Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The Bush Family Gets Away with Crimes That Would Land Anyone Else in Jail by Robert Parry

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
Joanne98 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-29-07 11:57 AM
Original message
The Bush Family Gets Away with Crimes That Would Land Anyone Else in Jail by Robert Parry

Consortium News - 2007-11-26
http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2007/11/28/the-bush-family-gets-away-with-crimes-that-would-land-anyone-else-in-jail-by-robert-parry/

In the history of the American Republic, perhaps no political family has been more protected from scandal than the Bushes.

When the Bushes are involved in dirty deals or even criminal activity, standards of evidence change. Instead of proof “beyond a reasonable doubt” that would lock up an average citizen, the evidence must be perfect.

If there’s any doubt at all, the Bushes must be presumed innocent. Even when their guilt is obvious to anyone with an ounce of common sense, it’s their accusers and those who dare investigate who get the worst of it. Their motives are challenged and their own shortcomings are cast in the harshest possible light.

For decades — arguably going back generations — the Bushes have been protected by their unique position straddling two centers of national power, the family’s blueblood Eastern Establishment ties and the Texas oil crowd with strong links to the Republican Right.

This reality was underscored again by how major news outlets and the right-wing press reacted to a new piece of evidence implicating George W. Bush in a criminal cover-up in the “Plame-gate” scandal.

Though the evidence is now overwhelming that President Bush was part of a White House cabal that leaked Valerie Plame Wilson’s identity as a covert CIA officer and then covered up the facts, major newspapers, such as the New York Times and the Washington Post, continue to pooh-pooh this extraordinary scandal.

The latest piece of evidence was the statement from former White House press secretary Scott McClellan that Bush was one of five senior officials who had him clear Karl Rove and I. Lewis Libby in the leak when, in fact, they were two of the leakers.

“The most powerful leader in the world had called upon me to speak on his behalf and help restore the credibility he lost amid the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq,” McClellan said in a snippet released by the publisher of his upcoming memoir.

“So I stood at the White House briefing room podium in front of the glare of the klieg lights for the better part of two weeks and publicly exonerated two of the senior-most aides in the White House: Karl Rove and Scooter Libby,” McClellan said. “There was one problem. It was not true.”

After McClellan’s statement touched off a brief furor on the Internet and cable TV shows, his publisher Peter Osnos tried to soften the blow. Osnos told Bloomberg News that McClellan didn’t mean that Bush deliberately ordered his press secretary to lie.

“He told him something that wasn’t true, but the President didn’t know it wasn’t true,” Osnos said.

What Bush Knew

But neither McClennan nor Osnos knows what Bush really knew.

The revelatory point in McClellan’s statement was that Bush was a direct participant in the campaign to protect Rove and Libby as they lied about their roles in the leak. Previously that was an inference one could draw from the facts, but it had not been confirmed by a White House official.

Indeed, looking at the available evidence, it would defy credulity that Bush wasn’t implicated in the Plame-gate leak and the subsequent cover-up, which led to Libby’s conviction earlier this year on four counts of perjury and obstruction of justice.

For Bush not to have been involved would have required him to be oblivious to the inner workings of the White House and the actions of his closest advisers on an issue of great importance to him.

From the evidence at Libby’s trial, it was already clear that Bush had a direct hand in the effort to discredit Plame’s husband, former U.S. Ambassador Joseph Wilson, after he had gone public in July 2003 with his role in a CIA investigation of what turned out to be bogus claims that Iraq had sought yellowcake uranium from Niger.

Bush, who had cited those bogus claims in his 2003 State of the Union Address in making his case for invading Iraq, was worried about his credibility when U.S. forces failed to find WMD evidence and when Wilson became the first Washington insider to start questioning Bush’s case for war.

So, Bush collaborated with Vice President Dick Cheney in mounting a counter-attack against Wilson. Bush decided to selectively declassify portions of a National Intelligence Estimate in order to undercut Wilson’s credibility and agreed to have that information leaked to friendly reporters.

It was in that context that Libby, Rove and other administration officials went forth to brief reporters, contacts that ended up disclosing that Wilson’s CIA wife, Plame, played a role in arranging his work on the CIA investigation. The suggestion was that Wilson’s unpaid fact-finding trip to Niger was a case of nepotism or a junket.

Following these press contacts, Plame’s identity surfaced in a July 14, 2003, article by right-wing columnist Robert Novak, who had gotten his information from two sources, Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage and his friend, the president’s chief political adviser Karl Rove.

But Rove’s work on the Plame leak didn’t stop with Novak’s article; he continued to peddle the information to other journalists, such as MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, who told Wilson a week after Novak’s column, “I just got off the phone with Karl Rove. He says and I quote, ‘Wilson’s wife is fair game.’”

Rove has since disputed the precise “fair game” quote, but he doesn’t deny talking to Matthews about Plame’s identity. So, we know that a week after the original leaks had blown Plame’s undercover status, Bush had not called off the dogs. His closest political adviser still was using the information to undermine Wilson.

Hardball Politics

This pattern of hardball politics, of course, fits with how George W. Bush and others in his family play Continued>>>
http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2007/11/28/the-bush-family-gets-away-with-crimes-that-would-land-anyone-else-in-jail-by-robert-parry/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Wapsie B Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-29-07 12:02 PM
Response to Original message
1. Bookmarking to read later.
Suggestion to Parry, stay off small planes for the foreseeable future.



Nominated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud2BlibKansan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-29-07 12:03 PM
Response to Original message
2. Just heard through the grapevine
that many in Congress think McClellan's book is the smoking gun that will finally expose the real crimes of the Bush administration.

Of course this would be the same Congress that refuses to move forward on impeachment, in spite of the growing pile of evidence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AndyA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-29-07 12:05 PM
Response to Original message
3. Two things can be determined from this.
1. Bush is an incompetent person who is not capable of performing the duties of President of the United States.

or

2. Bush is a criminal involved in the outing of a covert CIA agent during a time of war for political reasons.

Either is good enough for impeachment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Frustratedlady Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-29-07 12:28 PM
Response to Original message
4. I keep giving them the benefit of the doubt, but is it possible...
that the Dems are waiting until after the election to bring forth the charges so Bush can't pardon everyone?

Is the mansion (hideaway) in Paraguay done, yet? Just sayin'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joanne98 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-29-07 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. No!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reprobate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-29-07 05:07 PM
Response to Original message
6. There will be no criminal investigation of this administration. The Dem leadership promised this.


There will be no investigations because they could only lead to criminal charges against Cheney/Bush and that would only lead to impeachment. The Dem leadership in congress promised there would be no impeachment. They don't want us looking back at their collusion in all the illegal acts. They want us looking forward to the election.

So they're pushing on us the candidate with the highest negatives and the lowest positives and telling us that she will lead us out of the swamps they put us in. Right! A DLC Republicrat will lead us into the light. And she certainly can feel our pain. Even thru the $50 million net worth insulation, she can feel our pain? Bull shit. A supporter of NAFTA and offshoring can feel our pain?

All of us here know the history of the Bush Crime Family - from Pescott's support of the nazi military build up that led to WWII to the lies that led to the Iraq war. But the M$M will not mention a word of any of it, so the population go along like sheep to the shearing.

The corruption inside the beltway goes far and deep. Ask any new congress critter - those who go to washington to make change happen for us. They'll tell you that by the time orientation is over they've been disabused of their high goals

The corruption is not only of the individuals, although we certainly do have a majority of evilness inhabiting all branches of our government. The SYSTEM is corrupt and will always remain so until we start funding our elections with public funds, takeing the profit motive out of politics. But of course the corrupt system will never let that happen.

I now find myself confused as to my opinions of the party I have supported and voted with since the Kennedys. On the one hand the national leadership's enabling of Bush's attacks on the constitution leave me with disdain towards them. On the other hand, my innate optimism will keep me supporting my local Progressive candidates with money and activities.

in the longer term, I can no longer support my party in it's current form. I don't hold much hope for the progressive movement taking over the party due to the power structure in place. But then the hope for a new Progressive party getting a foothold I think is no more than whistling in the wind.

As is now all I can see is the Democratic Party destroying itself by losing any sense of what it was and what it's grassroots wants it to be. Perhaps it's time for it to fade into history and let it's membership form a new party that would more represent them and not the Vampire Elite that now owns the party. At least that's my hope.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-29-07 05:30 PM
Response to Original message
7. UnPrecedented Protection For Unprecedented Criminality
If they didn't need it.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 03:42 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC