? am i just supposed to ignore that? this just sounds really strange. (and i spent five minutes in the dark dressed in a “holocaust robe” curled up on don giovanni’s feet tonight.)
Ouch! The whole 13 year old girl characterization really hurts.
Turing word: pegged. As in, Arthur Silber sure has you jokers pegged.
Sorry, I gotta respond to this: “Conflates a comment about a country with a people.” A country that contains 38% of the world’s Jews and whose population is 80% Jewish is pretty much the Jewish country. I see no problem with conflating a country and a people in this case.
I can hardly believe this post is real. Reading through it I was positive it was one of Jeff’s more inspired moments. I was only sure it wasn’t once Hmmmm posted the Conyers letter.
I would also like to point out this
(via SayAnythingBlog.)
That’s enough partisan conflating. I just held a mock election, and I’m the President now.
Knock it off, or I will invade your URLs!
I’ll be back later. I’ve got to go impeach myself.
Conyer:
Well it does make you the object of ridicule, as well as derision and scorn, you total loser.
Conyer:
No it’s not, you loser. It’s a summation of the meeting.
And you are twisting one sentence from the memo “… and facts were being fixed around the policy” which you are shoehorning into your preconceived notions that Bush 1) knew that there were no WMD and 2) manipulated the intelligence to make it seem there were. But anybody who has the reading compression of a fifth grader would recognize that it says neither. A casual reading of the memo makes it clear that the people at the meeting accepted the existence of the WMD and regarded it a threat at the least, in the event of an invasion.
Silber, right. Pegged. Exactly. Ouch. No more, please.
<heh> Keep reachin’. “Critical of Israel” is now anti-Semitism. And I just loved the fisking there. They’re not minutes! They’re not minutes. I guess you and the power tools will be front page news with that fine disassembling of the issue. Or should that be dissembling?
Even that nutball Howard Dean can recognize anti-semitism in his own party over his own shouts of “Aaarrrgghhhh!”
TTMYGH tries hard:
At least that’s what Howard Dean and the DNC thought. What a bunch of Republican shills!
TTMYGH continues to bloviate:
Which explains why you and Conyar both have such trouble reading the memo. Apparently neither of you have a reading comprehension level above that of a fifth grader.
Jeff – this is fascinating with TTMYGH – he’s actually providing a sort of online behavioral psych experiment: how long can a troll survive without sustenance?
Someday, long after Iraq is established as a democratic republic, Saddam swings from a gibbet, the mullahs are ousted, & Tom Cruise is dating Lindsay Lohan’s granddaughter, an intrepid anthropologist will stumble across the last surviving member of the Angry Left, muttering to himself in a hole: “Bush lied! Bush lied! Bush lied!”
Isn’t there an anti-psychotic medication for this sort of thing?
The funniest part of the Conyers letter is his claim that he is a friend and supporter of Israel.
I’m sure that explains his vote against H. Res. 392 in 2002 (one of only 21 members – 17 Democrats and 4 Republicans to vote no).
Here is the <a href = “http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c107:2:./temp/~c107jT8AuI::”>resolution’s text</a>
Here is the <a href = “http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2002/roll126.xml“>roll call</a>.
Nick
Jeff, if TTMYGH and this Silber fool are your own version of Puce I’m never going to forgive you.
I’m cringing so hard I expect my ears to fall off. Painful.
’F-ing Joos.’- Yes, I am of the jocular pontiff-icators. The proud republicican, the sheepish Dem; all juncate to a tiff over a perfectly reasonable question: Why do Americans insist in extending our sovereignty? At what cost?
Let us have our questions a-holes.
Our check is your balance.
I think you’re gonna have one nasty hangover, scratch.