Lawmakers: Bush Withheld Tillman Documents

White House Cites "Executive Branch Confidentiality Interests" In Withholding Info On Friendly Fire Death

(AP)  Two influential lawmakers investigating how and when the Bush administration learned the circumstances of Pat Tillman's friendly-fire death and how those details were disclosed accused the White House and Pentagon on Friday of withholding key documents and renewed their demand for the material.

The White House and Defense Department have turned over nearly 10,000 pages of papers — mostly press clippings — but the White House cited "executive branch confidentiality interests" in refusing to provide other documents.

House Oversight Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif., and Tom Davis, R-Va., the committee's top-ranking Republican, said Friday the documents were inadequate. They insisted that the Defense Department turn over the additional material by July 25 and asked that the White House do likewise.

Tillman, a San Jose native, turned down a lucrative contract with the NFL's Arizona Cardinals to join the Army following the Sept. 11 attacks. He was killed April 22, 2004, by friendly fire in Afghanistan.

Although Pentagon investigators determined quickly that he was killed by his own troops, five weeks passed before the circumstances of his death were made public. During that time, the Army claimed he was killed by enemy fire.

Tillman's family and others have said they believe the erroneous information peddled by the Pentagon was part of a deliberate cover-up that may have reached all the way to President Bush and then-Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld. The committee said Friday it had scheduled a second hearing on Tillman's death for Aug. 1, this time to probe what senior Pentagon officials knew and when.

Rumsfeld and Richard Myers, the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, were among those the committee invited Friday to appear.

The White House has turned over nearly 1,100 pages of documents and the Defense Department nearly 8,500 pages since the committee requested information from them in April, part of an inquiry into why Tillman's family and the public were misled.

"The document production from the White House sheds virtually no light on these matters," Waxman and Davis wrote to White House counsel Fred Fielding, part of a renewed request for additional papers.

The committee made public a letter last month in which Fielding said the White House was holding back certain papers "because they implicate executive branch confidentiality interests." He added the White House had blacked out portions of "purely internal e-mails between White House personnel."

The White House's argument for withholding some papers is the same one it used last month as it rejected congressional subpoenas for documents in the firings of eight U.S. attorneys. Executive "confidentiality" is a lesser claim than "executive privilege"

more a polite way of declining than a firm refusal — and thus still leaves room for negotiation, congressional staffers involved in the matter said.

Fielding added the White House had blacked out portions of "purely internal e-mails between White House personnel."

Waxman and Davis fired back that "these are not appropriate reasons for withholding the documents from the committee." And they charged that the White House had simply held other papers back.

In particular, they expressed doubt that the two documents they'd received on communications between the White House and Pentagon on Tillman's death were the only ones of their kind. One was simply a packet of newspaper clippings.

"Corporal Tillman's death was a major national story," they wrote. "It is not plausible that there were no communications between the Defense Department and the White House about Corporal Tillman's death."

"The committee was fully aware that certain documents were withheld as our letter to them made clear last month — along with our offer to discuss possible accommodation that meets the committee's interests while respecting separation of powers principles," Blair Jones, a White House spokesman, said Friday evening. "We continue to offer an opportunity for the committee to move forward in a spirit of accommodation, rather than conflict."

Waxman and Davis complained to Defense Secretary Robert Gates of a "failure to provide a complete production to the committee." For instance, the committee received no documentation on how Rumsfeld learned of Tillman's death.

They said the Pentagon had not produced any papers from, among others, the offices of Gen. John Abizaid, then head of Central Command.

A week after Tillman died, a top general sent a memo to Abizaid warning that it was "highly possible" that Tillman was killed by friendly fire. The memo made clear that the information should be conveyed to the president. The White House said there is no indication that Bush received the warning.

Two days later, the president mentioned Tillman in a speech to the White House correspondents dinner, but he made no reference to how Tillman had died.

A White House spokeswoman did not immediately respond to requests for comment Friday.

Separately, Waxman asked the Republican National Committee for copies of e-mail communications that involved Tillman and White House officials. That request was an outgrowth of the oversight committee's finding last month that 88 White House officials had e-mail accounts with the RNC, and that the administration may have committed extensive violations of a law requiring that certain records be preserved.

[rharrin1]

The president had initially said he would fire anyone in his administration found to have publicly disclosed Plame's identity.

"It has been a tough issue for a lot of people in the White House, and it has run its course, and now we're going to move on," Bush declared.

Several Bush administration officials revealed Plame's identity. White House political adviser Karl Rove and Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage were the primary sources for a 2003 newspaper article outing Plame. Former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer also admitted telling reporters about her. And jurors apparently believed prosecutors who said Libby discussed Plame with reporters from the New York Times and Time magazine. Libby was the only one charged in the matter.

So bush will not live up to his word but as with everything else he has said he proved to be a liar.
Remember bush stating he listens to military leaders
Mr. Wolfowitz, the deputy defense secretary, opened a two-front war of words on Capitol Hill, calling the recent estimate by Gen. Eric K. Shinseki of the Army that several hundred thousand troops would be needed in postwar Iraq, "wildly off the mark." Pentagon officials have put the figure closer to 100,000 troops.

Shinseki was forced into retirement, that is how bush listens.

[rharrin1]

Accusing President Bush of covering up the facts surrounding a US soldier's death is really going over the line. I realize that the liberal media and most US Democrats hate President Bush, but making a vulgar, baseless claim like that is despicable! Anyone who has ever been shot at knows that when the bullets start flying, all bets are off. Friendly-fire casualties are far more common than anyone would like to admit, but no one is covering it up. Many times, due to the chaotic nature of war, friendly-fire incidents are never discovered. Often times, even an autopsy cannot conclusively reveal the truth. Also, the US federal government is an enormous, ineffective bureaucracy. Does anyone really believe the Pentagon or the president could keep that information secret for even a day? Get real.
Posted by S_Temper at 10:41 AM : Jul 15, 2007

When only Americans are shooting they know right away what happened. bush didn't want to release the truth as it would be bad for his oil war effort.

[ioweign]

Will some spineless Democrats please IMPEACH Cheney and Bush!!!
Posted by mh4cbs1 at 01:55 PM : Jul 15, 2007

Do you know the steps required to impeach?

The House of Representatives must first pass "articles of impeachment" by a simple majority.
Next, the Senate tries the accused. In the case of the impeachment of a President, the Chief Justice of the United States presides over the proceedings. Otherwise, the Vice President, in his capacity as President of the Senate, or the President pro tempore of the Senate presides. This may include the impeachment of the Vice President, although legal theories suggest that allowing a person to be the judge in the case where she or he was the defendant wouldn't be permitted. If the Vice President did not preside over an impeachment (of someone other than the President), the duties would fall to the President Pro Tempore.

In order to convict the accused, a two-thirds majority of the senators present is required.
Are there 67 Democratic senators? No
So you see, it is not the spineless Democrats, it is the spineless Republicans.

[whight]

I am not a media liberal. I am a retired SMSGT and I do believe that the Pentagon and Bush did not want anyone to find out the truth on this matter. Just like they did with the hospital rescue of that woman soldier, it was a means to glorify the war. There is very little truth in anything Bush, Rummy or anyone else in this administration has to say.

[hungry1968]

Accusing President Bush of covering up the facts surrounding a US soldier's death is really going over the line.
Posted by S_Temper at 10:41 AM : Jul 15, 2007

I'll go one farther and ask - How does an American soldier get shot three times in the back by his own troops? I still think Bush had him assassinated to popularize his war. I really believe he's that twisted and delusional.

[randalds]

Accusing President Bush of covering up the facts surrounding a US soldier's death is really going over the line. I realize that the liberal media and most US Democrats hate President Bush, but making a vulgar, baseless claim like that is despicable! Anyone who has ever been shot at knows that when the bullets start flying, all bets are off. Friendly-fire casualties are far more common than anyone would like to admit, but no one is covering it up. Many times, due to the chaotic nature of war, friendly-fire incidents are never discovered. Often times, even an autopsy cannot conclusively reveal the truth. Also, the US federal government is an enormous, ineffective bureaucracy. Does anyone really believe the Pentagon or the president could keep that information secret for even a day? Get real.
Posted by S_Temper at 10:41 AM : Jul 15, 2007

No one is accusing him of doing...he did do it. There is no dispute from any credible source that Bush and the White House with-held the information about Tillman's death because it was embarrassing and withholding it would also boost recruitment. Bush is that despicable. He really is that evil and insane.

[moonshadow22]

Pat Tillman was a brave American who felt that it was his duty and privledge to serve his country. He gave his life for what he believed was right. Let nothing overshadow that.

Friendly Fire deaths happen...that's a sad but true reality of war. Many of these embarassing accidents are "whitewashed" and kept quiet.

The Bush Administration has always had a very loose interpretation of the truth (I'm being very nice here) and this is just another case where their "spin" on the story and the reality of the situation contradict each other.

When a high profile and noble man such as Tillman goes into combat and is killed by his own forces, it is only natural that politicians in favor of the war would want to cover that up, so they could hold him up as a "Great Hero" and use his memory as a recruitment tool.

In my mind Tillman IS a hero and it's an absolute shame that his life, along with the lives over 3600 other Heroes have been wasted in Iraq.

As far as Bush goes, if you want to talk about "high crimes and misdemeanors", try 3600 counts of negligent homicide and 25,000 counts of reckless endangerment.

[pepperp1]

Repug propaganda it was the NYT who carried the Bush-Cheney WMD water and most if not all of the mainstream media is Neo Conservative or just plan propagandist who failed this country, the White House press core is an absolute joke with the CNN correspondent can not call her a journalist probably out in front as the most outrageous pro WH coverage, even attacking the opposition for them, Big wet Kiss...indeed. There is no liberal press other than as a Repug taliking point, boggeyman fallguy for failed performance because they know the base loves to hate and fear.

I realize that the liberal media and most US Democrats hate President Bush, but making a vulgar, baseless claim like that is despicable!

Posted by S_Temper at 10:41 AM : Jul 15, 2007

[red164]

I realize that the liberal media and most US Democrats hate President Bush, but making a vulgar, baseless claim like that is despicable!

Posted by S_Temper at 10:41 AM : Jul 15, 2007

For heaven sakes, we kid about the liberal media, but every Republican on earth does that."

%u201CBill Kristol,
%u2018I admit it,%u2019 Kristol told The New Yorker. %u2018The whole idea of the 'liberal media' was often used as an excuse by conservatives for conservative failures.%u2019%u201D




In unguarded moments, however, even far-right figures like Pat Buchanan come clean: "The truth is, I've gotten fairer, more comprehensive coverage of my ideas than I ever imagined I would receive." He further conceded: "I've gotten balanced coverage and broad coverage -- all we could have asked%u2026 For heaven sakes, we kid about the liberal media, but every Republican on earth does that."

%u201C[T]he larger fallacy of the %u2018liberal media%u2019 argument is the idea that reporters and mid-level editors set the editorial agenda at their news organizations. In reality, most journalists have about as much say over what is presented by newspapers and TV news programs as factory workers and foremen have over what a factory manufactures...

[menofoz]

9/11: A "Godsend" for Bush9/11: A "Godsend" for Bush. News stories immediately preceding 9/11: ... Bush blocks release of father%u2019s records (including Iran-Contra records) under the ...

How Bush Hit the 'Trifecta' on 9/11--and the Public Lost Big-Time

No transcript
Bush and Cheney did not testify before the panel -- they were not under oath and there was to be no recording made of the session nor a stenographer in the room.

The two members of the White House counsel's staff were expected to take notes during the session, and the commission members were also allowed to take handwritten notes.

Bush brushed off a question from a reporter Thursday on whether 9/11 families were entitled to a transcript of the session.

"You asked me that question yesterday," Bush replied. "I got the same answer."

He did not repeat the answer, but the White House has said there will not be a transcript of the session. Bush said he expects details of his "conversation" with the commission to go into its final report.