EJ Dionne is stuck with the reliable talking points of Joe Wilson's defenders:
Libby-Cheney apologists have argued over and over that Cheney had a right to be angry because Wilson said that Cheney had sent him to Niger. But Wilson said no such thing. In his New York Times piece, Wilson wrote only that he had been "informed by officials at the Central Intelligence Agency that Vice President Dick Cheney's office had questions about a particular intelligence report.'' That was true.
Please. If Wilson's only relevant statement was the July 6 op-ed, why were the White House and State Dept responding to his charges in June - eerie prescience?
Actually, they were responding to these May 6 and June 13 Kristof columns and the misconceptions they fueled. Here we go, May 6:
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.
And June 13:
Condoleezza Rice was asked on "Meet the Press" on Sunday about a column of mine from May 6 regarding President Bush's reliance on forged documents to claim that Iraq had sought uranium in Africa. That was not just a case of hyping intelligence, but of asserting something that had already been flatly discredited by an envoy investigating at the behest of the office of Vice President Dick Cheney.
And for laughs, here is Chris Matthews insisting, *after* the Wilson column came out, that Wilson was sent "at the behest" of the Vice President.
Public perceptions can be hard to change, as Mr. Dionne demonstrates.
MORE: IIRC, somewhere in Grossman's testimony he says that, in talking to Wilson in June, it seemed that Wilson believed he had been sent by the VP. And folks paying attention during the trial noticed that Valerie Wilson wrote the memo recommending/endorsing her husband for his Niger trip on Feb 12; Cheney asked his questions on Feb 13.
WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE: From Dionne, emphasis added:
Whatever the jury decides, Fitzgerald has amply demonstrated that Cheney directed Libby to destroy Wilson's credibility, partly by leaking that his wife, Valerie Plame Wilson, was a CIA operative who had suggested Wilson was well qualified to investigate the claims in Niger.
Is "amply demonstrated" a new threshold of proof? How does it compare to "reasonable doubt"?
Cheney directed Libby to destroy Wilson's credibility
Perfectly legal, last I checked.
leaking that his wife, Valerie Plame Wilson, was a CIA operative
Also perfectly legal, unless she was covert, which nearly everyone now agrees she was not.
IOW, Cheney stands convicted of playing bareknuckles politics. In Washington D.C.! So why are we in court again?
Posted by: R C Dean | February 27, 2007 at 07:19 AM
How can you destroy something that wasn't first established?
I read that NYT piece at the time and thought "No one human being could make those claims given the amount of time they spent and the circumstances of their travel."
The fact that Joe Wilson wrote the op-ed was entirely beside the point.
Posted by: BumperStickerist | February 27, 2007 at 07:26 AM
Tom:
Is "amply demonstrated" a new threshold of proof? How does it compare to "reasonable doubt"?
I prefer "partly cloudy"
Posted by: hit and run | February 27, 2007 at 07:36 AM
Dionne should now feel properly bitch slapped. Way to go TM. But I'll bet you confused him with all those facts and whatnot.
Posted by: bad | February 27, 2007 at 07:45 AM
OT
OMG. I was just feeding the the Herbmeister and in the background RolyPoly Russert was babbling on the Today Show and he actually said that AlGore was positioned to become the Dem nominee if one of the front runners faltered in part because "he's won the Academy Award". That's right. Tim Russert thinks winning an Academy Award contributes to your being in a good position to run for president.
I'm going to buy some property in Wyoming and stock up on guns and food because the end is truly nigh.
Posted by: Dwilkers | February 27, 2007 at 08:20 AM
Yes, Al Gore invented it for "Inconvenient Truth."
It's the new, carbon-neutral factual standard to replace the MSM's shopworn "many critics believe...."
Posted by: capitano | February 27, 2007 at 08:25 AM
Cheney stands convicted of playing bareknuckles politics.
Yeah, Cheney is so badass he got Armitage at State to leak to Novak. Don't bother that Armitage was antiwar and didn't particularly like the administration. Cheney is one mean dude.
Posted by: Pofarmer | February 27, 2007 at 08:27 AM
Tim Russert thinks winning an Academy Award contributes to your being in a good position to run for president.
Vanity, all vanity. There is nothing I hate worse than a vain man.
Posted by: Pofarmer | February 27, 2007 at 08:28 AM
Sorry to see a fine gent like Dionne subscribing to what has increasingly become the mantra of the left-of-center media: If at first you don't succeed, lie, lie again.
Nick Kasoff
The Thug Report
Posted by: Nick Kasoff - The Thug Report | February 27, 2007 at 08:32 AM
If at first you don't succeed, lie, lie again.
Rules of propaganda. A lie repeated often enough becomes the truth.
Posted by: Pofarmer | February 27, 2007 at 08:37 AM
EJ Dionne:
This is ludicrous.
Fact 1: Cheney never sent Wilson
Fact2 Val is not covert
Fact 3
Feb 13th is when Cheney asked about referral
Fact 4: Cheney was not out to get Wilson just correct his misinformation and tousle his very important hair.
Posted by: maryrose | February 27, 2007 at 08:40 AM
This really is just getting depressing.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | February 27, 2007 at 08:41 AM
Ya mean the fact that the MSM and the prosecutor apparently couldn't find their ass with a bell tied to it? Or something else?
Posted by: Pofarmer | February 27, 2007 at 08:53 AM
TM:
Actually, they were responding to these May 6 and July 13 Kristof columns and the misconceptions they fueled.
Should be June 13.
Posted by: Dwilkers | February 27, 2007 at 08:55 AM
"amply demonstrated" is the new "consensus" which is the old "everyone knows" which is the older "No one knows any such thing." I.E., the Harper Valley PTA rule.
Besides, it's been "amply demonstrated" that special prosecutors never prosecute crimes that the "consensus" is actually took place,
Posted by: richard mcenroe | February 27, 2007 at 09:12 AM
I really think that everyday you read the op ed page of the WaPo you lose brain cells.Lots of brain cells.
Posted by: clarice | February 27, 2007 at 09:16 AM
"Office of the Vice President".
"Hi,this is the CIA,do you want us to send an expert to examine the Niger issue - or would Joe Wilson do?"....."It would help since we at the CIA are having an embargo on all things French,Freedom Fries,Freedom covert operatives,Joe speaks fluent French,soul of discretion ,besides the climate suits his dark complexion".
"Thanks Mr Vice President - you won't regret this".
Posted by: PeterUK | February 27, 2007 at 09:18 AM
I don't watch or read anything from the MSM - haven't for years, unless referenced by a blog.
But they still have a lot of power, they can pick any topic and report total dortions on it day in & day out and the average Joe will eventually believe it. Seems to happen all the time.
Posted by: PMII | February 27, 2007 at 09:23 AM
EJ Dionne, the next in line after David Broder.
It's a good idea to take Dionne to task. In particular, to take the Washington Post to task. Dionne is slated to be THE columnist for the WAPO for a long time. If he's setting these standards now, what are we to think of the next columnist in line at the Washington Post?
Has anyone invited EJ to become a JOM reader? I think he's overdue.
Posted by: Gabriel | February 27, 2007 at 09:25 AM
I wrote an e-mail to Dionne yesterday (a couple of times in the past he has actually responded), and this morning I cut-and-pasted Maguire's opening paragraphs for another e-mail to him. He's one of the most insidious of the propagandists, in that he does a pretty good job of portraying himself as a man of principle. Until now.
I, too, think it's depressing. It reminds me of the current throw-away line, "the now-discredited charges of the Swift Boat veterans," as if the issue were settled. Happily, the single sound-bite "Christmas in Cambodia" is enough to quash that one. And sound bites are all that is allowed these days.
Posted by: Other Tom | February 27, 2007 at 09:26 AM
Clarice: Try reading the NY Times op'ed page!! They include lots of letters from the goofy lefties living in all the liberal voting cities. They are hysterical!! A great way to get your blood flowing in the morning.
Posted by: bio mom | February 27, 2007 at 09:33 AM
Yesterday before the offing, someone edited Wikipedia under Chayes, but, hey, the Pashtu's tried to off Dick, so, like, if Dick was dead, were would that leave the Plame thing?
Plame isn't covert and Chayes isn't CIA, but I'd still like to know if Arghand paid out to those warlords. The USAID money came from Shayes, so, I guess the USAID money is traceable and she did open up day labor facilities like the ones in Canada, but, hey, only a day laborer may have known she's a spy. So, Joe, Chris, Ames, Howard, Shayes(and wife), Chayes, etc. were all what?
So, Plame knew these?
Abram Chayes
cache.boston.com/.../05/09/1147173064_4814.jpg
www.travispark.org/images/photos/sarah_chayes.jpg
www.mercycorps.org
Also see Abram Chayes; Harvard, Kennedy Peace Corps, Green Berets, Afghanistan War rural pacification program run by Mercy Corps from heavy USAID(CIA) funding while Sarah Chayes ran Mercy Corps another RPCV(retired Peace Corps volunteer) became the first civilian casualty assassinated(under provisional authority) while going to destroy a house. She was a judge and this was the beginning of the program to have retired judges work overseas as volunteers. Also see Chris Chayes Intelligence Committee and wife - RPCVs; funding and planning of Afghanistan war. Phase one Green Berets and phase two rural pacifiction alot like the Vietnam war. The issue of poppeys and the drug eradication program was appointed to a retired Peace Corps Director, Mark L. Schneider, who was once noted for referring to a murdered Peace Corps Volunteer who was hacked to death and put in a barrel as 'garbage.'
Also see Abram Chayes; Harvard, Kennedy Peace Corps, Green Berets, Afghanistan War rural pacification program run by Mercy Corps from heavy USAID(CIA) funding while Sarah Chayes ran Mercy Corps another RPCV(retired Peace Corps volunteer) became the first civilian casualty assassinated(under provisional authority) while going to destroy a house. She was a judge and this was the beginning of the program to have retired judges work overseas as volunteers. Also see Chris Chayes Intelligence Committee and wife - RPCVs; funding and planning of Afghanistan war. Phase one Green Berets and phase two rural pacifiction alot like the Vietnam war. The issue of poppeys and the drug eradication program in Afghanistan was appointed(Drug Program) to a retired Peace Corps Director, Mark L. Schneider, who was once noted for referring to a murdered Peace Corps Volunteer who was hacked to death and put in a barrel as 'garbage.'
It has been rumored on the internet for years that Sarah Chayes is involved, like Plame, in intelligence activities because of the heavy USAID funding and past history in relation to the planning and funding of the Afghanistan war. The insurgency in Afghanistan South began shortly after Chayes renounced Karzai and family that she had become very close to through USAID funding.
It's not the best entry, but a start. But kill Dick? Gee, 8/10 over a photo.
Notice the Foley along with Bushs:
http://www.andover.edu/about_andover/notable_alums.htm
Harvard International programs:
http://www.law.harvard.edu/ils/resources/fellowships/chayes_international_public_service_fellowship/
The first civilian casualty in Iraq was probably because of Plame and Chayes. Fern Holland, one too.
Cool countdown clock:
http://www.thecleverest.com/countdown.swf
I might write a book if I can write coherently.
Posted by: Mary Luminatrix (Paris) | February 27, 2007 at 09:33 AM
Yeah, OT, exactly. "Now-discredited claims" that were pretty well documented, the anthropogenic warming "hockey stick" that is an artifact of data mining, Iraq a "failure", the "defeat" at Tet....
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | February 27, 2007 at 09:35 AM
I might write a book if I can write coherently.
Don't hold our breath, you say?
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | February 27, 2007 at 09:36 AM
I must say, I don't uderstand how Abram Chayes enters into this thing at all, and would be interested if someone would explain.
Chayes taught me Civil Procedure in the Fall of 1973. He had been in the Kennedy Administration (45 years ago), where his chief claim to fame had been calling the blockade of Cuba during the missile crisis a "quarantine."
He's got to be well along in years by now. What's going on here?
Posted by: Other Tom | February 27, 2007 at 09:39 AM
"EJ Dionne, the next in line after David Broder."
So will he be the last stegosaurus or the next to last? There must have been a time in my life when I actually gave a damn about what a pseudojournalist had to say about anything but for the life of me I cannot remember who it was or when I stopped paying attention.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | February 27, 2007 at 09:40 AM
the anthropogenic warming "hockey stick" that is an artifact of data mining,
Aw, now c'mon. You mean just because readings in areas that have remained rural are relatively unchanged from 100 years ago there may be some problem with data.
Posted by: Pofarmer | February 27, 2007 at 09:44 AM
I just checked, and Abram Chayes died in April 2000 at the age of 77. So how does his name crop up in the Plame thing?
Posted by: Other Tom | February 27, 2007 at 09:47 AM
You think it was a natural death, do you, OT? Hah!! *rolling eyes*
Posted by: clarice | February 27, 2007 at 09:49 AM
"Whatever the jury decides" That means that this little weasel (Dionne) is trying to publicly hedge his bets because, while his America-hating heart makes him want to believe in Fitzmas, his mind is telling him that there isn't a Paddy Claus.
Posted by: secarr | February 27, 2007 at 09:50 AM
Congressman Dingell started talking about how much more dangerous Dick Cheney will get as legal attention closes in on him.
From EW over at the swamp. The link is on the right if you want to read the entire blog. My question is...are congressman really this bizarre? They talk about the VP of the US getting more dangerous? WTF is wrong with this country? Seriously...
Posted by: Sue | February 27, 2007 at 09:52 AM
Other Tom:
Chayes taught me Civil Procedure in the Fall of 1973.
Well, that sounds like fun and all, but not compared to Telluride at that time. I mean, Charlie and Jane and snowball fights and streaking?
Posted by: hit and run | February 27, 2007 at 09:53 AM
Back around 1972, Congressman Dingell co-sponsored a bill with Sen. Russell Long of Louisiana. It was known as the "Long-Dingell bill." No one in Washington could mention the bill by name without breaking into a knowing grin. I'm not making this up.
Posted by: Other Tom | February 27, 2007 at 09:55 AM
H&R, if I had it to do over again I'd have been in Telluride from that day to this.
Posted by: Other Tom | February 27, 2007 at 09:57 AM
I'm amazed. Why am I amazed? I see it everyday. I read it everyday. But damn it, I keep hoping that the left is just silly, not truly delusional. We are in a world of hurt, when people in this country find the VP of the US more dangerous than the enemies of our country. And these freakoids are in charge!
Posted by: Sue | February 27, 2007 at 10:00 AM
I have always believed we should have term limits for both houses of congress. Now I also think we need to have a mandatory retirement age. Dingell is well past the time he is thinking rationally. Murtha also. There are many on both sides of the aisle who should be enjoying their retirement. I would like to trust the voters of their districts or states to do this, but the great power of incumbency doesn't allow this. Why else is Robert Byrd still in the Sentate?
Posted by: bio mom | February 27, 2007 at 10:03 AM
Dingell is the only thing in the House preventing Pelosi from "greenng" America--a/k/a taxing us all to death for energy use while Gore and Pelosi,Teresa and John, Barbra and Lear hog it up and pay "offsets" .Otherwise, I have no use for him, either.
Posted by: clarice | February 27, 2007 at 10:06 AM
Apparently whatever numbers are put in the computer model,birthday,size of bust,shoe size,the result is a hockey stick.
On the other hand there is clear evidence of anthropogenic lying by the algorati.
Posted by: PeterUK | February 27, 2007 at 10:07 AM
Harummph! We need a thread herder!
Posted by: Jane | February 27, 2007 at 10:11 AM
FWIW Wilson was on CNN in March 2003 talking about the niger forgeries and criticizing the WH. He also talked to Congress about Niger in the months before his op-ed.
So, from my perspective, the idea that Armitage and Woodward were tiptoeing around WH anti-Wilson talking points in early June makes sense.
The idea that Libby et al suddenly developed a plan to push back against Wilson after the op-ed is absurd.
Posted by: jerry | February 27, 2007 at 10:13 AM
bio mom:
Robert Byrd is the concious of the Senate.
As in, "oh look, Senator Byrd is conscious today."
Posted by: Tomf | February 27, 2007 at 10:13 AM
Sue
WTF is wrong with this country?
And the answer is....MSM
PMII
But they still have a lot of power, they can pick any topic and report total dortions on it day in & day out and the average Joe will eventually believe it.
The path to "Wilson lied, Libby tried". Internet not there yet. If we intend to win another war or not pay UN global taxes.....faster, faster.
The best kid on the block in 2003 with all this crap was NBC/MSNBC. O'Reilly just noticed in 2007. Needs to move on to ABC. More refined version of MSNBC and much more effective for the 2007 viewer.
Posted by: owl | February 27, 2007 at 10:16 AM
Perhaps, E.J. Dijon was just letting off a little mustard gas.
Posted by: Neo | February 27, 2007 at 10:16 AM
It reminds me of the current throw-away line, "the now-discredited charges of the Swift Boat veterans," as if the issue were settled.
Mr. Right said that recently and I almost passed out. Mr. Right is a very bright man, but he gets his news from the NY Times. He is absolutely convinced the SWVT have been discredited. If so, I missed the whole thing.
Posted by: Jane | February 27, 2007 at 10:19 AM
Don't hold our breath, you say?
So far the laugh out loud line of the day.
Posted by: Jane | February 27, 2007 at 10:22 AM
How did the Chayes family enter this conversation?
Posted by: Gabriel | February 27, 2007 at 10:25 AM
jerry: That reminds me. Has anyone put together a timeline of Joseph Plame's media appearances over the last 5 years?
Posted by: Gabriel | February 27, 2007 at 10:26 AM
President Pro Tempore of the Senate
The Constitution provides for a president pro tempore to preside over the Senate in the absence of the vice president. By tradition, this position goes to the senior member of the majority party . Since 1890, the president pro tem has held office continuously until the election of another. The president pro tem is third in the line of presidential succession, behind the vice president and the Speaker of the House.
110th Congress (2007-2009) Robert C. Byrd (WV)
Isn't this scary.
In the meanwhile, as Chairman of the Committee on Appropriations, Bob will continue his quest to move the CIA to West Virginia.
Posted by: Neo | February 27, 2007 at 10:28 AM
TM
I sent your Rawstory interview to Lucianne yesterday...it's a must read on her site today.
Posted by: windansea | February 27, 2007 at 10:28 AM
TM,
Is it possible to receive college credit for the education received reading JustOneMinute?
Posted by: PMII | February 27, 2007 at 10:38 AM
Harummph! We need a thread herder!
Posted by: Jane | February 27, 2007 at 07:11 AM
I nominate you...Step up! I've so much to do today at work, that if I have to come in and wade through multiple threads, it'll kill me.
[ed. -- that sounds like a possible motive for the multiple threads, no?]
Uh oh.
Posted by: hit and run | February 27, 2007 at 10:39 AM
This morning on the ABC radio news on the hour, they were reporting that a juror was dismissed yesterday "in the trial of vice president chief of staff Lewis Libby for leaking the identity of a CIA agent."
*sigh*
Posted by: cathyf | February 27, 2007 at 10:39 AM
"And these freakoids are in charge!"
Not exactly, Sue. The Copperhead Congress is very close to being 10% over and I challenge you to identify anything done to date. Speaker StarKist, Dingy Harry, Abscam Jack Murtha and Cold Cash Jefferson are proving to be archtypical Dems. Very long on promises, very short on delivery.
We're going to be treated to a tale told by idiots for the next twenty months and I'm positive that the promised "hearings" will occurr but very little significant damage will be done due to the true insignificance of the character of the people involved.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | February 27, 2007 at 10:42 AM
--The president pro tem is third in the line of presidential succession, behind the vice president and the Speaker of the House.
110th Congress (2007-2009) Robert C. Byrd (WV)
Isn't this scary.--
Almost as scary as who is number two.
Posted by: Barney Frank | February 27, 2007 at 10:42 AM
I nominate you..
Of course you do, but as I understand the job, it is a lifetime appointment, so get crackin'!
Posted by: Jane | February 27, 2007 at 10:46 AM
Do not read EJ Dionne and take nothing the man says with any seriousness whatsoever. He is Maurenn Dowd in pants. Nuff said.
Posted by: Gary Maxwell | February 27, 2007 at 10:50 AM
“Is it possible to receive college credit for the education received reading JustOneMinute?”
Why, yes it is. And it’s affordable too.
We will be sending you our new brochure that outlines the requirements and costs associated with receiving a degree from JOM University. Simply fill out the enclosed credit application and return it in the envelope supplied with our course materials.
Posted by: jwest | February 27, 2007 at 10:50 AM
They{the dems will never get the chance to rule or change anything substantially. They've already broken their campaign promises and are incoherent on Iraq.There 08 contenders will bloody themselves so much before the general election that the majority of Americans will recoil in horror and vote for the people's mayor Guiliani with a strong VP of either Huckabee or Hunter or in a surprise move Obama with a new bipartisan ticket.Possible Romney or McCain if they haven't taken on too much water by then as VP candidates.
Posted by: maryrose | February 27, 2007 at 10:55 AM
Rick Ballard,
Agree, but the average guy (90% of the population) has no clue & believes what's in the paper or on the nightly news...
Posted by: PMII | February 27, 2007 at 10:56 AM
amply demonstrated pertains to Cheney's campaign to smear Wilson.
"Amply demonstrated" is sufficient standard to provide foundation for Fitzgerald's close.
"Amply demonstrated" is sufficient for the Wilsons to prevail in their civil suit.
For the Libby trial, "reasonable doubt" is the standard for the specific charges against Libby's lying, etc. On these charges, Fitzgerald met the necessary standard of proof (reasonable doubt).
Fitzgeral did his job of providing "ample evidence" for his claims he used to support these charges, and to meet the stadard of proof (reasonable doubt) for the the specific charges against Libby.
Tom Macquire, you know that the prosecutor does not need to prove every word he says by the standard of reasonable doubt. The jury needs to determine that the charges have been proved to that standard, but the claims of a Cheney smear campaign do not need to be so proven, as long as there is sufficient other evidence to support the charges.
Posted by: UncleCharlie | February 27, 2007 at 11:02 AM
"Is it possible to receive college credit for the education received reading JustOneMinute?
Posted by: PMII
Click on the PayPal icon above then follow the links.Choose one option listed on the menu,Phd,MA,BA,etc,there is a sliding scale of charges.You will find an image of a scroll appears on your monitor,bow,place your hand on this and press print.
Posted by: PeterUK | February 27, 2007 at 11:03 AM
"'Amply demonstrated' is sufficient for the Wilsons to prevail in their civil suit."
Au contraire, my esteemed friend. The Wilsons must first survive the motions to dismiss that have been filed by all the defendants, which motions will be heard in May. The various grounds advanced include the applicable statutes of limitations, the immunity of the defendants to civil claims for damages, and the failure of the plaintiffs to allege cognizable constitutional torts. And beyond a reasonable doubt, these grounds present a formidable hurdle for these two publicity-seeking frauds.
Posted by: Other Tom | February 27, 2007 at 11:14 AM
Click on the PayPal icon above then follow the links.Choose one option listed on the menu,Phd,MA,BA,etc,there is a sliding scale of charges
And if you want the BS, come see me.
Posted by: hit and run | February 27, 2007 at 11:14 AM
Come on Tom, throw up Joe Wilson's quote from the June 14, 2003 EPIC conference. You always forget to include it! It is the most clear example of how Wilson spread the claim that he was sent on behalf of the Vice President and NOT the CIA. That's what he said himself!
Not to mention all the articles that the VIPS clan were involved in during the time that recycled the same claim. For Wilson, and now Dionne, to continue to pretend they had nothing to do with this misperception is beyond the pale.
Posted by: Seixon | February 27, 2007 at 11:14 AM
h&r,
I want the BS
Still especially fond of what the 12 jurors were thinking/saying.............
Posted by: PMII | February 27, 2007 at 11:17 AM
--amply demonstrated pertains to Cheney's campaign to smear Wilson.--
And that was "amply demonstrated" how?
Posted by: Barney Frank | February 27, 2007 at 11:17 AM
PMII,
I estimate that only 40% are totally clueless and that the same 40% are apolitical - they don't vote and they don't care. The next tranch is the 20% who do as you describe (they are also the tranch which when added to the previously described 40% constitute the 60% of the voting age population who cannot identify their Representative). The remaining 40% do care - to the extent that they have some concept of self identification on a political basis and are generally unwilling to change.
The editorial page isn't directed to the water, salt and fodder 20%.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | February 27, 2007 at 11:20 AM
BarneyFrank:
According to Fitz a few notations on a published article is "ample evidence".
I hope your wife is doing OK. I keep her and the newly named "bad" and Larwyn in my prayers.
Posted by: maryrose | February 27, 2007 at 11:21 AM
FROM CAROL HERMAN
NO! The question IS why didn't Waltoon let this information into the court, so Libby could defend himself from these charges. And, dohn't tell me "because he had to take the stand! That's just outrageous. Ditto, for having to call Cheney. THE FIX WAS IN!
Too bad for the fixers (this time), they were innept.
And, it's just a matter of time before the truth comes out and bites Russert in the ass.
Russert never had a "60-minutes-Type" show. His fall, won't come from having sat at anchor in a "steller career." A de-railing. But not on tip-top tracks. But, believe it or not, JUST LIKE THE OSCARS, ratings really count. At the "GREEN" Oscars, is also the color one achieves when one gets very nauseous.
What's the plug that gets pulled? AUDIENCE SHARE! (Where, even car dealerships have taken to suing newspapers for overblown circulation numbers.
How long? Well, bly definition, anytime you involve lawyers the rope twists slowly in the wind for years and years.
Do people "tune in Meet The Depressed, now? Sure. Do people looky-loo traffic accidents? But it SLOWS traffic. It doesn't make for efficient drive-by's, either.
Perhaps, the flavor of shark jokes, ahead will change? They'll get meaner. While Bush isn't running for anything in 2008. And? The donks, in their carts, have steered themselves into their boonies and freaks. Perhaps, they think they emerge? Or, Hillary advances by flying up on her broomstick? Too bad the stench of pelosi is not benefiting the "chat & run" crowd?
You say Murtha. And, I say Mirtha. And, some day we will laugh the whole thing off.
Posted by: Carol Herman | February 27, 2007 at 11:22 AM
Rick Ballard,
I'll keep it simple. If you gave everyone a test that included who represents you including: President, US Senators, Representative, and Governor, I would be surprised if more than 10% would get all of them right. And if you can't get these right, how can you not be clueless....
Posted by: PMII | February 27, 2007 at 11:25 AM
Uncle Charlie:
Nice parody!
Posted by: JM Hanes | February 27, 2007 at 11:28 AM
Telluride? Skiing? I had a law class too. He was retired CIA. Public International law as opposed to Chayes International Law. He wasn't considered anything exceptional with the exception of Kennedy. Peace Corps. Joe, Foley, Fern.
Okay; Abrams, tank, Abram, Sherman; that should make your research easier.
Spelling? I think she runs the Red Cross or something and she's all kids.
Posted by: defend net neutrality | February 27, 2007 at 11:31 AM
PMII:
I'll keep it simple. If you gave everyone a test that included who represents you including: President, US Senators, Representative, and Governor, I would be surprised if more than 10% would get all of them right.
I could answer all of them, but last night I saw my governor on tv and I was seeing him
as if forthe first time.Told my wife, that you coulda put he and Jesse Jackson together in a lineup and I would have hesitated before picking him as my governor.
Posted by: hit and run | February 27, 2007 at 11:31 AM
This is basic, basic stuff. If you take the VP out of the loop, as EJ Dionne has apparently done, the "WH ignored the intelligence" meme becomes inoperable.
ABC's gaffe was even worse. There is no dispute, right, left or center, no one is being tried for leaking anything. Basic stuff.
It seems to me that corporate journalists often do not have the time to research a story adequately. I don't know why.
Posted by: Chants | February 27, 2007 at 11:31 AM
The Wilsons must first survive the motions to dismiss
I know this makes me a really bad person, but I so want this case to survive thru discovery. Please please please let's depose Joe and Val.
Posted by: Jane | February 27, 2007 at 11:33 AM
Please please please let's depose Joe and Val.
Posted by: Jane | February 27, 2007 at 08:33 AM
Make it a video deposition, to boot.
Posted by: Chants | February 27, 2007 at 11:38 AM
I know how you feel, Jane. But I think they knew before they even filed that their case would never reach the discovery phase, and they would never have to appear for examination under oath. Judge Bates will frog-march them out of court, and then they will complain that he's a Republican.
Posted by: Other Tom | February 27, 2007 at 11:38 AM
We could be devious and get one of us to pose as a biographer--where's that rascal PUK?
Posted by: clarice | February 27, 2007 at 11:42 AM
Val and Joe under oath in a truth-telling no spin zone...I can dream can't I?
Posted by: maryrose | February 27, 2007 at 11:43 AM
Somehow, I don't think UncleCharlie listened to any of the defense's cross.
Posted by: Pofarmer | February 27, 2007 at 11:47 AM
TM:
"Public perceptions can be hard to change, as Mr. Dionne demonstrates."
I also think that it's entirely possible that only the crowd reading JOM & Captain's Quarters et al actually know about the dates that make the VP's behesting impossible. Having given up on Dionne in disgust a year or more ago, I believe it's also entirely possible that he might ignore that fact even if he were made aware of it -- but I do wonder if anybody has actually tried to bring it to his attention.
Unless it's headlined by Drudge (was it headlined by Drudge?), there's not much reason to believe what's common knowledge here has penetrated the MSM. Dionne's response to my last scathing missive suggests that he sees reader email as a marketing opportunity: Thanks for writing. You'll want to buy my book!
Posted by: JM Hanes | February 27, 2007 at 11:49 AM
By coincidence, JMH, three minutes ago I sent Dionne another e-mail, this time with the appropriate excerpt from Wilson's remarks at the EPIC conference. I suggested to him that his credibility was his own concern, but that he should be aware that the facts are available to all who are interested in seeking them, and those facts are being discussed extensively on the web today, at the great expense of E.J. Dionne's reputation. Whether any of this will penetrate is another matter altogether, but at least he's on notice that well-informed people are scrutinizing what he says, and they are in constant touch with one another.
Posted by: Other Tom | February 27, 2007 at 11:55 AM
Good for you. These people live in a bubble where the only facts at their disposal are the ones their friends made up.
Posted by: clarice | February 27, 2007 at 12:00 PM
I got a post to go through at the swamp. Wonder how long it will remain?
Posted by: Sue | February 27, 2007 at 12:03 PM
I believe the jurors convene daily at nine. Anybody know what time they call it a day, and how long they break for lunch?
Posted by: Other Tom | February 27, 2007 at 12:18 PM
Clarice! Out of the park! This may be the most concise summation of all that's wrong with the MSM I've ever read! There are a myriad of things wrong with the MSM, but you statement really does hit the heart of the matter:
"These people live in a bubble where the only facts at their disposal are the ones their friends made up."
Beautiful, just beautiful!
Posted by: secarr | February 27, 2007 at 12:19 PM
Most Courts I've been in have lunch from 1-2. So the soonest we would hear about a verdict would probably be 2:30. And most Courts (around here) end the day at 4:00 altho jurors have been known to stay longer if they are close.
It's not like working for the government is heavy lifting.
Posted by: Jane | February 27, 2007 at 12:20 PM
maryrose,
--I hope your wife is doing OK.--
She's doing fine. In remission and feeling good; getting back to normal. Thank you for thinking of her.
Posted by: Barney Frank | February 27, 2007 at 12:27 PM
Today should be the day. If they do not come to a verdict today it is a strong indication that they are having trouble. It really should have been yesterday, but between the morning issues with the art curator and the afternoon power outages, I can see it slipping into today. After today we will start the "hung jury watch."
Posted by: theo | February 27, 2007 at 12:30 PM
It's not like working for the government is heavy lifting.
Ask a section chief in any large bureaucracy "about how many people work here?" and the honest reply will be " about half of them."
Posted by: Gary Maxwell | February 27, 2007 at 12:30 PM
BF, That's very good news, indeed.
Posted by: clarice | February 27, 2007 at 12:32 PM
Good for you. These people live in a bubble where the only facts at their disposal are the ones their friends made up.
So true yet for years I've had to endure the MSM insinuate that the Bush Administration was living in a bubble and was disconnected from the average American.
The MSM couldn't recognize a average American out of a line-up, they (MSM) are the ones which live in a cocoon. President Bush was elected to his second term and received more votes than any President in history, the MSM are lucky to get a million viewers and a large percentage of those are there to see how much they get wrong.....
Posted by: royf | February 27, 2007 at 12:33 PM
OT wrote: and the failure of the plaintiffs to allege cognizable constitutional torts
A translation of "cognizable constitutional torts" please.
Posted by: Alcibiades | February 27, 2007 at 12:37 PM
Clarice,
Biography,something like,"Dude,Where's My Cover?"
Posted by: PeterUK | February 27, 2007 at 12:37 PM
Sue-
Ya-I went over there to the Land of "watery tarts".
Stupid bastards only time they give an F about the military is when they are dead and useful for "headlines".
You know what-I admire you for going over there and givng it a go-but I wonder if it's good for your blood pressure-
They are over there questioning your tone.
Posted by: roanoke | February 27, 2007 at 12:38 PM
Just keep in mind that even if they are close to hanging, they may be hanging on as few as one or two counts. They may have reached unanimity on the others some time ago.
Posted by: Other Tom | February 27, 2007 at 12:38 PM
JMHanes.
"Thanks for writing. You'll want to buy my book!"
Tell him only if it comes on a perforated roll.
Posted by: PeterUK | February 27, 2007 at 12:39 PM
PUK, I'm flattered that you would seek my advice, but we all know you are the king of deviousness and need absolutely no input from anyone...esp not from a naif like me.
Posted by: clarice | February 27, 2007 at 12:42 PM
Jane:
"I know this makes me a really bad person, but I so want this case to survive thru discovery. Please please please let's depose Joe and Val."
I picked up the Wilson's Opposition to the dismissal motion (Doc 32, 1:06-cv-01258) from Pacer, and while I haven't yet read the defendants' replies, the CREW team made a far more credible argument than I expected. It's my understanding that in determing whether or not to dismiss, the only question the Judge has to answer is: If everything the plaintiff alleges were true, would that be an adequate basis on which to proceed?
When the factual errors that pervade the Wilson's complaint are removed from consideration, I'm not so sure that a dismissal is a slam dunk. Ignoring, for the moment, my own opinion of the complainants, I'd have to say that, at first blush, I find the VP's claims of absolute immunity rather unsettling. That's one of several issues in contention that struck me as worth pondering. Of course, I won't know whether the cases they cite are actually on point till I read the responses. ::grin::
Posted by: JM Hanes | February 27, 2007 at 12:45 PM
You know what-I admire you for going over there and givng it a go-but I wonder if it's good for your blood pressure-
::grin:: Don't worry about my blood pressure. I'm like Cheney, without the heart problems. Cool. Not easily rattled. And really don't give a shit what they think about me or my POV enough to get my blood pressure up.
I'm surprised I was allowed to post anything. The moderators must be busy.
Posted by: Sue | February 27, 2007 at 12:46 PM