Gates responds to Clinton letter.
Gates responds to Clinton letter.
On Monday, Under Secretary of Defense Eric Edelman sent a letter to Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY), rebuffing her requests for Pentagon briefings to Congress on the administration’s plans for redeployment. “Premature and public discussion of the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq reinforces enemy propaganda,” wrote Edelman. Yesterday, Clinton sent a new letter to Defense Secretary Robert Gates. In a new statement, Gates responds, but does not promise congressional briefings:
I have long been a staunch advocate of Congressional oversight, first at the CIA and now at the Defense Department. I have said on several occasions in recent months that I believe that Congressional debate on Iraq has been constructive and appropriate. I had not seen Senator Clinton’s reply to Ambassador Edelman’s letter until today. I am looking into the issues she raised and will respond to them early next week.
As ThinkProgress reported yesterday, Clinton and Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) plan to introduce legislation requiring the Pentagon to brief Congress on redeployment plans.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
The real question is, did he see the letter that Eric Edelman sent to Hillary Clinton. If so, then I guess he approved of the letter. If not, he’s a piss poor manager. It’s going to be interesting to see how Gates gets out of this mess. All that Edelman did by his letter was to give Hillary Clinton a boost in her polling. She responded to him in a decisive manner and really slapped him down.
July 21st, 2007 at 1:09 pmPrecisely Bilbobaggins.
I want to know what Gates thinks of Edelman’s atrocious comments. How can gates even make a statement on this subject without mentioning that?
July 21st, 2007 at 1:14 pmAnyone thinking Gates is his own man has another thing coming. Chimpy and Shooter only hire “yes” men. Petraeus is another. People need to take note of those 40+ Repug Senators that keep voting for them and toss every damn one of them out of office. They are all traitors!
July 21st, 2007 at 1:16 pmYeah, and if Kerry’s legislation passes, Bush will sign something that says his administration is going to ignore it.
We’re in a pickle.
The cure for pickles is impeachment.
July 21st, 2007 at 1:19 pmI’m betting that Gates was blindsided by the Cheney operative Edelmann.
Now, Gates has to decide whether he can press on, knowing that he will be continually undercut by Cheney political operatives, or resign as Defense Secretary.
Frankly, if Gates was blindsided, we need him to stay on, because the alternative could be much worse.
July 21st, 2007 at 1:19 pm“The real question is, did he see the letter that Eric Edelman sent to Hillary Clinton.”
Comment by bilbobaggins — July 21, 2007 @ 1:09 pm
Good point. Gates doesn’t seem to be giving any hints that he did see it, but note that he refers to Edelman as “Ambassador Edelman”– in my mind, that could be interpreted in a couple of ways.
Edelman was a fool for giving in to the temptation to vilify Senator Clinton. She did exactly the right thing in her response to his letter, and I believe that she gained more respect for it.
No wonder the Turks couldn’t stand him!
July 21st, 2007 at 1:20 pm#5 Hit,
I think you are still assuming there are honorable people operating in the WH. This is the mistake the dems make at every turn. They give these guys the benefit of the doubt…like the Iraq war vote… or the vote for Petraeus to lead the surge. When these things haven’t worked, chimpy and the repug gang just throw those votes back in the dems faces. It’s very effective and the dems have fallen for that bullshit every time.
It’s time to get rough with these bastards in the WH and treat them like the traitors they really are. With absolutely ZERO respect!
July 21st, 2007 at 1:30 pmi thought it looked like edelman had rove write that letter…
took points for it, at least…
good on hillary for her response, and backbone…
July 21st, 2007 at 1:31 pm…
I had not seen Senator Clinton’s reply to Ambassador Edelman’s letter until today.
Please correct me if I am mistaken about this, but is the proper title for an Undersecretary of Defense really “Ambassador”? That seems rather oxymoronic to me. I mean, you call in the Defense department when the State department (the one with the ambassadors) cannot reach a satisfactory conclusion.
July 21st, 2007 at 1:43 pmOh Ya, we’ve got a plan for withdrawal – sometime in early 2009, we’ll be packing our bags, loading them into our limos, heading out of town, and leaving you all to clean up our mess.
July 21st, 2007 at 1:47 pmHillary definitely made points on this issue. Gates is clearly stalling for time here. He knows everything he needs to know right now in order to make a moral judgment and statement back to Hillary. He’s just playing games. After all, he was a Bush 41 wipe so what can you expect? Sure, he’ll try to soften things to make himself not look like the sycophant Bushevite whom he is….but at the end of the day, we know what Gates is all about. It will be interesting to see how this is handled though.
This is definitely a “win/win” for Hillary.
July 21st, 2007 at 1:48 pmThe fact is that Hillary is calling their bluff since she knows that there was never a plan going into this illegal war, has never been a plan and never will be a plan because there is no beginning point for one to develop any logical “plan”…..no reason for the war, so why be at war? If there is reason to play war games here, then at least tell us why. It’s shifted now from WMD’s, to deposing a Dictator, to establishment of a democracy, and now to stability (oh that totally subjective, never able to be defined type of word: stability – how could we possibly EVER fall for that one?).
So Hillary calls the bluff of the White House and they attempt to smear her. Guess what: A pig is a pig is a pig – there’s no polishing a pig. You can put lipstick on the pig and doll it up, but it’s still just a pig. Pig = Bush = Iraq War. All the same pig.
July 21st, 2007 at 1:51 pmNo plan going on/No plan for going out = NO PLAN!!
July 21st, 2007 at 1:53 pm#4 Hi George: You’ve got the ONLY answer and it’s impeachment, the only card the people have left in their deck.
go to http://www.smirkingchimp.com and check out the call for impeachment thread. I’ll try to find it and post it here for you if you can’t find it. It’s good and there’s a huge impeachment movement afoot right now. Get involved.
July 21st, 2007 at 1:54 pmEdelman was ambassador to Turkey. I suppose his correct current title should be ….former ambassador….but it is not that uncommon to refer to people by their former titles. President Clinton, for example…
July 21st, 2007 at 1:54 pmThis the Executive Branch line;
July 21st, 2007 at 1:56 pm“I believe that Congressional debate on Iraq has been constructive and appropriate. ”
Just so long as they don’t do anything, If they could.
George: Here’s the impeachment link for you to read and share with your friends! Enjoy!
July 21st, 2007 at 1:57 pmhttp://smirkingchimp.com/thread/8851
http://smirkingchimp.com/thread/8861
This is another good read : Bush’s White House Descends into Calamity! Now that’s a total understatement!
July 21st, 2007 at 1:58 pmThat Swiftboat never left the dock,it sank at it’s moorings,with all hands onboard!
July 21st, 2007 at 1:59 pmFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
“Sedition is a term of law to refer to covert conduct such as speech and organization that is deemed by the legal authority as tending toward insurrection against the established order. Sedition often included subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontent (or resistance) to lawful authority.”
When Cheney, Rumsfeld and others conspired to carry out the False Flag attacks against the United States, were they not employing “covert conduct such as speech and organization that is deemed by the legal authority as tending toward insurrection against the established order?”
How could this term then be applied to those acting against this rogue government, itself having come to power through false pretense and vote-rigging? Such a government could not be defined as having “lawful authority.”
Absent the “Lawful Authority” of a government, there can be no Sedition.
They, the (s)elected, are in fact “the Outlaws.”
They are the ones subverting the Constitution.
Therefore it is they, the Administration itself, who have committed the act of Sedition.
“Sedition complements treason and martial law: while treason controls primarily the privileged, ecclesiastical opponents, priests, and Jesuits, as well as certain commoners; and martial law frightens commoners, sedition frightens intellectuals.”
The First Amendment clearly states that “Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech.”
Speak Up.
IMPEACH.
July 21st, 2007 at 2:02 pmHow foolish of America to think this Administration has any “plan” for anything it does but try to stay in power. This is what happens when Karl Rove is put in charge–at the time we had the whole world as an ally (9-12-01) Rove was allowed to make the real war on terror a political tool that was supposed to usher in the a “permanent Republican majority” but will instead spell the end of the GOP. With Rove it’s always politics over policy.
July 21st, 2007 at 2:15 pmComment by Badger — July 21, 2007 @ 1:54 pm
Not to be nit-picky, but Edelman’s correct current title should be “Under Secretary of Defense”, or Gates could have just called him “the Under Secretary.” If Edelman didn’t currently have a position with a title, yes, “Ambassador” would be correct. (Just as Joseph Wilson IV is called “Ambassador Wilson.”)
Anyway, that’s why I found the reference to “Ambassador” so intriguing. Particularly since, with Edelman’s record as having been the much-disliked Ambassador to Turkey, I doubt that Edelman would appreciate the public reference to his ignominious prior performance.
July 21st, 2007 at 2:16 pmPlease note, the Adminstration does not want to have a plan. If forced by the Dems to pull out of Iraq, they would prefer it proceed very badly. Lives are of no importance to them, the more that are lost, the more chaotic the withdrawal becomes, the more valid their position becomes: That pulling out of Iraq is worse than staying in Iraq.
If Republicans can’t keep this War for Profit going indefinitely, then they want a bloody, horrific end to it, and they will stop at nothing to try to pawn this catastrophe onto the Dems. It’s their only hope of survival.
July 21st, 2007 at 2:17 pmComment by Jane E. Schneider — July 21, 2007 @ 2:16 pm
I stand corrected. Thanks…
July 21st, 2007 at 2:23 pmComment by AboveTheClouds — July 21, 2007 @ 2:15 pm
Comment by RagingGurrl — July 21, 2007 @ 2:17 pm
Good point, both of you. (”Great minds…”)
July 21st, 2007 at 2:24 pmComment by Badger — July 21, 2007 @ 2:23 pm
Badger, as I just told Wayne, I made the first part up–it just seems logical to me, though. The part about Edelman’s ambassadorship, though, yeah, the Turkish people really, really didn’t like Edelman one bit.
July 21st, 2007 at 2:28 pmMK-Ultra:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=i46RI2twVao
The Nazis are in the White House.
July 21st, 2007 at 2:38 pmJane …it sounds logical to me too. Edelman sounds like he has a naturally abrasive personality.“Premature and public discussion of the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq reinforces enemy propaganda,†Who is he to say this is PREMATURE…what’s wrong with PUBLIC discussion….and Bush’s incompetent actions are all the reinforcing that enemy propaganda needs.
July 21st, 2007 at 2:39 pmI’m not surprised the former ambassador was not that popular in Turkey.
Comment by Badger — July 21, 2007 @ 2:39 pm
It seems that Bush prefers his “ambassadors” to be the tough and ruthless kind. Or is that “rough and toothless”? :-) (C’mon, someone HAS to have seen “Kentucky Fried Movie” besides Wayne and I!)
July 21st, 2007 at 2:44 pm(C’mon, someone HAS to have seen “Kentucky Fried Movie†besides Wayne and I!)
Comment by Jane E. Schneider
It’s been a while…
How about… “I guess I just picked the wrong day to quit sniffing glue…”
July 21st, 2007 at 2:47 pmCointelpro:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=tJaDLhuNxi8
Mind Control:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=SB3Qpe_7wuA&mode=related&search=
July 21st, 2007 at 2:47 pmHow about… “I guess I just picked the wrong day to quit sniffing glue…â€
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — July 21, 2007 @ 2:47 pm
I’ve been using that line, and it’s variations (plus some I made up) for the past two weeks – we have a new computer system at work, and it’s driving us all batshit!
If you can find “Kentucky Fried Movie” (which so far we can’t), it’s well worth re-watching, much like the “Airplane!” silliness.
July 21st, 2007 at 2:55 pmIf Hillary were elected President, she’d raise taxes.
That’s why I’d never vote for her.
Plus, her butt looks fat in those pant suits.
July 21st, 2007 at 6:03 pmIf Hillary were elected President, she’d raise taxes.
That’s why I’d never vote for her.
Plus, her butt looks fat in those pant suits.
Comment by muckdog — July 21, 2007 @ 6:03 pm
Oh no! Heaven forbid the American people actually have to pay for things we need!
July 21st, 2007 at 6:11 pmIf Hillary were elected President, she’d raise taxes.
That’s why I’d never vote for her.
Plus, her butt looks fat in those pant suits.
Comment by muckdog
Sorry, muckdog, that’s meaningless gibberish. NEXT!!!
July 21st, 2007 at 6:29 pmIf you can find “Kentucky Fried Movie†(which so far we can’t), it’s well worth re-watching, much like the “Airplane!†silliness.
Comment by Jane E. Schneider
Isn’t that the one w/ the Bruce Lee parody sequence?
“Oh, and you’ll get to kill 50-60 people…”
July 21st, 2007 at 6:30 pmOh no! Heaven forbid the American people actually have to pay for things we need!
What sort of things have you decided that the American people “need?”
July 21st, 2007 at 7:12 pmWhat sort of things have you decided that the American people “need?â€
Comment by muckdog
Of course, /w that attitude, one could ask, what sort of things have you decided the American people don’t need? Why are you qualified to make those decisions?
July 21st, 2007 at 8:33 pmay-oooo!!!
The ever so subtle, “Go fuk yourself!!!”
July 21st, 2007 at 9:43 pmWhy are you qualified to make those decisions?
I’m not qualified. Therefore, the American people should decide what they need.
That’s why I can’t vote for Democrats.
Heck, if it were up to me to decide, I’d decide that you need some education. But you’ve made the decision to not acquire an education. Who am I to question your choice?
July 22nd, 2007 at 3:55 amEric Edelman, like all neocons, is a traitor who works for Israel.
He had to resign as ambassador to Turkey when he tried to interfere with Turkey’s sovereign national policy in regards to Syria.
He should be in jail, not government.
July 22nd, 2007 at 5:59 am