# Senate Review of Iraq Intel Due in March: Does It Matter?
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-review-of-iraq-intel-due-in-march-does-it-matter/230406
**Category:** Great Debates
**Created:** [February 21, 2004, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-review-of-iraq-intel-due-in-march-does-it-matter/230406 "2004-02-21T19:35:45Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)
#### Post date: [February 21, 2004, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-review-of-iraq-intel-due-in-march-does-it-matter/230406/1 "2004-02-21T19:35:45Z")
> [@](#):
>
> \*\*[Senator Roberts’ Statement on the President’s Independent Commission on Intelligence\*\*](http://roberts.senate.gov/02-02-2004.htm)
> _February 2, 2004_
> When my Committee completes its examination of pre-war intelligence it will issue a public report that I believe will answer many of the questions being asked by the media, my colleagues and by the American people.
> “Over the past eight months, we have interviewed over 200 individuals and reviewed thousands of documents including every piece of intelligence underlying pre-war assessments.
> “Members of the Intelligence Committee will receive the draft report this Thursday and **I anticipate completing the report by the second week of March**.
>
> **[CHAIRMAN ROBERTS AND VICE CHAIRMAN ROCKEFELLER ISSUE STATEMENT ON INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE’S REVIEW OF PRE WAR INTELLIGENCE IN IRAQ](http://roberts.senate.gov/02-13-2004.htm)**
> \*February 12, 2004 \*
>
> WASHINGTON, D.C. – Senator Pat Roberts (R-KS), Chairman, and Senator Jay Rockefeller IV (D-WV), Vice Chairman, of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, today announced that the Committee unanimously agreed to refine the terms of reference of the Committee’s ongoing inquiry into pre war intelligence with regard to Iraq. The new terms are as follows:
>
> \*\*A. \*\* The matters set forth in the [joint release of the Chairman and Vice Chairman on June 20, 2003](http://roberts.senate.gov/06-20-2003.htm):
>
> 1.the quantity and quality of U.S. intelligence on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction programs, ties to terrorist groups, Saddam Hussein’s threat to stability and security in the region, and his repression of his own people;
>
> 2.the objectivity, reasonableness, independence, and accuracy of the judgments reached by the Intelligence Community;
>
> 3.whether those judgments were properly disseminated to policy makers in the Executive Branch and Congress;
>
> 4.whether any influence was brought to bear on anyone to shape their analysis to support policy objectives; and
>
> 5.other issues we mutually identify in the course of the Committee’s review;
>
> \*\*B. \*\* the collection of intelligence on Iraq from the end of the Gulf War to the commencement of Operation Iraqi Freedom;
>
> \*\*C. \*\* **whether public statements and reports and testimony regarding Iraq by U.S. Government officials made between the Gulf War period and the commencement of Operation Iraqi Freedom were substantiated by intelligence information;**
>
> \*\*D. \*\* the postwar findings about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction and weapons programs and links to terrorism and how they compare with prewar assessments;
>
> \*\*E. \*\* **prewar intelligence assessments about postwar Iraq;**
>
> **F. \*\* any intelligence activities relating to Iraq conducted by the Policy Counterterrorism Evaluation Group (PCTEG) and the [Office of Special Plans](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=199309&page=2&pp=50&highlight=office+special+plans) within the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy; and
> \*\*
> G.** \*\*the use by the Intelligence Community of information provided by the[Iraqi National Congress (INC)](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&postid=3326581). \*\*
Apparently, these latest “terms of reference” fell under the category of “other issues we mutually identify.”
I contend the unanimous agreement achieved by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence that these new terms of reference deserved to be specifically considered in the report is easy to understand given the many rumors floating around regarding items C, E, F and G.
It’s a worthwhile benefit if the ill-formed and unfounded among these rumors were laid to rest.
This committee will examine the controversial areas (intentionally?) not covered by the PotUS’s commission, (namely items C, E, F and G).
Given these two current threads [[1](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=239954&page=1&pp=50)], [[2](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=240702)], the incredible number of dead and semi-conscious threads and the teeming thousands of SDMBGD posts re the recent United States foreign military venture in Iraq, this upcoming report deserves the robust attention of GD Dopers, (and the American electorate).
**How much weight should this committee’s report be given?**
ps
If anyone knows that the PotUS’s commission actually _is_ going to look into any of these items please post here.
---
### Author:  [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)
#### Post date: [February 23, 2004, 12:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-review-of-iraq-intel-due-in-march-does-it-matter/230406/2 "2004-02-23T00:56:53Z")
It will be interesting to see what is said and also what is said _about_ the report.
But I am even more interested in this forthcoming video: **Uncovered: The Whole Truth About the Iraq War**
I think that it is available from Amazon and maybe [MoveOn.org](http://MoveOn.org).
From the website for the film: ( [http://www.truthuncovered.com/home.cfm](http://www.truthuncovered.com/home.cfm) )
> [@](#):
>
> Among those interviewed are former Ambassador Joe Wilson, weapons inspectors Scott Ritter and David Albright, anti-terrorism expert Rand Beers, former CIA analyst Ray McGovern, former CIA operative Robert Baer and Washington editor of The Nation, David Corn.
It is also going to be shown here in Nashville this week in a theater. The showing is sponsored by the Veterans for Peace.
It want to compare the views on pre-war intelligence.
---
### Author:  [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)
#### Post date: [February 23, 2004, 7:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-review-of-iraq-intel-due-in-march-does-it-matter/230406/3 "2004-02-23T07:53:35Z")
> [@Zoe](#):
>
> It will be interesting to see what is said and also what is said _about_ the report.
>
> But I am even more interested in this forthcoming video: **Uncovered: The Whole Truth About the Iraq War**
Why are you more interested in the movie than the Senate Select Intelligence Committee’s review of pre-war intelligence?
---
### Author:  [@scotandrsn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scotandrsn)
#### Post date: [February 23, 2004, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-review-of-iraq-intel-due-in-march-does-it-matter/230406/4 "2004-02-23T17:57:14Z")
> [@SimonX](#):
>
> **How much weight should this committee’s report be given?**
With regard to what? Deciding if the President knew what he was talking about? There’s been plenty of publicly revealed information on that. The answer to your question depends on many factors.
Who is on the committee? Who is doing the actual information gathering?
What are their records on conducting this type of assessment, and how reliable have their results beenin the past?
Are influential people on the committee beholden to one or another particular conclusion, regardless of the information collected?
One would liek to think that given the weight of the issues and responsibility of the Senate to get it done right, doesn’t mean that it will be.
---
### Author:  [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)
#### Post date: [February 23, 2004, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-review-of-iraq-intel-due-in-march-does-it-matter/230406/5 "2004-02-23T18:07:08Z")
Here’s some selected intel on the Senate Select Intelligence Committee:
\*\*[Home Page\*\*](http://intelligence.senate.gov/index.htm)
\*\*[Committee Members\*\*](http://intelligence.senate.gov/members.htm)
Republicans
**[Pat Roberts](http://roberts.senate.gov/)**, Kansas Chairman
**[Orrin G. Hatch](http://hatch.senate.gov/)**, Utah
**[Mike Dewine](http://dewine.senate.gov/)**, Ohio
**[Christopher S. Bond](http://bond.senate.gov/)**, Missouri
**[Trent Lott](http://lott.senate.gov/)**, Mississippi
**[Olympia J. Snowe](http://snowe.senate.gov/)**, Maine
**[Chuck Hagel](http://hagel.senate.gov/)**, Nebraska
**[Saxby Chambliss](http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/senators/one_item_and_teasers/chambliss.htm)**, Georgia
**[John W. Warner](http://warner.senate.gov/)**, Virginia
Democrats
**[John D. Rockefeller IV](http://rockefeller.senate.gov/)** West Virginia, Vice Chairman
**[Carl Levin](http://levin.senate.gov/)**, Michigan
**[Dianne Feinstein](http://feinstein.senate.gov/)**, California
**[Ron Wyden](http://wyden.senate.gov/)**, Oregon
**[Richard J. Durbin](http://durbin.senate.gov/)**, Illinois
**[Evan Bayh](http://bayh.senate.gov/)**, Indiana
**[John Edwards](http://edwards.senate.gov/)**, North Carolina
**[Barbara A. Mikulski](http://mikulski.senate.gov/)**, Maryland
**[Google Search of SSIC site for "Iraq"](http://www.google.com/search?as_q=&num=100&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&newwindow=1&c2coff=1&btnG=Google+Search&as_epq=&as_oq=iraq&as_eq=&lr=&as_ft=i&as_filetype=&as_qdr=all&as_occt=any&as_dt=i&as_sitesearch=http%3A%2F%2Fintelligence.senate.gov&safe=images)**
As you can see [here](http://intelligence.senate.gov/hr108.htm), despite an average of nearly a meeting a week , (sometimes eight meetings a month), they’ve been w/o an _open_ hearing or briefing for more than a year now. They’ve been busy behind closed doors.
> [@](#):
>
> \*\*[Jurisdiction\*\*](http://intelligence.senate.gov/juris.htm)
> Created pursuant to S.Res. 400, 94th Congress: **to oversee and make continuing studies of the intelligence activities and programs of the United States Government** , and to submit to the Senate appropriate proposals for legislation and report **to the Senate concerning such intelligence activities and programs**. In carrying out this purpose, the Select Committee on Intelligence shall make every effort to assure that the appropriate departments and agencies of the United States provide informed and timely intelligence necessary for the executive and legislative branches to make sound decisions affecting the security and vital interests of the Nation. It is further the purpose of this resolution **to provide vigilant legislative oversight over the intelligence activities of the United States to assure that such activities are in conformity with the Constitution and laws of the United States.**
As a part of the United States Government, a presidential admin’s gathering, use and dissemination of intelligence falls under the jurisdiction of this committee which is specifically charged to “oversee and make continuing studies of the intelligence activities and programs of the United States Government.”
The most serious and important obligation and duty of the SSIC is to “to provide vigilant legislative oversight over the intelligence activities of the United States to assure that such activities are in conformity with the Constitution and laws of the United States.”
Clearly, the Bush Admin’s gathering, use and dissemination of the various intelligences it acquired re the “Iraq situation”, (WMD; al Qaeda; Hussein’s undeterrability; poison-spraying, flying, Iraqi robots attacking the US; etc), is subject, at the least, to the oversight and continuing study of the SSIC.
**Given the quality, [quantity](http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Iraq/Nov_13_03_iraq_press.pdf)**_(.pdf)_\*\* and variety of legitimate concerns of the American electorate re the gathering, use and dissemination of these intelligences by the Bush Admin, the SSIC is bound “to provide vigilant legislative oversight over the intelligence activities of the United States _to assure_ that such activities are in conformity with the Constitution and laws of the United States.”
The American electorate is rightfully due such assurances.\*\*
Can the SSIC deliver meaningful assurances?
Will it?
---
### Author:  [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)
#### Post date: [February 25, 2004, 4:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-review-of-iraq-intel-due-in-march-does-it-matter/230406/6 "2004-02-25T04:33:58Z")
Alas, still having to wait. And alas again at what won’t be covered in the report.
> [@](#):
>
> \*\*[Senate Panel Expands Probe of Iraq Data
> Inquiry to Determine Whether Information Was Exaggerated to Make Case for War\*\*](http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A37872-2004Feb12?language=printer)
> _By Dana Priest
> Washington Post Staff Writer
> Friday, February 13, 2004; Page A23_
>
> …closed-door struggle between Republicans, who sought to keep the focus of the panel’s inquiry on the CIA and other intelligence agencies, and Democrats, who wanted to add a thorough probe into administration actions leading up to the war.
>
> Republicans succeeded in limiting the probe of the administration to a review of public statements, reports and testimony given by administration officials.
>
> The new mandate limits the inquiry into the _[Office of Special Plans](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=199309&page=1&pp=50&highlight=office+special+plans)_ to “any intelligence activities” it conducted; \*\*it does not permit an investigation into whether the OSP influenced top policymakers’ judgments on Iraq. \*\*
> **Yesterday’s vote does not authorize the committee to use its subpoena power to probe whether Bush and his top officials relied on other, as yet undisclosed, intelligence when they made statements about Iraq’s weapons…**
>
> For the past eight months, the committee has been investigating the underlying judgments that went into the intelligence assessments on Iraq. That part of the probe is to be completed by the end of March. **The new findings will be contained in a second report to be released months later.**
>
> - © 2004 The Washington Post Company \*
Why don’t these Republican Senators want the ugly, divisive rumors laid to rest?
---
### Author:  [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)
#### Post date: [February 25, 2004, 5:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-review-of-iraq-intel-due-in-march-does-it-matter/230406/7 "2004-02-25T05:14:29Z")
> [@SimonX](#):
>
> Why don’t these Republican Senators want the ugly, divisive rumors laid to rest?
Probably because they think the rumors are true, and they’d rather sell their country down the drain than their party.
---
### Author:  [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)
#### Post date: [February 26, 2004, 3:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-review-of-iraq-intel-due-in-march-does-it-matter/230406/8 "2004-02-26T03:15:31Z")
Republicans in the senate are definitely circling the wagons in an effort to protect the president: [GOP’s Iraq ambush](http://www.hillnews.com/news/022604/iraq.aspx)
> [@](#):
>
> Republicans plan to stage a lengthy Senate debate on Iraq today to respond to intensifying Democratic attacks on President Bush over his conduct of the war and its turbulent aftermath.
> …
> The debate is expected to draw close to a dozen Republican senators to the floor to defend the president, a show of solidarity reminiscent of the 40-hour marathon debate Senate Republicans held on Bush’s embattled judicial nominees last year.
> …
> Republicans did not give the Democrats advance warning of their plans.
With this sort of atmosphere, there’s virtually no chance that the public will get any explanation of the chain of screwups and deceptions that got us into this damn fool war.
---
### Author:  [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)
#### Post date: [February 26, 2004, 5:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-review-of-iraq-intel-due-in-march-does-it-matter/230406/9 "2004-02-26T05:02:30Z")
I don’t know what to think **Squink**.
I wish that the various GOP Senators had the guts to settle these things out in the open.
Rush Limbaugh has a saying about things that run from the light of day, things that people want hidden fromthe light of day.
> [@](#):
>
> \*\*[Pentagon intelligence offices on Iraq scrutinized\*\*](http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?reportID=562588&storyID=3550125)
> _REUTERS
> 19.02.2004_
>
> [A defence official, speaking on condition of anonymity said,]
> “This was prudent policy planning based on intelligence that’s produced and shared throughout the federal government. These critics have twisted this into something it isn’t.” [a defence official, speaking on condition of anonymity]
> Pentagon officials said the **Counter Terrorism Evaluation Group** was created…to study…terrorist organisations and state sponsors.
>
> **Feith said this group discovered “linkages between Iraq and al Qaeda,” and briefed…CIA chief George Tenet**.
>
> Pentagon officials said the two offices [OSP and the CTEG] never collected intelligence and simply brought a fresh perspective to data gathered by the intelligence community.
I love the whole gig that’s been going on lately with the “not-lying.” Both “Pentagon officials” and the anonymous “defence official,” (presumably Britspeak for a defense dept official), deny charges that haven’t been made and they both affirm, in part, the charges that have been made. Then there’s Feith’s admission that the “discovery” of the “linkages between Iraq and al Qaeda” came out of these efforts. Is the use of the word Iraq opposed to Hussein or Baathi intentional? If so then maybe Feith’s discussing Asnar al-Islam. In any case, this discovery is part of the problem. Feith’s just placing the blame.
The charge is that they “cherry picked” the intel from raw reports sometimes w/o regard to the outcomes of the vetting processes. And used these selectively excerpted bits to craft and exaggerated vision to motivate the nation toward war. While it may not have been what I would call “prudent,” it certainly was both “policy planning based on intelligence that’s produced and shared throughout the federal government,”(with a few exceptions for mystic revelations of utmost certitude received by various Bush Admin members), and a “fresh perspective to data gathered by the intelligence community.”
Even the sources provided by the Iraqi National Congress, ( and other non-impartial international groups ), by way of the OSP were relatively known commodities to the intelligence community. Some were already known as liars _and_ thieves.
And these two sisters have a maiden aunt called the White House Iraq Group.
---
### Author:  [@Uncivil](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uncivil)
#### Post date: [February 26, 2004, 11:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-review-of-iraq-intel-due-in-march-does-it-matter/230406/10 "2004-02-26T11:47:23Z")
Just shows how little accountability politicians have for the decisions they make. How often do govenrment enquiries place any significant blame at the door of politicians? I’m certainly struggling to think of any.
---
### Author:  [@Desmostylus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Desmostylus)
#### Post date: [February 26, 2004, 12:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-review-of-iraq-intel-due-in-march-does-it-matter/230406/11 "2004-02-26T12:37:10Z")
> [@Uncivil](#):
>
> Just shows how little accountability politicians have for the decisions they make. How often do govenrment enquiries place any significant blame at the door of politicians? I’m certainly struggling to think of any.
Your age, or perhaps rather your lack thereof could be showing here.
Blame is often laid. Usually frivolously, but sometimes very seriously. What seems to be lacking in the US is the _consequences_ of the blame being laid. Try Secretary of Defense [Caspar Weinberger](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caspar_Weinberger) for instance. Bush I pardoned Weinberger before anything nasty could be done to him over the Iran-Contra stuff.
Expect to see Bush II pardon Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and Perle very soon. Also expect the term “plausible deniability” to be bandied about.
---
### Author:  [@Uncivil](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uncivil)
#### Post date: [February 26, 2004, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-review-of-iraq-intel-due-in-march-does-it-matter/230406/12 "2004-02-26T17:58:34Z")
> [@Desmostylus](#):
>
> Your age, or perhaps rather your lack thereof could be showing here.
>
> Blame is often laid. Usually frivolously, but sometimes very seriously. What seems to be lacking in the US is the _consequences_ of the blame being laid. Try Secretary of Defense [Caspar Weinberger](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caspar_Weinberger) for instance. Bush I pardoned Weinberger before anything nasty could be done to him over the Iran-Contra stuff.
>
> Expect to see Bush II pardon Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and Perle very soon. Also expect the term “plausible deniability” to be bandied about.
Ta for that. More to do with the fact I’m from the UK than my age.
I think the problem is very few politicians are going to vote in measures that increase their accountability. And I don’t see a mainstream party being brave enough to try to push this as an election issue. Wonder what would happen if the press were to kick up a fuss about this?
Does anyone else find the notion of a Presidential pardon somewhat outdated?
---
### Author:  [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)
#### Post date: [February 26, 2004, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-review-of-iraq-intel-due-in-march-does-it-matter/230406/13 "2004-02-26T19:00:33Z")
He wouldn’t _dare_. Besides, everything was done right out in the open, they didn’t think they were lying, they convinced themselves and each other that they were acting in the best interests of thier nation. I’m not pissed at them for being villainous scoundrels, I’m pissed at them for being stupid and arrogant!
Let the whole crew follow Mr. Perle out the door so they can write crisp and vociferous policy statements for rightard think tanks. Just get their hands off the levers of power, so that thier cupidity and self-righteous bluster won’t cost any more lives.
These men crave, more than anything else, to be taken seriously. Remove that, and they shrivel like a worm on a griddle. Good.
---
### Author:  [@Uncivil](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uncivil)
#### Post date: [February 26, 2004, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-review-of-iraq-intel-due-in-march-does-it-matter/230406/14 "2004-02-26T19:42:17Z")
> [@elucidator](#):
>
> He wouldn’t _dare_.
Didn’t Clinton dish out a load of presidential pardons just before he left the White House? Is there anything to stop Bush doing the same if he loses the election?
I don’t know much about the presidential pardon, what controls are there on it and is it subject to review? Other than, say, the political fallout of pardoning an obvious crook.
---
### Author:  [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)
#### Post date: [February 26, 2004, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-review-of-iraq-intel-due-in-march-does-it-matter/230406/15 "2004-02-26T19:52:06Z")
Oh, heck, the criminal statutes aren’t the worry, that’s not what clenches thier sphincters. If the Dems, if God shall cease to avert His eyes, sweep into control of the Congress and the Executive, that means that all those investigatory committees will be under New Management. That could mean things like testifying _under oath_ without the benefit of a discreet and circumspect Committee Chairman who can be relied upon to keep the questions within polite boundaries.
Pry the lid of those various and sundry cans o’ worms and the neo-con Rightards will be run out of town on a rail. Needless to say, to my immeasurable glee.
---
### Author:  [@quixotic78](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/quixotic78)
#### Post date: [February 26, 2004, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-review-of-iraq-intel-due-in-march-does-it-matter/230406/16 "2004-02-26T20:38:38Z")
Big ups to you, **SimonX** , for collecting and updating these links. I bookmarked your OSP thread, and I’m doing the same here.
Thanks.
---
### Author:  [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)
#### Post date: [February 26, 2004, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-review-of-iraq-intel-due-in-march-does-it-matter/230406/17 "2004-02-26T22:06:52Z")
> [@Zoe](#):
>
> But I am even more interested in this forthcoming video: **Uncovered: The Whole Truth About the Iraq War**.
I’ve seen it. It’s anti-Bush porn.
I hold Bush in extremely low regard, and I think the Iraq war was a tremendous mistake, but that film is about as objective and insightful as a Michael Moore film or a Rush Limbaugh rant.
---
### Author:  [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)
#### Post date: [February 27, 2004, 1:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-review-of-iraq-intel-due-in-march-does-it-matter/230406/18 "2004-02-27T01:22:51Z")
> [@Desmostylus](#):
>
> Expect to see Bush II pardon Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and Perle very soon. Also expect the term “plausible deniability” to be bandied about.
What do you suppose it would take to puncture the veneer of plausible deniability?
I maen how many times re one set of issues can someone rely on plausible deniability?
Doesn’t it wear out at some point?
**luci** ,
You _really_ think that they “meant well”?
**quix** ,
Thank you. You _are_ too kind. I’ll try provide content worthy of review.
I expect that this one will be another only a few attack-Iraq Bush-backers participate much. Neither Rush nor the my GOP have provided many talking points re these issues for the consumption and use of the general public.
There’re some independent minded ones who may be willing to brave the waters on their own. I look forward to whatever they may have to contribute.
Nothing’d please me more than to be horribly and egregiously wrong about the Bush Admin, (at least very few things would please me more). I keep hoping that I’m woefully misled in my assessments.
---
### Author:  [@Jojo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jojo)
#### Post date: [February 27, 2004, 2:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-review-of-iraq-intel-due-in-march-does-it-matter/230406/19 "2004-02-27T02:18:09Z")
Uncivil,
> [@](#):
>
> Didn’t Clinton dish out a load of presidential pardons just before he left the White House?
Someone will correct me if I’m wrong but I think outgoing presidents _always_ issue a load of pardons before they leave. It’s a tradition or an old charter or something.
Clinton’s pardons did, I recall, raise some controversy because he pardoned some buddy of Hilary’s but the actual act of issuing pardons isn’t out of the ordinary.
---
### Author:  [@Uncivil](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uncivil)
#### Post date: [February 27, 2004, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-review-of-iraq-intel-due-in-march-does-it-matter/230406/20 "2004-02-27T15:45:37Z")
Ah, I only heard about the controversy, I didn’t realise it was mainly a tradition. Seems a strange one to me, if you are given a pardon I’d have thought the implication was that you’d done something wrong in the first place. Does a presidential pardon not normally have any stigma attached to it then?
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-review-of-iraq-intel-due-in-march-does-it-matter/230406.md?page=2)