And Then There Were Some

The NY Times rounds up a few “I was not Woodward’s source” denials and sets the fox amongst the chickens:

A senior administration official said that neither President Bush himself, nor his chief of staff, Andrew H. Card Jr., nor his counselor, Dan Bartlett, was Mr. Woodward's source. So did spokesmen for former Secretary of State Colin L. Powell; the former director of central intelligence, George J. Tenet; and his deputy, John E. McLaughlin.

A lawyer for Karl Rove, the deputy White House chief of staff who has acknowledged conversations with reporters about the case and remains under investigation, said Mr. Rove was not Mr. Woodward's source.

Mr. Cheney did not join the parade of denials. A spokeswoman said he would have no comment on a continuing investigation. Several other officials could not be reached for comment.

"Mr. Cheney did not join the parade of denials"!  C'mon, where are the spokespeople for Dick Cheney, Stephen Hadley, and Condi Rice, just for starters?

And keep in mind - Woodward’s leak was that Ms. Plame was a CIA analyst, which tracks with the INR memo that circulated at the State Department prior to being discussed at a White House meeting.  Colin Powell is by no means the only senior Administration official at State - let’s get denials from Marc Grossman, Richard Armitrage, and a few others (some of whom were apparently out of town in mid-June).

Hmm, I should have kept reading...

In fact, only a small group of officials - at the White House, the State Department, and the Central Intelligence Agency - are believed to have known by early June 2003 about Ms. Wilson's ties to the C.I.A. They included Secretary Powell, Mr. Tenet, Mr. McLaughlin, Mr. Cheney, Mr. Libby; Marc Grossman, then the under secretary of state for political affairs; Carl Ford, then the head of the State Department's intelligence bureau; and Richard L. Armitage, then deputy secretary of state.

...Mr. Fitzgerald's indictment of Mr. Libby provides some clues about the small number of people who were directly involved in exchanging information about the Wilsons. It says that Mr. Libby first sought information about Ambassador Wilson's trip from Mr. Grossman, on May 29, 2003. It says that Mr. Grossman directed Mr. Ford's intelligence bureau to prepare a report about Mr. Wilson and his trip to Niger, and briefed Mr. Libby about that report as it was being completed, telling him on June 11 or 12, 2003, that Mr. Wilson's wife worked at the C.I.A. and that State Department personnel were involved in the planning of the trip. Mr. Grossman declined to comment on Wednesday, and Mr. Ford did not reply to a telephone call and an e-mail message.

...Other administration officials known to have been interviewed by investigators include Condoleezza Rice, who was then national security adviser and is now secretary of state; Stephen Hadley, then deputy national security adviser and now the national security adviser; Mr. Card; and Mr. Bartlett.

The Times is oddly quiet on whether Ms. Rice or Mr. Hadley responded to a request for a denial.

From a different direction, we can also play “Follow the bouncing source”:

(a)  In Woodward’s own statement, he spoke with “three current or former Bush administration officials”;

(b)  In the WaPo story yesterday, we were told that Woodward’s source was a “senior administration official”.  And they must have gotten that from Woodward, right?  Not exactly:

Woodward declined to elaborate on the statement he released to The Post late yesterday afternoon and publicly last night. He would not answer any questions, including those not governed by his confidentiality agreement with sources.

Emphasis added for comic effect. 

So who promoted Woodward's source - Woodward's attorney, or someone in Fitzgerald's office?  Please.  Irrational exuberance is my preferred theory.

(c) The NY Times reverted to Woodward’s text in their coverage, telling us that Woodward spoke with “a current or former Bush administration official”;

(d) Today’s WaPo compounded the fun - check this:

Woodward testified Monday that contrary to Special Counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald's public statements, a senior government official -- not Libby -- was the first Bush administration official to tell a reporter about Plame...

So, the source is “a senior government official”, a “current or former Bush administration official”, or “a senior administration official”?  Lacking elaboration from Woodward, I am mystified.

However, I am taking a bold stand here - I am highly confident that Woodward’s source was neither his mailman nor the security guard at the front desk of the EOB.

Let’s note one other (possibly minor and distracting) point - Woodward said that he spoke with three “current or former” officials.  Two of them have been identified as Andy Card and Lewis Libby. 

So, is the third official the reason the word “former” is used, or was it used simply in a cornucopia of source concealment? [D'oh - Libby is a former official now.]

We await more clues tomorrow.

MORE:  The Anon Lib tells us that Raw Story is tapping Stephen Hadley, and who knows?  We have also said before that "Raw" may be an underestimate of their cooking time - "Half-baked" might be closer.

UNRELENTING:  The Times says this:

Mr. Pincus, who has written that he first heard about Ms. Wilson from a senior administration official in July, said he did not recall that.

Emphasis added, and I don't think so - I question their use of the word "first", and eagerly await evidence that Mr. Pincus denied hearing about a "Wilson and wife" connection earlier.

Here is what Mr. Pincus wrote in the Nieman Watchdog; here is a summary of the Times reporting and sources for their earlier look at Mr. Pincus; and here is his original account from October 2003:

On July 12, two days before Novak's column, a Post reporter was told by an administration official that the White House had not paid attention to the former ambassador's CIA-sponsored trip to Niger because it was set up as a boondoggle by his wife, an analyst with the agency working on weapons of mass destruction. Plame's name was never mentioned and the purpose of the disclosure did not appear to be to generate an article, but rather to undermine Wilson's report.

Comments

[brogie62]

Isn't Libby a 'former' official now?

[Creepy Dude]

As an aside-how does the mighty Woodward first learning that Plame was CIA in June square with that fact allegedly being common knowledge among reporters since time immemorial?

[Gary Maxwell]

Can I make a deal with you lefties? I wont bring up anything DiGenova says and you will leave out Raw Story from any posts. Neither seems to contribute any crumb of value ever.

[Creepy Dude]

Only if you throw his execrable wife Toensing in the deal.

[Anonymous Liberal]

Gary,
A wise man once said, "even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while." Such is the case with Raw Story. Some of their stories have panned out. At the very least, it puts something on the public record that should prompt a denial from Hadley if he is not the source. I remain skeptical of the Raw Story "scoop" as well, but the longer this goes on without a denial by Hadley, the more I'll be inclined to believe the story.

[Sue]

AL,

Why should it prompt a denial? That is putting more emphasis on Raw Story than they deserve. That is like asking Clinton to respond to Limbaugh, during the Lewinsky days.

[Gary Maxwell]

A Lib

Granted blind squirrel et al

In Raw Story's case I think they already found their Nut, in the person of former CIA officer Johnson. Throw him in to balance Toensing ( who at least was present when the spook statue was written ) and we have a deal.

[Lion]

Keep your eyes on the ball: whoever the "offical" was, if he didn't lie about a material matter in the course of the investigation, he committed no crime.

[TP]

I would not overlook the fact that "former or current" could have 2 meanings. It could describe an official who now works for the current Bush administration, but doesn't work there any more. It can also describe an official who worked for both Bush I and Bush II who might not have been questioned by Fitzgerald during the investigation.

I would think that Woodward's source agreed to this characterization.

[Dwilkers]

OK. So then we know 2 of the three - Card and Libby. Unless Woodward and the Post are using a clever dodge (Libby was then 'current' but is now 'former'. Tsk tsk. That would be really sleazy) that means our man/woman is a former official.

Isn't it fair to believe that based on what they've said? Surely they aren't being deliberately misleading. Right?

Hmmm...Ari Fleischer?

[TP]

Why wouldn't it be another CFR guy like Scowcroft? He, Scooter and Judy all belong to the same club. It is entirely possible that Joe spilled all of the beans to him and he just assumed that a man who loved his wife wouldn't out her to a total stranger.

[Dwilkers]

Don't you think it has to be someone that actually served in this Bush administration TP?

I mean really. If the WaPo and Woodward are going that far to lead us astray they aren't a "news" source worthy of the title.

[Lew Clark]

He didn't say who's administration. I'm betting on the Putin administration, since the Russians have known about her much longer than most Americans.

[Rob W]

Gary Maxwell put a sharp light on one of the worst parts of this whole thing--the fact that each side has water carriers claiming to be "experts" in the sense that they are unbiased. They aren't Johnson is rightly mad that someone went after his friend, but that should disqualify himself as an expert. Toensing and hubby DiGenova are long-time Republican hacks. Just because she was in on the drafting doesn't mean that she knows what the statute is about--only the statements of Congress count in the legislative history.

Presenting water-carriers with their agendas on the air should stop. Its tiring and tells us nothing.

Raw Story=Drudge. Sometimes right (Lewinsky), sometimes wrong (Kerry's alleged affair). Raw story runs with single sourced material and gets burned. They really don't care anyway, they just want to be first.

They are fun, however!

[clarice]

I'll defend Victoria and Joe--They have special clearance to represent CIA agents or people suing them and long experience as D.C. criminal attorneys dealing with national security issues. They probably know more about this area than anyone.

[Chants]

In July, 05, there was much nashing of teeth and rending of cloth over whether Cooper initially contacted Rove or if Rove contacted Cooper. At the time, the direction of the initial contact seemed important because it implicated whether there was an active campaign by the administration to seek revenge. If a it came out off-handedly during a call made by a reporter, well, then, that's not a very active campaign.

In Woodward's account, it seems like the reporter, Woodward, contacted the senior government officials.

I suppose the new spin will be that the revenge conpiracy was not active at all; it was very subtle and devious. The administration knew reporters would come asking questions, as they always do, so they waited for them to come knocking, and then let slip the name of Plame.

[Cheez-Wiz]

Hey Clarice-what's your take on the Woodward- Casey deathbed revelations in Veil?

Repub/CIA types have long said Woodward is just a flat out liar and indeed actually fabricated the incident.

Maybe lightning is striking twice. What think ye?

[TP]

I think DiGenova and Toensing were co-counsel to the group of news organizations that filed the amicus brief during the investigation phase of the Libby case. If they are lobbying for anybody, it is the newspaper organizations who don't want this case to come to trial.

[TP]

Dwilkers. Actually, Woodward is not writing the story. He is part of it. He is just honoring his agreement with the source of another story he may or may not have been working on.

The news organizations are in a horrible grind here, but, then, a number of them wanted the investigation. What a circus!

[JohnH]

TM
If Raw Story self-admits to being totally uncooked, why do you give them credit for being half-baked? Do you know something that you are not sharing?

[Rob W]

Revenge was not the motive for these crimes. At the time, there was no link between Cheney and the Niger forgeries. The push back was actually about who sent Joe Wilson to Niger. Cheney didn't want to have his fingerprints on the questions about the reports. Of course when it all backfired, they came clean and everyone figured it was for revenge. I think it is much more easily explained as an attempt to push off the mission on the CIA, not on Cheney's questions to the briefer.

[Florence Schmieg]

Woodward told Libby about Plame. 2 years later with 16 hour days and 100s of emails and documents to deal with daily, he mixed up which reporter it was. Said Russert instead of Woodward. Hence the indictments when Russert denied. Just my theory.

Who cares who told Woodward or who told Novak? This was no criminal conspiracy and Joe Wilson is a jerk who deserved some pushback.

[Marianne]

Raw Story is occasionally useful in one respect - they seem to get an advance look at some of the big stories that are about to appear in the NYT or Wash. Post. Maybe they have sources inside the papers, or sources for those papers that tell Raw Story "the Times just called, are writing a story about X for tomorrow's paper, and asked for confirmation on Y". But sometimes the trumpeted story never appears - maybe they don't get enough new information to run it, or the editors kill the story.

[p.lukasiak]

Raw Story=Drudge. Sometimes right (Lewinsky), sometimes wrong (Kerry's alleged affair). Raw story runs with single sourced material and gets burned. They really don't care anyway, they just want to be first.

the "Hadley was Woodward's source" story is not singly sourced, its quadruply sourced to "intelligence officials" (friends of Larry's no doubt) and "attorneys close to the investigation" (people in the law firm representing the Post is my guess.)

RawStory does tend to hype in its headlines stuff that really doesn't pan out in the article. But then again, our host is not exactly immune to "mountain-out-of-molehillitis", now is he?

In this case, the reporting looks pretty solid. RawStory is perfectly capable of stating as fact in the headline something that its story shows is merely a rumor being passed around. But that is not the case on this story.

[Cecil Turner]

The push back was actually about who sent Joe Wilson to Niger.

The push back was about who sent Joe Wilson to Niger (CPD vs Cheney), and what he reported back (nothing useful vs debunked forgeries). Adding the Plame detail was probably a mistake, and certainly not the main event.

[Rob W]

Florence:

Regardless of what you think about Mr. Wilson, Valerie Plame isn't him. Note that they could have done tons to pushback against him without involving his wife or compromising her job. The fact that her job was working in the CIA's Operations Directorate as a covert, non-official cover agent notwithstanding. My dad taught me lesson 1: Morality applies to everyone, including White House operatives. No matter whether or not laws were violated, this was a shameful act.

[creepy dude]

I agree Rob W-the pathetic thing it's actually low down on their greatest hits lists of shameful acts.

[JayDee]

Adding the Plame detail was probably a mistake, and certainly not the main event.

But it was a mistake that tells us so much about how this WH operated. Clearly they were in a frenzy over this Wilson guy, despite all the re-written history that he was a meaningless boob. Since they were so incensed over his op-ed, why not just write an answer to it or hold a press conference and address it openly, cleanly,factually, with the dignity befitting their office? Instead they chose to engage in a whisper campaign and, as seems inevitable with this slimy lot, character assassination.

You can see this pathology at work again in their laughable "pushback" to those 57% of Americans who now beleive they were willfully misled into war. This admin has blocked every attempt to independently examine and explain to its citizens the mechanics that created this asinine war. How cynical for them to now be launching vicious partisan attacks against opponents, just because those opponents are finally giving voice to the people's desire for the truth.

The upshot of this Woodward story is the story keeps getting longer legs. Obviously Fitzgerald is still on the case. And somehow, I don't think he's going to be embarrassed or intimidated by anything this bunch has to throw at him.

[Gary Maxwell]

...as a covert...

Do you have any evidence of this at all? If true why would the prosecutor not bring charges and why would a supposed "smartest man in the room" not call her covert in his indictment?

Unless you have something that none of us have seen, then think about it and see why you are wrong.

And if lying disqualifies you from working in the White House, we missed your little morality play your Dad taught you back a few scant years ago.

[Marianne]

Re Woodward's depiction of his contacts as
“three current or former Bush administration officials” ... This is merely an attempt by Woodward and/or the unrevealed source to obscure that source's identity. There are thousands of current or former Bush administration officials. They don't want us to be able to guess which one. At least not until some of us pay $30.00 for Woodward's next book, and maybe not even then.

[topsecretk9]

Has anyone speculated that one of Woodward's "former" Official Source is Rand Beers?. That's who I think it is, at least to the "former" official.

[topsecretk9]

and possibly Novak's too...wasn't his second source former too? (Rand Beers)

[Cecil Turner]

But it was a mistake that tells us so much about how this WH operated.

If you say so. It looks to me a lot like Wilson's report . . . people read into it pretty much what they already believed.

[Syl]

Clarice

I'll defend Victoria and Joe

No wonder Novak was confused when he once mentioned Victoria Plame. He was thinking of Victoria and Joe, not Valery and Joe.

Not being terribly serious here, just adding to the confusion I guess.

[Jim E.]

Novak's second source was Rove.

[Syl]

Rob E

I think it is much more easily explained as an attempt to push off the mission on the CIA, not on Cheney's questions to the briefer.

Spreading lies, I see.

Cheney was not at Wilson's house where the briefing took place. Two CIA, Wilson, and his wife as hostess.

[DwightKSchrute]

If I remember correctly, Woodward gave many misleading details to the press and public in order to keep Mark Felt's indentity secret (claiming DT wasn't in the intelligence community, creating the smoking thing). So perhaps the analysis and parsing over "current or former" just might be a big tail chase.

[Lion]

Rob W, don't forget that Wilson strongly implied that the Vice President had sent him. So strongly, in fact, that Jay Rockefeller insisted to Chris Matthews that the VP had sent him, and Matthews agreed--all on the basis of what Wilson had written and said. If Wilson had not lied about who sent him and why, his wife would never have come up. The statement by administration officials that "the CIA sent him on the recommendation of his wife, who works there" was simply the truth and, as we now know, was not a criminal act. Re Woodward, I believe he was caught red-handed in a lie about his deathbed conversation with Casey, but he didn't tell that lie to a grand jury under oath, and there was no living person who could contradict him. Extremely unlikely he lied here; he'd have to be completely insane.

[Syl]

Jaydee is back. Whoopie.

You can see this pathology at work again in their laughable "pushback" to those 57% of Americans who now beleive they were willfully misled into war.

And why do you think Americans believe that lie? Because the Democrats have been making false charges and the media 'innocently' jumped on the bandwagon.

It's not 'laughable pushback' it's the Revision Busters and we're going to win this battle. Just like the American people are going to understand that the WH was pushing back on Wilson's false charges.

Be proud, be very proud, that the Democrats politicizing of the war and attempts to delegitimize it are having an effect in Iraq. Guess what the Sunni parties are asking for!

If America pulls out now it will be a total PR disaster for us. How do you think the international community you want to please so much will view our betrayal of the Iraqi people and our promise to them if we do?

Do you want to be responsible for the consequences? You can be against the war, but to make false charges against its inception is deceit and to even think of demanding a pullout before the Iraq government asks us to leave is close to treasonous in my mind.

[macranger]

Let's not forget....

The "Who Leaked" question is no longer news...

Fitz's indictment was about perjury, obstruction....nothing on the original reason - because she didn't fit the bill.

Hell, at this point it doesn't matter who talked about her - that wasn't decided by Fitzgerald and determined in October of 2004.

Woodward can come forward now because as he says, "When I think all of the facts come out in this case, it's going to be laughable..."

Which is why Rove has a "bounce in his step".

[Jim E.]

"The 'Who Leaked' question is no longer news... Hell, at this point it doesn't matter who talked about her."

Maybe. But it matters enough that Woodward's source has forbidden him to make his name public.

[JayDee]

Syl,"politicization of the war"? Please, give me a break. Is this not the administration that launched phony terror alerts to win an election? The bald faced way rightwingers are able to accuse others of their own most egregious behaviors is a neverending revelation.

I'll let a Republican speak for me :
Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) strongly criticized yesterday the White House's new line of attack against critics of its Iraq policy, saying that "the Bush administration must understand that each American has a right to question our policies in Iraq and should not be demonized for disagreeing with them."

If this administration has a SHRED of integrity or dedication to OUR democracy, then let them launch a full blown, independent, public inquiry into this matter of pre-war intelligence and how it was used by both the executive and legislative branches. They will never do that. Instead they'll launch personal attacks against their opponents and engage in McCarthyite smears of good Americans.

They have the ability to make this right with the American people. Instead they're acting guilty and desperate - just like they did when they decided to smear Joe Wilson rather than simply confront him with their own case.

[Syl]

JayDee

Oh puhlease. Critizing policy is one thing, false charges that Bush deceived us and lied is into war is quite another.

Your desparation that Bush is actually calling you on it is revealing.

[Sue]

Jay Dee,

When did calling the president a liar become policy?

[Rob W]

The Vice President admitted on Meet the Press in Sept. 2003 that his questions spurred the CIA to investigate the Niger question and to send Wilson to Niger. This is all in the public record. Cheney denies ever having been told what the results of Wilson's trip was. That's where the rubber hits the road, because if Cheney was given the answers to his questions and the Administration continued to push the Niger claims anyway, well, Mr. Cheney will then have a problem.

Wilson has never said the VP sent him personally. That's simple spin. What he said was that the VP's questions urged the CIA to send someone out to check out the claim.

On return, Wilson would have never personally debriefed the Vice President. The question is, did the Vice President ever get an answer back to his questions?

The story is being unravelled from two directions then--from the forgeries in Italy to the White House and back from Wilson's trip to the White House. The key question will be when did they know the information was false--before or after they publically made the claims about the purchase of uranium. At the end, that's where this is going.

[Rob W]

Macranger:

Fitzgerald never said anything about why he didn't indict for more other than Libby's lies made it impossible for him to determine the true motive of why Libby leaked. Never once did he say, in the entire press conference that Plame "didn't fit the bill." Call facts facts and supposition, supposition. You'll win more arguments that way.

[Gary Maxwell]

And I will let a Democrat speak for me:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/Commentary/com-11_15_05_Lieberman_pf.html>Joe Lieberman yesterday

[Rob W]

As for why Fitzgerald didn't call her covert in the indictment, he didn't charge under the IIPA. Therefore no need to assert that she was covert. If and when he brings such charges, such an assertion will be in the indictment. If he never brings such charges, then he won't include it. But the four corners of the indictment contain only materials necessary to charge the party.

[Marianne]

Vice President Cheney has refused to respond to questions about his earlier statements that now appear to be unsupportable. Since his re-election a year ago The Vice President has not (to the best of my knowledge) allowed himself to be interviewed or questioned except on Rush Limbaugh's radio show. He is understandably reluctant to discuss the indictment of his Chief of Staff. But the questions of intelligence handling before the war are not the subject of any criminal probe. Cheney has no excuse for limiting his appearances to closed venues with no Press allowed. It is time for him to come out of the shadows. Cheney talks about having backbone yet he won't face the public or the Press.

[JayDee]

Syl, try and remember we aren't blabberboxes on tv throwing party generated talking points, ok? Bush is calling ME on it? What nonsense you write.

The truth is a funny thing. When you're telling the truth, your story never changes. You fear no inquiry. Instead we have constantly shifting war rationales and pathological fear of objective investigation. Even without the disgusting fearmongering, the mushroom clouds, the aluminum tubes, the yellowcake, the non-meeting in Prague, and all the rest of their garbage, the elimination of contradictory evidence from NIE reports, the failure to mention the lack of credibility of their sources, their reliance on con men like Chalabi - even without all that evidence that we were deliberately misled, you would suspect there was deception merely from their behavior TODAY.

I don't contend Bush deliberately did anything. I realize he's a puppet president. I contend, and I believe it to be entirely true, that - rather than seeking every means possible to spare humanity the horror of this war - his puppetmeisters worked arduously to CREATE a case for war that did not in fact exist. Not a false charge. I believe it to be entirely true. If it were false, I beleive with all my heart this admin would already have accepted open inquiry to prove it was false. The way people telling the truth are willing to do, and people lying are not. Very simple. The only desperation I feel is that my country has been so harmed by this government, I don't know when in my children's lifetimes it will begin to be able to recover.

[The Unbeliever]

Rob, that question was already investigated. Per the Senate Intelligence report, way down in Conclusion 14:

The Central Intelligence Agency should have told the Vice President and other senior policymakers that it had sent someone to Niger to look into the alleged Iraq-Niger uranium deal and should have briefed the Vice President on the former ambassador's findings.

Barring any kind of strange word-parsing, that seems to clearly indicate that Cheney was not briefed on Wilson's trip. It's probably safe to assume Cheney eventually got a separate answer to his questions, but as Conclusion 13 states, Wilson's trip "did not change any analysts' assessments of the Iraq-Niger uranium deal. For most analysts, the information in the report lent more credibility to the original Central Intelligence Agency reports on the uranium deal".

[Gary Maxwell]

Wilson has never said the VP sent him personally

LLL canard alert. Seems like once a day now.

He clearly said in the EPIC speech that it was "the government, the government ( repeated for emphasis apparently ) not the CIA" that sent Joe W to the garden spot that is Niger. He was retailing that it was the administrationthat sent him,to anyone that would listen both in private and (as preserved by Epic)in public. Now you can read District of Columbia DMV for government if you choose to be clueless. Given all the stuff in the NYT and WaPo about Cheney by multiple reporters, he meant Administration and probably said Cheney to more than one reporter. Or they just made it up however unlikely that is.

[Syl]

JayDee

I don't contend Bush deliberately did anything.

Then let Reid know.

[Florence Schmieg]

My goodness. How many of you remember the Vietnam era and the devastating consequences of having the country turn on the effort, forcing politicians to remove support and the U.S. to leave causing millions of deaths in Vietnam and Cambodia. Not to mention the devestation to our military and intelligence for years. This is not some football game with two sides. We need to win this war. The consequences of not would be devastating. If you remember the Vietnam era you should fear what is happening right now. And it is the same group of former Vietnam protestors who now people the Democratic senators who are the instigators of this. And they are willing to hurt this country once again. Why can Christoopher Hitchens see this and not some of you?

[Davebo]

"If America pulls out now it will be a total PR disaster for us."

LOL!

Hate to be the bearer of bad news and all, but the horrible PR disaster has already occurred.

[Syl]

Marianne

Vice President Cheney has refused to respond to questions about his earlier statements that now appear to be unsupportable.

They were supportable at the time he made them. That is all that matters.

BTW, there is still no consensus on the use of those aluminum tubes. Some are even thinking that a supplier was pulling a fast one on Saddam.

[Syl]

Davebo

Hate to be the bearer of bad news and all, but the horrible PR disaster has already occurred.

Yep. For al Qaeda.

[The Unbeliever]

Easy question, Florence: because Christopher Hitchens isn't suffering from BDS, or trying to raise campaign money from George Soros and MoveOn.org, or aiming to win back the Presidency in 08.

[JayDee]

Nice bipartisanship, Gary. I'll gladly take Hagel and give you Lieberman.

Since pubs are suddenly so on board with "criticizing the policy", I guess no one will object to retired Marine Rep. John Murtha's comments today.

The war in Iraq is not going as advertised. It is a flawed policy wrapped in illusion. The American public is way ahead of us. The United States and coalition troops have done all they can in Iraq, but it is time for a change in direction. Our military is suffering. The future of our country is at risk. We cannot continue on the present course. It is evident that continued military action is not in the best interests of the United States of America, the Iraqi people or the Persian Gulf Region." You all really need to read what this 37 year veteran and patriot has to say, including the misuse of intelligence.

I'd really like to see that dirtbag Cheney call HIM out. Not that he'd have the guts to answer this guy: "I like guys who've never been there that criticize us who've been there. I like that. I like guys who got five deferments and never been there and send people to war, and then don't like to hear suggestions about what needs to be done."

[davebo]

"BTW, there is still no consensus on the use of those aluminum tubes. Some are even thinking that a supplier was pulling a fast one on Saddam."

And some believe Adam and Eve rode dinosaurs to church. (ht SNL)

However, a set of technical experts from the Department of Energy’s (DOE) Oak Ridge, Livermore, and Los Alamos National Laboratories reviewed the CIA analysis and disagreed with this interpretation because the tube dimensions were far from ideal for this purpose. In fact, the dimensions and the aluminum alloy were identical to those of tubes acquired for rockets by Iraq in the 1980s. Furthermore, the Iraqis had developed and tested centrifuges before the first Gulf War that were much more capable than those that could have been built with the imported tubes.

The DOE experts also pointed out that if these tubes were actually intended for centrifuges, there should be evidence of attempts by the Iraqis to acquire hundreds of thousands of other very specific components, but no such evidence existed. This critique of the CIA interpretation was seconded by the State Department’s intelligence branch and, independently, by an international group of centrifuge experts advising the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).66

Stick a fork in them tubes.. they're done

[The Unbeliever]

JayDee, you're coming humorously close to jumping on board Heinlein's Starship Troopers scenario of veterans-only rule. And if it came down to that, I suspect you wouldn't like what the majority of our veterans would say...

[Rick Ballard]

Florence,

Hitchens has principles - really lousy politics but principles.

Just as George Orwell did. Orwell gave us the formulation regarding pacifists in his day - objectively pro-fascist - that fits today's objectively pro-terrorist twits to a T.

Both men "of the Left" but both men with principles. None of the Kossacks know the meaning of the word.

[davebo]

I'm a veteran, my Dad is a disabled Marine veteran, both my nephews are OIF veterans.

Yet we all share the same opinion of this fiasco.

I'll take my chances with my fellow veterans.

[Rick Ballard]

The joys of anonymity.

[creepy dude]

It's officially 1984-war is peace.

Hugh Hewitt: "Senator Frist, please sit down. We wish you well, but yesterday's vote was a giant slap in the face of the American military who are winning the peace in Iraq, the courageous Iraqis campaigning for election, and the president and his Adminsitration which has fully informed the Congress of its strategy and its progress."

53 Americans have dies in Iraq since November 1. Thank god we're at peace over there. Asshole.

[JayDee]

Unbeliever, I quoted John Murtha, not myself. Nice to see you found it "humorous". Smugness can get to be a pretty ugly habit.

[JayDee]

53 Americans have died in Iraq since November 1.

And I'll bet you everything I own not a single one of them - or any of the other nearly 2,100 - are related to Hugh Hewitt.

[Gary Maxwell]

I dont really want either one but I do generally think Lieberman tends to be sincere. Of course he was a big enough whore to throw away much of what he had stood for, to run on the Sore Loserman ticket.

Hagel? You can have him. How he thinks he he is going win any Republican primaries is beyond me. And democrats have no real use for him either, except when he can be propped up as a sock puppet for them.

[Davebo]

The joys of anonymity.

Whatever...

[Syl]

davebo

The DOE is only one voice among many who analyzed the aluminum tubes. Show us what all the agencies said, not just one.

Otherwise you're only cherry-picking, not making a case at all.

[JM Hanes]

JayDee -

It is very simple indeed. We know what the intelligence said. We know what the President said.

We also know that the Robb-Sil commission said that the PDB's were more alarming than the NIE, but regardless of their content, no President is going to turn such materials over to Congress. We have separate branches of government for a reason; if there's anywhere Executive applies, and rightly so, that's one of them. Democrats know this, which why they feel free to build whatever house of cards they like on the President's refusal.

It's time to concentrate on winning the war, not litigating it to death.

[The Unbeliever]

JayDee, you quoted Murtha, then made an appeal from authority argument based on his years in the military to imply that neither we nor the Administration can question him. And when you do an AfA argument based on military service like that, then you are echoing Starship Troopers to a degree--which I find rather humorous, coming from a lefty.

Smugness can be a rather nasty habit--here's hoping you'll break it someday soon.

[Gary Maxwell]

News Flash!!!! Must attribute Jay DEE

Cyberspace November 17, 2005

JayDee has found a Democrat, no really a Democrat calling for the immediate withdrawal of forces from Vietnam ( sorry Iraq, I dont know what made me type that).

In other news dog bites man.

Report just in, Sun rose in the East AGAIN!

[JayDee]

JM Hanes, can you explain how Congress is supposed to its Constitutionally appointed duty to declare war if the President has the right to pick and choose what evidence it hands over?

Please remember, since your winger media does not, that the Silverman-Robb commission WAS NOT charged with investigating HOW intelligence was used by the administration and DID NOT investigate that matter. It's a tiny factoid your partisan press likes to ignore, and which your president again MISLED the nation about in his Veterans Day tirade.

I really don't understand the contempt pubs hold for our democracy, either in principle or practice. It seems useful to them only as a sloganeering source for obtaining and abusing power.

[JM Hanes]

Florence -

Chief among ironies is that those who have so religiously equated Iraq with VietNam seem to have forgotten the single most compelling lesson we learned: War should not be run by politicians.

[JayDee]

Maxwell, shouldn't surprise me that you don't know shit about your government, but Murtha is a 37 year Marine vet retired, just about the most hawkish Dem in the House, who enthusiastically voted for the war and has until recently supported Bush in very strong terms. Always amazing how little you "patriots" know about your own government.

[creepy dude]

The military wasn't the one itching to invade Iraq.

[Gary Maxwell]

Just answer the question hog breath. Is he or is he not a Democrat? If he is, I rest my case. He aint my Representative but I got $20 right here that says he is a Democrat. Want to bet me? I did not think so.

[JayDee]

Well, since I SAID he was "most hawkish Dem" in the House, what are you betting me for, moron?

[creepy dude]

Don't be so spendthrift with your allowance Maxwell.

[Gary Maxwell]

I did not think you read the stuff you cut and paste from the DUmp, moron. Congratulations a Democrat palying politics with the war, a find there sport.

[Gary Maxwell]

Creepy

You want some of this action? Was it you yesterday that wanted in on the action with a female posters fiance? HMMMM.

[Marc]

Simply said. Democrats, if they haven't already, are getting very close to overplaying their hand.

BTW, rolling out Murtha is a good strategy for the Democrats. He is one of only a handful that has any sort of credibility when talking about this issue. Methinks Ms. Pelosi has been asking him non-stop to do this for a while now.

Regardless of being pro the Iraq war, or anti the Iraq war, even Democrats can obviously see this isn't about having an honest policy debate. Its about scoring political points (why else would you continuously want to revisit the past decisions rather than pushing your own plan for the future), and nothing else. If this experiment in the Middle East turns out to spread Democracy, look for the Democrats to try and take credit like they tried to with the Cold War despite fighting Ronald Reagan's policies EVERY STEP OF THE WAY.

[Syl]

War should not be run by politicians

True. However we're stuck with it.

The Vietnam comparison certain quarters love to make is dangerous in that when we cut-and-run from Vietnam, it had no effect on us (only the millions of not-us slaughtered over there) but cutting and running from Iraq will affect us more than just in moral terms.

First, just calling for our withdrawal emboldens al Qaeda. They're sure all they have to do is attack us here and we will be sure to cut out of Iraq. I just saw on CNN that al Qaeda has a new video out calling for withdrawal from Iraq and threatening that America, Australia, Britain, and Italy will be their next attacks.

Thank you, Democrats.

[creepy dude]

Maxwell-I'm going to give you my handle. It's a joke to me-but you earned it.

[Sue]

Jay Dee,

Murtha is not saying anything he hasn't already said. Try the year 2004.

[Truzenzuzex]

JayDee:

Maxwell, shouldn't surprise me that you don't know shit about your government, but Murtha is a 37 year Marine vet retired, just about the most hawkish Dem in the House, who enthusiastically voted for the war and has until recently supported Bush in very strong terms. Always amazing how little you "patriots" know about your own government.

He also seems to have drunk a serious overdose of the Kool-Aid recently:
From CNN:

"I resent the fact that on Veterans Day, they criticized Democrats for criticizing them," Murtha said. "This [the war] is a flawed policy wrapped in illusion. The American public knows it, and lashing out at critics doesn't help a bit. You've got to change the policy. That's what's going to help the American people. You need to change direction."

This from a person who supported the war. He has been drinking from Pelosi and Reid's cup, trying to wrap the "Bush lied" meme in a the cloak of a veteran's credibility. Too bad this speech cost him most of his. If he listened to Bush's speech, it wasn't criticizing the Democrats for their criticism - it was Bush criticizing them for dissembling.

[JM Hanes]

JayDee -

Precisely the way they did it. They require the NIE, and then they read it. The Intel committee has access both to raw data and to the intelligence officers involved -- which is why they meet in a specially secured room designated for that purpose, and why their papers are protected. If anyone demanded that they share their own work product with Congress, Democrats would be up in arms just as fast as Republicans. At the moment, they're in the process of proving they're the best cherry pickers around.

[The Unbeliever]

JayDee: His "Veteran's Day tirade"? Oh, now THAT is funny. Why didn't your Murtha quote get the label of "tirade"? He seemed just as angry as the President was during the VD speech.

And a quick point of order--when you want to claim it's "amazing how little you 'patriots' know about your own government", it's best not to be caught labelling our republic as a democracy two posts above your statement. It's amazing how little appreciation lefties have for the difference between the two forms, though it does explain why they constantly misunderstand the "principle or practice" behind our government.

[topsecretk9]

Drudge is blaring "Wilson says probe Woodward"

Obvious retort..."Okay, can we start by talking to Walter Pincus? and then Wilson too???"

Question, when do you think Fitz will tire of Joe WIlson telling him what to do?

http://reuters.myway.com/article/20051117/2005-11-17T211710Z_01_EIC770061_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-BUSH-LEAK-DC.html

[JayDee]

Well it's obvious none of you bothered to read Murtha's remarks. Accuse him - the guy who goes to Iraq, goes to Walter Reed, 37 year combat and military intelligence veteran - of playing politics. It's pretty clear whose playing and who isn't.

[The Unbeliever]

Er, JayDee, he's a Congressman. By definition, it's his very job to play politics.

[owl]

Jay Dee, I'll take that swap you offered. Give me Liberman but you Must take Hagel.

[Marcel]

Al-Queda will threaten us as long as they exist. They did more than threaten before we invaded Iraq. If we do manage to extricate ourselves from Iraq and al-Queda is still in business, they will attack us for any number of other reasons (our support of Israel, our bases in other Muslim countries, whatever). We do need to develop a plan to reduce our presence in Iraq, on our own terms and on our own timetable. We shouldn't let their propaganda influence us.

[JM Hanes]

Maybe Murtha can hook up with Cindy Sheehan and get that old moral authority mojo back.

[Syl]

top

Wilson is watching his threatened civil suit crumble before his eyes. He really needed a charge on the alleged underlying crime. He hasn't gotten it, and probably won't, ever.

[owl]

ts....I think Fitz bought Wilson/CIA/MSM/DNC otherwise, why would he have "told his little story" exactly like one of them?

[Marianne]

JM Hanes; Congress got the NIE only 3 days before the vote. It was only 97 pages long so it is doubtful that it included more than a summary of the intelligence. It is a bit hard to swallow that the Administration had only that much intelligence to share.

[TP]

Marianne, I would be astounded if 10% of them even read the NIE.

[topsecretk9]

Sly and Owl

Not only his civil, but his slander suit too! He is looking pathetic and paranoid at this point.