
Well, lookie who was authorizing Scooter Libby to leak like a glass full of birdshot in the run-up to the Iraq War, according to Libby's own testimony (via Waas):
Although not reflected in the court papers, two senior government officials said in interviews with National Journal in recent days that Libby has also asserted that Cheney authorized him to leak classified information to a number of journalists during the run-up to war with Iraq. In some instances, the information leaked was directly discussed with the Vice President, while in other instances Libby believed he had broad authority to release information that would make the case to go to war.In yet another instance, Libby had claimed that President Bush authorized Libby to speak to and provide classified information to Washington Post assistant managing editor Bob Woodward for "Plan of Attack," a book written by Woodward about the run-up to the Iraqi war.
Bush and Cheney authorized the release of the information regarding the NIE in the summer of 2003, according to court documents, as part of a damage-control effort undertaken only days after former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV alleged in an op-ed in The New York Times that claims by Bush that Saddam Hussein had attempted to procure uranium from the African nation of Niger were most likely a hoax.
According to the court papers, "At some point after the publication of the July 6 Op Ed by Mr. Wilson, Vice President Cheney, [Libby's] immediate supervisor, expressed concerns to [Libby] regarding whether Mr. Wilson's trip was legitimate or whether it was in effect a junket set up by Mr. Wilson's wife."
Long time readers here at FDL will recall our coverage of the White House Iraq Group (WHIG), and their media circle jerk plan of planting information via one member of the WHIG cabal so that others could cite the leak as proof that the Administration's position was on "solid" ground -- ground of their own making, anyway. (See here and here, just as a couple of examples.) And that last paragraph quoted above sure does call the whole "I never asked anyone to look into Wilson's trip." tap dance by Cheney and company into question, doesn't it?
As Rayne says, Woodward was being used: "Shorter Waas: Woodward = used like Kleenex." Ah, how true it is. (And for more on Woodward, see Jane's classic "Plan of a Hack.")
I gotta wonder -- has Fitz spoken with Lawrence Wilkerson about the big, slimy Cheney accounting trail on the run-up to Iraq yet? If not, perhaps someone on his team ought to do so. Seems like things might dovetail nicely...I'm just saying.
ThinkProgress contrasts some prior Presidential statements on leaking and protecting classified information and national security matters with today's big news. Interesting, to say the least...when does Scotty brief again?
And so this is crystal clear for everyone -- the NIE did not say that Saddam was actively seeking nuclear materials. Eriposte at The Left Coaster has hit this numerous times and provides a great summary today.
So, immediately after the NIE was released, the CIA started to seriously backtrack and dismiss the uranium claim as not credible. The CIA's unclassified White Paper (which was actually a truncated version of the Key Judgements section of the classified NIE) that was released *after* the NIE was released, did not mention the uranium from Africa claim. This is important to note because even if the CIA did not want to reveal "sources and methods" (as was incredulously claimed by the WINPAC Director as the reason why he wanted the claim removed from the Bush 2003 SOTU - see Sec. 3.2.5 below) they could easily have introduced a simple, general statement that Saddam Hussein was seeking uranium from Africa, in the NIE Key Judgements and the White Paper (just like the British did in their own declassified White Paper released prior to the NIE). That would not have revealed sources or methods. Yet they chose not to do so - because the claim was not based on credible or reliable intelligence.
Naptime is fast approaching at our house, meaning I can finally sit down and do some serious writing and analysis on the legal docs. My goodness, it's a meaty, information-filled day in the world of Traitorgate, isn't it?
Login Here
Share This
Spotlight
Fitz is our Savior!
Fitz!
I’d say Fitz but I’d be redundant today.
Fitz!!!
Here’s another thought — does this get Libby his pardon post haste? The way to make this go away — fast — is a pardon that stops these proceedings cold.
Just EPU’d…
I didn’t see this in the thread above, here’s the link to the Executive Order currently in force concerning declassification: http://fas.org/sgp/bush/eoamend.html (I haven’t figured out how to hyperlink in the new comment format yet, sorry) and an annotated version showing changes since the Clinton EO: http://fas.org/sgp/bush/eo13292inout.html
It’s interesting, is it not, that Cheney felt he couldn’t declassify the NIE on his own? Undermines some of the “VP can declassify anything he wants†theory. (As I read it, the VP can only declassify things he himself originally classified. But I don’t really know if the VP is a “supervisory officerâ€, and IANAL.)
This isn’t a slam dunk, but you just know that the “contest people aren’t seeing yet†is waiting just around the corner to come out…
Christy, Great Title!
(WAG Alert) The CNN recant and the WaPoo and NYT’s “punt” to publish the AP’s version suggest a war in the WH. Those loyal to Bush are lobbying all the major media outlets to publish his version. DeadEye’s people are lobbying for Libby’s version, “Bush authorized the leak.” The WaPoo and the NYT’s haven’t figured out which way to lean, but the pressure got to them so the WaPoo first and then the NYT’s “punted” and published the AP version. (Wild Ass Guess)
I have a feeling that after the 2006 election, should we retake the House and/or the Senate, we are going to be finding out a lot more unpleasant information regarding these matters.
Ahhh, nap time…a long ago wish. Our 4.5yo stopped napping about 1.5.
Great work all.
Mark down April 6, 2006 on your calendar.
Today is the tipping point. We now have clear confirmation of the escalating internecine war within the Bush Administration.
There has been a great deal of evidence of this war accumulating up to this point. But today marks the first time it has emerged for all to behold.
Professor Foland — ooooooohhhh…that’s a GOOD one. I knew about the EO, but never actually read it anywhere.
Why did section 1.6 need 180 days longer to implement than the rest of the EO? Had they ALREADY leaked in March 2003 (or earlier) but didn’t want to put any hallmarks on it until later?
Apropos of FDL’s efforts to collect quotes on right wing fever swamps:
Here is a Google search for “Plame non-story”:
http://www.google.com/search?a.....afe=images
You know, just in case you feel the overwhelming - but childish and deplorable and bad, bad, bad! - urge to tell any of these people “I told ya so.”
Not that I’m recommeding that.
Ensor on CNN said that the NIE contained info about Valerie Plame. Do we know enough to categorically say that is not true?
Maybe I’m not understanding the legality of this but if Bush asserts an executive order to declassify information, then isn’t Libby claming Bush authorized the leak a cover for both Libby and Big Time Veep? Can the president release the name of an undercover CIA operative as part of his perogative to declassify information?
OT: Why isn’t Tom DeLay’s “know-it-all women” statement all over TV yet?
Would someone (with the time) please cross-reference some of this with the timing of the changes to the Executive Order covering the classification/de-classification authority of the POTUS & VP. I know the timing was “suspicious” at best based on what was known at the time (June or July 2003???), but I would very interested to see it in the context of this new info.
I’m well beyond being surprised by these guys, but being sick is another thing.
This is simply sickening.
The implications, to the holy of holies “national security” (do they even know that those words mean anymore?), to the depths of corruption and moral bankruptcy in the White House.
I’ve watched in horror every step taken to come to this, and now it’s come to this. And tomorrow it will be something even worse.
Why is that as soon as “Christians” conquered the US government, God has forsaken us?
I’m not particularly religious, but God help us now.
Helen Thomas coming up on AA . . .
OT: Why isn’t Tom DeLay’s “know-it-all women†statement all over TV yet?
They have no room in the news schedule for a non-Cynthia McKinney story.
OT but this man Harry Taylor deserves a medal of freedom:
A man who identified himself as Harry Taylor rose at a forum here to tell Bush that he’s never felt more ashamed of the leadership of his country. He said Bush has asserted his right to tap phone calls without a warrant, to arrest people and hold them without charges and to revoke a woman’s right to an abortion, among other things.
http://wfrv.com/topstories/top.....24452.html
zennurse, I think this will be helpful to your “already declassified” thoughts.
Cheney/Bush/Addington gave Libby verbal go to declassify the Key Judgements. I believe they wanted very selective release in two ways - very selective in who they released to (Miller / “friendliesâ€) and what they released selective key judgements. When Libby tried this with Miller, Miller didn’t bite (see 2nd link).
When the 2002 “real” (as opposed to the Libby verbal) NIE declassification occured, the material declassified was broader - including the alternate views, and was released more broadly - to all journalists.
Links to comments from last thread:
http://www.firedoglake.com/200.....ment-57550
http://www.firedoglake.com/200.....ment-57655
Perhaps this internecine war can act to prevent the tactical nuking of Iran. It’s pretty clear that there are no Democrats strong enough to oppose it (though I did hear on Air America the other day that Jane Harman was saying the Iran intelligence doesn’t make anything close to a clear case), nor are there patriotic Republicans in Congress who have the guts to pull a Goldwater-telling-Nixon-its-over move.
#7 WAG - I have felt for quite some time that a deadly game of gotcha has been going on between the VP et al and the WH et al. I think 2/11 emboldened the WH to think they had a cudgel with Cheney’s name on it. IMO it has only made Dead Eye more dangerous and desperate. This is strictly a ‘no honor among thieves’ event and I sincerely hope the massive egos and hubris of these two ‘men’ will be the downfall of both.
A little bit off-topic, but not really: Cynthia McKinney has apologised (a real apology, too, not those awful things the Repugs do). I’ve personally got very mixed feelings on her need to, but it sure does shut up that part of the Noise Machine, now doesn’t it? My husband thinks she should slug Boehner in the middle of the House floor, since they’ve all got immunity anyhow, but that’s another issue…
Do you think Fitz leaked this to take the heat of Delay?
; )
Didn’t President Bush state that he would fire anyone in the White House involved in the leak of CIA spy Valerie Plame’s name to the media.
Just asking……….
oooooo– shooogarp: you serious??
Larry, here is a nice compliation of all the lies Bush told about leaking …
http://www.democraticundergrou.....215;861326
Damn, Link didn’t work … hope the poster at DU doesn’t mind …
“I think I made that very clear last week. The topic came up, and I said that if anyone in this administration was responsible for the leaking of classified information, they would no longer work in this administration. This is a very serious matter. The President made it very clear just a short time ago in the East Room, and he has always said that leaking of classified information is a serious matter. And that’s why he wants to get to the bottom of this. And the sooner we get to the bottom of it, the better.” - Scott McClellan, October 6, 2003
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news.....100…
“If I could find out who anonymous people were, I would. I just said, it’s totally ridiculous.” - Scott McClellan, September 16, 2003
“The President expects everyone in his administration to adhere to the highest standards of conduct. No one would be authorized to do such a thing. Secondly, I’ve seen the anonymous media reports, and if I could find out who “anonymous” was, it would make my life a whole lot easier.” - Scott McClellan, September 29, 2003
“The President has set high standards, the highest of standards for people in his administration. He’s made it very clear to people in his administration that he expects them to adhere to the highest standards of conduct. If anyone in this administration was involved in it, they would no longer be in this administration.” - Scott McClellan, September 29, 2003
“…if there is a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is. And if the person has violated law, the person will be taken care of… I want to know the truth. If anybody has got any information inside our administration or outside our administration, it would be helpful if they came forward with the information so we can find out whether or not these allegations are true and get on about the business.” - George W. Bush, September 30, 2003
http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/cialeak.html
“And, you know, there’s a lot of leaking in Washington, D.C. It’s a town famous for it. And if this helps stop leaks of - this investigation in finding the truth, it will not only hold someone to account who should not have leaked - and this is a serious charge, by the way. We’re talking about a criminal action, but also hopefully will help set a clear signal we expect other leaks to stop, as well. And so I look forward to finding the truth. … I don’t know who leaked the information, for starters. So it’s hard for me to answer that question until I find out the truth. You hear all kinds of rumors. And the best way to clarify the issue is for full participation with the Justice Department. These are professionals who are professional prosecutors who are leading this investigation, and we look forward to — look, I want to know. I want to know.” - George W. Bush, October 6, 2003
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news.....100…
“I don’t know if we’re going to find out the senior administration official. Now, this is a large administration, and there’s a lot of senior officials. I don’t have any idea. I’d like to. I want to know the truth. That’s why I’ve instructed this staff of mine to cooperate fully with the investigators — full disclosure, everything we know the investigators will find out.” - George W. Bush, October 7, 2003
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news.....100…
Q Given — given recent developments in the CIA leak case, particularly Vice President Cheney’s discussions with the investigators, do you still stand by what you said several months ago, a suggestion that it might be difficult to identify anybody who leaked the agent’s name?
THE PRESIDENT: That’s up to -
Q And, and, do you stand by your pledge to fire anyone found to have done so?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. And that’s up to the U.S. Attorney to find the facts. - George W. Bush, June 10, 2004
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news.....061…
“As the President talked about earlier, there are a lot of senior administration officials in Washington, D.C. And the President wants the career officials at the Department of Justice, who are charged with looking into matters like this, to get to the bottom of this. And we are doing everything we can to assist them get to the bottom of this.” - Scott McClellan, July 11, 2005
http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/cialeak.html
“It’s best people wait until the investigation is complete before you jump to conclusions. I don’t know all the facts. I want to know all the facts.” - George W. Bush, July 19, 2005
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8605680
OT, but can you pardon someone who’s only been indicted? I mean, jeez, don’t they actually have to be convicted of someting?
When I say “you” I don’t mean you personally. :)
I’m schoolgirl giddy. Yum.
libopinion 28
Thanks
Samurai Sam: I quote from Section 3.1.b of the EO (but remember, IANAL so I’m just reading this as plain English):
In some exceptional cases, however, the need to protect such information may be outweighed by the public interest in disclosure of the information, and in these cases the information should be declassified. When such questions arise, they shall be referred to the agency head or the senior agency official. That official will determine, as an exercise of discretion, whether the public interest in disclosure outweighs the damage to the national security that might reasonably be expected from disclosure.
and 6.1.l:
l) “Declassification authority” means:
(1) the official who authorized the original classification, if that official is still serving in the same position;
(2) the originators current successor in function;
(3) a supervisory official of either; or
(4) officials delegated declassification authority in writing by the agency head or the senior agency official.
I think under “supervisory official” this latter section clearly gives the President power to declassify; but upper section would seem to put George Tenet in the crosshairs: he would have to have made the determination if the President was following the law laid out in his own EO. (Reminder: IANAL. Just reading these things as if they are plain language. And as there’s not some secret verbiage in between that I missed.)
libopinion: linky-no-worky
There is a crucial distinction which the AP headline makes clear: Bush authorized a *leak*. A leak is disclosure of previously secret information to a single person, or a very few persons, for the purpose of getting a story into the public domain. A full fledged declassification would mean announcing that the information has been released to a broadly accessible area. If nothing else, the reporters who were not in on the initial leak are able to fully appreciate this distinction. A leak automatically means that the information is no longer classified; you can’t put that genie back in the bottle. Whether the leak/declassification was legal, much less appropriate, is another issue.
Thanks, Pat, I was just about to elaborate after I went back to see your kind comment. What I’m trying to zero in on is more about that “verbal”declassification. I just looked at P. Foland’s links, and it looks like there is a bit more involved. Is it true that, as Abu Gonzales says, the P and VP can “declassify on the back of a cocktail napkin”, esp when it’s something as risky to national security as the NIE?? It just seems that the CIA or someone should have been involved-ie whoever was the originating agency for the NIE. (showing my utter stupidity about who that is here–Duh)
libopinion 28
Link not working??
Let’s hear that one again:
“I have no idea whether we’ll find out who the leaker is, partially because, in all due respect to your profession, you do a very good job of protecting the leakers.”
Liar! Can we get that video posted somewhere? Are you out there, Mr. Amato?
sandoz (16)
Bush’s EO was released March 25, 2003
Is there anyway Firedoglake can get a threaded comment section?
As is, it’s difficult to follow discussions unless you read every single comment. A threaded diary makes it more of a community. Please consider threaded comments. If you agree, post a comment on this too.
PS. How about SoapBlox?
Also, isn’t the disclosure of a CIA agent’s identity a separate issue (and statute)? In other words, even if the president had the authority to declassify ad hoc in some cases, wouldn’t there be a bigger burden if he was violating the terms of 50 U.S.C. Sec. 421? Because that’s a specific statute dealing with protection of government agents. It’s for their protection, not for national security generally.
Thread Theorist–the executive order explicitly says that a leak does not cause the information to automatically become declassified.
1.1.(b) Classified information shall not be declassified automatically as a result of any unauthorized disclosure of identical or similar information.
OT:
“There you go with that tactical stuff again…I wish you was a tack, so’s I could put you on a chair”
;>)
This recent article helps put Waas prior reporting into a potential context.
http://www.prospect.org/web/pa.....leId=11370
Part of getting the issue to resonate with the public is to frame a compelling and coherent storyline to fit all of the pieces.
The story emerging is that the President and his men were willing to do whatever it took to win in 2004. Use classification and declassification for partisan purposes and keep truth hidden from the public.
It worked with what he knew about Iraq, the NSA spying story and Plame.
This is story about abuse of presidential power to keep the truth hidden from the public until after safely re-elected and missuse of national security information for political partisan ends.
Thanks Professor! That question came up from being forced to watch the odious Brit Hume make that argument on Fox at lunch. Damn wingnut cafeteria…
Violating the public good and endangering our national security sure sounds like “high crimes and misdemeanors to me” especially from a president who claims protecting Americans is his biggest responsibility.
Professor:
Thanks. Now look at the timing.
March 8, 2003: Wilson comes out strong.
March 25, 2003: EO change.
June. . . .
Good Lawyering (ahem. . .Addington?)
Tommy Yum #29
That is exacly what Bush 41 did to put the kabosh on Iran-Contra investigations/trials.
Two thoughts –
Does the Feingold Censure Motion look prescient or what? Will there be a stampede of Senators to endorse it — GOoPers included?
If these developments lead Scooter to re-assess his options, and he decides to turn State’s Evidence — what will it do to the Comstock Defense Fund thingy?
heh . . .
SO, when will dear old Mr. Cheney’s Heart start to bother him so much that he is going to have to step down… and who will the replace him with? Condi? Is this why John McCain has been licking Bush’s wang so hard lately?
dannyboy at #24 — I just want to say straight out for the record as to my opinion on all of this: I don’t care who you are, where you work, what your position is, what color you are, whatever, striking a police officer when they are appropriately performing their duties is wrong. Period. If an officer tells you to stop at a security checkpoint and you do not do so, and then the officer attempts to restrain you in some way — that’s appropriate procedure, as I know it. Striking the officer is not the correct behavior under the usual circumstances.
I wasn’t there to see what happened with McKinney and the officer, so I can’t comment on any of the facts involved with their specific incident with any authority because I haven’t seen a police report or any formal statements taken from witnesses or anything — but if the apology was appropriate and the right thing to do, then I’m awfully glad she issued one. (Whatever racial profiling issues may or may not be involved, I have no idea, btw — although I’m sure someone is looking into that as well.)
That said, the whole blowing it up into a huge political issue to distract from GOP corruption issues was utter crap. And it smacked of a Tom DeLay special.
But I feel it necessary to say flat out that you do not strike a police officer when they are doing their job. Especially when it is an issue of a security checkpoint. The laws apply to everyone — the President, members of Congress included. I don’t want this to escalate into some huge flaming argument, but I’ve worked with enough decent law enforcement people that I really felt the need to say that straight out.
I vote no on threaded comments, hate ‘em. Sorry.
Prof Foland- that’s exactly the part of the OE I was thinking about. It looks like there was some kind of sneak around and that this wasn’t a real declassification, just a verbal “go ahead” or authorization. Authorization th share, I mean, rather than a true declassification. Maybe Hadley did know, but the actual declassification was a CYA process.
Tommy Yum # 29
Bush41 pardoned Weinberger before his trial, so I guess Pres. can pardon the indicted
The Masters is underway–Tiger plus one after 12- not a great beginning.
Dannyboy #27 -
Whatcha think?
I am SO serious.
I don’t know about the legalities of this, I’ll leave that to our lawyer community.
As Redd points out,
- Cheney authorized him to leak classified information to a number of journalists during the run-up to war with Iraq
- President Bush authorized Libby to speak to and provide classified information to Washington Post assistant managing editor Bob Woodward for “Plan of Attack,”
- Bush and Cheney authorized the release of the information regarding the NIE in the summer of 2003
The documents are either declassified, and all can see them or they are not. This administration wants to pick and choose what they declassify and to whom using INFORMAL release and using “we can declassify” as COVER.
Tommy Yum, #29, others regarding the pardon issue:
Bush II may pardon, but in this case, there’s the possibility of civil trial to consider. The dirt would still come out.
NPR is leading the hour’s news with a kick ass report, saying that Libby was “authorized via Cheney/Bush to leak to Judith Miller (mentioned by Name!) - and that the “intelligence” has since been discredited. Very very clear.
rwcole #51 - was counting on ya to keep us up to date - remember, Tiger didn’t cover himself in glory until the 4th round last year
I posted the Bush comments in the next post under my non-working link. #29 Sorry!
my only comment on McKinney. Good choice. Ugly GOP.
I haven’t changed out of my PJ’s or combed my hair yet, I have no cat food and need go to the market. I need to finish my laundry and clean my fish bowls.
BUT I CAN’T TURN OFF FIREDOGLAKE! I MIGHT MISS SOMETHING!
Cat food and fish bowls necessary. Laundry, not so much.
Talk of the Nation leading with thes, Bloombergs Richard Kyle.
Christy — As I said, I’ve got pretty mixed feelings on it. For one thing, for a black woman, it’s not exactly the healthiest thing to do, so I’m assuming she didn’t really know it was a cop., didn’t see who grabbed her — or reacted instinctively to being grabbed, or touched. Otoh, for them not to recognize her (you know, there are so many black female members of congress…) does sort of smell of harrassment, as does everything that’s happened since. But I agree, it was stupid. Actually, where I’ve gotten with things, ALL violence is stupid. And wrong. There’s always a better way — always.
Oliphant speaking to this on Franken now.
After a long time waiting the frog jumped out of Libby after being squeezed by Fitz and croaked the ultimate truth–BUSH AUTHORIZED
THE LEAK. So what is next? Is Iran going to be bombed soon? Are
the Democrats going to retake Congress and Impeach? Is Cheney
going to fall on the sword? Most likely we will see an internecine
carnage at the Whitehouse between Cheney’s gang and Bush’s
gang led by Rove. Rummy –now who’s side is he on? Keep the
popcorn away from the _________ hitting the fan.
Bill Schneider says it is EXTREMELY damaging to the preznit that he discredited a political opponent by declassifying information. Fredricka said if his approval ratings were in the TOILET before, they will probably go further. Schneider says there are serious questions about his honesty. They played a tape of Nadler and Abu when Nadler pointed out that the preznit could declassify information for political gain and nobody could do anything about it, right? Then they played a tape of the proud patriot I mentioned upthread who lambasted chimpy. woo hoo.
hope our regular ‘Lawyer’ Mary is catching all this - she was so in need of some good news
Via Raw Story -
Strange Bedfellows - Sensenbrenner and Conyers tore Abu a new one in a hearing/NSA this morning (replay not up at C Span yet)
am having serious linking challenges w/this one
Even if this latest information doesn’t implicate Bush as outing Plame, it speaks directly to the manipulation of intel to go to war–in this case, the deliberate cherry-picking of the NIE–and it’s an issue that makes the President’s numbers drop down into peak pony territory.
Kirby - here’s a link to the declassified 2002 NIE.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t.....kuh4vOsWKg
http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....17_pf.html
So help me understand how a memo written in 2003 got into the 2002 NIE?
Ensor’s confused.
zennurse 58 –
The cat won’t starve and the fish won’t die — and if they do, it was going to happen anyway.
Dammit. It’s bad enough they want me to show up on time, But they want me to WORK too! So dang busy rigght now. I have to pop in now and then to keep up.
“the real problem for the pres will be political, has authority to classify and declassify”
“Took place after Wilson disclosure about WMD, uranium, forged documents. Admin spent next 10 days trying to deal”
“Interesting window in to Governments view of Libby’s strategy. Makes clear that Prosecutor is prepared to prove that Libby is very methodical and wanted his action authorized”
That’s an excellent point, that Libby went to some lengths to get the confirmation from Addington before talking to Miller, and shoots a huge hole in the theory that he would have believably forgotten the events around the disclosure because he was such a busy guy.
Actual FReeper quotes:
“It is not a leak if the President OK’d it.”
“If Bush authorized it, it AINT A LEAK. Get it, it IS NOT ILLEGAL!”
Well, if the president does it then that means it is not illegal. -RMN
Update on Raw Story headline I mentioned in the previous thread:
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2....._0406.html
Let’s see.
Condi and Rumsfeld are feuding.
The Bush/Rove and Cheney/Libby Klans appear to be in open warfare.
Republicans in the House are in mutiny.
Inner party warfare against Dr. Catkiller Frist.
Heads are reportedly set to roll in the Whitehouse.
Tom Delay has stepped down in cloud of ethics scandals.
Right wing media are openly declaring war on women and minorities.
Heckuva job Georgie, heckuva job.
-GSD
Schneider eh? Wow- that old geek normally lives on Clusterfuck’s vomit and feces. If he’s goin after GW–it doesn’t look good!
Christy, I am glad so you weighed in on the McKinney incident because the way that many of us on the left have defended this has left me with a very queasy feeling.
Not only is it inappropriate to ever hit a police officer, it is just simply wrong to EVER hit anyone unless you are legitimately defending yourself from physical harm - someone putting their hand on your arm doesn’t rise to that definition, in my book. If McKinney felt that she was being unjustifiably harassed or targeted (which may very well be the case) there are so many other ways to deal with things than to lash out at a fairly lowly federal employee. She is a powerful member of this society, the burden for good behavior is on her.
If we blindly excuse the bad behavior of “ours” then how can we possibly - justifiably - hold the rethugs accountable for anything?
JWR 11:14am
That won’t play in Peoria any more. Tricky Dick tried that angle a few years back…
tee hee
:-)
There are two separate issues arising from the news about the court disclosures.
Even if Libby can play CYA with the claim that the President authorized leaks of prewar intelligence, that still leaves open the issue of authorization specifically to disclose Plame’s CIA identity. According to the WaPo article:
“There was no indication in the filing that either Bush or Cheney authorized Libby to disclose Valerie Plame’s CIA identity.
But the disclosure in documents filed Wednesday means that the president and the vice president put Libby in play as a secret provider of information to reporters about prewar intelligence on Iraq.â€
Re: Woodward being used.
This is pathetic; the hot shot investigative reporter still earning a living on his past Watergate exploits, turns out to just be a pawn in the whole mess. Probably the biggest news story in his career, bigger than Watergate by the time it plays out right under his nose, and poor befuddled Woodward is standing on the sidelines.
The NIE leak cannot be distinguished from the Plame leak, since they were part of the same effort.
The only remaining question is whether Cheney or Bush is the one who autorized the attack on Plame.
.
“or whether it was in effect a junket set up by Mr. Wilson’s wife.”
A junket? Doesn’t that imply some kind of cushy St Andrew-style trip? Avec la wife and kids or la mistress and her minks? A junket to Niger! Phah!
I vote no on threading comments, please. One of the great pleasures of FDL is the perusal of all the great comments.
Saw a bumper sticker on a Bush/Cheney’d car today that made me spittin’ mad - “Give War a Chance”. I hope I see it again. It was (no offense to those of you who may own one) a monster truck, wheels jacked up and covered in mud. I have a sticker I want to put on his bumper, right next to the Bush/Cheney one - “If your pecker was as small as mine, you’d need a monster truck too.”
Stephen Parrish, CPA # 70
thanks! can’t wait for the replay
Just got to the office. Been at a hospital giving a presentation. Whazzup?
So, MSM blaring headline is all about Immigration? Bush authorizing Libby leaks is sidebar coverage? The President selectively green-lights dissemination of classified information to the press — but NOW demands FBI hunts for those who gave up his NSA shit?
Why is this not a 96-point type above-the-fold shitstorm?
It’s Harry Taylor Day.
The official day that the Bush Admin. jumped the shark.
-GSD
Game on boys and girls!
FINAL DAYS!
Warm up Marine one and pass the warm pretzels.
I’d say this would be a good time to hammer the James Moore ‘ little tubes of terror’ angle and why those 16 plus words were not sudennly ‘ inoperative’ as well but we might be getting a wee bit ahead of ourselves…
Wormed into the heart of the wermacht was G Gordon Libby who has reportedly just ‘ liberated’ el jefe presidente-for-life Arbusto. Maybe his ashes will be deported to …Mars?
Who gives a flying fuck at a pretzel. The ModeRATe wha?
There are several things about these new developments:
1. This administration does not just have a credibility problem, it has a credibility catastrophe.
2. Bush is now in the “loop” on these allegations. The stories point out that he didn’t violate any law — but he can’t talk about how leakers hurt the government if he is actively involved himself in leaking when it suits his political purposes.
3. This underscores again the abysmal failure of one-party government where there is effectively no vigorous Congressional oversight for political reasons. Under one party government Congressional CYLYKW (Cover Your Leader’s You-Know-What) has replaced Congressional oversight.
4. Expect that if there are more revelations to come out, they will. Under the old modus operendi of journalism, this kind of story would trigger a competition in the media to get more on this angle (the President participated in leaks…so what other ones did he participate in?). The new attention deficit media of the early 21st Century may not pursue it the same way, but it’s unlikely that this will be the last story looking closely at Bush’s role.
5. If the Democrats gain control of the House in 2006 it’ll be a whole new ball game. It will not necessarily mean impeachment proceedings (which is the threat some GOPers are using to try and rally their base for the mid-term elections). But there will be the threat of real — if even excessive — Congressional oversight coupled with political consequences.
It’ll be interesting to see if additional revelations will be forthcoming from Mr. Libby (who should turn down that hunting invitation from Vice President Dick Cheney…) Bushs balls and Bushs brains were not going to take the fall.
This make’s Bush’s pathetic efforts to “find the leaker” look a lot like old O.J. being out there looking for “the real killer” even if the shrubster did age dramatically last year.
Agree with Redd- (as usual) on slappin cops–it’s a “no-no”.
OT — Bill Moyers gives powerful testimony to how we the people can take back our government and election process from the corrupt politicians and lobbyists who have temporarily taken over…. Must reading at the common dreams website:
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0406-29.htm
If this duplicates another poster’s comments, more power to us [I’m flyin’ between appts today] …Moyers deserves a read.
Thread Theorist–the executive order explicitly says that a leak does not cause the information to automatically become declassified.
1.1.(b) Classified information shall not be declassified automatically as a result of any unauthorized disclosure of identical or similar information.
Thanks for the EO citation. In this case I believe that Bush’s defenders will claim that he personally authorized both the leak and the consequent declassification of the information. The particular clause above may refer to an unauthorized individual learning still classified information. That individual is still obligated not to disclose the information further, the information is still classified. However, if Miller was being given the hope that she should print it, then Bush/Cheney/Libby were assuming that the information had been declassified by Presidential fiat. The idea that classified information can be declassified by selective Presidential leaking, without careful review, should be repugnant to all who have risked their lives to get that information.
Dannyboy #27 -
Whatcha think?
I am SO serious.
- shoogarp
Why would Fitz care about DeLay?
and, this was not really timed, it is a response to another filing by Libbys team wanting more, more, more paper to muddy the issue.
CK– the cat can eat leftover chicken, but the fish are truly disgusting, I’ll take a break now and be back in 20. I should probably eat, it’s only 2:15!! But thanks, nice to know I’m not a complete lunatic. After all, this is kind of a big day and participation is the beauty of FDL.
Speaking of participation, Christy do we have an ETA for Rubber Stamp video? I know you have your hands full with this .pdf, but I’m just thinking you may have had an email or phonecall this am???? I’m soooooo excited!!!
shooogarp — I don’t know: it certainly has eclipsed DeLay’s precipitous fall from glory, and maybe I want to believe in Fitz too much, but do you really, really, in your heart of hearts, believe he’s one of “them” ??
“A junket to Niger! Phah!”
Laughing my ass off.
Zennurse #58: Your cat would no doubt be more than happy to clean out your fish bowl! ;)
If I am not mistaken, Bill Schneider of CNN was a signatory to the 1998 PNAC letter to Clinton calling for “regime change” in Iraq.
-GSD
GSD # 71
Thank you for that lovely summation. It looks so pretty in that bright red bow too!
GSD - Can you explain to this out-of-touch old lady (I was asked yesterday if I get the senior discount, sniff. Not yet, honey.) what jump the shark means?
OT
Mommybrain - too funny!
My friends and I always joke….the bigger the SUV, the smaller, well, you know the rest.
Whenever I read one of these well researched posts on FDL, DK, or any of the other blogs I frequent, I always pop over to MSNBC (yeah, I feel slimed after doing it) to see if, just by mistake, they felt it was an issue that needed to be covered. Most times I find they do not bother. Today, however, lo and behold, it’s actually above the “fold” (although not prominently featured with a picture like it deserves).
It does my heart good to see the words “Libby: Bush authorized Iraq leak”. And to see such a headline featured before a late Friday afternoon boogles the mind.
I didn’t read the story - I’m sure they screwed that up somehow. The headline, however, is a thing of beauty.
Greenlantern - thanks for this…
“But the disclosure in documents filed Wednesday means that the president and the vice president put Libby in play as a secret provider of information to reporters about prewar intelligence on Iraq.”
This is damning. I’m glad the WaPo is characterizing this as such. The Administration’s idea of declassification is to have Libby to tell who he wants what he wants.
Miller rejected Libby’s verbal efforts.
http://www.firedoglake.com/200.....ment-57655
10 days later the 2002 NIE was officially declassified. I wonder had Miller written the story, would Libby have spiked the declassification?
can hardly wait for RH’s thoughts tonight.
Joe Wilson IV for Secretary of State (and Valerie for DDO CIA).
“Libby claims Cheney said Bush OK’d NIE leaks…NOW!!! EXCLUSIVE!!!, BACK TO ARUBA AND THE NATALIE HOLLOWAY COVERAGE WITH OUR ROUNDTABLE PANEL OF EXPERTS!!!“
Mommybrain #78, bumpersticker…LOL LOL LOL…glad I wasn’t drinking anything when I read that!
Mommybrain–
Jump the shark refers to an infamous scene near the end of the Happy Days run. Fonzie was water skiing, a shark came up, he managed in his Fonzie-like way to jump it. The term quickly came into use to describe any kind of desperate, over-the-top, we’ve-run-out-of-ideas-so-let’s-do-something-ridiculous moment. It’s when you know it’s all over.
Separate note: I don’t read the posts or post myself as often as others. So I need definitions for
Troll-trexing
EPU’d. Does this have something to do with Evil Parallel Universe?
Thanks.
P.S. Fitz!
mommybrain -
I don’t mean to steal GSD’s thunder, you’re going to be surprised where this phrase originated…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jumping_the_shark
The Gospels:
I. Lewis Libby testified to the grand jury investigating the CIA leak that Cheney told him to pass on information and that it was Bush who authorized the disclosure, the court papers say”
This is the gospel: according to Judah…errr Libby.
OT
Mommybrain, I could be wrong, but I thought Jump the Shark refers to the 1970s show “Happy Days”. Towards the end of their TV run they completely ran out of writing material, so out of desperation they had Fonzi at the beach jumping over a shark cage while on waterskis.
So, i guess, if your desperate and running out of ideas you “Jump the Shark”!
Today is the tipping point. We now have clear confirmation of the escalating internecine war within the Bush Administration.
I wont buy this until there are reports of exchanges of birdshot up and down the halls of the Whitehouse, the forces of Cheney firing from the cover of doorways while the Bushies are hunkered down, returning fire from behind the cov