Jamie Gorelick: Mistress Of Disaster

[TexanBob]

American Thinker.com

by C. Edmund Wright

Ken Lay and Jack Abramoff must be green with envy over the all the mischief that has been accomplished by Jamie Gorelick, with scarcely any demonization in the press.

Imagine playing a central role in the biggest national defense disaster in 50 years. Imagine playing a central role in one of the biggest economic disasters in your country's history. Imagine doing both as an un-elected official. Imagine getting filthy rich in the process, and even being allowed to sit self-righteously on a commission appointed to get to the bottom of the first disaster, which of course did not get to the bottom of that disaster or anything else for that matter.

Imagine ending, ruining or at least causing signficant quality deterioration in the lives of millions of people, most of whom will never know your name. Imagine counting your millions of dollars while people who tried to stop you from causing all this mayhem were getting blamed for most of the ills you actually contributed to.

Well, as un-imagineable as this is, there is one American who doesn't have to imagine it. One Jamie Gorelick is this American. And without pretending that she caused the loss of countless thousands of lives and countless billions of dollars of wealth by herself, she certainly did push some of the early domino's in catastrophic chain events that are a major factors in life in America today.

This is not a bad millineums's work, when you think about it. Gorelick, an appointee of Bill Clinton, is the one who constructed the wall of separation that kept the CIA and the FBI from comparing notes and therefore invading the privacy of nice young men like, say, Muhammed Atta and Zacarius Moussaoui. While countless problems were uncovered in our intelligence operations in the wake of 9-11, no single factor comes close to in importance to Jamie Gorelick's wall.

n fact, it was Gorelick's wall, perhaps more than any other single factor, that induces some people to blame Clinton himself for 9-11 since he appointed her and she acted consistent with his philosophy of "crime fighting." She put the wall into place as Deputy Attorney General in 1995.

And for good measure, she was appointed by Tom Daschle to serve on the "non partisan" 9-11 Commission. And we thought the fox in the henhouse was simply a metaphor. Of course, in a splendid example of "reaching across the aisle," feckless Republican Slade Gorton of Washington did all he could to exonerate Gorelick in the commission. Thanks, Slade. God forbid the nation actually knows the truth.

But for Ms. Gorelick, one earth shaking catastrophe is just not enough. You might think that she caused enough carnage to us infidels on 9-11 as to qualify her for the 72 virgins upon her death. (this would also keep her consistent with several of Clinton's philosophies).

Alas, that's only part of her resume. Her fingerprints are all over the Fannie Mae-Freddie Mac mess, which is to say the mess that is central in the entire mortgage-housing crisis. Without so much as one scintilla of real estate or finance experience, she was appointed as Vice Chairman of Fannie Mae in 1997 and served in that role through 2003, which is when most of the systemic cancers that came home to roost today happened. She was instrumental in covering up problems with Fannie Mae while employed there and took multiple millions in bonuses as she helped construct this house of cards.

From Wikipedia:

One example of falsified financial transactions that helped the company meet earnings targets for 1998, a "manipulation" that triggered multimillion-dollar bonuses for top executives. On March 25, 2002, Business Week Gorelick is quoted as saying, "We believe we are managed safely. Fannie Mae is among the handful of top-quality institutions." One year later, Government Regulators "accused Fannie Mae of improper accounting to the tune of $9 billion in unrecorded losses"

As we know, the financial damage done by the housing related problems in this country are still incalculable. Ms. Gorelick's evil tab is still growing.

But it doesn't stop there. She managed to be on the wrong side of the Duke LaCrosse case, working for Duke University to protect that school from it's damaging knee jerk reactions to the spectacularly unbelievable charges filed by a stripper. (excuse me, exotic dancer). So, even on a smaller scale, she continues to make money while working to ruin the lives of innocent Americans in defense of liberal dogma. At the Department of Defense, when she served as legal counsel there in 1993, she drafted the "Don't ask /don't tell" policy.

From what can be gleaned, it all comes from being well connected. She was educated (is that what they call it?) at Harvard undergrad and Harvard Law. From there, she kept getting appointed to positions above her experience level where she could flex her liberal muscles, add a resume item, and move upward.

Sound familiar?

[TexanBob]

A key factor in the 9-11 tragedy as well as the home mortgage crisis.

I guess you can have a hand in two of the biggest **** -ups in American history and skate away with $75 million in your pocket when you belong to the same political party as the mainstream media.

[W*GS]

I wonder how LABF and the other lefties will try to spin their way out of this one...

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by W*GS

I wonder how LABF and the other lefties will try to spin their way out of this one...

Well, we all know that if anybody can figure a way to blame everything on Clinton, you're going to be on board in a heartbeat.

[Spider]

I need to see this in a more creditable news source ...Last time I believed a site like this was over that yellow cake bull**** , turns out everyone knew about it since 1991 ....

[Rohirrim]

These guys produce the majority of the source material for Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Michelle Malkin.

[W*GS]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

These guys produce the majority of the source material for Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Michelle Malkin.

"Attack the messenger and pretend you've discredited the message"?

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by W*GS

"Attack the messenger and pretend you've discredited the message"?

Just a fact. Take it for what it's worth. Are you telling me you accept the argument that there is one, single person behind this? Gorelick, the Evil Genius. Like Dr. No? Or Blofeld?

On the face of it, this argument is ludicrous. As ludicrous as Rush Limbaugh. Of course, all he has to say is "Clinton" and you snap to like Pavlov's dog.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Originally Posted by W*GS

I wonder how LABF and the other lefties will try to spin their way out of this one...

So she served 3 years under Bush after all this and he didn't have a problem with that?

[Spider]

Originally Posted by W*GS

"Attack the messenger and pretend you've discredited the message"?

the dude used Wikiopedia , Look W*GS just cause you read it on the net doesnt make it true

[TexanBob]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

Are you telling me you accept the argument that there is one, single person behind this? Gorelick, the Evil Genius. Like Dr. No? Or Blofeld?

Even the article doesn't claim that one person is completely responsible. But since you are interested in facts, let's bring some out:

1) Clinton appointed Gorelick to Assistant Attorney General. She writes the "wall of separation" memo that prevents intelligence agencies from sharing information.

2) The CIA has info about the 9/11 plot. So does the FBI. But because they aren't allowed to share what they know with each other, the 9/11 terrorists are able to carry out their plot because nobody was able to put all the pieces together in time.

3) As a way of getting the Democrats to go along with a bipartisan commission to study 9/11 and suggest ways to prevent another attack, the Democrats are given power to name half the commission members. The Democrats name Gorelick to the commission so she has the ability to whitewash her culpability in denying information between intelligence agencies.

4) Four years before 9/11, Clinton appoints Gorelick to a Vice Chairmanship at Fannie Mae. One key to the mortgage crisis was the elimination of "redlining", spoken as a code word for racial descrimination in housing loans when it was actually a method to eliminate bad credit risks from being qualified for home loans which, by its nature, would affect a large number of minority applicants.
As one of the corporate heads of Fannie Mae, Gorelick puts in the policy banning redlining. With redlining eliminated, the housing market shot out of sight on the backs of thousands of predictably bad housing loans that would ultimatelty default.

Nobody is saying that Gorelick, all on her own, caused thousands of deaths and forced thousands more from their homes in foreclosure. But she had a key role in both crises yet was able to jettison out of Fannie Mae in 2003 with a $75 million dollar golden parachute, the type liberals routinely decry when corporate heads get those with other companies.

If this is in error, show me where it is in error. Don't complain about the source where it is posted. Don't tell me how much you hate Bush. Focus on the facts here and tell me where what I am saying is factually incorrect.

[Rohirrim]

Wow! Now I understand! Gorelick is actually Bin Laden!

[Spider]

Originally Posted by TexanBob

source where it is posted.

so you wouldnt have a problem with me posting something from the daily kos ?
ok lets look at this ......... How does this fit in ?
http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/1996_hr/h960925g.htm
PREPARED STATEMENT OF
JAMIE S. GORELICK
DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
BEFORE THE
HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
RE: H.R. 3011, THE SECURITY AND FREEDOM THROUGH ENCRYPTION (SAFE) ACT
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 1996
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, for providing me with this opportunity to discuss with you the Administration's policy on the important and complex issue of encryption and our position on H.R. 3011. Although the Department of Justice opposes H.R. 3011, we look forward to continuing the productive discussions we have had with Congress on this issue.

Since 1992, when AT&T announced its plan to sell a small, portable telephone device that would provide users with low-cost but robust voice encryption, the issue of encryption 'that is, the use of mathematical algorithms to protect the confidentiality of data -- has been vociferously debated in the United States. Some people -- legitimately concerned about privacy, commerce, and computer security -- have advocated the unfettered proliferation of strong encryption products, and disapprove of the Administration's attempt to promote cryptographic methods that allow for law enforcement access to plain text. They have argued that government should simply stay out of the encryption issue entirely. Government controls on the export of strong cryptography have come in for particular criticism. In the din of the debate and in some legislative proposals, however, the significant impact that unbreakable encryption would have on domestic law enforcement and national security has often been ignored or understated.

First, let me make clear that we believe that the availability and use of strong cryptography are critical if the "Global Information Infrastructure" (GII) is to fulfill its promise. Communications and data must be protected -- both in transit and in storage - if the GII is to be used for personal communications, financial transactions, medical care, the development of new intellectual property, and myriad other applications. Indeed, people sometimes lose sight of the fact that law enforcement is responsible, in part, for protecting privacy and promoting commerce over our nation's communications networks. We protect communications privacy, for instance, by prosecuting those who would violate the communications privacy of others, and we help promote commerce by enforcing laws that protect intellectual property rights, by combatting computer and communications fraud, and by helping to protect the confidentiality of business data. Our support for robust encryption stems from this commitment to protecting privacy and commerce.

At the same time, however, we must be mindful of our other principal responsibilities: protecting public safety and national security against the threats posed by terrorists, organized crime, foreign intelligence agents, and others, and to prosecute serious crime when it does occur. Thus, notwithstanding the significant benefits of encryption, we are gravely concerned that the proliferation and use of unbreakable encryption would seriously undermine our ability to perform these critical missions.

Court-authorized wiretaps have proven to be one of the most successful law enforcement tools in preventing and prosecuting serious crimes, including terrorism. In addition, as society becomes more dependent on computers, evidence (and the fruits) of crimes are increasingly found in stored computer data, which can be searched and seized pursuant to court-authorized warrants. But if unbreakable encryption proliferates, these critical law enforcement tools would be nullified. Thus, for example, even if the government satisfies the rigorous legal and procedural requirements for obtaining a wiretap order (which can be obtained only in limited circumstances), the wiretap would essentially be worthless if the intercepted communications of the targeted criminals amount to an unintelligible jumble of noises or symbols. The potential harm to law enforcement -- and to the nation's domestic security -- could be devastating.

Our concern is neither theoretical nor overstated. We have already begun to encounter the harmful effects of encryption in recent investigations.

- In the Aldrich Ames spy case, Ames was instructed by his Soviet handlers to encrypt computer file information to be passed to them.

- Ramzi Yousef, recently convicted of conspiring to blow up 10 U.S.owned airliners in the Far East, and his co-conspirators apparently stored information about their terrorist plot in an encrypted computer file in Manila. (Yousef is also one of the alleged masterminds of the World Trade Center bombing.)

- In a child pornography case, one of the subjects used encryption in transmitting obscene and pornographic images of children over the Internet.

- In a major international drug-trafficking case, the subject of a court ordered wiretap used a telephone encryption device, significantly hindering the surveillance.

- Some of the anti-government militia groups are now promoting the use of encryption as a means of thwarting law enforcement investigations. ..Continued at the link

[Spider]

Originally Posted by TexanBob

Even the article doesn't claim that one person is completely responsible. But since you are interested in facts, let's bring some out:

1) Clinton appointed Gorelick to Assistant Attorney General. She writes the "wall of separation" memo that prevents intelligence agencies from sharing information.

got one right here ........ Since you are allowed to use a bias site and claim it as fact , I will defend in kind .. http://mediamatters.org/items/200508180007
Memo to NY Post, et al: So-called Gorelick "wall" could not have been responsible for military failure to share alleged Atta intel

In the past week, conservative media -- including two New York Post columnists and two Post editorials -- have falsely suggested that information obtained by military intelligence purportedly identifying lead 9-11 hijacker Mohammed Atta may have been withheld from law enforcement officials because of a 1995 memo written by then-Clinton deputy attorney general Jamie Gorelick. But the Gorelick memo and ensuing guidelines, which conservatives claim created a "wall" between intelligence agencies and law enforcement officials, had nothing to do with military intelligence -- those documents addressed communications only among divisions within the Department of Justice. Moreover, as Media Matters for America has previously noted, the "wall" that conservatives accuse Gorelick of enacting had been operative well before Gorelick -- or Clinton -- took office.

While the truth remains unclear, Rep. Curt Weldon (R-PA) and Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer have recently suggested that Shaffer's classified military intelligence unit Able Danger identified Atta more than a year before the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks but was unable to relay that information to the FBI.

But if Able Danger did in fact identify Atta, the Gorelick memo and the subsequent 1995 Clinton administration guidelines based on it did not prevent the group from sharing that information with intelligence agencies or law enforcement officials. As former Attorney General John Ashcroft noted in his testimony before the 9-11 Commission, the Gorelick memo provided the "basic architecture" for the 1995 guidelines established by then-Attorney General Janet Reno that formalized rules for intelligence sharing that were already in place. But, as the 1995 guidelines clearly state, the Gorelick memo and the guidelines applied only to intelligence sharing "between the FBI and the Criminal Division" within the Justice Department, not a military unit established by the Defense Department:

SUBJECT: Procedures for Contacts Between the FBI [intelligence/counterintelligence functions] and the Criminal Division Concerning Foreign Intelligence and Foreign Counterintelligence Investigations

The procedures contained herein, unless otherwise specified by the Attorney General, apply to foreign intelligence (FI) and foreign counterintelligence (FCI) investigations conducted by the FBI, including investigations related to espionage and foreign and international terrorism. The purpose of these procedures is to ensure that FI and FCI investigations are conducted lawfully, and that the Department's criminal and intelligence/counterintelligence functions are properly coordinated.

9-11 Commission executive director Philip Zelikow also clearly noted during the commission's hearings that the "wall" applied only to the Justice Department: "Over time, the wall requirement came to be interpreted by the Justice Department, and particularly the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, as imposing an increasingly stringent barrier to communications between FBI intelligence agents and criminal prosecutors."

[gyldenlove]

Originally Posted by TexanBob

2) The CIA has info about the 9/11 plot. So does the FBI. But because they aren't allowed to share what they know with each other, the 9/11 terrorists are able to carry out their plot because nobody was able to put all the pieces together in time.

The president had access to both briefings and chose to do nothing. Since both the FBI and CIA were too incompetent to do anything about it on their own, why is it assumed they would have somehow managed to pull their head out of their arses by collective effort and manage to thwart the terrorrists together?

They are only 2 of the largest, if not the 2 largest police and intelligence agencies in the world with access to more technology than the researchers at CERN.

[Rohirrim]

But the Gorelick memo and ensuing guidelines, which conservatives claim created a "wall" between intelligence agencies and law enforcement officials, had nothing to do with military intelligence -- those documents addressed communications only among divisions within the Department of Justice. Moreover, as Media Matters for America has previously noted, the "wall" that conservatives accuse Gorelick of enacting had been operative well before Gorelick -- or Clinton -- took office.

Oops! You mean the American Thinker is full of ****? Imagine that?

[Spider]

Originally Posted by gyldenlove

The president had access to both briefings and chose to do nothing. Since both the FBI and CIA were too incompetent to do anything about it on their own, why is it assumed they would have somehow managed to pull their head out of their arses by collective effort and manage to thwart the terrorrists together?

They are only 2 of the largest, if not the 2 largest police and intelligence agencies in the world with access to more technology than the researchers at CERN.

well George Tenet knew who did it , but more then that , Tessican Boob is trying an old political trick , thats why I posted the 1993 piece , to show him that the orginal intent of Gorelick wasnt to inhibit or build a wall , but to keep a lid on encrypted data ........

[Spider]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

But the Gorelick memo and ensuing guidelines, which conservatives claim created a "wall" between intelligence agencies and law enforcement officials, had nothing to do with military intelligence -- those documents addressed communications only among divisions within the Department of Justice. Moreover, as Media Matters for America has previously noted, the "wall" that conservatives accuse Gorelick of enacting had been operative well before Gorelick -- or Clinton -- took office.

Oops! You mean the American Thinker is full of ****? Imagine that?

thats why I posted the 93 part ... so people can get the meaning behind what went down , why the memo was even made in the first place , it seems peoples like Tessican Boob think these things come out of the blue

[Spider]

how was that for spin W*GS ?

[Mr.Meanie]

Originally Posted by TexanBob

4) Four years before 9/11, Clinton appoints Gorelick to a Vice Chairmanship at Fannie Mae. One key to the mortgage crisis was the elimination of "redlining", spoken as a code word for racial descrimination in housing loans when it was actually a method to eliminate bad credit risks from being qualified for home loans which, by its nature, would affect a large number of minority applicants.

As one of the corporate heads of Fannie Mae, Gorelick puts in the policy banning redlining. With redlining eliminated, the housing market shot out of sight on the backs of thousands of predictably bad housing loans that would ultimatelty default.

Wait a second... redlining has been a term used in real estate and insurance for years, and has been outlawed since 1977.

How was she responsible for banning redlining when it has been illegal for 30 years?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

Oops! You mean the American Thinker is full of ****? Imagine that?

Darn!

Just when Texan Bigot and W*GS thought they'd found a way to pin both 9/11 and the Nightmare on Wall Street on Clinton all in one fell swoop.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Imagine getting filthy rich in the process, and even being allowed to sit self-righteously on a commission appointed to get to the bottom of the first disaster, which of course did not get to the bottom of that disaster or anything else for that matter.

Huh?

Wait a minute...

Is W*GS conceding that the 9/11 Commission didn't get to the bottom of what happened on 9/11?

[Bronco Bob]

Originally Posted by W*GS

"Attack the messenger and pretend you've discredited the message"?

Seems to work for you. That's your standard rebuttal when anyone posts
any article critical of the right/Republicans. Attack the writer of the article
as being a leftist/socialist/kook/anti-semite and ignore what was written.

[W*GS]

Actually, that's LABF's favorite tactic. Dismiss the argument because it doesn't come from bartcop/Kos/Democratic Underground, and consider the argument refuted. Toss in a few smears and slurs, and LABF figures he's done.

[W*GS]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

Huh?

Wait a minute...

Is W*GS conceding that the 9/11 Commission didn't get to the bottom of what happened on 9/11?

What would do you without a few misrepresentations?