Rahm Emanuel, Robert Gates
Posted by Thomas Nephew on November 2nd, 2008
“We’ve put about $45 billion into Iraq’s reconstruction . . . and they have not spent their own resources,” said House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (Ill.). “They have got to have some skin in the game.”
–from paperwight’s brief post, “Rahm Emanuel: Soulless Shitheel.” Of course, minus the unfortunate mention of “skin”, this is not much different from Obama’s frequent mention of Iraqi surpluses on the campaign trail.
While Emanuel may or may not be a soulless shitheel, Robert Gates is definitely a narrow survivor of the Iran Contra scandal in the Reagan administration, when he served as a Deputy Director for Intelligence starting in 1982 and advancing to acting director in 1986. From Chapter 16 of the FINAL REPORT OF THE INDEPENDENT COUNSEL FOR IRAN/CONTRA MATTERS:
Gates consistently testified that he first heard on October 1, 1986, from the national intelligence officer who was closest to the Iran initiative, Charles E. Allen, that proceeds from the Iran arms sales may have been diverted to support the contras. Other evidence proves, however, that Gates received a report on the diversion during the summer of 1986 from DDI Richard Kerr. [...]Notwithstanding Independent Counsel’s disbelief of Gates, Independent Counsel was not confident that Kerr’s testimony, without the support of another witness to his conversation with Gates, would be enough to charge Gates with perjury or false statements for his testimony concerning the timing of his knowledge of the diversion. [...]
The evidence established that Gates was exposed to information about North’s connections to the private resupply operation that would have raised concern in the minds of most reasonable persons about the propriety of a Government officer having such an operational role. Fiers and Cannistraro believed that Gates was aware of North’s operational role. The question was whether there was proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Gates deliberately lied in denying knowledge of North’s operational activities. A case would have depended on the testimony of Poindexter. Fiers would not testify that he supplied Gates with the details of North’s activities. In the end, Independent Counsel concluded that the question was too close to justify the commitment of resources. There were stronger, equally important cases to be tried.
I mention these things because I’ve been hearing from well-informed people — and then finding ample support in news reports — that these two may be the chief of staff and continuing Secretary of Defense in an Obama administration, should Obama prevail on Tuesday.
Not surprisingly, Obama was not forthcoming when asked directly about Emanuel, saying only “I’m trying to win an election” and “David Plouffe is my chief of staff” (Lynn Sweet, Chicago Sun-Times).
One rationale for Gates is supposedly that unbroken chains of trusted command would remain in place as two wars are being waged — i.e., that top brass would be reassured that they wouldn’t be “switching horses in midstream,” as the saying goes. But it seems to me like this is the movie every time a Democrat takes the White House — it is the president who must for some reason accommodate the Pentagon, rather than the other way around. Clinton played the Republican card with William Cohen; it’s time the Democrats had a Democrat for Secretary of Defense.
Moreover, it would be nice to have one who hadn’t narrowly avoided prosecution for covering up actions that defied specific legislation against supplying terrorists (i.e., Contras) with weapons. The United States is a country of three hundred million people; surely we can find someone else?
=====
NOTE: With all due dislike of Rahm Emanuel for his Iraq statement above in particular and his role in the failed Democratic opposition of the past two years in general, I don’t know why a headline should identify him as a “Prominent Jewish Congressman“; is FOX Network expanding its race-baiting beyond Hispanic- and Arab-Americans?
Category: Post. Tags: obama.
Thread RSS,
Comment, Trackback.
Print This
November 2nd, 2008 at 1:27 pm
That Rahm’s name was floated is I believe a pre-emptive move by someone who’s not his friend. It makes it less likely than it might have been that he’ll be offered the job.
And why would Obama want to take RE out of his House leadership position, where he can be of immense use? Besides, the mean little mother didn’t even support Obama in the primaries; I can’t believe a job requiring that much mutual trust would go to him. Not that I’m thrilled with the other name that keeps getting floated, Daschle. Take me now, Lord.
Gates likewise. I’m willing to give him whatever credit he deserves for gumming up the works wrt an attack on Iran, but that’s it. He’s a Papa BushCo operative, always has been, always will be.