Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

"Either way, the president has painted himself into a corner."

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 » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
understandinglife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 01:22 PM
Original message
"Either way, the president has painted himself into a corner."
And, Fitzgerald is definitely not distracted by any of Bush's stunts, like nominating Roberts.

<clip>

So why has Bush not acted? It seems there are two possibilities. The first is that he is a man of his word only when it suits his interests. Rove has been instrumental in Bush's political success. Perhaps Bush meant to say that he has one set of rules for his advisers and another for everyone else. The second, more disturbing, possibility is that Bush authorized, either explicitly or implicitly, the leak to retaliate against Joseph C. Wilson IV, who publicly presented evidence that the administration was distorting facts to sell the American people on going to war. Either way, the president has painted himself into a corner.

From Will Bush give Rove a pass?

by DAVID GAGNE


July 20, 2005

More at the link:

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/lett... /


I agree with Mr Gagne that Bush has 'painted himself into corner.'

And, I think a third answer to the question "So, why has Bush not acted?" is that he has acted. He has knowingly provided protection for those who conspired and leaked Mrs Wilson's (Ms Plame's) covert status.

For several reasons I find the nomination of Roberts to be among the more pitiful 'last gasps' of a regime fully aware of its fate.

Let us remember that on February 15, 2005, the three judges of the Court of Appeals issued their contempt ruling on Miller and Cooper. Even a cursory reading of Judge Tatel's opinion makes clear that Cooper and Miller are being held in contempt because they are protecting one or more criminals.

Yesterday, Murray Waas, published insider information on Fitzgerald's investigation and, as you will see from the quotes I've selected, the information being cited about Rove is information that the Court of Appeals likely had well before their decision on February 15, 2005.

Let's compare a few quotes from Murray Waas July 19 2005 article, with comments from Judge Tatel's opinion, February 15, 2005:


Murray Waas: White House deputy chief of staff Karl Rove did not disclose that he had ever discussed CIA officer Valerie Plame with Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper during Roves first interview with the FBI, according to legal sources with firsthand knowledge of the matter.

Waas: The omission by Rove created doubt for federal investigators, almost from the inception of their criminal probe into who leaked Plame's name to columnist Robert Novak, as to whether Rove was withholding crucial information from them, and perhaps even misleading or lying to them, the sources said.

From An Unlikely Story: Karl Rove's alibi would be easier to believe if he hadn't hidden it from FBI investigators in 2003

by Murray Waas


July 19, 2005

Link: http://www.prospect.org/web/printfriendly-view.ww?id=10...


Judge Tatel: .... because the communication is unworthy of protection , recipients reactions are irrelevant to whether their testimony may be compelled in an investigation of the source. Indeed, Coopers own Time.com article illustrates this point. True, his story revealed a suspicious confluence of leaks, contributing to the outcry that led to this investigation. Yet the article had that effect precisely because the leaked information -- Plames covert status -- lacked significant news value. In essence, seeking protection for sources whose nefariousness he himself exposed, Cooper asks us to protect criminal leaks so that he can write about the crime.

<clip>

Yet it appears Cooper relied on the Plame leaks themselves, drawing the inference of sinister motive on his own. Accordingly, his story itself makes the case for punishing the leakers.

Link:
http://199.249.170.220/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?v...


Please note the persistent, consistent use of the plural by Judge Tatel: "sources," "criminal leaks," and "leakers."

So, now you may want to reflect on Lawrence O'Donnell's assessment of the severity of the situation and how Judge Tatel describes it:


One of the most important observations made by O'Donnell is precisely the fact that "all the judges who have seen the prosecutors secret evidence firmly believe he is pursuing a very serious crime, and they have done everything they can to help him get an indictment."

Specifically, O'Donnell notes:

"In February, Circuit Judge David Tatel joined his colleagues order to Cooper and Miller despite his own, very lonely finding that indeed there is a federal privilege for reporters that can shield them from being compelled to testify to grand juries and give up sources. He based his finding on Rule 501 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, which authorizes federal courts to develop new privileges in the light of reason and experience. Tatel actually found that reason and experience support recognition of a privilege for reporters confidential sources. But Tatel still ordered Cooper and Miller to testify because he found that the privilege had to give way to the gravity of the suspected crime.

Judge Tatels opinion has eight blank pages in the middle of it where he discusses the secret information the prosecutor has supplied only to the judges to convince them that the testimony he is demanding is worth sending reporters to jail to get. The gravity of the suspected crime is presumably very well developed in those redacted pages. Later, Tatel refers to having carefully scrutinized voluminous classified filings.

Some of us have theorized that the prosecutor may have given up the leak case in favor of a perjury case, but Tatel still refers to it simply as a case which involves the alleged exposure of a covert agent. Tatel wrote a 41-page opinion in which he seemed eager to make new law -- a federal reporters shield law -- but in the end, he couldnt bring himself to do it in this particular case. In his final paragraph, he says he might have let Cooper and Miller off the hook were the leak at issue in this case less harmful to national security.

From The One Very Good Reason Karl Rove Might Be Indicted

by Lawrence O'Donnell


July 7, 2005

Link:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/theblog/archive/lawrence-...

See also:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...


Bush, Rove, Cheney, Libby, and many others may deflect a question or two by nominating Roberts, but Mr Fitzgerald seems undaunted in his pursuit of one or more individuals whom he has already convinced members of the judiciary are not just criminals, but criminals who have harmed our national security.

It's not just perjury or obstruction of justice, either, as Congressman Waxman and others have made clear. And, in protecting the nefariousness of others, Mr Bush, since at least July 14, 2003, has provided safe-harbor to those who damaged our national security.

Mr Bush has very publicly painted himself into a corner and he'll have to go through Mr Fitzgerald, for starters, to get out of that corner.

Let us also never forget that the act of revenge, in addition to its violation of our national security, was meant to be a signal to anyone attempting to expose the lies used by Bush to launch his illegal war of aggression on Iraq.

Hopefully, this time, folk like Senator Kerry will remember Iran-Contra, remember the deeds of folk like Abrams, and never allow this pack of traitors to escape full retribution for their crimes against our Constitution, our national security and humanity.




Peace.

www.missionnotaccomplished.us - How ever long it takes, the day must come when tens of millions of caring individuals peacefully but persistently defy the dictator, deny the corporatists their cash flow, and halt the evil being done in Iraq and in all the other places the Bu$h neoconster regime is destroying civilization and the environment in the name of "America."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Oreo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 01:24 PM
Response to Original message
1. So if Bush gets impeached and resigns before Roberts gets approved...
Does the nomination become null and void?

Sorry... just had a nice little daydream.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ganja Ninja Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 01:35 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. If there are charges filed against two or more people ...
in the administration then the nomination should be tabled in committee and not carried forward until the whole thing is settled. A President with serious ethical problems shouldn't be allowed to place someone on the SC that may be there for the next 25 to 30 years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jillan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 04:40 PM
Response to Reply #5
13. I love that picture !! :0
I detest limpo. More than I detest Rove,* and Cheney.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #5
19. "...that may be there for the next 25 to 30 years."
--that may be there judging Bush's or Cheney's appeals of their convictions!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
understandinglife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 09:50 PM
Response to Reply #19
27. That's one of my concerns about this person, Roberts.
He's a dangerous dude. Here are my initial comments in another thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Multi-tasking is an entry level qualification for those who want to preserve and expand our democracy! I've never understood those who thought our Constitution was a cocoon of complacency instead of a living system that we need to nurture and protect, at all times.


Peace.

www.missionnotaccomplished.us
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreedomAngel82 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 12:30 AM
Response to Reply #5
34. Could Fitzgerald stop the SC ordeal?
Edited on Thu Jul-21-05 12:30 AM by FreedomAngel82
Or does he not have that kind of power? Maybe this is why Bush is wanting to put Roberts up now? Because he knows he could be impeached soon and he wants to have a loyalist on the bench? The timing of this nominatation is very interesting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shelley806 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 11:14 AM
Response to Reply #34
49. I could not agree with you more...I've been waiting for someone to
post this. Apparently Roberts was involved behind the scenes with Jeb Bush during the 2000 recount (giving him advise about the constitutionality of B* election even if he'd lost in Florida.) It was posted at DU yesterday...I'll try to find the link. Very suspicious timing and nomination, indeed!

"The timing of this nominatation is very interesting."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
burrowowl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 01:08 AM
Response to Reply #5
42. Unfortunately
the GJ ends in Oct.
May the Dems and ethical Pubs delay Robert's nomination!

I know, dream on!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FloridaPat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 01:24 PM
Response to Original message
2. There are good leakers and bad leakers. * will fire bad leakers -
those who let out * secrets to the masses or media. However, leaks intended to harm others at the * behest are OK. So when he said he'd fire leakers, he meant those who leaked stuff he didn't want leaked. Rove leak that which was suppose to be leaked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 01:26 PM
Response to Original message
3. Most excellent compilation. Nominated. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 01:28 PM
Response to Original message
4. Excellent letter. Echoes Kerry's statement yesterday.
I think that is the question we all must keep posing, because the press won't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Magistrate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 01:36 PM
Response to Original message
6. Well Done, Sir! Very Well Done Indeed!
You have laid out the true parameters of this matter clearly and forcefully.

It is not going away.

It is treason that is at issue here: this must be the battle-cry!

"Treason doth never prosper, what's the Reason? Why, when it prosper, Sir, none dare call it Treason!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
understandinglife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. I appreciate your comments, very much. Thank you. And, indeed, ..
... we must never allow Treason to prosper, never.


Peace.

www.missionnotaccomplished.us
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Magistrate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 08:39 PM
Response to Reply #7
25. You Are Most Welcome, Sir
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kliljedahl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 06:25 PM
Response to Reply #6
54. Exactly, I keep seeing posts with "Rove-Gate"
The new meme should be

Treason-Gate





Keiths Barbeque Central
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Magistrate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 09:14 PM
Response to Reply #54
57. Traitors' Gate, Sir
Has always had a nice ring to it....

"Kill one, warn one hundred."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maddezmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 02:25 PM
Response to Original message
8. recommended and bookmarked
Great job pulling it all together :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maddezmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 09:40 AM
Response to Reply #8
46. and kicked
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vickitulsa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-24-05 05:22 AM
Response to Reply #8
65. Truly excellent job, perspective that was needed.
And connecting the dots to reveal a clearer picture every day will go a long way toward edifying the public and forcing their eyes open. Put one of those little contraptions from Clockwork Orange on their eyelids so they cannot NOT see the nauseating truth of this Bush administration's evil nature. Hold it all up before them in crystal clarity until their little peepers are watering.

I'm not vengeful; vengeance is a treacherous emotion and the very one that got Rove and his liege into the hot water they're in right now. I just want to see the truth come out and in ways that make it so clear to those who have supported W & Co that they can no longer simply deny, deny, deny.

At some point, the whole thing will have to be distilled into a storyboard for a lot of *'s followers. But right now, this sort of piecing together of the puzzle is essential. Carry on!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClayZ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 02:45 PM
Response to Original message
9. bu$h is on the branch side of the saw!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TalkingDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 02:59 PM
Response to Original message
10. Wait, I'm confused. I'm sure I heard Bush say he would fire
anybody caught with a bloody machete hacking the paws off kittens...
no? Oh, maybe he said he would fire anybody who lied and hacked the paws off kittens with a machete. But just leaking a name....? Come on now...that's just politics.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
understandinglife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 03:14 PM
Response to Original message
11. Oversight hearing on the impact of disclosing the identity of a covert ..
... intelligence officer

WHO: Members of Congress: U.S. Senator Byron Dorgan (D-ND), U.S. Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-CA), Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ), and other members of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives.

Witnesses: Larry Johnson, former CIA analyst; Jim Marcinkowski, former CIA case officer; David McMichael, former CIA case officer; Mel Goodman, former senior CIA analyst.

WHAT: Oversight hearing on the impact of disclosing the identity of a covert intelligence officer

WHEN: 10:00 AM, Friday, July 22, 2005

WHERE: Room 138 - Dirksen Senate Office Building, United States Senate, Washington, D.C.

WHY: To examine the national security consequences of disclosing the identity of a covert intelligence officer.

The panel of witnesses will include former intelligence officers and analysts who will discuss the impact of such disclosures, based on decades of experience and service to our country on intelligence and national security matters.

The hearing comes only days after the witnesses who will appear at the hearing, along with other former intelligence officers and analysts, delivered to the House and Senate leadership a letter expressing deep concern over both the disclosure of the identity of a covert intelligence officer and the continuing partisan attacks on that officer. The letter said that public statements questioning her status and the significance of disclosing her identity reveal an astonishing ignorance of the intelligence community and the role of cover.

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Democrats_plan_their_own_...


Mr Bu$h, if you are ever going to do one honorable thing in your entire life, you should resign now and provide an under-oath deposition to Mr Fitzgerald.

You are a war criminal. You are a traitor.

The only question is, do you have at least the dignity demonstrated by Nixon when he resigned.


Peace.

www.missionnotaccomplished.us





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreedomAngel82 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 12:35 AM
Response to Reply #11
35. I don't think he'll do like Nixon
I think if Bush does ever resign or is impeached all these other dirty secrets will come out. Everything is connected I think. He'll have to be thrown out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 12:51 AM
Response to Reply #35
40. Hell, he'll have to be dragged out in chains .................
he will NEVER admit wrongdoing (he IS the second coming of Christ, after all). He will NEVER resign. If impeached and convicted, he will refuse to leave and declare martial law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
understandinglife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 01:28 AM
Response to Reply #11
43. As kos notes: "It's the CIA. Funny how those guys don't like their covers
.... blown."

Check the link entitled No Rest For Rove:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/7/21/03230/5137

You betcha, Karl is going to get no rest, and rightfully so.

Just take a walk to Arlington National Cemetery and count all those dead and buried who would still be alive excepting for Bu$h's lies and Rove's pathologic incapacity to ever be truthful or honorable.


Peace.

www.missionnotaccomplished.us
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bleever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 03:46 PM
Response to Original message
12. Excellent compilation. Much thanks. Another way to divine *'s guilt
is to simply note that whenever * believes what he's saying, his arrogance and latent anger are clear in his demeanor.

But when speaking of this leak, over the last two years, he has always had the innocent school-boy look on his face, and spoken more softly in a "Gee...I have no idea" sort of way.

Thanks for the great links and analysis, UL.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
understandinglife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 04:58 PM
Response to Original message
14. "A president's ability to govern effectively depends on a measure of ...
... accountability"

Summer Stonewall

by David Ignatius


Wednesday, July 20, 2005; Page A23

A president's ability to govern effectively depends on a measure of accountability -- the public's confidence that the leader will hold subordinates accountable for lapses in performance, ethics and judgment. That is precisely the quality that is beginning to slip away from the Bush administration, just six months into its second term.

The Bush White House's stonewalling and temporizing in the leak investigation of Karl Rove is the most dramatic sign of this problem, but it isn't the only one. This is an administration that rarely holds anyone accountable for anything, other than political disloyalty. That has been the problem on Iraq and Abu Ghraib. People who make mistakes, or worse, have had too many medals pinned on them.

<clip>

Presidential second terms are slippery slopes. People get arrogant; they start to think that because they won reelection, the political rules of gravity no longer apply. Presidents Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton were brought crashing back to earth by bad mistakes in their second terms. This summer we are watching another reminder that reelection doesn't suspend the laws of accountability.

Link:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...


Problem for Mr Bush is that at anytime after his State of the Union address in 2003, should he have held himself "accountable," he would have had no choice but to surrender to the nearest Federal Marshal.


Peace.

www.missionnotaccomplished.us
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
understandinglife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 05:13 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. Ehrlichman: It took us three-and-a-half years to be corrupted by the power
Edited on Wed Jul-20-05 05:17 PM by understandinglife
What is certain is that Valerie Wilson no longer can work undercover and that an American intelligence asset 21 years in the making - she joined the agency in 1984 - has been irreparably damaged.

In a commentary published Sunday in the Sacramento Bee, former Republican congressman Pete McCloskey recalled a visit he paid years ago to John Ehrlichman, the late former domestic policy adviser to President Richard Nixon. Ehrlichman was in federal prison at the time, having been convicted of obstruction of justice, perjury and conspiracy for helping orchestrate the crimes of Watergate.

McCloskey said he asked Ehrlichman, an honorable World War II veteran and attorney, why he had lied for Nixon. Ehrlichman replied, "It took us three-and-a-half years to be corrupted by the power. . . ."

I don't know whether Rove, now Bush's deputy chief of staff, is a criminal, but I know he suffers from a case of mistaken self-identity. Yes, he serves at the pleasure of the president. But Rove works for the people of the United States of America. He has betrayed their trust.

From KARL ROVE: He has betrayed the nation by Eric Mink
Of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch

July 20, 2005

Link:
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/columnists.nsf/er...


Oh, Karl and George, it seems rushing your SCOTUS nomination has not distracted all that many folk from the malignancy of treason that will consume your administration.

One thing, my fellow Americans, once we rid our government of this malignancy, we might want to enact a further limitation on the Presidency - one four year term. I see no justification for anything more and never have; just as I think members of the Senate should not be permitted more than two consecutive terms.


Peace.

www.missionnotaccomplished.us


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 06:59 PM
Response to Reply #15
21. It took Nixon's regime three and half years to be corrupted by power.
It took the Bush regime about five minutes, if that.

(Spring 2001, Cheney Energy Task Force meeting. May 3, 2001, first tax cut for the rich.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreedomAngel82 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 12:39 AM
Response to Reply #21
36. Of course
They had the corruptness the whole time. Look how Bush was brought up by Mama and Poppy Bush. And look at Cheney. They're all corrupt people. Also according to the PBS.org doc on Karl Rove called "The Architect" when they "got in" in 2000 he already was starting to work on 2004 so everything they do is based around some kind of campaign. Now they are clearly showing they don't care and don't need to campaign again since they stole 2004 and everything so we have seen them be even more arrogant and corrupt because they don't hide it like they did before.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Disturbed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 05:15 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. Dignity ?
Sociopaths do not posses such a thing. GW Bush is a Silverspoon Sociopath. Hmm.... Fuzzy math?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
understandinglife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 06:29 PM
Response to Original message
17. DR. RICE: "Yes. Are you sure you're through with this?"
Edited on Wed Jul-20-05 06:57 PM by understandinglife
CONDI PUSHED THE "WILSON WIFE'S SENT HIM STORY"?

by daxman


July 20, 2005 -- 04:47:22 PM EST

Press gaggle transcripts show that it was Condoleezza Rice, not Ari Fleischer, who was pushing the press to look into the reasons the CIA sent Wilson to Niger.

<clip>

Q Dr. Rice, when did you all find out that the documents were forged?
DR. RICE: Sometime in March, I believe. Is that right?
MR. FLEISCHER: The IAEA reported it.
DR. RICE: The IAEA reported it I believe in March. But I will tell you that, for instance, on Ambassador Wilson's going out to Niger, I learned of that when I was sitting on whatever TV show it was, because that mission was not known to anybody in the White House. And you should ask the Agency at what level it was known in the Agency.
Q When was that TV show, when you learned about it?
DR. RICE: A month ago, about a month ago.
Q Can I ask you about something else?
DR. RICE: Yes. Are you sure you're through with this?

(The exchanges go on to issues unrelated to who sent Wilson on his trip)

In reading the whole transcript youll find that no reference to Wilson had been made before Condi brings it up.

So Condi uses a barely-related question to bring up the issue about why Wilson was sent to Niger. She offers the news that he was not sent by the White House and then literally prods the reports to go ask the CIA why he was sent.

More at the link, including some very interesting comments:
http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/7/20/16340/8649


Most likely all of this is old news to Mr Fitzgerald. But, one question suggested in the comments is both obvious and important:

Was Judy Miller on that AF1 flight to Africa on July 7 - 13, 2003?

I haven't been able to find an answer and am going to pose the question as a separate OP to alert anyone who might be able to get the answer.

As to Rice trying to deflect attention from the OVP - forget about it. Cheney may not have asked the CIA to send Ambassador Wilson; but Cheney was pushing the CIA hard to determine the status of the Niger yellow cake issue, as we all know. The fact that the CIA sent Ambassador Wilson is secondary, though for the sake of the truth and our Nation, it is fortunate that they did send Ambassador Wilson.

Nice try Condi ..... oh, and I'm so very sure that you had to watch TV to learn of Wilson's trip .... what a joker you are Condi ....

Peace.

www.missionnotaccomplished.us


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dooner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 06:39 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. You said flight was in 2005, should be
"Was Judy Miller on that AF1 flight to Africa on July 7 - 13, 2005?"

should be 2003, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
understandinglife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 06:58 PM
Response to Reply #18
20. Typo corrected; good catch. Thank you!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
understandinglife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:37 PM
Response to Reply #17
28. Ray McGovern: "Cheney Wasn't Involved Either... Right"
Cheney Wasn't Involved Either... Right

by Ray McGovern


July 20, 2005

By now it should be clear that the White House assault on former ambassador Joseph Wilson and his wife had much less to do with personalities than with the "particular lie" that Wilson exposed. I believe this helps to explain the highly unusual role Vice President Dick Cheney played regarding the forged "intelligence" about Iraq seeking to acquire uranium from Niger - the source of that particular lie.

Our Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) writings provide contemporaneous insight into the major flap that hit the White House two years ago, when it was discovered that the "intelligence" was based on a forgery. It was clear at that time that the first item on the White House list of talking points was: "It wasn't Dick."

<clip>

In our memo of July 14, 2003, we warned President George W. Bush that the Iraq-seeking-uranium-in-Niger forgery was "a microcosm of a mischievous nexus of overarching problems" in his White House. We cited the remarks of then-presidential spokesman Ari Fleischer earlier that week, which set the tone for what has followed - right up to today. When asked about the forgery, Fleischer noted - as if drawing on well memorized talking points - that the vice president was not guilty of anything. (The denial was gratuitous; the question asked did not even mention the vice president's possible role.) And the liturgy of absolution continued on July 11, 2003, when then-director of the CIA George Tenet did his awkward best to absolve the vice president of responsibility.

<clip>

Last week it became clear that Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, was as active as Karl Rove in doing the job on the Wilsons. Surprise, surprise. We ended our July 14 Memorandum for the President from VIPS with this reminder:

This was no case of petty corruption of the kind that forced Vice President Spiro Agnew to resign. This was a matter of war and peace. Thousands have died. There is no end in sight. And that was two years ago.


Link:
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/072005C.shtml


And, NOW, we have the context of Ms Rice's little proding episode with the press on AF1 during Bu$h's trip to Africa - the lead-up to Novak's hit piece.

So many are going to be indicted; oh so many.


Peace.

www.missionnotaccomplished.us


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreedomAngel82 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 12:44 AM
Response to Reply #28
37. I think so too
By the end of this whole ordeal it will be very interesting to see how many people will be gone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
understandinglife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 12:10 AM
Response to Reply #17
31. MSNBC picks up WaPo, quickly: Plames identity marked as secret
Plames identity marked as secret: Memo central to probe of leak spelled out informations status

by Walter Pincus and Jim VandeHei


July 21, 2005

A classified State Department memorandum central to a federal leak investigation contained information about CIA officer Valerie Plame in a paragraph marked "(S)" for secret, .....

<clip>

The memo may be important to answering three central questions in the Plame case .....

<clip>

Almost all of the memo is devoted to describing why State Department intelligence experts did not believe claims that Saddam Hussein had in the recent past sought to purchase uranium from Niger. ....

<clip>

The memo was delivered to Secretary of State Colin L. Powell on July 7, 2003, .... Plame was unmasked in a syndicated column by Robert D. Novak seven days later.

<clip>

It records that the INR analyst at the meeting opposed Wilson's trip to Niger because the State Department, through other inquiries, already had disproved the allegation that Iraq was seeking uranium from Niger.... On July 6, 2003, shortly after Wilson went public on NBC's "Meet the Press" and in The Post and the New York Times discussing his trip to Niger, the INR director at the time, Carl W. Ford Jr., was asked to explain Wilson's statements for Powell, according to sources familiar with the events.

<clip>

He went back and reprinted the June 10 memo but changed the addressee from Grossman to Powell.

Link:
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8635385


Firstly, I've provided the link to the MSNBC pick-up of the WaPo release to indicate that MSNBC posted the Pincus, VandeHei report 29 minutes after it appeared on the WaPo online site (per google news) - quick, I'd say.

Message to Rove and Bu$h - your little Roberts distraction didn't stick.

Deeper messages include Powell, Rice and Cheney are all going to be at each others throats in the days, weeks ahead.

Even deeper message - Georgie boy, you are not going to be well-treated by history or by a bunch of juries and judges that are almost certainly part of your future. Resign dude; do at least one decent, honorable thing in your totally miserable, criminal life. Just one.


Peace.

www.missionnotaccomplished.us


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithy Cherub Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 07:12 PM
Response to Original message
22. Judy is willingly in jail to keep a criminal out. She
according to multiple, 'Your Honors', has gone from protecting a source to something that resembles treason by way of affecting national security or putting it at grave risk. The leakers played fast and loose with the law, because a journalist(s) would stake their reputation, such that it is, on an (mis)interpretation of the First Amendment. This becomes a large mega scandal once Fitzgerald aims to move, which may be closer to October. The new SCOTUS term starts the first Monday in October...

A Most Excellent compilation of the scope of the treachery, treason and traitors!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 07:41 PM
Response to Original message
23. I just read something else Condi Rice said--reported by Wilson in an
Edited on Wed Jul-20-05 07:47 PM by Peace Patriot
interview. (Sorry, don't have the link handy.) Wilson called her to get Bush regime to disavow Iraq Niger nuke claim. He didn't speak to her directly. Through intermediaries, she said she was not interested in his information, but, if he was so concerned about it, why didn't he publish his concerns? (He then did, in the NYT, 7/6/03.)

Makes me think she was baiting him. (She was also speaker of the "mushroom cloud" line, so I doubt she had any good motive.) As she was speaking through intermediaries, she would have had time to consult with Cheney, for instance. And I think he was the prime mover of the plot to disable Plame and her WMD network. (I suspect Rovian revenge is a cover story.)

I also have a theory that they were very worried about what David Kelly (Brit WMD expert, whistleblowing to the BBC at the same time) might know and might disclose. (Blair was told Kelly "could say some uncomfortable things"--not what Kelly had already said--Iraq intel "sexed up"--but what he "could say.")

Timeline:

May 22, 2003: Kelly starts whistle-blowing
June 5-10, 2003: Kelly goes to Iraq
july 6, 2003: Wilson whistleblows
July 9, 2003: Blairites out Kelly's name to the press
July 7-10, 2003: Kelly grilled in secret, then sent home without protection
July 14, 2003: Plame outed (by Novak)
July 18, 2003: Kelly found dead, in extremely suspicious circumstances.
July 22, 2003: Plame network outed (by Novak).

Interesting connective tissue of Judith Miller. One of Kelly's last emails--the one in which he warned of "many dark actors playing games"--was to Judith Miller. She had used him as a major source in her book, "Germs." In the news article about his death (NYT, 7/21/03) she fails to disclose the 'Germs" collaboration, or the "dark actors" email.

I think the Plame outing--perhaps long in the planning--may have been triggered by fear of something Kelly knew (and Plame might find out, or verify), rather than the Wilson article being the trigger. The Wilson article was just the means (to out Plame) not the reason. It all feels a bit panicky to me--calling at least six reporters (to make sure it gets done, pronto?)

My guess at the reason: A plot to plant WMDs in Iraq that summer. Maybe Kelly stumbled upon it, or even foiled it. That's what it feels like to me. He had a change of heart about the war in April-May. Had supported the war (wanted Saddam toppled); then started whistleblowing AFTER the invasion, which would undermine the thing he supported. Why did he do this? He had tried internal pressure to keep the intel honest, but didn't whistleblow then, not til after. It feels like something happened; he found something out.

No concrete evidence, though. Just a hunch.

Not to forget: Judith Miller was running around Iraq hunting for WMDs in that period (not sure which month)--and was very disappointed not to find them. And I suspect she put some words in the dead Kelly's mouth, in her article about him--some self-serving stuff about US troops not looking hard enough for WMDs. She leaves out quotations marks. (It just doesn't fit with his whistleblowing frame of mind.)

(And they were all in an airplane over Africa, at the time that all this was occurring? That's a bit strange. Didn't know that before.)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 08:11 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. I was just trying to find what Miller was writing in July, to see if she
said anything about being on AF-1. Didn't find that (but not finished looking), but did find that on July 20,2003, two days after Kelly was found dead, and a day before she published the article on his death, she published a sort of apologia on the WMD issue, trying to explain why they weren't found, and blames it mostly on US forces not looking hard enough. This is just what she had Kelly saying, "to his associates," with his words not in quotes (in her article about his death). Too, too self-serving.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
understandinglife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 09:45 PM
Response to Reply #24
26. Yes, her 20 July 2003 apologia is disgusting in the extreme. I have ..
... been tracking what she wrote as well. In a different thread, I just posted the following:

I think one of the reasons she did not write an article on the Wilsons ...
.... includes the fact that she had been such a comprehensive propagandist it would have immediately alerted folk to her being central to the revenge/smear/national security crime(s).

Given that, she would certainly have never written about that trip if she were on it, as that would have placed her in the middle of the conspiracy to stomp the Wilsons.

Just speculation, but three planes (2 plus AF1) loads of folk made the trip with Bu$h and it is not exactly subtle that they have refused to release any details as to whom was on the trip except for those so visible as to make it impossible to hide - Powell, Ari, Condi, etc. But, you betcha they'd do everything possible to hide the fact that Judith Miller was along for the ride.

I'm just hoping that one or more members of the WH Press Corps that did make the trip will answer the question. I've sent the question to a bunch of folk (e.g., Olbermann, Conyers, etc) and urge all of you to do the same.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...


Her contact with David Kelly has always screamed at me and the coincidence of his contacting her with such a dark message just prior to his 'suicide' is an alarm bell that will not stop ringing until we get to the bottom of what he knew. I wish Galloway and Short and others would demand access to everything that those who interrogated Kelly recorded as well as all records of his findings (if it all hasn't been scrubbed).


Thank you for sharing your thoughts and your research; much appreciated.


Peace.

www.missionnotaccomplished.us
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 09:24 AM
Response to Reply #26
45. Brit intel confiscated all his computers, notes, etc, right after
his death. It's interesting that they were right there, after his death, taking everything. And where were they as he bled to death all night, out in the open, in the rain, near his home?

I was just thinking of Paul Wellstone and the probable impact of his death on US politicians (fear! --having to operate in a Byzantine hell). There SHOULD HAVE BEEN a Senate inquiry into Wellstone's death. There was none--and no public inquiry at all (standard for such a high ranking official, according to a book I've read on Wellstone's death). Maybe Kelly's death had a similar impact on Brit politicians. (Fear!) There WAS an official inquiry (Lord Hutton) on Kelly's death, but it was a complete whitewash and coverup (comparable, in quality, to our 9/11 inquiry).

As far as I know, the Hutton inquiry never even asked the question: Was he under surveillance? (He absolutely had to have been!) Nor: why didn't the gov't provide him with security when he went home? (--among a zillion other things they ignored or didn't ask.) (The conclusion of the report was, no evidence of foul play, the Blairites were spotless, and his "suicide" was mostly the **BBC's** fault! Un-frigging-believable.)

(The things they deliberately ignored were astonishing--eyewitnesses to the body having been moved, and not enough blood; lots of expert dissent on cause of death, and more.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
understandinglife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 10:24 AM
Response to Reply #45
47. Yes, and, as you note the most obvious fact is he had to have been ...
.... under constant surveillance - constant. So, he either was skillful enough to give the surveillance team the slip and commit suicide, or.................


Peace.

www.missionnotaccomplished.us
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tiptoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-24-05 02:49 AM
Response to Reply #47
63. "...commit suicide, or..."
Edited on Sun Jul-24-05 02:52 AM by tiptoe
...or the ulterior reason Judy Miller opted to "protect her source": Given the "extremely suspicious circumstances" of Kelly's "suicide", Miller may have seen a silver lining in Fitzgerald's threat of jailtime.

(...maybe...)

(IIRC, Miller was quoted commenting something like "it's dangerous out there" as she trekked off to jail.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreedomAngel82 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 12:48 AM
Response to Reply #24
38. Very interesting
Edited on Thu Jul-21-05 12:49 AM by FreedomAngel82
Do you think she knew that his ill-faited fate would happen and could've possibly been in on it? Do you think she was involved in everything since the beginning of 2003? She could've possibly been paid by the Bush camp to do writings for them but nobody at the NYTimes knew? :shrug: Just some question's and guesses.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tiptoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-24-05 12:53 AM
Response to Reply #24
60. "...but Judy was definitely NOT on AF1..."
Who was on AF1?
"Judy Miller was meeting with Libby and getting the leak from him on July 8, the day after AF1 left. I don't have a roster, but Judy was definitely NOT on AF1."

(Adamantly expressed, but source of the information not stated.)




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
understandinglife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-24-05 01:01 AM
Response to Reply #60
61. Yes, interesting that "emptywheel" at TPM was so emphatic, but did not ...
.... provide any basis for the claim.

Good pick-up and Welcome to DU - 'tiptoe'!

I wonder just how 'emptywheel' knew of the meeting between Libby and Miller on July 8, 2003? Any idea?


Peace.

www.missionnotaccomplished.us
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tiptoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-24-05 01:57 AM
Response to Reply #61
62. No idea...Others on AF1, though, and a link to an analysis...
Others on AF-1:
July 7, 2003 AF-1 departs to Africa. Known aboard: Bush, Powell, Fleischer, Dan Bartlett, WH Chief of Staff Andrew Card, Karen Hughes, Mary Matalin, Condi Rice and Deputy Foreign Sec for Africa Walter Kansteiner. Air Force One lands 08/07/2003 22:41 - (SA)


The leakers of Air Force One, and the passenger who heard them
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tiptoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-24-05 04:47 AM
Response to Reply #61
64. Newsday.com July 16, 2005
Edited on Sun Jul-24-05 04:54 AM by tiptoe
Search for sources goes beyond Rove BY TOM BRUNE
WASHINGTON BUREAU


WASHINGTON -- New disclosures this week that Bush aide Karl Rove was a source for two journalists who wrote about covert CIA agent Valerie Plame two years ago raise questions about the identities of additional sources each of them cited.

<snip>

The disclosures also highlight the special prosecutor's interest in jailed New York Times reporter Judith Miller and her meeting in Washington with an unnamed government official on July 8, 2003, the same day, according to the disclosures, that Rove spoke with Novak.


(The "unnamed government official" would be Libby.)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:52 PM
Response to Original message
29. great post ul you always amaze me..and do remember..
that fitzgerald took down the repug party in chicago..and they have yet to recoup from the scandals fitzgerald exposed and prosecuted...

this man has brass balls for the truth!! and for justice!

thanks again ul!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MisterP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:57 PM
Response to Original message
30. try to bury Treasongate or try to bury Judge Dredd, it'll blow up in his
puzzled chimp face
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 12:25 AM
Response to Original message
32. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
understandinglife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 12:28 AM
Response to Original message
33. Senator Boxer: Its the Presidents White House, and the buck stops there.
Edited on Thu Jul-21-05 12:28 AM by understandinglife
STATEMENT BY U.S. SENATOR BARBARA BOXER ON THE WHITE HOUSES INVOLVEMENT IN THE LEAK OF A CIA OPERATIVES IDENTITY

July 20, 2005

I am here today to discuss the White Houses involvement in the leak of a CIA operatives identity, and the ripple effect this disclosure has had on the intelligence community and the women who nobly serve in our intelligence agencies.



America is a country that stands for justice and expects that their leaders reflect that value.

In 1973, when President Richard Nixon was defending his record in the Watergate case, he said, people have got to know whether or not their President is a crook. Well, Im not a crook. That explanation wasnt good enough for the American people.

Neither is President Bushs most recent statement that if someone committed a crime they will no longer work in my Administration.

That standard is far too low and backtracks from the Presidents original statement, which was I dont know of anybody in my Administration who leaked classified information. If somebody did leak classified information, Id like to know it, and well take appropriate action.

The White House press secretary, Scott McClellan also said, If anyone in this administration was involved in it, they would no longer be in this administration.

The American people want and deserve to know that the top officials in the White House are held to the highest ethical standards, not the lowest. The American people expect that their President meant what he said originally and that he will deal with his top staff who clearly put a CIA operative in jeopardy.

Karl Roves acknowledged involvement in the exposure of Valerie Plames identity was clearly wrong. He described the CIA agent as Wilsons wife, and that is enough to be able to identify her.

And the bottom line is that the intelligence community was betrayed and that was a huge disservice not just to them, but to our national security.

Lets look at what White House Advisor Karen Hughes said about the CIA leak in October of 2003:

Karl has said that he was not involved.

Whoever did this leak obviously was not serving President Bush very well.

Thats what Karen Hughes said and I agree with her.

There has never been a more important time for U.S. intelligence agents to be able to do their work unimpeded; the threats posed by terrorists are simply too great.

But Karl Rove and maybe others in this Administration leaked the identity of a CIA agent.

And to what end? To discredit her husband. And here is the real irony her husband was right in the advice he gave to the Administration. He said Iraq did not buy uranium from Niger.

Instead of being thanked for his work, Karl Rove set out to destroy his wifes career.

Is this the way we treat women who risk their lives for their country?

We need diversity in our intelligence community, and what message do we send to women who are considering jobs at the CIA or NSC when a woman like Valerie Plame is used a political weapon?

Karl Rove thought nothing about her career, her family, her safety, and the integrity of the CIA.

Now, I want to go to something else Karen Hughes said in October 2003. At that time, when she believed Karl Rove had no involvement in this matter, she told Time Magazine, I dont believe its right to hide behind journalists.

Again, I agree with Karen Hughes. Its not right for White House officials to hide behind journalists, and its not right for the White House to hide behind this investigation.

This President has spoken in the past about people being held accountable from the top down.

Well, I think President Bush needs to heed President Trumans advice about the Presidency, namely, the buck stops here.

This President needs to take responsibility for his White House, and send a message to the entire nation that actions such as those taken by Mr. Rove will not be tolerated.

Its the Presidents White House, and the buck stops there.

Link:
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Boxer_issues_statement_on...


Loud and clear, Senator Boxer. And, Georgie, she's talking to you, dude, and that slovenly, wretched VP of yours.


Peace.

www.missionnotaccomplished.us
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
understandinglife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 12:51 AM
Response to Reply #33
41. SeattlePI Editorial Board: "Leaking Standard: No pal left behind"
Leaking Standard: No pal left behind

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER EDITORIAL BOARD


President Bush likes to talk about high standards, accountability and personal responsibility. While Bush expects students, school systems and future retirees to toe the line, his friends get an easier deal.

Consider White House political strategist Karl Rove, now implicated in off-the-record discussions that preceded the exposure of a CIA officer's identity. Viewed in the best light, Rove was engaged in leaking information about national security for the political purpose of making the president's sales pitch for the Iraqi invasion appear to have been honest.

<clip>

Schoolchildren, take note. There will still be high standards for you, your teachers and your schools. But at the White House, the rule is a little different: No pal left behind. Unless, of course, he is an out-and-out criminal. That's quite a standard.

Link:
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/233352_karlxed.as...


Get that everyone: "... for the political purpose of making the president's sales pitch for the Iraqi invasion appear to have been honest."

That is treason, pure and simple. And, the guy harboring the traitor(s) currently claims the title President of the United States of America.

He works for YOU. What are YOU going to DO about it?

Stop acting like a spectator, my fellow Americans.

YOU are in charge; your hard-earned tax dollars pay these dudes' salaries. Start acting like the members of the board of directors that YOU ARE.

FIRE THE TRAITORS.


Peace.

www.missionnotaccomplished.us
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nothing Without Hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 12:50 AM
Response to Original message
39. So important - and we MUST MUST MUST answer THESE QUESTIONS:
Edited on Thu Jul-21-05 12:52 AM by Nothing Without Hope
  • Who forged the Niger documents?

  • By whom and how was the fact that they are brazen, laughable-quality forgeries suppressed? MONTHS went by when all requests by outside experts were stonewalled, then when they were finally seen, they were debunked in hours.

  • HOW ABOUT THE FBI PROBE OF THE FORGERIES? Sen. Jay Rockefeller requested it in early 2003 and we have heard NOTHING. Rockefeller's family is part of the oil empire - was the request's effect of stifling other investigations the desired one? Was it a bogus, fake request?

Let's DU him and ask for a PROGRESS REPORT!!!


Background on all of this in the opening post and replies in this thread:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Thread title: Yglesias: WHO FORGED THE NIGER DOCUMENTS? At the heart of the WMD lies

...and RECOMMENDED. This is an important post, as so many of yours are, UL. :patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hiley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 06:26 AM
Response to Original message
44. I feel Bush has acted as well,
he has to stay "loyal" to Rove because of his own criminal activity.
Excellent analysis UL, great work as always.
hiley


Throughout history, it has been the inaction of those who could have
acted; the indifference of those who should have known better; the
silence of the voice of justice when it mattered most; that has made it possible for evil to triumph:
Haile Selassie
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shelley806 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 11:04 AM
Response to Original message
48. So Excellent...TU; Kicked and nominated...hope everyone reads this...
5 Star Kick!

:kick: :kick: :kick: :kick: :kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
understandinglife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 11:15 AM
Response to Original message
50. An important insight into who Fitzgerald is and how he operates
In all, more than 30 current and former city executives including five current or past members of Mr. Daleys cabinet are talking, Mr. Fitzgerald said.

How can Mr. Daley answer that? Assuming the feds can prove their case, he cant. If Mr. Daley didnt know what 30 former city executives knew, why not?

Who runs his government?

If he didnt want to know, why not? Does the buck stop on someone elses desk?

And if he did know, how can he possibly defend not only routine violation of the federal anti-patronage Shakman Decree but blatant rigging of employment tests?

<clip>

From Daley out of options as federal heat grows by Greg Henz

July 19, 2005

Link:
http://chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?id=17157


Mr Bush you are way into that corner. Oh, and Mr Cheney, so are you.

No where to run; no where to hide.


Peace.

www.missionnotaccomplished.us


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lannes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 11:20 AM
Response to Original message
51. Great Post.Great insight.
Im glad you pointed out the fact that we dont have to worry about other issues like Roberts nomination distracting or derailing Rovegate.

Fitzgerald wont be distracted so we can go ahead and discuss other issues as they pop up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
understandinglife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 12:41 PM
Response to Original message
52. Update from Congressman Waxman posted at dKos:
First, I want to iterate a point that I hope we can all keep in mind: the leak of Ms. Wilson's identity is a serious national security breach. There is no reason that the President should wait until someone on his staff is criminally convicted before he clamps down, isolates the leaks, and works to remediate the damage that has been caused. The President's first priority should be to protect the security of this country, not to engage in political damage control. That is his responsibility as President and Commander-in-Chief.

Last week, I put out this fact sheet (http://www.democrats.reform.house.gov/Documents/2005071... ) describing what the Executive Order 12958 requires.

If a career civil servant was involved in violating his nondisclosure agreement and leaking classified information, the agency head would be required under the executive order to take prompt corrective action, including issuing a reprimand, suspending the employee's security clearance, or dismissing the employee. There should not be a different standard for Karl Rove, no matter how elevated his position.

As I mentioned, I will be co-chairing a hearing in the Dirksen Senate Office Building at 10 am tomorrow that will hear testimony from four former CIA and Defense Intelligence Agency officials.

(http://www.democrats.reform.house.gov/docs/docs_hearing... ).

The hearing may be shown on C-SPAN and video will be available after it is concluded.

Joining seven of their colleagues, these former intelligence officials issued an open statement -

(http://www.democrats.reform.house.gov/docs/excia_open_s... )

- to Congress this week concluding that the coordinated strategy to discredit Ms. Wilson "reveals an astonishing ignorance of the intelligence community and the role of cover." Those are extremely strong words. I urge you to read their full statement, if you haven't yet already.

Among the questions I will have for these witnesses is how a breach like this impacts an agent's network of contacts in real terms. I also want to know their thoughts as intelligence officials on the White House actions to date.

There is much more to this situation we do not yet know, including who told Karl Rove and Scooter Libby, the Vice President's chief of staff, about Ms. Wilson's position at the CIA. That is why congressional oversight is so important.

Please know that I am working hard here in Washington to find answers to these questions. I appreciate your efforts on Daily Kos and elsewhere to make sure that this reprehensible abuse of power is not ignored.

Link to comments:
http://dailykos.com/story/2005/7/21/103055/210



Peace.

www.missionnotaccomplished.us
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 06:18 PM
Response to Original message
53. Some further thoughts about the Kelly/Plame connection:
I was just listening to Randi Rhodes recite the time-line of the Plame outing, and this is what struck me about it:

July 14, 2003: Plame herself is outed by Novak.
July 17,2003: David Kelly dies.
July 22, 2003: Novak outs Plame's whole network (the CIA front business).

Why did they out the front business?

If the Plame outing was to punish Wilson for his public dissent (something it's pretty clear that Condi Rice baited him to do), why did they THEN out her network and CIA front four days later? It was bad enough, treason-wise, to out Plame (especially using her maiden name--the name she would have been known by, to much of the network). If punishment of Wilson was the goal, why risk MORE treason charges by outing her company (and everything it would be associated with--all agents and contacts)?

I am more and more convinced that the goal of this plot was NOT to punish Wilson, but was INTENT UPON disabling all CIA capability for tracking WMDs. And that leads me back to Kelly and why he may have been killed. If he was killed, it was for something he "COULD say" (as it was put to Blair), not for something he HAD said.

Not for the exaggerations of the Iraq WMD threat that he had whistleblown about, but for something ELSE--something worse.

And the reason that HE thought it was all resolved with the gov't--why he was looking forward to his daughter's wedding and returning to Iraq, and thought it would blow over in a week (all of which he said in his last emails) is that he had assured the Blairites that he would say no more. That's what the secret security grilling was all about. (What did he know? What might he say? "He could say some embarrassing things."--so it was reported to Blair. But he'd already done that. What else did he know?)

In this little novel I'm writing here, they were not about to trust his assurances that his whistleblowing was over--that, whatever else he knew, he wouldn't go public with it. (As I recall, there was testimony about him being threatened with the Official Secrets Act and loss of his pension.) Whatever he knew, it was something they could not risk disclosure of. And so they offed him.

Note on his death: He wasn't evading anybody--or not obviously. He was out on his normal afternoon walk, and waved to neighbors. If he was trying to evade surveillance, he would certainly not have done what he supposedly did: sat down under a tree on his normal route, slit a wrist and taken painkillers. He was a very smart guy, a scientist--and also a tough guy; had stood up to Saddam Hussein and the Russians on WMDs issues. He was somewhat legendary for it. He'd been at it for some 20 years. His intelligence and his courage were often mentioned. It is just totally unlikely that he would kill himself this way. And, once you realize that, then the details of his death (the moved body, the lack of blood, the lack of surveillance or security, and other details) just about scream at you: assassination.

Also, there was no note, and no sign of depression--and rather an upbeat attitude about it all (except for the "dark actors" email--which doesn't point to suicide but to suspicion). I think it's pretty likely he would have left a note, if he'd killed himself, although someone could have stolen the note. The Blairites were under scrutiny for having mistreated him, so if he blamed them, they wouldn't want anybody to know that. The lack of a note is not conclusive--it just adds up with all the other details.

And the timing of it is quite riveting. Three days AFTER Plame is outed; four days BEFORE her whole company is outed.

Why didn't they leave the CIA company alone? Why did they go to all that extra trouble and risk--with Plame disabled, and Kelly was out of the way? Something they found in his computers or notes maybe?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
understandinglife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 08:38 PM
Response to Reply #53
55. Excellent insights and questions. I think some of the answers are ...
...summarized well, here:
http://antiwar.com/justin /
"Patrick "Bulldog" Fitzgerald - American Insurgent"


David Kelly was way to close to the truth of the neoconster global threat.


Peace.

www.missionnotaccomplished.us
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tiptoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-24-05 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #55
66. edit of link given above (J. 'Bulldog' Fitzgerald, American Insurgent...)
Edited on Sun Jul-24-05 02:41 PM by tiptoe
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
understandinglife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-22-05 09:30 PM
Response to Reply #53
59. fyi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
understandinglife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 09:04 PM
Response to Original message
56. Think Progress releases the Bloomberg article on Rove and Libby.
BREAKING: Bloomberg Reporting That Rove, Libby May Be Subject To Perjury Charges

July 21, 2005

Below is a Bloomberg article which is reporting that Karl Rove, senior adviser to the President and deputy chief of staff, and Lewis Libby, chief of staff to Vice President Cheney, are being investigated for having lied to a federal grand jury about how they learned the identity of a covert CIA agent, Valerie Plame (Murray Waas at the American Prospect wrote a similar story yesterday).

Rove, Libby Accounts in CIA Case Differ With Those of Reporters

By Richard Keil


July 22 (Bloomberg) Two top White House aides have given accounts to the special prosecutor about how reporters told them the identity of a CIA agent that are at odds with what the reporters have said, according to persons familiar with the case.

Lewis Scooter' Libby, Vice President Dick Cheneys chief of staff, told special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald that he first learned from NBC News reporter Tim Russert of the identity of CIA agent Valerie Plame, the wife of former ambassador and Bush administration critic Joseph Wilson. Russert has testified before a federal grand jury that he didnt tell Libby of Plames identity.

White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove told Fitzgerald that he first learned the identity of the CIA agent from syndicated columnist Robert Novak, who was first to report Plames name and connection to Wilson. Novak, according to a source familiar with the matter, has given a somewhat different version to the special prosecutor.

<clip>

More at the link:
http://thinkprogress.org/2005/07/21/breaking-bloomberg-... /



And, Mr Bush and Mr Cheney, let's talk -- under oath.


Peace.

www.missionnotaccomplished.us


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
understandinglife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 11:03 PM
Response to Original message
58. "In another indication of how wide a net investigators have cast ..."
The effort was striking because to an unusual degree, the circle of officials involved included those from the White House's political and national security operations, which are often separately run. Both arms were drawn into the effort to defend the administration during the period.

In another indication of how wide a net investigators have cast in the case, Karen Hughes, a former top communications aide to Mr. Bush, and Robert Joseph, who was then the National Security Council's expert on weapons proliferation, have both told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that they were interviewed by the special prosecutor.

<clip>

From For Two Aides in Leak Case, 2nd Issue Rises by DAVID JOHNSTON in the New York Times, July 22, 2005

More at the link:
http://nytimes.com/2005/07/22/politics/22leak.html?hp&e...



And, somebody is going to tell me that Bush and Cheney weren't riding herd on this operation. Oh sure.........


Peace.

www.missionnotaccomplished.us

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SalmonChantedEvening Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-24-05 02:55 PM
Response to Original message
67. Only * could paint himself into a corner in an oval office.
Edited on Sun Jul-24-05 02:58 PM by SalmonChantedEvening
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 Tue Sep 02nd 2014, 11:17 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) 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