Powered by TypePad

« A Quick Surge On "Reality-Based" | Main | The Greatest! »

March 22, 2007

Comments

MikeS


Wrong Tom:
I must have misunderstood. I thought that 18 days past between a request for documents and when the documents were provided.

Are you saying that there are 18 days for which no documents were provided?

Tom

sara,
"as they try to put together a bare minimum majority on tomorrow's appropriations bill"

Oh-oh...

“After two grueling weeks of meetings, progressive members of Congress brought forth an agreement that provided the momentum to pass a supplemental spending bill that, for the first time, establishes a timeline for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq,” the four California congresswomen said in a statement.

One well-placed Democratic aide said Pelosi had approached the progressives asking them to supply four votes, but that they ultimately pledged to deliver about ten."

Tom

MikeS,
Is this clear enough?

Researchers have discovered an 18-day gap in the 3,000 documents on the U.S. Attorney purge released this week by the Justice Department. The gap extends from mid-November to early December, “which was a critical period as the White House and Justice Department reviewed, then approved, which U.S. attorneys would be fired while also developing a political and communications strategy for countering any fallout from the firings.”

During today’s press briefing, CNN’s Ed Henry noted that one of the last emails before the gap is from Attorney General Alberto Gonzales’ ex-chief of staff Kyle Sampson to then-White House Counsel Harriet Miers, asking, “Who will determine whether this requires the president’s attention?”

Tom

MikeS,
Well??

MikeS

I think that is suspicious.

BarbaraS

Libby was convicted by a jury who heard every word of testimony, from BOTH sides.

Evidently not. The jury from all reports only heard Fitzgerald's rebuttal. They then did the investigation that Fitzgerald didn't. They convicted Libby on the war.

It is just like a liberal to believe that because a liberal jury, a liberal court, a liberal prosecutor and his former boss, a liberal FBI agent, and a liberal US senator set up a perjury trap then Libby is guilty because the liberal jury said so. This is why we say this is a travesty of justice. This means no republican official could get an acquital in DC for love or money. This is why Bush will not let his people testify under oath. Democrats in congress, which is supposed to be representing the people and doing their business, is setting perjury traps for an administration they despise.

SunnyDay

They should not have made the emails available. They should have just said no.

BarbaraS

Your eyesight must be bad, it wasn't a whole hand - just one finger.

On the contrary. It is your knowledge that is bad. My point was that if he had gotten rid of the back stabbing, obstructionist democrats in his administration he would not be having the trouble his has been having. For instance, McNulty is also a protoge of Shumer's and he has caused mega trouble for the administration's DOJ with his lies and false reports. Everywhere you look you see Shumer's fine hand. He is the second most disengenious politician I have ever seen. The most disengenious was Bill Clinton.

Tom

BarbaraS,
Yeah, that's it.

The jury ONLY heard the Fitz rebuttal. No defense, just Fitz.

And of course...a "liberal jury, a liberal court, a liberal prosecutor and his former boss, a liberal FBI agent, and a liberal US senator."

Prozaic?

Tom

Sorry...prozac.

clarice

He should have gotten rid of Clarke and Beers, too.

He WAS warned about them BTW.

topsecretk9

Hey, does this google news link work for anyone else? It's not working for me - says "Bad Request (Invalid Hostname)" - but that's weird...

CIA paid top Iraq mole $100000 Gulf Daily News, Bahrain - 21 hours ago WASHINGTON: Iraq's foreign minister under Saddam Hussein spied for the CIA before the US-led invasion in 2003 in return for a $100000 (BD37,800) payment, ...

LINK


http://www.gulf-daily-news.com/Story.asp?Article=173692&Sn=WORL&IssueID=29002

MayBee

Sunny Day: They should not have made the emails available. They should have just said no.

I think Congress is ready to demand they get cc:'d on all White House emails from now on.

topsecretk9

Check Clarice's link in the other thread, it looks like it's not good news for the dems. (first blush, seems like it's in the emails)

SunnyDay

Yes, maybee, I think you're right. :D

SunnyDay

FNC did an interview with Feinstein and didn't ask her about any of that. I thought that was kind of wussy - surely they know she was one of the people complaining about Lam?

grrrrrrrrrrrr

SunnyDay

From Politico dot com - Kyle Sampson may not appear as scheduled. hehe

Kyle Sampson Says Not So Fast to Senate Appearance


Kyle Sampson, who recently resigned from his post as chief of staff to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, is scheduled to appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee next week to talk about his role in the U.S. Attorney firing scandal.

But Sampson may not make it after all. Sampson's lawyer, Brad Berenson, has a previously scheduled family trip that conflict with next Thursday's hearing.

In addition, Berenson wants Sampson to wait to see if the White House turns over any more documents to the committee before appearing, or if the committee issues document subpoenas that result in the release of a new set of memos and e-mails regarding the firing of the eight U.S. Attorneys.

"We believe it would be unreasonable and counterproductive to expect Mr. Sampson to furnish testimony before he has had an opportunity to review and analyze the full documentary record, which may be critical to refreshing his recollection of the matters under consideration by your Committee," Berenson wrote in a letter to Sens. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), the chairman and ranking member respectively of Judiciary.

Berenson wants Sampson's appearance postponed until at least April 2, and possibly longer. The Judiciary Committee has not subpoenaed Sampson to appear yet, although Leahy and Specter have been authorized to do so by the full panel.

Sampson left his position after e-mails between him and former White House Counsel Harriet Miers were publicly released, including plans to terminate some or all of the 93 U.S. Attorneys. Justice Department officials said that Sampson did not fully disclose the extent of his discussions with Miers.

clarice

ts the link doesn't work for me.

topsecretk9

Sunny...sounds like there is enough to bury Dems and let it just drip, drip.

--Berenson wants Sampson's appearance postponed until at least April 2, and possibly longer. ---

til it won't be necessary anymore.

topsecretk9

Damn. Thanks for trying Clarice. It sounded interesting.

BarbaraS

Prozaic?

No, I don't make a habit of sticking my head in the sand like liberals. I go only by proven facts not wishful thinking.

Tom

BarbaraS,
Like Rush?

Spartacvs

Everywhere you look you see Shumer's fine hand. He is the second most disengenious politician I have ever seen.

Karl Rove has more disingenuousness and more raw political power than any elected politician in the land. He's an asset that Bush will not easily give up, perhaps can't afford to give up.

Batten down the hatches.

Sara (Squiggler)

"We believe it would be unreasonable and counterproductive to expect Mr. Sampson to furnish testimony before he has had an opportunity to review and analyze the full documentary record, which may be critical to refreshing his recollection of the matters under consideration by your Committee,"

Message from the Libby experience heard loud and clear.

Spartacvs

I think Congress is ready to demand they get cc:'d on all White House emails from now on.

Especially the ones going through georgewbush.com and gwb43.com.

topsecretk9

Man, Fienstein sure is covering herself - and if she was at that meeting- yikes.

That suggestion - to subpoena Feinstein aides on their political attack strategy to try and shut Sampson down - no wonder he's dangling only a carrot.He also has the ability to say she was PRESSURING him (you know how much liberals hate pressuring others) on Lam's lax immigration enforcement (incidentally, not good press in CA) incessantly - turnabout is fair play.

clarice

Second message,Sara--first message was don't cooperate and give them some sham process crime to destroy you with. Second message don't go without your notes and being fully prepared.

clarice

Now, should be go after Schumer who screamed about others asking about the progress of ongoing investigations forgetting his two letters to DoJ overtly trying to influence the RESULTS of an ongoing investigation and after Feingold who screamed about Lam's being fired for something not even in her office and forgot she was pushing herself to get her fired for the very reason Lam WAS fired.

Everybody's memory stinks--Is there some kind of amnesia epidemic in D.C.?

Syl

Spart

Especially the ones going through georgewbush.com and gwb43.com.

It was a joke, dumbass.

If the Executive demanded being cc'd on all emails between staff and congresscritters, would you go along with that?

I suspect your answer would be 'It depends on which party is in the White House and which party controls Congress'.

Funny there's no mention of Democrat vs Republican in the Constitution. Surely it must be in there somewhere.

topsecretk9

I think Congress is ready to demand they get cc:'d on all White House emails from now on.

Talking out of 2 sides of their mouth

ferson attorneys seek return of FBI-confiscated papers March 5, 2007

Attorneys for Democratic Rep. William Jefferson asked a federal appeals court Wednesday to force the Bush administration to return all documents that were seized during an FBI raid last year on the congressman's office.

In their 52-page request, lawyers for Jefferson, D-La., argued that*** the Justice Department violated Congress' right to withhold certain information from the executive branch*** when it conducted the unprecedented 18-hour search last May 20-21.

The raid was part of a 16-month international bribery investigation of Jefferson, who allegedly accepted $100,000 from a telecommunications businessman - $90,000 of which was later recovered in a freezer in the congressman's Louisiana home.

Jefferson's attorneys said nearly 19,000 pages of documents and electronic files seized by prosecutors and the FBI are covered by Congress' separation of powers privilege to shield certain legislative material from executive review.

But the FBI "inspected every document in the office suite and copied every computer hard drive or other electronic storage device they could find," the attorneys wrote in their request filed Wednesday with the U.S. Court of Appeals in the District of Columbia.

"Once that occurs, the privilege is breached."...

http://www.louisianaweekly.com/weekly/news/articlegate.pl?20070305t

BarbaraS

The jury ONLY heard the Fitz rebuttal. No defense, just Fitz.

I'll amend my statement. The jury only listened to the rebuttal. From what Denis Collins, jury foreman, said on all the talk shows the jury only considered the rebuttal not any of the other testimony. It was to get the administation for the war and nothing else. They convicted the person who was at hand.

BarbaraS

BarbaraS,
Like Rush

Contrary to what you liberals think not everyone listens to Rush.

Spartacvs

It was a joke, dumbass.

So was my reply, dumbass x 2

BarbaraS

Karl Rove has more disingenuousness and more raw political power than any elected politician in the land. He's an asset that Bush will not easily give up, perhaps can't afford to give up.

Batten down the hatches.

It is wonderful the role that the liberals give Rove. In case it has not crossed your mind Rove is a political appointee not an elected president or senator. The only reason you people put so much importance to this man is because of his get out the vote talent. You all make yourselvces ridiculous for going after this guy in this fashion. He is an advisor to the president and that is all. He is not some svengali taking over the mind of the president and the administration. You people will latch on to anythng and everything to drive your wild theories and never let facts get in the way of your desires.

MayBee

Yeah Spartacvs, those emails were so well hidden they got turned over in the first document dump.

BarbaraS

Everybody's memory stinks--Is there some kind of amnesia epidemic in D.C.?

No, they just hope we don't remember.

topsecretk9

Sorry, OT - but hmm, this is from September***2002***( 28/09/2002)

War-torn Congo is target in Baghdad's hunt for uranium

By Jane Flanagan in Johannesburg and David Wastell Diplomatic Correspondent

Western intelligence officials believe that the Congo is vulnerable to illicit approaches from abroad. Last November Kenyan authorities arrested five Iraqi men, attempting to travel to the Congo on fake passports, on suspicion of being terrorists. Officials were unable to say last week whether the men had been deported or were still in custody.

Henri Boshoff, a military analyst at the Institute for Security Studies in the South African capital Pretoria, said that unrest in the Congo made it the most likely African country to have been targeted by Iraq.

"The Congo has virtually no border or airspace security; there is virtually no control over movement," he said. "If anyone had enough money and determination I think they could get uranium, although the risks of being caught are enormous."

...The Congo's research reactor, near the capital Kinshasa, has lost at least one and probably two nuclear fuel rods in recent years, according to nuclear safety officials - although the Congolese government denies it. One turned up in Italy in 1998, when police arrested 13 men as they were about to sell it to the Mafia.

The International Atomic Energy Authority, which has checked the Kinshasa reactor, says it is now "under safeguards".

...War-torn Congo is target in Baghdad's hunt for uranium

By Jane Flanagan in Johannesburg and David Wastell Diplomatic Correspondent
Last Updated: 9:21pm BST 28/09/2002

The Democratic Republic of Congo has emerged as the likeliest target of Iraq's attempts to secure uranium for its nuclear weapons programme, after Britain gave warning that Saddam Hussein has sought "significant quantities" of the radioactive metal somewhere in Africa.

Not only has the country - formerly Zaire - been destabilised by four years of civil war, but it also possesses the mine which supplied the raw materials for the atom bomb dropped on Hiroshima, in addition to other deposits of uranium and one of the few nuclear power reactors on the continent.

It is home to a string of brutal and feuding militia groups, at least one of which is believed to have approached Baghdad with an offer to supply minerals.

advertisement

The Congo is just one of several African countries with exploitable uranium deposits, and four others - Niger, Namibia, South Africa and Gabon - export almost 10,000 tons of ore a year between them. South Africa had its own weapons programme under the apartheid regime and still has two full-scale nuclear reactors.

Western intelligence officials believe that the Congo is vulnerable to illicit approaches from abroad. Last November [2001] Kenyan authorities ***arrested five Iraqi men, attempting to travel to the Congo on fake passports, on suspicion of being terrorists. ***Officials were unable to say last week whether the men had been deported or were still in custody.

Henri Boshoff, a military analyst at the Institute for Security Studies in the South African capital Pretoria, said that unrest in the Congo made it the most likely African country to have been targeted by Iraq.

"The Congo has virtually no border or airspace security; there is virtually no control over movement," he said. "If anyone had enough money and determination I think they could get uranium, although the risks of being caught are enormous."

A nuclear weapon requires about 55lb of highly enriched uranium, which has to be extracted from low-grade ore and then enhanced in a long and complex production process which Saddam has been trying to develop...

...The area of the country in which the mine lies is now under the control of Zimbabwean forces, one of several states to have sent troops to the aid of the Congolese government. In a sinister twist Robert Mugabe, Zimbabwe's president, is said to have encouraged North Korean interest in the mine.

Zimbabwe has its own reserves of uranium ore but a Canadian mining company studying prospects for development halted operations three years ago because of the country's political and economic instability.

The Congo's research reactor, near the capital Kinshasa, has lost at least one and probably two nuclear fuel rods in recent years, according to nuclear safety officials - although the Congolese government denies it. One turned up in Italy in 1998, when police arrested 13 men as they were about to sell it to the Mafia.

The International Atomic Energy Authority, which has checked the Kinshasa reactor, says it is now "under safeguards".

This was not always true: three years ago Michela Wrong, a novelist, visited it while doing research and found rusted gates, fastened by a simple padlock, leading to the reactor. Only two guards were at the entrance and she was waved inside after signing a visitors' book.

"It's an extremely worrying situation there," Miss Wrong said. "It is almost surreal the security conditions there, and I emerged thinking I couldn't believe what I had seen." Miss Wrong interviewed the director of the reactor who said he believed that the fuel rod might have been stolen when his predecessor lent out his keys.

Boy...the whole Niger package is looking more and more just like big red herring.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2002/09/29/wirq329.xml

hit and run

Name for the non-scandal:

Aesop's Fable: Lam in Wolf's Clothing

Semanticleo

"Everybody's memory stinks--Is there some kind of amnesia epidemic in D.C.?'

Naw, it's an accountability thing.

Or is it just 'LAWYERS'

TMF

Those who cant do, teach

Those who cant legislate, INVESTIGATE

Silly me, I always thought it was the job of the legislative branch to actually legislate

Not issue subpoenas every time the president farts

Oh well, the people got what they wanted I suppose. A firetruck full of clowns, poseurs and charlatans

Gabriel Sutherland

Well, even Bob Schrum thinks it's a bad idea for the Democrats to force this issue. The Americans that live in the sticks could care less about this subject. This is a controversy for the press abetted by the politicians that manipulate them.

Load em up. Alert the community. The Circus is coming to Washington.

Tom

topsecretk9,
You're still blathering on about Wilson's trip, and using an article from 2002 to shore up your point?

Get a life, Dude...it's over.

boris

What are you doing here then?

Check the subject.

Tom

boris,
To educate and aggravate pea brains like yourself?

boris

Get a life, Dude...it's over

Tom

Psssst: They just passed the Democratic version of the Iraq/Afghanistan Bill, requiring the Iraqis to actually DO
SOMETHING for themselves.

And it's about time, too.

Sara (Squiggler)

Boris: "Not our Tome" Tom is just another in a long line of pathetic trolls who just happened to get assigned to JOM by his handlers. He has demonstrated he is a dumbass, just like those who preceded him.

SunnyDay

Tom, you need to go read AJStrata's explanation of what just happened.

a brief quote:

A little lesson on government is in order. Any law passed this right now will only effect funding for this fiscal year (which ends in September). The budgets for the government’s fiscal year for 2008 (which runs from Oct 2007 through September 2008) will not be voted upon until later this summer. So while the money is through August, nothing is really binding until Congress passes the 2008 budget - and that will not be done for months.

So all that BS about pulling troops in August 2008 and stopping funding then? Meaningless. Absolutely, legally, meaningless. So did the Dems dump their liberal base? Damn straight. All that language about a pullout is media PR pretending. And if the House Bill does by some quirk of two-faced-lying-to-the-base pass it will not see the light of day of the Senate or the veto pen.

Tom

Sara,
Thank you. You sound like a very nice person.

Tom

Sara,
What is a "Tome" and is it something you worship or own?

Being what you call a "dumbass" I need to know.

Tom

SunnyDay,
"Meaningless" to who?

You?

Or, have you already forgotten the message sent via the recent elections?

Tom

"Tony Snow To Undergo Surgery For Abdomen Growth"

They think it may be a conscience and want to get it out before it spreads.

Tom

Oh-Oh:

Public allegiance to the Republican Party has plunged during George W. Bush's presidency, as attitudes have edged away from some of the conservative values that fueled GOP political victories, a major survey has found.

The survey, by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, found a "dramatic shift" in political party identification since 2002, when Republicans and Democrats were at rough parity. Now, 50% of those surveyed identified with or leaned toward Democrats, whereas 35% aligned with Republicans.

What's more, the survey found, public attitudes are drifting toward Democrats' values: Support for government aid to the disadvantaged has grown since the mid-1990s, skepticism about the use of military force has increased and support for traditional family values has decreased.

The findings suggest that the challenges for the GOP reach beyond the unpopularity of the war in Iraq and Bush.

cboldt

-- A little lesson on government is in order. Any law passed this right now will only effect funding for this fiscal year (which ends in September). --

H.R.1591 - Making emergency supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2007

The vote was purely symbolic and pabulum for the dumbed-down masses. The Senate will consider its own version of the emergency supplemental, the differences between the two versions will be hammered out in conference, after which both houses have to pass the same compromise.

The rhetoric for pull-out deadlines won't appear in the Senate version. Someone in the Senate will object to the amendment as "legislation on an appropriations bill." It takes a supermajority to overcome the objection.

topsecretk9
Plame’s testimony shifting, source says Printer Friendly | PDF | Email Mar 23, 2007 3:00 AM (10 hrs ago) by Rowan Scarborough, The Examiner Font Size: a a A A Current rank: # 18 of 25,825 WASHINGTON (Map, News) - The public testimony of former CIA officer Valerie Plame before a House committee last week conflicts with what she told a bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee three years ago, a government source told The Examiner this week.

The difference centers on Plame’s role in a CIA supervisor’s decision in 2002 to send former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, her husband, on a trip to Niger to investigate claims that Saddam Hussein pursued uranium for nuclear bombs.

The trip eventually embroiled the White House in a three-year criminal investigation.

Plame has filed suit against current and former Bush officials for leaking her covert CIA occupation to the news media. Her version of events would represent a major piece of evidence if the suit reaches trial. Her lawyer declined to respond to questions submitted this week by The Examiner.

Before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee last week, Plame testified under oath that a CIA colleague, whom she did not name, first mentioned her husband as a trip candidate during a discussion at Langley headquarters. She denied recommending her husband, as Republicans have reported in their attempt to show why Bush officials discussed her occupation.

According to a U.S. government source, who spoke to The Examiner this week on condition of anonymity, Plame did not mention this incident when she provided secret testimony to the Senate Intelligence committee in 2004.

Bond said he was willing to re-interview witnesses. Melvin Dubee, spokesman for committee chairman Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., said he has heard no such talk on the Democratic side.

“This is a whole new story,” the source told The Examiner...

Sounds like Plame had an entirely different "story" in 04

Tom

topsecretundercoverguy:
"According to a U.S. government source, who spoke to The Examiner this week on condition of anonymity, Plame did not mention this incident when she provided secret testimony to the Senate Intelligence committee in 2004."

First of all, "not mentioning" something is not the same as lying, she may very well have not even been asked the question. (Do you know if she was?)

Second, until we know who the "source" is and if they're "reliable,"...what's the point?

topsecretk9

Tom - the anonymous poster

uh huh.

Tom

topsecretundercoverguy:
I have no idea what you're talking about, I'm no more "anonymous" than anybody else.

And I notice you haven't responded to my previous post. Other than an article by a Washington Times columnist, who's the "source??"

topsecretk9

Tom

uh huh - was the response to you post - as in "we don't know, blah, blah, blah" I responded with a sarcastic - "uh huh"

Sure, she prolly wasn't asked "Did a colleague happen by your office and out of the blue recommend a trip to Niger by you husband?"

Then again, a colleague testified to the secret 2004 committee that Valerie "offered up" Joe...so why would they?

But, I am pretty confident they did ask for the circumstances surrounding her role and this extraordinary happenstance encounter was not part of the "story"

Tom

topsecret,
All I know is this: As of today, Valerie Plame is the ONLY one with the guts to testify UNDER OATH, in full view of the American public. If she was lying...file perjury charges and prosecute her just like Libby.

When the rest of the people who say they have information step forward and do the same, we can compare stories.

PeterUK

"Tony Snow To Undergo Surgery For Abdomen Growth"

They think it may be a conscience and want to get it out before it spreads.

Posted by: Tom | March 23, 2007 at 01:55 PM

What a despicable bit of scum you are Tom Troll.

topsecretk9

PeteUK

I second that.

SunnyDay

Tom does not belong here.

PeterUK

SunnyDay,
Tom Troll belongs in an Institution.

SunnyDay

PUK - indeed. How offensive. I do hope TM blocks his access to JOM.

Looking_for_a_way_out

Its Friday so I had to stop by JOM for a look at the week's Plame arguments and I see we're still complaining that Plame wasn't covered by IIPA.

Nobody in a position to know, has ever gone on record saying she wasn't covert. Yes, I agree, that isn't proof that she was covered by IIPA. But there are many reasons why she could be covered by IIPA yet it was not charged. For one thing, Scooter had committed other crimes in covering up his actions that could result in punishment on par with conviction of IIPA. And, if that is the case isn't charging the lying, perjury and obstruction a better course of action from the CIA's perspective than going the IIPA route? If they charged IIPA wouldn't the CIA have to explain in open court the messy details about the measures they were taking to protect her cover?

Yes Armitage leaked to Novak, but Judith Miller provided testimony that Libby had leaked to her well before the Novak column was published, making him also a leaker of classified information. While Armitage might be able to say he didn't know Plame's status, Fitzgerald would have a stronger case on that against Libby because he had talked to so many people in the CIA about Wilson.

In any event, the referral cites a leak of classified information occurred. Both Fitzgerald and now DCI Hayden have stated in unambiguous language that Plame's employment by the CIA was classified. Isn't the rest of this a whole lot of navel gazing?

It also is pretty funny that Novak is frustrated by Hayden's refusal to answer his questions. When Bill Harlow tried to discourage Novak from publishing classified information Novak cited him as a confirming source. Novak is probably the last person the CIA would intentionally provide such a piece of significantly newsworthy information. Doesn't he get that?

Looking_for_a_way_out

"I’m no Sherlock Holmes but, wouldn’t someone who had “set out to gather the facts” want to quiz Gregory and Mitchell on the subject?"

Well I've always wondered why the defense didn't call Gregory or Dickerson. I think Fitzgerald went out of his way to make sure the court observers understood he didn't pursue them because they were journalists and DOJ rules prohibit prosecutors from asking them to violate source privilege when the source is not a criminal target, and since Ari had secured his immunity deal they were immaterial to the case. But why didn't the defense call them?

As for Mitchell, didn't the court record reflect the fact that she had changed her statements over time and that putting her on the stand simply to deny that she knew what she said she knew previously would have no value to the jury? I think the whole Mitchell thing is a tempest in a teapot as well. She wanted to appear like a big shot, in the know, she shot her mouth off, then she realized that she exposed herself to legal examination and she backed off her words. Her actions completely support that explanation. And, to this date, all the other journalists to have been "in the know", Woodward, Novak, Coper, Miller, Pincus, and even Dickerson and Gregory have had their "knowledge" explained. Libby's defense cost millions of dollars, surely they tried to find another journalist that could say they knew Wilson's wife worked at the CIA. That they wanted to use Mitchell actually speaks to the weakness of the "everybody knew" argument.

narciso

Another distressing angle about "uranium in Africa' comes to us, from AJ. venter's recent book on the subject; Allah's bomb.
At the outset, it suggests that South Africa
is one of the newer Al Queda outposts. With
the rise of training camps in KwaZulu, near
the Vela nuclear testing center. It outlines
the rise the PAGAD, mostly among the opponents of the ANC in Natal & other regions, who were ignored in the embrace of Mandela and Mbeki; in the aftermath of the
collapse of authority in those regions. Thanks to the sanction regime, sponsored
by the Democrats. In the vaccuum, Islamist mobs began operating in the country"s main cities the Quibla, another Al Queda' splinter group rose up (Hey didn't Wilson serve in South Africa in the early 80s) Wasn't there a whole batch of S. Afican passports that went missing, some years ago;
one in the hands of a Islamist border crosser through the Rio Grande. Ironically,
very little of this hs surfaced; there was
an early piece by Foer in the New Republic;
instead the focus has been on Wouter Basson
and his ties to the Die Organisee; the role
of former South African commandoes as mercenaries in Iraq, Laura Rozen & Nick
Kristof's insinuations against Hatfill for
his brief South African ties (sounds like the reworking of Sum of All Fears. A
final thought to try out; in a recent novel, Andrew Britten's the Assassin, an explanation is made of the loss of armaments from the likes of the Al Qua Qua Defense Establishment (the main site for the development of the Argentine/Brazilian Egyptian condor missile) a former UN inspector made off with an American FAE, it; traded it to an Iraqi Baathist big wig, and will use it as a WMD in the States.

Anonodyne

Is there anyone I can pay to take apart the Tim Noah attack on Robert Novak in Slate? http://www.slate.com/id/2162463/fr/flyout

Noah seems to have swooped back in to the story without the benefit of any information that came out during the trial. He has no idea about what we now know Armitage did.

clarice

Why not just forward it to Novak? Surely he's capable of fighting his own battles.

Anonodyne

I guess I'm already paying Novak for that with my Post subscription.

clarice

Well, his is the most immediate interest in correcting lies about him.

antimedia

I think you should call "Tom" Tomtom, because he constantly beats the liberal drum. It's hilarious reading his "arguments".

I love the way liberals could care less about the CIA et. al. until it suited their purpose to feign indignation.

Tom Maguire wrote I think that for the typical lefty that is true - facts are not facts unless they see them at Kos.

I think that's wrong, Tom. They could care less about facts. They simply make up whatever suits them to "win" their "argument". The facts are completely irrelevant, as is justice, the future of America or anything else but winning and power.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame