Don't Be Fooled Again...

Hugh Hewitt links to Rowan Scarborough's obituary of the Plame "scandal" and has a fun idea:

Perhaps Tom Maguire or some other accomplished Plameologist will provide for us sideliners a convenient scorecard of those whose names ought never to appear in print except as accompanied by the phrase "who was so memorably taken in by Joe Wilson" or "who, it must be remembered, believed deeply in Fitzmas."

Such a list would be long, and the work hard, but what a service to have in one place, easily linked to, a comprehensive listing of the easily fooled.

That sort of project surely appeals to my dark, malicious heart.  Now, I could never do this project justice working alone but, as no one ever said, you're never alone if you are talking the Plame Game at Just One Minute.

So how about it - I bet the regular commenters can come up with a comprehensive list pretty quickly.  I picture at least three categories - politicos, journalists, and bloggers.  But if more categories make sense, speak up.

And a link to the nominees "Best Effort" would be great.

MORE:  I'm stuck - I say "Keith Olbermann" and can't even type for laughing.  Larissa Russkie at Raw Story.  (Or was that Larissa Badenov?  Oh, dear...)

Comments

[Gabriel Sutherland]

Lou Dobbs anyone?

During his multiple years of "selling out America" stories, on numerous occasions he has hosted discussions about Plamegate as an example of the White House "selling out America".

David Shuster gets my vote. It's not entirely his fault that he tops my list. I just happen to get home from work at the same time his lying starts in his nightly reports.

There's a bevy of former spook com members that were behind Plame the entire time. Start with Admiral Stansfield Turner, bring in Ray McGovern and the VIPS crew, then branch out and reel in the retired General's PR fronts.

The House Democrats list is going to be very long. The congressional record is litterred with PLame citations.

[Neo]

So it appears that the IRS started an investigation into Cisneros tax records, which apparently DOJ couldn't touch until they decided to refer to DOJ, which I assume never happened, so Barrett was not able to dig as deep as he wanted to.

Cute scheme. Using the IRS as a shield.

[Barney Frank]

I am one who thinks the Clintonian conspiracies are as nonexistent as the Bush/Cheney/Rovian ones are. Presidents and their staffs are generally neither as clever, nor as venal, as their political opponents paint them amongst each other.

The above generality in the second sentence is true to a certain extent as most generalities are. But to lump the Clinton's in with other administrations flies in the face of a mountain of both circumstantial and direct evidence of systemic corruption and abuse of power at nearly every level of the Clinton administration.

[JM Hanes]

Clarice:

The book is a must, accurate & droll would make a welcome change from the usual droning political fare. TM could call it "Hubris: the Selling of Joe Wilson" or "Hubris: Selling a President Down the River" -- but, thankfully, he wouldn't! I'll help with the graphics.

In the meantime, I'd settle for an updated summary we could send around to reporters. I find the obligatory set-up paragraphs now in almost universal use increasingly annoying.

[maryrose]

BarneyFrank:
I agree wholeheartedly with your conclusions regarding the Clinton Whie House. There was more going on there than the Lewinsky scandal. Hillary was up to her eyeballs in the Travel Office scandal, Rose Law Firm Records, Vince Foster and Ron Brown"s fates and confidential IRS files found on prominent republicans at the W.H. In President Bush's 6 years you don't hear about any goofy stuff like this.

[TallDave]

Joe Wilson's publisher, who named his book (snicker) "The Politics of Truth."

No, sorry I can't hold it at a snicker.

BWAHAHAHAAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

[equitus]

Wasn't there some blogger named Glenn something (not Reynolds) that we could add to the list? Can't remember his name, but I do recall he had a Brazillian boyfriend and was once had his stuff read on the Senate floor....

[Jane]

>The book is a must, accurate & droll

And pithy. You have to cull all the minutia down so people like me don't get lost while still making your point. I'm happy to edit as long as there is a staff of hundreds. I like JM's suggestion about a summary.

Wasn't there some blogger named Glenn something

Greenwald.

[Engram]

Here, I present delicious excerpts from Paul Krugman, Maureen Down, Nicholas Kristof and the editors of the New York Times. Krugman's column is the best. In fact, it's a classic.

[clarice]

JMH, I'm working on a piece for the Weekly Standard on the case itself, but if you'all can twist TM's arms, I'm game.

(If Libby is Dreyfus and Armitage Esterhazy(the real spy)who's Hubert Henry (the guy who framed Dreyfus by inserting false documents in his file to frame him)? Grossman?

[Other Tom]

There's a special place in hell--and in any book--for Armitage and Powell, who have no parallels that I can think of in the Drefus affair.

[clarice]

Engram, nicely done! I believe Don Surber also did a nice compendium to remind the amnesiacs at the NYT editorial desk what they overlooked in their own archives.

[equitus]

Greenwald

Thanks, Jane. I knew that but was trying to be funny.

Still, I find it interesting that his name is hardly mentioned these days.

(And no, I'm not his sock-puppet.)

[sbw]

You must include Crown Publishing PR team and blurb writers. . . but be careful. I dare you to read it all the way through in one sitting without heaving.

HUBRIS: The Press Release

[Neo]

The Politics of Truth

[topsecretk9]

---Joe Wilson's publisher, who named his book (snicker) "The Politics of Truth."

No, sorry I can't hold it at a snicker.

BWAHAHAHAAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!--

---------------

Also, John Kerry, for hiring WIlson for political hits and sponsoring what has now become THIS!

[maryrose]

TM:
Consider your arm officially twisted. You have my vote to collaborate with Clarice to write the book about Plame Mania.

[clarice]

The Mandarinate Uprising?

Drums along the Potomac?

Pinched:How the NYT and Assorted Moonbats Pulled Off the Greatest Post-Stalinist Disinformation Campaign .

[JM Hanes]

Clarice: I shudder to think what a twisted Maguire might look like! But hey, "Untwisted" might have some potential title-wise.

Back to the list: Could we reserve a special (and permanent) Dishonorable Mention for the anonymous folks who write the headlines?

[clarice feldman]

Odd, for the second time in a couple of weeks, some kid has called my home phone asking for Mark Corallo who neither lives here nor with whom I have any acquaintance. This time he asked me if "I was sure" that Mark didn't live here and that this was my phone number.
Sounds to me like some nutroots playing games or acting on a scarey larry hot tip.

[Breaker]

You need to add another major category:

Lawyers who file frivolous lawsuits for Wilson/Plame:

Cotchett, Pitre, Simon & McCarthy. And that liberal smart rear - Erwin Chemerinsky

[Lurker]

Melanie of CREW, breaker.

[danking70]

Dana Milbank wasn't on our list.

Surely, he had some words regarding Plamegate.

[clarice]

He co-authored the 2 1/2 year late walk back by Pincus.

[sbw]

Claarice, whatever the title, insiders will refer to the book as "Munchurian Candidate."

[Ellers Ellison "Ellsberg" McWilson]

equitus,

Jealous much?

Glenn Greenwald has had his statements read on the floor of the Senate, has a law degree, and is author of the New York Times Best Selling Book “How Would Richard Armitage Act?” His comments often become front-page stories on most major newspapers in the country. And he has one of the most-read blogs on the Interent, after just 9 months of blogging. I love how all you super-important rightwing bloggers attack me, I mean him, just to get traffic.

I bid you GOOD DAY, sir.

[topsecretk9]

Feel free to add to the series, I've started with:

"Ensure the story has Legs" Part 1: Make sure as many reporters as possible MISQUOTE and Misattribute YOU" By Joseph Wilson
____________________________________________________

• Wilson, Epic, wife listed in bio "Valerie Plame" June 14th, 2003

"...that American ambassador who has been cited in reports in the New York Times and in the Washington Post, and now in the Guardian over in London, who actually went over to Niger on behalf of the government--not of the CIA but of the government--and came back in February of 2002 and told the government that there was nothing to this story, later called the government after the British white paper was published and said you all need to do some fact-checking and make sure the Brits aren't using bad information in the publication of the white paper, and who called both the CIA and the State Department after the President's State of the Union and said to them you need to worry about the political manipulation of intelligence if, in fact, the President is talking about Niger when he mentions Africa. . .I can assure you that that retired American ambassador to Africa, as Nick Kristof called him in his article, is also pissed off, and has every intention of ensuring that this story has legs."

____________________________________________________

• The Selling of the Iraq War: The First Casualty
By John B. Judis and Spencer Ackerman* , New Republic June 30, 2003

...In his State of the Union address on January 28, 2003, Bush introduced a new piece of evidence to show that Iraq was developing a nuclear arms program: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. ... Saddam Hussein has not credibly explained these activities. He clearly has much to hide."

One year earlier, Cheney's office had received from the British, via the Italians, documents purporting to show Iraq's purchase of uranium from Niger. Cheney had given the information to the CIA, which in turn asked a prominent diplomat, who had served as ambassador to three African countries, to investigate. He returned after a visit to Niger in February 2002 and reported to the State Department and the CIA that the documents were forgeries. The CIA circulated the ambassador's report to the vice president's office, the ambassador confirms to TNR. But, after a British dossier was released in September detailing the purported uranium purchase, administration officials began citing it anyway, culminating in its inclusion in the State of the Union. "They knew the Niger story was a flat-out lie," the former ambassador tells TNR. "They were unpersuasive about aluminum tubes and added this to make their case more persuasive."

link "1"

• Missing in Action: Truth
By Nicholas D. Kristof New York Times May 6, 2003

I'm told by a person involved in the Niger caper that more than a year ago the vice president's office asked for an investigation of the uranium deal, so a former U.S. ambassador to Africa was dispatched to Niger. In February 2002, according to someone present at the meetings, that envoy reported to the C.I.A. and State Department that the information was unequivocally wrong and that the documents had been forged.

The envoy reported, for example, that a Niger minister whose signature was on one of the documents had in fact been out of office for more than a decade. In addition, the Niger mining program was structured so that the uranium diversion had been impossible. The envoy's debunking of the forgery was passed around the administration and seemed to be accepted — except that President Bush and the State Department kept citing it anyway. "It's disingenuous for the State Department people to say they were bamboozled because they knew about this for a year," one insider said.

link "2"

• CIA Did Not Share Doubt on Iraq Data
Bush Used Report Of Uranium Bid
By Walter Pincus, Washington Post Staff Writer, Thursday, June 12, 2003; Page A01

Armed with information purportedly showing that Iraqi officials had been seeking to buy uranium in Niger one or two years earlier, the CIA in early February 2002 dispatched a retired U.S. ambassador to the country to investigate the claims, according to the senior U.S. officials and the former government official, who is familiar with the event. The sources spoke on condition of anonymity and on condition that the name of the former ambassador not be disclosed.

During his trip, the CIA's envoy spoke with the president of Niger and other Niger officials mentioned as being involved in the Iraqi effort, some of whose signatures purportedly appeared on the documents.

After returning to the United States, the envoy reported to the CIA that the uranium-purchase story was false, the sources said. Among the envoy's conclusions was that the documents may have been forged because the "dates were wrong and the names were wrong," the former U.S. government official said.

link "3"

• White House in Denial
Nicholas D. Kristof, Op-ed columnist, The New York Times, Friday, June 13, 2003

...To help out Ms. Rice and Mr. Cheney, let me offer some more detail about the uranium saga. Piecing the story together from two people directly involved and three others who were briefed on it, the tale begins at the end of 2001, when third-rate forged documents turned up in West Africa purporting to show the sale by Niger to Iraq of tons of "yellowcake" uranium.

Italy's intelligence service obtained the documents and shared them with British spooks, who passed them on to Washington. Mr. Cheney's office got wind of this and asked the C.I.A. to investigate.

The agency chose a former ambassador to Africa to undertake the mission, and that person flew to Niamey, Niger, in the last week of February 2002. This envoy spent one week in Niger, staying at the Sofitel and discussing his findings with the U.S. ambassador to Niger, and then flew back to Washington via Paris.

Immediately upon his return, in early March 2002, this senior envoy briefed the C.I.A. [and for you Plameologists - notice Wilson is "Senior"--hmmm, as Senior Administration Offical for sourcing] and State Department and reported that the documents were bogus, for two main reasons. First, the documents seemed phony on their face — for example, the Niger minister of energy and mines who had signed them had left that position years earlier. Second, an examination of Niger's uranium industry showed that an international consortium controls the yellowcake closely, so the Niger government does not have any yellowcake to sell...

link "4"

• Ministers Knew War Papers Were Forged, Says Diplomat
By Andrew Buncombe and Raymond Whitaker, The Independent, Sunday 29 June 2003

A high-ranking American official The retired US ambassador said it was all but impossible that British intelligence had not received his report - drawn up by the CIA - which revealed that documents, purporting to show a deal between Iraq and the west African state of Niger, were forgeries. When he saw similar claims in Britain's dossier on Iraq last September, he even went as far as telling CIA officials that they needed to alert their British counterparts to his investigation...

... But in his first interview on the issue, the former US diplomat told The Independent on Sunday: "It is hard for me to fathom, that as close as we are and [while] preparing for a war based on [claims about] weapons of mass destruction, that we did not share intelligence of this nature."

Asked if he felt his findings had been ignored for political reasons, he added: "It's an easy conclusion to draw." Though the official's identity is well-known in Washington - he was on the National Security Council under President Clinton - he asked that his name be withheld at this stage...

...During eight days in Niger he discovered it was impossible for Iraq to have been buying the quantities of uranium alleged. "My report was very unequivocal," he said. He also learnt that the signatures of officials vital to any transaction were missing from the documents.

link "5"

Wilson testified June 2003

• SSCI July, 2004

The talking points did not refer to the specific reporting on the alleged Iraq-Niger uranium deal, did not mention names or dates from the reporting, and did not mention that there was any such deal being reported in intelligence channels. DO officials told Committee staff that they promised the former ambassador that they would keep his relationship with CIA confidential, but did not ask the former ambassador to do the same and did not ask him to sign a confidentiality or non-disclosure agreement. The former ambassador left for Niger on February 21, 2002.

Second, the former ambassador said that he discussed with his CIA contacts which names and signatures should have appeared on any documentation of a legitimate uranium transaction. In fact, the intelligence report made no mention of the alleged Iraq-Niger uranium deal or signatures that should have appeared on any documentation of such a deal. The only mention of Iraq in the report pertained to the meeting between the Iraqi delegation and former Prime Minister Mayaki. Third, the former ambassador noted that his CIA contacts told him there were documents pertaining to the alleged Iraq-Niger uranium transaction and that the source of the information was the intelligence service. The DO reports officer told Committee staff that he did not provide the former ambassador with any information about the source or details of the original reporting as it would have required sharing classified information and, noted that there were no "documents" circulating in the IC at the time of the former ambassador's trip, only intelligence reports from intelligence regarding an alleged Iraq-Niger uranium deal. Meeting notes and other correspondence show that details of the reporting were discussed at the February 19, 2002 meeting, but none of the meeting participants recall telling the former ambassador the source of the report

(U) The former ambassador also told Committee staff that he was the source of a Washington Post article ("CIA Did Not Share Doubt on Iraq Data; Bush Used Report of Uranium Bid," June 12, 2003) which said, "among the Envoy's conclusions was that the documents may have been forged because `the dates were wrong and the names were wrong." Committee staff asked how the former ambassador could have come to the conclusion that the "dates were wrong and the names were wrong" when he had never seen the CIA reports and had no knowledge of what names and dates were in the reports. The former ambassador said that he may have "misspoken" to the reporter when he said he concluded the documents were "forged." He also said he may have become confused about his own recollection after the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported in March 2003 that the names and dates on the documents were not correct and may have thought he had seen the names himself. The former ambassador reiterated that he had been able to collect the names of the government officials which should have been on the documents.

-At the time the former ambassador traveled to Niger, the Intelligence Community did not have in its possession any actual documents on the alleged Niger-Iraq uranium deal, only second hand reporting of the deal. The former ambassador's comments to reporters that the Niger-Iraq uranium documents "may have been forged because 'the dates were wrong and the names were wrong,'" could not have been based on the former ambassador's actual experiences because the Intelligence Community did not have the documents at the time of the ambassador's trip. In addition, nothing in the report from the former ambassador's trip said anything about documents having been forged or the names or dates in the reports having been incorrect. The former ambassador told Committee staff that he, in fact, did not have access to any of the names and dates in the CIA's reports and said he may have become confused about his own recollection after the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported in March 2003 that the names and dates on the documents were not correct. Of note, the names and dates in the documents that the IAEA found to be incorrect were not names or dates included in the CIA reports.

• July 18, 2004: CNN Late Edition, Wolf Blitzer. Wilson reviews the allegations against him.

BLITZER: So when the committee says that you told them you had misspoken, what did you misspeak?

WILSON: Well, actually, what I misspoke was, when I misspoke to the committee, when I spoke to the staff -- this interview took place 15 months after The Washington Post article appeared. I did not have a chance to review the article. They did not show me the article.

They threw it out there, and the question I took as being a rather generic question: Could you have misspoken? Yes, I am male, I'm over 50. By definition, I can misspeak. I have gone back since and taken a look at this particular article. It refers to an unidentified former government official. If it is referring to me, it is a misattribution, of facts that were already in the public domain and had been so since March.

My first public statement on this, in my own words, was on July 6th.

TM's Timeline
(sound like the Libby defense doesn't it?)

• July 19, 2004: Paula Zahn interviews Joe Wilson, who explains his press problem - they all misquoted me!

ZAHN: I want you to respond to that very specific allegation in the addendum to the Senate report, which basically says that your public comments not only are incorrect, but have no basis in fact.

WILSON: Well, I'm not exactly sure what public comments they're referring to. If they're referring to leaks or sources, unidentified government sources in articles that appeared before my article in "The New York Times" appeared, those are either misquotes or misattributions if they're attributed to me.

TM's Timeline

• July 19, 2004 WIlson letter to SSCI

The first time I actually saw what were represented as the documents was when Andrea Mitchell, the NBC correspondent handed them to me in an interview on July 21. I was not wearing my glasses and could not read them. I have to this day not read them. I would have absolutely no reason to claim to have done so.

link

• Sunday, October 30, 2005, National Press Club

At the Press Club speech yesterday, Wilson was not under oath and so the admission of "mis-speaking" turned into an accusation that Kristof lied. Wilson quoted Kristof "as saying that he was aware that I had not seen the documents. He knew it. And yet it got into his article.”

(so now we go from Mispeak and misatrribution to lying about him)

link

• Waiting for the Kristof Korrection In which we revisit his famous May 6, 2003, column.
By Jack Shafer, Posted Wednesday, Nov. 2, 2005

...Reached by phone as he prepared for a trip to Darfur, Kristof wasn't sure that a correction was in order for a number of reasons. For one, he said was sure his piece accurately reflected what his sources told him. For another, he couldn't think of an example where a Times column or article was corrected after six months. The news pages do correct "ancient errors," but Times op-ed columnists have only recently been made subject to a uniform correction policy.

link

[topsecretk9]

shoot...forgot to bold this

Committee staff asked how the former ambassador could have come to the conclusion that the "dates were wrong and the names were wrong" when he had never seen the CIA reports and had no knowledge of what names and dates were in the reports. The former ambassador said that he may have "misspoken" to the reporter when he said he concluded the documents were "forged."

[Gary Maxwell]

No fair Top

Newspapers are supposed to be disposed of within 24 hours. You cnat expect these professionals, who feel the enormous pressure to write many many column inches weekly, to remember what they said before or even to own up to it. That is now how the game is played.

[topsecretk9]

---Odd, for the second time in a couple of weeks, some kid has called my home phone asking for Mark Corallo who neither lives here nor with whom I have any acquaintance. This time he asked me if "I was sure" that Mark didn't live here and that this was my phone number.
Sounds to me like some nutroots playing games or acting on a scarey larry hot tip.

Posted by: clarice feldman | September 06, 2006 at 12:01 PM---

Sounds like it too me...

[Sue]

::yikes::

Top, are you okay?

::grin::

[topsecretk9]

Sue...your were right...

Firedoglake is giving EW a book deal!

It is for this reason that we are going to be publishing our first book through FDL Books, in order to have Marcy’s work seen by a larger audience.

First praise?

Marcy Wheeler is one of the very best of the researchers investigating the leak of Valerie Plame Wilson’s identity as a covert CIA officer. Her work has been consistently on the mark and her conclusions almost always confirmed as facts dribble out. Hers will be the definitive study of what happened and why.

– Ambassador Joseph Wilson

[topsecretk9]

Sue

Shouldn't that post get me a bookdeal from TM? ::grin::

[Sue]

Her work has been consistently on the mark and her conclusions almost always confirmed as facts dribble out.

Sure, if you ignore all the times she is wrong. ::grin::

[Sue]

Top,

You got my vote!

[Sue]

Top,

Save those somewhere easily accessed. I have a feeling you will want to refer back to them in the coming days and weeks and months and years and centuries and eons and infinity...(I suspect this thing will never go away.)

[sad]

Gee Tops in regard to your multiple links to articles quoting smokin joe:

When you line it all up like that and lay it out so clearly it makes someone look pretty bad and aw shucks it just seems downright mean and all.

[maryrose]

Patrick Fitzgerald requesting private hearing about classified documents to be considered in Libby trial.Can't have an open forum. What documents would he be referring to?

[clarice]

maryrose, is this something new? What's the reference?

[Gabriel Sutherland]

Who the heck is Marcy Wheeler?

I asked myself. Google answered.

http://thenexthurrah.typepad.com/the_next_hurrah/

Marcy's is the very first "Blog to Book" for FireDogLake Books. It's a blog, only in book form. Her topic is Plame!

I like Milhouse's Alf/pog comparison better.

Milhouse: I traded your soul for Alf pogs. Remember Alf? He's back. In pog form.

[Sue]

Marcy Wheeler...the emptywheel...who is right when she isn't wrong.

[topsecretk9]

Yeah...that Paula Zahn interview is priceless...

I "misspoke" to the commitee staff when I said I "misspoke" I was really "misquoted" and "misattributed"

[topsecretk9]

--Patrick Fitzgerald requesting private hearing about classified documents to be considered in Libby trial.Can't have an open forum. What documents would he be referring to?--

All the crap the Libby requested, he asked for an extension because the Gov't wasn't done going through it, now it is.

[clarice]

I bet the judge will be real happy to see him. /s,

[lurker]

Dems Call For "No Confidence" Vote on Rumsfeld

Give me a break!!

[lurker]

"Marcy Wheeler is one of the very best of the researchers investigating the leak of Valerie Plame Wilson’s identity as a covert CIA officer. Her work has been consistently on the mark and her conclusions almost always confirmed as facts dribble out. Hers will be the definitive study of what happened and why.

– Ambassador Joseph Wilson"

Ah, the discredited Ex-Ambassador Joseph Wilson!

I have no plans to buy her books.

[Specter]

Well...wouldn't this be a kick - if Rumsfeld is forced to resign (and BTW - I do not expect that to happen, not do I advocate it), wouldn't it be fitting if Bush appointed Lieberman? LOL

[sbw]

How's this for a title: "The Wilson Caper: Bush Derangement Syndrome in action."

[clarice]

The Truth of Politics?

[Aubrey]

I hope this victory celebration is justified and Plamegate is about done. I’m not so sure; after all, this has happened before. In 2004, when the SSCI report was published, the Washington Post published an article that essentially said Joe Wilson was lying. After Joe wrote a rebuttal letter to the editor, easily shot down by the Post’s ombudsman, Joe closed down his web site and resigned from the Kerry campaign. However, he quickly learned that the left either didn’t believe he was lying or didn’t care. After all, the “Bush lied” accusation rested on Joe’s word, and everyone knew Bush had lied, so Joe must be telling the truth. He was back in business in a couple of weeks.

Mere facts and a couple of editorials probably won’t make Joe and Valarie as radioactive as they deserve to be. I think we will continue to see them through the end of the Bush administration and perhaps beyond. We have the Libby trial and their lawsuit to plod through. We have two upcoming elections in which the character of the Bush Administration will be an issue. And we have Joe and Valarie’s cottage industry, relentlessly promoting their victimization through her book (someone will publish it), speaking engagements and TV appearances. I believe they will continue to find a rich market for their story. Shame is a quality that doesn’t seem to exist on the left.

[clarice]

Well, from the fact that Powell and Armitage haven't shown their faces in public for a while, it seems it does exist in DC--for a while at least. Maybe after a few months they'll go on Oprah or some such and tell us about their rehab treatment for perfidyaholics or something.

[JM Hanes]

Clarice:

I think shame may be less a factor than not wanting to face a slew of additional questions he doesn' t want to answer.

[equitus]

OK, so I'm not much of a regular in these comments. I get it now.

The mere mention of GG (he-who-shall-not-be-named) acvitates the ellers-bot, which posts the de facto sock-puppet spiel. No one wants to read that again, and so discussion of GG is effectively discouraged.

Genius.

I am jealous much!

[danking70]

I was at the doctor's office today flipping through the magazines and came across an article in Vanity Fair by Michael Wolff entitled "All Roads Lead to Rove".

A little too nuanced if you ask me....