Why does Dean think secrecy is bad with 911, but sealed records are good?

He keeps criticizing Resident CheneyBush for blocking an investigation into 911, and pointing out how secrecy leads to
suspicion and speculation.

So why the double standard when it comes to privacy with
his own records?

If so, you'd have a point.

Yep.

I've given up on questioning Dean's double-standards and lies.

He bends the truth and regurgitates his bullshit in pretty every speech he gives.

on September 11, 2001.

Citizens from 62 countries were killed on September 11, 2001.

Btw, we still have not been shown any proof that "Islamists" were the killers.

So we can't possibly know...unless they're *unsealed*.

Dean has left it up to a judge.

Right?

Or is it ok to seal your records so long as you're not asking how people died?

Why is he leaving it up to a judge to decide if they should be unsealed?

The point here is that if Dean feels that government should be transparent and accountable to the citizenry then he should unseal the records of his governorship. To do otherwise leaves one with the impression that, while he may be saying these things, he doesn't really believe them. Seems like YOU'RE the one without a point...unless your point is to deflect the question through use of logical fallacies.

Do you consider this logical reasoning?

Julie

that Bill Clinton thought sealing his Governor records was a good idea before seeking the presidency.

He said he would unseal his records if Bush would unseal his. Tit-for-tat. Sounds like a trade to me, and it takes the issue out from under the administration. You'll notice not much has been made of it as of late.

I'd agree he should open them. The GOP will twist Dean's records into wild accusations. Nothing good comes from feeding witch hunters.

he's still in a primary. The "well the GOP is worse" excuse isn't up to snuff when it comes to his flip-flop on campaign financing, and it isn't in this case

at this stage, and this issue definitely informs us on the issue of who the best dem is.

:)

:hi:

"Nothing good comes from feeding witch hunters."

Welcome to DU!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=898709&mesg_id=898709

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=898801&mesg_id=898801

Those two are dupes.

:shrug:

I hit alert and nothing has happened.

Can't let THAT happen! The Dean contingent NEVER posts duplicates of their own! :eyes:

</excessively dripping sarcasm off

The first one was regarding a news article "Gephardt Demands Dean Release Records" with a link to the story.

The second one was a question posed to others on this board - not relating to the Gephardt story but asking for their comments on "Why won't Dean release his records until after the primaries?" with no link to news source.

At least that is how I read them ...

You can do a search for it. The judge is handling the records now. You may now relax...it is in good hands.

This is the third time this subject has been posted in GD TODAY alone, Myra. :wtf:

eom

*I* didn't post the dupe, friend. :eyes:

If that is ALL the repugs can try to get on Dean...this is a sorry siutation.

There is no "there" there. Do you understand?

All Dean has to bring up is where was Bush* during 1971-1972? Uh, just where was he? He has NEVER explained this.

Who really has the power? I think it's Dean.

Dean did not preside over the single worst national security failure in American history, and then try to divert attention from his responsibility in the event.

Is there no Dean supporter that is bothered by this double standard?

Must have 911 commission, secrecy is intolerable in Democracy!
(But maybe a judge can try to unseal my records but I'll stall as
long as possible...)

Dean is talking about a sitting government. If Dean was still in office it would be incumbent upon him to open his records too, but right now he's a private citizen, so the standard is different.

That is a distinction. Appreciate the post.

I can understand why people have a problem with Dean keeping his records sealed. Personally I don't have a problem with it, but I can understand how it could look hypocritical to some. That's perfectly fair.

simple really.

his records are unsealed if you care to visit TX - a day late and a dollar short. Many have said they would NOT have voted for the man had they known what was in those sealed records at the time. Maybe it's a little history lesson?

but Bush's are not?

The hypocrisy is sickening!

Texas.

computer hard drives, discs, etc.? :eyes:

If Kerry has records kept while serving as a Senator, they belong to US citizens and he probably would share them.

records?

Bush-lite Dems sicken me.

If that were true, they'd have been wriiten about long before now, molly. care to back up your statement with a citation or link?

with Dean's "records"...they could give a shyte about what bush is getting away with.

"Bush-lite Dems" but I think you've missed the point. The poster is asking Why DEAN (who has, evidently, asked bush* to open his records) Is not willing to open his OWN records.

Nowhere has it been insinuated that BUSH* should NOT open his but Dean SHOULD.

The point is that they BOTH should - Unless, of course, there is possibly something in the records (either party we mean) that they want to hide.

Even it that were not the case - it casts a shadow of doubt due to their unwillingness to do so.

On Edit: Reply to 37

You are trying to equate Bush sealing the 28 pages that show the monetary involvement of Saudi Arabia in the atrocity of September 11 with the sealing of Dean’s gubernatorial records?
A strong case can be made politically not sure about legally that Dean release his records. The same goes for Clark’s possible involvement in the 1993 destruction of the Branch Davidian compound in Waco Texas, which violated the Posse Comitatus act.

A declassified Pentagon report that identifies -- by title only -- Army brass who provided "training, equipment and material" to law-enforcement agencies for the operation. Among them: the commanding general of the 1st Cavalry Division, who at the time was General Clark. A source familiar with Clark's military record said that at one point Clark's outfit was ordered to supply some equipment to the FBI.

how dare you question Dean??

Or maybe address what I said? I did concede that politically he should open his records.I really find myself admiring Clark at times but some of his supporters Occasionally steer me in another direction. Notice how I said some and Occasionally not sweeping generalizations like the thread starter.

:(

I'd like to see the correspondence and staff-meeting notes, please...