Memeorandum


Powered by TypePad

« You Fish, I'll Hold The Rod | Main | Bill Clinton's New Book »

May 17, 2006

Comments

clarice

What, ts? I don't understand.

Neo

It seems we have migrated from "False but Accurate" news to "Wishful News."

Perhaps if Jason pulls out one of his teeth and puts it under his pillow, the truth fairy will come and give him his wish.

... it's tooth fairy not truth fairy

Never Mind Do it anyway.

ghostcat

clarice -

Re: USAT. We could both be right.

topsecretk9

I think Luskin was at the vet, then home nursing a sick cat...I think that Fitz was in Chicago with his office very busy ( a pretty huge trial starting Monday, a cooperation negotiation and the bank lady charges), and I think Wilson uses Jason because he knows JL will print anything he wants and JL will print anything Wilson tells him because he is no dummy and knows he gets a pass if he's accepting the "exalted one's" words...and I think JL is pretty smart here because no doubt he sold a few books and has Wilson by the balls...is what I think. WHo knows.

topsecretk9

--What, ts? I don't understand.--

the night before Libby was indicted, drudge had it up.

Syl

jerry

I don't think these "leaders" are unconscious, just horribly devoted to their power-lust/dependency/greed.

It never ceases to amaze how some people cannot simply accept the fact there are policy differences but have to ascribe nefarious motives to opponents instead.

I suppose if one doesn't assert this crap then one must actually face the arguments behind the differences and not defend one's own stance.

It's an intellectually lazy way of looking at the world.

clarice

Ah..She does get the stuff as soon as it hits the press wire's.

It might be fun to track back thru JL's stuff and figure out what big mouth Wilson told him--like Grossman, for example. %^)..

topsecretk9

just for historical comparison...here is where the Libby-- night before news started (10-27-05) -- with the lovable (at least to me) JimE...

ordi

Jerry Wrote:

The surrender of the Republican majority to CYA stupidity.

ROTFLMAO! Simply more projection from the left. Other than a book by George Stephanopoulos the CYA stupidity was ABSOLUTE in the Clinton Regime.

As for the power lust BS. Is someone going to tell us the next Dem president would not attempt to use the power given to them by the American people. Yeah, Right!

topsecretk9

Clarice

I searched Raw Story and I can't find one story BEFORE November 05...which is weird because it seemed like the RStory stories were coming fast and furious pre-indictment...

topsecretk9

I dunno...seems like Raw Story would like to scrub/forget Leopold...I found this story on TM, searched it at RStory and when you actually click on it goes to a fundraiser letter...if you go this way though it is still there...dropped out queue I guess...but when you read the story you can see why


but, whatever.


topsecretk9

huh...the link through TM's site above doesn't work...you have to go to a TM Cached page to get to the Leopold article...don't media sites get blog swarmed (WAPO Blog comments) for doing this sort of thing?


if that doesn't work...google

justoneminute "raw story" October 2005


and hit the cache

Kate

The Talk Left lady seems like a nice person. I wanted to help her out but not enough to register for a TypePad account.

She has found someone who can reconcile Jason's account with something resembling reality. His name is Wayne Madsen.

Problem is Wayne makes Jason look like Walter Cronkite by comparison. I took a look around his websites and he speaks often of the neo-con cabal. I decided to leave when I read that the 7 July London bombings were actually a conspriracy by right wing Brits to get people angry at the Muslims in their midst.

Oh, my.

M. Simon

BTW the nuclear part of Saddam's WMD program was outsourced to Libya.

Kdaffy gave it up the day after Saddam was pulled from the sewer he was hiding in.

PeterUK

Lurker,
"So Fitz is looking for something big to fry?"

Been saying for ages Fitz is a head hunter,this is all about Mrs Fitzgeralds little boy Patrick.

PeterUK

The only time "high level sources" would meet with Loophole is if they had to pick him out of a lineup.

PeterUK

Let's just say that an individual earns his bread through crime,snatching the bags off old ladies,items out of the back of cars.

One day tired of being beaten sensless by ladies who are from the "My body is a temple era",sharing a cramped room with a guy who calls him Fluffles,he hits on a new scam.
Make up shit and sell it,no contact with the boys in blue,live by the First instead of the Fifth.

clarice

Thanks, ts..Perhaps JL truly began then or perhaps he was writing elsewhere.
PUK, now there's a point.
It does strike me as odd that anyone would choose --or be forced to--leak hot stuff to someone with his bad reputation.I think you'd do it only if you wanted to spread lies because he is so easily discredited. And then LJ and Wm R Pitt revealed Wilson as JL's source giving away the game:They picked him for exactly that reason.

Dwilkers

I'm still trying to figure out if Leopold is just lying or if he thinks he has real sources. That's why in the other thread I was mulling how Johnson and Wilson would end up as 'sources' for information about what's going on in the SP's office. I just don't see it.

On the one hand Leopold can't be lying unless you think Leopold's editors are liars too.

On the other hand it seems to be clear what he said isn't true, at least in its specifics.

clarice

Madsen's latest which has TL astir is that Luskin and Rove are in legal jeopardy! LOL..Next they can revive the famous the WH ate the emails story. Maybe we should call them the Cargo -Gate Cult, people yearning to revive the moment that the media brought down an elected President they couldn't beat at the polls. Luskin a subject..ROFL

Dwilkers

On the other other hand Rick Moran is correct. Fitz is still investigating something and one must assume he thinks other 'crimes' have been committed. But what crimes?

It seems as though he's abandoned the idea that the original leak is prosecutable. Or has he? I suppose it is possible he is pursuing UGO. Or perhaps he is after someone else that he thinks lied or obstructed.

If he's not going after the original leak then he's just trolling for trumped up charges he can bring.

I say 'trumped up' because he must know by now who leaked what to whom and when along with the bare facts about Plame's status. If it is not the original leak he is pursuing then after all this time the only thing I can figure is he's running through exquisite detail of each person's testimony looking for tiny conflicts and whatnot.

If Fitz is just trolling for charges he can bring then TM is right Rove is most definately going to get it eventually. Hell he's been before the GJ 5 times. It is inevitable that if Fitz is going to bring a perjury charge for any Rove misstatment then he's going down.

Then agin, could it be someone else he is pursuing? And if so who could it be?

Patton

If these were real leakers with solid information and wanted to leak it...they would have gone to more than just this guy...they certainly would have found great friends at the New York Times, NBC News, etc. etc.

His source is probably the grade school teacher, of the kid, of a illegal alien housekeeper, who's Mom works for a friend of
the Dad, of one of the Junior attorneys, of another law firm, who's son has a job in the mailroom at PBB.

Patton

What makes ZERO sense about Fitzs investigation is his constant secrecy.

The BIGGEST break Fitz had in his case was when he went public in a press conference and started throwing out baseless charges.

That brought Woodward out of the woodwork and we learned UGO was the FIRST to leak.

It appears Fitz has since shut up so he doesn't learn anymore facts that further destroy his Libby case/claims.

windansea

a dummy explains

It's Fitzo de Mayo while it's still May
...and then we'll have to come up with something new in June. After that we'll have Fitzmas in July... or we'll have a Fitz of July celebration on Fitzipendence Day.

August will be tough since there are no holidays that month. Maybe it'll be the Fitz Days of August.

Then we'll have Fitzoween, then Fitzgiving... and then it'll be FITZMAS!!

I say enjoy the ride!

kim

Probably Fitz's great skill is breaking down criminal conspiracies. Maybe he'll figure out that the criminal conspiracy here revolved around Joe Wilson and not around anyone at the White House. He has a technique which apparently nearly unfailingly does reveal criminal conspiracies. The problem for him here, is that even though the White House response was conspiratorial, it probably wasn't criminal. And he's not getting after Joe, he's missing the elephant in the room, because his technique started in on the White House conspiracy. Maybe he'll learn and turn, and maybe not.

But if Joe is reduced to LJ, and JL, and hysteria, then there is rot.
=====================================

clarice

The only leaks of classified information I've seen in this case come from inside the CIA and the VIPS.
Fitz said when he announced he was convening a new gj that it was common practice to do so to deal with odds and ends that might arise.
Patton, that's a good point. If Fitz hadn't overstated the case and said "the first to leak", it's not clear that Woodward would have come forward because it would not have been clear that he had any relevant information.

Dwilkers

Patton-

I don't think it makes zero sense. After all GJ proceedings are secret and SP investigations are normally not very public affairs.

Clarice (from Madsen)-

"WMR can confirm that the appearance of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales before the Grand Jury at the US Federal Courthouse in Washington was a formality in which the jury informed the Attorney General of their decision to indict Karl Rove."

What the heck is he talking about? Is it normal for an AG to be called before a GJ for a formal notification about an indictment of an administration official? That sounds like utter hooey to me.

That's beyond the fact that it would seem to me that if Rove were in imminent danger of indictment - and they knew it, which is what he's suggesting - he wouldn't be running around making speeches and generally being so visible.

Rove may be in danger but I don't buy any of the last Friday notice 24 hour yada yada horse hockey.

I'm kind of baffled about what's going on here. There are signs one way and signs the other.

kim

I mean, you don't see Pincus, or Kristoff, publishing his stuff much, lately, do you?
===================================

Patton

"""Patton-

I don't think it makes zero sense. After all GJ proceedings are secret"""

And how often is Fitz before the GJ??

It appears 95% of what he is doing is not in the GJ. And he certainly doesn't have a problem slantedly describing GJ testimony (Without the exact transcript)in public filings. Even making stuff up when it suites him.

Patton

Fitz mischaracterized Libbys GJ testimony by claiming he wasn't authorized to reveal the yellowcake info, just the key findings.

He mischaracterized the conversation regarding an article implying it someone related to Plame when she wasn't even mentioned in the article.

He has provided us with snippets of testimony by Cooper and Miller that do not square with what they have subsequently said publicly.

He seems to have no problem sending out attacks as long as he can't be fully scrutinized and then he subsequently has to back off and apologize or make excuses when caught.

Patton

Even Fitzs arguments before the court he does not want anything regarding the Wilson affair scrtinized in a public trial.

he wants false newspaper reports in but doesn't want testimony in front of the jurors pointing out all the lies in the articles.

I don't think anyone can fairly say Fitz is after the TRUTH here. He's after a win at any cost, and a win is a conviction of a White House guy, period.

Syl

Dwilkers

Supposedly Gonzales went to the courthouse just before Libby's indictment.

And someone saw two SUV's go into the basement and some secret service types were hanging by the doors. Could be Gonzales, could be Cheney ;) Could even be Chelsea. Well, maybe not Chelsea.

I don't know if anyone actually saw Gonzales.

That was from WMR. I haven't seen any confirmation of the sighting of that suv parade though. I'm sure there were reporters there besides that guy.

Florence Schmieg

The stupidest part of this story is that Rove was told he had 24 hours to get his affairs in order?? Why?? Was he going to be arrested and tossed into jail with no chance for bail?? Was Libby supposedly told to get his affairs in order in 24 hours? Don't remember anything like that happening. That sounds more like a TV script than anything that would actually be said. Seems ridiculous to me, but I am not in the law profession.

Patton

What is MOST ridiculous is Fitz is feeding the judges misinformed argument that he doesn't want to re-try the reasons we went to war.

WILSON HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHY WE WENT TO WAR.

The simpliest thing to point out is the President and VP never saw Wilsons report so it is meaningless.

The second, which maybe gets a little more complicated, is Wilson and he media buds have put him on a pedestal that somehow Bush and Cheney just didn't listen to him.

When the fact is, even if Wilson has great evidence and wrote a stunning report showing Iraq never even thought of pursuing yellowcake, the question is not why didn't Bush or Cheney listen, the question is WHY DIDN'T THE ANALYSTS IN THE CIA LISTEN AND CHANGE THEIR NIE, DUE TO THAT, WHICH THE COUNTRY'S LEADERHSIP ACTUALLY USES TO MAKE DECISIONS.

Tenent and the anaylsts themsleves have said Wilsons report was meaningless at best and at worst made the reports MORE likely.

And if you REALLY want a taste of the truth judge. This was all about John Kerrys run for President and the hangers on who wanted to hook up with his campaign and get prestigious government positions when Kerry won.

But Wilson is not even a drop in the OCEAN of the entire world
of data the CIA used over 15 years to assess Saddam Husseins WMD programs, period.

Syl

Florence

I think it was a little 'literary flair' ;)

Dwilkers

I'm still somewhat (although not totally) resistant to the idea that Fitz is just a hack or a boob. He could be of course, or could be behaving that way in this case.

His behavior in the investigation is what matters about that though not his behavior in the courtroom. With regard to the charges against Libby you can expect him to do any legal thing it takes to win. That's expected and perfectly normal for a prosecutor.

clarice

When we write the screen play for the Mission to Niger, I want Wilson in top hat and striped pants soft shoeing to "A Little Literary Flair" just before the Intermission.

kim

What is expected of a prosecutor is that his duty is to see that justice is done, and as Peter has ponted out, also that justice is seen to be done. He is failing on both counts, badly; winning appears to him as it did to Corrigan.
=====================================

kim

I'm gonna leave 'ponted'.

Peter Puck ponted a peck of public punditry,
A peck of public pun....well, you get the idee.
=======================

Gary Maxwell

OK so how is sitting in the virtual tent over at the Firedoggie site camping out awaiting the second coming of the Fitz? Would seem to me that with coffee running low, the biscuits being stale and mosquitos and horseflies providing the only real entertainment against the exceedingly boring monotony, that some of the faithful would be striking the colors, folding the tent and leaving the midnight vigil in the pumpkin patch since the Great Pumpkin did not show up again. But I have not had the courage to go look.

lurker

Ha! They seem to keep putting off the 24-hour deadline day by day. One poster seems to think it will happen today.

kim

Jason didn't say which 24 hours.
===================

Gary Maxwell

Seems ridiculous to me, but I am not in the law profession.

When you look at the cast of characters, Wilson, Leotard Fitz et all you perhaps get a mental image of another profession, one of a much older origin.

lurker

Wayne Marsden

"Can now report more details...."

"WMR can report tonight on more details concerning the confusing reports regarding Karl Rove and Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald from last Friday. WMR can confirm that the appearance of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales before the Grand Jury at the US Federal Courthouse in Washington was a formality in which the jury informed the Attorney General of their decision to indict Karl Rove. That proceeding lasted for less than 30 minutes and took place shortly after noon. Gonzales's personal security detachment was present in the courthouse during the Grand Jury briefing. From the courthouse, Gonzales's motorcade proceeded directly down Constitution Avenue to the Department of Justice.

According to sources within the Patton and Boggs law firm, Karl Rove was present at the law firm's building on M Street. WMR was told by a credible source that a Patton and Boggs attorney confirmed that Fitzgerald paid a visit to the law firm to inform Rove attorney Robert Luskin and Rove that an indictment would be returned by the Grand Jury against Rove. Contrary to other reports, some of which may have emanated from the Rove camp in order to create diversions and smokescreens, the meetings at Patton and Boggs did not last 15 hours nor was a 24-hour notice of intent to indict delivered to Rove. In the Scooter Libby case last October, after the Grand Jury decided to indict Libby on Friday, October 21 and the Attorney General personally heard the decision the same day at a meeting with the jury, the actual indictment was issued the following Friday, October 28. Several sources have told WMR that an announcement concerning the indictment of Rove will be made on Friday, May 19 generally following the same scenario from October 28, 2005 -- the posting of the indictment on the Special Prosecutor's web site followed by a press conference at Main Justice.

WMR was also told by a credible source that part of the reason for Fitzgerald's visit to Patton and Boggs was to inform Rove attorney Luskin that he has moved into the category of a "subject" of the special prosecutor's investigation as a result of a conversation with Time reporter Viveca Novak, in which Novak told Luskin that Rove was a source for Time's Matt Cooper. The special prosecutor, who has prosecuted one defense attorney in the Hollinger case, is reportedly investigating whether Luskin, as an officer of the court, may have violated laws on obstruction of justice.

WMR has also discovered that last year Rove, realizing he remained a lightning rod in the CIA Leakgate scandal, made preliminary plans to move into the private sector from the White House to take political heat off the Bush administration. However, as it became clear that he was in over his head legally and his legal bills piled up, Rove decided to remain at the White House."

Key statement here is:

"as a result of a conversation with Time reporter Viveca Novak, in which Novak told Luskin that Rove was a source for Time's Matt Cooper."

And another one regarding whether Luskin violated the laws on obstruction of justice.

And Rove started to make plans last year to move into the private sector (probably as a campaign consultant for the November elections).

TruthOut is still saying JL was right after all.


lurker

Talkleft has a new post:

a href="http://talkleft.com/new_archives/014875.html">Another Internet Report of a Karl Rove Indictment

Now TO posters are getting excited about it.

clarice

Really? I expect as a private consultant Rove would make far more than he does on the government payroll and would find his legal fees less onerous. Moreover, once he left the government he could plead the Fifth and make Fitz find a real , rather than contrived crime, with which to charge him.

clarice

My first google hit on WM turned up a Counterpunch story captioned Bush's "Christian" Blood Cult. I think I'll pass.

lurker

Interesting, Clarice, that's probably why Rove decided to stay with the WH. Although, the odds are high that he has quietly continued with his plans once he is indicted.

Jeralyn's post seems more plausible than Wayne's.

"So it's hearsay....A lawyer told a source of Madsen's who told Madsen. Wouldn't this lawyer be discovered, fired and face disciplinary action for leaking privileged information about a client of the firm?

If this lawyer-rat does exist, it sounds like he or she may also be one of Jason's sources, in which case, he or she gave different informaton to Jason than to Madsen's source. Considering that Madsen is a former NSA officer, and former CIA Analyst Larry Johnson and Joseph Wilson reportedly have received similar information, it's beginning to sound like a close-knit group of sources."

If this is the case, then Fitz may have the similar problems that CIA has - a very politically anti-Bush group of lawyers and investigators????

Gary Maxwell

Wait a second, if you are being pursued but not a subject of the investigation, why wouldn't the Government be providing for his defense costs? Arguably everything that could be dealt with here is arising from his legal duties and he cooperated at the insistance of the President. I dont think he has legal bills, but some tell me what I am missing.

clarice

All of the government people involved have enormous legal bills and must pay them themselves. For some of the support staff who are young and still stuck with college bills it is a particularly costly tribulation.
I do believe that for those charged but cleared they have recourse against the government and will be repaid, but for those who were just questioned, they will not be.

Gary Maxwell

Marsden on Marsden, in his own words. this will give some background on the guy:

As a political pundit, I have witnessed campaigns from the inside and outside. I supported John McCain in the 2000 GOP primary as a means to stop Bush, Ralph Nader in 2000, Howard Dean in 2004, and John Kerry in 2004. I did not support Al Gore in 2000 because he chose a quasi-Republican and anti-labor, pro-corporation candidate, Joe Lieberman, as his running mate. I thought Al Gore should have run in 2004, sans Lieberman, because he has rediscovered the roots of the Democratic Party and would have more than likely beaten Bush in an energetic, pay back-oriented campaign. I rejected Nader's 2004 candidacy because of its destructive spoiler threat to Kerry and electoral and financial support from right-wing groups. I wrote OP EDs supporting John Edwards for Kerry's running mate and opposed the primary candidacy of Wesley Clark in the Democratic primary because of his affiliation with Acxiom and his foolhardy and dangerous Balkans War strategy during the Clinton administration. Bombing buildings in downtown Belgrade was no different than bombing them in downtown Baghdad -- period. I am one of the relatively few union journalists in Washington, DC -- National Writers Union -- AFL CIO Local 1961. I reject the Democratic Leadership Council because it is anti-labor. I am also opposed to the creation of a Latin American-style duopolistic oligarchy for the United States (Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton-Bush, et cetera, ad nauseum).


This web site will continue to serve as a watchdog over the neo-conservative and Christian fundamentalist/dominionist movements and their dealings within both the Republican and Democratic parties. The threat is real. The penetration of both parties is real.

Yell BOO and see if he jumps.

Sue

http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2006/05/keep_those_goal.html#comment-17411843>Top

Thanks for the link to the time warp machine. I thought I remembered us knowing the night before that something was going down the next day.

richard mcenroe

"I think it was a little 'literary flair' "

Syl — From what I remember of Flairs they were rather dull and lost their point quickly. Seems appropriate.

Gary Maxwell

What the hell is a dominionist? I need to know what the hell he is talking about beofre I can concentrate on the threat he sees.

Patrick R. Sullivan

'I'm still trying to figure out if Leopold is just lying or if he thinks he has real sources.'

Oh, he believes his own nonsense. I speak from personal experience debating him, and let's just say he's more than a little slow on the uptake. He has quite a bit of trouble with syllogistic reasoning.

He knows beforehand what he wants to believe and grasps at whatever 'facts' he can find to reinforce that belief. Any contradictory evidence is simply ignored. Sorta like Fitzgerald.

He's really quite entertaining to debate--for a sadist like me. Over at Delong's blog during the Thomas White brouhaha, he blurted out that the NY Times--in investigating Krugman's use of his (Leopold's) supposedly incriminating White e-mail--found six editors who had worked with him in the past who told the Times they would never do so again.

During the course of our discussion it became obvious that Jason had a forged document. Which is something he's plead guilty to in a prior life. I suspect in both cases he'd convinced himself of the authenticity.

lurker

Now the TalkLeft posters are interpreting Wayne Marsden's article that Luskin is now a "subject".

Interesting how different the TalkLeft posters are from the TruthOut and DU posters...

Ah...Wayne's bio makes perfect sense!

I meant Fitz's "close-knit" group of anti-Bush lawyers and investigators as...influencing Fitz in driving those meaningless and weak counts.

Possible...just another one of those conspiracy theories...

We will see what kind of MSM reaction we get by this afternoon...

clarice

In the "You Don't Say" folder:
"The left-wing web site Truthout's most recent defense of its increasingly bogus-looking story includes this intriguing paragraph:
We have been contacted by at least three reporters from mainstream media - network level organizations - who shared with us off-the-record confirmation and moral support. When we asked why they were not going public with this information, in each case they expressed frustration with superiors who would not allow it.
Who are Truthout's MSM collaborators? Their sudden appearance in this strange tale seems to indicate that the same sources who fed bunk info to Jason Leopold have also been talking to MSM reporters — probably for a lot longer than just the past few weeks. If so, who knows how much reporting about the Scooter Libby case could derive from these anonymous fabricators? " jerks circle

Patrick R. Sullivan

'Fitzgerald paid a visit to the law firm to inform Rove attorney Robert Luskin and Rove that an indictment would be returned by the Grand Jury against Rove.'

What a crock. A prosecutor doesn't know what the GJ will do ahead of time.

clarice

Marsden also claims that Cuba and Venezuela warned us ahread of time of 9/11..Just in case you still think he's credible.

Gary Maxwell

Marsden on Marsden part deux ( thats French!)

He has written for The Village Voice, The Progressive, CAQ, Counterpunch, and the Intelligence Newsletter (based in Paris).

Oh yeah could figure out how to capture it but he has up proudly a picture of himself sitting with George McGovern.

Nader, Dean, Village Voice, Progressive, Paris

Add in hates Lieberman, DLC, neocons and fundamentalist christians and most especially Bush

Got a mental image yet? I have not develved into the writing yet but if it looks like he is moving hs lips while Ray McGovern speaks I am out of there.

maryrose

I'm convinced that the only reporter willing to listen to Wilson is our friend Leopold.
I think Wilson is madas hell that Rove has NOT been indicted and is now trying to make it happen by leaking false information.He's a loser on all counts.

lurker

Oh crud...if the Rove indictment doesn't take place; not only will we see more backpedaling of Jason, Marc, and, now Wayne, add Conyers on a different topic

for trying to appease the swing votes to the left side.

Sue

Didn't Fitzgerald call Wilson right before the Libby indictment?

kim

In which case, mr, Joe's just increasingly deluded. Sooner or later Fitz can't help but notice the stench of conspiracy rising just outside his window. There's somenthing rotten in Denmark.
=========================

clarice

Where is the pic of Marsden and McGovern please?

PeterUK

Can't wait for the musical.

"It's Fitzmas for Wilson and Leopold,
Winter for Libby and Rove"

clarice

I cannot think of a better way to roll up a ratline between the Wilsonistas and the press than to float this and see where it goes...say to MSNBC and Schuster/Matthews, the one network Libby called to complain of its coverage.

lurker

McGovern and Madsen

Dwilkers

Yeah I think Patrick points to what for me is a glaring problem with TalkLeft's logic.

If Fitz didn't have an indictment then he couldn't possibly know for sure what indictments he could get from the GJ. If he did then he'd be violating GJ secrecy rules by revealing it in a plea negotiation.

In one event Fitz is breaking the rules (no way) in the other he's trash talking and Luskin would know that. I doubt it.

And FWIW I don't buy Luskin under the gun at all. Lawyers don't do that. We've already had our dumb lawyer of the decade in Libby getting himself in this situation. There's no way a highly experienced criminal lawyer like Luskin put himself in the crosshairs.

Gary Maxwell

Marsden has links to editorials he has written. Several on global warming, ( must be some kind of covert plot I guess ) melting cgaciers, opposed outer contnental drilling for natural gas, GOP is racist for advocating enforcement of immigation laws, etc.

Calls Michael Hayden "Hitler Hayden".

If you are keeping score this guy has hit the trifecta : Nader, Dean and Hitler ( when speaking about the administration ).

I quit, I showered this morning and now its all wasted.

PeterUK

Florence,
Leopold is projecting his own experiences,since these consist of petty crime and drug abuse,that is what comes out.

lurker

Sorry about wasting your shower but here's an email to Jonah Goldberg

Gary Maxwell

Lurker I gotta say I dont think you realize what Jonah is doing by publishing the e-mail. He is laughing at the guy. A self proclaimed looney lefty, says no no no never and the leftosphere is policing itself, but then in the same breath says "boy Jason sure sounds earnest and sincere." The whole irony is lost on the guy And YOU?

clarice

PUK, Hasn't the left been projecting all along? Take the example of the missing emails. Fitz said it was an archivist problem and the left jumped to the fore with a claim of document destruction or hiding (Hillary's missing billing file which showed up in her WH residence just after the proceedings in which it had been subpoenaed ended).

Claims that all the WH staff lied (Whitewater prosecutor saying Hillary lied before the gj but prosecutorial discretion compelled him not to bring charges because no DC jury would convict her.)

PeterUK

How much is this story worth@ I'm not sure of the exchange rate for thirty pieces of silver nowadays,but one thing is sure if this story were kosher,the journalist would be lunching with Pinch and negotiating the fee.
You have a scoop, you follow the money,you don't go to a penurious rag like Truthout

clarice

PUK, what a cynical capitalist pig you are!

windansea

The Person In Fitz's Bull's Eye Is Richard Armitage" (ex-NSA Head)

What Inman (ex-NSA Head) shared with some of us -- and this was a repeated assertion from comments that I have confirmed that he made in Austin -- is that the person in Patrick Fitzgerald's bull's eye is Richard Armitage.

....................

But I do believe that Armitage was possibly a key source for Dana Priest and Mike Allen early in the Plame outing story and wrote such in November 2005. I don't have more information on whether Armitage was Novak's source or not -- and what legal consequences there might be, if any, if that was the case. I always assumed that Armitage was cooperating closely with Fitzgerald and would not be in any legal jeopardy.

But Inman stating this matters.

For those who attended the Princeton meetings who will no doubt read this and who may be surprised by my reporting Inman's comments -- do understand that I have been able to confirm that Admiral Inman made the same comments in other venues.

What Inman stating that Richard Armitage is the target of indictment is news and could have some veracity because of who he is.

More later.

-- Steve Clemons

linky to Washington Note

Sue

Madsen is the author of Genocide and Covert Operations in Africa 1993-1999

Interesting how all these people Out of Africa keep intersecting in the Plame affair.

lurker

Gary, :) Here is Jonah's post from an hour earlier:

Jonah's opinion

PUK, how's this?

"What's fascinating to me is that a lie people want to hear (like the US Government ordered the 9/11 attack on the Pentagon) gets traction solely because people want to hear it."

clarice

Sue, maybe they all picked up some strange brain wasting disease while there..or maybe they all made money under the table selling yellowcake.Or perhaps the best people were always stationed in cities where Vuitton has shops, not in Niamey. Who knows?
________
Windansea , that's an interesting report. But if so, why has Fitz gone to such efforts to protect disclosure of Armitage's name?

Sue

Seriously, how easy would it be for someone in the news business to find out if Fitzgerald was in Washington last Friday? That should not be a guessing game at this point.

kim

It's an ill windansea that blows no one some good chops.
==============================

Sue

Clarice,

From the quality of people coming out of Africa, I vote for perhaps the best people were always stationed in cities where Vuitton has shops, not in Niamey.

But one thing for sure, they all know each other.

Gary Maxwell

Lurker

I read it before I posted. Key statement is :

What's fascinating to me is that a lie people want to hear (like the US Government ordered the 9/11 attack on the Pentagon) gets traction solely because people want to hear it.

clarice

There's a market for everything, Gary. Even tripe.

kim

Bobby Ray,
Cee Eye Ay.
Say today,
What the Hey.
=========

clarice

Madsen made news before--riffing off a typo in the WaPo about the time of the President's arrival for Thanksgiving in Iraq, he insisted long after the WaPo's correction that the Pres arrived at breakfast time, and the entire dinner story was a phony photo op.

Cecil Turner

Oooh, ooh, I have one:

April 8, 2002
Anthrax and the Agency
Thinking the Unthinkable
By Wayne Madsen
Now that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has officially put the anthrax investigation on a back burner, it is time for Americans to think the unthinkable: that the FBI has never been keen to identify the perpetrator because that perpetrator may, in fact, be the U.S. Government itself. Evidence is mounting that the source of the anthrax was a top secret U.S. Army laboratory in Maryland and that the perpetrators involve high-level officials in the U.S. military and intelligence infrastructure.

windansea

***Windansea , that's an interesting report. But if so, why has Fitz gone to such efforts to protect disclosure of Armitage's name?***

I have no idea, Clemons seems to think it means something because Inman has said it several times

Bobby is definitely not a partisan gunslinger (for Bush anyway)

I like the rumor cuz it comes out of left field

clarice

Perhaps it's Inman who's out of left field. After all we are talking about the "innocent accused". OTOH it might explain Bob Novak's appearance before the gj.......

clarice

OTOH If it is true, imagine how much stronger the cross examination of Grossman by Libby's lawyers will be.

topsecretk9

is that the person in Patrick Fitzgerald's bull's eye is Richard Armitage.

Heh, my suspicion...Would explain why Novak was called to the GJ in December after Woodward...(if that NYT's article still has not been corrected). Also that article said when Rove was called back he was asked questions concerning contacts with Novak...Rove said he learned the *name* "Plame" from Novak, Novak said he didn't know the name before he talked to Rove (which I thought was weird because he used *Valerie* a day before with the stranger on the street)

Anyways, I bet having talked to Woodward so early made something about his testimony about Novak square...who knows.

topsecretk9

*not* square

ed

Now the TalkLeft posters are interpreting Wayne Marsden's article that Luskin is now a "subject".

Yeah that's a real tough interpretation to make. From Madsen:

WMR was also told by a credible source that part of the reason for Fitzgerald's visit to Patton and Boggs was to inform Rove attorney Luskin that he has moved into the category of a "subject" of the special prosecutor's investigation as a result of a conversation with Time reporter Viveca Novak, in which Novak told Luskin that Rove was a source for Time's Matt Cooper. The special prosecutor, who has prosecuted one defense attorney in the Hollinger case, is reportedly investigating whether Luskin, as an officer of the court, may have violated laws on obstruction of justice."

PeterUK

There are some nine first person singulars in Madsen/Marsden's screed,plus he calls himself a pundit.
Another egomaniac.
Time to start thinking Michael Moore or John Kerry.

clarice

I think we ought to engage Dr. Sanity as house shrink for Truth Not.

windansea

hmmm

maybe UGO is not Armitrage?

clarice

Oh, I think he is. But maybe after Woodward showed up and Novak testified, the "innocent accused" story lost it's luster. Or maybe this is just nonsensical..

PeterUK

Clarice,
"'Animal Farm' "And the creatures outside looked from man to pig, and from pig to man, but already it was impossible to say which was which."
Oink!

Gary Maxwell

White knight is talking backwards and the pills that mother gave dont do anything all

Too too bizare. Wish tradesport would put up a board, easy money lefties would be fun.

The comments to this entry are closed.