Important Piece By Byron York

While our headline writer remains on strike, let me flag this important piece by Byron York:

Is Everything We Know About Joe Wilson’s Trip to Niger Wrong?

New evidence from the Libby trial — evidence Senate investigators never saw — could change the storyline.

Very briefly - why was Wilson asked to go to Niger?  The "old" version is that the defense Intelligence Agency circulated a report on Feb 12, 2002 ruminating about Iraq, Niger, and uranium.  The VP expressed an interest and wondered what the CIA thought; so did the State Dept and the Defense Dept.

With all this interest, the CIA felt behooved to organize a trip. Ms. Plame wrote a memo on Feb 12 suggesting her husband (Wilson apologists insist that this was written at the behest of her superiors; all agree that she had suggested Joe for a similar trip to Niger in 1999).  This is all straight from the Senate Intel Committee report.

But wait! 

The wrinkle introduced by Mr. York is a new defense exhibit apparently not available to the Senate investigators - it is a memo from Dick Cheney's CIA briefer to the CIA noting the VP's interest and asking for their thoughts.  And guess what?  The note is dated Feb 13.

The CIA briefer meets with Cheney first thing in the morning and it is a fair guess that he does not wait a day to follow up. Consequently, by the time Cheney had been apprised of the new DIA report and expressed his interest in the CIA reaction, the CIA had already begun turning the wheels to send Joe to Niger.

So why did Wilson think he had been sent by the VP, or as a result of the VP's questions?  One possibility is that he is a shameless, self-promoting liar.  But another perfectly good explanation is that the CIA figured that a bit of name-dropping might help everyone get excited about the Wilson trip, so they told people that the VP was interested in the results (which was fair enough).  Invoking the VP probably has more sway in Washington than invoking the interest of, for example, an Undersecretary of State, or so I would guess.

Meaning that Wilson was misinformed, but that Cheney's interest was not what initiated the Niger trip.

MORE:  Folks who abhor "behested" will balk at "behooved".  Behave.

Comments

[Carol Herman]

FROM CAROL HERMAN

Finally! SOme coverage about WHY Cheney thought Joe was such a liar. And, the media co-operated by silence!

NOW? I'm gonna bet there's such a flood of information! Because how else do you stop the train wreck that was Russert?

Again. CNN (of all people), has Toobin out, now saying RUSSERT was a disaster.

Maybe, it will be worth all the side-issues the press is willing to tell about what had been kept such a tight-lipped inner-circle secret.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/02/08/otsc.toobin/

[Gary Maxwell]

Stick with your first instinct. Its a good one.

[clarice]

Old news--I blogged it at least 2 days ago--And Cecil caught it first. Snap out of it!

[Alcibiades]

Hey, Tom, you got us all over here to see yesterday's article!!?

[Carol Herman]

FROM CAROL HERMAN

Let's say Scooter Libby takes the stand.

Given that the jurors heard 8 hours of the prosecutor's attempts to accuse Libby of his guilt in the GJ, where his lawyer wasn't present ...

Where's the downside for Libby, now? In front of the jurors. Why? Everybody got a belly-full of Libby being hammered by Fitz, IN the GJ. While here?

What can Fitz do on CROSS to top that?

HERE? Don't forget you've got Wells SITTING. And, you've got a JUDGE.

If there are people who have formed an opinion that the GJ system is flawed; wouldn't it help the justice system to see how Fitz could be prevented from jumping to conclusions?

If he harasses Libby in this environment, so much the better.

The other thing I noticed? Fitz is like a man who prematurely ejaculates. He sure wants to "go fast." Look how brief he was with Russert, who delivered his career to Wells on Cross? I don't see what Fitz accomplished at all on re-direct. If that's "saving Russert's skin" ... all Russert is now is a skinless potato.

[Alcibiades]

So while you're here, Tom, and the thread is short, are trackbacks working or not? I assume not...

[hit and run]

I wonder if Tom ain't seeing a spike in traffic - and many of the newbies aren't down here in the bowels.

Might be a good public service to put it up there "in lights"

[400,000]

CIA was behooved? I thought it was UN holding jobs back for some reason, like the Director General?

Psychopaths really don't understand they are, but, hey, Lucifer knows he is so what's their problem? Al is going to Toronto on Joe's CIA travel day and, you know, why worry about Spain or anything? Al invented spying......and global warming.........and the internet........soon it's the whole thing!

[Whitehall]

Can we talk yellowcake now?

Who owned the mines in Niger, who would send an invoice to Saddam?

Wilson had three real missions:

1) Help Kerry by creating a media scandal

2) Divert attention from the French gvernment's role in supplying yellowcake to Saddam, just as they had provided the Osrik reactor and several core reloads of highly enriched uranium to Iraq.

3) Making Joseph Wilson IV a powerful, wealthy, and famous man.

Libby's trial is a travesty and an embarassment for our criminal justice system aand of our MSM but ultimately the yellowcake issue is of FAR greater importance.

[Pete]

Ok, I'll bite. Lets assume that everything York says is true.

So what does that prove? It means that the CIA and the DIA were duking out on the Niger papers (guess who was wrong? and guess who appointed the people who were wrong?). The CIA was responding when a request from Cheney gets tacked along.

Wilson would still be correct in saying that Cheney asked a question and that the CIA sent him to answer the question.

Big deal.

[Another Bob]

Now very Clintonian of you, Pete.

[Another Bob]

*How* not Now.

[pete]

Mr. Cheney, Tear Down This Wall
By Nicholas D. Kristof
The New York Times

Tuesday 06 February 2007

At the Republican National Convention in 2000 that nominated him for vice president, Dick Cheney told a rapturous crowd that Democrats "will offer more lectures, and legalisms, and carefully worded denials. We offer another way, a better way, and a stiff dose of truth."

So, Mr. Cheney, now that the Scooter Libby trial is raising doubts about your own integrity, you owe the nation an explanation. Here are a few questions to help frame your explanation of your activities:

Mr. Vice President, did you push Mr. Libby to dig into Joe Wilson's background and discredit him? Mr. Libby made such a major effort to gather materials from the C.I.A. and State Department about Mr. Wilson - both before and after you told him on June 12, 2003, that his wife worked at the C.I.A. - that it seems likely that you commanded the effort. True?

What did you mean when you wrote, in a note to Scott McClellan that has been entered into evidence, "not going to protect one staffer + sacrifice the guy the Pres. that was asked to stick his head in the meat grinder because of incompetence of others."

First, you wrote that it was "the Pres." who had asked Mr. Libby to do this, and then you crossed out those two words. Did President Bush indeed ask that Mr. Libby take charge of the effort to discredit Ambassador Wilson? And is it true, as was hinted at in the trial, that the White House tried to block the release of this document?

When you discussed Joe Wilson with Mr. Libby on Air Force Two on July 12, 2003, what instructions did you give him?

Trial testimony indicates that on that flight, Mr. Libby looked over some questions a reporter had sent in about Mr. Wilson and then said: "Let me go talk to the boss and I'll be back." After consulting with you, Mr. Libby later called reporters to feed them a skewed version of Mr. Wilson's trip.

Mr. Cheney, on that plane, did you specifically tell Mr. Libby to leak to reporters the fact that Mr. Wilson's wife worked at the C.I.A.?

Deborah Bond of the F.B.I. has testified that Mr. Libby acknowledged in one of his interviews that on that flight, he might have talked to you about whether to tell the news media about Valerie Wilson. So did he?

Since Mr. Libby is renowned for his caution, it seems highly unlikely that he would have leaked classified information twice to reporters right after talking to you, unless you had sanctioned the leak.

During the leak investigation, were you aware that Mr. Libby was telling the F.B.I. apparently false information?

You rode to work with him nearly every day in your limousine, and the issue never came up? Or did you ask Mr. Libby to protect you because you didn't want it known that in fact you were the one who had told him about Ms. Wilson? Was there some other information you wanted kept secret?

Were you trying to cover up your own reliance on misinformation about Iraqi W.M.D. by blaming the C.I.A. and anybody else within range, like Mr. Wilson?

More than anybody, Mr. Vice President, you made the argument in the run-up to the war that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. And one senses, in the indictment and the trial testimony, that by the early summer of 2003, there was panic in your office that the W.M.D. had failed to materialize.

So when Ambassador Wilson came forward, you seem to have been infuriated. You tried to blame the C.I.A., and then your office tried to discredit Mr. Wilson by arguing that he had simply enjoyed a junket arranged by his wife.

Robert Grenier, a C.I.A. official, told the court that he thought the White House was "trying to avoid responsibility for positions that they took with regard to the truth about whether or not Iraq had attempted to acquire uranium from Niger." So did this all arise from an attempted cover-up?

So when are you going to come clean?

When Richard Nixon was accused of misusing campaign contributions in 1952, he gave his famous Checkers speech. When questions rose about Spiro Agnew's conduct in 1973, he repeatedly addressed them in public. (Look, you know you're in trouble when the press tries to hold you to the same standards of transparency and integrity as Nixon and Agnew.)

I'm not accusing you of committing a crime. But there are serious questions here, and you owe the nation not legalisms, but that "stiff dose of truth." If you continue to stonewall, then you don't belong in office and you should resign.

[Thread Herder]

From Old Thread

(This filed under law of unintended consequences, with sincere apologies.)

I'd like to nominate Christopher Fotos for Best Closing Line in a WaPo Fisking. WRT to the most revealing moments in the Russert cross-exam:

The Post's Leonnig and Goldstein spared you from these unneccessarily interesting developments.

Posted by: JM Hanes | February 08, 2007 at 01:20 PM

[clarice]

pete, I liked that a lot better when TM posted it as a thread days ago and fisked it to within an inch of its life.

[ARC: Brian]

Reposting here since the other thread was closed it appears....

From the juror questions, I've noticed that Walton always prefaces with this spiel about Plame speculation about Plame being covert.

Walton reminds jurors that Plame's status as covert is not under consideration here, and they are not to speculate about it. Then he reads the questions

So let me do some of my own speculation.... Is there a Juror question that keeps coming up that is asking that? Is that why he keeps reminding the jurors? In other words, "Juror #4 stop asking me if she's covert, I don't frickin know, and you shouldn't be speculating on it!"

[clarice]

That's my guess..

[jerry]

Note: the date in question is 2.13.02, not 2.13.03 (that would be after the contraversial "16 words" in the SOTU).

[Cecil Turner]

Heh, Mr Wilson-debunked-the-documents himself spinning more conspiracy theories.

Fool me once . . .

[topsecretk9]

--"Juror #4 stop asking me if she's covert, I don't frickin know, and you shouldn't be speculating on it!"--

Heh.

[ARC: Brian]

whats your guess Clarice?

[Patrick R. Sullivan]

Scrappleface reports and derides:

'The prosecution in the perjury trial of I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, the former vice presidential chief of staff, today continued to cast doubt on Mr. Libby’s claim that he “misremembered” details about events that led up to his failure to break a law against leaking a CIA agent’s name to reporters.

'The prosecution called an FBI agent to the stand yesterday to testify that Mr. Libby, who is not charged with illegally revealing the name of CIA operative Valerie Plame, “feigned surprise” during an FBI interview when reminded of conversations he had with reporters during which he broke no laws.'

[clarice]

That at least one juror still can't figure out why the hell they are trying to figure out who said what about trivia and keeps leaping to the conclusion that there was something secret about Plame,ARC

[Pofarmer]

One possibility is that he is a shameless, self-promoting liar.

That's the one I'd go with.

[Pofarmer]

and keeps leaping to the conclusion that there was something secret about Plame,ARC

Which is exactly what Fitz is banking on .

[Alcibiades]

Heh - here's something I don't often do: Here's Christin Hardin Smith making the same point about media privilege that some of us have:

From the Washington Post:

Russert said, he viewed the subpoena as threatening his and other journalists' commitment to protect confidential sources and their newsgathering.

"That could be very open-ended questioning," Russert said. "Go in court? That as a journalist is not something I wanted to do."

And her response to this:

And, as a journalist, you felt that you had to keep all those high-end conversations confidential…solely to protect your role as a journalist. Eh, Tim? I think that Jane and Arianna ought to get a shot at asking Russert a few questions. What do you think?

[ARC: Brian]

Ok, thanks Clarice, glad I'm not as in looney land about this case as I thought I was. If thats the case.. what does that say about the state of the jury?

I almost had an inkling that "Juror #4" in my description is actually a severe BDS sufferer, and wants the "big" case brought out. Wants the whole Rove/Cheney, neo-con conspiracy to come to light and needs the "Plame was covert" evidence to hang their arguments on in deliberation.

If it's the opposite, then its truly possible that we could see a hung jury here.

I know its way to early to speculate about deliberations. Just caught that tidbit from the Walton, and thought to myself, haven't we heard that SEVERAL times? Why is he beating them over the head with it?

[Carol Herman]

FM: CAROL HERMAN

Juror question could be to "ask Russert what was it so important NOT TO KNOW Plame's name?

A two fer? Is that why you're here to testify about a secret the juror is supposed to "know nothing about?" Are your answers predicated on my not knowing, because you told the truth about NOT surprising Libby that you knew?

[pete]

Clarice

"pete, I liked that a lot better when TM posted it as a thread days ago and fisked it to within an inch of its life."

There will be many such posts until Cheney is where he belongs ... behind bars (not the belly up kind).

I still haven't heard Cheney's response. He'll be lawyering-up soon.

[Sara (Squiggler)]

Alcibiades -- Typepad holds all trackbacks until the blog owner approves them. It is a relatively recent policy of SixApart. They used to go thru automatically, so Tom may have just forgotten that now he must physically check off each one as approved before they work as a trackback.

[clarice]

If the pleadings on Mitchell are filed tonight, I hope someone will grab and post them--It would be nice to see the cases and arguments. The paper filed by Fitzgerald on Mitchell this the other night(to keep her from testifying altogether) looked thin and based on rather old caselaw which it appeared some states no longer follow.

[Alcibiades]

Thanks Sara. I thought it might be something like that, but since they never got posted at all, I thought there was an equal chance it might be a broken feature as well.

[Alcibiades]

Clarice, what do you think about Walton's hints that he might keep the Andrea Mitchell tapes out?

[Carol Herman]

FROM CAROL HERMAN

Clarice, why do you mention "some states' case law?" I thought the FEDERAL SYSTEM, governed by it's own Supreme's. Sits apart.

When Federal cases go on appeal, I'm guessing, it goes to CIRCUITS. We don't have 50 of them. Just some that are funnier than others.

WOW! You're in the courtoom on Monday. What time to you show up? How will you blog "thru?"

[Christopher Fotos]

The Thread Herder....has a heart of gold.

Like I always say, if Bergman ever had Black Hooded Scythe of Doom serve cocoa and cookies and say kidding!, his films could have had a mass audience.

(Sorry for the OT--thanks TH)

[centralcal]

Tom M: Now I get why you hustled everybody over to this thread. Looks like you got a prominent linky-poo in the netroots.

[SteveMG]

There will be many such posts until Cheney is where he belongs ... behind bars (not the belly up kind).

Methinks Mr. Maguire will have the last word on that.

And why he continues to put up with your juvenile act mystifies me.

But as I said, his blog, not mine.

Or yours.

[owl]

I hate to break the news but the MSM is refusing to allow any facts to sift through their barricade. Not only was Shep Smith's show a fact barren land but I am seeing it all over FOX. These people are at a Covert Agent's Leak Trial.

[centralcal]

"Walton reminds jurors that Plame's status as covert is not under consideration here, and they are not to speculate about it."

Suppose your speculation is correct, and a juror (or more than one) keep asking questions about covert status, isn't that a pretty clear indication they are not or cannot obey the "no speculation" command?

What are the remedies for something like this, Clarice?

[mbbsdphil]

The more likely explanation: The CIA had already learned the hard way that working with Cheney -- a guy whose only constitutional function is to break tie votes in the Senate and wait around for the president to be "unavailable" -- was not going to be business as usual. Saying "No" to him when the facts dictated it was not an answer he would accept without first firing whomever said it, and then asking the same question to the next guy in line.

Cheney's office wanted the Niger report checked out; it didn't care who did it. A Jesuitical distinction lost on everyone but Cheney's defenders. Joe Wilson was qualified, cleared, cheap and available. Even the CIA must have known he was married to one of their own. Which does away with any notion of nepotism or a boondoggle. (That Joe Wilson is a relentless self-promoter may be true; it would not put him in the minority in Washington.)

Wilson came back and dissed the Niger rumor. Others did the same. State and CIA determined the supporting docs were forged. The CIA dutifully and promptly reported same to the OVP. [See, first paragraph about saying "NO".] The OVP used the rumor anyway, and reinserted those sixteen words into the President's SOTU speech every time wiser heads took it out.

Joe Wilson's piece came out, after Kristoff's and Pincus's. The White House bailed and in an unusual admission, said they should never have used those sixteen words. In a panic, Cheney fought back the only way he knew how -- dirty -- and orchestrated a Code Red against Wilson and his wife. It wasn't personal, Cheney might say, it was just business.

Thinking themselves invincible, the OVP -- which Cheney considers a Fourth Branch of government, "attached" not to the executive branch, but to the legislative branch -- never guessed the stalwart press would have a cat fight and spill the beans about a not too carefully hidden dirty trick.

Ten years in an orange jump suit for Libby? Only if Cheney takes his hand out of the Shrub puppet before he has it sign the pardon.

[lurker]

Libby lawyers grill NBC's Russert

Is that so biased of MSM? As if they are saying, "How dare you grill one of us!!"

So far there are no grounds to charge Cheney and put him behind bars.

[ghostcat]

RE: Media Blinders

This morning, my local paper (Oregonian) ran Apuzzo's AP report and subheadlined that Russert is the final witness in the case. Hey, Seuss!

[pete]

SteveMG

"And why he continues to put up with your juvenile act mystifies me."

Could it be that he finally understands where you fascist children-of-the-corn have been leading this country and he's getting anxious. He has already stopped blogging on the Iraq fiasco. Maybe he finally understands that no matter what there will be no happy ending in Iraq and defending the handmaidens of the atrocity is not good for business or politics.

[John R]

Re Shepard Smith coverage:

Smith is dumb as a stump. I think even C. Mathews has a higher IQ. It would be a close call, I grant you. For some reason, Brit Hume adores him. Of course, Hume is no great intellect himself.

In covering the Katrina aftermath, Smith stood on an overpass pleading for someone to do something, anything, to help the victims while behind him Coast Guard, Navy and National Guard helicopters could be seen landing one after the other doing just what he was pleading for.

The rescues were going on right under his nose, but he missed it.

[boris]

Meaning that wilson was misinformed, but that Cheney's interest was not what initiated the Niger trip.

So how did Wilson wind up misinformed? After all his own wife said "there's this crazy report!" [DIA report apparently]. And she was in on the pre-Cheney genesis of the mission. He wasn't.

Consider this from cathyf a couple of threads back ...

what he [Libby] used from the alleged Russert conversation (when talking to Cooper, Miller, etc. after July 11th) was that Wilson's wife was not the answer to the question "who behested Wilson to Niger?" but the answer to the question "who told Wilson that the vice president behested him?"

Whatever Libby did or did not know before, something about the time of the Russert conversation clued him to a bigger part of the backstory. Not that Val told Joe it was Cheney who behested him, rather that she told him to use that in his false accusations.

[Evelyn]

"Ten years in an orange jump suit for Libby? Only if Cheney takes his hand out of the Shrub puppet before he has it sign the pardon."

For a minute I thought I had accidently opened a left-leaning blog. I really resent reading this kind of discourse (tripe) here on JOM.

[Sara (Squiggler)]

mbbsdphil -- you seem rather misinformed on the facts.

[clarice]

Good old Matt Apuzzo comes thru the media wall again. Bravo! Of course, he's not constantly running to the makeup and hair crew--he's like actually sitting in the media room.
Alcibiades, it's an interesting question and I want to see the briefs.It's not something I feel confident answering off the top of my head..

CH--on the reference in the pleadings post about state law, I just meant I hadn't researched the question fully myself but the limited research available to me online indicated the caselaw might not be as clear as the Prosecution argued, but I wasn't sure. (Apparently it wasn't, the judge is allowing Mitchell to take the stand I understand.)
If the jurors keep asking these questions about Plame's status, I suppose in a motion to dismiss, motion notwithstanding verdict or appeal, Libby has some proof that the effort to separate the two issues was demonstrably unsuccessful, denying him the right of a fair trial.

[pete]

But by all means keep counting those fairies on the tip of Fitz's nose.

[SteveMG]

Could it be that he finally understands where you fascist children-of-the-corn have been leading this country and he's getting anxious

Like I said, why he continues to put up with your juvenilia puzzles me.

You forgot to include the brown shirts.

And I look quite handsome in a brown shirt with jeans if I may say so.

SMG

[lurker]

Could it be that he finally understands where you fascist children-of-the-corn have been leading this country and he's getting anxious. He has already stopped blogging on the Iraq fiasco. Maybe he finally understands that no matter what there will be no happy ending in Iraq and defending the handmaidens of the atrocity is not good for business or politics.

I seriously doubt it and wondered just the same with SMG.

[tp]

Johnr. Thanks for the memory. That was the last time I watched Shepard Smith. What a clown show!

[lurker]

OT:

Wow! About time for Lebanon government to stand up against Hizbollah:

Lebanon Update

And Hizbollah is pitching a fit!

[boomdude]

Pete
Consistency test here- What do you think of the fascist Dem senator from NY, who thinks its fine and dandy to use the Government to confiscate a corporations profits?

[tp]

What is really amazing is that, at one time, Fox had both David Shuster and Shepard Smith.

[Pofarmer]

defending the handmaidens of the atrocity is not good for business or politics.

This coming from fans of President for life Chavez, Castro, Saddam, Mugabe? That's rich.

[Jane]

My gawd, I spend a few minutes at the gym and I've missed one or maybe two entire threads, and the moonbats are back.

This place is a madhouse!

[SteveMG]

defending the handmaidens of the atrocity

Interesting that the handmaidens are not al-Qaeda or the Baathist insurgents who kill civilians in markets or in schools and are trying to overthrow by force a democratically-elected government, but Bush and Cheney and the neocons.

Because, of course, before we overthrew Saddam and the Baathist dictatorship, everyone was living in peace. Nevermind the inconvenient fact that Saddam and the Sunnis were slaughtering the Shi'a and Kurds by the hundreds of thousands.

A little peak into the mindset here.

[Alcibiades]

I know how you feel Jane. I was working this morning and then out doing stuff. And trying to catch up afterwards was tough - thank God for the early recess.

tp:

What is really amazing is that, at one time, Fox had both David Shuster and Shepard Smith.

Heh! Actually, they had Olbermann and David Shuster!
And as I commented a few days ago, Shuster wasn't half bad on Clinton during the impeachment trial, but now I've got to wonder if he was applying the same "journalistic standards" as he does today.

[theo]

clarice --

Good news if he lets Mitchell testify. It sounded like he was going the other way on that earlier. But a judge who needs to consult other judges over lunch is not a confident judge.

[Lew Clark]

"So far there are no grounds to charge Cheney and put him behind bars."

Lurker, you obviously don't live in pete's world. In pete's world the political opposition is often taken out and shot. Pete can't understand why that is not done here. Cheney's politics are directly opposed to pete's. And pete can't grasp why he hasn't been punished for that!

[Lew Clark]

Help! We're trapped in bold and can't get out!

[JM Hanes]

SMG:

"Like I said, why he continues to put up with your juvenilia puzzles me."

For the same reason folks can't help gawking at car wrecks on the highway.

[clarice]

Well, it's unclear from what we have, but it does seem to me he said the defense could call her, but it is unclear what he can ask.

[Lew Clark]

Good, skip saved us

[Alcibiades]

Oh crap. Sorry everyone!

[theo]

Pete --

I answered Kristoff's inane questions the other day. Look up the answers if you dare. But it is looney to suggest that Cheney is blaming Wilson for Cheney's misreliance on the intelligence about WMD. Just when did Cheney blame Wilson for the WMD? Or the war? Or anything else?

[windansea]

wow..somebody sent me a great big baby pixel club with spikes

any baby pixel seals in here??

[theo]

Clarice --

My read on what he said was that they could call her IF she was going to impeach Russert -- i.e., say that she told Russert. But if she was going to deny it they could not put her on the stand just to try to impeach HER. He may be right as a matter of law as well.

[MikeH]

'Pete' said - "Could it be that he finally understands where you fascist children-of-the-corn have been leading this country and he's getting anxious."

C'mon Pete, go for the full 'H----r' attribution. You know you want to. C'mon, go for it! You'll feel better after you do.

[JM Hanes]

windansea:

No offense, but I find the baby pixel thing kinda sorta really icky.

[RichatUF]

Posted by: mbbsdphil | February 08, 2007 at 02:38 PM

Wow...I wonder if that is Scary Larry. I've wanted to ask Larry what it's like to be Joe Wilson's 'step-and-fetch' boy.

RichatUF

//catching up on the days proceedings

[clarice]

Her lawyer says she won't. How is Wells going to get around it? Talk about prepping for shows. Share what they know. How often talks to Gregory?Russert?
Go thru her notes and memos? Bring out the leaks she reported (obviously from DOS) during those dates?

Lets assume that they know someone--say Armitage and Wilson-- had a number of calls with her at that time and they are planning to call Armitage as a witness? Better, yet suppose they have in the wings one witness who knows she knows..

[SteveMG]

The Australian foreign minister is out of touch, apparently:

“People in the West, and not only in Europe, blame America for a suicide bomber in a market in Baghdad,” he said.
“That only encourages more horrific behaviour. Every time there is an atrocity committed, it is implicitly America’s fault, so why not commit some more atrocities and put even more pressure on America?”

Indeed.

And:"The al-Qa’eda leadership has said on many occasions that more than 50 per cent of the battle is a battle in the media. The more you can get media denigration of America, the more that the war against terrorism is seen to be an indictment of America, the better for those who started this war.”…

Nah, let's just blame Bushco. Get rid of them, the problem goes away.

See, if we leave Iraq, the war is over.

(sigh)

SMG

[Thread Herder]

New Thread

Just a notice. I am not trying to shut anything down.

Stay here, stay on other threads. Go to the new one. I only want unity. I would never ever want to divide.

It's cool. It's all cool.

[RichatUF]

pete-
there will be no happy ending in Iraq and defending the handmaidens of the atrocity Oh you mean Bill Clinton who tried about 7 coup attempts on Hussein in the 1990's and had that NFZ and sanctions thing going.

where you fascist children-of-the-corn have been leading this country It always gives me a little cuckle that someone will through out that old fascist slur and not know what fascism really is...

RichatUF

[JOMJunkie]

Russert to be on NBC Nightly News to talk about his testimony.

[Thread Herder]

Did everyone click through to the Christopher Fotos link at PostWatchBlog?

If not, you're an ass.

If you haven't yet and don't do so now, you are no better than Joe Wilson.

You want that hanging over your head?

[mbbsdphil]

I suspect that Mr. Cheney resented Mr. Wilson for allegedly being misinformed and publicly contradicting him on a point central to his leadership of the war effort. He seems to have taken an enduring and personal interest in managing the public response in an attempt to refute the Wilson statements.

[Laddy]

'T was all sweetness and light on the NBC evening news. How do these people sleep at night?

[lauraw]

Alright, as a very committed lurker (have read every word on every thread ever since the trial started, and all of JOM, sans threads, for at least four years), let me register as an English prof my amazement at the deeply sloppy use of the English language by very smart, legally-trained, even Jesuit-trained, people who really should know better. Don't they know what the meaning of "is, is"? They should have learned from that Machiavellian master who now lurks and waits for First Husband status.

[Sue]

Saying "No" to him when the facts dictated it was not an answer he would accept without first firing whomever said it, and then asking the same question to the next guy in line.

Can you provide an example of someone who said no to him and was fired?

[JM Hanes]

JOMJunkie:

Tuned into NBC for Russert, got Anna Nichole instead and a reporter telling us that: "Her life has now ended but the media spotlight is even brighter." So thanks, but I think I'll take the water torture instead.

[lurker]

pete-
there will be no happy ending in Iraq and defending the handmaidens of the atrocity Oh you mean Bill Clinton who tried about 7 coup attempts on Hussein in the 1990's and had that NFZ and sanctions thing going.

where you fascist children-of-the-corn have been leading this country It always gives me a little cuckle that someone will through out that old fascist slur and not know what fascism really is...

RichatUF

If pete has issues with us being "fascists", then he needs to move to Europe or Middle East in order to learn the real definition of fascism.

[clarice]

It's the kind of news TV lives for..it's not so com-pli-cat-ed.

[pete]

"This coming from fans of President for life Chavez, Castro, Saddam, Mugabe? That's rich."

Pofarmer. Hmmm. I don't recall being an advocate for any of these friends of yours.

"Interesting that the handmaidens are not al-Qaeda or the Baathist insurgents who kill civilians in markets or in schools and are trying to overthrow by force a democratically-elected government, but Bush and Cheney and the neocons."

SteveMG. You could try behaving like an adult and accepting reponsibility for your own actions ... . The slaughter house is still there. It's just under new management ... ours. And it's only costing us one trillion+ so far.

"Lurker, you obviously don't live in pete's world. In pete's world the political opposition is often taken out and shot."

You know I don't think even Carol (FROM CAROL HERMAN) understands that one.

"For the same reason folks can't help gawking at car wrecks on the highway."

Congrats JMHanes. The car wreck is your political party. Dig in buddy.

"I answered Kristoff's inane questions the other day."

Theo. The article calls for answers from CHENEY not you.

Don't feel bad if I did not respond to your post. It was simply because it was unintelligible.

[SteveMG]

SteveMG. You could try behaving like an adult and accepting reponsibility for your own actions ... . The slaughter house is still there. It's just under new management ... ours. And it's only costing us one trillion+ so far.

Ours? Our management? The US is to blame for the deaths in Iraq?

The people causing the destruction in Iraq are predominantly al-Qaeda along with former members of the Baathist dictatorship who wish to overthrow the democratically-elected government and reinstall a tyrannical regime where they get to run things and murder any who oppose them. As they did before we overthrew them.

We're trying to stop them from regaining power and slaughtering again.

They're to blame.

Not Bushco.

I guess you believe that if we leave, the war stops and the deaths will abate.

Why am I not surprised. As the old chestnut goes, there isn't a problem in the world that liberals don't think can be solved by simply having the United States walk away.

But we can't walk away from this one, my friend.

SMG

[windansea]

No offense, but I find the baby pixel thing kinda sorta really icky.

sorry JMH...I find it icky that pissants like Pete spew garbage here and then retreat to their protected nanny blogs

plus it is Ballard's fault for combining a horrendous practice in real life with a well deserved pixel clubbing of churned excrement

[Dan S]

"'T was all sweetness and light on the NBC evening news. How do these people sleep at night?

Posted by: Laddy | February 08, 2007 at 03:39 PM"

The same way they spend their days.

With their eyes closed.

[topsecretk9]

--their protected nanny blogs--

Nanny Blogs! Love it.

[lurker]

on't feel bad if I did not respond to your post. It was simply because it was unintelligible.

It's because you don't understand our intelligent comments.

[lurker]

Pete, read this before you call us "Fascists".

Islamofasiscm

[lurker]

Didn't someone report that Pelosi wants beds on her new airplane?

[lurker]

Pelosi wants a free ride with Murtha threatened to pull funds if Nancy doesn't get her plane.

Are you willing to pay $300,000 per round trip to fly her back and forth between west and east coasts?

And she rode in a Tahoe to her speech about Global Warning...a Tahoe not allowed in her home town.

[JM Hanes]

Pull up a chaise, windansea. Trolls are just the bitters in an ice cold gin. :)

[Seixon]

Of course, the wrinkle in all of that is that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA and could have easily found out whether Wilson was sent at the behest of the VP. You know, if you forget the fact that she recommended that he go. As I suggested a long time ago, it would seem that perhaps the cunning Plame fooled her husband by tapping into his egomania.

"Yeah honey, really, the VP is asking that you go to Niger."

I suggest the Wilsons make a sitcom out of their life.

[RichatUF]

I suggest the Wilsons make a sitcom out of their life.

a fictious french farce filmed for fools

RichatUF

[mbbsdphil]

"Saying "No" to him [Dick Cheney] when the facts dictated it was not an answer he would accept without first firing whomever said it, and then asking the same question to the next guy in line."

Can you provide an example of someone who said no to him and was fired?
Posted by: Sue | February 08, 2007 at 03:50 PM

For a place to start, see the articles by Seymour Hersh in the New Yorker, Karen Kwiatkowski in Salon, and Larry Johnson, at e.g., TPMCafe. Links below if they print.
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/031027fa_fact?031027fa_fact
http://dir.salon.com/story/opinion/feature/2004/03/10/osp_moveon/print.html
http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/7/13/04720/9340
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/9/17/16165/6118

The litany of angst about the Wilson's motivations seems unthinkingly resentful of criticism of Mr. Cheney. As if Mr. Wilson's allegedly being relentlessly self-advertising, if true, would put him in the minority in Metro DC, where it would be called fighting fire with fire.

The more important issue seems to be the administration's willingness to out an intelligence asset ("fair game" in Mr. Rove's opinion) as part of a partisan political game. A trend that our intelligence assets would greet with dismay, but which would delight those they compete with.