I Salute The Times

If the NY Times is gracious enough to serve me crow, I should be gracious enough take a healthy helping - contra my complaint of a few days back, the Times has revised their "Diary of a Leak" coverage of John Hannah's testimony.

Here is their original text describing Special Counsel Fitzgerald's cross examination of John Hannah:

Mr. Hannah conceded that if Mr. Libby took two hours out of his busy day - as he did to meet with Ms. Miller - it meant Mr. Libby considered Ms. Wilson a key issue.

My point - Mr. Fitzgerald had asked a more or less rhetorical question noting that if Libby spent two hours with Judy Miler it must have been important to him; however, he had not mentioned "the wife" in his question, and most of the meeting had been devoted to Libby's presentation of the secretly declassified National Intelligence Estimate.

The revised Times:

Prosecutor Patrick suggested that Mr. Libby would have devoted time only to matters of great concern to him in the week of July 6, 2003. He asked Mr. Hannah that if Mr. Libby spent "an hour or two" on something during that week, whether that could be construed as something important to Mr. Libby. "Well, with regard to me, yes," Mr. Hannah replied. Left unsaid in the exchange was undisputed testimony that Mr. Libby spent nearly two hours on July 8, with Ms. Miller.

Hard to fault that as it stands alone.  My one quibble is really more a comment on the inherent problem of doing a summary of this case - most of the details other than the discussions of Ms. Plame have been summarily dismissed. 

For example, here is the Judy Miller summary:

PROSECUTION: Mr. Libby first told her about Ms. Wilson's identity on June 23, 2003, saying that she worked for the "bureau," a reference she first thought was to the F.B.I. but which she soon realized meant a division of the C.I.A. He discussed the agent with her again on July 8.

DEFENSE: The defense brought up several occasions in which Ms. Miller acknowledged a weak memory and seemed not entirely certain of the notes she made after meeting with Mr. Libby. Ms. Miller admitted that she heard about Ms. Wilson from sources other than Mr. Libby but she could not remember who those people were.

One might be left thinking that Judy Miller and Libby discussed nothing other than Ms. Plame, which is not accurate.   But this is a summary.

Comments

[Rick Ballard]

OK, I'll salute the Times too.

Geez, what happened to my strength? I can barely raise one finger!

[hit and run]

Yeah, one of my fingers has risen to the occasion. Actually two of them. One on each hand.

[[email protected]]

Five Year Lawmaker!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Rick Ballard]

Geffen managed that two fingered, two hand salute in opposition to the Times annointment of Mrs. Clinton. I'd pay for a seat at a Geffen - Sulzberger matchup and cheer every low blow received by either.

[clarice]

Watch Hillary! When she thinks she's on top she shrilly shouts like your mother did when your room was a mess.But yesterday when under the gun, she reverts to a soft spoken folksy style full of middle American colloguialisms--remember "stand by your man"? Same thing.
Man , she should never play poker.

[dorf]

Pant suits are in our future I fear.

[hit and run]

dorf:
Pant suits are in our future I fear.

[Insert Giuliani cross-dressing joke here]

[dorf]

I'll take Rudi in a dress any day over a Maoist in pants.

[Gary Maxwell]

OT

Confederate Yankee has a very funny post up, at least I found it humorous, dark humor but funny enough to laugh out loud. Here is the Title:

Raceless Female Raped by Raceless Male at a Party Hosted By a Raceless Fraternity in the Same City Where Rich White Boys Raped A Poor Black Stripper

[clarice]

Gary, if I ever get around to writing,"How to Read a Newspaper", that will be one of my examples, along w. a story today about a moonbat who was visiting and attacking campus Republicans for their beliefs which never identified the political views of the assailant, indeed, indicated they were unknown.

[Carol Herman]

FROM CAROL HERMAN

Perhaps some of you are waiting for a miracle? Like God proposing "LET THERE BE LIGHT."

On the other hand? Just what will Woodward do?

He's got an "insider" on the jury.

The jury has a way to create for itself a "media run" after this trial is over. Meaning? They could take with them more than just a red Valentine's tee-shirt.

ANd, as far as we know; Fitz won't be making the rounds of TV talk shows, either.

Will Fitz FRITZ Russert? Will people be asking, ahead, for TUBBY FRIES?

Is it possible, like someone posted to JOM, yesterday, that Woodward's book is already written. ALl he needs is some "last chapter interviews?"

Certainly won't sell like WaterGate. And, it will NEVER be as good as Allice In Wonderland!

But up ahead? You just never know how things come out, when the toothpaste tube accidently squirts up more than you need?

Up at the Wall Street Journal, today? Guilini's name has broken loose of it's bonds, where he was a persecutor from HELL! You want a man like that to occupy the Oval Office? (Gee, you don't think he wouldn't stuff his administration with goons like Bernie Korik?)

Hard to say what's ahead. Only that Americans, for the most part, have chosen not to listen. Not to participate in this swamp.

A long time ago, Lincoln rose to fame; and in particular wrote and gave his HOUSE DIVIDED SPEECH, repeatedly.

There hasn't been a single speech writer equal to such a task.

As to waiting for this jury to come back? Where a book deal probably has them seated longer than it should to decide?

It's the one factor where I think a "hung jury" caboshes the potential for fame. And, fame, more than plame looks like the joker in the deck, so far.

Who pulls it?

Who cares?

[roanoke]

dorf-

Well that's the Maoist Motto-isn't it?

Pantsuits for Everyone!

[Carol Herman]

FM: CAROL HERMAN

TO: DORF

In reading SUPREME CONFLICT, it turns out, when Anthony Kennedy swung left (1991), instead of hiring conservative clerks (as had been his wont), he hired a protege of LAWURENCE TRIBE: MICHAEL DORF.

So, Dorf, are you that guy?

"Maoists" at haarvard, aren't what most people think of when they're debating tyrants, ya know?

[dorf]

Carol: with my law school grades I would not be allowed to be a member of a tour group to the supreme court.

[Carol Herman]

FM: CAROL HERMAN

TO: DORF

A better answer would have been that your first name isn't Michael.

[chad]

@Carol Herman -

I am just a semi-regular reader here so maybe I am missing something, but WTH are you trying to say?

In every thread I see huge booming pronouncements from you and out of the billions you have posted I have been unbale to figure out what your point is. Help me please. Spell it out in a way my simple mind can understand. And lay off the caps please it's starting to cause me to have epileptic fits just like a flashing red light.

I'm serious here I know you have something to say, I know you feel it is important, I just can't puzzle out what it is.

[arcanorum]

"A better answer would have been that your first name isn't Michael."

more precise perhaps, but not half as funny.

"Kent Dorfman: Uh, what's my Delta Tau Chi name?
Bluto: Dorfman, I've given this a lot of thought. From now on, your name is Flounder.
Kent Dorfman: [Pause] Flounder?"
- Animal House

[arcanorum]

"Spell it out in a way my simple mind can understand. "

a simple mind has no chance of comprehension of the rich and complex tapestry carol weaves with historical, political and pop culture threads, best for you when you see her byline to scroll on by.

yes, just scroll on by.

[maryrose]

arcanorum:
Any "Animal House reference is always welcome. I believe Belusi's response to "Flounder?" was "Why Not?"

[me]

NOT FROM CAROL HERMAN

As I am not Carol Herman, I am not INSANE.

[arcanorum]

"As I am not Carol Herman, I am not INSANE."

There is no great genius without some touch of madness.
-Seneca

ad hominem attacks, the sign of a weak mind.

[Gideon]

Another long time lurker. Carol, I know you must be passionate about this, and that is great, but your long posts sail right over my head too.

[arcanorum]

"Another long time lurker. Carol, I know you must be passionate about this, and that is great, but your long posts sail right over my head too."

many have voiced a similar complaint, and so Carol has thoughtfully labelled her posts at the top of each one with her byline. When you see this byline, and if you do not appreciate her wit and insight, then just scroll on by.

yes, just scroll on by.

[me2]

FROM CAROL HERMAN MUNSTER

Lily? Lilly? Grandpa? Eddie?

[Happy Days]

Re: Carol's posts.

I was wondering if it was just me. Glad to know it's not.

[me3]

FROM PEE-WEE HERMAN

Has anybody seen my missing bicycle?

[rjarango]

The Plamiacs here are going to go through major withdrawal when this case is over! What is the next project?

[Carol Herman]

FROM CAROL HERMAN

To, Chad. And, others. The banner on top is to "halp" you. It lets you identify my post, so you can just scroll on by. It's the SOB factor.

[Carol Herman]

FROM CAROL HERMAN

What a slow news day!

But ya know what? For those that "can get it," here's an observation from the CAINE MUTINY.

It's more than just a story about strawberries.

There's also a key scene, where Captain Queeg, locked in his mental paranoia, is upbraiding a sailor. Because the sailor's shirt tails are not tucked inside his pants.

Ah. So, while he was upbraiding the sailor, his ship was going in circles. AND, CUT THE TOW LINE.

Good lesson.

Goes along with a great tale. For those who need their shirt tails tucked inside? There's always the SOB RULE.

[Patton]

I think Carol Herman is actually Tom Maquires alter ego...kind of like Ed Norton and Brad Pitt in Fight Club.

Tom blanks out and doesn't know 'Carol' has taken over....
It's a working theory.

[Carol Herman]

FM: CAROL HERMAN
TO: RJ ARANGO

Interesting that you think there's no life after this trial ends. While I believe Woodward wants to have a BLOCK BUSTER. He's probably got the goods on Armitage. He probably "dislikes" Fitzgerald even more than he disliked Nixon.

So until you see what he puts into print, you can spend some amount of time trying to guess?

What's his best shot,coming out of this jury? And, if there's "No Michael Jordan" to get the ball into the Net," what would the rim shot be?

Don't confuse those who "pay attention," with people who have nothing else to do. Because that's a false premise.

[Patton]

Well, the crazy judge in Florida just gave custody of Anna Nicoles body to Scooter Libby....Ahhh, things are back to normal.

[sbw]

Regardless of the outcome of this trial, why shouldn't President Bush declassify the CIA referral to DOJ of the "Plame" case that Fitz wanted to keep hidden?

[hithere]

FROM CAROL BURNETT

I'm so glad we had this time together....

[miriam]

Regardless of the outcome of this trial, why shouldn't President Bush declassify the CIA referral to DOJ of the "Plame" case that Fitz wanted to keep hidden?

Clarice, is this a possiblility?

[clarice]

He can declassify anything. He's the Prez and that is an executive function.
The CIA might try to talk him out of it w/ blabber about secrets that might hurt national security to divulge. But if I were him I'd tell them what I think after all this and post it on the WH website os ANS tomb marker since it will certainly draw no press interest.

[Carol Herman]

FROM CAROL HERMAN

Early guess on Woodward's next book title: TENET'S REVENGE.

The "real fifi" up on a Libby thread at Freeper's details not just the NY Times article; but Azaghal and JM Hayne posts as well.

Well, while we wait for the jury, why not try to connect some dots on who caused this mess to fall into the swamp in the first place? While it bypassed Aschroft's well-oiled body. More into following his own religious beliefs, than in ever serving this president. So be it. But payback probably will journey forward, ahead.

[chad]

@Carol Herman

I'm serious, if you have a point you are trying to make I am more than willing to consider it. I just don't understand what it is.

Your response to just scroll on by and the follow-on referencing the Caine Mutiny.

Yes I know that the strawberries incident was used as an analogy earlier in the trial, but I don't quite understand your point about Seaman Urban and the shirttail in this context.

I could see it as an expression of Fitzgeralds unnatural fixation on Libby, but that hasn't been demonstrated. I think it has been demonstrated that Fitzgerald lacking a case for what the investigation was putatively opened for tried to save some face by bringing questionable charges. To me however that would fit in more with the Maeryk prosecution in the book.

And what is the SOB rule?

[royf]

What would be great if right as President Bush were leaving office he released the entire case, All the transcripts and interviews and shady agreements everything.

The journalists double dealings all of it, the press will never write anything positive about 43 anyway, At least we could watch the press and all the other dirty players sling mud at each other for the next ten years....

[hit and run]

Clarice:
He can declassify anything. He's the Prez and that is an executive function.

Has anyone ever asked if Bush has read the referral? Any chance that he has?

[cathyf]

And what is the SOB rule?

Scroll On By

[Carol Herman]

FROM CAROL HERMAN

Really, Chad, you are a very s-l-o-w learner.

SOB stands for SCROLL ON BY.

But better yet, if you read just the first letter in every paragraph coming down, so far, it reads: ROVE DID IT.

And, no. I'm not selling you a DECODER RING, either.

[MarkO]

Wow. Case at an end and everyone turns on one another. It's amazing that we all think that our posts are more cogent and comprehensible than Carol's. She doesn't pretend to be all knowing---and I have allowed that she is an acquired taste. At least she is self- aware and posts her name at the top of her posts. If you read them, you assume the risk; if you don’t, so what? But, derision could better be directed to the unctuous among us, including, from time to time, me. Even now.

[Cecil Turner]

I could see it as an expression of Fitzgeralds unnatural fixation on Libby, but that hasn't been demonstrated.

Not sure how it could be, except by inference.

I think it has been demonstrated that Fitzgerald lacking a case for what the investigation was putatively opened for tried to save some face by bringing questionable charges.

Really? Seems to me he could pin a pretty good one on either Armitage or Fleischer . . . both of whom read bits of a TS memo (or an attachment), and blabbed to reporters. Or perhaps Fitz has an unnatural fixation on Libby.

[Cecil Turner]

It's amazing that we all think that our posts are more cogent and comprehensible than Carol's.

Oh, I don't think that. (Just kidding, I think my posts are more cogent and comprehensible than just about everyone else's . . . just like everyone else does.) But I would echo the point that Carol puts those headers on by popular demand. And thus giving her grief for them is both unwarranted and misdirected.

[capitano]

Watch Hillary! When she thinks she's on top she shrilly shouts like your mother

...first ex-mother-in-law.

[Carol Herman]

FROM CAROL HERMAN

Oh, no! Never you!, Mark O. Coming as I am now to appreciate so much wit and piracy jokes.

And, believe it or not, I'm not offended. I've been in classrooms where, when the teacher left, the black board erasers would be flung. And, then hidden. We created an atmosphere, in my yoot, that few teachers dared risk living the room.

But that's just me.

Here, I want to raise the issue of GEORGE TENET. And, how the puzzle piece Azaghal's post ... run up at FREEPER's ... by the "Real Fifi," brought to my attention that so far the BIG GUNS HAVE NOT BEEN FIRED.

Not by Bush.

Not by Woodward.

And, Tenet? His book was supposed to hit Amazon on February 6th. On SUnday, February 4th Drudge said he was reading from an advance copy.

Drudge said he "couldn't believe it!" the First Paragraph was such a mess! It sounded like "On 9/12/2001 [tenet] was on [his] way into the Oval Office to meet the President for the first time. When walking out was Richard Pearl. Who said to [tenet] "Ah, now we can go after Saddam."

Anyway, I've heard press stories that Tenet's still writing his book? Or perhaps he's just waiting for the jury's verdict?

While Woodward? What could happen ahead, if there's gonna be "dueling books" Tenet and Woodward are gonna be out there SHOUTING at each other.

Sure. Woodward never raises his voice.

But he has powerhouse writing gifts, when he sets his mind to it.

And, no shrinker from this ball, either, will be Robert Novak.

I think the dust, though, has to settle on the Libby trial, for the Libby scenery to be moved off stage. And, the BIG GUNS come in.

Nicely poised to move the clock too? Towards 2008? Where a few candidates with their hats currently in the ring, aren't really getting themselves strategically placed for the future engagement?

Well, at least RJ ARANGO doesn't have to worry. ATTENTION MAY GET PAID TO THESE ISSUES YET? And, not just here. And, not just by a few devoted fans who like to play "Sherlock."

[MarkO]

Carol,

Don't make me rethink that.

[PaulV]

Hate to say it but after watching Anna Nicole Smith TV, all ANS, nothing but ANS, Carol Herman seems sensible. TM should give her her own thread,

[Sara (Squiggler]

including, from time to time, me. Even now.

Ya think?

[maryrose]

capitano:
Good one.
Hillay -screaming and throwing things -isn't that what a two year old does when she throws a tantrum?
Hil in Nevada -talking about the "politics of personal destruction and vast right wing conspiracy-more excuses for not taking responsibility for her own and Bill's illegal actions.
Last night Matthews for once got it right as did Schrummy-Hil is not to be criticized BY ANYONE-least of all Geffen. Wolfson could not answer coherently when Matthews trie to point out to him the perception that Hil and Bill are not to be criticized.

[Dale in Atlanta]

FROM DALE IN ATLANTA
TO: CHAD...

Chad, unfortunately, Carol posts over at Captain's Quarter's Blog, and occasionally at AJ Strata's.

And sadly, her posts on those two boards, are even more incomprehensible than her ludicrous posts here!

Fortunately, over at CQB, people know better by know, and the vast majority just completey ignore her; best not to even answer or post a reply or question.

Occasionally, someone will make a mistake, and ask her to clarify something (an oxymoron, actually..); and the results in even more mindless rants and drivels, that leave people scratching their heads, and wondering....

My advice: ignore her completely, ANY type of "attention", only encourages her....

[chad]

Dale,

I think I will take your advice.

[chad]

- I think it has been demonstrated that Fitzgerald lacking a case for what the investigation was putatively opened for tried to save some face by bringing questionable charges.-

Really? Seems to me he could pin a pretty good one on either Armitage or Fleischer . . . both of whom read bits of a TS memo (or an attachment), and blabbed to reporters. Or perhaps Fitz has an unnatural fixation on Libby.

I agree that these two could potentially be charged with revealing classified information, but the investigation was supposedly dealing with an IIPA violation.

Neither of these individuals are apparently guilty of that crime.

They are also not as tempting a target as the VP's Chief of Staff.

I think my point stands.

[PeterUK]

I can remember the time if a man and a woman were alone together for two hours the first thing that was suspected was an affair,now it seems they must be discussing Plame/Wilson.A great excuse for the divorce courts,but with that vision in mind,one would need to OD on Viagra.No wonder the liberals aren't breeding.

[arcanorum]

"My advice: ignore her completely, ANY type of "attention", only encourages her...."

"Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you."
-Christ

thanks very much for the advice.

but next time, just scroll on by, its not so hard.

[Carol Herman]

FROM CAROL HERMAN

When I was young, my dad read to me Aesop's Fables. His favorite one dealt with a blind canary. Who was blinded following a contest in the forest, where sure of her singing skills, she got into a debate with a crow, "as to which bird had the better voice."

The crow proposed the bet. The next animal that wandered into their area of the forest would be asked to hear them both sing. And, then that animal would chose. And, the "winnah" would get to pluck out the eyes of the loser.

Afterwards, the canary was asked, "what does it feel like to be blind?" And, the canary responded it wasn't the blindness that bothered her; ONLY THAT A PIG WAS HER JUDGE.

The Internet is an open forum. Not really owned by bullies. Be they right wing nutter types. Or dull leftoids. And as far as I'm concerned there's no way anyone's remarks can cover everyone under the Bell Curve.

As to the limitations of some blogs? I noticed it this morning. When I posted that I didn't think FIRE DOG LAKE was gonna get to fame, after the court closes down. Because? For some reason, even with the Internet coverage; by having the media types "select" such odd voices as you saw spinning from EMPTY WHEEL, all you really saw is that mainstream America TUNED OUT.

If mainstream America had been following this trial; it would have been big news. Drudge would have been in the forefront of the coverage. So, at first, I noticed, he was not.

That a few people sling insults? Nothing newsworthy in that.

And, Dale's dumb remark? That I get "encouraged?" Nah. By the time I hit the POST BUTTON I'm thru.

And, ya still have the choice right at the top to just scroll on by.

WHile the Dale's of the world? They're always cutting their own tow lines.

[bio mom]

Posted by Byron York at NRO's TheCorner: No verdict today. Jury has ended their deliberations for today.

[PeterUK]

"The Plamiacs here are going to go through major withdrawal when this case is over! What is the next project?"

There is no other project "De Var fill go on foreffer".

[JM Hanes]

PUK

We seem to have a slew of folks wandering by to speculate on the magnitude of our imminent withdrawal symptoms, don't we? Such folks must be suffering from a serious deficit of the imagination.

[Rick Ballard]

Some of it is just honest curiosity. rjarango had absolutely no ulterior motive to his question. He's a contributor at Flares who has been busy with other matters for a bit.

[PeterUK]

JM Hanes,
They haven't seen "The Duelists".

[Rick]

"My advice: ignore her completely, ANY type of "attention", only encourages her...."

Dale,

That certainly never works with semanticleo--much more incomprehensible--so why would affect anyone else differently?

Cordially...

[Cecil Turner]

I agree that these two could potentially be charged with revealing classified information, but the investigation was supposedly dealing with an IIPA violation.

Don't recall seeing anything in the appointment letter about the IIPA. Per the indictment, the original tasker was:

a criminal investigation into the possible unauthorized disclosure of classified information regarding Valerie Wilson’s CIA affiliation to various reporters in the spring of 2003

That seems to match up fairly exactly with Armitage's role . . . especially since he was the source of the leak that actually got published.

Neither of these individuals are apparently guilty of that crime.

Probably not, or any other crime, as they both appear to lack criminal intent. (Just as Libby does.)

They are also not as tempting a target as the VP's Chief of Staff.

I think my point stands.

If your point is that he was fixated on Libby--despite him having little or nothing to do with the actual leak--because he was the VP's Chief of Staff, I think that works.

[PeterUK]

Carol.
Your posts are very racy and scatological,reminiscent of JP Donleavy,but they need organising into chapters,then you can get the book published.

[clarice]

PUK, you are really devious.

[Carol Herman]

FROM CAROL HERMAN

Actually the advice from Mark O is well taken. I see him saying that snarking among shipmates is STUPID.

All points of view add something to the mix.

Cleo didn't need a clintonian sized stain on her "blue gap dress." Or anywhere near her posts.

It's a free country. Everyone's entitled to their opinions.

And, if everyone here was actually convinced that Libby had a "SLAM DUNK" we'd be out there quoting the imbicile with the Medal of Freedom, George Tenet.

Where does evil lurk? In politics, as the Nixon fiasco showed, when the insiders are shark hunting, the president's head falls.

And, so far? I'm pleased to see that Bush's head is still ON. And, up ahead, when the Libby scenery is removed from the landscape? I think a lot of people will get a much clearer view of the actual "perps" in this lunatic case. As if Mrs. Wilson ever supported real important secret stuff at the CIA! Probably a chance as close to NEVER as you're gonna get.

And, if it comes to eating your own shipmates, that kind of canibalism works better on the left, anyway. They're trained feeders at this stuff. WHile here you merely get pikers.

[PeterUK]

Thank you Clarice.

[Alcibiades]

Carol:

The "real fifi" up on a Libby thread at Freeper's details not just the NY Times article; but Azaghal and JM Hayne posts as well.

What's the link to that? I haven't learned to navigate at Freepers yet.

[clarice]

HEH,PUK!

[Alcibiades]

Last night Matthews for once got it right as did Schrummy-Hil is not to be criticized BY ANYONE-least of all Geffen.

Of course, back in the day, BB (before Bush), when Matthews was semi sane and much more watchable, he regularly criticized the Clintons and had on guests who did the same.

Back then, the liberals used to criticize him for being too far to the right!

[nodakboy]

The "purloined letter" of the whole Libby-Wilson-Plame game is the fact that Cheney-Rove-Libby obviously thought that the fact that Wilson was sent to Niger because his wife worked at Langley.
Why is that a significant link? Why would telling a reporter about the Wilson-Plame bedfellows tend to discredit Wilson's report, such as it was?
Someone should walk us all through this seemingly overlooked but pivotal fact, or macguffin, as Hitchcock would say, to the whole plot of the soon-to-be book-then-a-film.
It's not enough to say that Wilson-Plame hookup shows nepotism. So what if it was nepotism? That wouldn't discredit his report, really.
It doesn't really show that Wilson was not qualified enough to get the story.
Whoever went at the CIA's beck would gather the moss of vetting by The Company; and the ensuing report would stand on its own, with sources, etc.
I suggest, or wonder, if what Cheney-Rove-Libby saw in the Wilson-Plame link is an obvious example of shenanigans within CIA and maybe State, in foiling the Administration's attempts to build the case for toppling Saddam, and in mounting the war on terror.
But no journalists seem to have picked up on this - Tom Friedman was puzzling over it all on Tuesday on Imus's show - but rather started freaking out (so sincerely, no?) about the morally depraved act of mentioning that Wilson's wife worked at Langley.
Wouldn't a better story be why did Cheney-Rove-Libby see the Plame link as discrediting Wilson, in general, or regarding his report on Niger.
Maybe because the Plame link showed a propensity of some in the CIA to stage-manage intelligence, by sending a useful idiot, who will get the story that some in the CIA want gotten, not necessarily the straight poop. To make sure, in fact, that the intelligence is NOT gathered; perhaps rather, covered up.
And what does that, if it's true, mean?
That might be a big story.

[JM Hanes]

markO:

"Wow. Case at an end and everyone turns on one another."

A little dramatic, don't you think? Reaction to certain posters has always been mixed here. Just like some folks can't resist flamebait, while others complain that such replies give trolls the very satisfaction they crave as threads wobble off the rails. I, myself, do some of both, of course -- but hitherforth I'll try to avoid unctiousness in deference to your sensibilities. :)

[Syl]

Such folks must be suffering from a serious deficit of the imagination.

Surely. But the real reason they're over here wondering what will happen to US during withdrawal is that during their OWN withdrawal all they can think of to do is come over here and ask US.

It's a cry for help!

:)

[miriam]

Bait and Switch by Clarice

Great article.

[Rick Ballard]

Syl,

I think it's safe to disclose now. The practices of the Idaho State Cosmetologist Licensing Board have been begging for exposure for years and it's up to JOMers to bring it under scrutiny.

[chad]

@Cecil Turner

That's why I said the putative reason.

putative(a): commonly put forth or accepted as true on inconclusive grounds; "the foundling's putative father"; "the reputed (or purported) author of the book"; "the supposed date of birth"

It is commonly accepted that the purpose of Patrick Fitzgerald's investigation was to discover who "outed" Valerie Plame, and in the dreams of many charge them with violating the IIPA. The fact that the appointment letter reads differently doesn't change that.

IRT fixation on Libby - While Libby became the target I think Fitzgerald would have been just as happy to get Rove, Cheney, or Rumsfeld, so I don't see that as a fixation on Libby. I might concede he was fixated on finding an official in the OotP or OVP. That would rule out Armitage.

[cathyf]

I suggest, or wonder, if what Cheney-Rove-Libby saw in the Wilson-Plame link is an obvious example of shenanigans within CIA and maybe State, in foiling the Administration's attempts to build the case for toppling Saddam, and in mounting the war on terror.

*snort*. Look, Honey, all of the actual evidence is that Cheney-Rove-Libby didn't see anything at all in th Wilson-Plame link until Dick Armitage explained it to them. (Through Bob Woodward, Bob Novak, and however many other leaks he did in between those two trying to find a reporter to finally print it.)

[JM Hanes]

nodakboy:

"Maybe because the Plame link showed a propensity of some in the CIA to stage-manage intelligence, by sending a useful idiot, who will get the story that some in the CIA want gotten, not necessarily the straight poop. To make sure, in fact, that the intelligence is NOT gathered; perhaps rather, covered up."

While I might frame it in slightly different terms, that is, in fact, where the real story here should have started out. If I had the time, the patience, and the necessary grasp of detail to write the book, that would be Chapter One.

[Cecil Turner]

It is commonly accepted that the purpose of Patrick Fitzgerald's investigation was to discover who "outed" Valerie Plame, and in the dreams of many charge them with violating the IIPA.

Regardless of public perception, Fitz's uninterest in the actual leakers and focusing on the OVP defies logic. Apparently your complaint with "fixation" is that it needn't be on Libby, and any ol' target at OVP or the WH would do. I suspect that's correct, but I'm not sure it's significantly different from a Libby fixation, and in any event is evidence of malfeasance on Fitz's part.

[clarice]

I can't go into details--because I haven't permission--but a reader says there is about one such general referral sent to DoJ per day--that non agents scour the papers and if they see anything which might involve classified info, draft a general purpose referral letter to DoJ. If that is what happened here--and I think it is--there was no Plame NOC IIPA in it..Nothing happened on it either until Tenet called.

[Jane]

JM Hanes,

We have decided on a screen play. We need your help.

[Syl]

but a reader says there is about one such general referral sent to DoJ per day--that non agents scour the papers and if they see anything which might involve classified info, draft a general purpose referral letter to DoJ.

Ahem. I've mentioned that here myself.

[clarice]

OT--Just another coincidence?

"Columbia, S.C. Two more black South Carolina lawmakers endorsing Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton have ties to a media consulting firm hired by the White House hopeful. However, both the lawmakers and the campaign said Thursday their support has nothing to do with any business dealings"

http://dwb.newsobserver.com/24hour/politics/story/3559707p-12791561c.html

[lurker]

Jeralyn posted that the Libby jury sent two notes to Walton for office supplies and photos of the witnesses.

Sounds like they're bunkering down for real.

Also sounds like they're having problems with the evidence.

[chad]

@Cecil Turner

Regardless of public perception, Fitz's uninterest in the actual leakers and focusing on the OVP defies logic.

I don't think it defies logic. As I understand the timeline in October 2003 Fitzgerald knew who the leaker was and that no actual crime had been committed in the revelation of Plame's relationship to Wilson.

At that point he had a choice, do the right thing and say "No Crime Here" and go home or go on a fishing expedition and hope to land someone big.

He chose the latter. It was his luck that Libby was either forgetful or stupid enough to lie about something he could twist to be material and he took his shot.

I do think that Fitzgerald was very interested in nailing someone in the administration, and I guess you could call that a fixation, but in the context of my discussion with Carol it doesn't fit. That's my only objection.

[azaghal]

Reference was made earlier to the OpinionJournal article that related the Libby trial to other examples of the trend in prosecutorial "style," citing Giuliani and Spitzer.

There are also two other noteworthy articles, OT, at OpinionJournal today. IMO. While I don't believe the second article is terribly deep from an historical or philosophical standpoint, it does raise a lot of important issues in a small space.

The
Spanish Connection

Misplaced Faith

[PeterUK]

"It's not enough to say that Wilson-Plame hookup shows nepotism. So what if it was nepotism? That wouldn't discredit his report, really.
It doesn't really show that Wilson was not qualified enough to get the story."

The question has got to be asked why the CIA Heart of Darkness did not already have an operative in one of the worlds major uranium producers Niger. Surely the CPD looked it up in the CIA Factbook?
The sun might be too much for Val's delicate skin,but a B list diplomatic celebrity like Joe would have the major intelligence agencies sniffing around in a trice,is it claimed that the Mukhabarat had forgotten the "Hero of Baghdad".The only reason to send Joe would be to attract attention whilst the real operatives got the goods.

[Tom Maguire]

Tom blanks out and doesn't know 'Carol' has taken over....
It's a working theory.

I've never seen us together...

I might concede he was fixated on finding an official in the OotP or OVP. That would rule out Armitage.

If Fitzgerald had been interested in "the truth", he would have spent a lot more time wondering who at State had read the INR memo and who at State had chatted with reporters.

If he had even asked Armitage for his June appointment calendar he would have seen Woodward there on June 13.

Does he need a conspiracy to get his juices flowing? Fine, Armitage and Powell leaked like sieves in June; Grossman cooked up his "I told Libby" story with Armitage as part of the cover-up.

Other "evidence" - why did Armitage invite Novak in out of the blue in late June (for a July chat) after ducking him for years?

Had he pushed, maybe he could have bagged Grossman for perjury (Grossman insists he told Libby, but Libby simply forgets this clearly memorable conversation, thereby proving it never happened. And Grossman's story had changed!)

And the ultimate target - Colin Powell, Mr. Clean.

Or, if he had been interested in the truth, Fitzgerald could have pinned down the Fleischer/Gregory story. Was Russert hiding something? Ooops, we can't be jailing reporters for perjury after all th ebad press associated with even interviewing them in the first place. Better not go there.

[bad]

The only reason to send Joe would be to attract attention whilst the real operatives got the goods.

You're going to upset his very important hair!! And he might file a lawsuit against you.

[Carol Herman]

FROM CAROL HEMAN

If the jurors are settling in, as they seem to be doing; does anyone wonder why, yet, they've sent no questions out to da judge?

[Carol Herman]

FROM CAROL HERMAN

And, to the "cast of characters," it should be added that GROSSMAN was Wilson's roommate at college. (UC Santa Barbara). Which takes the whole "PLAME GAME" up to another level. CONSPIRACY.

After the Libby scenery is moved off stage, what we have seen so far is only ACT ONE.

There's NO IMPEACHMENT OF BUSH.

So the left won't be happy no matter what.

And, if Libby "gets the book thrown at him?"

Guiliani is NOT CLEAN! He's just like Fitz, in that he started going after innocent men, making big cases out of NADA. Just to get noticed. And, make his own political footsteps out of it fall into New York's Mayor's Office.

Guiliani, in 2006, also didn't want to race against SPITZER. A man, like himself, to boot. The Governor's seat of NY wasn't good enough?

Sometimes, careers grow. Other times? They explode like zits.

[PeterUK]

Bad,
Perhaps,but there you have the reason the CIA was pissed,they didn't have the information.They had been submitted these vast budgets whilst missing the collapse of the Soviet Union,the fall of the Shah,the subsequent terrorist upsurge,Iraq WMD,9/11,Dr Kahn,Dr Zeus,the Easter Bunny and a myriad things the CIA gets paid to do.
It must have been upsetting to have focus shift from the paper clip appropriation budget to put together intelligence written on the backs of envelopes stuffed into drawers and cupboards.

[JM Hanes]

Rick:

"Some of it is just honest curiosity."

I was really just making idle comments, and didn't intend to single anyone out. I myself suffer from fingers which just keep on typing. Perhaps I can make up the difference with a what-next suggestion of my own -- or to be accurate, by expanding on a comment made by someone else who is welcome to reclaim the credit.

I suspect the chances of an OPR investigation into prosecutorial misconduct are slim to none. While I think writing letters is certainly worth the effort, there's not much we can do to bring influence to bear on that decision. Even were OPR to undertake the effort, there's no guarantee we would be privy to the process or to its results should they be anything less than a clear cut adverse finding.

The idea of exhorting the Administration to declassify all the relevant documents, however, has real possibilities. Sunshine is the best disinfectant, and holds the most promise of laying still unanswered questions to rest.

The beauty of the thing is that our counterparts on left have a vested interest in bringing such facts to light as well and we could potentially join forces to get that job done -- each assuming, of course, that they will ultimately be vindicated by full disclosures. Of course, such a campaign might well end up disturbing the present cosy relationship between the firedogs & a soon to become resistant VIPs & press -- which would be a significant achievement in its own right.

It seems relatively safe to assume that neither the Prez nor VP have further political ambitions, although if the Prez were inclined to render aid to brother JEB, a clearing of the air, not just a potential pardon, as GW leaves office might be just the thing. I should think the VP would definitely be game for it, don't you? I'm not just talking about FOIA'g the referral letter here. I'm talking about getting the real skinny on every mandarinate in sight.

[Bostonian]

nodakboy: "The "purloined letter" of the whole Libby-Wilson-Plame game is the fact that Cheney-Rove-Libby obviously thought that the fact that Wilson was sent to Niger because his wife worked at Langley."

Um, why did Cheney-Rove-Libby "obviously" think this? I mean, how is it obvious to you that they thought this?

[lonetown]

You've got to look at Carol Hermans post as a stream of consciousness that results from a tempest of memes crashing and breaking and reassembling.

What comes out can be some interesting juxtopositions.

[Carol Herman]

FM: CAROL HERMAN
TO: ALCIBAIDES at 3:18 (Pacific time/here)

Libby's link at FREEPERS:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/search?m=all;o=time;s=libby

Here, you'll see a thread called: BAIT & SWITCH. It's Clarice's article at American Thinker. And, right away, when you look at the by-line, you'll see it was posted by THE REAL FIFI.

There are 44 COMMENTS. On this link. And, it is inside that you'll find the REAL FIFI discussing both JM Haynes & Azaghal's posts at JOM.

Hope this helps. Nothing here is a BLUE LINK. You need to cut & paste. Which is the best I can do. It's a pretty visual way of showing you, though,what I'm reading off of my own monitor. The wonderful Ferarri. By ACER.

[JM Hanes]

Jane:

"We have decided on a screen play. We need your help."

If only you'd told me one post sooner!

[Jane]

JMH

RECANT!

[Syl]

TM

Grossman cooked up his "I told Libby" story with Armitage as part of the cover-up....And Grossman's story had changed!

The jury is recreating the wrong chart. It should be on dates of testimony, not dates people 'told' Libby.

-Grossman tells FBI he didn't tell Libby
-Armitage speaks to Grossman night before GJ testimony.
-Grossman tells GJ, sorry, now I'm sure I DID tell Libby.

Doesn't look too good. Looks worse because fitz is quite aware of it.