Fitz for getting the cat out of the bag yesterday.

Fitz!

Cheating has not “simply become their perferred mode of operation.” It has always from the get go been their preferred mode of operation. (Ask John McCain about his family and how they are viewed in South Carolina). And why not. It has brought them nothing but success and there has never been any accountability or consequences. The only accountability Bush recognizes is a loss at the polls. Which cannot happen now and given their lack of shame around cheating not likely to ever have happened.

Fitz to you, too!

There’s no way that Rover would let anybody through if it was a threat to him personally, no matter the gravitas of the “messenger”. Although I do think that a Repug of stature that is NOT a politician might have a better chance of getting through, maybe a celebrity who’s come around but is no risk politically; they might be able to breach the firewall. But I can’t think of anybody who’d take this on.

We’re left with the hope that a Harry Taylor will break through the bubble at one of the events — but that’s not likely since the so-called unscripted events are doing nothing for the POTUS approval rating. Bush has been coming off as a bigger *sshole than many average non-blogging Joes realized.

Maybe that’s what’s called for, fighting fire with fire. We need a non-politician major league *sshole Repug to call Bush on his *sshole nature.

it’s an excellent slogan, redd. i think we should spread that around.

1006 elections? William had to do conquering in 1066 … we shall conquer in 2006 !

Unbeknownst to most historians, the 1006 elections were landslides all across Europe by the old Republykaan party, who promptly plunged the Western world into a dark age that took centuries to come out of.

Senator Warner, perhaps?

We still don’t know who told Libby (or Rove, or others) to talk to the press about Valerie Plame. Once we get that, Fitz is free to prosecute that person for committing the substantive crime. If Bush were a culprit, I wonder whether Fitz would step out on a limb and prosecute him. My understanding is that there’s no settled law concerning whether a sitting president could be prosecuted for committing a crime.

YES! The question I haven’t heard anyone ask yet, is WHY? THAT’S going to be what fries Chimpy’s ass in the end…patent and obvious abuse of presidential powers. It is what it is.

Love the graphic…it’s deja vu all over again! Let’s get ready for a long, hot summer of Treasongate, kids!

We have know this, and they don’t care since this lie got them re-elected.

That an the social diversion they ran along with Kerry saying he voted for it before he voted against it.

Christy, read “The Wars of Watergate” by Stanley Kutler. Everybody, if you haven’t already, give this great book a careful read. I’m going to try to find time to reread it.

On Page 361:

On Page 370:

Despite appearances, Howard Baker had been Nixon’s most effective supporter on the Senate Select Committee…. His question regarding the President’s knowledge, carefully repeated as it was, served to protect Richard Nixon. Who among those witnesses knew what the President knew, or when he knew it? Not many, and those who did seemed unlikely to answer. But the discovery of the tapes undid Baker’s careful handiwork. The tapes made irrelevant his question to John Dean….. Through the tapes, Richard Nixon himself could answer Baker, and in indelible word.

Kutler makes very clear that Baker was a covert shill for the Nixon WH. He made the “smoking gun” remark in the belief that no such thing would ever be found.

Are there Howard Bakers out there you ask? Well Quicksilver posted this comment on an Emptywheel thread at The Next Hurrah that seems to reply to your query, Redd:

I spent the day trying to find a quote from a Republican in Congress — any Republican in Congress — willing to voice criticism about the President and Vice President’s role in the ordering the leak of classified information. I came up empty-handed.

It’s official: not a single Republican in Congress feels there’s anything wrong with leaking classified information, or lying about it, so long as it’s in the service of covering up a plan to go to war. Not Olympia Snowe. Not Arlen Specter. None of them, not a single Republican, not a single damn one of them.

http://thenexthurrah.typepad.c…..t-15916528

I agree about the need to hold this administration accountable, but there’s another issue on the horizon: Iraq Redux — Iran.

Thomas Kean is the republican with enuf stature and credibility to tackle the mess the bushies have created. Can’t imagine why he’d want to.

dare i mention (cringing) Newtie? the Gingrich was just saying how easy it would be for “had enough” to be the Dem’s legit slogan….

I woke up this morning at 5 with this simple idea. Everyone who supports censure should send $1 to Russ Feingold’s office. One dollar = one vote. A simple way to send a message of support to Russ and a message of where ‘the people’ stand to the rest of the Democrats in Washington. Remember that court room scene in “Miracle on 34th Street†where the defense has the Post Office carry in all the mail bags full of letters to Santa. Maybe the blogosphere can send an avalanche of mail bags to Washington to get our message out. Using Paypal just wouldn’t have the visual effect that actual physical letters with dollar bills in them would!

If the rep.are able to maintain control ,by hook or by crook I fear for the result.I think bushs numbers are so low now that anything is pssible…I worry some truly hairbrain schemes may be tried by those wishing to maintain rep. control at any cost

Redd:
“we’d better all hope for some serious electoral shift towards Democrats in the 1006 elections.”

The 1006 elections? I knew that Shrub was moving the country backward, but I did not know it was that far.

Senator Danforth has the gravitas…

I think one point that needs further exploration in all of this is many harms that are created by selective, private, declassification – which is apparently what Bush did with regard to the NIE (and probably Plame’s identity).

1. No opportunity for the CIA or other relevant agencies to scrub the document to protect national secrets and ongoing missions.

2. The person disclosing the information (Libby in this case) can selectively leave out relevant contervailing information (as was done in this case w/r/t the strength of the evidence that Iraq was developing WMD’s). The reporter receiving the information cannot follow up and learn more – he must take the source at his word.

3. The person disclosing the information can lie without being called to account on it due to source anonymity.

4. The reporter may feel pressured to print the story because not to do so would be to endanger the privilege of special and unique access to previously classified information.

5. It creates confusion as to what is and what is not classified. In this case, we saw that Bush seemingly declassified information twice – once to Cheney and Libby, and again publicly. Why the redundancy?

6. It allows the administration to threaten anyone in any government agency, either explicitly or implicitly, that it can and will disclose damaging classified information, such as the identity of a CIA operative, as retribution for disloyalty, or for any other reason it sees fit. Secret, selective declassification allows for this because, at least until Fitzgerald, the administration believed that the disclosure would never come back to haunt them because of the protection of journalistic privilege. Selective declassification was seen by the Bush administration as a one-way ratchet that could damage its enemies and bolster its case for war, etc. It is a one-way release of information with no possible means for the journalist to verify or identify contradictions.

Other thoughts?

As for any Senators that come to mind…please the “moderate” McCain is carrying Bush’s water right now.

Bush didn’t declassify the information. Under the Exec. Order “classified information†is any information that “requires protection against unauthorized disclosure…â€. As Libby testified, Bush gave him authorization “to discuss information that would be classified but for that approval†– an authorization Libby testified was “unique in his recollection.†It is apparent, therefore, that Bush determined that the information did indeed continue to require protection against unauthorized disclosure, and therefore the information remained classified by the terms of bush’s own Exec. Order 13292.

The current Exec. Order simply does not recognize the concept of selective or limited declassification. By the terms of the order itself any information that remains subject to protections against unauthorized disclosure is “classified information.†The president (and other officials authorized to declassify) do indeed possess the power to authorize limited or restricted disclosure, but the means for doing this is not declassification but rather the provision of clearance to specified individuals. Well, you might ask, didn’t Bush then simply authorize Libby to grant Judy Miller (or any other journalist to whom Libby leaked) a clearance with respect to the classified information? Apparently not, because such a clearance would have subjected the journalist to a non-disclosure obligation – a result contrary to LIbby’s testimony that the purpose of the authorization from Bush was to get information in the NIE into the media for public dissemination of information that might undermine Joe Wilson’s credibility.

Why didn’t Bush simply declassify the information? That would have been a transparent attempt on the part of the Administration to attack Wilson. It was essential that the information be leaked, i.e., disclosed to the journalist with the understanding that the information was not for attribution. In that way the Administration could not be accused of engaging in a political attack on Wilson, and the journalist, though aware that the Administration was indeed engaging in such an attack, would be bound to protect the identity of her source and therebyunable to report that such attack was taking place.

In sum, Bush did not declassify because that could be traced to the Administration and certainly would have been perceived as an attack on Wilson. And Bush couldn’t simply grant a clearance to the journalist because that similarly would have defeated the purpose of dessimination by subjecting the jouranlist to a non-disclosure obligation. Quite simply, Bush neither declassified nor granted clearance, and thereby achieved an objective that the law plainly does not permit – the selective disclosure of classified information to parties that are not themselves bound not to disclose.

This is illegal, my friends. Christy, you are one of the “go to” guys on legal analysis of bush administration depradations. Please counter the spin that bush declassified this information – he did not.

Good question — where are the patriots hiding these days? Is there not one out there in the Republican Party that will step forward and do the right thing?

Continuing #12, since POS comment editor ate the quote from Page 361:

Thomas C – Your analysis seems dead on. Bush was trying to have it both ways and apparently committed a crime. Selective disclosure, as practiced in this instance, was not just unorthodox, but illegal. And for good reason.

They — the republicans in toto — do not believe that dubya has done anything wrong. There may be a handful of elected Rs who have some doubts about this or that aspect of whatever it is that they think or know that Dubya has done or some doubts about the way it has been done, but none of them believes that what has been done is itself wrong and that view is shared by a lot of Dems, too.

You’re not going to find a Howard Baker in this environment. The whole notion of acting on law and principle or the Constitution simply doesn’t occur to these people. Those ideas are “quaint.”

And when did it become the Republicans’ responsibility to oppose Bush and his cabal? It’s too bad the Democrats didn’t see it as their responsibility, and still don’t (though they claim otherwise, they still can’t wrap their minds around actually doing something — like supporting Feingold’s censure resolution — instead of cowering and “distancing themselves” from any Dem that gets uppity). But it has become fashionable to claim that the Rs are supposed to be opposing Bush, they are supposed to do oversight, they are supposed to tell him to desist. While the Dems are supposed to sit quietly with their hands folded in their laps.

Nonsense.

Since the Dems will do nothing, and the Rs don’t think that anything’s wrong, and the courts are completely subverted and corrupt, it is now left to the People to take matters into their own hands.

One suggestion is to assemble (peaceably) in DC by the hundreds of thousands or millions and stay there until this whole rotten edifice is brought down.

I’m sure there are other suggestions for action. But the fact of the matter is that if we don’t recognize — after all these years — that the electeds (R and D) and the courts and the media aren’t going to intervene or even tell the truth, then it is up to the People and no one else.

My father is exactly like Bush that it’s scary, so let me tell you from my experience, Bush will NEVER admit a mistake. He might listen to his mom or Laura if they talk to him, but if they suggest that he admit mistakes publicly, he would not do that for even them. His type of personality can not admit they were wrong.

PS. a comparison like that to the devestation of 1066 is objectionable

Good morning, friends.
I haven’t read through yet. but wanted to just drop this in as it seems to relate.
Today at about 4pm, there’s a discussion on C-Span called “Republican Legal Issues” starring Karl Rove and Harvey Tettlebaum. I realize that watching Karl for more than 30 seconds may cause your eyes to swell, but it might be an interesting little window into peek through.

Gooper Ego Dance

I really do believe there is a massive divide between the POTUS and VPOTUS. And I don’t believe this is the endgame. It is just beginning. I think w and KKKarl are trying foist this all off on Dick, and Dick isn’t taking it lying down.

W missed his Friday luncheon with Dick last week. Anyone know his schedule for today?

Continuing #12, since POS comment editor ate the quote from Page 361:

“What did the President know and when did he know it?” The Senator’s question had nothing less than the purpose of impeaching [John] Dean’s importance as a witness. He asked Dean to structure his answer within three categories: direct, circumstantial, and hearsay evidence. Baker seemed confident that any complete answers to his basic question could only fall within the last or, at best, the second category.

Baker led the witness through different time frames for both the break-in and the cover-up to show that his knowledge was based only on circumstantial or hearsay evidence. Dean counterattacked with a memorandum he had prepared for the President’s meeting with Baker to discuss the proceedings of the Senate Select Committee…. Dean preserved his credibility and Baker his. But the moment disarmed Baker…. After Dean’s revelations, Baker seemed more muted, even more obsequious and deferential to [Sam] Ervin….

BTW the comment editor is previewing buggy html as being fine. I wouldn’t trust it.

Redd:
Forget it. The Republican statesmen are all gone. Back in 1973 there was not only (Howard) Baker, but Al Haig, Elliott Richardson, Barry Goldwater and numerous others. Trent Lott was one of few that voted against impeachment in committee and we savaged him for it. Now Trent is viewed as a non-fascist Repub Senator. I don’t think that Trent’s views have changed one iota over the last 30 years. It just that Republicans at large have shifted towards authoritarianism, so Trent doesn’t seem as repugnant. I’m sure that Barry Goldwater and all other honest and libertarian Republicans of that era are turning over in their graves now.

This conversation came up once before, a long time ago, around here, and I always thought Warner of Virginia had the stature and credibility.

He’s an old senate lion with big defense credentials, he’s been supportive of Bush but he’s not a product of the Bush/Rove machine or movement, and he’s been independent from time to time in his career.

The real comparison is to Goldwater, who went to 1600 Pennsylvania to inform Nixon he had lost the support of Congress and would be impeached. That led to Nixon’s resignation. In today’s environment, I think that delegation might be led by Warner.

*ilson46201 gave the name that came to my mind at #19, but I’m afraid he’s too “retired” to have much effect. Witness the great reaction (*yawn*) engendered by his comments (as an Episcopal priest, no less) against the takeover of the republican party by the religious right.

The arrogance of the NeoCons is that they believe they know what is best for our country. And they have the Administration by the balls. Now they want military action against Iran…and they’ll likely succeed. Hell, most of the leading Democrats (Clinton, Biden, Feinstein) support these guys…

fiat n.
1. An arbitrary order or decree.
2. Authorization or sanction: government fiat.

What we have here, (What Bush has done) is not only an act of political expediency but something a kin to “if I do it, it’s good, if you do it, it probably isn’t.”

DC (#9)
“My understanding is that there’s no settled law concerning whether a sitting president could be prosecuted for committing a crime.”

That’s true only because it has not happened before. However, since the executive power is vested in the President, an indictment of him (even if it is deemed Constitutional) is only symbolic. He has the power simply to order an investigation and/or prosecution halted. Then we’re stuck with impeachment as the only solution.

Warner might have Dan Coats with him too … Danforth might tag along as well

Thanks everyone — my figners are a little stiff this morning. I’ve fixed the 1006 to what it ought to have been — 2006. Appreciate the heads up. *g*

This disclosure came at such an appropriate time…..I feel Fitz is getting ready to pounce on some CON very soon.

I was reading the Libby/Bush story in this mornings Chicago Tribune and was wondering if your excellent blog plans follow up on the story? Did the Presidents denial in 2003 specifically ” if anyone leaked classified information”…It would have been a weaselly denial since he was asked specifically about the Plame outing. Even if Bush is hiding behind semantics and his legal power to declassify documents to his political advantage, isn’t outing Plame still a crime if he was involved? I hate it when this administration moves the goal posts and we all just go along, calling 3rd and long plays instead of 3rd and inches we just had. They are on the ropes. If Rove thinks setting the President up for the political heat he’ll take for the ” I declassified , I’m president , its within my power” position is better than the true Plame fallout it’s time to bear down on Plame.

Warren Rudman, ex Senator from New Hampshire, is another candidate.

oddly enuff: Dick Lugar would be a dark-horse candidate to inform the Preznit “It’s over!”

Thomas C, thanks a lot. I agree that it seems clear-cut that if it wasn’t declassified, it is illegal for even the President to leak it. It also seems to me that it’s legal for the President to declassify it, provided he has an opinion from DCI that it’s OK.

So our choices for what happened are:
1. It was never declassified (which you make a good case for)—clearly illegal
2. It was declassified correctly, and somewhere there’s a memo from George Tenet saying all this is fine–probably legal
3. It was “declassified” but not in accordance with the EO–seems like it would be illegal
4. Scooter is lying (that is, after all, what he was charged with…)

But I’ll say again: our President lied to get us into a war, then blew an American spy to cover that lie, then instructed his staff to lie about that through an election. It shouldn’t matter whether it was all done legally. If this can only be addressed in a court as an illegality, our political system has failed.

(And if I hear another Democrat call the King hypocritical this morning I’m going to scream. He’s not “hypocritical”: he’s a liar who’s been caught trying to cover his tracks.)

Billy Graham

wiki thingie here:
Politically, Graham has been a lifelong supporter of the Democratic Party, although more recently he has adopted a flexible position, choosing to cast his vote with either party, depending on which he considers most appropriate at the time. He has had close relationships with Lyndon B. Johnson and Bill Clinton, but he is still very close to the Bush family. Just two days before the 2000 presidential election, Graham spoke at a prayer breakfast in Florida with George W. Bush in attendance and stopped short of formally endorsing him. His messages have been apolitical.

Christy, Josh has a snippet from the Post. It wasn’t a Libby lie.

How do we know that these people who are getting mentioned here didn’t already tell Bush these things? There sure wouldn’t be an anouncement about it.

Great, thought provoking, post.

I think it is up to the Democrats to push this issue.
AND WE THE PEOPLE!
We need to stand up to this tyranny. I have a sense that if the people do not demand the impeachment of this administration, our country as we know it is lost.
My generation is the generation of Watergate and Vietnam.
We need to ban together and let our elected leaders know what and how we expect Washington to act or vote then out of office or even recall them.
The republicans have used all the above tactics.
I felt it with Nixon and I feel it with Bush & co they need to be impeached.
I think our country was done a great disservice by not impeaching nixon.
It left a legacy that the president can get away with anything.

Here’s the post exerpt (via TPM):

A senior administration official, speaking on background because White House policy prohibits comment on an active investigation, said Bush sees a distinction between leaks and what he is alleged to have done. The official said Bush authorized the release of the classified information to assure the public of his rationale for war as it was coming under increasing scrutiny.

Rev. Billy Graham also shocked the whackos when he endorsed the Nuclear Weapons Freeze …

“Warner might have Dan Coats with him too … Danforth might tag along as well”

Not likely. Danforth? Although I appreciate his honesty (maybe the last honest Republican on the planet), he’s a wingnut ideologue. (Remember how he shepherded Clarence Thomas around the Senate during his circus…er…confirmation hearing? This is what I meant when I stated that extremism looks less bad when the whole party becomes extreme. Dan Coats is a wingnut non-entity, a latter day Roman Hruska, although probably less dishonest. If you don’t know who Roman Hruska was, you understand my point exacly.

I’m not sure Hagel has the “gravitas” in that he’s a relative youngster and he’s a sitting senator, but he could play a role. I lean toward minnesotachuck and *ilson46201’s ideas–Rudman and Lugar. Oh, I like the Kean idea too. Can’t think of any other Repug governors that have some “national” status that also have ethics (which definitely rules out my ex-gov, Tommy “Ladies’ Man” Thompson…gag).

But when has Bush ever considered a serious, thoughtful idea brought to him? Why would he now?

The thing is that all the ethical Republicans either left the party or have been purged by now. Chuck Hagel is the one that comes closest, and he’s Mr. Diebold.

“Bush sees a distinction between leaks and what he is alleged to have done.”

Wow! Bush is unveiled (in case some did not already know) as a real, live Humpty-Dumpty!!!!!

Wonderful points and questions, and this was asked in much shorter form in yesterday’s comments by someone. I doubt there is a Republican who has not in some way had pressure brought to bear on them by the Bush/Rove machine, making this kind of discussion almost unthinkable. Watching the body language Bush displayed while Harry Taylor was speaking yesterday, and the fact that he interrupted him to incite laughter by the audience, reinforced my belief that Bush cares only about Bush and Bush’s inner circle and thier agenda. He has no concern for how any American feels or thinks about any of it; he intends to do whatever he wants without consideration for the people who elected him, especially those who earn less than 100K, who can’t push his agenda in the way he prefers. His public appearances are nothing but manipulations and propaganda shows. His word means nothing and there is not an empathetic bone in his body.

I think he would see John Warner as a Jack Murtha character, old guard, behind the times. I doubt he has any respect for anyone in Congress and cannot imagine he would even meet with them if he had an inkling what they intended to say and do.

Ouch, that’s some damned fine writing Christy.

Interesting. In response to a question of “who” amongst the repugs might come forward, 2 names mentioned above strike me as possibles: John Warner and Arlen Specter. But I’ll not hold my breath, or bet sustantial amounts of money on either!
Now then, as I’m still very new here, Ms. Christy, I compliment you on this article! Good job! Since it appears that you’re an attorney, and closely follow PlameGate, I’ll pose two questions:
1. WHEN (if anyone knows) did Fitz interview the president, and VP? And, WHEN did Libby testify to the GJ that he was given the “ok” to talk to reporters about sections of the NIE? The timeline could be illuminating. Now, of course, we cannot know WHAT Fitz asked the president or VP in his interviews of them…but I wonder if Fitz asked these guys about NIE matters, and what the president and VP said in response???
2. Next question, for the lawyers: I always thought, generally, that there must be a SIGNED Order before something takes effect. A judge might announce a decision from the bench, but it’s not “official” until the judge SIGNS an order reflecting the decision. Am I right, or in error? Does this apply to DE-classification of materials? Does the president need to SIGN a written order, or can he just say “presto, I declassify”, and that’s it? DID the president or VP ever sign such an order?
Questions, questions, questions! Everyone take care out there, Ghostman

Regarding the discussion of Republicans who may have the gravitas, etc. to stand up to Bush:

My fear is that with the Democrats failing to attack, the door is opening for certain Republicans to stand up to Bush and position themselves as “reformers”, thus leaving Democrats in the dust. I put “reformers” in quotes here because I believe that Republicans are highly unlikely (to say the least) to be the ones who clean up their own mess.

A Republican Senator with enough gravitas? How about Joe Lieberman?

Go Ned!

To paraphrase Larry Franklin—

Yesterdays revelation is riveting–the effort to smear Joe Wilson and his wife went to the very top of the White House. This was not an operation of rogue political operators. Instead, we have a rogue President.
If we can impeach a President for lying about a blow job, the time has come to impeach a President for feeding the American people a line of bullshit about Iraq in order to justify a war that has now left almost 2400 American soldiers dead and over 17,000 wounded. George Bush did not leak to protect America. He leaked to cover his ass.

That, my friends, is the pure definition of a coward.

Leslie Nielsen has a new movie coming out featuring a naked president and naked congress- guess there is a message there?

ROFL john! We have a winner! Lieberman… too funny.

Isn’t declassifying something solely to bolster your political position with the American public a misuse of your power

It is the very definition of abuse of power. Add it to the articles of impeachment.

Even if the president can declassify at will can he out a CIA agent’s identity?

Larry 61– Rogue and coward he is and he is also responsible for thousands of innocents’ deaths, maiming and the destruction of property too. He is responsible for war crimes. a criminal.

Ghostman-
According to Abu Gonzales during his senate testimony, not under oath, he said the president can declassify anything on the back of a cocktail napkin. Yesterday, he reconfirmed that in his discussion of the issue with the House.

I wanted to point out, in reference to those hearings, something we observed at the time of the Senate hearing: Abu is the Attorney General of the US, but in both of these hearings, he appeared to be continuing his role as Counsel to the President, not as serving the American People, which is his actual job as AG. I think that’s another important part of the Bush Parallel Government. Anyone in the DOJ who has dared to challenge him or the Admin has been moved or discredited, replaced by someone who won’t make waves. As a result, they are all really representing Bush et all, not any of us.

I noticed that Jon Stewart didn’t touch this last night. No doubt there will be a highlight reel of Bush in living color on Monday’s show. Mean while, Delware Dem at the Kos has done some yomen work already. It’s a rather lenghty list of Bush’s words bitting him in the ass: Bush Fires Himself: A Collection of Quotes

Good Morning Everyone,

Alas Christy, it is something of a false premise implying if someone ‘got through’, Bush would proceed differently. All the talk of the Boy King and Bubble Boy reflect this guy’s entire sheltered adult life – and frankly I don’t know whether much of what he has done is the result of him being stupid and fed bullshit or how much of it is his idea that this is simply how ‘bidness’ is done

That said . . .

Pacha offering up Warner is apt to the Baker mold, but the good Senator is from another place and time that doesn’t allow him to see Bush for what he’s done although I suspect by now he has a clue as to how endangered the Party may be as a result

No, if anyone, it’s Newt. Certainly not b/c he’s of the stature/character you apply to Howard Baker – but because when you google “craven opportunist” his mug pops up. Like a velociraptor testing the electrified wires, I believe it is he who has been leaking little nuggets to the Moonie Times – various little trial balloons – and if he’s who I think he is, he will step that up in the coming days as a means to squeeze them – in turn going to Party Elders, telling them he can get BUSHCO to stop killing the party blah blah blah endearing himself to the machine (taking advantage of McCain’s apparent solidarity w/WH and of Hagel’s hanging back too long, too quiet). Could be wrong on some of the mechanics, but Gingrich is all about doing what he can under these circumstances to appear to ’save’ the Party/Machine

I’m chiming in late to thank David for his post last night.Seems the troll only served to prove the points he made,so in that respect the troll showing up added to my own education on this topic.We live in scary times.Inciting hate and violence has now become acceptable and often comes dressed up in expensive clothes and given voice in the mainstream so it appears nice and legit.

I’m afraid,as the far right begins losing traction the violence and hatred is only going to escalate.People are going to get hurt or worse.I thought we learned the lessons of being loyal to one person or party over country long ago,but obviously this nation has forgot those lessons.

And WTF is Delay still doing all over the TeeVee? Doesn’t he have a set of legal problems he ought to be focused on?What his supporters did to Nick Lampson yesterday is disgusting and disgraceful.

I’m very worried about violence on election day this November.In the 2004 election in GA,Bush supporters in my neck of the woods were practically frothing at the mouth,screaming at voters in line,trying to shove pamphlets in people’s faces.Writing down licence plate numbers in the polling place parking lots,etc.Intimidation,and it seemed to be well organized.This year I’m bringing a camera and doing some documenting of my own.

The blogger Driftglass has been saying for awhile now that you can’t be a good republican and still be a good american,you have to choose.I used to think that sort of statement was unfair.Not anymore.And I won’t change my mind until I start seeing Republicans denouncing this madness vocally,repeatedly and often.

Why can’t Bush call off all U.S. elections for the next 30 years? (National Security reasons…â€I mean how can I trust an electorate that’s tolerated all my lies and horse-shit for the past five years…and pleeease don’t mention the innocent dead people I’ve left in my wakeâ€) he could appoint himself Emperor, with a clear line of succession, you know past the baton onto the twins, “Emperettesâ€, when they’ve finally mastered “My Pet Goatâ€â€¦I mean Abu Alberto Spier Gonzales could work this all out…
BTW he don’t leak so much when he remembers his Depends…

Shargash – Let us not forget that it was only a partial declassification – they left out the parts that undercut their case for war – so they disclosed half truths (literally) to bolster their political position. Which is even worse, in my mind, then straightforward declassification for political purposes.

RE: #49 XYZ Here’s the post exerpt (via TPM):

“A senior administration official, speaking on background because White House policy prohibits comment on an active investigation, said Bush sees a distinction between leaks and what he is alleged to have done. The official said Bush authorized the release of the classified information to assure the public of his rationale for war as it was coming under increasing scrutiny.”

I’m sure this will be the new Repub. talking point. But if Bush felt he didn’t do anything wrong, why didn’t he come out and say this to the public at the time, instead of saying we’ll fire the leakers blah blah blah… And then let an expensive investigation begin to boot.

re the Post quote (#49)

OK, thank you for confirming! That’s pretty much what we thought!

So unless there’s a letter from Mr. Tenet somewhere, this was just illegal. There’s an argument, which is not specious on its face, that it was illegal but not particularly damaging, as it was declassified a few weeks later. But I can’t see an argument that it wasn’t illegal.

But I’m sure the president would never do that with any other classified information, such as an agent’s name. Not.

Also, I have to ask: if we can’t even come up with a plausible (R ) name to speak privately with the King to tell him he lacks the votes, what makes us think that the King is going to lack the votes??? As things stand, twenty-two (R )’s would have to cross for conviction. (And as with Clinton, you can be sure he won’t be leaving if he’s not convicted.) There aren’t even twenty-two (D) votes for censure.

The only Republicans I can think of who would have enough character and stature are all, unfortunately, quite dead. I am serious. Where are “todays” Senator George Aikens (the Republican Senator hawk from Vermont who said, when it had become inescapably apparent that the Vietnam War was a total debable, “we should declare victory and bring the troops home!”). There were people with whom it possible to vehemently disagree with, yet still respect.

Ché Pasa @ 26

Since the Dems will do nothing, and the Rs don’t think that anything’s wrong, and the courts are completely subverted and corrupt, it is now left to the People to take matters into their own hands.

One suggestion is to assemble (peaceably) in DC by the hundreds of thousands or millions and stay there until this whole rotten edifice is brought down

its much easier to ignore phone calls and letters than thousands of people in the street, especially in a growing and consistent movement (immigrant rights here, worker’s rights in france).

it seems to me that at the moment the ground is being prepared – we are preparing ourselves for such (nonviolent) actions, while working to spread the understanding so that many others will join us and many more will support us.

i hope it doesn’t come to that… but absent enough political leaders that speak for us in defense of the constitution and against a lawless presidency….

Larry-
I think you mean Larry Johnson.
:-)
zen

OT – Driftglass is good today.

http://driftglass.blogspot.com/

Katjam (#65)
“Even if the president can declassify at will can he out a CIA agent’s identity?”

Of course not!! But we’re through the looking glass here folks. We cannot dispassionately dissect the arguments because the analogies break down.

For instance, what if Shrub “declassified” all H-Bomb secrets and delivered them to Iran? If he can declassify other secrets, why not that too? The ulitmate answer is political. If he were to do that, 90% of the country would demand his immediate impeachment — and dispense with the parsing of “legalities.”

(Of course, the Democrats would refuse to vote for impeachment because they are afraid they’d hurt Bush’s feelings!!!)

Maybe it’s time to revisit the timing of the announcement that Al-Qaeda operative Mohammad Naeem Noor Khan was arrested, coincidentally during the Democratic National Convention in 2004.

What did the Brits think of that? From CSM:
“”The whole thing smacks of either incompetence or worse,” said Tim Ripley, a security expert who writes for Jane’s Defence publications [who was interviewed by Reuters]. “You have to ask: what are they doing compromising a deep mole within Al Qaeda, when it’s so difficult to get these guys in there in the first place? It goes against all the rules of counter-espionage, counter-terrorism, running agents and so forth. It’s not exactly cloak and dagger undercover work if it’s on the front pages every time there’s a development, is it?”

Associates of Mohammad Naeem Noor Khan went on to participate in the London Bombings in July of ‘05.

The events of recent days highlight again why the timidity of the Democratic leadership to stand behind Feingold is not only unprincipled (as if that weren’t sufficient to damn it) but politically foolish. That their cowardice is born of political calculation is a bitter irony. Their apparent belief that the national security issue is best neutralized by an unprincipled cowardly silence mistakes peril for opportunity. Within these currents, the national security issue can be more than neutralized. It can be taken away and employed offensively.

The administration is a den of personal insecurities, where bragadoccio is gravitas and and feints of machismo are national security policy. What do we fear in exposing the boy behind the chaps?

Unwavering confrontation and merciless ridicule please.

The Post also reiterates this quote:

“There are too many leaks of classified information in Washington. There’s leaks at the executive branch, there’s leaks in the legislative branch, there’s just too many leaks. I want — and if there’s a leak out of the administration, I want to know who it is. And if a person has violated law, the person will be taken care of.”

Notice how Jr. leverages the image as a verbally inept person to hide his careful parsing.

1. It was never declassified (which you make a good case for)—clearly illegal
2. It was declassified correctly, and somewhere there’s a memo from George Tenet saying all this is fine–probably legal
3. It was “declassified†but not in accordance with the EO–seems like it would be illegal
And all of the above sounds good to me. Thank you, ThomasC & Prof. Foland. Mwahaha!

Does the Bush Administration even care about the consequences of their petty and impulsive behavior — or has cheating simply become their preferred mode of operation?

It has always been their preferred mode of operation. The reason Gore and his campaign failed in Florida in 2000 was that they (along with many of us) did not realize that these people had no intention of playing by the rules.

If Bush told Scooter to blab about Valerie Plame, we’re beyond “gee, can a prosecutor prosecute the President?”

It won’t even come to that. He’ll have to resign. The pressure will be intense. A group of elder GOP statesmen (if they can be located} will pay a little visit to the White House.

Zennurse 77

You are correct and I am shamed

jboa (#81)
“That their [Democrats] cowardice is born of political calculation is a bitter irony.”

Bravo!! The democracy is imploding and the only reason these slugs (Dems) take their thumbs out their asses is to stick their fingers in the beltway wind to see which way it blows. And another irony is that the beltway wind blows in a different direction from that of the country at large.

Lowell Weicker has some experience impeaching presidents.

Here are 2 links worth reading. If you have time call your Senators and ask them to support Sen. Schumer’s bill # S.2468. Thanks I already have called Babs and Paul. Thanks. http://balkin.blogspot.com/200…..nsure.html
http://glenngreenwald.blogspot…..html#links

I posted this originally at The Next Hurrah. After I reread it I relized that these thoughts were triggered by J. Hamsher’s post “Context” and now those ideas have been expanded here. I appreciate the notion that there are no republicans apparently willing to step forward and own this issue. But I do think these thoughts could be useful for expanding the framing of this issue in pushing Congress:

I just finished reading what this one Booman has to say about the textual evidence that portions of the NIE and assertions constitutings its eventual contents had been continually and consistently leaked to Judith Miller since the fall of 2002.

It occurs to me that if this pattern of release goes back that far and was authorized by the President moving back that far that the essence of this selective declassification would be a contempt of Congress in a full blown technical legal sense.

In other words, while the rationale of classification was being used to deprive the peoples’ representatives of the complete evidentiary picture for the lead up to war this material was yet subject to an ad hoc decalssification to create some kind of media based justification for the actions of the administration including media based arguements for the invasion and extending to the push back against Joseph Wilson. And this double dealing was deployed to the extent that Sen. Durbin allows that he felt compelled to bite his tongue as to what he knew of the Administration’s causi belli out of respect for the system of classification. Remember classification is used to justify [limiting] the scope of the membership of Congress entitled to review of classified information.

In maintaining the assertion to Congress that certain information was classifed which had in fact been leaked or shall we say subject to some species of de facto declassification, the Administration has in fact deceived the Congress by relying on classification to justify limited disclosures to that body. And because the information sourced to classified material has otherwise been publically disclosed one would expect that any “national security” justification for limiting the disclosure of information to Congress would be strainded at best but more likely untenable. The disclosure of any classified material, cherry picked or not, necessarily involves a suggestion of “sources and methods.” And the way these particular disclosures were used was an attempt to circumvent Congressional inquiry by manipulating a public sentiment. If this pattern of disclosure to Miller was in fact authorized at the highest level it is all the more egregious in that the information disclosed has been proven to be unreliable by being taken out of context. The very context one would hope Congress would provide if given all the facts.

It seems to me that this might be a fruitful line of inquiry in moving forward in understanding the problems this latest revelation may present for the argument that the President has at all times acted in good faith in pursuing his policies.

Just a thought.

I’m beginning to think that Bush via Cheney approved outting Plame too and Fitzy is floating a trial balloon to let the evil-doers know that more bad stuff will be coming out soon…

timewarp (75), they’re not all dead. There’s still Gerald Ford: “Our long national nightmare . . . is back.”

Slothrop (#85)

I hope that your forecast (”A group of elder GOP statesmen… will pay a little visit to the White House”) is correct, but I don’t think so. Resignation will not happen unless the Democrats scream loudly and abundantly. And THAT is not yet happening. Failing that, the Repubs will roll with the punches until the story dies down (which it will if the Dems let it).

Well, well, well, as the worm turns. Kurtz has written a column called Leaker-in-Chief..

1st sentance: “So I thought George W. Bush was against leaks.”

How is Karl going to try to spin that?

Christy,

Great writing as usual…but the most important idea you presnt in this post is the question: ” I’ve been thinking for quite awhile about which Republican currently in the House or Senate, or in the greater political heierarchy, would have the stature, the power and the integrity to meet with president Bush and tell him that he not only has to clean house but that he has to own up to to his Administrations lies and Constitutional missteps…or else”.

There is not one Republican today with “the stature, the power and the integrity” to meet with the president and tell him what you want to tell him. That is the terrible situation we have in this country right now…the fascists have taken power through the established Republican Party and have so corrupted that party that there is only one solution for the country. We must throw the Republicans out of power in November, impeach this President AND Vice President, purge the entire government of fascist appointees(root and branch),send all the players in the Plamegate scandal to jail, and charge and convict all the corporate war profiteers. No small task but anything short of all of the forgoing will leave us vulnerable for an inevitable replaying of this terrible situation. We are not only gettin’ to look like 1932-33 Weimar Germany, we are lookin more like the end of pagan Rome and the beginnin’ of the Christian one.

KEEP THE FAITH, WE CAN DO THIS!!

Professor Foland says:
April 7th, 2006 at 6:38 am

(He’s not “hypocriticalâ€: he’s a liar who’s been caught trying to cover his tracks.)

There you go. No one, at least not on this earth, is gonna convince Bush that he may be even slightly mistaken. So unless he has a dream or a vision in which God gets on his case, forget about it.

The word to hammer is LIE. L.I.E. Short word, three letters, rhymes with a lotta stuff – like Apple PIE. As in – He LIED, she LIED, they LIED, they have LIED, are LYING, will continue to LIE, he’s LIAR, etc.

I’ve said it before, we need a Walter Cronkite moment in which the right Great Big Somebody uses the word LIE. Don’t know who it could be – I guess Cronkite himself is still around. Maybe Colin Powell – I don’t know. But OldMedia won’t use the word. I did hear though, on Olbermann last night, Dana Milbank used the word and Keith followed up right behind also saying it. Lying is nice and simple for everysinglebody to get their head around.

LIE.

Thoughts:

1. I’ll go with the three obvious Senate choices that no one has yet mentioned: The New England Republican trio of Collins, Snowe, and Chafee. This kind of nonsense, like the NSA scandal, does not play well with northeast libertarians. If you’re looking for a Republican pointman/pointwoman, I’d pick one of those three. My personal choice would be Chafee, just because I like the Rhode Island versus Texas imagery that it elicits.

2. The only pro-Bush response I’ve seen to all of this has more or less been: If Bush authorized it, it wasn’t illegal. Please note that, thus far, NO ONE has said (or even implied) that Libby, who is under indictment for lying and perjury, was lying or perjuring himself when he said that Bush and Cheney told him to do this.

3. Jason Leopold says that Bush and Cheney didn’t own up to any of this during their chat with Fitz. I’d love to see that transcript. I’m skeptical about this claim, though. You’d think Scooter and Cheney would’ve taken the time to get their stories straight. I realize that they never thought they’d get caught, but still.

looks like Snottie is having a presser today cspan 1– Want to venture a guess how many times he says ongoing investigation???
12:45 PM EDT
0:30 (est.) LIVE
News Briefing
White House Daily Briefing
White House, Briefing Room
Scott McClellan , White House
The beginning and end of this live program may be earlier or later than the scheduled times.

not OT today: “Bush doesn’t do Email…” Who doesn’t do email these days???? My 80 year old mother does email. it’s not like it’s IM or txt msgs. he has kids!!!! what a freakin’ dope!

OK, gratifyingly, Matt Lauer just asked Tweety on The Today Show the question I raised all day yesterday. If this was SO vital to the national interest, and the President has the unfettered authority to de-classify intelligence information at whim, WHY, then, not simply hold a press conference and release the stuff openly (even redacted) to make the case? Why go secretly to Judith Miller on deep background?

THANK YOU!!

The stonewall silence from the White House also now speaks volumes. Why not simply come out and deny it? Why not say Libby is lying?

We know why, ‘eh?

HAMMER this point relentlessly, everyone.

Want to remind everyone about Fitz’s comment (or was it a snark?) about the declassification process being “cumbersome”.

What has the President declassified and why did he leak it?

Please correct me if I’m wrong here, but my understanding is that—although Libby claims his superiors had authorized some leaks to reporters even prior to the war—the recently revealed, Bush-sanctioned leaks from the 2002 NIE went to J. Miller on July 8, 2003. Naive guy that I am, I figured we could deduce some of what Bush allegedly declassified by looking at Miller’s work from that timeframe.

But when I look over the articles she wrote back then, I don’t find anything in them that looks like Bush-declassified info from the NIE. So what’s the deal? Did she spread around Libby’s leaks to other reporters behind the scenes? On talk shows (which I haven’t the stomach to search right now)? Did the Bush thugs hold off on demanding that reporters publish the leaked info until after they’d (redundantly, perhaps) redeclassified the NIE by mechanisms more appropriate than presidential fiat?

Can someone refresh my memory as to Miller’s explanation (if any) of this?

P.S. The answer to the second part, “why did he leak it,” seems pretty obvious—if difficult to prove. He declassified it to confuse us rubes about the question of whether he attacked Iraq in good faith.

Given GWB’s ‘daddy’ issues, here’s a question for some enterprising media type to ask the Prez at the next presser.

“Mr. President, why didn’t your father claim the inherent powers you say exist in the Consitution and force authorization? He certainly had the opportunity. Was he wrong, or are you wrong?”

I’ll say he’d pay attention if people like Warner, Hagel, McCain, and Roberts eventually tilt – maybe it’s the surprise that’s necessary.

Among outsiders, Kissinger, Albright, Jim Baker, maybe a Supreme Court Justice or a significant journalist/intellectual (Buckley, what’s-his-name who’s friendly with Wolfowitz).

The basic problem is that while Baker is a strong symbol, an action similar to his during Watergate takes more than one prominent Republican with integrity. Baker could take that message to Nixon because Nixon knew it meant that he had lost, and that the Senate and Congress would follow Baker’s lead. For Bush, it would just mean a new target to be savaged by the rest of the unswervingly loyal Republicans in Congress.

It takes more than one man with the courage and integrity to stand up, it also takes enough others with at least enough courage and integrity to follow, and that we will never have with the current crop. The best we can hope for is rats leaving a sinking ship — if enough of them decide that Bush going down will be less damaging to their own selfish prospects than propping him up, they will turn on him, but not before.

That hasn’t happened, and honestly I have to say from that self-serving perspective, they are right. While Bush’s ratings may have hit such historic lows that it’s bad for Republican candidates to be seen with him, having his crimes fully revealed could tar the whole party for some time to come.

They know how fragile the whole house of cards is (from the shockwaves each of Fitzgerald’s disclosures produce, if nothing else), so even the ones who may be uncomfortable with some of the Administration’s actions understand that they can’t have any serious investigation without risking bringing the whole thing down. So in a weird way, magnitude of their wrondoing protects them, because it leaves no safe way out for other Republicans.

I’ve often wondered if they weren’t after Plame to start with. She and her group and Brewster Jennings were crucial in tracking WMD. From what I understood, it was a network that took decades to establish. Now why, you ask, would someone want to destroy such a far reaching spy network? Hmmmmmm….

Amen jaytz. I am sure many of us know people who don’t have the interest or the ability to wrap their heads around the nuances of this case, especially when faced with the msm spin-noise machine.

But everyone can get this.

Bush LIED. He authorized a leak to a reporter and then lied about it. He lied repeatedly. In all likelihood he still is.

No one can trust anything he says. Liars cannot be trusted. Bush is a liar.

(I can’t wait to hear Al Franken’s deconstruction of all this!)

Oops, I forgot Specter. Throw him in with my other three.

And ditto the point about Howie Kurtz calling Bush the Leaker-in-Chief. That’s more traction then I expected by now.

http://thankyouharrytaylor.org

In other words, while the rationale of classification was being used to deprive the peoples’ representatives of the complete evidentiary picture for the lead up to war . . .
Excellant. That & what follows.

OT a bit but all of it swirls together in bushworld:

in my hometown paper this morning there was an article about a 49 page book that a father had written and probably self published dealing with the death of his son, killed in iraq.
This quote by the father illustrates why people will let bush do ANYTHING he pleases to do.

In addition to a __________(fill in your favorite adjectives) administration, we can thank Rush etc. and fauxnews for spreading the poison that folks, like this man, gobble up on a daily basis.

Here’s the excerpt:

“Unfortunately, the human nature has a tendency to forget. In coming upon the two-year anniversary of the death of Jonathan, I am reminded of what Iraq is all about. We must not forget 9-11,” Kephart said. “When we are attacked by those who want to take us down, we must fight to protect our freedom. As long as there are those who want to take away our freedom, there will be no peace. We will – we should fight to defend our freedom.”

I feel very sorry that this man lost his son, but, if he’s going out and pushing this 9-11 link thing, he’s going to have to expect some backlash.

Today’s word is TRACTION. I watched the opening for each of the major morning shows and they all started off with this story. C-SPAN was also taking calls on th subject of “leaker-in-chief”.

The longer the WH stays in no-comment mode, the worse it gets for them.

xyz -

Yep. Simply deny that Libby’s testimony is truthful. A simple matter. Then go on with all their gibberish spin about the President’s unlimited authority to do what he pleases with national secrets, blah, blah, blah…

They CANNOT, though, ‘eh? LMAO! It just begs the question of why he didn’t directly address the nation, rather than sneaking it off to Adjunct White House Press Secretary Judy Miller, and then covering up having done so.

Christy, do you really mean Bush declassified the leaked parts of the NIE? From what I’ve been reading the controversy is if its a retroactive rationalization or for real.

OT, what’s going on with the rubber stamps? Haven’t heard about anything since 100 were mentioned in the House. Thought there were thousands plus video.

I am so awaiting Judy Miller’s article about this story …

Fitzgerald’s 39-page filing compared this case with another one, saying both had *co-conspirators*. Elsewhere in the document he alludes to conspiracy without being this direct. Is this another little ‘present’ for the defense? [I read this at 3am and forgot to write down the specifics. Oops.]

Rep. Henry Waxman’s letter to Pres. Bush ..see Truthout..well worth reading.

Taylor says:
April 7th, 2006 at 6:12 am

And not only do we not have a Howard Baker (with Taylor’s caveat), we sure as hell don’t have a Sam Ervin.

jayt – nice to see you around. Good point, too. Use the KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) principle whenever possible. It seems to be the only way to talk to Republitards.

You’re missing something here–classifying something for political or other extraneous reasons is also illegal.

Material can’t be declassified unless it’s classified first. This administration has been classifying like crazy, even old stuff about the Korean War.

We need to get after them about the abuses of classification from beginning to end.

Regarding the Post Article:

Isn’t it interesting that Bush is using an anonymous source to defend his decision to disclose classified information via an anonymous source.

Why can’t he speak to the American people himself on this matter? What a weakling.

Democrats need to hammer on this. They need to tell Bush to stop hiding behind a veil of anonymity. That is what started this all in the first place. If Bush is going to lie to us about the leak again, lie to our f**ing faces. He’s done it before. I want to see him try it again on this issue.

This may seem only tangentially related to the current fiasco, but Christy, Jane, and all other bloggers who are mortified by this administration: treat this episode as a warning sign to get out in front of the Iran issue. Bush and Cheney are so impulsive that I have no doubt they’ll attack Iran just to get out of the shit they’ve put themselves into. This is the time for bloggers to be preemptive on Iran. And don’t listen to people who say attacking Iran would be calamitous and Bush & Co. couldn’t possibly do it. They can and they will. they are capable of anything.

Once I would have thought John Warner was a good candidate, but I’ve lost confidence in him. Having Abu Ghraib hearings with no followup was the beginning, but the last straw was the letter I got from him in response to my call to oppose the Graham amendment stripping habeas corpus for Guantanamo inmates, in which he cited as one of his reasons for voting for it that those habeas corpus requests could be a “nuisance.”

I think he still has some integrity, but he’s still possessed of the quaint notion that the Administration generally tells the truth, rather than just saying whatever serves their political advantage at any given moment. If he hasn’t been shaken out of that by now, I fear he never will be.

Why should a president be allowed to declassify anything? Seriously, the president has too many responsibilities to be able to understand the implications of declassifying specific information. For our own good, information should only be declassified by the organization that classified it in the first place.

OT, I am tired of this “inherent powers” bullshit. There is no such thing as inherent powers in a constitutional democracy. That is why there is a constitution. And, BTW, has Congress ever actually declared a state of war against “terror”? I believe only Congress can declare war and I don’t recall that they did actually declare war. If no official declaration of war has been made, we are not at war, and this idiot is not a war president and does not have unlimited power.

Let’s see, what are the qualities of someone who might be sufficiently PO’d to take on Dubya?

+ someone with an Intelligence background, who’d be ticked about anyone playing fast and loose with intelligence matters – a past CIA Director, for example

+ someone with a foreign service background, who’d be ticked about how our international credibility has gone down the toilet because of the Iraq mess, like a former ambassador

+ someone with national/international stature as a past holder of high office, like a president

Oh wait – we’ve got someone who fits that bill: George HW Bush!

Haven’t heard much from him lately, have we? Still, I can imagine the family conversations . . .

GHWB: “Dubya, you did WHAT? When are you ever going to learn about telling lies?”

Jeb: “There you go again, spoiling all my plans. It’s a good thing for me you were born after me, because if you’d come first, Mom and Dad would have quit having kids!”

BB: “That’s enough from both of you. Dubya, to your room. No, not the oval one.”

While I’d be thrilled if Olympia and Susan from Maine would step forward, I wouldn’t hold my breath. Neither of them will meet with their constituency. After Collins’ speech at the Margaret Chase Smith Center war opponents spoke up and she evaded. The next week, in Machias, Maine at a Middle School, she basically told the students not to “bother” with protesting. Click.

I awoke with Chris Mathews chirping on the radio. He actually gave a passable overview. The President wanted a war and sold it to the American people based on the imminent threat of nuclear attack from Saddam Hussein. Proven by Iraq’s attempt to buy African Uranium and the Aluminum Tubes to purify the Uranium. Except the President was well aware that the State Department, parts of the CIA and the Energy Department all had serious reservations about both justifications.

In the Spring of 2003, after the invasion, when no weapons of mass destruction were being found; Joe Wilson inconveniently pointed out that one leg of the justification for invasion was bogus. Karl Rove and the Iraq Group went into high gear and successfully leaked, hid and smeared the fact the President knew that the justifications for the Iraq Invasion were false until years after the successful 2004 reelection.

I wonder whether the CM like WaPo has changed its reporting of deaths in Iraq (to the better). I have this recollection that up until a few months ago only American deaths were reported widely — at least in terms of numbers killed. These days, I see a lot of headlines about numbers of persons killed, and they are not only U.S. soldiers — or any soldiers, for that matter. For example, At Least 40 Killed in Iraq Blasts in today’s WaPo.

Is that new, or is my impression of past reporting faulty?

Oops – Jeb was born after Dubya, after all. Still, he can’t be please about this mess, if he has any plans for moving north . . .

Given the very consistent adherence to “plausible deniability”, there won’t be a good enough smoking gun to tie the President to the Plame leak. I don’t think that’s the angle.

Rather, my suggestion for the meme would be “Do you want a leaker to be tapping your phone?”

Tim Feeney 124: There is no such thing as inherent powers in a constitutional democracy.

Wrong. The Tenth Amendment grants the states and the people a vast chunk of inherent powers.

Suggested correction: There is no such thing as inherent executive power in a constitutional democracy.

*ilson -
good one on Lugar- and Danforth for that matter, maybe Lugar will be among those who make the trip up the hill via Goldwater.

Angry Old Broad – Driftglass has been on fire of late – did you see his post about 2 weeks ago wherein he informed David Brooks and others as to what Chimpy has done to the so-called conservative movement while they all stood by adoringly ? – almost every sentence was a dagger.

I should have qualified my thoughts on Gingrich above by saying I’m not sure he’ll be successful, but I have a popcorn bowl labelled Gingrich Redux and I will enjoy the show

Ironically this nation is watching a trial where a would be terrorist has just been judged to be eligible for the death penalty partly because he knew about a plot to harm people on 9/11, lied when questioned about it and subsequent to his actions, Americans died. It’s not an impossible stretch to juxtipose Bush’s actions here. In a climate of cherry picking leaks global warming may take on a wider definition here.

John Dean in his book makes the case seen upthread – Howard Baker was Nixon’s shill. or ringer.

Tim Feeney #124–IANAL, but in plain English the EO does require the President to gain agreement from the originating agency, and surely it’s there for exactly the reason you suggest–the President can’t be expected to keep track of how bad a disclosure would be.

So it seems to me the whole episode can be cleared up in short order (as a legal matter) by producing the letter to DCI expressing the president’s desire to declassify the NIE, along with DCI’s letter of agreement. Which I’m sure they have on file. Not.

That said, I think I lean to ThomasC’s interpretation that the president didn’t actually declassify it (so whether it’s legal for him to do so seems moot).

The only way things will get cleaned up in the White House is by flushing the toilet. They are inherently incapable of cleaning things up themselves. They are inherently incapable of even recognizing their mistakes. It will take a Dem Congress to flush that toilet. Repubs are inherently incapable of doing so.

America’s marching orders have been issued – return checks & balances/balance of power to our government. Then flush, repeatedly if necessary.

Curioser, 114:

“Christy, do you really mean Bush declassified the leaked parts of the NIE? From what I’ve been reading the controversy is if its a retroactive rationalization or for real.”

Based on what I have read, this is a very murky issue, without more revelations. But apparently Libby had some serious reservations (according to his testimony) about disclosing the “key elements” or whatever they call it.

Hadley suggested they declassify that part of it so Libby can show same to Miller and people of such persuasion. But apparently Addington put forward the theory that the president can declassify by fiat..that is to say, by being leaked by POTUS the information is automatically declassified. An astounding theory but there you have it.

So whether the information passed to Miller was declassified or not partly depends on the Bush/Cheney/Addington theory.

It might be possible that they then retroactively declassified the key elements in a procedural manner for ass-covering, but the evidence on this is not at all clear.

But whether or not what Scooter revealed was already cleared is really somewhat beside the point. The president did apparently engage in leaking sensitive security information to bolster his case for taking us to war, and by extension, blowing the cover of a NOC, Valerie Plame.

There seems to be no evidence yet that Bush had Plame specifically in his sights. His main goal seems to have been to ramp up the war. The Plame thing apparently is more of a creation of the OVP, and a source of future discord between WH and OVP.

That is my understanding, flawed as it may be.

BTW, the keystroke lag time is still seriously bad.

Follow up to my rant #100-

I guess Bush couldn’t go public with selected NIE snippets, because THAT would then pretty much require that congresscritters with the requisite security clearances be given access to the full info — which would have subsequently laid bare the extent of the lack of WMD threat consensus in the NIE report. As I understand it today, if Libby is to believed, only Bush, Cheney, Libby, and Judy Miller knew of this ad hoc, off-the-books “de-classification.”

LindyH,

You are right on target…the oligarchy had to destroy the one element that could expose the nuclear proliferation profiteers and they were less concerned about the Iraq War bein exposed than havin their profits stopped. This has been billed as a war over oil but this whole administration has been about profiting from nuclear proliferation and replacin’ oil with nukes AND stealin the entire federal treasury in a bogus war for oil that ain’t there anymore. These are criminals and they all must go to jail…from this day until the whole nest a criminals is thrown in jail anyone who calls him/herself a Republican should be immediately arrested for adding and abeting a criminal conspiracy.

Pergury and conspiracy aren’t good enough and neither is impeachment…treason trails are the on appropraite remedy.

KEEP THE FAITH AND PASS THE AMMUNITION, THEY’RE STILL IN POWER!!

4 Rayne says:

April 7th, 2006 at 6:06 am
Fitz to you, too!

There’s no way that Rover would let anybody through if it was a threat to him personally, no matter the gravitas of the “messengerâ€.

Well then…..maybe Fitz’ll take him out. Get him out of the way so that the natural order can start being restored.

Fitz knows he cannot take out the president. But he can take out everybody surrounding the prez and let the natural order finish the job.

*ilson

That same thing crossed my mind. Fitz just told them he’s got more than they know. They were completely flat footed on this. From the NOTE:

It is testament to the Democrats’ certainty that this Bush/leak story is a winner for them — as well as to their improved communication coordination — that they are driving that same kind of Republican-style effort right now.

And in the media (the network news shows, on cable, the morning shows, and the newspapers), the White House appears well cemented in a very bad news cycle.

The (near-total) silence from the President’s side is pretty deafening. That RNC release didn’t seem to us to address the President’s politically precarious position on this, simply his strong legal foundation. And claiming it was in the “national interest” to leak the information (as one network reports an Administration official did) might cause more problems than it solves.

Yeah, “Angry Old Broad” … another Driftglass aficionado!!

“The blogger Driftglass has been saying for awhile now that you can’t be a good republican and still be a good american,you have to choose.”

Driftglass is straight talk, Damn the Horses and Aunt Mathilda wonderful. And he NEVER EVER bends over or parses the ethics or principles. Driftie, alas, is too dead-eye for most spineless ones (including all Repukes and their dwarf “moderate” Repukes). And he gets faux liberal pantyhose in a twist every time he sez: Sometimes you gotta swing that baseball bat. Hooray for Driftglass.

The quote below is from The Post’s headline story.

“He also said in the new filing he was withholding information from Libby’s legal team related to “other subjects of the investigation,” including other administration officials. Fitzgerald disclosed that he does not intend to seek testimony at Libby’s trial from Hadley or White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove, whose roles in rebutting Wilson’s article have been under scrutiny.

Unlike the statement exonerating Bush, no statement is made in the filing about whether Cheney played a role in the leak of Plame’s name. Cheney is depicted as acutely interested in and dismissive of what Wilson wrote as the result of a trip he took to Niger, where he was sent by the CIA to probe claims that Iraq had attempted to acquire nuclear weapons materials.”

DOes the above indicate that Hadley and ROve are off the hook?

Has anyone tapped Guiliani for this? He stamped out male prostitution in Times square so this would be a walk in the park for him. Oh and can help for this?

I keep hearing this disturbing refrain in my head…Reagan proved deficits don’t matter…Reagan proved deficits don’t matter…Clinton proved impeachments don’t matter ARRRGH! …and I wake up in a cold sweat.

Curioser #114 — we hit a video editing snag and are hoping to have it done soon. We didn’t want to put it out to you guys with a flaw, but I promise we’re working on it and will let everyone know the minute it is ready to view.

6 *ilson46201 says:

April 7th, 2006 at 6:07 am
1006 elections? William had to do conquering in 1066…!

I KNEW Buschco was leading us back in medieval times! And “William”, I trust, is Frist?!

It is mighty interesting that Bush is so quick to jump on the media for not reporting the good news in Iraq. In the run up to the war he only wanted to report the news that bolstered his opinions. So in his world, only news that supports him and his beliefs is worthwile.

Now that is the sign of a statesman and an intellectual and a great leader.

-GSD

new thread – team libby

cut me off…

It also reads as if Dick is in Fitz’s sights. Am I misreading this?

Excellent article Christy, and some really thought provokig posts. Marrak at 71 isn’t far from the truth, and the Depends at the end – priceless!

joejoejoe above discusses the outing/arrest of Khan in 2004 and points out:

Associates of Mohammad Naeem Noor Khan went on to participate in the London Bombings in July of ‘05.

Though it is apparent Bush hisself isn’t the brightest bulb in the chandilier, the people with their hands in the sock puppet are always playing at least six moves ahead. Just like outing Valerie Plame helped discredit Joe Wilson and simultaneously shut down the source of accurate information on Iran’n nuclear program, the arrest of Khan helped the election campaign and greased the wheels to allow the London Bombings to occur at a time when public support of Bush/Blair policies were waning.

Regarding the main point of Christy’s post, it’s clear that Bush won’t listen to anyone saying anything he doesn’t want to hear. As he stated in the interview where he was asked if he had consulted with his father before invading Iraq, he replied that he consults with a “higher” father. Bush the Elder was by no means a “great” President, even though he looks good by today’s standards. But he was actually President and did actually manage to execute what most people consider a pretty successful war, with Iraq – though war itself is a failure of human interaction. At least he built a real coalition, had broad international support and a successful and rapid outcome.

The Chimporer though doesn’t even really listen to that higher father. Just like his leaking of the NIE estimates, cherrypicking the parts that supported his position, he ignores his higher father when he says things he doesn’t want to hear. Actually it is hard for me to see anything that Jesus ever had to say that Bush actually pays any heed, certainly not anything about tolerance, loving the poor, being against greed or the value of peace. Isn’t he called the Prince of Peace?

Just standing back for a minute, and I haven’t been able to read as much as i’d like today …. i caught this from the WAPO:
“Once the disclosure of Plame’s name became the target of an investigation, Libby ‘implored White House officials’ to issue a statement exonerating him, according to Fitzgerald’s account. When he was rebuffed, Libby requested that Cheney intervene. He also wrote a draft statement by hand, asserting that he ‘did not leak classified information.’”

And over at War and Piece, Laura Rozen says “Doesn’t seem such a statement was forthcoming.”

Doesn’t that heavily imply that the WH knew FULL WELL that Libby had leaked. Either they knew he had leaked and didn’t want to get caught in a complete lie by issuing the statement that he wanted, or didn’t know he had leaked classified material so had no reason to reject the wording he requested.

Does that make sense?

Bus is going to use the Ronald Reagan…”in my heart” I was not sending missiles to Iran defense.

Fucking pathetic.

-GSD

mainsailset #133,

“Ironically this nation is watching a trial where a would be terrorist has just been judged to be eligible for the death penalty partly because he knew about a plot to harm people on 9/11, lied when questioned about it and subsequent to his actions, Americans died.”

My thoughts exactly! Over 2,000 American dead & thousands more wounded in a war entered into with “cherry picked” intelligence.

Come on folks, don’tcha get it…there are no “Republican leaders” who don’t support everything that their fascist bosses have been doin. Hello out there, the entire Republican elected leadership, their institutional footsoldiers and the entire corporate oligarchy are fascists and support what has been happenin’ here. Wake up and smell the coffee folks, the only solution there that saves some semblance of democracy in this country is overthrow of the Republican Party in November, impeachment of Bush and Cheney, purge of the entire administrative apparatus of government, treason trials and war profiteeering trials. Anything short of this leaves too much of the cancer.

And the nice thing about this radical solution is it is all doable within the legal and constitutional framework we got now. We hafta reshuffle the political deck but first we gotta take out the jokers and the entire 5th suit. The corporate power structure has got ta be brought to heel and the only way we do that is to reinvigorate the federal government AND the federal treasury…confiscation of war profits and RICO convictions of the Bushes and other families are the only way to recapture enough of what has been lost to refuel the economy.

KEEP THE FAITH AND REMEMBER, LET’S HAVE FUN OUT THERE!!

I am apologizing in advance for not reading all the posts in this thread, but I’m leaving the office early today, and have much to do before I go.

A couple thoughts (and I apologize if these have already been raised):

One: It simply cannot be that the declassification process is one that does not involve documentation. Nor can it possibly be the sole province of the president and the vice-president (if you believe that Cheney has the power, too) to declassify materials they themselves did not classify in the first place. The president cannot possibly look at one document and know enough about the underlying materials to be qualified to declassify on something approaching a whim. How could they possibly be certain that their decision to declassify is not compromising security if they have not consulted with whatever agency originally deemed the material classified?

Two: Does declassifying a portion of an NIE also declassify the underlying intelligence that went into that NIE, or would the underlying information still be protected?

Three: Given the administration’s unwillingness or inability to ever admit a lack of power or authority, I do not believe the president can now concede that he did not have powers or authority under which he has instituted questionable programs or policies. If he does, he’s in effect confessing to – at a minimum – a breach of the rules, and at worst, he’s confessing to having committed a crime. Lacking an admission of error (and “good faith†does not, in any way vindicate his actions), the only way this president and many in his administration can be stopped is by an action to censure or impeach the president, and possibly also the vice president.

Four: Turnabout is fair play. For all the many statements this president and others in the administration made about 9/11 and Saddam in ways that allowed the public to believe there was a connection, I am quite happy to allow the media to play, endlessly, his many comments about leaks and leaking, even though he will claim they were referring to Plame.

Which Republican could “save the day?”

Bush Sr. might be our only hope. Despite his obvious proximity to the problem, he’s never been centrally planted in either the “unitary executive” camp (that’s Cheney) or the “world chaos is God’s will” mindset.

When the law can’t solve the problem, maybe what Shrub needs most of all is a woeful spanking. And to be sent to his room. Maybe Daddy would know best.

Christy said “Who could get through to King George that he really, truly is not entitled to play at being king?”

I haven’t read all the responses yet because my boss frowns on it, but the answer is oh, so obvious…….

FITZ!!

There’s only one person with the standing, the gravitas, the credibility, and the language skills to sit down with the President and make him understand why this is wrong.

Unfortunately, Mr. Rogers died a couple of years ago.

… BTW, has Congress ever actually declared a state of war against “terrorâ€? I believe only Congress can declare war and I don’t recall that they did actually declare war. If no official declaration of war has been made, we are not at war, and this idiot is not a war president and does not have unlimited power.

The last time Congress declared war was December 8, 1941. Congress did not declare war against Iraq in 1990, nor did Congress declare war against Iraq in 2001/2. What Congress did do was authorize the use of military force under United Nations auspices.

The chimperor’s dyslexia apparently has convinced him that words do not matter. An authorization to use military force is a declaration of war. I’m very sorry, but words do matter. Congress could have declared war on Iraq, but Congress chose not to declare war. Chimy treats this as a distinction without a difference, but he’s wrong in that. Of course, it’s far from the first time he has been wrong.

BC

Isn’t declassifying something solely to bolster your political position with the American public a misuse of your power? … Does the Bush Administration even care about the consequences of their petty and impulsive behavior — or has cheating simply become their preferred mode of operation?

Well said, Christy, and it puts me in mind of how Nixon used the IRS to audit his political enemies. This of course is of a scale and consequence far beyond that.

As far as asking who in the GOP has standing to reach Bush/Cheney, there is no one. Because it’s all about the POWER. No one in the party, or in the country, except perhaps for the leading CEO’s of the multinationals, has the power that would make them pay attention. Their strength throughout this (and well before) is their shamelessness.

You also said it well when you spoke of the extension into the white house of the ends-justifies-the-means mentality from the campaigns. Now, too, in a fundamentally corrupt and terrifying way, it’s all about the maintenance of power, which is why the Republicans in Congress also give way. (Even though most of them in their bones know how bent and rotten they’ve allowed their brnach of government become.)

Do other folks remember when Bush joked about how problematic democracy — with all its rules and such — was, and that he’d be happier if he were dictator?

YOU SAY, and say it well:

Who could get through to King George that he really, truly is not entitled to play at being king? That he’s a President, who works for the whole of the nation, and that its about time he started acting like one.

Hate to say it but we’re all baying to the moon here.

He is a King; he doesn’t have to face election, not that he ever did face an election where he had a chance of losing. Thanks to Diebold and ESS, Rethuglicans don’t have to worry about actual elections anymore, just keeping it close enough so that the “actual” vote is plausible compared to the exit polls, which they don’t release anymore anyway.

What can be done when you face NO POLITICAL CONSEQUENCES for anything you do? You just have to steal more votes?

Let’s create a fund to do real exit polling and the results will be released to the public. Maybe Jimmy Carter could oversee it as he does in overseas elections.

REMEMBER: in third-world countries, when the exit polls don’t match the “actual results” it is always taken as an indicator of VOTE FRAUD.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2…..exit_polls

Maybe that’s what we should start doing: save money now to hire our own exit polling firm to collect data for November to show the country that these are STOLEN ELECTIONS.

Fudgie McLellan said that the Democrats were engaging in “crass politics” in calling Bush hypocritical.

First, he is not a hypocrite, he is a liar.

2nd. In Bush world, attacking Wilson is hardball politics….calling the president on his dishonesty is “crass politics”….I think the bell is tolling for that pale, fat liar.

-GSD

Thanks for the update Christy. Can’t wait to see the video. :)

I forgot to post this earlier. I think George H. Bush with Bill Clinton might be the people to confront this administration and only be an uprising of hostile public opinion can effect Bush’s bubble. I don’t see any evidence private conversations can influence someone who’s delusional like W.

Orangejumpsuit @ 137 I thought it was murky too.

I didn’t have time to read all of the responses above, but as for Republicans with the stature to knock some sense into Bush, I think the answer is obvious…

HIS FATHER!

My post in 164 had a mistake. The 2nd sentence in the 2nd paragraph should have been this

I think George H. Bush with Bill Clinton might be the people to confront this administration and only in public. It will be an uprising of hostile public opinion that can effect Bush’s bubble.

Sorry for the fat finger (over-)typing error before.

I think it was jayt above who commented,tongue in cheek, that only God might persuade our Dear Leader of the errors of his ways. I’ve been wracking my brains trying to think of a religious figure he might listen to, but I can’t come up with one who isn’t in his camp. Obviously, I’m not the proper person for this job, being a godless libral and all. Anyone else?

I think it would be appropriate for the preznit to release/declassify intelligience for the purpose of warning citizens about an imminent threat – but for political gain, without making sure contacts and sources in an operation are protected, no. There’s a simple word for that – TREASON!!!!!!

jr says:

“I didn’t have time to read all of the responses above, but as for Republicans with the stature to knock some sense into Bush, I think the answer is obvious…

HIS FATHER!”

A couple of other posters suggested Bush Sr. as well. I think that’s close. However, I think there’s only one person who can convince the boy that the soldiers aren’t plastic and the rules not written by Parker Brothers: his mommy.

Chuck Hagel (R.-Neb.)is one Senator who I believe has the stature and character needed to challenge Bush on his lawlessness, if only he had the courage.

Hagel could do it, but I think as far as Senators go, Specter is the guy. I think W would just ignore his dad.

I bet Chris Shays and Heather Wilson are both talking with their staffs about this. They should know that if they don’t make a move soon, they’re toast in November.

The comments above about the changes in the Replubican attitudes toward Presidential wrong doing since Watergate are particularly insightful. I’m reminded of Nixon’s first run for the president where he was pummeled on national security issues especially the Soviet “Missle Gap”. Eisenhower had hard evidence from the U-2 overflights that the Soviet missle program was very much over stated by the press and Kennedy but kept that information secret. This certainly contributed to Nixon losing the election. The flights were both a valuable intelligence source and dangerous to the pilots. Eisenhower valued the mens lives and the information generated for the country defense more than winning the election for his party something beyong the comprehension of Rove and company.

Oh, Please. PLEASE. Give me ten minutes with Georgie. I will show him the error of his ways.

But if y’all insist on a Republican I know of a few on a tiny island about 90 miles south of key west that could give him an earfull. So to speak.

sorry if this has already been asked/discussed:

but did anyone warn valerie plame that her status as an undercover cia agent was about to change [when the president “declassified” that information to be “leaked” to judy miller] — if it were no longer classified because the president declassified it, why would it have to be “leaked” not just plain old announced?

AND

why bother having a “leak of classified material” investigation if it wasn’t classified? Why doesn’t fitz just say: oops, no crime here, my mistake, i’m wrapping up this expensive dog & pony show now, BYE!

and why didn’t j miller howl, NONOWAIT, that’s not a crime to leak unclassified material, and i’m too classy a dame to sit in prison for no gd reason a’tall?

HUH?

they think we’re stupid.
maybe so, but not as stupid as them.

Every GOP member of congress is a Bushite. They are ALL mortal enemies of the Republic.

I recently read in a post at Huffington’s website that John Kerry argued passionately behind doors that his fellow democratic senators vote against the Iraq resolution. If true, the establishment’s candidate in 2004 permitted himself to be stampeded on a matter of war.

Whether that particular account is true, the great majority of democrats who suppported- and continue to support- the party of treason are no more than collaborators with an organization they understand perfectly well to be absolutely corrupt. Their pathetic bromide that they were conned by a treacherous president, one whom they believed would faithfully act to avert that war, is sordid.

It’s naive to ask which members of the GOP might possess the integrity to challenge those abortions of humanity that currently comprise the executive branch. The answer is obvious: not one of them.

And talk is cheap. Dean, Reid, Pelosi, Kerry- all their yadda yadda yadda is just hot air. A much better question is which democrats are prepared to battle for impeachment. It would provoke a constitutional crisis that would shade Watergate, but that way lays the path of duty. That they would certainly lose the fight is superfluous in light of the larger imperative of why the fight must be made.

I don’t believe they have it in them. Any group of people who were buffaloed into entrusting a declaration of war to GW Bush are hopeless. Sweet Jesus, they didn’t even have it in them to reflexively support a censure resolution.

I hope I’m wrong, but think not. Then again, I didn’t think there was any way in hell the people of my state would elect Arnold Schwarzenegger governor, either. Still find it hard to believe, so there you go.

I agree with several who suggest Bush Sr. More than anyone else, this is his particular responsibility.

I bet Chris Shays and Heather Wilson are both talking with their staffs about this. They should know that if they don’t make a move soon, they’re toast in November.
I suspect Shays must know he’s on the outs with the GOP. He’s too weak to make a move though. I am almost 100% certain Bush *did not* come to CT to support Shays wed., although Shays was probably in on the plan.

I wouldn’t trust Specter as far as I could throw him. Not after a few of his last major performances.

re #54:

I think it’s Hagel – precicely because he is Mr. Diebold. If he says boo, no votes for you!

I just saw David Brooks on PBS (The NewsHour With Jim Lehrer) say that first Scooter gave Judy Miller the NIE and other reporters including himself a few day s later. Lehrer then said “Raise your Right Hand”, as if he was swearing David under oath.

Its not the reality of the leak that is troubling – its the rank hypocrisy of this particular president, and this particular administration that I think resonants with most folks. Then again, I figured the NSA scandal and Feingold’s censure resolution had traction as well, so apparently I’m not a very good judge of these things.

I have this feeling the guy (pResident Arbusto) will get to walk away due to voter apathy and crummy Dem candidates. Of course, he’s probably going into exile when his term ends, because his people will remind him of what happened to Somoza II. And we will pay for his blunders forever.

You might want to keep Howard Baker out of it. Baker’s famous quote was meant less to get to the bottom of what Nixon did and more an attempt to discredit John Dean and his testimony before the Senate Select Committee. Baker carried water for Mr. Nixon pretty well up until Nixon’s wrongdoing was fully exposed.