The NY Times seems to think the political contributions of the sacked CIA officer are significant, but their investigative skills are apparently a bit rusty, since they are about $7,500 light in their reporting. From David Johnston and Scott Shane we get this:
Public records show that Ms. McCarthy contributed $2,000 in 2004 to the presidential campaign of John Kerry, the Democratic nominee.
I applaud their instinct to look in this direction at all. However, per public records at Open Secrets, we can easily find the $2,000 donation to Kerry, a $5,000 donation by Mary O. McCarthy to the Ohio DNC, a $2,000 donation by a Michael J McCarthy from the same address (Husband, brother, bro-in-law, dad? I'll guess hubby), and a $500 donation to Barbara Mikulski, all in 2004. $9,500 in 2004 donations from two folks who have reported almost nothing before that. Might be a story there, if the Times could find it. But will the Times try to follow the money?
The FEC website has more info, including home addresses, in their searches.
Flopping Aces has lots on McCarthy; I have some below.
UPDATE: If it is worth reporting, it is worth getting right - David Cloud follows up for the Times on Saturday, and still scores an "incomplete", twice:
Others said it was possible that Ms. McCarthy — who made a contribution to Senator John Kerry's presidential campaign in 2004 — had grown increasingly disenchanted with the methods adopted by the Bush administration for handling Qaeda prisoners.
And a bit later:
Several associates of Ms. McCarthy said she returned to the C.I.A. in 2004, taking a job in the inspector general's office. That year, public records show, she contributed $2,000 to Mr. Kerry's presidential campaign, identifying herself as a "government analyst."
This is simply not this difficult.
Conscience or politcs?
Follow the money.
Posted by: Chants | April 22, 2006 at 09:23 AM
Color me conspiratorial
There's some things I'd like to know.
Things we do know.
McCarthy was CIA IG.
She would know people in the DOJ.
The Fitzgerald investigation has been handled as an ivestigation of the administration and not like a "leak" investigation from the get go. Ergo, we know who the leaker is, but there's no charges.
Fitz is from Chicago, which is highly Democratic.
So, what I want to know.
Who reccommended Fitz at the beginning of the chain?
Is Fitz just a useful idiot, or is something a little more/less sinister involved.
Posted by: Pofarmer | April 22, 2006 at 09:48 AM
Tom,
There is a story in the political donations of McCarthy and her husband. I just hope someone with the resources to figure it out runs with it.
Posted by: Sue | April 22, 2006 at 09:59 AM
Reading through blogs and news reports on this topic, I came acrooss a quote indicating that the McCarthys and Wilsons were friends. There was no supporting link, however, and was wondering if anyone saw supporting links on this, which I would find interesting, although not totally surprising.
Posted by: Kate | April 22, 2006 at 10:01 AM
Like Pofarmer, I'm afraid I'm going to have to get out the tinfoil and make a hat.
Biers, Berger, Clark, Plame, Wilson, the Kerry campaign, money for the Dems and Kerry, and 2 female managers at the CIA. Stolen docs from the archives, illegal leaks of classified material.
OK who in the media is going to start connecting the dots here, because this is starting to have the stench of a real live conspiracy. Is it a coincidence this all happened around the same time during a presidential election? All these guys started pulling this crap at the same time accidentally?
Posted by: Dwilkers | April 22, 2006 at 10:01 AM
I don't get the NYTs. If they thought it was important enough to include the $2000 donation, why wouldn't it be even more important to note that during the election year of 2004, McCarthy and her husband made $10,000 in donations to democrats? Surely I'm not a better investigator than these investigative journalists. It was fairly easy to find, took me all of 5 minutes.
Posted by: Sue | April 22, 2006 at 10:02 AM
There's some very interesting information on Free Republic re. Joe's Wilson's second wife:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1619050/posts?q=1&&page=1251
Posted by: Paul Vincent | April 22, 2006 at 10:05 AM
And now the ranking Dem on the Ethics Committee gets run out on a rail...
What Culture of Corruption? Where?
Posted by: richard mcenroe | April 22, 2006 at 10:38 AM
Tom,
There is a story in the political donations of McCarthy and her husband. I just hope someone with the resources to figure it out runs with it.
I'm not sure why you need a 'story'. Seems pretty clear you already know what happened and why. A NYT 'story' would just be filled with balancing 'facts' like 'she served under original George without leaking information about secret CIA prisons in Eastern Europe' as evidence that people who know what happened (like yourself) are just conspiracy crazies.
Better to do what Mr. Maguire does and leave the innuendo out there without the 'reporting'.
Posted by: keatssycamore | April 22, 2006 at 10:44 AM
I don't think it's greed or desire for political influence or greater status in the "right" party that drives folks like Mary McCarthy, Mary Mapes, Dan RaTHer, Joe Wilson, most of the news media, etc. It is, unfortunately, much worse than that. It is a burning ideology of moving the US in the "proper" direction towards socialism/marxism that is so deeply ingrained in these folks.
Bush's stupid little war derailed the perfect plan - Bill Clinton gets 8 years to set things up, get the right people in the right offices. Al Gore gets a few years to basically do nothing because he's too inept - but he's a useful tool to keep things moving in the right direction, take orders from Hillary, get the rest of us dummies used to the "proper" direction for the country. Then Hillary gets in and pushes us over the edge and beyond any reasonable recovery - er, for the greater good, you know - with the media cheerleading all the way.
These folks share a similar passion for their ideology that the Islamists have for theirs - maybe why they get along so well, and can't see the damage that will come from it. In fact, the Islamists are helping the cause. A common thread between the shared passion for each of these ideologies is that they will both do absolutely anything to further their cause. The unending stream of sedition and treason coming from these groups is evidence of what these people are willing to do to their country in their passion for their ideology. It is truly scary and depressing, especially when the unelected and unaccountable media who shares this ideology still controls what most people see.
Posted by: Bill in AZ | April 22, 2006 at 10:49 AM
Keats,
That is my angle, not Tom's. You might want to leave him out of my musings. ::grin::
Posted by: Sue | April 22, 2006 at 11:03 AM
The problem so far with connecting this to Kerry is that Ms. McCathy's only known leak is related to a November 2005 story.
Posted by: Chants | April 22, 2006 at 11:04 AM
The things that jump out at me are the $10K and the donation to Ohio.
Given the area where they live (Northern Va) and the value of their home ($800K +) I would suspect the debt service alone would not leave a considerable amount of free cash ($6K/month $72K per year?)- even if they are in the $200K range in income. The $10K is a lot of money to throw around given where they are economically.
Second - how did they know to give to the Ohio Democrat party?
Unfortunatley we know thta nobody in the Drive-by media will be concerned with this. They need to cous on the real issues of the day - The VP wearing sunglasses and the President tapping his foot during Hu's welcoming ceremony.
My guess is that if it is even mentioned on Sunday it will be framed around the idea that since the President did it it is no big deal.
It has become apparent that the Democrats thirst for power has thrown them into an alliance with the Islamofacists.
Posted by: AMDG | April 22, 2006 at 11:05 AM
The leak I'm interested in is the leak to Mitchell re the referral to the DOJ. That would be in the fall of 2003, I believe. Was our Mary in a position to leak that. And Andrea was droaning on last night about how one's man's leaker is another's whistleblower. Wasn't referring to Libby, I think.
Of course, there are probably dozens of leakers.
Posted by: Kate | April 22, 2006 at 11:10 AM
Could be Kate. She seems to be in the right place at the right time.
I would not be surprised (at all) if the VIPS are tied very closely to McCarthy.
This may be the biggest bust since Rathergate.
However, I do not see Fitz tied in at all. That's a rickety bridge.
Posted by: Chants | April 22, 2006 at 11:20 AM
AMDG --
Do keep in mind that Ms. McCarthy has lived in the DC area for a long time (decades), so she presumably purchased her house long before prices started skyrocketing.
Whoo, this is just too easy...
Here's their property.
Posted by: Fredrik Nyman | April 22, 2006 at 11:31 AM
I came acrooss a quote indicating that the McCarthys and Wilsons were friends.
Joe and Mary worked together for a year, and both their addresses in the DC area are public record - they might be neighbors (that goes on my Never-Shortening To Do list)
Surely I'm not a better investigator than these investigative journalists. It was fairly easy to find, took me all of 5 minutes.
Not to sell you short, but one wonders how the Times managed to *not* find it.
I'm not sure why you need a 'story'. Seems pretty clear you already know what happened and why.
I do? I'm torn between the "Auntie died, what should I do with the money?", the George Soros laundering scheme, and the McCarthy's new determination to save America by any and all means possible, including illegal leaks and big checks.
More facts might help, and the Times is in a better position to get them. But obviously, there are lots of incurious lefties out there to whom the Times must cater. "Follow the money" won't count here.
Posted by: TM | April 22, 2006 at 11:33 AM
McCarthy was Larry Johnson's boss
http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/1670
Why am I not surprised
Posted by: AJStrata | April 22, 2006 at 11:46 AM
Is this whole thing starting to unravel now? Is that what we're watching? Seems to me like it might be just that.
Posted by: Dwilkers | April 22, 2006 at 11:52 AM
AJ,
You have got to be kidding me? There is an actual connection between Johnson and McCarthy? LOL. I would bet Tom Clancey is taking notes for his next novel. ::grin::
Posted by: Sue | April 22, 2006 at 11:56 AM
With this many lice, I sure hope Goss is using a very fine toothed comb for the nits. I wonder how many unpublicized "retirements" have occurred at Langley since he took over?
Not enough, apparently.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | April 22, 2006 at 11:58 AM
Sue,
I linked to Johnson's just released post admitting it himself. Can't get firmer than that.
Posted by: AJStrata | April 22, 2006 at 12:07 PM
Sue
I know I am being a pest, and I don't know why I need your confirmation...but did you see my Mary McCarthy-Dana Preist - Syemour Hersh - Joe Wilson - Larry Johnson - CSIS - NYU connection links?
If so I will stop bugging you.
Posted by: topsecretk9 | April 22, 2006 at 12:12 PM
oh and Mary McCarthy - Daniel Benjamin - Patrick Fitzgerald link too
Posted by: topsecretk9 | April 22, 2006 at 12:14 PM
AJ,
I just went over to your site and read it. This story just keeps growing.
Top,
Yes, I saw it. I haven't looked at it closely yet. I hope someone who has the power of the pen is looking. Talk about 6 degrees of separation. This story is crawling with it.
Posted by: Sue | April 22, 2006 at 12:15 PM
Top,
Were are your links!
Cheers,
AJStrata
Posted by: AJStrata | April 22, 2006 at 12:16 PM
I'm willing to give Fitzgerald a break in the connection. He had the power in 2004 to bring down the Bush administration and didn't do it. If he was involved in anything, other than a clueless investigation, he could have leaked the names of who he was investigating. If you will remember, during the run up to the 2004 election, we were still guessing that Rove and Libby were involved. Just a small leak to the press in mid October could have made a difference.
Posted by: Sue | April 22, 2006 at 12:19 PM
Hi all...I hope I didn't post this in the wrong spot, I just didn't know where to put it.
According to an Indian Ocean Newsletter dated 10/233/99, a delegation of American businessmen traveled to Ethiopia to participate in a meeting. The article mentions Mohamed Hussein Al Amoudi, Midroc, Westar, Rock Creek Corportaion, Elias Aburdene and Joe Wilson. It also mentions F.C. Schaffer and Associates, a sugar company.
Now I'm no chemist but I have read that sulfuric acid is used to mill yellowcake. It's also used to recover sugar from the waste left over after sugar cane processing, the end result being ethanol.
The SSCI states on page 40, "However, the purported 4,000-ton annual production listed is fully 1,000 tons more than the mining companies claim to have produced in 2001."
Page 56, "One of the two mines cited by the source as the location of the uranium oxide is flooded."
Since yellowcake is sold in metric tons, and the UN Food For Oil Program documents tons of sugar being traded...am I reaching here? here?
Posted by: Rocco | April 22, 2006 at 12:20 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,81148,00.html
Worthy of a repeat link.
Posted by: Chants | April 22, 2006 at 12:22 PM
Rocco,
Rock Creek Corporation. Reminded me of something Roger Simon said.
http://www.rogerlsimon.com/mt-archives/2004/07/heart_of_darkne.php
Posted by: Chants | April 22, 2006 at 12:28 PM
Wild speculation here: Perhaps the Libby thing went as long as it has because of an investigation into the big-time leakers in the CIA.
Talk amongst yourselves..........
Posted by: sad | April 22, 2006 at 12:30 PM
Start here and scroll through to the next 3 or four - the Mary McCarty - Dana Priest connection at NYU Security group
(Or here, here, and here)
Sue - the benefit of the doubt, agree...but it sure explains to me why Fitz bought the "whistleblower" angle -- close people whispering in his ear
Posted by: topsecretk9 | April 22, 2006 at 12:34 PM
Top,
There might be that connection. I am not going to believe that just because Fitzgerald knows some of them he would become involved in a conspiracy with them. The others, I'll buy it in a heartbeat. For some reason, I just can't let myself think Fitzgerald would be aware of it or part of it. He might just be Fitz Magoo, as AJ likes to call him. ::grin::
Posted by: Sue | April 22, 2006 at 12:38 PM
Sue
You misunderstand...I am not saying he is involved in a conspiracy...I am just saying if a friend may have "colored" his view, communicated a mean smear campaign wasn't to Fitz ...and since one of those friends is so close to all of it, it wouldn't surprise me in the least if a opinion of the Plame leak was communicated to Fitz.
Posted by: topsecretk9 | April 22, 2006 at 12:42 PM
Does that make better sense?
Posted by: topsecretk9 | April 22, 2006 at 12:43 PM
Top,
Fitz definitely buys the whistleblower meme.
Posted by: Sue | April 22, 2006 at 12:44 PM
Tops
I agree with your assessment. No conspiracy on Fitz' part, just some "insider info" from a trusted associate.
Posted by: sad | April 22, 2006 at 12:45 PM
Rocco: you might find this link interesting.
What">http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1256475/posts">What Joe Wilson Didn't Say About Africa
Fedora post
Posted by: Lesley | April 22, 2006 at 12:48 PM
I'll just throw this out...McCarthy and Benjamin are close (both on CSIS and NYU)...she communicates a mean smear campaign designed to quash a whistleblower...Benjamin then communicates a mean smear campaign designed to quash a whistleblower... if a friend is of the belief it was a mean smear campaign designed to quash a whistleblower...and that same friend is one quoted in a Fitz bio...then I won't be surprised if that friend communicated to his friend a mean smear campaign designed to quash a whistleblower...
and coming from a "trusted" friend I would believe a mean smear campaign designed to quash a whistleblower
Posted by: topsecretk9 | April 22, 2006 at 12:51 PM
Sy Hersh's piece "The Stovepipe" claims an anonymous CIA told him a disgrunteld group of retired CIA forged those Niger documents to set Bush up...I've always suspected VIPS to be that group
Posted by: Rocco | April 22, 2006 at 12:52 PM
Mary has some more interesting colleagues quite a roll of honour.,Clarke,Zinni..
Posted by: PeterUK | April 22, 2006 at 12:53 PM
OT, but my bestest friend just called and the flight last night to Sacramento with the crazy bomb threat guy who also tried to open the emergency exit -- her husband was one of the passenger tacklers --- he's a hero - Let's Roll
Posted by: topsecretk9 | April 22, 2006 at 01:08 PM
{He had the power in 2004 to bring down the Bush administration and didn't do it.}
Who knows, maybe Fitz wasn't "empowered" to leak names before the election. Maybe there was an acknowledgement from whoever might give Fitz the go-ahead that to do so would unleash, from Karl Rove's general direction, a barrage of ads featuring JK tossing medals over the White House fence. Or something.
Posted by: hrtshpdbox | April 22, 2006 at 01:15 PM
The leak theory seems extremely unlikely to me. Remember, after the story broke Goss testified very forcefully that the disclosure had very seriously damaged the agency's ability to do its job. It's hard to imagine that he would plant a false story knowing (as he surely would have known) that its publication would cause that kind of damage. And he already had an investigation, complete with polygraphs, uderway concerning the NSA surveillance program.
Posted by: Other Tom | April 22, 2006 at 01:16 PM
"Ole Hick'ry said we could take 'em by suprise, if we didn't fire our muskets 'til we looked 'em in the eyes."
The long-rumored Spring Offensive has begun.
And the Fitz role may be the bestest surprise of all.
Posted by: ghostcat | April 22, 2006 at 01:17 PM
Testing
Posted by: clarice | April 22, 2006 at 01:19 PM
Roger.
Posted by: ghostcat | April 22, 2006 at 01:20 PM
I'll just throw this out...McCarthy and Benjamin are close (both on CSIS and NYU)...she communicates a mean smear campaign designed to quash a whistleblower...Benjamin then communicates a mean smear campaign designed to quash a whistleblower...
I will also add that McCarthy was in position to communicate an opinion of the Plame leak to her trusted friend -- the mean smear campaign --- because she, alas...was in the office that dealt with the smear campaign referral....
Posted by: topsecretk9 | April 22, 2006 at 01:21 PM
Clarice is currently locked out of comments (typepad needs to be swatted with a newspaper). She suggests that the leak may be linked pack to Berger, Clarke, Beers (I'd toss in all VIPS) and wonders whether McCarthy may have had some part in the referral on Plame.
I would say that this disclosure gives Counterintelligence an opportunity not to be missed to sift every damn byte on Ms Mary's computer and ask the FBI for help with warrants on her house and anything else that they can think of.
If they can find reliable FBI agents, of course.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | April 22, 2006 at 01:22 PM
Looks like she found the key.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | April 22, 2006 at 01:24 PM
Rick -
The FBI is far more trustworthy than the CIA. In no small part, because the Bureau still draws recruits from Flyover Country. The Company has way more glamor-appeal, of course, and pulls 'em in from Blue America. The rest is history.
Posted by: ghostcat | April 22, 2006 at 01:37 PM
If they can find reliable FBI agents, of course.
That's a problem I've been thinking about for the last couple hours. Not FBI specifically but how they investigate and prosecute it.
These people being so tangled with the Dems and Kerry campaign makes it difficult to see how they could approach it. In fact, that there is no SP appointed on this is the strongest evidence I am aware of that there is no Dem senator involved. You just couldn't have the AG investigating the president's political opponents - wouldn't work politically.
Wouldn't it be rich if they developed it all including all the links and dumped it on Fitz? I know, they couldn't really, I'm sure they don't trust him to find the truth at this point. What about where this intersects with Plame though? Don't they have to turn that over to him?
Posted by: Dwilkers | April 22, 2006 at 01:37 PM
I doubt the "sting" scenario. Although it's good drama. Analogy: The store knows 10% of the inventory is going missing, but don't have a clue when and how. So they set up a sting to catch the culprits. Versus: They know the stuff is disappearing between 1 and 3 AM on Sunday mornings. And there are five nondescript vans parked at the back door at that time. In scenario #2 you just have the police show up at the appropriate time and arrest the people hauling stuff into the vans. The CIA leaks are more like #2. You want to catch the leakers. Watch the people wearing VIP t-shirts really closely.
Posted by: Lew Clark | April 22, 2006 at 01:44 PM
Who is on Fitzgerald's staff and might some of those people be involved. I remember in '92 when the Weinberger indictment was leaked by some hack on Walsh's staff the weekend prior to the election.
Posted by: AMDG | April 22, 2006 at 01:44 PM
The hack who leaked the Weinberger indictment was a San Francisco lawyer and Democrat activist named Jim Brosnahan. He's the guy who represented the American Taliban.
Posted by: Other Tom | April 22, 2006 at 01:49 PM
Thanks, Rick. It's not typepad I'm afraid but unfamiliar laptops with settings I'm not familiar with.
Posted by: clarice | April 22, 2006 at 01:52 PM
---The FBI is far more trustworthy than the CIA. ---
yeah, but do they know about the this thing...the internets?
Posted by: topsecretk9 | April 22, 2006 at 01:57 PM
Sue
"If you will remember, during the run up to the 2004 election, we were still guessing that Rove and Libby were involved. Just a small leak to the press in mid October could have made a difference."
Now I'm not trying to paint Fitz as a conspirator here of any kind, but just a small leak confirming Novak's cooperation on his source, for just one example, could have made a big difference in an opposite way.
Posted by: JM Hanes | April 22, 2006 at 01:59 PM
tops
You're the virtual incarnation of mo' betta sleuthing! I'm constantly amazed at the stuff you ferret out and piece together.
Posted by: JM Hanes | April 22, 2006 at 02:01 PM
"The FBI is far more trustworthy than the CIA."
In general, I agree completely. However, I assume that the "investigator" whose questions Fitz used to concoct his indictment was FBI and I further assume that the same investigator chatted a bit with Eitz prior to Fitz calling Libby before the gj - after Fitz had the name of Novak's source in his hot little hand.
My assumption may be in error and I am sure that well over 90% of FBI, CIA and DoJ employees do their jobs without regard to political considerations but I am still left with 'how many skunks does it take to spoil a picnic'.
Should the US ever suffer the misfortune of Democrat control of any branch of government again I believe that the Dems are going to have a very difficult time rebuilding any trust in the institutions which they are hell bent on destroying.
Let's see if the DoJ has anyone with the stones to indict Miz Mary or the Times Treason Twins. In the instance of the NSA betrayal enough time has passed for a decision to have been made. That no indictments have been announced is not a good sign.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | April 22, 2006 at 02:02 PM
JM,
I'm not following. Did that happen?
Posted by: Sue | April 22, 2006 at 02:08 PM
My understanding from the inside is that the FBI agents who did the original interrogations were exceedingly hostile to the Administration neocons. I do not know from which branch they were drawn, but assume it was from that misguided Szady's counterterrorism outfit.
Of course, Fitz and the FBI could have been misled by well-placed peopls in the agency, for example in the IG's office.
Posted by: clarice | April 22, 2006 at 02:08 PM
The word that comes to mind is cabal.
Posted by: Beto Ochoa | April 22, 2006 at 02:08 PM
How much longer do you suppose Fitz will be able to continue to refuse to turn over the referral letter now? There is no way the info in that letter was honest. It seems likely McCarthy had a role in the fraud..
Rick, about the NSA investigation--my question all along has been whether Gonzales has the gonads to do the job he must. Others have said the President is so adamant about this, the AG must act. MacRanger says the investigation should be completed next month.
Posted by: clarice | April 22, 2006 at 02:13 PM
Pofarmer I think you may be off base re Fitz. Fitz lives in Chicago and is from NY. The Democratic party in IL is very unhappy with him right now because of multiple investigations of Dems in Springfield and City of Chicago. (He also just put away a Republican ex-governor last week). Fitz was also recommended for his post by the Administration.
I see no conspiracy.
Posted by: Terrible freedom | April 22, 2006 at 02:17 PM
Clarice is currently locked out of comments...
But welcome back! I was going to say that it has happened to me on ocassion as well, and all I can recommend it waiting it out.
FWIW - I found a few VIPS here and here, and there are no notable donors among them.
The VIPS I checked:
Ray Close, Princeton, NJ
David MacMichael, Linden, VA
Raymond McGovern, Arlington, VA
Richard Beske, San Diego
Kathleen McGrath Christison, Santa Fe
William Christison, Santa Fe
Patrick Eddington, Alexandria
Raymond McGovern, Arlington
Ray Close gave $1,000 to Wes Clark and $1,000 to Rush Limbaugh (NO, holt the phone, it was Rush Holt!).
Otherwise, roughly nada.
Anyway, I favor calling the VIPs the "Vipers", but that is just me.
Posted by: TM | April 22, 2006 at 02:25 PM
Dana Priest's husband, Goodfellow, is with the Center for International Policy (Ford Foundation anf other funders from the one world with the foundation granting lefties at the top)..Front page has a big piece on it..If there's no Soros or Heinz money in it, I'll eat my words..
Posted by: clarice | April 22, 2006 at 02:25 PM
CULTURE OF TREASON!
TIME MAGS "BEST SENATORS"
Democrat's "Culture of Treason"
Take that Nancy!
Posted by: larwyn | April 22, 2006 at 02:28 PM
One thing about Fitz: his goal-orientation and personal drive both border on obsession. He's a heat-seeking missile, and once he launches ... once he thinks he's connected the dots ... he'll head for the hottest target in the area. Even if that target is barely above room temperature. Enter Libby, stage right.
Another thing about Fitz: if he concludes you've double-crossed him or, worse yet, set him up for an embarrassing failure, you'd best beware.
Note that his prosecutorial actions in L'Affair Plame have herded the cabal of cats into a kill zone. Perhaps coincidentally, perhaps not.
Posted by: ghostcat | April 22, 2006 at 02:29 PM
Tops,
If you continue to dig you'll find Tenet involved with McCarthys' day to day ops and in the know on every facet and level. These arrogant bastards didn't think they needed to cover their tracks any better than they did.
PS
Prior to Plames name showing up in the press Bob Woodward was in communication with Tenet on at least a weekly basis. Tenet's the leaker. Tenet set all this crap up and he has something huge on Clinton. Most likely the Commerce Sec. Ron Browns' trading nuke secrets for ChiCom DNC funding, Browns attempt to repent and tell all and his subsequent accident.
Posted by: Beto Ochoa | April 22, 2006 at 02:31 PM
Sue
I basically meant that a big chunk of what Fitz could have leaked (but didn't), would have helped the Administration, not hurt it, so I'm not sure that he gets props for anything other than personally keeping his mouth shut for the most part -- the way he's supposed to. I'd sure love to know who all those anonymous donors "close to the investigation" happen to be though.
Posted by: JM Hanes | April 22, 2006 at 02:38 PM
On the subject of odd donation patterns, a search of contributors to the Democratic Party of Ohio (the vehicle for fighting the 2004 Ohio election results) in November of ’04 comes up with 138 donors of $5000 or more.
Looking at the list, the vast majority are CEOs, attorneys and private business people of recognizable wealth and with a record of previous contributions. Of the remainder, a few are “homemakers” (as in Abigale Disney and Joanne Corzine), but the only federal government related donor seems to be our gal Mary.
This election must have meant the world to her.
It would be interesting to know her financial position at that time. If only she was a republican running for governor of Maryland we could find out.
Posted by: j.west | April 22, 2006 at 02:43 PM
Brilliant work, jwest.
Posted by: clarice | April 22, 2006 at 02:45 PM
Larwyn,
The flopping aces link comes up with a 403 error. Is the blog down?
Posted by: Beto Ochoa | April 22, 2006 at 02:46 PM
Kate,
Bet if someone can get their hands/eyes on all the talkie interagency/organization newsletters there will be photos of these people breaking bread at events and other things they tout as great successes.
This old computer won't load photos - but a search of all the DC's glossies that covered Clinton and his Buddy list bashes - photographs on file should be very interesting.
If the S.O.B.'s can use the one of Abramoff leaning in background - needed mag glass to identify - wouldn't some of these be treasure!
Larwyn of the repeated, repeated rant.
Posted by: larwyn | April 22, 2006 at 02:50 PM
Interesting how she failed so many lie detector tests...meaning that she not only leaked classified info, but lied about it.
In other words, she wasn't some proud whistleblower...she knew she had done something very profoundly wrong and so lied about it.
I wonder how many in the press will point this out?
Posted by: Thought | April 22, 2006 at 02:58 PM
Priest's husband, Goodfellow--a hint of where he stands:William Goodfellow [Director of the Center for International Studies], "Starvation In
Cambodia," Op-Ed, New York Times, July 14, 1975, p. 25. An excerpt:
The evacuation of Cambodia's larger cities has been sensationalized in the
Western press as a "death march." In fact, it was a journey away from certain death
by starvation, for at the time the former Phnom Penh Government surrendered,
starvation was already a reality in the urban centers, and widespread famine only a
matter of weeks away, while in the countryside there was a sizable food surplus. . . .
The coup d'état of 1970 was followed by five years of death, suffering and
destruction, with 600,000 Cambodians on both sides killed. Primarily because of a
large-scale United States bombing campaign in which 539,129 tons of bombs were
dropped on the Cambodian countryside, the agrarian economy was shattered. . . .
Last March, the director of the United States Agency for International Development in
Cambodia, Norman Sweet, estimated that in Phnom Penh alone 1.2 million people
were in "desperate need" of United States food. . . . A.I.D. officials reported that
stockpiles of rice in Phnom Pehn could last for six days.
http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:wYomZLIHMasJ:www.understandingpower.com/Chapter3.pdf+William+Goodfellow++subcommittee+on+Asia+++Cambodia+1976&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=4&client=firefox-a
Posted by: clarice | April 22, 2006 at 02:58 PM
Beta,
Use the Gateway link - Culture of Corruption link there.
Having big probs today - notified
friends are receiving kick backs of emails to me. And now I can't
copy and paste.
Only works if I SELECT ALL - then copy. But can only delete sections by BACKSPACING - the highlighted areas won't hold.
won'f let me copy out the hhttp to give you that.
hope someone copyrights that
CULTURE OF TREASON
DESERVES OWN NEW WEBSITE
Posted by: larwyn | April 22, 2006 at 02:59 PM
Macranger says she was found out by a tip from within the agency..If so, expect a roundup to follow
Posted by: clarice | April 22, 2006 at 03:01 PM
Priest's husband, Goodfellow--a hint of where he stands:William Goodfellow [Director of the Center for International Studies],
there's that CSIS link again.
Posted by: topsecretk9 | April 22, 2006 at 03:02 PM
JM,
That was basically my point. I don't think he is/was involved in anything more nefarious than just being stuck on stoopid with regards to this investigation. Unless I don't know everything he knows. ::grin:: Then maybe he isn't all that stuck.
Posted by: Sue | April 22, 2006 at 03:06 PM
Answer me this... if McCarthy was at CSIS from August 2001 until 2005, why do all but one of her political donations still list her as a U.S. Government employee? Was she doing double-duty? Or did the Kerry campaign and the DNC misreport the identity of a high-dollar donor?
On 3/14/2004, she is a U.S. Government employee when donating to the Kerry campaign. On 10/5/2005, she is at CSIS while donating to the Ohio Democratic Party. Twenty four days later, she is back at the CIA when she cuts a last-minute check to the DNC.
Also: $5,000 donations to state parties are pretty rare, and rarer still for out-of-state contributors. The maximum is $10,000. Since the mid-'90s, here are about 3,700 people listed as individual contributors to the Ohio Democratic Party, and based on some rough eyeballing, less than 10% are for amounts of $5,000 and above. This would put McCarthy in the top 300 donors to the Ohio Democratic Party in 2004 -- on a civil servant / think tank salary.
This isn't your average Bush-hater with a few bucks to spare. This is a savvy political operator, throwing that much money around in a swing state. I would not be at all surprised if she were the Democratic equivalent of a Pioneer or Ranger.
Posted by: Machiavel | April 22, 2006 at 03:08 PM
All the leftist creeps--the unwatched super rich foundations, the Kerry campaign, the press, the Pulitzer Committee...the Clintonistas..Am I dreaming this, or has Dubya just laid down a royal flush?
Posted by: clarice | April 22, 2006 at 03:09 PM
Machiavel--That is interesting. Do you suppose she remained on the Agency payroll while assuming some lecturing or teaching duties? Did she get any outside grant money while at CSIS? From whom?
Posted by: clarice | April 22, 2006 at 03:12 PM
For any interested, I speculate on whether McCarthy could have been leaking on the Plame Game to Knight Ridder in 6/03
http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/1675
Cheers,
Posted by: AJStrata | April 22, 2006 at 03:12 PM
I always laugh when his detractors paint GWB as unintelligent or out of touch. They paint him as this playboy, hard drinking frat boy and denigrate him unmercifully. What they and nearly everyone else forgets is that GWB cut his teeth at his father's knee and his father at various times was head of the CIA, UN Ambassador, Vice President for 8 years, President for 4 years and RNC chairman. I've probably forgotten some things, but the point is, GWB has been on the inside since he was a kid. This is why he is so "misunderestimated" so often.
Posted by: Squiggler | April 22, 2006 at 03:16 PM
Clarice,
I realize there is line between analysis and activist, but there comes a time when all good [persons] should come to the aid of their party.
The reason a great deal of the facts so easily collected here are not found on the cable news networks is the, shall we say “unindustriousness” of the producers. Unless the information is laid out in a simple format with links to easily check, the Sunday reports will be a regurgitation of the NYTimes.
Therefore, using the powers invested in me by [redacted], I hereby appoint you to correlate, outline and present the relevant talking points for the media.
No need to thank me for the appointment.
Posted by: j.west | April 22, 2006 at 03:20 PM
Clarice,
When the investigators start combing their financial records I hope that they look at contracts to her husband. A Tides Foundation contract for a landscape study would be an interesting find. It could still be a roll of the dice on holding an appointed position in the Kerry administration but that last minute give in Ohio stinks pretty badly.
It won't be a royal flush without a matching NSA indictment but it sure looks like ace trips at the moment.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | April 22, 2006 at 03:20 PM
Sue
I hope you don't think I am suggesting anything nefarious on the part of Fitz other than a friends connected opinion or information possibly "coloring" his view and direction of his investigation - that's all -- and I'm also not thinking Benjamin nefarious, other than trusting his colleagues information and passing it on - does that make sense.
If she leaked to Dana Priest, highly likely she would leak other and more information to colleagues and group members.
Political donations are just that. They suggest a preference but not necessarily wrong doing.
Posted by: topsecretk9 | April 22, 2006 at 03:23 PM
TS,
Wouldn’t the primary contact between Fitz and the CIA pertaining to the referral on Plame be “someone” in the CIA IG’s office?
Posted by: j.west | April 22, 2006 at 03:27 PM
Jwest
my limited knowledge answer would be yes.
Posted by: topsecretk9 | April 22, 2006 at 03:29 PM
Top,
I don't think anything. Myself, I'm more interested in the donations than the Fitzgerald link. But that is just what set my inner 'hmmmm' to purring.
Posted by: Sue | April 22, 2006 at 03:30 PM
bRILLIANT RICK!
How about looking at all government contracts awarded to him.
lot of stuff doesn't require bids and lots of people in position to help out their buddies.
Wouldn't a connection via an NGO that Molloham involved with using this landscape architect - molloham "make his $$$$$ in RE"
You buy it fix it up sell it - so you plant flowers/shrubs
sounds like some LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE work to me. McCarthy not far from W VA
AND MOLLOHAM STEPS DOWN YESTERDAY!
lORD WISH i HAD A DECENT COMPUTER TO DO SOME OF THE WORK - BUT CAN ONLY BE A "SUGGESTER" (GW would like that word!)
Posted by: larwyn | April 22, 2006 at 03:30 PM
jwest I blogged your excellent find to American Thinker where you will find it posted. I am away from home and if I get some free time and can use my son's real (not laptop) I will try my hand at pulling together what we know at this point. If not, I will do something later in the week when I am back to my private lair.
You can be sure that the usuals will try to undercut this..but my spidey sense says they cannot..and my antenna are saying Tides/Ford/Soros about those contributions..Now, my spidey sense is often right on this case (see The Wilson Gambit from last year) but it is not evidence. Studd is flying in fast, and we don't want to sound like Truthout where a reorganization of Rove's duties becomes a sign he lost his security clearance.
I love GW. I know he is no fool. He made lots of money at Harvard playing poker with other geniuses who made the same mistake.
I cannot tell you how excited I am about this story. And if you haven't paid much attention, I refer you to the work of my friend, Laurie Mylroie, whose book, Bush v, The Beltway really did deserve a Pulitzer.
Posted by: clarice | April 22, 2006 at 03:34 PM
*************StuFF***************
Posted by: clarice | April 22, 2006 at 03:35 PM
You are way too loud, larwyn.
Posted by: Chants | April 22, 2006 at 03:39 PM
NY Times brings out the CSIS gang to defend McCarthy
http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/1676
Riduculous!
Posted by: AJStrata | April 22, 2006 at 03:40 PM
Chants,
The sight impaired like bold and
the when mind to fingers is impaired hard to shift - sorry if I offend - but excited and think that Rick has hit on valid search idea.
Was that better?
Posted by: larwyn | April 22, 2006 at 03:43 PM
People! Great fun!
The CIA analyst was fired...she should have been, even though retribution for leaking at the CIA, in the form of firing is pretty much not heard of.
As for the feeding frenzy here on what else she could have done with various other people--its just pure entertainment. I love the one about the guy analyzing the incomes of the CIA folks and seeing if it seems to be to much for them to do on their own.
SO where do you all come down on Condi being fired IF repeat IF she leaked/shared classified info with the Israeli lobbyist? I think there is alot of circumstantial evidence she did leak, so therfore she should be fired.
Posted by: Hit The Bid | April 22, 2006 at 03:46 PM
Chants, lay off Larwyn. You have no idea how hard it is for her to even get a post posted.
Posted by: Squiggler | April 22, 2006 at 03:47 PM