Crazy Pete Hoekstra Writes a Letter (Again)

Given the news that the National Security Council (aka John Brennan) had decided to brief only leaders (of both houses of Congress, plus “appropriate” committees) on the Nidal Hasan investigation, I decided to check to see how Crazy Pete responded.

Google News suggests he hasn’t–yet–run to the press bitching about the briefings. Instead, Crazy Pete and his fellow Republicans have sent Nancy Pelosi a letter demanding a quick investigation into Nidal Hasan.

Now, the letter is interesting on a number of accounts–starting with the fact that it’s not designed to accomplish anything aside from grand-standing. Think Congress needs to conduct an inquiry into Nidal Hasan? Fine, go to the relevant Chair–like, maybe, the Chair of the committee in question, Silvestre Reyes–and talk about who to accomplish an investigation. But you don’t just write the Speaker and ask her to have Congress (all of Congress? Really?) conduct an investigation–unless your sole goal is grand-standing.

But I’m also interested in the language Crazy Pete uses to grand-stand.

As Members of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, we believe that even the limited information made available to date–both classified and unclassified–strongly indicates that the circumstances surrounding the shootings at Fort Hood require immediate and thorough investigation.

The records appears to establish significant intelligence and intelligence sharing failures that must be reviewed and addressed immediately to ensure that the American people receive the fullest protection against potential attacks. We strongly disagree with the suggestion that Congress should abdicate its Constitutional oversight and fact-finding responsibilities in this regard. Extensive precedent has established that oversight in no way interferes with concurrent criminal prosecution–particularly where, as here, prosecutors have no responsibility for the even more critical task of ensuring the effectiveness of our intelligence community. The future security of over 300 million Americans is far more pressing than after-the-fact investigation of one man.

Sure, there’s all that tedious Crazy Pete hallmarks, such as insinuating that Pelosi (or Reyes) made a suggestion–abdicating their Constitutional oversight role. There’s the way Crazy Pete ignores the obvious precedent of the Iran-Contra investigation, in which a Congressional investigation led partly by Richard Bruce Cheney ended up threatening the legal investigation into the matter.

And then there’s this sentence, which for the life of me I can’t understand at all.

The future security of over 300 million Americans is far more pressing than after-the-fact investigation of one man.

Is Crazy Pete saying that Congress, with almost no investigators, will somehow move more quickly than the Defense Department investigators? Is he suggesting that bringing Hasan to justice just isn’t that important? And how is investigating the very pressing issue of defending 300 million going to do any good, until they actual learn what happened with Hasan?

So, to answer my own question, Crazy Pete has gone in a matter of days from bitching about a delay in briefings to–at a time when briefings have actually been delayed–going silent on that point and instead demanding immediate investigations, not briefings.

Crazy Pete is weird.

image_print
22 replies
  1. WTFOver says:

    Crazy Pete is weird.

    crazy pete is a prime example of too much Dutch inbreeding.

    we see alot of that on this side of the state, being so close to the Dutch Triangle ( grand rapids, holland, zeeland, grand haven, etc ).

  2. Hmmm says:

    And then there’s this sentence, which for the life of me I can’t understand at all.

    The future security of over 300 million Americans is far more pressing than after-the-fact investigation of one man.

    Put that together with the news that Hasan may have referred some of his psychiatric patients for investigation for war crimes, and it looks to me like Crazy Pete is saying fergawdsake don’t publicly investigate this, keep it inside the IC, because if publicly probed then the war crimes angle will come out for all and sundry to see, and then there’ll be bigtime blowback terror strike hell to pay, here inside the US.

    Not (of course) that I agree with that, especially since it seems unlikely, perhaps highly unlikely, that those things that have been happening in Iraq and Afghanistan are currently secret to anyone who would be willing and capable of doing us significant harm.

    • emptywheel says:

      I’m not entirely convinced. It may be that Crazy Pete is right on this one, and Hasan did have ties (that we haven’t learned abotu yet) that bore closer examination.

      THough of course, Crazy Pete is writing a letter on which he is the only signatory that has seen all the classified data (assuming he showed up to today’s briefing). So who knows.

    • klynn says:

      Let me put that OT in context EW. You wrote:

      On January 13, 2003, the INR Iraq nuclear analyst sent an e-mail to several IC analysts outlining his reasoning why, “the uranium purchase agreement probably is a hoax.” He indicated that one of the documents that purported to be an agreement for a joint military campaign, including both Iraq and Iran, was so ridiculous that it was “clearly a forgery.” Because this document had the same alleged stamps for the Nigerien Embassy in Rome as the uranium documents, the analyst concluded “that the uranium purchase agreement probably is a forgery.” When the CIA analyst received the e-mail, he realized that WINPAC did not have copies of the documents and requested copies from INR. CIA received copies of the foreign language documents on January 16, 2003. [my emphasis]

      Juan Cole on Tuesday November 17th wrote:

      The Israelis have been maintaining that a ship, the Francop, that their forces boarded near Cyprus originated in Iran and was bringing arms to Hizbullah and Hamas. Many US news outlets published the accompanying picture, which seemed to indicate that the arms were being supplied by the Ministry of the Sipah [i.e. of soldier].

      The name of that ministry was changed 20 years ago, however, to the Ministry of Defense. One Iranian journalist opined, “So this begs the question of what the emblem of a nonexistent body was doing on the cargo?”

      It is tempting to speculate as to how the Israelis got the letterhead of the Iranian Ministry of the Soldier. It should be remembered that in the 1980s, Israel was allied with Khomeini and received petroleum and other goods from Iran in return for helping against Iraq. It is likely during that era of good feeling that Israel received the letterhead, and whoever dredged it back up to plaster on the goods carried by the intercepted ship did not realize that in the meantime the Iranians had changed the name of the ministry concerned.

      The Likud government is perfectly capable of such a diversionary tactic. Maybe it has a good explanation for all this. We’d like to hear it.

      What is it about this Iran document that reminds me so much of a document that took us into Iraq…Ummm…I just cannot put my finger on it. Is it MO? Is it similar footprint? /s

  3. klynn says:

    I find it odd that two ships with seizures by the US and Israel in the past two months are both German owned out of Hamburg (the Francop and Hans India). Odd that there was a quick show for diplomats too.

    The public prosecutor, Kai Thomas Breas of Stade, near Hamburg, is in charge of investigating violations of Germany’s foreign trade laws barring arms and military commerce with nations sanctioned by the EU and the UN.

    Evidently critics in Germany, US and Israel have argued that Germany is dragging its’ feet in imposing sanctions on Iran.

    Germany has largely remained Iran’s biggest EU trading partner, with business totaling almost €4 billion in 2008.

    And this IS NO cowinkidinky right? /s

    My goodness. Where are Ghorbanifar and Ledeen right now?

    Ummm, reminds me of some aerial footage released last Spring?

    Is there a pattern here? Getting my tinfoil out.

  4. klynn says:

    Oh finally you got it! I was done posting because I did not want to blog-whore.

    Now, I am happy bmaz. I had been missing my Filipino Monkey fix.

  5. cregan says:

    While Pete is crazy, I do agree with an implied premise to his letter:

    The Justice Dept. and other agencies have a huge vested interest in framing the results away from terrorism. The PR fallout from this being found to essentially be a result of terrorism are great.

    I am not saying it is one way or the other. But, the penalty for it being one way and the incentive to make it the other way are too great to not have some other group check it.

    The people in Ft. Hood have suffered already. Putting Hasan in prison will not bring them back. Finding out what are the real facts and what those facts tell us about how to prevent any future similar incidents IS important and useful. No matter, Hasan will get his justice whether Congress investigates or not.

Comments are closed.