Conyers To Hold Downing Street Memo Stunt

Rep. John Conyers, as predicted here 10 days ago, will hold one of his patented “fake hearings” on the Downing Street Memo Thursday afternoon at 2:30 p.m. EST. Pay no attention to the fact that the witnesses list is lead by the same lead witness (John Bonifz) who presented at his Ohio vote-rigging “hearing,” or that Conyers will trot out Valerie Plame’s husband, Joseph Wilson, who can regale the “hearing” with tales of yellowcake and book sales. Luckily for Wilson no members of the Senate Intelligence Committee will be present to bitch-slap him again. Given the lack of reporting about his cratered credibility, Wilson probably sounded like a great witness to Conyers.

At Conyers Ohio vote-rigging “hearing” the witnesses even addressed him as “Mr. Chairman,” though one suspects he will have counseled his new stooges that tomorrow’s stunt is neither an official meeting of the House Judiciary Committee nor an official hearing, and that in any event he is merely the ranking minority member of the Committee that’s not actually meeting.

What a handful of C-SPAN3 viewers will be treated too is a bunch of Democrats, many of whom are members of the Judiciary Committee attempting to hold a hearing without the Chairman and majority members. Given the moonbat factor I suspect that every member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus (note their website is hosted by the lone Socialist in Congress – Rep. Bernie Sanders) will find a way to get some face time.

Undoubtedly they’ll fail to mention this:

Prewar British Memo Says War Decision Wasn’t Made – [NYT]

The second Downing Street Memo, which is a briefing paper for the meeting the original memo captured minutes of, states not once but twice that “no political decisions” to invade Iraq had been made. Of course they’ll probably argue that the briefing is superseded by the memo (are you dizzy yet) so no attention should be paid to the briefing. They’ll ignore that the chief of Britain’s Secret Intelligence Service’s (Sir Richard Dearlove, noted as C in the memo) quote from the original Downing Street Memo, “Military action was now seen as inevitable,” was characterizing his impressions of the opinions of US intelligence officials he had recently met with. They’ll also ignore the fact that, other than providing intelligence, those officials Dearlove met with were uninvolved in the “political decision” making process.

And Conyers, et. all, will wonder why their fake hearing receives scant attention…

Prior Downing Street Memo coverage.

Update: They most certainly won’t be talking about the Editorial Board of the Washington Post saying:

AFTER LAGGING for months, debate on Iraq in Washington is picking up again. That’s a needed and welcome development, but much of the discussion is being diverted to the wrong subject. War opponents have been trumpeting several British government memos from July 2002, which describe the Bush administration’s preparations for invasion, as revelatory of President Bush’s deceptions about Iraq. Bloggers have demanded to know why “the mainstream media” have not paid more attention to them. Though we can’t speak for The Post’s news department, the answer appears obvious: The memos add not a single fact to what was previously known about the administration’s prewar deliberations. Not only that: They add nothing to what was publicly known in July 2002.

And they’re not the only ones saying that there was “no there, there” – see Kinsley and Kurtz for more of that.

Update 2: They surely won’t be discussing Fred Kaplian’s analysis of the Downing Street Memo (and all the other memos) at Slate. Exactly how many mainstream liberal media institutions (NYT, WaPo, Slate, etc) must debunk the DSM obsessed bloggers assertions? Go back to the quote from the Fox News article about this being a test for the liberal blogosphere if you’re wondering who should be worried. Today’s “fake hearing” leaves the DSM issue precisely where the Ohio vote-rigging story is, nowhere. Much of the media has bent to the will of the left and issued mea culpas for not reporting on the story initially, but by and large they’ve also noted upon examination of the DSM story that there’s hardly even a bit of smoke (let alone fire) to the story. Many liberal bloggers have made this their ship and seem intent on going down with it. If that’s their choice so be it – we’re just interested observers to the non-story story…

The New Truth Laid Bear
Let's *Really* Compare U.S. Soldiers to Nazis


  1. Wendigo June 16, 2005
  2. Will Franklin June 16, 2005
  3. rdboyda June 16, 2005
  4. Jason June 16, 2005
  5. Crank June 16, 2005
  6. Michael L. June 16, 2005
  7. yellow dog dem June 16, 2005
  8. Kirk Muse June 16, 2005
  9. Webster June 16, 2005
  10. Brandon June 16, 2005
  11. Mark June 16, 2005
  12. bear in the buckwheat June 16, 2005
  13. Peter June 16, 2005
  14. Hunter June 16, 2005
  15. Peter June 16, 2005
  16. Peter June 16, 2005
  17. Randy Gomberg June 16, 2005
  18. Peter June 16, 2005
  19. Michael L. June 16, 2005
  20. Peter June 16, 2005
  21. Jason June 16, 2005
  22. Stever June 16, 2005
  23. Mike June 16, 2005
  24. Les Nessman June 16, 2005
  25. Am I A Pundit Now? June 17, 2005
  26. sue June 17, 2005
  27. Michael L. June 17, 2005
  28. Am I A Pundit Now? June 17, 2005
  29. Rob in LA June 17, 2005
  30. Am I A Pundit Now? June 17, 2005
  31. Rob in LA June 17, 2005
  32. Rob June 17, 2005
  33. Am I A Pundit Now? June 17, 2005
  34. Peter June 17, 2005
  35. Dan June 17, 2005
  36. Peter June 17, 2005
  37. Peter June 17, 2005
  38. Dan June 17, 2005
  39. Dan June 17, 2005
  40. Peter June 17, 2005
  41. Dan June 17, 2005
  42. Peter June 17, 2005
  43. ross blake June 17, 2005
  44. Peter June 17, 2005
  45. Dan June 17, 2005
  46. Peter June 17, 2005
  47. Dan June 17, 2005
  48. Peter June 17, 2005
  49. Peter June 17, 2005
  50. Dan June 17, 2005