Check this out. Roberts is still trying to cover-up. This is so much more important than a stain on a blue dress. This is about hundreds of thousands of dead and maimed people and billions of dollars of ill gotten gains for the vice president and his cronies.
Here's the message for the Senate: YOU WORK FOR US AND WE WANT TO KNOW EVERYTHING.
We should have known BEFORE the last election. Oh well, water under the bridge. Another bridge coming up.

Senate Panel Squabbles Over Inquiry
The usually cordial Intelligence Committee is split along party lines on the progress of a report on prewar claims about Iraq's weapons.
By Greg MillerTimes Staff Writer
November 5, 2005
WASHINGTON — Republicans and Democrats are locked in what a senior GOP congressional aide described as a "fundamental disagreement" over how to proceed with the Senate Intelligence Committee's inquiry into whether administration officials misused intelligence in making the case for war against Iraq.
The discord centers on the process for determining whether the officials exaggerated the threat posed by Iraq....
...But the Iraq probe is particularly sensitive because it threatens to draw fresh attention to the Bush administration's prewar claims at a time when polling data suggest the public is increasingly disenchanted with the war...
...The Intelligence Committee's staff director, Bill Duhnke, told reporters Friday that the committee had assembled about 480 statements by administration officials and members of Congress, as well as statements in the 1990s by Clinton administration officials.
He said the panel's staff also collected language from intelligence reports to compare with the statements by officials. But the two parties are at odds over how to determine whether the statements of policymakers were warranted....
...Duhnke said that of the statements assembled for scrutiny, about 330 were compiled by Democratic members of the committee, and all represented claims by Bush or other members of his administration. The remainder of the list includes about 100 statements by members of Congress — evenly split between Democrats and Republicans — as well as comments by Clinton administration officials.
Duhnke said Roberts' plan called for committee members to evaluate statements without the names of the speakers attached, to guard against partisanship. If necessary, Duhnke said, the committee could hold a vote on each claim to determine whether it appears to have been substantiated by intelligence available at the time. The results would then be presented in a public report that would carry the names of officials and their comments.
Democrats have balked at that plan, saying staff members should make initial determinations on the validity of officials' comments, just as they rendered preliminary judgments on whether the words contained in prewar intelligence reports were warranted...http://tinyurl.com/d57hv
*