About the GOP’s Iraq ‘briefing book’…

June 16, 2006

During yesterday’s absurd “debate” on the war in Iraq, [tag]Republican[/tag] lawmakers weren’t just reading party [tag]talking points[/tag]; they were also reading a strategy document prepared by the [tag]Pentagon[/tag] at taxpayer expense.

In a highly unusual attempt to influence the debate, the Pentagon sent a 74-page “[tag]prep book[/tag]” to several members of [tag]Congress[/tag], outlining what it called “rapid response” talking points to rebut criticism of Mr. Bush’s handling of the war and prewar intelligence. The Pentagon sent the book to Democratic leaders on Wednesday night, apparently in error, then sent an e-mail message two hours later asking to recall it.

Needless to say, Dems weren’t terribly interested in giving the 74-page document, labeled “Iraq floor debate prep book,” back. The Pentagon’s legislative affairs office offered it to Dems voluntarily (albeit accidentally), so it was hardly unreasonable of the minority party to read it and start asking questions.

At the top of the list: can the Pentagon do this legally?

Thursday afternoon, Sen. [tag]Frank Lautenberg[/tag] (D-N.J.) sent a letter to [tag]Donald Rumsfeld[/tag] complaining that his office had spent “taxpayer dollars to produce partisan political documents.” Lautenberg also suggested that the document may have violated laws prohibiting the Executive Branch from using taxpayer dollars for lobbying and propaganda activities.

The Pentagon later said the document was produced by the [tag]National Security Council[/tag] — but did not offer an explanation as to why it was sent out by the Office of the [tag]Secretary of Defense[/tag].

I’ve obtained a copy of the Lautenberg letter and the senator makes a pretty compelling case that the Pentagon went way over the line on this one.

Here’s the letter to [tag]Rumsfeld[/tag] from Lautenberg in its entirety (sans footnotes):

It has come to my attention that your office is spending taxpayer dollars to produce partisan political documents for Republican Senators to use during debate on pending Senate Resolutions on the Iraq War. Taxpayer dollars appropriated to the Pentagon should be used to help our troops win the war in Iraq, not help you win political debates in Washington.

In addition, your office’s activities appear to violate two laws that prohibit the Executive Branch from using taxpayer dollars for lobbying and propaganda activities: 18 U.S.C. § 1913 and the Transportation, Treasury, Housing and Urban Development, the Judiciary, the District of Columbia, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 2006, P.L. 109-115, §824 (2005).

On June 14, your office electronically submitted a “debate prep book” to Members of Congress, the U.S. Ambassador to Belgium and the Embassy of Iraq. This prep book contains large sections of highly political and partisan attacks that can be made against the pending Senate Resolutions. To make matters worse, it appears that your office forwarded these materials to representatives of a foreign government to be used against American legislators.

I have attached the briefing book to this correspondence. I urge you to immediately stop using taxpayer funds for propaganda and political purposes in the future and instead, concentrate on serving the needs of our men and women in uniform.

As for the email that went out accidentally, here’s the entire “to” field from the “Office of the Secretary of Defense:

To: Traynham, Robert (Republican-Conf); Call, Amy (Frist); Angie Sowa; Bailey Wood — Cox; Bobby Sepucha – Ford; Chrissy Shott- SRC; Crist, Greg (E-mail); Daly, Brendan (E-mail); Deb Fiddelke; Embassy of Iraq; Emily Larimore – Wilson; Harald Stavenas (E-mail); Jamie Findlater – Hunter; Ferguson, Jessica (Thune); Steinberg, Jon (Reid); Josh Holly; Katie Elbert- Hoyer; Kelly Bulliner; Lara Battles- Skelton; Loren Dealy (E-mail); Maggie Grant (E-mail); Maggie Grant (E-mail); Ridgway, Marcie (Voinovich); Collipriest, MaryJane (Bennett); Mary Petrella; Michael Grismer – Kingston; Stransky, Michael (RPC); MLA dd – LA-All; Nick Holder- Bishop; Pam Turner – DHS; Powell Moore; Shannon Flaherty; Stacy Kerr; Andringa, Tara (Levin); Tom Korologos; Tom Korologos; Tommy Ross (E-mail); Torry Mazzola; Micki Work – Wilson; teresa.lukach; Fred.Smith; Sarah.Nagelman; Barber, Allison Ms OSD PA; Brad MacDougal; Caitlin Carroll — Granger; Carrie Sloan; Jeff Green; Ullyot, John (Warner); Martinko, Stephen (Conference)

Some of these names are more recognizable than others; I think Dems are still Googling away at the full list.

Maybe the House Republicans will say this is no big deal. They requested some information on Iraq for a policy debate, and the Pentagon provided them with the materials they requested. Except that’s not what happened here. The Office of the Secretary of Defense sent out a highly partisan set of detailed talking points as part of a scheme to help Republicans “win” a fixed debate. It’s a fairly blatant example of abusing a pubilc agency for political gain.

I don’t imagine the public will get an explanation for this — we are talking about Donald Rumsfeld’s office — but this abuse deserves to be more than just a one-day story.

And I imagine the poor clerk who sent the thing out, and who a bit later was frantically clicking on “Recall this message” is by now out of a job.

  • Jeebus. After we finish the greatest hits list for W (where we at on that anyway) can we do a list of reason why Rummy should be fired, or shot or both? That is another target rich environment!

    As for this, this is crap! Is it possible that the “King James Version” of the Consitiution that the Republicans seem to prefer mis translated the original text? It seems to me the word seperation is not coming through. Seperation of church and sate, seperation of powers, seperate but equal (oh wait they must have seperate right).

    The Senate Republican Caucus should not be a political wing of the Executive Branch! This is outrageous! I smell Alberto Gonzales all over this for some reason.

    I’ll also bet the reason the DoD blamed it on the NSC was so they can claim national security as a reason for not explaining themselves. What is with the Ambassodor to Belgium? how come he rates?

  • I understand that the flag-burning amendment yet lives. But we can still burn the Constitution. The symbolism would be much more apt than lighting up Old Glory.

    This should make it clear to us that the Constitution has failed–whether the GOP denies it or not. Unless there is evidence to the contrary, we can assume that what CB has described pervades every aspect of the federal bureaucracy. We should expect that, as MNP said, the GOP senators and representatives are in the employ of the executive and will not act to protect their own institutional interests. We can presume that every branch of public service will be used to amplify the White House’s message. We can predict that federal institutions, packed with cronies and politicized to the point that serious civil servants leave in disgust, will be completely unable to respond to emergencies or do anything with competence.

    We, in effect, have forced taxation without representation. Also known as banditry.

  • Is someone keeping a list of all the things that the GOP,and their supporters, both in the blogosphere and the SCLM, seem to think is okay for the Executive Branch to do? I just want to be sure that when the Democratic Party controls the Executive Branch they don’t cry foul without being exposed as hypocritical frauds.

    Just off the top of my head:

    * Spending public dollars for propaganda supporting legislative and policy priorities

    * Outing of covert, or just recently not covert, CIA agents

    * Wiretapping without judicial or leglislative oversight

    * ignoring expert analysis to defend policy decisions

    there must be more…I just want to be sure that when a Dem president does this, a) we can say “we didn’t like it when W was President and we don’t like it when ____ is President”, and b) “you didn’t mind when W was President, but you don’t like it now and thus you lost any claim to credibility or integrity”.

    I know it probably wouldn’t matter, but it would seem like smarter people than me would be able to turn that into hard hitting, easily remembered sound bites that would be effective in gelling support for Dems and resistance to the Repulicant’s (can’t be trusted if they can’t be consistent).

  • I think this is why Americans like divided Government. You don’t have to trust them to play by the rules, they do it naturally.

  • I wonder how many other briefing books there are on the servers at DoD and various political offices. I doubt this is the only time they’ve done it.

    Politics stops at the water’s edge, my ass.

  • This is the party that shrieked, “rule of law, rule of law!” all through the Clinton impeachment hearings? I thought so.

  • Remember when we used to be so concerned about preserving a separation between governing and campaigning that we worried about which phone Al Gore used to make fundraising calls?

  • Edo, I started on that list you’re asking about, but developed Carpal Tunnel Syndrome when I got to page 4,312 of abuses.

  • Like yet another letter by another outraged politician is going to do any good. Let’s face it, we’re now living in a lawless society. Not totally, perhaps, we still have to pay for speeding tickets, get building permits and other minutiae of daily life. But at the highest levels of government they simply ignore whatever they don’t want to acknowledge, and there is no effective mechanism to bring them to heel because the enforcers have become members of the same crime syndicate.

    It’s a good thing the majority of Americans still have some faint hope in the power of democracy, because in many other countries this kind of despotism would result in an armed rebellion sooner or later.

    We can take some comfort from what happened in Nepal, where a similar despot eventually gave up due to courageous and unrelenting opposition from the population. Let’s hope we have the same courage as the Nepalese.

  • So, let’s see the 74 page document … not likely, but there may be a fact or two in it that we can verify.

  • Curmudgeon: The majority of Americans do not, I repeat, do not have any hope in the power of democracy. The majority are to engulfed in their own need for more, more of everything, that they don’t give a rat’s ass what the government does. Watch Good Morning America today, the big story, grandfathers should be involved with their grand kids. Wow, earth shattering. The real story is that Americans do not want to hear, see, touch the dead in Iraq. They don’t want little Sally to know that Uncle Bill had his legs blown off, or that Cousin Ernie was killed and we did not honor him by showing America what happens in war. No we have reduced this ongoing episode into a Fairy Tale, the return of democracy, the voting rights, the bullshit.
    Let us not forget that the only job the military are qualified for is war. The top military officials need war service for more pay, more medals and that golden parachute a job with a military contractor. The longer the war goes on the better for all of them.
    I don’t recall the military having access to the media during Vietnam. I don’t recall them saying what a just war it was, or that the dead were a small price to pay.
    The world is upside down when war, killing, maiming and ignoring our military sacrifices are only trivial events. Americans can shop, go to Walmart, buy the Hummer, carry the bible once a week, and try to fuck the neighbors wife. We don’t got time for war.

    • Comments are closed.