The Incredible Shrinking Scandal

John Tierney of the Times christens the investigation into the Plame leak "Nadagate".  But however inconsequential this scandal seems now, it could get smaller!  We still have not found Novak's first source, but it could be Ari Fleischer, who left the Administration on July 14, 2003.

That won't tie in well with the theme that Bush has been harboring criminal leakers in his Administration.

Then again, if Steve Hadley is Novak's first source, this scandal gets a little oxygen, depending on the circumstances.

Comments

[Martin]

I'm not sure what's been declared more often: no scandal in Plamegate or victory in Iraq.

[peapies]

sour grapes Martin.

[Martin]

No pissed off grapes. 54 people killed in Iraq in a terrorist bombing today alone.

No plan. No end in sight. Iraqi constitution to be drafted by August 15.

A law passed by Congress required benchmarks for measuring progress to be delivered by July 11. No delivery. No word when the law will be obeyed.

So whatever. Wilson's a scumbag. Yeah. Great.

[BumperStickerist]

Personally, I'd *love* to hear the NSA communications intelligence intercepts from Niger during and immediately after Wilson's trip.

All of Joe's 'I found nothing ... Nothing!' bluster would be put into perspective upon the release of a couple of intercepted phone calls which, when translated, said:

"Yeah - Wilson left, we showed him what you wanted us to show him.

Yeah, he bought it - and, man, can that guy drink tea."

[SteveMG]

Martin:
Interesting that you didn't express a single word of outrage over the terrorists who committed the atrocity today.

No, it's Bush's fault. Or the neocons. Or Israel. Or Halliburton.

Never the terrorist thugs committing the acts. We're at war with radical Islam. A religion of more than 1 billion people is being hijacked - or attempted hijacking - by a radical element that is at war with modernity itself.

But there's not much political capital that can be garnered by blaming them, right?

SMG

[ArminTamzarian]

SMG:

Why would the Left be concerned about Muslims killing Muslims unless whitey's somehow involved?

[kim]

Hey, Marty; have a peep o' purple.
===========================

[Martin]

You guys are truly despicable. Yes-I am extremely pissed off that terrorists are killing innocent Iraqis.

What is our obligation to the Iraqis in your view?

And SMG-please quote for me Bush's "words of outrage over the terrorists who committed the atrocity today."

I assume he said something? Right?

[SteveMG]

Martin:
Quote you Bush's words? Have you been sleepwalking through the past two years?

Bush has repeatedly - repeatedly - condemned the terrorist attacks in Iraq and elsewhere.

Elements in Islam - whether followers of Sayyid Qutb or the Wahhabis sect - have been at war with modernity for the past 25-40 years (depending on when one wants to set a date). They wish to convert - or eliminate - all those who do not follow their brand of Islam.

As such, they have been killing fellow Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Christians, Jews, animists and any other sect over the past 25 years. In Iraq, in Pakistan, in India, in Indonesia. And now Great Britain.

Bush is NOT your enemy. The neocons are NOT your enemy. The Religious Right is NOT your enemey. The Republicans are NOT your enemy, pace Begala.

Radical Islam IS YOUR and OUR enemy.

SMG

[Ipso Loquitur]

This was reportedly where the investigation was last February:

Cheney's Staff Focus of Probe
Posted Feb. 5, 2004
By Richard Sale [UPI]
Published: Tuesday, February 17, 2004

Federal law-enforcement officials said that they have developed hard evidence of possible criminal misconduct by two employees of Vice President Dick Cheney's office related to the unlawful exposure of a CIA officer's identity last year. The investigation, which is continuing, could lead to indictments, a Justice Department official said.

According to these sources, John Hannah and Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, were the two Cheney employees. "We believe that Hannah was the major player in this," one federal law-enforcement officer said. Calls to the vice president's office were not returned, nor did Hannah and Libby return calls.

The strategy of the FBI is to make clear to Hannah "that he faces a real possibility of doing jail time" as a way to pressure him to name superiors, one federal law-enforcement official said.

Original link now dead, text here:

http://www.onlisareinsradar.com/archives/002070.php

'Shrinking' isn't the first word that comes to mind.

[Les Nessman]

Ipso

If you can't believe unnamed 'officials', well, who can you believe?

[SteveMG]

"Cheney's Staff Focus of Probe" - February 17 2004?

Hey, Tom: Is there a parallel FBI investigation of this matter going on along with Fitzgerald's?

Is the FBI investigating this along with Fitzgerald?

Nah, can't be. It's all the same investigation under Fitz.'s direction.

Or is it?

SMG

[Neo]

As it appears more and more that the "Seer of all Seers" Karl Rove is not the source of the leak in the Palme case, I think it's time to ask for resignations of all those who jumped to the conclusion that Karl Rove should resign.
Chuck "the Schmuck" Schummer appears first on my list. As a former prosecutor he, of all people, should know better. His only excuse is naked politics.

[SamAm]

Two federal judges say different.

[jukeboxgrad]

Steve said "Elements in Islam - whether followers of Sayyid Qutb or the Wahhabis sect - have been at war with modernity"

You're right that the Wahhabis are a very serious problem. They do stuff like this.">http://www.christianresponse.org/articles/159/saudi-police-arrest-40-pakistani-christians%22">this. So it's a darn good thing we're facing right up to them.

Kind of reminds of this other occasion when we decided it was time to get a grip on evil.

[MaDr]

Poor Martin

Terminal liberal inadequacy (no viable solutions, no consistent arguments based upon logic and facts.) Clinton can bomb Bosnia at 60,000 ft with innumerable civilian casualties - Lefty, good. Bush launches lower altitude, more precision weapons, less civilian casualty risk in Iraq - Bad, not Lefty.

Clinton launches airstrikes (pinpricks) against Iraq and Sudan based upon CIA intelligence (same as Bush had) - Lefty, good: Bush bad)

The hypocrisy (and inconsistency) of the Left (and Martin) is glaring.

Please Martin, in all sincerity, if you want to be taken seriously, apply your standards/opinions etc equally towards the Right and the Left.

If you should deem to respond from your self acknowledged position of superior intellect and more importantly wisdom, first expound the wonderful Leftist utopia, former the USSR. Don't want to talk about past history, then pra(e)y tell educate we poor intellilecturally deficient conservatives on the wonders and virtues of Cuba. China?

[jukeboxgrad]

Martin, I know it's been another typical day in Iraq, but please get with the program. Haven't you heard this is just the "last throes?" It was only a week ago that we were told "Insurgency Weakened in Baghdad ... The U.S. commander of military forces in and around the Iraqi capital said Friday that insurgents apparently are no longer capable of carrying out more than sporadic attacks in Baghdad after a seven-week security crackdown ... the ability of these insurgents to conduct sustained high-intensity operations, as they did last year -- we've mostly eliminated that" (link).

Hmm, I guess that's why "after a relative lull of a few weeks, there has been a rush of bombings since Sunday, including at least 18 in Baghdad" (link).

Hey, wait a minute, that was written yesterday, so it doesn't include the 54 killed today at the gas station. That attack "capped a string of three major bombings over the past four days that killed at least 120" (link).

So please try to remember these important facts: this is just the "last throes." And "we found the weapons of mass destruction" (link). And any claims that Rove was involved in outing Plame are "totally ridiculous" (link).

[jukeboxgrad]

Steve also said: "Radical Islam IS YOUR and OUR enemy"

Which is why it's a damn shame Bush let the head radical Islamist get away ("resources were diverted from Afghanistan to Iraq before we accomplished our mission there. How can I be so sure? General Franks told me;" link), because Bush had an obsession with a secular nationalist who, by comparison, was not a threat to us.

Speaking of letting OBL get away, let us know why Bush let Zarqawi get away (link). While you're at it, let us know why Bush is currently acting like he needs a permission slip to get OBL.

You can also explain how we're making ourselves safer by giving OBL a recruiting and training bonanza beyond his wildest dreams. Or at least that's what the CIA seems to think. That darn CIA. When will they ever learn that we want facts that fit our policy, not the other way around.

[SteveMG]

Jukeboxgrad:
Not sure this is the appropriate post to debate our policies re radical Islam.

Suffice it to say that the enemy we face pre-dated OBL by 25 years. And that the radical Islamists were more than happy to align themselves with secular leaders like Saddam. The links/connections between Iraq and al-Qaeda are voluminous.

And please, will the left stop with this "Bush let OBL get away" nonsense. I can cite specific instances, again multi volume works, where Mr. Clinton was twiddling his thumbs and his you-know-what while al-Qaeda was turning out terrorists by the thousands in Afghanistan in the 1990s.

My daddy can beat up your daddy. So there.

SMG

[richard mcenroe]

SMG — And my Karl can lick their Karl.

[jukeboxgrad]

At the risk of bringing things back on-topic (although in a moment I want to respond on the off-topic subtopic):

Tom, you're touting Tierney, who repeated the standard GOP talking point that Wilson's report "in some ways ... supported ... the Iraq-Niger link."

Tierney also said Wilson's report was "of not much interest to anyone outside the Wilson household."

I'm really having a hard time grasping how those two statements inhabit the same reality. Don't we all agree that Cheney had a keen interest in any information that would help us comprehend the great threat posed by Saddam? Especially with regard to WMD? And especially with regard to nukes, and especially with regard to uranium? Wasn't the whole IC scrambling to see if it had information supporting the idea that Saddam was trying to get uranium from Africa? So then Wilson produces a report that "in some ways ... supported" this idea, and no one thought it would be a good idea to let Cheney's office know about it? Tierney claims the only people interested in such a report would be the "Wilson household?"

Somehow it seems that both things can't be true (that Wilson's report, in any meaningful way, "supported" the Iraq-Niger link, and also that only the "Wilson household" had an interest in the report).

Sort of like how these two things can't both be true: that Rove discussed Plame with Cooper, and also that it's "totally ridiculous" to suggest that Rove was involved in outing Plame.

I think I just need a little help understanding BushSpeak. Maybe it depends on the meaning of "is."

[Ipso Loquitur]

"One former Republican official who retains close ties to the White House said there could be a political cost for keeping Mr. Rove on board even if he is found to have done nothing illegal. "If Karl survives, he does so at the president's political expense," said the former official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he did not want to be seen as disloyal to Mr. Rove.

"George W. Bush came into office promising two tenets that are in competition now: straight talk, non-parsing - and loyalty," the former official said. "He's either got to choose loyalty or straight talk. He can't do both."

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/17/weekinreview/17korn.html?8hpib=&pagewanted=print

[jukeboxgrad]

Steve said: "Suffice it to say that the enemy we face pre-dated OBL by 25 years."

Yes. Darn shame we played a major role in training them way back then. Sort of reminds me of this and this. And who knows, maybe even this.

"The links/connections between Iraq and al-Qaeda are voluminous."

Maybe not quite as voluminous as our own links to the roots of al-Qaeda. And maybe not quite as voluminous as our own links, very much to this day, with backers of terrorism, whose links to Islamic terrorism are arguably much deeper and more dangerous than Saddam's ever was or ever would be.

"Mr. Clinton was twiddling his thumbs"

Ah, the omnipresent "not any worse than Clinton" argument. Sort of reminds of Rove: Not Necessarily a Convicted Felon!

"while al-Qaeda was turning out terrorists by the thousands in Afghanistan in the 1990s."

Yes, soon after Reagan and Casey spent billions to support and train them. Sort of reminds me of this.

[bethl]

course we also trained and armed them in Kosovo--seems by then we should have known better

[Seven Machos]

1. It's amazing. The newest "TERRIBLE scandal" is dying before the eyes of the Democrats, so they are falling back on the Iraq-War-Bad strategy (which has served them so wonderfully in the last two election cycles).

2. When an unnamed "former Republican official who retains close ties to the White House" -- GEE, who in the WORLD could that be? -- starts making policy suggestions, Bush had better listen. If there's one thing the Times and one former Republican official who retains close ties to the White House both care about, it's ensuring Bush's success.

3. I am not a reflexive Clinton-hater, and I agree that some on the right are. (Certainly, reflexive Bush hatred seems to be the hallmark of the left.) But Clinton had the chance to kill bin Laden, or to have him extradited and tried, and he didn't. We suffered a rash of terrorist attacks against U.S. interests all over the world under Clinton. He failed to stop Islamofacism early. Mark my words: historians will fovever compare Clinton to Chamberlain in this regard.

[SteveMG]

Jukeboxgrad:
Here we go with the Cleopatra's nose argument.

It's said that the left has no new ideas. They do, but they all wind up blaming America for the sins of others. In the world of the left, other people don't have free will. Actors don't act independently.

No, they're corrupted by the evil CIA or the evil USA.

Just one observation:

Isn't it interesting that in Kaplan's tendentious history that he never blames the Soviet Union for invading Afghanistan in the first place. If we want to blame the evil Reagan or the evil Bill Casey for funding the Mujahideen (of course the funding began under Carter but we'll overlook that), shouldn't we have just a teeny bit of criticism directed at the USSR for causing the whole thing?

No Soviet invasion and slaughter of more than one million Afghans and no support for the mujahideen.

Interesting that the left blames the US for unleashing the Pandora's box of terrorism for invading Iraq but doesn't criticize the USSR for invading Afghanistan and opening up another set of ills?

Why is that, Jukeboxgrad?

And not to be snarky, but you do know the fallacy of the argument from authority? Instead of providing links to other voices, why not summarize your own views?

This will be my last post on this topic here. You can of course have the last word.

But we can visit it elsewhere with Tom's permission.

SMG

[richard mcenroe]

"Rove: Not Necessarily a Convicted Felon!" — why does this remind me of Howlin' Howie Dean's "no evidence of impropriety but the appearance of impropriety" climb-down when his own hired expert called him for lying about Ohio vote fraud, another non-issue the left rode into the ground and abandoned...

[Jim Glass]

"If Karl survives, he does so at the president's political expense," said the former official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he did not want to be seen as disloyal to Mr. Rove.
~~~~~~~

I love all the guys in this whole episode who've put a knife in someone else's back anonymously because they don't want to be seen as being disloyal. ("Be seen" being the operative words.)

Where would political journalists be without such sterling charactered anonymous leakers? How would they make their story quotas? (Which is of course why they deem their unique self-created right to protect felonious leakers so vital to the Constitution.)

Now, I've been only half-way following this story. Parsing what Rove may or may not have said is all very nice -- but the idea that Joe was the one who actually outed wifey's "secret agent" status to kickstart the whole scandal when it was going nowhere after Novak's column (and to get a nice Max Smart/Agent 99 celebrity photo shoot in Vanity Fair) is the *fun* one for me. What's happening with that?

[Jeff]

RIchard McEnroe - I might have missed it. Did you ever find the link or transcript for the alleged Andrea Mitchell quotation about knowledge of Plame's status at the CIA? The one that was quote to begin with at something like third-hand on powerline and now repeated ad nauseaum as a Known Fact by the right? Thanks for the response in advance.

[TM]

The investigation must be under Fitzgerald's supervision, but his investigators might be FBI guys.

Wilson's report "in some ways ... supported ... the Iraq-Niger link."

Tierney also said Wilson's report was "of not much interest to anyone outside the Wilson household.".

Sure, some parts supported the Iraq-Niger link (the mention of the 1999 trade delegation, and some parts did not (no evidence of current sales).

The net effet of the report was that no mnds were changed (per the SSCI report).

Of course, in Wilson's telling, his report was conclusive (no link), and deliberately ignored.

[Jim Glass]

"Mark my words: historians will fovever compare Clinton to Chamberlain in this regard."

Actually, Chamberlain had an excuse -- he was in a position of military weakness and was trying to buy time to rearm.

Also, Chamberlain never had the Sudan offer to turn over one of the world's most wanted terrorists to him, only to decline the offer (lest we forget) because, as his national security advisor later told the WaPo, "we had no triable case against bin Laden so bringing him to the U.S. was not an option", it would have been "embarrassing". Although one might wonder what kind of Justice Department doesn't have a triable case ready for those on the top of its most wanted list. Whatever was Janet busy doing?

Anyhow, Chamberlain was trying to play a bad hand. Bill had no interest in the game.

[jukeboxgrad]

Steve,

"blaming America for the sins of others"

There's a happy medium somewhere between the extremes. We should blame others for the sins of others, and we should blame America for the sins of America.

"the funding began under Carter"

True, but Reagan ramped it up enormously. Anyway, there's more than enough blame to go around. The important thing is to learn from our mistakes. I'm not sure I see that happening.

"shouldn't we have just a teeny bit of criticism directed at the USSR"

Like I said, there's more than enough blame to go around. What I think is true on both a personal level and a national level is that self-improvement (which is painful but also very much in my best interest) comes from taking responsibility and holding oneself accountable. That doesn't mean I pretend everyone else is perfect. It means I worry about getting my own house in order first. If I tend to have a knee-jerk reaction of always trying to shift blame elsewhere (reminds me of a certain president) it means I'm probably never going to learn anything.

"Instead of providing links to other voices, why not summarize your own views?"

I think I make my views pretty clear, and I think I have a pretty good track record of not ignoring sincere questions. Let me know if you notice otherwise.

[jukeboxgrad]

TM,

"in Wilson's telling, his report was conclusive"

He said "his [Bush's] conclusion was not borne out by the facts _as I understood them_" (emphasis added). I think that's a moderate and reasonable statement, and far from a claim of being "conclusive."

"and deliberately ignored."

Question: imagine that Wilson had come home with the opposite result: "Val, guess what, I saw the trucks getting loaded with uranium." Or imagine something more moderate: "hey Val, someone told me about an Iraqi trade delegation that just came through last week, not several years ago, and they said they definitely wanted yellowcake, unlike several years ago when the word uranium was assumed, but not explicit, and they specifically said they wanted 500 tons, unlike several years ago when the conversation never even got close to that point." (By the way, I've obviously constructed that to match the claim Bush made, which included the words "recently" and "significant quantities.")

How many nanoseconds would have elapsed before Cheney dispatched a personal limo to fetch Wilson and stand him up in a prime-time news conference?

My point is that the White House was shopping, and it knew exactly what it wanted. This is called setting policy and then finding facts, instead of the other way around.

So yes, it was deliberately ignored in the sense that it was the conclusions, rather than the subject matter or the source, which determined whether or not it was going to be sent upstairs.

By the way, I'm not suggesting it landed on Cheney's desk and he shredded it. I'm suggesting it never got near Cheney's desk, because all the folks further down the chain understood exactly what Cheney wanted to see and didn't want to see.

[jukeboxgrad]

Jim,

"Bill had no interest in the game."

Thanks for the link. Since I read the full article, it's not exactly that "Bill had no interest in the game." Actually, it seems that he was trying to set up a form of what we now call extraordinary rendition. Too bad it didn't work out.

Anyway, Clinton didn't know 9/11 was going to happen. When Bush decided to let OBL run in order to chase Saddam instead, obviously 9/11 had already happened. Likewise for when Bush let Zarqawi get away. Anyway, it's no surprise that Clinton fumbled the ball with OBL, since Democrats are weak on defense. What's Bush's excuse?

[richard mcenroe]

Jeff — It was on MSNBC. I'm still trying to find which program.

[SaveFarris]

You're right jukeboxgrad. Clinton had no idea someone was going to blow up the World Trade Center. None at all...

[Knemon]

"It means I worry about getting my own house in order first."

No. It means you spew bullshit at half of your own house first.

How has our house gotten in order, after 41 years of intense left/social-democrat agitation? This coincides with the period y'all tag as our Great Decline and Betrayal of the Dream which will Never Die but sure isn't Looking too Healthy at the moment ...

You strike me as a smart/artic. guy (and the "grad" in your name betrays a little threat on that part, but hey, look who's talking), so I wanna ask you straight up:

Are you aware that your posts on the bombings in Iraq come off, if read against the grain, as gleeful? That you really do seem to revel in slaughter?

I hesitate to bring this up because such interpretations of tone are
a) subjective
b)

So anyway - I'm a neocon, or whatever, in that I used to spew the Foucaulvia with the readiness, and my startup page was wsws.org for a while ... then I got hit with the clue bat.

What did that? Reading around. "Republic of Fear" for one thing. "Terror and Liberalism." Hell, if you want one by someone who *still* hates the Bush Family Evil Empire, try "The Demonic Comedy" by Paul William Roberts (who's been spinning Bush Knew theories, so hopefully that's enough mooncred for you?)

So anyway, as one asshole to another, here's what I wanna know:

Are you

a) simply ignorant of what Iraq was,

b) simply uncaring,

c) of the queasy school which feels our past complicity (The Handshake, halabja, etc.) bars us from acting now?

There might be a (d) and beyond, so hip me if I'm presuming.

[Knemon]

Sorry, the first b), left blank above, should read:

b) notoriously difficult to "read" correctly on the internet in particular

[Toby Petzold]

I'd be interested to know what y'all think of my attempt to answer the question of whether Tenet's request of an investigation of the Great Leak was statutorily required. Everybody seems to be saying that the CIA wouldn't have requested an investigation if they hadn't believed a possible crime had been committed, but I don't think that's entirely true.

[ed]

Hmmmm.

@ jukeboxgrad

Which is why it's a damn shame Bush let the head radical Islamist ...

Interesting. So you're asserting that UBL is "head radical Islamist"?

I was under the impression that Wahhabism extended far beyond AQ or UBL and that UBL might be the leader of AQ but he's definitely not the leader of Wahhabism.

Or do you have any proof of your statement?

[ed]

Hmmmm.

@ jukeboxgrad

Steve said "Elements in Islam - whether followers of Sayyid Qutb or the Wahhabis sect - have been at war with modernity"

You're right that the Wahhabis are a very serious problem. They do stuff like this. So it's a darn good thing we're facing right up to them.

Kind of reminds of this other occasion when we decided it was time to get a grip on evil.

One of the complaints of the Left is always that Bush is too much the cowboy and that he doesn't have nuance. Well there's your nuance. It's also called diplomacy.

Sure we could declare war on the Saudis. I'm not sure what it would accomplish beyond causing more problems with muslims, damage our economy and whole host of other issues. Would I prefer to do something about them? Sure thing. But right now the only thing that can be done is by working with other nations to limit the activity and reach of the Wahhabists.

It's a simple fact that modern western nations have a great deal of trouble dealing with rogue religions. The respect for independent religious thought is almost sacrosanct in the west.

So what's the answer? We could embargo the Saudis and not buy their oil, but that won't achieve anything because someone else will. It's called the gobal marketplace after all. We could blockade the Saudis, assuming that we're able to stop overland travel too, but that won't achieve anything either as it's not a long term solution. And frankly I don't think the rest of the world would accept a US blockade of the Saudis either. We could bomb the hell out of them, but you lefties have been screeching about Iraq for years now and quite frankly a bombing campaign wouldn't achieve anything either as Wahhabism is an ideology. To defeat it using bombs would require slaughtering all of it's followers.

But it's just like you to complain about it without offering an alternative. So how about it? Got an alternative you're willing to post about? Or are you just going to mimic all the other lefties and just complain a lot and point fingers? Got an idea on how to deal with the Saudis and Wahhabists?

[ed]

Hmmmm.

@ martin

I'm not sure what's been declared more often: no scandal in Plamegate or victory in Iraq.

Well martin. Every day is a victory in Iraq. As for the scandal bit, there is a scandal there, quite a few different ones actually.

Just not the one you want.

Too bad, so sad. But you can keep hoping. What the heck, if you pray every night, and remember to wash behind your ears, then it might come true.

Frankly Rove is going to resign sooner or later. After all he's a professional campaigner and Bush's campaigning days are over. If Rove is going to be involved with the 2008 election he'll have to resign by no later than the 2006 elections, and maybe a lot sooner.

So look at it this way. When everything is settled and Rove is cleared of all charges, and the MSM ends up looking like a bunch of partisan fools, then you'll eventually have your day in the sun. Rove will resign to work on someone else's campaign and you'll be able to crow about how you helped "drive Rove from the White House".

It won't mean anything really, since Rove will have done it to work for someone else, but these days you lefties need to claim as many victories as you possibly can.

Hell GannonGate's still a major triumph isn't it?

[ed]

Hmmmm.

@ jukeboxgrad

Speaking of letting OBL get away, let us know why Bush let Zarqawi get away (link). ...

Really? I went to that link but all I found there was a lot of verbage, and not much of anything else. One of the reasons given for not hitting that camp was that they couldn't be certain that Zarqawi would be there. If he's not there then what? Weren't you liberals screaming about the invasion even at that point?

Tell me. Would it have been politically possible for the President to strike at a camp in Iraq, prior to the invasion, without any proof that Zarqawi was there? What would have been the result if he weren't there? Wouldn't we have heard endless rounds of how "defenseless women and children were injured in this senseless attack..."? And even if he was there, Zarqawi wasn't exactly a household name back then. In fact I doubt 1% of America had heard of him.

So whose fault is it that Zarqawi's camp wasn't struck early and often? President Bush who got hammered day and night by you lefties while trying to do his job? Or you lefties for impeding the AGWOT every chance you got?

[ed]

Hmmmm.

@ jukeboxgrad

Hmm, I guess that's why "after a relative lull of a few weeks, there has been a rush of bombings since Sunday, including at least 18 in Baghdad" (link).

Well there you go, oblivious to the obvious. If there's a lull of a few weeks, then that means the terrorists are having to save their resources for creating a one big series of bombings. This isn't an indication of strength, it's one of weakness. That they can continue to bomb is a given, we've seen a recent series of bombings in London after all. It can happen anywhere.

But when terrorists cannot maintain a strong tempo of attacks, that does indicate that they are weakening. Unles you're of the opinion that reducing the overall number of attacks is somehow an indication of strength?

[ed]

Hmmmm.

@ jukeboxgrad

So then Wilson produces a report that "in some ways ... supported" this idea, and no one thought it would be a good idea to let Cheney's office know about it?

It's clear from reading the relevant portions of the SCCI report that the intelligence community, beyond the CIA's CPD unit, didn't think much of Wilson, his trip or his "report". The INR analysts who attended the meeting with CPD, that eventually decided to send Wilson, objected to the trip since Wilson didn't have the requiste skills:

SCCI report (pg.40): The notes also indicate that INR believed that the embassy in Niger had good contacts and would be able to get to the truth on the uranium issue, suggesting a visit from the former ambassador would be redundant. ... An e-mail from a WINPAC analyst to CPD following the meeting noted "it appears that the results from this source will be suspect at best, and not believable under most scenarios." CPD concluded that with no other options, sending the former ambassador to Niger was worth a try.

Then we look at Wilson's debrief on March 5 plus the dissemination of the resulting report on March 8th.

SCCI (pg.43): The update also noted that the CIA would "be debriefing a source who may have information related to the alleged sale on March 5." ... Later that day, two CIA DO officers debriefed the former ambassador who had returned from Niger the previous day. ... The intelligence report based on the former ambassador's trip was disseminated on March 8,2002. ... DO officials also said they alerted WJNPAC analysts when the report was being disseminated because they knew the "high priority of the issue." The report was widely distributed in routine channels.

It's equally clear that the debriefing DO officers didn't think that anything that Wilson had to say, he had a verbal debrief, was important enough to go fast on. From what has been gleaned, Wilson's trip didn't amount to much so taking 3 days to write the report and then send it around shows what little respect it had.

Frankly I'm endlessly amused by this quote "CPD concluded that with no other options, sending the former ambassador to Niger was worth a try.". Can you just imagine that meeting? "anybody got any ideas?" ... "no?" ... "ok. let's send Valerie's husband to Niger. what the hell. he's been annoying her so let's help get him out of the house.".

[ed]

Hmmmm.

@ jukeboxgrad

Steve said: "Suffice it to say that the enemy we face pre-dated OBL by 25 years."

Yes. Darn shame we played a major role in training them way back then. Sort of reminds me of this and this. And who knows, maybe even this.

Yeah I think it's terrible how Democratic President Jimmy Carter mismanaged the attempt at fostering a guerilla campaign against the Soviets in Afghanistan. If he had taken a more hands-on approach, instead of trying to subcontracting everything to the good graces of the Pakistani ISI, then we wouldn't have many of the problems we do today. It's frankly disgusting how you lefties point to the training and equiping of the Taliban as some sort of evidence of Republican perfidy, when it was the Democrats and their endless incompetence in foreign affairs that were the cause of it.

Just like you lefties to make a mess, and then blame others for it. You should be ashamed.

[ed]

Hmmmm.

@ Jeff

Do you have a response to my posts:

link
link

?

[kim]

I'm not sure Wilson thought his report was conclusive until May 2003 when no WMD were immediately found.

Wilson had been arguing against the war on the grounds that Saddam would use chemical and biological weapons against our troops. He had an op-ed to that effect in the 2/6/03 LATimes. When that didn't happen, Wilson had to shift his
opposition to another rationale. Instead of picking the rationale supported by what he thought his joke of a report showed he should have rejoiced that the people to whom he was once a representative had helped free themselves.
Instead, he's still anti-war. What a despicable person.
Val, Val, Val. Unless that's what you like about him.
================================

[kim]

Just why didn't Joe Wilson support the depostion of Saddam?

The ease of the invasion brought into sharp relief Wilson's relative previous cowardice(can't attack Saddam, he has WMD), so that he denigrated what he formerly feared into something not worth attacking.
Could this be why a man, who supposedly knew what Saddam was like, did not want to get rid of him, by external force? Is Joe a victim of Saddam's oppression, also?

Or is he simply a Saudi tool?

Martin? JBG? Tell me more about your valiant prince, Joe.
=============================
==========================

[kim]

Joe Wahabi Wilson. Who'd a thunk it.
=============================

[kim]

He's the political equivalent of a suicide bomber.
===============================

[kim]

Ed, I'm no expert on that era(to busy working), but I think our effort in Afghanistan with the Mujahadeen vs the Russkies was relatively appropriate and effective. No shame there. But we lost interest once the Soviet Union collapsed. Hey, a bunch of stone-age shepards, why would they yearn to be free?
==============================

[BumperStickerist]

Ed,

There's a value to sending Wilson in that other people will might talk about it and those communications can be intercepted.

Joe Wilson - Stalking Horse
so to speak.

That's a useful role in intel gathering and Wilson's taking on the assignment is admirable.

Just everything Wilson did after that trip makes him a political hack.

As for Novak blowing Plame's employment status, that's been dealt with - David Corn and the Wilsons themselves provided that service.

[kim]

My joke after 9/11 was: Afghanistan is going to get bombed up to the Stone
Age?
My other one was: What we need now is a few extremists. Any volunteers?
Make no mistake. I have vast respect for the Afghani people and their urge to independence. From experince more than a third of a century old, half the men carried rifles on their back in the market. The other half acted as if their weapons were merely hidden. A prouder people cannot be found.
=================================

[kim]

And another thing. Muslims don't hate the infidel and want to kill them. They want to welcome the unbeliever into their house as an honored guest, feed them, and help them accept the truth and superiority of Allah's will.
===========================

[kim]

Observe on high Mt.RCP, and mark Steyn at the Summit.

Here he is on Joe and his Nigerien Nepotismatic Escapade:

"politically motivated narcissistic kook's drive-thru intelligence mission"

I don't know how much more of this I can take.
==============================

[kim]

K: Think of all the assholes in Iraq who are glad their anuses are their own and not Saddam's.

TP: I've argued that the CIA referred it simply because it was too hot a potato(e) to hold. Also why Ashcraft self recused.
============================

[RiverRat]

It appears that the only value of covert status for Plame as an energy consultant with Brewster-Jennings was to make Democratic political contributions without disclosing that she worked for CIA in Langley since 1997. Her name had been on the online resume of a former Clinton State Department operative working as a consultant to the Saudi's for a couple of years. The day of Wilson's Op-Ed Novak could get her name from Google and her employer from any reporter on cocktail circuit with one phone call.

Hmmm...Wilson worked for the Saudis. Might that be worth considering when evaluating his motives?

[kim]

Hey, Joe, say it ain't so. You didn't get none o' that Wahabi money, did ya?
================================

[Rider]

Repeat after me: Joe Wilson is not the focus of the investigation.

You have all been carefully-taught by Karl Rove in the art of the partial-truth abortion: smear the messenger and spin the malefactor as hero.

Mr. Fitzgerald is not distracted.

[kim]

Wahabi about it, Madrassahgrad, and Casbahmart?
==============================

[RiverRat]

Rider,

And just how do know Wilson isn't a focus of the investigation...because you don't want him to be?

[kim]

And I say you smear the messenger and spin the malefactor as hero, but in your case you think Rove is the messenger and that Wilson is the hero portrayed as acting badly.

Well, I pick first, and I'll take Rove for my team. You get to try to play ball with Slippery Joe.
===========================

[RiverRat]

May 03, Wilson leaks classified data to Kristoff. June 03, Wilson leaks classified data to Pincus. July 03, Wilson publishes classifed data in an NYT Op-Ed. Knowing, unless he's completely braindead, his wife'w employment history is going to be publically explored.

If I were Fitz I'd be a fool not to look at him and Fitz isn't a fool.

[jukeboxgrad]

RICHARD

"It was on MSNBC [Andrea Mitchell saying Plame wasn't covert]. I'm still trying to find which program."

Maybe this will help you.

Oh, I forgot, you read it on Power Line, so it must be true.

SAVE

"Clinton had no idea someone was going to blow up the World Trade Center. None at all..."

If you really want to convince me Dubya wasn't sucking his thumb pre-9/11, you should start by dealing with stuff like this: "Information obtained in August 1998 that unidentified Arabs planned to fly an explosive-laden plane from a foreign country into the World Trade Center" (link).

KNEMON

"I hesitate to bring this up because such interpretations of tone are a) subjective"

Maybe next time you should "hesitate" even longer.

"as one asshole to another"

I guess you might be half right, which puts you ahead of lots of folks around these parts.

"hip me if I'm presuming"

Here's some unsolicited advice: do more hesitating and less presuming.

By the way, I'm sure you and I could have a very interesting conversation, but I'm already over my quota for off-topic posts. Maybe some other time and/or place.

ED

You're a complete waste of time.

I might consider actually reading your posts again after you let me know that you've finally mastered the meaning of words you find challenging, such as "usually" vs. "always."

KIM

"The ease of the invasion brought into sharp relief Wilson's relative previous cowardice(can't attack Saddam, he has WMD)"

That's an astounding bit nonsense, even for you. Now the fact that Wilson actually believed some of Bush's WMD crap becomes yet another reason to slam Wilson.

"Tell me more about your valiant prince, Joe."

I did, here.

Your turn. Address these simple issues about Rove.

[kim]

If he thought Fitz was closing in on him, though, why would he appear with Schumer? Unless he's braindead. Oh.
=============================

[Les Nessman]

ed,

When talking about JBG, you said, among other good points:
"But it's just like you to complain about it without offering an alternative."

and

"Really? I went to that link but all I found there was a lot of verbage, and not much of anything else."

Get used to it. That's the usual M.O.

[kim]

Next I'd like to take that braying jackass O'Fool who first let Rove's name out as Cooper's source way back when(2 weeks) and openly flay his hide. Newsman? Fah. Go tend your flock and don't cry wolf when it's your own dog that's gone rogue.
===========================

[Dwilkers]

SMG, please. The left were suitably outraged over the Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan. Carter boycotted the Moscow Olympics, remember?

On topic, "this scandal" is dying from what I can tell. If Rove is going to get indicted I don't know what more Fitzgerald is going to get than he already has in hand. From what I can tell someone else is the target, perhaps even for some other crime than 'outing' Plame.

[kim]

Fah. Perhaps the finest word in the English language.

It's enshrined in guffaw, the sneer the face forms in skeptical exclamation.
==============================

[kim]

Do you not think, JBG, that Wilson going from believing in WMD prewar to slamming Bush post invasion for the lack of WMD, is not evidence of hypocrisy, or poor logical skills? Maybe you think it was raw, stupid, typical political opportunism on Joe Wilson's part. Or maybe you don't.

And I'm still interested in hearing what other people(ones who knew him) say about Joe Wilson's past. Are all of his old pals chiming in with anecdotes? Or is it the Joe Wilson One Man Band of Brothers?
============================

[Rider]

You are seriously, seriously delusional if you actually believe that the CIA referred this case to the FBI because of anything Joe Wilson said or did. ROTFL.

As I said, this is typical Rovian smear-and-spin. Wilson dared utter something damaging to the President and the President's men. The State Dept. memo shows that the WH dis-intell operation was already rolling from the time of Kristoff's vague mention of a former ambassador to Africa. Wilson's op ed was the trigger to start the leaks. You see in today's Time article that the leaks from Rove and Libby started before the dis-intell memo (the CIA disputes the anti-Plame "intell" therein) had even been "declassified." Smear Wilson. Smear Plame. Smear anybody that gets in the way of the machine. Smear their family: Ann Richards, John McCain, John Kerry, etc., etc.

When it's available, take a look at that old liberal Bob Schieffer's closing comment today on Face The Nation. He lays Bush out cold.

[Rider]

RiverRat

Wilson didn't even mention his wife in the op ed. Yeah, but I guess you're right. Any fool who dares speak out against Bush policy should be aware that Bush's pack of pit bulls is going come right after his wife, even if it means they will treasonously out her as a covert agent along with the entire network of covert agents who worked and are working with her. He should have remembered that their first loyalty is not to the United States, that no treachery was too great for them in the defense of W'04. Wilson was really kind of asking for it, huh?

[kim]

Bob's bitter backlash. Wilson creates huge scandal from his own ignorance and paranoia, and Bush is to blame? Fah!
===============================

[kim]

So, R, are you still trying to maintain that his connection to his wife had no pertinence? It may be that there is no linking whatsoever between them in their professional lives, and the question is still pertinent. Have you ever heard of avoiding the 'appearance of impropriety'? And on top of that there is certainly some evidence of improrpriety if not criminality.

So get real here.
===================

[kim]

And you keep talking about delusions, but the facts, as they've been slowly revealed, are not falling your way. The forest will be felled when you look around from trying to keep Joe standing.
====================

[Rider]

You can even see a mini-version of the Rove Smear-and-Spin Machine at work on poor old Mark Felt. Thirty five years later, the man has Alzheimer's, Nixon is dead and buried, and the apparatchicks are out doing hatchet-jobs on Felt (self-serving, ambitious, bitter at not being promoted) and even his daugher (old hippie, estranged from her father, lived in communes, flakey religious ideas). The instinct is there and ready to spring into life even when the "enemy" is thirty-five years from being an active threat. They don't know any other way to respond to anything. Go for the throat. Spread lies. Attack the family. Totally trash the person as an example to anyone else who is giving any thought to speaking out. This is what's in the RNC talking points and you've all been well-trained in this method. Nobody in his right mind thinks Wilson is or should be the focus of the investigation and you are still smearing him, like dogs that won't stop barking when you tell them it's the postman. Look what Rove has done to your mind. Are you current with your rabies vaccination, kim?

[Rider]

What's in Mr. Fitzgerald's background that they can use if/when indictments come down? Gee, I guess Mr. Fitzgerald better worry about his wife, too. Who does she work for? Is he married? Or, is he gay? Who are his friends? Which candidates does he contribute to?

[Seven Machos]

JUKEBOXGRAD

"Information obtained in August 1998 that unidentified Arabs planned to fly an explosive-laden plane from a foreign country into the World Trade Center"

So you are telling me that we knew in 1998 that September 11 might happen. Man, you are right, then. Certainly:

1. Cockpit doors should have been secured in 1998.

2. Hundreds of federal marshals should have been added in 1998.

3. Pilots should have been armed in 1998.

4. Sketchy Arabs training at U.S. flight schools should have been imprisoned, deported, or killed in 1998.

THIS IS ALL BUSH'S FAULT! AND ROVE'S!! THOSE IRRESPONSIBLE, STUPID BASTARDS SHOULD HAVE PREVENTED 9/11 IN 1998. NO BLOOD FOR OIL!!!!!

[kim]

Oh, yes, Felt. Passed over for promotion. Broke the law getting back at his boss.

You feel a little bite in what I say, Wry Dear. Joe is indefensible. Your dog is the mad one spewing lying froth.
===============================

[kim]

That newscycle you rode in on is sputtering. Or is that you frothing at the mouth and blowing smoke out your ....exhaust?
============================

[Seven Machos]

You are right, Rider. I wish my political side could be as cordial as the Left when it comes to smear campaigns. We don't have to look very far to see the role model here. I mean, just look how the Left treats...Karl Rove.

Then, of course, you have the picture of decorum and professionalism with which the Left has treated: Clarence Thomas, Antonin Scalia, Paula Jones, Katherine Harris, Linda Tripp, George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Rick Santorum...

[RiverRat]

Rider,

"Wilson didn't even mention his wife in the op ed."

Does your brain work at all?

The point wasn't what he said or didn't say about his wife; it was what did he expect the Press to do? (...) Not find out everything they could about him and his wife/life/strife? This is where I think Miller comes in. She likely knew Plame and her status because of prior WMD work well in advance of this kerfuffle.

Better than even money says Miller was the Press's original source on Plame's employment status.

The Press didn't need Rove, Libby, or anyone else in the Administration to find out where Plame worked and what she did. The only thing seemingly unknown to anyone in the press or the Administration was that Ms. Plame, although living and working openly at Langley in a high profile marriage under her real name, was at some point in the distant past a NOC operative under her real name.

I doubt that anyone, even in CPD, knew or remembered she had once been under NOC in the Operations Directorate.

The anti-Bush cabal at CIA probably took two weeks of file shuffling to even confirm her prior status in order to file the DOJ complaint.

[kim]

Do you suppose they got a verbal report on her status?
=============================

[RiverRat]

Who's "They" Kim?

The Press?

[kim]

Well, yeah, them, too.
=====================

[dblaiseb]

"Information obtained in August 1998 that unidentified Arabs planned to fly an explosive-laden plane from a foreign country into the World Trade Center"

So, assuming Miss Cleo told this administration on 9/10 that it was time to act on that info, prohibiting foreign planes from entering US airspace would have accomplished what? For sure, it would have meant that those travellers returning from Europe wouldn't have met all those nice people in Halifax who put them up overnight.

But the planes used on 9/11 came from Newark and Boston, no?

I'm curious about the latest line of attack on Rove, the alleged violation of the Executive Order prohibiting disclosure of classified information based in the oath contained in the nondisclosure agreement.

Is the fact that an individual works at Langley automatically classified?

By the way, this site and its commenters are top notch. Thanks for all the good, clean fun.

[Rider]

RiverRat

You are stark rove-ing mad. The press did not out Mrs. Wilson to Novak; two WH sources did.

By your twisted logic, no one whose spouse is a CIA operative should ever write an op ed.

The minute Kristoff's column was published they started a domestic intelligence operation on Wilson. This was a month BEFORE Wilson published his op ed. No doubt Rove also learned what time the Wilson kids get home from pre-school, too. Well, what can you expect, right?
He served Bush I admirably and Old Poppy sent him a nice note saying he was regretted all this had happened, but after all he dared question something His Majesty, King George said. So, he got what was coming to him and his pretty little wife too.

Did I mention that all this was in the works (we now know) BEFORE Wilson wrote his op ed?

[RiverRat]

I doubt that during the days following Wilson's OP-ED that Rove, Libbey, or anyone on the political team was deliberately looking at Plame. Sure, they wan't to discredit Wilson; That's part of their job.

In attempting to find out about the mission from CIA they may well have heard from Agency staff that she worked there and that she was a mover in arranging the mission. What I'd bet the bank on is that they didn't find out anything about her previous NOC status and without knowing that, regardless of their source, I just don't see a crime let alone immoral behavior by DC standards.

[RiverRat]

Rider,

Absent knowledge of Plame's NOC status do you believe that mentioning that Wilson's wife worked at Langley constitutes "outing" her?

[kim]

Well, he didn't say White House sources, and I'd guess that Novak heard about Plame from at least other journalists besides his so-called 'administration' sources, which, you may notice, he didn't say FIRST told him.
=============================

[Rider]

RiverRat

If you will take a moment to read the Time article published online today, "The War on Wilson," you will see that Rove and Libby were looking at Plame as an avenue to discredit Wilson in conversations with Cooper. The State Dept. memo that was circulating before Wilson's op ed already had disinformation and dis-intelligence in it about Plame and Wilson. The CIA disputes the information in that memo that Plame convened and led the meeting at which it was determined that Wilson should go to Niger. That was disinformation put into the memo as part of its being packaged for later release to the press. This was on month before the op ed. They were after him and they were going for the wife from before day one. I have no doubt whatever that Judith Miller knew the name Plame, but I would bet you even money she learned it from them. She has served with distinction as Cheney's and Rumsfeld's chosen vessel, you know. She does not give information to the WH; it flows the other way.

[Rider]

from the Time story:

"...Rove told me material was going to be declassified in the coming days that would cast doubt on Wilson's mission and his findings....As for Wilson's wife...Rove added that she worked on "WMD" (the abbreviation for weapons of mass destruction) issues and that she was responsible for sending Wilson. This was the first time I had heard anything about Wilson's wife...I have a distinct memory of Rove ending the call by saying, "I've already said too much."...On background, I asked Libby if he had heard anything about Wilson's wife sending her husband to Niger. Libby replied, "Yeah, I've heard that too," or words to that effect."

[kim]

I like that, quotes, and then the disclaimer, "or words to that effect".
==============================

[Seven Machos]

Rider: "The State Dept. memo that was circulating before Wilson's op ed already had disinformation and dis-intelligence in it about Plame and Wilson." What does this mean?

You are being completely unreasonable and you don't know what you are talking about. The one thing you are sure of is that every fact must fit into the Rove-Cheney-Bush-Bad storyline. A good lawyer, or philosopher, or scientist, or investigator does not spin facts to fit a preconceived theory. He or she gathers facts, then creates a theory.

[RiverRat]

Rider,

I've read it and watched him on MTP...you still haven't answered a simple question. Try stop moving the goal; classic leftard tactic.

Let me restate the question:

Absent knowledge of Plame's NOC status do you believe that mentioning that Wilson's wife worked at Langley constitutes "outing" her?

[richard mcenroe]

Jukeboxgrad — You posted your transcript link on the 15th. Friday. That would make Thursday the 14th.

The mentions on the blogs were ALL earlier than the 14th. Therefore I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest there is another transcript of an earlier appearance, which I will continue to look for, or that you are a lying sack willfully trying to misdirect readers. Not that the two are mutually exlcusive.

[kim]

Once he decides, he'll let out his belief, or words to that effect.
============================

[Les Nessman]

"The War on Wilson"

So the guy lies and is a political hack for the opposition, and when the WH refutes him the MSM portrays it as a War On Poor 'Ol Mr. Wilson.

Give me a break. Can you imagine Time headlining it this way if the political parties were reversed?

[Rider]

Does mentioning she works at Langley constitute outing her?

For years the Wilson's had told all their friends she was an energy analyst for a private company. The company out at Langley is not a private company. Hmmm. If she is a desk jockey at Langley, why have they always said she worked for a private company? Whatever she does they must not want people to know it? Must be secret. Let's see...some secret agents are stationed in foreign embassies under diplomatic passports. No, not that. And some secret agents are without cover, "no official cover." Valerie Wilson an NOC agent? Can't be. That's even more dangerous than being a Navy SEAL because if you're caught our government will disavow you. Can't be Valerie Wilson.

Then, the name Plame is put out. Thank you, Bob Novak.

Then Brewster-Jennings & Co. Thank you, Bob Novak.

Now, an entire CIA front company and everybody that ever worked there and everybody they ever spoke to comes under review.

Yes, I think revealing she worked for the CIA outed her, whether Rove knew it or not. He may be a victim in that regard of people who sourced him with dis-intell.