The Perfect Smear

By Aussiegirl

If you wanted to imagine a scenario whereby you could smear and defame the reputation of a person seeking public office with complete impunity, you could hardly invent a more sinister and perfect scheme than that hatched by Harry Reid on the Senate floor yesterday.

One might call it the "Perfect Storm" of smears. The question remains whether the storm will sink the nominee -- or Harry Reid -- who publicly discussed confidential FBI files of judicial nominee Henry Saad and characterized them in a negative way contrary to explicit Senate rules.

The really insidious part is that Henry Saad has no way of knowing what is in the FBI report, he will never be given permission to see it, he cannot defend himself in any way -- and neither can anyone else -- because it is against Senate rules to do so. So unless the Republican leadership takes action to punish Reid, which given their recent behavior is most unlikely, the democrats have just pushed the envelope a little further in the tactics they are prepared to deploy to defeat any and all judicial nominees.

Last term the Republicans let the Democrats get away with filibustering judicial nominees, something which had never been done before. By letting them get away with it -- the Democrats can now claim that it is Republicans who are violating Senate procedures when they try to prevent the filibuster of a nominee.

Similarly, if the Republican leadership lets this skate, they will be allowing the democrats to set a new precedent for defaming future nominees.

All a Democrat will have to do in the future is refer darkly to some "disturbing" information in an FBI report -- and that will be enough -- as long as they can claim that there were leaks prior to the claim -- then everyone else is bound by the rules -- which means they can't discuss it -- and the nominee goes down in flames -- along with his lifelong reputation.

THE WASHINGTON TIMES" has the low down:

Minority Leader Harry Reid strayed from his prepared remarks on the Senate floor yesterday and promised to continue opposing one of President Bush's judicial nominees based on "a problem" he said is in the nominee's "confidential report from the FBI."

Those highly confidential reports are filed on all judicial nominees, and severe sanctions apply to anyone who discloses their contents. Less clear is whether a senator could face sanctions for characterizing the content of such files.

"Henry Saad would have been filibustered anyway," Mr. Reid said on the floor yesterday, about the Michigan Appeals Court judge who is nominated to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit.

"All you need to do is have a member go upstairs and look at his confidential report from the FBI, and I think we would all agree that there is a problem there," Mr. Reid continued.

Republican aides pointed to Standing Rule of the Senate 29, Section 5: "Any Senator, officer, or employee of the Senate who shall disclose the secret or confidential business or proceedings of the Senate, including the business and proceedings of the committees, subcommittees, and offices of the Senate, shall be liable, if a Senator, to suffer expulsion from the body; and if an officer or employee, to dismissal from the service of the Senate, and to punishment for contempt."

Furthermore, a "Memorandum of Understanding" covering the use of FBI background reports limits access to committee members and the nominee's home-state senators. Mr. Reid would fall into neither category.

. . . Confidants of Judge Saad said yesterday that the judge would release the file but that he has never seen it, let alone obtained copies of it. Judge Saad is not permitted to see the file, Senate staffers said.

COMMENTS:


At 10:06 Aussiegirl said:
When comments are this wonderful -- I like to just kick back and savor them -- I'd step in -- but I don't think BonnieBlueFlag needs any help -- she's holding down the fort brilliantly. Personally, I'm taking bets as to whether or not Mr. Morrison ever collects on that blackberry cobbler -- thanks, everyone, for your great comments -- I find myself agreeing with all of you. But I must say, the Republican party is losing my support faster than I ever imagined possible.

If the parties keep this up we are in for the possibility of a credible third party run in the next presidential election. I think there are as many disaffected Democrats as there are disgusted Republicans.

I don't know where it will come from -- but who had ever heard of Perot before he blew into town and swept Bill Clinton into power? It's quite possible that the same thing will happen again -- who might it be? Dean? Schwartzenneger would be a shoe-in if he wasn't disqualified because of his citizenship. Someone like Lieberman might win -- but he's too bland to seize the imagination -- even though a good and decent man. The sad part is -- I can't think of a single person who has the integrity and personality and philosophy to aspire to the presidency without being beholden to all the special interests which seem to hobble most men. Where are the Reagans of our age? Sadly -- you don't get too many of them in one lifetime. We shall see -- but I lose hope by the day.

At 1:56 PM, BonnieBlueFlag said...
Aussiegirl, I am so tired of writing e-mails to my US Senators, the Senate Majority Leader, Senator Frist, the Republican National Committee Chairman, presently, Ken Mehlman, the White House, and any other Republican that I can think of regarding a particular subject.

The Republicans won't make a move no matter what, unless they receive a ton of mail and a million telephone calls to their offices; most of which are probably threats of no further campaign contributions or votes, if they don't get crackin' on a particular matter.

Why do we have to poke them and prod them to do what is right in the first place? Why must we insist that they give us an up or down vote on Bush's nominations? Why are they letting the Democrats drag Bolton through the mud based on the testimony of lowly Democrats eager for their 15 minutes of fame?

Why are they letting Harry Reid call the President a loser, attack judicial nominee Henry Saad, in such a way that it is impossible for him to defend himself?
I am so sick of these Republican wimps, and sometimes that includes GW, that I can hardly stand it anymore. When are they going to represent "we the people" who sent them there to make good on their campaign promises, and their oath to uphold the United States Constitution?

At 2:31 PM, Michael Morrison said...
Two points, if I may:

1) Bonnie, you need to get a copy of my now-favorite bumper sticker, and post it prominently for yourself to see daily. "I feel so much better since I gave up hope."
Child, as long as you put any hope in The Stupid Party (as Sam Francis and others labeled it), you will never feel better.
The currently dominant part of the Boot On Your Neck Party is just as rotten and corrupt as the other, which is called The Evil Party.

(Actually, the Democrats might be considered more honest: They tell us right up front they intend to steal our money, confiscate our property, and make us slaves. The Republicans tell us they believe in the Constitution and individual rights -- then, in office, steal our money, confiscate our property, and make us slaves. See the REAL ID bill as proof.)

It's just wimpier -- or it's wimpy in following through on any of its campaign promises, but likely it never intended to follow through, anyway.

2) Back in what were supposedly the bad ol' days, there was a chorus of gasps and outrage when it was announced that nasty ol' J. Edgar Hoover had secret files on members of Congress.

Mere lad that I was at the time, I still recognized that the members of Congress were just exactly on whom the various law agencies should be keeping records.
Harry S. (for Slime) Reid is merely further proof of my wisdom at that very young age.

At 6:36 PM, Timothy Birdnow said...
Scary Harry brings out the muse in me:

Scary Harry, quite contrary
how does your party grow?
With smear that sells
and rotten smells
and filibusters of our foe!
Sorry, couldn`t resist!

At 6:49 PM, Aussiegirl said...
Oh --- hahahaha --- fillibuster, filibuster, shchmilibuster -- what's in a name??? I'm dying of laughter here -- that's just too good for words -- thanks, Tim!!!!

At 7:36 PM, BonnieBlueFlag said...
Dear Mr. Morrison,
I am quite prepared to slap that bumper sticker on my forehead, lest I forget that it was indeed "Hope" that brought me to this breaking point!

It was hope that caused me to believe that if enough Republicans were elected, the Democrats would be forced back into their coffins like the vampires that they are.
But, instead of nailing those coffins shut, the Republicans have said come on up on the porch and sit a spell. We'll be serving fresh blood later a la francaise, we have Tom DeLay, John Bolton, Henry Saad, Janice Rogers Brown and Priscilla Owen for appetizers.

While my disgust and disappointment in the Republicans increases daily, I cannot yet bring myself to say that they are equal to the likes of Byrd, Clinton, Kennedy, Kerry, Fienstein, Boxer, Reid, Biden and Leahy (who is both stupid and evil), etc.
"Stupid" can be poked, prodded, led, and taught not to let the bully steal its lunch money, but "Evil" will look you in the eye and lie with a charming smile, as it plots to steal your soul.

P.S. I see you have overcome that Republican (spit, spit) lisp, but I have a feeling that it may be only temporary.

At 9:26 PM, Michael Morrison said...
Yes, sorry, Bonnie, it is only temporary. I desisted out of respect for your sensibilities, and out of anticipation of that blackberry cobbler.

Since, though, I have not received said cobbler in the mail or by fax, nor have I even received an invitation to come pick it up, I will go on to say that most of the members of the U.S. Congress (well known as the opposite of the U.S. Progress) are the enemies of freedom, of honesty, of decency, and that includes those -- with perhaps one exception -- in the (spit, spit) Republican Party as well as the (gag, urrp) Democrat Party, and the two alleged "independents," too.

Bonnie, and anyone else still reading, you need to consider the Green or the Constitution or the Libertarian party if you want honesty and a genuine political philosophy.

At 10:39 PM, BonnieBlueFlag said...
Dear Mr. Morrison,

The blackberries are not quite ready for pickin', but I did think you had stated a preference for a square pie rather than a cobbler.

Kind sir, I regret to advise you that I could never vote for a Green Party candidate, however, I would vote for a candidate from the Constitution or the Libertarian Parties, if either had a chance to win the election.

As long as we have what amounts to a two party system, I would have to vote for the lesser of the two evils.

One of the most cunningly deceitful presidents we have ever had, strode into the White House courtesy of the misguided voters who said, "I am voting for Perot, because I want to make a statement."
They made a statement all right, and that statement was that their vote, that was bought and paid for by the blood of fellow Americans, was not a precious gift to be used wisely.

I firmly believe that term limits would solve a great many of the problems that exist in the US congress. Decisions would be made based on what is good for my state or my Country, and not how can I use my congressional vote to secure my own personal future, and win my next election.

P.S. If you are terribly eager to get that pie, I could use blackberries from Guatemala. Now that the Minute Men have left our Southern border, there should be an influx of trucks using produce to hide the illegal aliens.

At 11:20 PM, Michael Morrison said...
Dear Ms Flag (if I must be Mr. Morrison), you are right about ... well, MOST of what you said.

There is a major strategic and philosophical error, though, in choosing an alleged "lesser of two evils."
It is still an evil.

We are never going to get what we want, which I hope for all of us is -- and I know for me is -- a free country, if we keep voting for politicians who oppose freedom.
George W. Bush is a prize example.

There is not one thing in any of our founding documents or in the plans and intentions of the Founders that this is any "two-party system."

That is another myth of the government school system (to which you referred, and so well, elsewhere).

In fact, they did not want any parties; in fact, we have essentially ONE party, the Republocrat Party, or the Boot On Your Neck Party, or the Government Party.

Only by voting for the new parties, and my preference is the Libertarian Party, will we ever effect any changes.

And you are absolutely right in the desperate need for Term Limits, for which I have worked and fought and written for many years now.

Remind me some time to tell you of my adventures petitioning for Term Limits in 1994.

Also, we need some form of Instant Runoff Voting.

In the meantime, if you don't have blackberries, how about peach?

At 12:15 p.m. BonnieBlueFlag said:

Good Morning Mr. Michael, if you prefer.
Yes, you are very correct in your observation that it is a sad state of affairs that the choice of a president, or any other elected office must come down to "the lesser of two evils."

While I cannot say with certainty that there was no mention of political parties, let alone that there should only be two, by the founding fathers. I do believe that they would be appalled by the number of congressmen who have made a career of being a US Senator, or Representative. They assumed that men would come forward to present themselves for public service as a patriotic duty. That these men would serve a number of years and then go back to their original livelihood be it farming, tradesman, or craftsmen.

If they had intended for us to have a king, they would have designated George Washington or someone else as such.

However, not being able to imagine such a creature as a "career politician," we now have a collection of rulers in: King Byrd, King Kennedy, King Inouye, all in office more than 40 years, and Crown Prince Biden, who is currently serving his 6th Senate term, all Democrats.

The longest serving Republican is Senator Stevens from Alaska with 37 years. Senator Stevens has set a shinning example on how much "Pork" one man can carry back to his home state, second only to King Byrd.

Almost one half of the members of the US Senate are multimillionaires. Some were wealthy before reaching the Senate, but most greatly increased their net worth after arriving in Washington, DC. Our government has become a rich man's game, leaving no room for the average citizen to make a contribution in ideas, morals, and decision making. This is in direct conflict with the vision that the founding fathers had for the United States of America.
In the meantime, however poorly President Bush has performed in some areas, I would still drag myself to the polls to vote for him again, rather than let the likes of Al Gore or John Kerry become president. Gore and Kerry could hardly contain themselves, in their eagerness to follow the example set by the Clintons in using the White
House to turn a personal profit.

Please tell me more about your adventures in petitioning for term limits, and for getting government out of our schools.
While you tell me about 1994, please sit down and have a big slice of chocolate cream pie. The peaches in the orchard will be ready in just about 2 more weeks.



Do you want a cup of coffee with your pie, or would you prefer a nice cold glass of fresh cow's milk?

BonnieBlueFlag