Senate Intelligence Committee

SENATE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, on my own time I would like to ask the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee if he would respond to a question.

Mr. ROBERTS. Yes.

Mr. DURBIN. I ask the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, is he prepared to say on the Senate floor today that the investigation of this committee will not only look into the conduct and activity of the intelligence agencies, but allow us to follow the intelligence information gathering to its use by the administration, from the President on down, specifically whether the committee, as we have requested on the Democratic side, will take this intelligence information, determine whether there was any influence by the administration on intelligence agencies, and determine whether or not the administration and any of its spokesmen, before the invasion of Iraq, in any way exaggerated or distorted the intelligence that was gathered in portraying the case to the American people?

Mr. ROBERTS. I say to my friend and colleague, we are in the process of conducting an inquiry. That inquiry I would say is about 85 percent complete. We have had full cooperation-not full cooperation but a spirit of cooperation from the White House, State Department, Department of Defense, and the CIA. Once our inquiry is complete, I think I can answer the question the Senator has posed.

We are on the right track. We want to get at the timeliness and the credibility of the intelligence that was provided. We had four goals to do that, agreed upon by Senator Rockefeller. We will do that job. At that particular time, why, the Senator's question would be pertinent.

I yield.

Mr. DURBIN. Let me reclaim the time. The response or lack of response from the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee explains why we are in the Chamber today. There are two responsibilities of this Intelligence Committee: Not only to determine whether the intelligence agencies did their job but whether or not the information they generated was correctly portrayed by the administration.

I have just asked the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee directly whether this investigation will go into the use of intelligence information by the administration, and you heard his response: Only after we have completed the first round of inquiry about intelligence agencies would we consider asking the question whether anyone in the administration exerted influence on intelligence agencies or mischaracterized the information coming from those agencies.

That was the direct question. There was an opportunity for the chairman of the committee to say point blank that we will allow this investigation to take its normal course, and he deferred. He said we will wait to a later time. That, I believe, is the source of frustration within this committee.

Our ranking member on this committee, Senator JAY ROCKEFELLER of West Virginia, has shown the patience of Job. He has tried literally for months to encourage and convince the Republican majority on this committee to have a full and complete investigation. That is what the American people deserve. That is what this committee should do. But, sadly and unfortunately, the Republican majority has built a wall and said we will gather all of the information and all the investigation about intelligence-but we will not breach that wall and go over the other side to see how the administration used this information.

That is the critical issue. How can you have a complete investigation without asking both questions? Unfortunately, it has been a decision by the Republican majority that they will not allow us to look into the use of intelligence data.

I have never seen this memo that has been referred to. No one has ever given it to me. I certainly had no role in the preparation of this memo. I don't know what it said. But if that memo expressed the frustration of many Senators on the committee that we have created this firewall to protect the administration, then the memo, frankly, speaks to real feelings.

The Intelligence Committee historically has been bipartisan, as it should be. Our efforts on the Democratic side were to urge the Republican majority to take perhaps the uncomfortable but necessary step so that the investigation would be complete. You heard what Chairman Roberts said this morning. He is not prepared to take the investigation of the Intelligence Committee to the use of intelligence data. And as long as that wall has been created, sadly, this cannot be the kind of investigation the American people deserve.

Just several weeks ago-maybe 2-Senator JOHN CORZINE of New Jersey came to the floor and asked for an independent commission on the intelligence that was gathered and how it was used by the administration before the invasion of Iraq. At that time his amendment was rejected by the Senate. It was opposed by Chairman Roberts of the Senate Intelligence Committee and Senator Rockefeller, the ranking Democrat. They said: Stay with the investigation of the Intelligence Committee.

I, frankly, took a different position. I really think this debate this morning proves the point that it is now time to appoint an independent commission-independent and bipartisan-that will literally take this investigation wherever it leads. If the chips fall on a previous administration or this administration, so be it. It is not our role in the Intelligence Committee, nor in Congress, to protect any political party or administration. Our role is to protect the United States of America. Our responsibility is national security. Once the chairman of the committee, as he said this morning, decided this investigation will not go into the use of intelligence data, it is clear that this Intelligence Committee cannot do its job as it should. It makes the case now more than ever that an independent commission needs to be appointed so there is integrity, transparency, and believability in this process.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. DURBIN. I am happy to yield for a question.

Mr. LOTT. I appreciate that because I believe Senator Roberts did respond to your question.

I didn't mention any names quoted in this London Telegraph article. But, Senator Durbin, you are quoted as saying that a public split and new inquiry is inevitable. I hope that is not a quote from you.

Mr. DURBIN. Well, it is a quote from me.

Mr. LOTT. Because to prejudge-

Mr. DURBIN. Reclaiming my time-

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senators will respond to each other through the Chair.

Mr. DURBIN. Responding to my friend from Mississippi, let me say that quote is accurate, that quote is mine, and what you heard from our chairman this morning is the reason for the quote. If we do not allow a complete and full investigation, a split is inevitable. If a decision is made to protect this administration at any level at the expense of the credibility of this investigation, we are not serving the American people well.

Senator Rockefeller has tried time and time again to convince the chairman, the Republican chairman of this committee, that we need a complete investigation. He said repeatedly to Senator Rockefeller, I have been led to believe, what he said on the floor this morning: We are going to draw the line. We will not look into the use of intelligence.

That, sadly, I think, is the reason we are here today and tied in this political knot. It is time for an independent commission.

I yield the floor.