Mrs Feinstein Regrets

Apparently the GOPs aren’t playing nice with Dianne Feinstein’s Senate Intelligence Committee investigation.

“I very much regret the fact that the Republican side of the Intelligence Committee has chosen not to continue to participate in the Committee’s study and investigation into the detention and interrogation of high-value detainees. However, that study and investigation is being pursued, additional staff are being hired, and the Committee is continuing the work with all due diligence.”

They’ve taken their toys and gone home.

Had Mr. Holder honored the pledge made by the president to look forward not backwards, we would still be active participants in the committee’s review,” Missouri Republican Christopher S. Bond, vice-chairman of the Senate panel, said in an e-mailed statement. “Instead, DOJ sent a loud and clear message that previous decisions to decline prosecution mean nothing and old criminal charges can be brought anytime against anyone — against these odds, what current or former CIA employee would be willing to gamble his freedom by answering the committee’s questions?”

But there’s a step Senator Feinstein should take now:

Dear Minority Leader McConnell:

Vice Chairman Bond of the SSCI has determined that he and the GOP members of our committee can no longer participate in good conscience in the investigation of detention and interrogation of high-value detainees. Have you any Republican members of the Senate who can engage in this extremely important undertaking? Can you think of any Republican Senators willing to investigate criminal behavior? If so, please appoint them in the stead of Mr Roberts and his GOP colleagues, whose service we have so valued up to this point.

S/ Dianne Feinstein

To which, of course, Miss McConnell would be obliged to reply,

Dear Di:

Sorry. Ain’t got none.

Yours most sincerely/ Miss

Not wanting to participate in this investigation is a blatant admission against interest to the existence of criminal behavior they wish to conceal, wouldn’t you agree? And one that might be of great interest to future war crimes tribunals.

"Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil" not being an affirmative defense in a Nuremburg proceeding.

Comments are closed.