Christy You’re GOOD!

FITZ

ROOTZ

REDD

JANE

PATCH

who am I leaving out?

Thanks, Christy. MTP doesn’t air here for another 10 min or so.

Timmeh the accomplice

So basically, Novak thinks that Tenet should have protected Valerie by outing her to Novak. Got it. Geesh, what an ass.

So, should the wingers hold this decrepit crypt keeper to the same standards they would hold the New York Times to?

Naw.

OT.

The rightwing doctor, the NYC “Townhouse Terrorist” who saw evil in the heart of Hillary Clinton, FDR and George Soros is dead.

-GSD

Novak says he went to his primary source to find out why they would send Wilson to Niger on this mission…

Didn’t Novak once say he (Novak) didn’t ask about how Wilson got sent to Niger, but that “they gave it to me”? This directly contradicts his earlier story.

so Novak hasn’t talked to his primary source since that interview? Interesting! Somebody not commonly accessed by even folk like Novak?

Don’t blame me, I was just the messenger.

“they gave me the name” from the Newsday article

Yup, he sure does sound like a messenger. “Here Bobby, take this and run with it. Good boy.”
Novak was sent on an errand. Anyone smell a conspiracy in just those words? I do.
(but IANAL, just a citizen.)

Yes, and Russert also failed to ask Swopa’s questions while he had Novak in the not-so-hot seat. SIGH

Redd

Very good pick up on the ID of source will come out sooner or later, probably sooner.

Something is in the air.

Novak got in front of the Wilson presser and rode it like a surfer catching a wave. he clearly knows a lot about what is going on behind the scenes and has some guesses about the timing thereof

Are we sure the source cannot be Shrub?

lhp, wouldn’t Novak (and everybody else) know to expect the Wilsons’ filing just b/c the statute was about to run?

lhp: that’s long been my suspicion: the Preznit his own bad self!

Are we sure the source cannot be Shrub?
NOT a partisan gunslinger? BWAHAHAHA.

“/04 G/J (Did anyone catch this date? I missed it…)”

It was also February 2004.

It was when he said that in order not to publish her name he would have needed someone (and, in his opinion, why should it not have been George Tenet himself?) to call and say that her life would be in danger if her name was published, that I walked out of the room.

I’m not a George Tenet fan, but is it really the job of the head of the CIA to personally call reporters and ask that they not publish names?

If the primary source is shrub, it explains SOOO much. It explains all the leaking about the mechanics of the declassifying the the WH staff knew nothing about.

it explains why the origainal source cannot be charged with the underlying crime.

It explains odd the behavior of both Woodward and Novak.

it explains why Scooter is not having trouble raising $.

It explains a lot of things.

Please, if we have definatively eliminated shrub as a possibility, tell me how we came to that conclusion

even Judy Miller, who also was given Valerie’s status as a CIA agent, did not publish that information. Novak should be held in greater contempt than Judy.

At what point in our society did we decide that taking no responsibility for the consequences of our actions was even remotely acceptable? For shame.

Accountability is for suckers and little people.

Op99

novak does not think Shrub is partisan. Novak has long touted and seemed to genuinely buy all that “uniter not diveder” “work with both sides of the aisle while in Texas” crap.

I always thought when he said that he was signalling that it was Shrub not Darth as most would expect

lhp: recall that Woodward said he allegedly told in passing Walter Pincus the name of his source but Pincus denies hearing it. Believe me, if Woodward had told Pincus it was the Preznit, he sure as hell would have remembered that. I doubt if Woodward would have shared so cavalierly such a bombshell at all…

Eli @ 20

Seems to me that you can’t get much littler than Shrub these days, unless you’re Dick Cheney.

lhp –

I left two more responses in the downstairs thread. If you want, I can send you some of the obscure stuff in my files — VIP memos, and things like that. Mostly, the best stuff can still be found on the Web — although the Rachel Berry piece was locked up behind the FindLaw firewall about two months after I’d started circulating the link. The Wayback Machine is a wunnerful thing . . .

ckcentral at yahoo dot com

Here’s a question that’s bugging me. Someone involved in this mess must have very carefully planned everyone’s actions. They believe they’ve danced right up to the line between legal and illegal activity, but over it. Most of the upper echelon of the WH are not lawyers. Not Bush, Cheney, or Rove.

So who planned this? Libby? Addington? Gonzalez (who was WH Counsel then)? Miers?

This was no accident.

As I said on my blog this morning:

The 1% Solution
So, let’s see we’ve gone from nearly 5 years ago…

“If there’s a one percent chance something bad might happen we have to act.”

To this:

“Everything is bad, let’s implement policies where there’s a 1% chance it might work.”

My vote is Gonzales

recall that on the day last fall when Fitz indicted Libby, he first paid a brief courtesy call to GWB’s personal lawyer and the Preznit certainly seemed grumpy as all hell at his brief press statement that afternoon.

“Novak says he doesn’t think he outed Valerie – thinks Aldrich Ames did so previously.”

You missed the most compelling evidence that this claim is utter horseshit – Ames’ outings were committed in 1985. He was arrested in 1994, which presumably put him out of the outing business. The CIA continued to use Valerie long after 1994. So QED, you lying scumbag Novakula.

bobo

Seems to me that you can’t get much littler than Shrub these days, unless you’re Dick Cheney.

Well, I meant “little people” in Bushian terms of “the help”, i.e., everyone who is not rich and important.

But Bush is absolutely, as a friend would put it, a wee tiny of a man.

Ames may have indeed outted Valerie to the Soviets (remember them?) but the lovely lady could have continued her spy work in other countries … risky but doable

I M Bobo, I’ve never heard that before. Ames spilled his secrets in 1985? Hell Valerie Plame just started her CIA training then. He could not have known her name.

Looking at Novak on Tim’s fake news show is revolting. Russert has been smacking Novak’s schmuck for far too long. Geeze Tim, I do have to concede, you are a primo jerker of the joint. And not just Bobby Novak’s.

lhp 21, POTUS is going to sit down for “a long conversation” off the record with Bob Novak? Doesn’t seem like Bushie’s style to spend much time with the peasants, even his own peasants. I do see your point that Novak could justify in his own mind that Bush is not partisan.

Great debriefing, Christy.
Typo alert: primary source said Wilson’s wife works for Novak, should be “…works for CIA.” And the sentence that starts “And stuff like the information that perhaps Scooter Libby…” is confusing to me, did something drop out?

As Christy notes, nothing is more frustrating for a prosecutor than the firm conviction subjects are guilty as hell but he’s constrained from doing anything about it. My late f-i-l was a county prosecutor and that’s a truth from the lowest level of justice all the way up to the halls of power in Washington.

And totally OT, but when we get back to “casting” The Valerie Plame Story, I nominate Uma Thurman for Valerie…see today’s parade.com.

Re: the Pincus thing. I never took that too seriously. No matter who the source was, I think it would have stood out in Pincus’s mind.

The sloppy sharing of secrets like that seems so in charracter for Shrub.

Even that psychophant Woodward describes shrub as having a “quick joshing manner which at times borders on impulsive” in Plan of Attack.

Which is the suck up’s code for, shrub has diarrea of the mouth.

wasn’t part of judy’s story that she wanted to run with the plame info, but her editor wouldn’t bite?

TheOtherWA #32

I didn’t know either (not exactly) till a minute before I posted. I recalled that the Ames case went down a pretty long time ago. So I googled Aldrich Ames.

Google is out friend.

bobo

Shorter Cheney and Neo-conartist philosophy:

Let’s implement policies that advance the cause of the top 1% of the nation.

-GSD

I didn’t expect much of an ‘interview’ from Timmy, but – as usual – he lived down to expectations.

What he is alarmingly doing, as so many faux journalists (not excluding Novak) is diverting public attention from what is the real crux of this story: namely, that KARL ROVE knowingly and with malice aforethought revealed the identity of a covert C.I.A. agent/operative.

We can discuss who sent Wilson on the trip; or the qualifications of Wilson (they were many); or the identity of Novak’s ‘primary’ source….but all of this is utterly beside the point and is an implicit participation in dealing with the fringes of this story.

Repeat after me:

KARL ROVE is a traitor.

KARL ROVE belongs in a jail cell awaiting a firing squad.

GEORGE BUSH is a liar (for many other reasons than just this, of course) but because he pledged that he wouldn’t countenance treason in his administration and not only has he countenanced it, he has underwritten it.

And I agree with the previous posts: Novak clearly knew that the Wilson press conference/lawsuit was coming up and he pushed in front of the line, so to speak, to get his smarmy-ass mea culpa (not) on record.

Disgraceful.

David Johnston of the NYT, who covers the Plame case, wrote the Aldrich Ames book. I’ll go out on a limb here and say that if that was true, he might have picked up on it.

WTF???

For what it’s worth, I think “W” is Novak’s source. Novak alluded to it some months ago when he said “President Bush could end all this speculation and reveal the source” (I’m paraphrasing here).

Also, could our president not have put on a more embarrassing performance at the G8 with his pig obsession and lecturing Putin that Russian government should model itself on Iraq’s? He really is just an idiot, isn’t he? I used to wonder if it was an act to make himself seem down to earth and folksy. No more. He’s a moron.

God, what a rogues gallery of blowhards, windbags, thieves, miscreants, dissemblers, prevaricators, mooks, goons, rubes and dolts we have running the nation.

I wouldn’t let these puds run my pizza shop.

-GSD

Is there no one alive who can drive a stake through the heart of Novakula?

I still hope for good things out of Fitz, but is he our only hope in this entire mess? (Maybe the civil suit will stir up some hidden dirt? Fingers crossed.)

I’ll wager that if W’s IQ ever comes out, it’s double-digit.

He ultimately gave the Soviet Union the names of every American agent working in their country.

Wikipedia is my friend. :P

Ok, so Ames started outing his fellow CIA operatives in 1985, but only those in the Soviet Union. Since it collapsed in 89, personally, I doubt very much Ames could have known who Plame was.

Jane at 41 — I know. Novak was so weird this morning. Amato is working on a clip — if you haven’t seen it, you really have to watch to believe that Novakula was throwing all this crap and out and hoping it would all stick with no fact checking. And Russert — no follow up whatsoever on the Ames point or otherwise.

Op99

“long conversation” is a relative term. may be the longest conversation Novak ever got from Shrub.

But yeah, after the 16 words blew up in their faces, they were all looking to get control of the story. So, it would not surprise me that Shrub was enlisted to charm a reliable like Novak. Remember they were trying like hell to sell the story. condi on Ar Force One, Scooter with judy, BUT NOBODY WAS PRINTING

So, it would not surprise me at all if they used access to shrub to push Novak over the line to actually print.

It may be that the “long rambling” sit down was the bait or even the Quid pro quo. Maybe it was only supposed to look like an accident, so Novack and Woodward would feel guilty and not want to blab because they flatter themse3lves to thinnk that shrub trusts them enough to let his hair down with them

Lotus,

I’d wager it would be around 90-tops.

That sounds about right, Rushton.

Very interesting…every time I try to send a comment to Meet the Press, my browser shuts down.

Here’s just one of the many things scorching my jeans about Novacula’s story:

By his own account, Harlow –the official CIA spokesperson–told him after inquiring within the company in no uncertain terms that Wilson was NOT sent by his wife. (Novack says Harlow used the word “facilitated” but I don’t think even his origianl accounts said that, and Harlow certainly didn’t say that). Novack immediately says it was later “confirmed” she DID send him, because that is what the Senate Intelligence Report indicated.(and Pumpkin, to his credit, challenged him on that [pointing out that was never a conclusion of the full panel, BTW.)

But Novack obviously didn’t know about the Senate Intelligence investigation at the time. He would have printed his original assertion, then, with the official CIA spokesperson denying the central point that Wilson was sent by his wife based on his unnamed original source with only Karl Rove confirming with either “I heard that too” (Rove’s version) or “I know that, too” (Novack’s version). And, of course there was not even a mention of Harlow’s explicit denial in the original “reporting” or since.

So on the next stop of his “Dead and Loving It” tour, I hope someone asks the Count why he ran with a story not just despite the objections of the CIA, but when the CIA had actually denied the premise that his wife had in any way initiated Wilson’s trip.

Oh, and one other little thing…Novak makes a big point that Harlow said it was very unlikely that Plame would ever be sent oveerseas again. Novak took that as somehow a carte blanche that somehow made it all ok. Just out a CIA “operative” on the chance she MIGHT not be used abroad again. Talk about your self-fulfilling fucking prophecies!

Diane at 40, I have to defend the job Timmeh did today; he had Novak in the chair, and he asked questions about facts of Novak. Did you want to see Novak sit there and editorialize about how blameless the administration is in the Plame outing, or did you want to see him pinned down about his part in it?

Novak was and is a liar.

No credibility– creepy and all over the place this morning. I used to ‘respect’ him, but then again, I was always taught to respect my elders.

Never again, until they earn respect.

Rushton at 42

novak also said

If you want to know who Woodward’s source is, ask Bush

What might explain Plame/Wilson not including Novak in their lawsuit?

So Novak revealed the name of his primary source to the grand jury and Fitzpatrick but he won’t reveal it publicly because he had a “tacit” understanding with the source not to reveal his name. His hemming and hawing about how his attorney told him he’d lose the case so it was ok, according to Novak, to reveal his source to the grand jury should disgust every fellow “journalist” especially those who fought the issue in court and even went to jail rather than reveal their sources. Every news organization should ban this jerk from their pages or airwaves. It is clear that Novak is out for Novak (and his buddies) and no one else. Disgusting is the only word that really describes him. Or of course “douchebag”, ala Jon Stewart…

He might just be one of the John D’ohs mperloe.

What might explain Plame/Wilson not including Novak in their lawsuit?

I don’t think Novak did anything technically illegal. Unethical and sleazy, absolutely. But leaking *to* Novak was the crime – once he has the info, it’s fair game.

That’s my non-law-talking-guy understanding of it, anyway…

The funniest thing is, if the primary source WAS shrub, Novak did not think the President of the United States was a sufficiently knowledgable source to rely on and had to go check with others.

Now normally when a source tell you something, I understand you are supposed to get confirmation, but when the President ells you something about his own government, that needs checking?

hillarious

GSD sed of Novakula: decrepit crypt keeper

Thanks, G, that’s the best description of him I’ve ever seen. Also encompasses the googly eyes that make him look so creepy.

The founding fathers never meant for legislators, not to mention the behind-the-scenes leeches, to set up shop in DC for their entire adult lives. Citizens need to do honest work, too. Let’s throw the bastards out!

I wouldn’t let these puds run my pizza shop.
-GSD

And your customers appreciate that, I’m sure!

Ok, so I tried another browser and got to the web form…when I submitted the form, I got an error page full of code. I can only hope that millions of people are trying to call bullshit on Novacula.

The Plame suit has John Does 1-10. I assume the identities of at least some of those John Does are known to Plaintiff at this time, but thta Plaintiff does not have sufficient admissable evidence against the John Does to survive a motion for judgement on the pleadings and so, has kept those allegations out of the case for the time being.

After taking some discovery, plaintiff can move to ammend the complaint to add allegations against new named defendants. In the meantime, naming them as John Does defeats the statute of limitations

At what point in our society did we decide that taking no responsibility for the consequences of our actions was even remotely acceptable?

Snicker.

Conservatism is a handy way to avoid responsibility.

You can always blame God or the “realities of the marketplace” for practically anything.

Did anyone hear Novak call journalist “THUMB SUCKERS” ?HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA.

froggermarch! long time no…

When Ames was outing CIA agents left and right, Valerie was probably still in training -with her AK-47s.

It is time for a Jack Nicholson/Joker strategy.

“This town needs an enema.”

-GSD

CK if you are still here,
Just went back and read your comments at te end of te last thread.

Actually the reason I want the quotes, is that the first chapter is a “why we fight” kinda pep talk to get the lawyers and poll watchers all jazzed up to go out there and protect the vote.

Glad to see we are both thinking the same way.

CHS – I loved the picture from the last thread. A friend has a sweet Rotty who always babysits her foals when they are very young. Not exactly lion and lamb, but always worth a smile to see. Now that I think of it, maybe the lion and lamb references dropped a few words. Maybe that poor lion of reference has actually succumbed to the venom of a smug watching rvl?

Tryggth – if you are still around – don’t make me go to the Corner. I don’t much care who had the “once more into the breach” speech, but I would like to know who thought it was science fiction. Is one of the Losst Boys growing up?

Betcha they could give some Star Trek quotes for you on voting lhp – you can email and ask. *g*

The only one I can even partly remember is the more depressing reference to *if it was important they wouldn’t let us do it* or somthing like.

Rice is the poster girl for the administration’s complete incapacity to predict such mysteries as whether the sun will rise in the east or the west. I say we chip in for a magic 8 ball. Statisticians I have spoken with claim that this predicative tool will increase our foreign policy effectiveness at least threefold.

lhp – the wingnut who wrote that piece — he does realize it pools almost ALL the Republicans as neocons, right? That or liberals.

op99@53: While I do give TR credit for even having the creep on the program, again, I go back to my central thesis on all this:

the whole Novak discussion is entirely and completely extraneous to the actual, bone fide crime that was committed here. An undercover CIA operative’s identity was deliberately leaked to a reporter whom the leaker (KARL ROVE) knew full well would publish it. Let’s not take our eyes off the ball.

Putting this another way:

I like to subject the Bush Administration’s crimes to what I call the “Clinton Test”. I’m sure many readers have done this. Comparing reactions then with reactions now, in our enlightened Republican-run junta.

During the Clinton Administration, to cite one example, when Bill and Hillary decided to expand the White House Christmas card list, there was a special congressional oversight committee appointed to review it. There were constant, non-stop panels, committees and investigations. Remember?

So, giving the KARL ROVE treason story the “Clinton Test”….how do you think Republicans would’ve reacted if, say, James Carville had revealed the name of a covert CIA operative to a cooperative, big mouth journalist? They would have tarred and feathered him in Lafayette Park. Tell me I’m wrong….

Hypocrisy.

Conservatism is a handy way to avoid responsibility.

Amen to that . . .

You can always blame God or the “realities of the marketplace” for practically anything.

I thought Liberal Evil Doer’s were to blame for every bad thing that happened.

Or is it the Evil Dewar’s?

But is America ready to “handle the TRUTH?”

“Novak now backtracking on the “they gave me the name” from the Newsday article – misstatement on Novak’s part, he says. (So, he apparently did say it, he’s now saying that he just said it incorrectly. Oh. Okay.)”

Actually, he’s backtracking from saying it twice. Give Russert credit for that one, he did his usual ambush quote thing… showed the first quote, Novak said he misstated it, then he showed another quote where Novak said exactly the same thing again later. Novak again said that he had misstated his answer but he looked kind of constipated as he did so. I don’t think he much liked the back to back quote thing.

Gee, I hate it for him.

So, can I conclude we have not been able to definatively eliminate Shrub as a suspect?

Cause I know Emptywheel is pretty convinced it is Addington and I take her opinion very seriously.

I thought maybe I was missing something that outright made it impossible or farfetched for Shrub to be the primary source for Woodward and Novak

w refuses to answer 3 questions on Lebanon’s call for a cease fire. ratb…….

Diane, by the “Clinton Test”, Bush would have been impeached at least 5-10 times over by now, if not summarily executed.

lhp –

more links –

ACLU publications

http://www.aclu.org/votingrigh…..tions.html

alternet — 2004 GOP vote supression

http://www.alternet.org/story/19917

Diane at 73, I agree with your basic premise, it’s just that I don’t think Novak is the guy to pursue it with. He’s a fact witness; when he’s on the “stand”, get him on the record about facts. And given Novak’s bloviating and misdirecting this week, it was absolutely relevant to have him on the show. I agree with Christy that Timmeh’s followup was crappy (as usual with Republicans), but he was on the right track with the direction of the interview.

Good Morning Mary: You are referring to the NYTimes article I posted on the last thread? What could have possesed them to publish that peice of piffle. The argument conflates things as well. That article is NOT an example of intellectual rigor.

Dianne

Welcome. Your name is new to me. Is that X-mas card story true? That’s a hoot!

Ah for the days of too much Congressional oversight

Angie @ 78,

In all fairness to “W”, he can’t answer the questions because he is too stupid to understand them in the first place. He’s still thinking about that wild boar he had for dinner and maybe wondering if there are wild cows out there too.

oink oink, mooooo, smoke em out of their caves.

yer right, Rushton!

If it was Bush, I think it could have been a stupid thing on his part, and once he did it and Rove or Cheney found out, the rest was put together as an attempt to muddy water and make sure there were so many layers it would never get pegged back to Bush, especially not before an election.

Re Novak – I do not understand why all the MSM lets him off the hook over Harlow. Novak sure doesn’t passs the jeune fille test. What DC or other competent reporter, who knows that they are getting ready to publish something about a CIA agent and is checking with the CIA, wouldn’t hold back identity after the CIA says, in essence, dear God in heaven don’t publish her name.

That goes so beyond the boundaries, and yet they all just sit there talking nicey to him about it.

See how the region is becoming tranquil and peaceful.

New reports that Turkey will “get tough” with the Kurds.

Can anyone say “regional meltdown”?

http://english.aljazeera.net/N…..D6629E.htm

-GSD

Eli –

If the truth about Bush and 9/11 and Iraq and all of the other crimes perpetrated by his den of thieves were known by the American People, a hundred years from now little children would still be pointing out the pock marks on the Washington Monument, where the firing squads missed.

Op99

Timmeh was on track with the quote ambush, the 2 count em’ 2 times Novak said that “they gave me the name”

I think ole’ Tim knows something and is trying to highlight it. This is one of those days when I am firmly convinced that it is all hidden in plain sight and that I am just too blind to see it. Arrrgh

Rove gave Novak Plame’s name….

Novak claims three sources — his (unnamed) primary source, Rove, and Harlow.

“Novak says he testified under oath that he was not given Valerie’s name directly from his primary source.”

And Novak obviously knew Plame’s name when he spoke to Harlow, because Harlow told him that the story was wrong, and not to print the name.

Ergo, the only other source of the name “Plame” had to be Karl Rove — Novak’s claim that he got it from “Who’s Who” does not hold water, because there is nothing in the listing that suggests that “Valerie” maintained her maiden name professionally.

CK than ks for the links. I clicked through and emailed the sites to myself

The Aldrich Ames reference was merely chum for the trailer trash authoritarian cult who know Bush The Magnificent can do no wrong. It wasn’t the traitor Novak, it was the traitor Ames. Nice to know traitors credit each other.

looseheadprop@82: I actually heard that reference (to the Christmas card investigation) given by Mark Shields on “The Newshour” about two months ago.

So: have I researched it? NO.

Do I believe Mark Shields? Implicitly.

At any rate: even if MS was exaggerating, I think the spirit of the comment remains intact, even if it’s not factually accurate

Paul

nice pickup. Plus, Novak getting it from Who’s Who would not explain how Judy got it

I despise Dan Bartlett– a Mehlman wannabe not interested in saving the world at all. (on Wulfie now)

where is Snowjob, anyhow?

re-gion-al melt-down, jest a part of the plan.

Almost August, puhleeze go to Crawford for the summertime.

Diane,
I just think that’s sooooo funny. Christmas card list. I love it

Christy, I’m glad you brought this topic up because for several days I’ve been wanting to write you and tell you not to blame yourself for the disappointment a lot of us feel in PJF for letting Rove and Novak off the hook. It it no way affects the wonderful reporting FDL did on the CIA Leak Case. In fact, a few months ago when everyone was in a fever pitch that Rove would be indicted, I printed out a great piece one of you two gals did on a Rove timeline and gave it to my friends who don’t blog. You showed convincingly with documentation at every step of the way how Rove kept changing his story, and I thought he was sunk. For whatever reason PJF backed off. I don’t think it’s to catch the bigger fish out there: no one in the WH is going to throw anyone else there under the bus, they’re all together on this. And I think the Wilsons have given up on PJF.

I had one of those forehead-slapping moments the other night when I commented on another blog. I said that a DOJ lawyer should never have been appointed in the first place. Maybe they didn’t change the name from independent prosecutor to special prosecutor for nothing. I made the biggest wrong backing of all time. I’m a non-afiliated voter, and I voted for that clown in the WH in 2000 completely on the basis that his administration was not going to get into nation building. Sometimes I can’t sit down because I’ve kicked myself so much over that!

“Ken Mehlman, played brilliantly by Hillary Swank.”

Stephanie Miller

Had this been the Clinton Administration, Gingrich would have formed a Congressional Irregular Army and would have moved on the Whitehouse by now.

By the way, Gingrich, that assturd was pushing his latest WWIII meme so that he and his Republicants can ride that new pony of fear into electoral victory.

War and more war. It is the endless war for enless peace that Gore Vidal warned us about.

-GSD

is Dan Bartlett married yet? (didn’t think so!)

Morning lhp – yep, that article. What a waste of space, but then again, it’s not like there are important issues that could use prudent discussion.

Next week maybe they can have a piece explaining how all the now recognized axises- axi-axii-axix? intersect. With drawings. Eschering in a new understanding for us all.

I don’t know that Bush is ruled out or in – but then again, I didn’t know Emptywheel thought it might be Addington or that there was Congressional oversight of the Clinton Xmas card list. No one ever tells me anything.

With the Middle East in flames and the planet possibly on the threshold of the last world war, both houses of Congress adjourned last Thursday for a four day weekend. Don’t I just love it! I fantasized that the legislative and executive branches might have actually worked through the weekend on a brainstorming session to look at ways to save us. Well yes… I know… that assumes these guys are in possession of brains in the first place. The picture I have of this weeked is one of our leaders, martinis in hand, very dry of course, cocktail-weenies up their a**, standing around the pool and BBQ, making deals with each other in the midst of the Mideast chaos.

last I saw, Emptywheel was fairly sure it was Armitage as the primary souce … Addington is a new (but not astonishing name) to add the list …

Tony Snow has walked into a deep, sticky puddle. He’s worse than Snotty Scotty – he’s really quick on his feet but his condescension (reminds me of Rummy)and circumnavigations of the truth really piss me off the way Snotty never did.

OFG – Stephanie Miller, my hero.

The Aldrich Ames reference was merely chum for the trailer trash authoritarian cult who know Bush The Magnificent can do no wrong. It wasn’t the traitor Novak, it was the traitor Ames. Nice to know traitors credit each other.

I assume they also point out that Aldrich Ames was a prominent Democrat, right?

Wild Bill Kristol plans on fighting the terrorists until the last soldier dies, not the last journalist, the last soldier.

The problem in the Muddled East is that the US hasn’t been “tough enough” for War Mongering Bill Kristol.

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/…../#comments

-GSD

Back to war gaming this:

Suppose it goes like this (and jump in and show me why this can’t work)

Even before SOTU, CIA (and WIlson?) try to keep the 16 words out. They fail, but WH is alerted that there are those who know a fraud has been committed in the SOTU.

Wilson starts talking to the press and reports questioning the 16 words start showing up in the MSM.

libby starts his notebook/dossier on Wilson

Libby, Rove, Cheney start quietly shopping the story around about the trip being a boondogle, nobody prints

WIlson writes the Op ED. Now Everbody gets inthe act. Condi, State, the whole Air Force One crowd, everybody is trying to get the press to look at Wilson rather than the 16 words. Still nobody bites.

They decide to use reliable friends of the Admin. Those who will never take even a grain of salt with anything GWB says.

So, Shrub casually drops it into conversation with Woodward. But woodward thinks that poor dimwitted Shrub ws being too trusting with insider Bob and doesn’t publish.

Later, they invite Novak for a deep background chat with shrub who drops it again. This time Novak bites. Yeah, I think then Rove with the confirmation pushed it. I think that conversaion had lots more than the quote attributed to/admitted by Rove.

Bush was sent in to direct their attention to Wilson and Wilson’s wife. Whether he was meant to do it the way Condi did, just skirting the line w/o crossing over and just couldn’t pull it off, or whether he outed her on purpose, I will never know.

He did however, accidently, at least I pray it was acciently, reveal that we were tracking Osama from his cellphone battery while shooting his mouth off on TV. So, there is some precident there for him not being able to talk about a sensitive subject w/o blabbing the confidential stuff (I’d like to see him accomplish even one Fitz presser)

So, assuming he just botched it, and outed her by accident. Once the rest of the WH knew that, you can see why they would get into all this Nixonian “if the president declassifies on the spot, it is legal” bullshit.

Mary says: “Eschering in a new understanding for us all.”
July 16th, 2006 at 9:33 am

That’s a very artful play on words, Mary. *g*

imad moustapha on cnn now.

escalation, not peace, is the m.o. from our administration.

this administration is killing the world.

these hateful people created and feed the GWOT– it’s a stupid term in and of itself. Terror is terror, it’s a method of warfare. There is no difference between the bombs or WP falling from our jets and the poor fool strapping on a bomb. People die.

*ilson

You may be right. I am terrible with names, but it did start with an “A”

That I am sure of. She definitely did not have a suspect who started with a “B”

Blog whore and broken record alert, but I think it would be a very good thing if we made Scooter Libby and everyone around him radioactive.

looseheadprop at 77:

“Cause I know Emptywheel is pretty convinced it is Addington and I take her opinion very seriously.”

Hmmm…I must of missed something there. I was of the impression that Emptywheel thought Armitage was the last unnamed source.

I’m still hesitant on Armitage. My bet is on Hadley.

20 Americans picked up in Lebanon. Team dropped off to organize evacuation acc to Barbaraaaa Brenda Starr on CNN.

Christy

Novak gave his dates in his column this week:

Inteview 10/7 (the same day WH turned in subpoenaed materials to Abu G)
Interview 1/14 (before anyone had testified b4 GJ)
Interview 2/5 (after Matalin, Scottie, Adam Levine, and Claire Buchan testified)
GJ Appearance 2/25 (presumably after Karl’s two February 2004 appearances)

But as I pointed out the other day, Anne Kornblut said Novak testified once after Libby’s indictment. Who’s telling the truth, Kornblut, or No-Facts?

allegedly, the night before the Libby indictment, Hadley was expecting to be frogmarched outta the White House the next day …

CHS-brilliant analysis as always.
what question did Swopa propose for Novak?

lhp @ 60 – great point – funny as hell

Well, I guess I better go make a living. Headed for Kerrville, TX. I guess I’ll head down toward Wichita Falls and on down past Archer City, then ease over to Graham and drop down to Breckinridge. Then it’s on to Brownwood to Mason and on down to Kerrville. Lotsa hot terrain today.

drive safely and keep kool, OFG! We need you.

I can’t stand to watch Novak on TV. Anyone who would put party before country, who would endanger our national security just to help the Party smear a political opponent should not even be given any time in the media. His lame excuses that he didn’t know Ms. Wilson’s status, etc, etc don’t relieve him of the responsibility for the damage he has done to our nation and to her and her family. A true journalist would err on the side of caution and not publish anything to do with a CIA employee’s identity. A true journalist knows that their job is to inform the public, not to be a propagandist for a party or administration.

One of the few times I have ever agreed with Bush Senior is when he said the following—unfortunately his less astute offspring apparently wasn’t listening:

“we have plenty of enemies… We need more human intelligence. That means we need more protection for the methods we use to gather intelligence and more protection for our sources, particularly our human sources, people that are risking their lives for their country… I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious, of TRAITORS…” George HW Bush remarks at Dedication Ceremony for George Bush Center for Intelligence.
(crossposted on JohnConyers blog)

The A/C in my KWhopper is extrordinairy. You can hang meat in the cab of my truck. (Okay, get your minds out of the gutter)

so if it was the shrub, Gonzo told it was not illegal so all is well, right?

*ilson46201 at 114:

Yeah, and Hadley as Asst Nat Sec Adv then fits the type who would know CIA-stuff like Valerie’s involvement.

As a matter of fact, I’m betting that when Cheney wanted to find out from the CIA how Amb Wilson got his boondoggle trip to Niger, Darth went to his main info-on-CIA squeeze, good ol’ Hadley.

Hadley also “nominally” fits Novakula’s description of “not a partisan gunslinger”. At least not “overtly”.

OFG –

Do you have loads both ways, or do you dead head?

Now that MTP finally aired here, I see once again Novak slips in the Matalin lie that Fitzgerald has determined there is no underlying crime. And it floats right past Timmah.

Fitzgerald NEVER said that.

This is how it’s done you goofy beltway pinheads!
CHICAGO, Illinois (AP) — Former Gov. George Ryan was indicted Wednesday on federal charges of taking payoffs, gifts and vacations in return for government contracts and leases while he was Illinois secretary of state. [snip] Ryan, who served as secretary of state from 1991 to 1999…
That CNN article is from Wednesday, December 17, 2003. There’s no requirement to indict from the top down, and it’s much more effective to start at the bottom and work your way up.

Why is this so hard for some people to understand?

lhp

There are two reasons why Novak’s “primary” source can’t be Bush. First, there’s no way his name fits in the redactions in Fitz’ filing. Second, here’s the presumably non-Rove content of Novak’s first column:

Wilson’s mission was created after an early 2002 report by the Italian intelligence service about attempted uranium purchases from Niger, derived from forged documents prepared by what the CIA calls a “con man.” This misinformation, peddled by Italian journalists, spread through the U.S. government. Wilson’s wife, who works for the office of nuclear non-proliferation [this NP detail didn’t show up in the column, but that’s what Novak says Armitage told him], suggested sending him to Niger to investigate the Italian report. [Bush’s SOTU] attributed reports of attempted uranium purchases to the British government … the British relied on forged documents

All this was forgotten until reporter Walter Pincus revealed in the Washington Post June 12 that an unnamed retired diplomat had given the CIA a negative report. Not until Wilson went public on July 6, however, did his finding ignite the firestorm. Messages between Washington and the presidential entourage traveling in Africa hashed over the mission to Niger.

This was someone who acknowledged the whole Niger claim was based on the forged documents, which I doubt Bush could have even said clearly, much less to the level of describing the Con Man we know to be Rocco Martino.

That said, there are a few pieces of information that Novak hasn’t accounted for in current story:

Plame’s name (he didn’t used to claim he had learned from Who’s Who, though now he does)

That Wilson was not CIA (that’s how he raised the question with his source–how did he know?)

Plame’s covert status

In other words, Novak hasn’t described who told him the IIPA related details. So I would suggest it likely (and have been doing, even before Swopa) that there is probably a pre-Primary source. That might be named BUsh, or might be named Cheney.

ck,

Most of the time, I deadhead one way. As a “heavy haul” truck driver, I’m already pretty heavy empty, just because of my equipment (truck & trailer) so it is hard to find loads for me. On this case I am loaded to Kerrville, TX and reload down there for Marshall, TX. From there I do not know. Get a real tour of “Baja Oklahoma” though.

*ilson #102,
Addington,Armitage, they both begin with an A as does Assholes.

300 Italians evacuated from Lebanon to Syria.

oh.

Thought the Syrians were the problem.

d’oh.

Novak has answered Swopa’s question, if I’m not mistaken. Novak has said that his first source – that is, Armitage – told him that Plame worked at the CIA. It may not be true, but that’s Novak’s answer.

Now, as for the question of who told him she was an operative, Novak’s official answer, which is patently false, is that he misused the word in the column, so that no one told him that. In this case, it’s clear that’s a false answer. But he’s sticking with it, though he seems to have gone silent on it. Is that what he testified to? I think that’s an interesting question.

re Novak – People who pride themselves on being clever are often prone to tipping their hands – phrasing things in a way that gives the wrong impression while technically (in a certain sense) not lying (b/c “not lying” is rarely the same thing as telling the truth). The whole thing about “her name” is just another thread in the big web.
[as beautifully highlighted by Colbert at the press club - “I meant to say ‘his wife, Joseph Wilson’s wife”. [got to go back through his columns now]. How much is he playing with the word “source”?? Source of what? Multiple things are possible.

ps – I would like to see Miranda Otto as Valerie Plame rather than Uma – gentler looks

Mary – 100

Nice. …”With drawings. Escherring in a ..”

Too cute. LOL.
—–
There ARE 10 John Does unNamed…it was, patently and obviously, a f***ing CONSPIRACY.

Bush, Cheney, Adder-ington, Gonzo, Libby, Rove, Rice, Hadley, Meirs…does it matter EXACTLY who? Excpept in a technical charge-bringing capacity?
Round ‘em up. They are the ‘usual suspects’ after all.
—–
I will say that imho, Bush had a direct role; either/both Bobby’s N/W ‘primary source’.
—-
No disrepect; you all are great dissecting this hall of mirrors.

As a citizen. We’ve been treasoned. Next to nothing has been confirmed ‘officially’ about this. It’s just so frustrating; we can all see it. We know basically what happened. Prosecutions seemingly stalled. No impeachment hearings, let alone Articles drawn. These bozos are WAY beyond even Nixon’s pale. TREASON, high crimes well beyond misdemeanors…

And I’m pissed.

just sayin’…
—–
Sorry for the rant.
—
Lot of typing there. Scanning thru comments, lhp has a nice outline of events, imho.

They forget that everyone has to be on the same page when lying & not elaborate or stray from the script. When they slip up, the always helpful media who have probably received the same memos interprets what they REALLY meant to say. If any right winger suddenly had a nervous breakdown while on a cable news show & spilled their guts with the actual truth, the sheep are so well programmed their brains would immediately delete anything but spin.

5 Canadians killed in Lebanon from airstrikes by Israel.

At what point in our society did we decide that taking no responsibility for the consequences of our actions was even remotely acceptable?

When Republicans started getting away with it?

Or maybe I have that backwards…

And president dipshit needs to enjoy his braindead hamster wheel bicycle crap without the rest of our world being involved.

Giving myself a half hour break before getting on with prep for impending arrival of family for birthday party, so forgive if I repeat what anyone else has already commented.

What I wondered is, who, among all the players in this tale, is Novak least likely to have spoken to in the intervening months/years since he testified before the grand jury or met with Fitzgerald? Assuming you can believe that he is telling the truth when he says he hasn’t spoken to his primary source since whenever – not sure I can, but it’s food for thought.

Russert could have done a much better job of putting Novak’s feet to the fire – Novak’s telling the story with the benefit of hindsight, which allows him to spin things his way.

Sad to say that the average person watching probably believes Novak when he says that Fitzgerald didn’t believe there was an underlying crime, and that’s why no other indictments.

Sorry, Bob – if that interview was meant to rehabilitate you and open the phone lines between your office and the “unnamed sources,” that used to be on your speed-dial, I think it failed. *G*

5 Canadians killed in Lebanon from airstrikes by Israel.

Does this mean Canada can retaliate against Tel Aviv?

Who used the “war on error”? If ONLY the administration gave the War on Error 1/100th of the care, attention and resources that they have devoted to the War on Terror. *s* I guess WOE didn’t get the same lobbying as WOT.

What needs to fit in the redact? No way it can be GWB? I don’t think the Novak bits rule Bush out – I can just see him saying to Novak – hey, we got took, see, there were these “con men” uh, that’s how my CIA briefer explained it to me Novie, “con men” you see, they, well, they conned us. …

I’ve just finished the Attaturk thread. INteresting stuff.

“At what point in our society did we decide that taking no responsibility for the consequences of our actions was even remotely acceptable? For shame.”

>>>>>>>

Beyond Mr. Sputtering Liar on MTP this morning and his lack of accountability, we now present to you the greater ME in flames.

For shame indeed.

At what point in our society did we decide that taking no responsibility for the consequences of our actions was even remotely acceptable?

That would be December 12, 2000.

I have a sense that Bush did not meet directly with Novak but the Plame outing was his brain child. He left it up to Rove and Cheney to work out the details. He just came up with the dumbshit idea.

As a citizen. We’ve been treasoned. Next to nothing has been confirmed ‘officially’ about this. It’s just so frustrating; we can all see it. We know basically what happened. Prosecutions seemingly stalled. No impeachment hearings, let alone Articles drawn.

Which is precisely why suggest we start making it hot for Scooter an everyone around him. It is unreasonable to expect Fitzgerald to do this by himself. The legal part of this is just one part, we have to change the political culture that made this possible. That is why we have to start making it hot for Scooter and all his supporters. So far there has been no price to supporting Scooter.

Sorry to be such a blogwhoring spammer, but I think we should think about the ways we can exert pressure.

At what point in our society did we decide that taking no responsibility for the consequences of our actions was even remotely acceptable?

That would be December 12, 2000.

preach it brother

Pierre, SD 117 yesterday– the hottest day ever recorded.

nah, global warming is not real.

no accountability there, either.

Thanks, emptywheel. Drat those redactions! “Clstrfck” fits, but I don’t think a good Regis graduate would refer to Bush that way. One additional point. IIRC, the “source’s” conversation with Woodward was before Wilson’s op ed came out, not after. Do we know when Novakula’s conversation with his “primary” source was? If it was after the op ed, then Novak would know from JW’s own words that he was sent by the CIA but was not himself CIA.

Oh, and for everybody else, don’t look for any of those Does to be private citizens. This is a Bivens action. Only state actors can deprive someone of their constitutional rights, and trying to add a non-state actor under a conspiracy theory would needlessly complicate matters. Novak will be a witness; he doesn’t have to be a defendant.

OT just a wee bit, but if you haven’t seen this Tom Tomorrow cartoon yet, you really oughta *g*

http://www.workingforchange.co…..emid=21043

it’s almost 10 at night in downtown Baghdad but it’s still at 99ºF

I think that this mess also speaks to the underlying belief that any ‘work’ women engage in outside the home is without value. Surely Val’s work was just a pastime and ‘real’ men don’t get sent on junkets by the wife.

lhp – do you really think Novakula could have cited Shrub as his source to the GJ and it would’ve stayed quiet? This would’ve been such explosive information in the hands of the jurors that I doubt one of them wouldn’t have leaked somehow, someway by now – just my 2 cents….

I’m also betting on Hadley. He’d met with Pollari in Sept. ‘02 and knew all the nitty-gritty on the Martino con’job cited by Novak – plus he was reportedly expecting to be indicted along with Scooter at that time….

Well, y’all will be proud to know that I am paying for a goof. Just went to the car to get started for the gawf course, and it’s dead. Apparently I mashed the trunk-release button on the key-fob while gathering up my groceries yesterday, the trunk’s been open ever since (just not enough that you can tell by sight), and of course the battery’s died.

Grrr. Really needed to smack the hell outta something this afternoon. ESPECIALLY since only us little people pay immediately for our mistakes.

OFG, if you ever find yourself in sunny southern californy, please come visit. Safe journey.

OT- I’m sorry if someone else has posted this. I know Wayne is not particularly know for his accuracy, but then again, the MSM isn’t particularly know for accurate and full reporting either.

July 16, 2006 — EXCLUSIVE TO WMR. Our intelligence sources in Lebanon have reported to us exclusively that Israel is now using poison gas and depleted uranium shells on towns in the south of Lebanon.

http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/

I think Marsden’s purpose is to float false scandals to divert us from the real ones and discredit the real ones.

Lotus 151 -

OY, I hate when that happens.

depleted uranium shells? makes one wonder who’s got the U235 that got removed … and what are they doing with all that U235?

Well, time for some comic relief, and who better than our Always Reliable Source?

Harris Taps Campaign Chest — for Home Makeover

Forgive me if this is too OT, but I just encountered trollishness(?) on previous thread & responded. Still steaming, so gonna repost here, with apologies. Would love to hear further comment, if only to help me calm down. I’m too mad to think straight *blush*
——————

This is partly for

John from El Norte at his 172 [Sunday Talking Head Thread]

but I hope others are still out there and will add their 2%

Okay, it may seem to you an utter waste, for people to spend a seemingly inordinate amount of time and attention on listening to and analyzing material they openly categorize as noxious, stupid, arrogant & self-serving,inane, boring, a waste of airtime, ya-dahXx-zzzzzz..

Nevertheless, even if YOU don’t seem to ‘get it’, there IS a point to doing all that, when you have a collection of minds such as those who tend to gravitate toward blogs like FDL.

I say !BRAVO! and a hearty !THANKS! to those with the stomach to plow through the stuff and the brains to analyze what they glean from it. These folks do NOT just sit there, dumbstruck by the spew from the tube. However,an awful lot of other folks do just that – maybe not consciously, but it’s well documented that most people use tv as their main news-source.

Therefore, what many unwary viewers are being ’spoon-fed’ by the media informs, and MISinforms, their opinions and actions, their decisions how or even whether to vote.

FDL bloggers, bless them, are among the most tireless, dedicated, and well-informed patriots you’ll find anywhere – spreading the word, sounding the alarm, calling mainstream media to task when they fail to do their jobs.

They are the ones gathering facts that fortify meaningful questions with which the rest of the populace can skewer laggard or crooked politicians, show their appreciation for those who DO CARE about their mission to serve the public good, and decide how to cast their vote. These viewer/bloggers perform a critical service for the rest of the country, by helping people know the difference between important facts and contorted, dangerous fiction.

In short, if more people back before the 2000 election had been paying attention, and doing what FDLers choose to do independently and together, today’s world might very well be in a lot better shape than it is right now. Alas, I would give anything that a certain nekkidemperor merely had responsibility over clearing his backyard brush pile, rather than strategizing the future of our whole world.

I’ll allow you one thing. If you meant to urge us all not to vegetate in front of the tube in our jammies for the rest of our lives, that’s your perogative. Rest assured, I truly don’t think that’s a danger among FDL fans.

oh how funny.

here I came a-ranting, right after lotus calls for comedybreak.

that helps.

thanks lotus ;->

it’s just – too hot to weed – then this ** showed up ‘n, pant pant.

luv you guys!

“A true journalist would err on the side of caution and not publish anything to do with a CIA employee’s identity. A true journalist knows that their job is to inform the public, not to be a propagandist for a party or administration.”

And yes, Novak is not and never has been a “true” journalist, as much as he’s been a GOP hack, willing to publish whatever his reptilian masters ask him to. Novak has been playing this game for decades.

This Rove to Novak schemery has been on display before. Rove was fired by Bush I for it.

I’m no lawyer, so I don’t understand why Novak was not named in her lawsuit, but what really gets me is that, of all the people involved in this, Novak is the one most directly responsible for outing Plame; he exposed her in the press. And yet, he’s the one person who appears to have been allowed to skate away free and continue to be able to lie his ass off about his role. Had Novak not wrote that column, or simply, wrote the column but not mentioned the part about Wilson’s wife, none of this may not have occurred. He could have referred to her in any number of ways, other than Wilson’s wife.

But Novak went with the storyline given to him by Rove, that Wilson’s wife “sent” him, even though there was evidence to the contrary. The paranoid, Nixonian Bush administration ginned up in their thick skulls that somehow Wilson had it out for them on principle, and that he got his wife to authorize a trip for him to got to Niger as ammo to use against them. Novak printed Wilson’s wife’s name because that what he was asked to do!

I can’t bear to see this man on TV either, but I forced myself to watch it, just to see what new lows this scumbag and DC bottom feeder would reach, and he did not disappoint. Novak should be condemned at every stop, for exposing the name of someone risking her life to keep this country safe, “in time of war.” He should not be able to surface without being questioned as to having sold out his country in the name of politics.

I know people on this site are big fans of Fitz! but I’m not. Nothing against him. Again, I’m not a lawyer and I don’t know all the legal maneuverings and manipulations at play here. But until Fitz brings home some Bush admin, bacon here, as far as I am concerned the game ain’t won yet. I am finding it very hard to swallow that, after all of this, the only person in the dock is Libby, and that for obstruction. The idea that this whole affair may close out with no one other than the pipsqueak Libby behind bars just angers the hell out of me.

I mean, let’s face it: if this had happened under a democratic admin, and say some dem friendly “journalist” had published the name of a CIA operative in an obvious attempt to support the admin’s political battle to cover up lies that got us into a disastrous war…well, the consequences are frightening. A hell of a lot more would have happened, than is happening now. And the key perpetrator, the “mouthpiece,” would not be going around giving genteel interviews from the likes of Russert focusing on how he got away with it all.

(flapping fan at Adie ;-})

anchorface on msnbc just reminded me that there are real people on the ground that are being affected by the conflict.

thanks so much.

Adie– thanks for that. If I could, I would take a long walk on the beach, dip my toes in, get a pedicure and manicure, visit for a long while with my family and friends, smell the roses, taste the salt air, make my favorite dinner and sleep like an angel only to dream of redecorating and other stuff.

I try to take care of myself and others. But til my placid existence is possible, I will stay involved and keep my ire up so that I never forget what can happen when we, as a nation, are uninformed and don’t vote or care.

Los Angeles hasn’t seen its morning fog for several weeks – usually it’s going in and out by now. If it isn’t global warming, it’s a good imitation.

Oilfieldguy, drive friendly down there in Baja OK, now! (And I wish the drivers in OK drove friendlier around people with TX plates; some of them seem to think anyone with TX plates is fair game.)

Lotus #157

Would that be Kathrine Harris’ artificially enhanced chest?

bless you, lotus

I’m well past that age, & sitting here in A/C splendour, tho I did manage to get the jammies changed.

I used to have to slog my way, alone, thru all those programs, so I’d be able to ‘counter’ them with my own contacts. Then I discovered FDL, and turned ‘lazy’. You guys are wonderful. No troll’s gonna get past aunt adie without a few scratches *g*

September 8, 1974.

And now I must return to studying.

1,207 DAYS AND THE KILLIN’ GOES ON AND ON AND…

OK folks, can somebody advance where we’re at if it’s the Shrub who talked ta Novakula? Does that mean, not only that no one can be indicted for the leak itself but that there is no underlyin’ crime here?

Can we figure on a firestorm when it comes out that the POTUS outed a CIA operative? Does Fitz now advance a report to Congress and the justice department, make a deal with Scooter and jest walk away…or do we now get ta the point that Fitz’s only option, if he thinks the system has been manipulated, is to go political and public?

Boy, are we and a vat a shit right now…can anybody trace the Walker-Bush family back ta Caligula??!!!

KEEP THE FAITH AND TAKE NO PRISONERS, THE GENEVA CONVENTIONS DON’T APPLY TO REPUBLICANS!!

well, condi was certainly sporting her best Pravda pumps this morning.

clark says: “I’m no lawyer, so I don’t understand why Novak was not named in her lawsuit…”
July 16th, 2006 at 11:06 am

Here’s why Novak was not named as a defendant: from BarbaraB’s 10:46 post above: “Oh, and for everybody else, don’t look for any of those Does to be private citizens. This is a Bivens action. Only state actors can deprive someone of their constitutional rights, and trying to add a non-state actor under a conspiracy theory would needlessly complicate matters. Novak will be a witness; he doesn’t have to be a defendant.”

Sharkbabe @136 always gets to the heart of the matter..gotta love it

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5185624.stm

New Lebanon air strikes kill 23

Israeli air raids have killed at least 23 people in south Lebanon hours after Israel’s prime minister warned the area would come under further heavy attack.

At least 16 died in the city of Tyre, while strikes on a border village killed at least seven, including five with Canadian and Lebanese citizenship.

More than 120 Lebanese have died since clashes with Israel began on Wednesday.

Earlier, eight civilians died and dozens were hurt after Hezbollah rocket fire on Israel’s city of Haifa.

Adie at 159-

Mr. from El Norte sure seemed to have a bone to pick. I don’t have a TV and I haven’t missed it, but I come and read FDL because they do the dirty work for me. My head asplode when I try to listen to the talking heads, and for some reason reading their nonsense is more emotionally possible for me. Mr. fEN also seems to be missing out on some key tips for healthy living – “Know your Enemy”, and “Keep your friends close, your enemies closer” (although I prefer to think of the heads and the administration as opponents or challengers, given that we are so far still all citizens of the same country).

Gingrich, with his attempt at polarization for political expediency, is demonstrating more of his linguistic tricks to jerk the rubes around for fun and profit…What a big piece of low-hanging rotten fruit he is.

May Air Force One be in flight the next time he leaves it by the back door.

PJ Evans -

Thinking the same thing this morning. 8:00 at the beach in Venice and a scorcher. Where is the fog, I wondered…

Why does Newtie wanna wait 6 weeks for that joint session of the ‘critters? Half the globe could go up and settle back in cinders by then!

Not that the ‘critters would be in any way useful to stop it. . .

Welcome to the New World Order

-Love Poppy Bush

“Man walks along the railroad tracks
He’s goin’ someplace, and there’s no turnin’ back
The highway patrol chopper comin’ up over the ridge
Man sleeps by a campfire under the bridge
The shelter line stretchin’ around the corner
Welcome to the New World Order
Families sleepin’ in their cars out in the Southwest
No job, no home, no peace, no rest
No rest!”

-Ghost of Tom Joad by Bruce Springsteen

msnbc just showed video of a distraught woman from Tyre repeatedly blaming bush for this.

oh, to be wrapped in the blissful fog of early morning CA again…

Darkblack on Newt:

“What a big piece of low-hanging rotten fruit he is.”

No wonder he is sooooooo slick. It is the decaying matter.

-GSD

I did have to google my Escher spelling, but I credit MattO’s stairs for making me think of it last night.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

OT – immunity. I don’t know anything about this, but appreciated the input on the threads. Here’s what I would be thinking about if it was a couple years back and I couldn’t get the Wilsons to go to a real expert and I was trying to think of an avenue. I did a quick google and looked at the headnotes at a couple of the links, but that’s all.

Still, it seems to me that there has not really ever been any claim, even at the Presidential level, that immunity extends to criminal actions, especially knowing criminal actions, especeially criminal actions resulting from a conspiracty to comment criminal actions.

The Wilsons aren’t prosecutors and can’t bring criminal actions. HOwever, I would wonder why they would be prohibited from arguing that their claim for damages is based upon prohibited criminal activity. They can’t prosecute the crime. They can claim that criminal behavior is the basis for their claim, though, can’t they?

They would, in essence, have to prove up the claim that Fitzgerald isn’t going after – but why shouldn’t they get a shot at that? The jury would have a bifurcated approach – with different standards of review, but why not let the Wilsons put on trial the issue of whether their injury stems for an unprosecuted criminal action?

It seems to me that there have been several cases that address the issue of criminal activity as not being protected by immunities or privileges. Even if the original source as Bush, but definitely if the original source was Cheney or if either of them (or both) were conspirators to the ultimate fruition and cover up of the crime, the novel question would be — is any elected official truly above the criminal laws?

Can immunities, qualifed or even absolute, that relate to performance of official acts, ever be deemed to extend to protect, as official acts, criminal violations of the laws of the United States? If not, then if those criminal violations also cause civil damages to a citizen whose Constitutional rights are deprived by the criminal actions of officials – then isn’t that very different in kind and nature than “mere” civil suits.

I think this would present a very different issue than Nixon v. Fitzgerald – where there was no allegation that, in taking a path to revenge the President knowingly broke a criminal statute. For example, if Nixon had shot Fitzgerald in the face instead of firing him . . . *g*

For example, in Gravel v. US, the Court discusses the absolute immunity conferred by the Speech and Debate clause, vis a vis the impact of illegal actions on citizens.

Those cases [referring to prior Speech & Debate immunity cases]do not hold that persons other than Members of Congress are beyond the protection of the Clause when they perform or aid in the performance of legislative acts. In Kilbourn, the Speech or Debate Clause protected House Members who had adopted a resolution authorizing Kilbourn’s arrest; that act was clearly legislative in nature. But the resolution was subject to judicial review insofar as its execution impinged on a citizen’s rights as it did there. That the House could with impunity order an unconstitutional arrest afforded no protection for those who made the arrest. The Court quoted with approval from Stockdale v. Hansard, 9 Ad. & E. 1, 112 Eng. Rep. 1112 (K. B. 1839): “`So if the speaker by authority of the House order an illegal act, though that authority shall exempt him from question, his order shall no more justify the person who executed it than King Charles’s warrant for levying ship-money could justify his revenue [408 U.S. 606, 619] officer,’” 103 U.S., at 202 . 11 The Speech or Debate Clause could not be construed to immunize an illegal arrest even though directed by an immune legislative act. The Court was careful to point out that the Members themselves were not implicated in the actual arrest, id., at 200, and, significantly enough, reserved the question whether there might be circumstances in which “there may . . . be things done, in the one House or the other, of an extraordinary character, for which the members who take part in the act may be held legally responsible.” 103 U.S., at 204 (emphasis added).

Granted, it is Speech & Debate clause discussion of immunity, but it is a criminal acts authorized by an immune source that impinge on a citizen’s rights case. And I think it makes it clear that, even where we have a Constitutionally MANDATED ABSOLUTE immunity, there is an open question of whether “extraordinary actions” (and in the context of the discussion – those seem to be criminal actions impinging on a citizen) that might result in liability even in the face of “absolute” immunity.

After over and over hearing lipservice to: The President is not above the law I’d like to see the arguments made as to there being an “absolute immunity” for the Vice President to violate, or conspire to violate, a criminal statute written by Congress to protect individuals. I don’t see why the Wilsons are foreclosed from getting into whether or not the Intel Ident. Act was violated in connection with their claim. It’s not res judicata – it’s not even charged anywhere else. Just bc Fitzgerald dropped it, doesn’t mean they can’t premise a part of their civil claim on their ability to prove, to criminal standards, violation of the criminal act — should it?

I’m wondering.

msnbc just showed video of a distraught woman from Tyre repeatedly blaming bush for this.

the Preznit probably just laughed and called the city Flat Tyre

Angie, PJ and jennyFTB – We had a weird May here in SoCal, all our June Gloom turned into May Grey and then June turned right into September, skipping our spring months, July and August. It was 108 yesterday here in the foothills of the mountings with DC-like humidity. The fog is in Pismo Beach. And Washington.

heh, heh. hey, Puti- poot, what’s for dinner?

Anyone else think that Katherine Harris’ chest has been tapped multiple times by multiple Republicans?

-GSD

sherocket 172

Well said. I hardly watch anymore myself, now that I have FDL. Can’t stand the T’heads, & the supposed unbiased “anchors” drive me stark raving nuts. “Tweetie”’s utterly without shame. Sorry, dawg-lovers (I love ‘em too, honest!), but Tweety reminds me of a brainless, hyper Husky that you wouldn’t dare put in the lead unless you wanted your sled wrapped around a tree. Idiot! Then there’s El Pompus Dobbs.

Enuf! Thanks everyone. I can’t wait to catch up on all the good stuff on this thread. How wonderful that the honourable mr n. went public so youse guys can have at him! This will be my recreational reading. (That and today’s “Opus”.) Love the graphic ! ;->

Does anyone know – has Harris only recently come unhinged or has she always been the very definition of bat-shit crazy?

Mary, I hope to goodness that, just because it makes perfect sense to me, your analysis isn’t all wrong, or ANY wrong.

Mommybrain — can’t help you on Harris’ mental-health history. Had never heard of her until 2000. But it’s clear that she’s 100% barking mad NOW.

mommybrain -

I suspect she’s always been batshit crazy but she’s never been challenged in quite this way before. She’s pretty much hanging out there by herself and it ain’t pretty watching a personality disintegrate…

*yep, I’m just a few steps from the ocean and can’t recall a summer in the past 20 years without our June Gloom. Lots o L.A. folks here, I see!

Sort of:

Congress can directly create laws under the 13th Amendment (outlawing slavery) that apply to everyone – whether public or private; likewise, if there is excessive entanglement between the state and the “private” activity then you can use the DP and EP clauses of the 14th Amendment; and, using its Commerce Clause powers, Congress can apply Constitutional norms to private behavior.

More interestingly here is the idea that RNovak WAS in fact an “agent” of the government in this instance, and thus just as liable for constitutional violations of rights. The gov’t cannot have private citizens act as its agents to do what it cannot do, especially when it involves actions at the government’s direct behest. My guess is that you could non-frivolously make RNovak part of the suit under an agency theory, but they might have other legitimate reasons for not going that route.

But now I really will go back to studying.

hey pootie– we gotta have some of that special beleaguered caviar that mummy and poppy used to serve in Kennebunkport for our oil buddies… i even brought my special and lucky silver boot to scoop it up with– haven’t used it much in public, but i’m feeling pretty powerful and righteous right about now.

I used to think the whitecoats would come for her the day after the primary, but any more, I don’t think she’ll last that long. Could be any minute now.

when you are as rich as Katherine Harris, you get an awful lot of quirks, oddities and eccentricities overlooked …

angie, I can’t see Dubya being sophisticated enuff for caviar. Unless as bait for them big perch . . .

Sorry, OT, but… I don’t see a time for George Soros today… looks like it’s been moved to NEXT Sunday? It’s a very, very good book and I’m looking forward to the conversation… looks like next week, then?

Sorry about the OT, but it looks like the info next to the book has changed, plus there’s no update on the main page.

Elsewhere in the Middle East http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5185828.stm

Suicide bomber in Iraq kills 13

At least 13 people have been killed and 25 injured in a suicide attack in a crowded cafe in northern Iraq.

The explosion happened in a coffee shop in Tuz Khurmatu, a town 75km (50 miles) from Kirkuk.

Police chief Colonel Abbas Mohammed Amin said the bomber asked for a glass of water before detonating himself.

Mr Amin said the cafe was close to a Shia mosque in an area populated by Turkmen, and warned that the number of people who had died could rise.

He added rescuers were searching through the rubble for survivors.

In another developments, a senior official from the Iraqi oil ministry was kidnapped on Sunday as he left a meeting in Baghdad, the second high-profile abduction in the capital in two days.

The country’s Olympic Committee chief, Ahmed al-Hadjiya, was kidnapped with 30 others on Saturday.

I can personally vouch for Katherine Harris’ sanity.

-Jennifer Wilbanks

5 PM EDT for Soros, reader.

Linky, GSD? That sounds most intriguing.

OT (ha!)

Has anyone else noticed the alarming increase of the word “gi-normous”? When did this creep into our lexicon and why didn’t I get the memo?

yer right of course, lotus, let him eat borscht– mebbe it’ll remind him of blood.

JennyFTB – If it was anyone but Harris, I’d wish for intervention from any remaining staff or friends. You’re right, it’s not pretty watching her spin in full view of everyone.

But it is Harris and so I’ll take my schadenfreude whereever I can find it. I wonder if it’s her conscience (telltale heart) whispering bad nothings in her ear? I remember that right after she was elected to Congress she blurted out some classified information at a press conference from a classified briefing she’d recieved earlier. I think that was the first inkling, for me.

I am afraid that the woman running after Drieir’s seat is in a similar vein.

“Ginormous” … hmm, maybe a year or so ago, Jenny?

OT– a very, very smart woman on the shuttle and “yet the mother of three” acc. to Tom Foreman on cnn.

WTF?????????

reader – Soros will be in person next week. This week is the preliminary discussion. Went out and bought several of Soros’ others after reading this one. Whoo hoo!

Here’s a reference from the Boston Globe to the Congressional investigation of the Clinton’s use of the WH Christmas Card list.

Congress reduces its oversight role
Since Clinton, a change in focus
By Susan Milligan, Globe Staff | November 20, 2005

WASHINGTON — Back in the mid-1990s, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, aggressively delving into alleged misconduct by the Clinton administration, logged 140 hours of sworn testimony into whether former president Bill Clinton had used the White House Christmas card list to identify potential Democratic donors.

In the past two years, a House committee has managed to take only 12 hours of sworn testimony about the abuse of prisoners at Iraq’s Abu Ghraib prison.

The jarring comparison reflects the way Congress has conducted its oversight role during the GOP’s era of one-party rule in Washington.

I bet that C. Amanpour all by herself raises the mean IQ of CNN’s “talent” by 10 points.

maybe so, lotus, but does she have any children ?

One, *ilson.

wow! two more and she can be an Astronaut !

Emptywheel,
If you are still here, I was away from the computer for a while. Just got back and saw your answer to my question. Thank you.

Two things. I am not wedded to the idea that the Woodward and Novak conversations took place AFTER the Wilson OP ED, I think they were probabaly already in the works before he published under his own name and could have happened before.

The redaction gap thing intriues me.

As for the other stuff, I think there were more than 3 sources too. I think Rove had a lot of background info, just from general reporting not for any single story. When he says “sources” for this story I think he is referring to those individuals that he quoted or paraphrased as opposed to those who may have given him general knowledge weeks months or years before.

lotus, hmm. Obviously I need to get out more *g*.

mommyb – I usually try to keep my schadenfreude in check because ultimately it’s a soul-killer for the schadenfreudER (the targets have already lost theirs) — but really, spring is bursting out all over lately… :)

ayldt

140 hours sworn testimony on an xmas list?

Feingold should have mentioned that tidbit when he asked to have Gonzales put under oath.

“If we can have 140 hours of under oath testimony on xmas lists under the Clinton admin, how about a few under oath hours involving multiple and ongoing felony violations of FISA?”

Jenny
I first heard Ginormous back in hte mid 1980’s, I think from a Navy SEAL. Maybe it was some knd of term of art originally? A contraction of two ideas? Dunno

Jenny from the Blog…199

“…why didn’t I get the memo?”

Obviously it’s a conspiracy designed to shelter you.

How many spaces for the redact? No chance that, if they knew it was a name that would be redacted at some point, they could have played?

angie, Of course women are first thought of in their breeding capacity.

lotus – about that outburst *blush*

What set me off was that I thot someone had written in last Sun. also, with virtually the same msg.
Don’t suppose you or anyone else remembers, do you?

Curious if it’s a known regular poster, or the same twit last week & again this. I didn’t remember seeing that name before. S’pose it’s not worth wasting time to find out, since he/she/it urged us to ‘get a life’ or some such.

Well, anyway, I feel better after exploding this week, ’cause I just fumed last week, & that obviously didn’t work. So he pulled the chain twice before I bit. Needed that burst of adrenaline.

thanks again.

Lotus,

One of my made up quotes.

Although Khaddaffy, Gary Busey and Charles Manson speak well of Harris and her mental capacity.

-GSD

I really am studying too :-)

http://www.mtannoyances.com/?p=327

Origin of “Ginormous”
Hey there. My wife, as well as some of my other friends, have lists of words whose mere mention gives them the proverbial “willies.” My acquaintance Brittney, for example (whom I would love to meet personally someday), wrote once that the word snack sets her teeth on edge.

Well, I’ve found in my conversational experiences with these “verbally sensitive” friends and family members that the slang adjective ginormous tends to appear on these lexigraphic “blacklists” more often than not. Hmm—very interesting. In this blog post we shall define this offbeat and colorful word and investigate its etymological origins.

The Oxford English Dictionary defines the adjective ginormous as “very large, simply enormous; excessive in size, amount, etc. (esp. in comparison with one’s expectation).”

Technically, ginormous is what is called a portmanteau term; that is, a word that is a result of the fusion of two other words. As I’m almost positive you already know, ginormous is a portmanteau of the following two adjectives:

ginormous = gigantic + enormous

The adjective ginormous is also what linguists call a neologism, which refers to a word, term, or phrase that has been recently created.

How does one use ginormous in everyday speech? Let me provide you with two representative example sentences:

“That Mandisa can definitely sing, but I must say that she looks ginormous wearing those blue jeans,” Rachel told Carlos.

The lead engineer looked up from his monitor with a look of grave concern etched on his face. “Anna, our server security log files are ginormous. Have you seen anything funky on our network in the past 30 minutes or so?”

Fine. On to matters of “first appearance.” The OED cites the first published appearance of ginormous as occurring in the book Dictionary of Forces Slang 1939-1945, by Eric Partridge, et al. The original publication date for this book is 1948; as can be evidenced by my hyperlink, this volume has been reprinted several times and is still available today through resellers.

Although I have not read the book, from what I’ve gleaned in my research the Dictionary of Forces Slang is a (surprise!) dictionary of slang used by Allied armed forces during World War II. It looks like a really cool title; I’d love to get my filthy mitts on a copy of it.

Anyway, it appears to my amateur linguist mind that ginormous has as its etymological roots World War II Allied military slang. That’s awesome! I enjoy colorful etymological stories like that.

Have a good one; I’ll catch you on the flip.

Oh, I thought it was pure slang. Just looked it up:

Ginormous: blend of gigantic and enormous. Well, yeah…

Gee, I hate these conspiracies!

McGee at 149

Yes I think the GJ would not have leaked. Believe me, if they were going to leak, they would have done so by now.

Heaven bless them.

They aretrue patriots, doing their duty and avoiding temptation to grab their 15 minutes of fame. When this is all over, I hope they get the round of applause they deserve so very much

Mary says: “Still, it seems to me that there has not really ever been any claim, even at the Presidential level, that immunity extends to criminal actions, especially knowing criminal actions…Can immunities, qualifed or even absolute, that relate to performance of official acts, ever be deemed to extend to protect, as official acts, criminal violations of the laws of the United States?”
July 16th, 2006 at 11:26 am

I realize that this case that I am about to cite is not a perfect fit (for purposes of discussing immunity for commission of criminal acts by a President or Vice President while in office) because of the fact pattern of the case, but how germane is U.S. v. Nixon (1974) to our present discussion?

As we delve further, please read this Wikipedia entry about Aaron Burr: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Burr

The entry does not explicitly state when Aaron Burr was charged with “multiple crimes, including murder, in New York and New Jersey…” going on to say that he “was never tried in either jurisdiction.” It appears that charges were filed before “he escaped to South Carolina, where his daughter lived with her family, but soon returned to Washington, D.C. to complete his term of service as Vice President.” His term ended in March 1805.

Whoa, my comment above about breeding capacity originally included a “slow burn”
but it was in those pointy brackets, so I guess it didn’t show.

Valerie Plame Wilson is the mother of twins, Angie. She might have been very smart despite that fact! lol!

Can you freakin’ believe it…

This bit of a press gaggle with Condeleeza Rice on AF One on July 14, 2003 after the Novak column has always intrigued me. She is trying her damnedest(unsuccessfully) to steer the press into asking why Joe Wilson got sent to Niger in the first place, but nobody bites:

DR. RICE: The IAEA reported it I believe in March. But I will tell you that, for instance, on Ambassador Wilson’s going out to Niger, I learned of that when I was sitting on whatever TV show it was, because that mission was not known to anybody in the White House. And you should ask the Agency at what level it was known in the Agency.

Q When was that TV show, when you learned about it?

DR. RICE: A month ago, about a month ago.

Q Can I ask you about something else?

DR. RICE: Yes. Are you sure you’re through with this?

Seems clear to me from this that EVERYBODY had their marching orders on this, and perhaps some did not follow directions as well as others (eg Rice) to let the press do the digging, not offer it to them.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news…..711-7.html (about 4/5 of the way down).

Harris has always been a couple of bricks short of a full load (in the head). But until recently, she has always been ‘under the protection’ of the Repub mightly wurlitzer, — given her role in 2000 — and everyone looked the other way. Now that she is no longer toeing the Repub line by getting out of the race, the public is allowed to see how batshit crazy she is, and how incapable of managing a campaign she is.

Her natural incapabilities just speak volumes that she could not have been in charge of the 2000 Florida election events. Yet another Right Wing tool tossed aside once the need to use is gone.

Not that she doesn’t deserve her own karma. Her own unprincipled, craven desire to be on the side of power put her where she is.

My 224, sorry, it was July 11, not July 14, 2003 for the press gaggle.

EPU, that’s pretty cool!

The word is like chalk on a blackboard for me, I gotta admit. :)

EPU
Forces Slang, that would explain why I heard it from a Navy guy

The adjective ginormous is also what linguists call a neologism, which refers to a word, term, or phrase that has been recently created.

How can a Paleo-Dumbo like Commander Codpiece be responsible for so many god awful neologisms?

Op99

That was the conversation I was referring to in my “war gaming” above

Katherine Harris is just another used rubber on the lawn of George W. Bush’s frathouse of life.

-GSD

The word “referenced” does it for me.
What ever happened to plain old “referred to”?

In a case with a wealth of pathetic ironies the Wingnut/Novak “But Ames outed her first” whine is the most pathetic. From Dana Priest via Wikipedia:

Plame’s case is different in that she was burned — not once, but twice. The first time was by Aldrich H. Ames, the CIA turncoat who is believed to have given the Russians the name of every covert operative in the Soviet/East European Division over 10 years beginning around 1985. Not knowing exactly whom he had outed, the CIA recalled hundreds of operatives, including Plame, for their safety. (my emphasis added)

So I guess it is now “fair game” to reveal any of these identitites in the national press no matter what current cpaacity or assignment they are working on. And further – the whole Ames affair happened in the lie/counterlie-deception/counterdeception climate of the US/Soviet espionage game where neither side was ever sure of what was true and what was bullshit.

To trumpet this crap at this late date shows the blackened void at the heart of a truly desparate soulless flack.

Appreciative sucks in my NOT so humble opinion. “I’d be appreciateve if you…..” vs. “I would appreciate if you….”

Kathrine Harris, shows what I believe to be symptoms of classic bi-polar disorder.

Adie, I remember a similar comment or two from that guy a week or so ago — think he was EPU’d (or nearly) late one night. Maybe just a weekend troll, but you certainly did a niiice number on him.

Pat Buchanan is saying on McLaughlin (PBS) that Israel is making a huge mistake in choosing to prosecute and execute the latest Middle East catastrophe.

New thread.

I’m gonna say bye for now, cause I got to get some work done, which will never happen if I continue to have fun with all of you

Stephen – I don’t know when the Burr indictments would have been other than sometime after the shooting.

Re: the Nixon privilege case – I think the context is that there has historically, in all of these areas, been a reluctance to extend privileges or immunities so far as to allow them to be insulators for criminal activity. It is, as you say, different facts, different affirmative defense, etc. But it also ties to the very recent Jeffereson case as well.

I liked the references in the Gravel case bc they also tied to the impact on a citizen of the illegal actions, but another case is the Agnew “problem” that precipitated Bork’s op about VPs being amenable to judicial process. He was was being investigated by a U.S. Atty for allegedly receiving payoffs when Agnew was governor.

GSD at 197 says:

“I can personally vouch for Katherine Harris’ sanity.

-Jennifer Wilbanks”

LOL!

And so do Pammy and Ann! *g*

Reflexives-for-objectives fry myself!

For the Clinton Rules – Christmas card investigation noted above.

From a great article in the Boston Globe last year:

Back in the mid-1990s, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, aggressively delving into alleged misconduct by the Clinton administration, logged 140 hours of sworn testimony into whether former president Bill Clinton had used the White House Christmas card list to identify potential Democratic donors.

In the past two years, a House committee has managed to take only 12 hours of sworn testimony about the abuse of prisoners at Iraq’s Abu Ghraib prison.

…sigh ….. but the real kicker was the Socks investigation:

1995: Rep. Dan Burton (R-IN), then chair of the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee, investigated whether taxpayers were footing the cost of stationery and postage for the fan club dedicated to President Clinton’s cat, Socks. (They were not – and it turns out Barbara Bush’s dog Millie had a fan club too.)

Jenny 199

Believe it or not, the surgeon at Texas A&M who did Romeo’s necropsy described the bloodclot that killed him “gi-normus”.

Jenny – I hold two ideas about Harris simultaneously – indeed about anyone for whom I feel the shiver. One is deep compassion for the human, for what she is going through so publicly. The psychic pain alone, of knowing you did something very wrong and that many people hold you in contempt for it, even if you only know it subconsciously, must be nigh crippling. Her actions make it pretty clear she’s a clueless Barbie doll, not so much introspective.

Compassion schadenfreude = weightlessness.

lhp 231, that’s what reminded me, lol.

OT but relevant (to me anyway)-

News at Noon in British Columbia – Israel raid in Lebanon kills eight (8) Canadians and wounds unknown number more – I’m sure Stephen (I worship George Bush) Harper still supports Israel’s “proportionate” response to being attacked –

let’s see now, 100-200 killed in Lebanon (including 8 Canadians) almost all civilians and woman and children

100 or so killed in Gaza – again mostly civilians

Israeli’s killed by Hizbollah = about 25, about half of them soldiers.

Israel sounds very restrained to me *cough*.

Huh, the plus sign showed up in preview.

should be

compassion plus schadenfreude = weightlessness

Mary 212

“140 hours sworn testimony on an xmas list?

Feingold should have mentioned that tidbit when he asked to have Gonzales put under oath.”

Every Congressional Democrat should mention that every time a hearing is cut short or not allowed, such as Conyers’ Downing Street Memo panel.

Saying that would be much more effective than “Can you imagine what they would have done if Clinton had . . . .”

BTW, that Globe article went on. I tried to indicate that it was clipped, but Wordpress ate my indication.

http://www.boston.com/news/nat…..le?mode=PF

They can use the “Socks Fan Club” investigation to break it up a little.

Anonymouse sources in the Bush Administration indicated that the investigation was necessary, “Everyone knows cats are reincarnated terrorists. Or maybe preincarnated.

lhp

In case you come back. Novak has said, at least, that his questions to Armitage (presumably) were in repsonse to Wilson’s hostility on MTP.

Also, keep in mind that Fitzgerald has mentioned a Libby meeting with a journalist on July 2, purportedly about the NIE leak.

I was pretty busy in the garage this morning working on a project but I had my little 5 inch TV on and was listening to the show. Wish I had a hand free to count each time NoFacts said he mis spoje or was taken out of context. What a contemptable piece of dog shit.

Mary says: “I don’t know when the Burr indictments would have been other than sometime after the shooting.”
July 16th, 2006 at 12:13 pm

That he was charged with murder and so forth while he was still Vice President tells us that the authorities at the time in New York and New Jersey didn’t think the high office which he held would be an impediment to prosecuting him for crimes committed while he served as Vice President.

I suppose that still leaves us with further exploration of the subject of civil actions for wrongful acts committed by a President or Vice President who either overtly engages in criminal or tortious conduct beyond the scope of official duties or who engages in illegal or tortious conduct (once again, beyond the scope of official duties) under color of federal law.

Mary and EPU — It is possible, but I think unlikely, that Nixon v. Fitzgerald could be distinguished if Bush were added as a defendant in the Wilsons’ case. Remember that absolute immunity is intended to protect a President against having to litigate the ultimate factual and legal issues. A complaint of illegality is not proof of illegality. As for EPU’s agency theory, don’t get me started on state action doctrine. Any standard that has eight or more tests for its application is per se incoherent. But if Novak is a state actor because he was deputized, then he would also be entitled to qualified immunity, and I think it would be much harder to demonstrate the necessary Bivens scienter in his case, undoubted dickhead though he is. As to either, the ultimate question is really strategic. How long do the Wilsons want to wait until they can start discovery? Don’t forget that immunity issues must be resolved at the outset. Bush would be back in Crawford before the Supreme Court got the chance to reconsider Nixon v. Fitzgerald, and Novakula would quite possibly have passed beyond the reach of service of process. No long arm statute covers Hell.

Extra thoughts on this thread:

first, recall that Ashcroft did not recuse himself until Dec 2003, which meant that the DOJ was full of former Nat’l Repubublican Committee people who were almost certainly passing info to their pals in the WH. (see Murray Waas June 6 or 8, 2006). That would help explan why it’s been so difficult to get evidence and charge a crime — these amoral toads had lots of knowledge about the investigation.

Personally, I tip my hat to any FBI agent who could stomach interviewing Libby, Rove, et al, while knowing full well that their reports would be given to Ashcroft, who would pass to the WH. This is beyond sinister.

Clark @ 159 – I feel your pain about being really, really frustrated that there seems to be no justice. But take some comfort in considering that Fitz and his group must be careful — CHS’s explanations at FDL have shown me how sharply focused and clearly targeted a successful indictment needs to be. Think of Fitz as a legal sharpshooter; ‘the good guys’ really have less latitude than the bad guys. Which is why The Good Guys have to be smarter, better, and tougher ;-)))

Totally agree with ember @ 141 — the WH toads insinuate that Joe Wilson isn’t a ‘real man’ and that no mom-of-two should be working. The irony, which I find wildly funny, is how many of those same jackasss would slobber over a lovely, brainy blonde like Ms Plame-Wilson. (Ummmm… except, of course, the WH guys who were/are clients of JimmyJeff.) I find it willdly funny that Joe Wilson is married to the lovely blonde that all the straight WH guys probably oogle. NO WONDER they’re pissed and whiny. Poetic justice ;-)))))

grandmatoo @ 119, I don’t honestly think these WH Repubs can distinguish between what’s good for the US and what’s good for their payola. They’re self-absorbed: MyBankAccount, My_McMansion, MyKickAssCar. Repub/Neocon ideology exalts selfishness.

Hope the whole US press calls Novak on the “Aldrich Ames” narrative as a fabrication designed to divert attention for crimes committed. Novak is to Murray Waas as a toxic puddle is to the Pacific ocean.

Assuming that Plame was working on WMD, and was focused on Iran, the news of this past week only served to deepen my own sense of just HOW HUGE a crime has been committed.

It may be a minor detail, but don’t forget that Novakula’s first public disclosure of Valerie Wilson’s CIA employment was not in the article he wrote. It was days earlier, to a stranger on the street.

Now as far as we know (*snort*) Novak is not CIA himself and was not cleared for that knowledge, so cannot be charged with the original leak. The criminal leaker must be farther upstream. It is not a crime for a journalist to publish leaked classified information.

But this is the first public airing of the Big Lie that Valerie “sent” her husband. And did Novakula say “facilitated” (also a lie, btw)? I think not.

“Wilson’s an asshole. The CIA sent him. His wife, Valerie, works for the CIA. She’s a weapons of mass destruction specialist. She sent him.“

These words need to be shoved in that pathological liar’s face until he chokes on them; they reveal him plainly to be the lying toad that he is.

Shorter Novak: “The Newsday story got its facts wrong, although they quoted me verbatim.”

Jesus, why does anybody in the SCLM give this little shitweasel the time of day anymore?

looseheadprop says:

July 16th, 2006 at 9:16 am

“So, can I conclude we have not been able to definitively eliminate Shrub as a suspect?

I thought maybe I was missing something that outright made it impossible or farfetched for Shrub to be the primary source for Woodward and Novak.”

Referencing the timeline (to back up ew’s #125 re Bush not being the mystery source):

The evening of Monday, July 7th, Bush was on his way to Africa, where he remained for the rest of the week. Novak has alleged (in one of his television appearances on Fox – I believe – in the last week) that his ‘hour long in-person’ interview with his “primary” source took place ‘just a few days’ after Wilson’s Sunday, July 6th op-ed was published. IF these statements by Novak happen to more or less match reality, Bush would be (physically) ruled out by these circumstances as the mystery “primary” source.

On the afternoon of Tuesday, July 8th, Bob Novak already knew Joe Wilson’s wife was named “Valerie” and that she was employed by the CIA [source: a friend of Wilson’s who chanced to speak with Novak when he met him walking down a street near the White House…].

[My money is on the “primary” mystery source interview taking place on Tuesday, July 8th (the same day Libby fed Judy at the hotel). And I also lean toward Hadley over Armitage, like Mad Dogs above. But I completely concur with Swopa and Emptywheel and others that Novak had all kinds of background information before his ‘hour-long’ interview with whomever (probably courtesy of Rove over the weekend). Just imagine how the blackberries and phones were lighting up on Sunday, July 6th between Dick in Wyoming and his watercarriers and Rove in wherever and his — after Wilson’s NYTimes op-ed, his appearance with Andrea Mitchell on Meet the Press (right in front of the very-connected roundtable guests that day) and the Washington Post article all hit together on the same morning. They had the wheels well set in motion for the week’s plot by Sunday night, I’d bet. Wouldn’t Judy Miller have had to plan to get to Washington from her home in New York on Monday in order to make the early Tuesday morning Libby meeting - by which time Libby has testified that he had already been given ‘permission’ to selectively leak the NIE by Cheney/Bush?]

And yes, Christy nails G.E. Russert’s unwillingness to follow-up except enough for “show.” Novak will not be exposing himself to any unfriendly interviewers — more proof that Russert is a partisan and biased interviewer who is ‘on their side’ on the big stuff (also exposed by the fact that Libby calculated and gambled that he could count on Russert to conceal, by hook or by crook, Libby’s lies about their conversation).

Paul Lukasiak is absolutely correct at #89 that there is NO indication in the Who’s Who listing that Wilson’s wife Valerie [who is listed as in a genealogy entry - as the person Joe married on a certain date with her first, middle and last (maiden) name given] ever again used her maiden name of Plame after her marriage, professionally, or otherwise…. That dog won’t hunt, Operative Rovak.

And yet another question no one who gets the opportunity to is asking Rovak publicly:

‘In your ‘hour-long’ interview with your “primary” source, did you take notes or record the conversation electronically?? And if so, did you turn that material over to the grand jury and Fitzgerald?’ Or did ‘the dog (conveniently) eat Novak’s homework’ day, weeks or months before he was requested to provide any such material to the grand jury?

When Novak said Fitz concluded “he already knew who my source was and concluded that no crime had been committed” set off my Spidey-senses.

Consider… the ONLY way the release of such information could NOT be considered a crime is if that person had THE AUTHORITY to release that information. Only two people have that authority: President Bush and (maybe) Dick Cheney.

So Novak has basically just revealed to the world that his source on Ms. Plame’s identity was either the President or Vice President of the United States.

Tell me I’m wrong.

According to The Boston Globe:

In 1997, Valerie Plame was called back to the U.S. when it was discovered her name appeared on a list of undercover agents supplied to the KGB by Aldrich Ames.”

Not exactly “public information”.

Yeah, right Bobby. “Ames” made Plame’s identity public, not you. Jackass. :(

Mugsy -

Novak is saying that. Repeat: NOVAK is saying that. Which means the chances that it is factual and true are 9 to 1 AGAINST. That is the case for MOST of what Novak says — which is why the only things that he says that we can trust at all are specific facts which can be independently verified from other sources. So, of course, people like G.E. Russert are very careful to avoid asking any such specific fact questions, which would help expose Novak’s bald-faced lies and deceptive parsing.

There is a key outstanding question that emptywheel pointed to above (#113): Did the New York Times (Anne Kornblut) MISTAKENLY state that Robert Novak has testified to the grand jury SINCE Libby’s indictment, or did Novak in fact return, as Rove has done. [Such a return engagement would rather challenge the notion that two years ago the slate had been wiped clean as to Novak’s sources and Novak’s involvement, which is the tale Rovak is out there peddling right now.] Novak isn’t volunteering the answer to that key question, and none of the Rove-friendly and/or submissive to Rove questioners who have been allowed to interview Novak are asking it…

pow wow

I’d have to go back and listen to it again, but I think Novak said in his Hume interview he took no notes or recording during the interview.

Muggsy

I don’t know whether you’re right or not. But there are two scenarios in which someone (Armitage, say) could have leaked Plame’s affiliation with CIA. 1) if he believed she was a non-covert analyst and he mentioned the affiliation or 2) if he didn’t leak her name on purpose. Given that Armitage has cooperated, so they say (though Jeff points out that Armitage’s friend’s comments to Novak could be interpreted as coaching), it is likely he convinced Fitz it wasn’t on purpose. Though that does sound rather flimsy.

Also, while Fitz has ceded that Cheney and Bush have the ability to declassify documents, how could you reasonably claim the right to declassify a covert ops’ ID without telling her?

PowWow – if Novak were telling the truth (a novel thought, that) about the hour-long interview with his primary source taking place a few days after Wilson’s OpEd appeared in the Times, it does not rule out Monday, July 7th as a possibility – I’m pretty sure the Sunday Times article appearing online the evening of Saturday, July 5th and being talked about almost immediately…

it seems to me that the President would have the legal right to declassify a covert agents status but common decency would require a warning to the agent… (yeah, yeah — I know — we are talking about George Bush here … )

So we now have the `Novak Criterion for Intelligence Personnel Disclosures:’ You can disclose covert operatives, unless the CIA Director himself calls you not to
publish.–
So now, the question to pose to Novak & friends:
`I just know the CIA Station Chief
in …., and I didn’t get a call from Tenet himself. So I can publish his name, can’t I?’

EPU’d BarbB – I was meaning to focus on Cheney’s status, but even so, if the Wilson’s were sitting in my office, I would do some research and see, even on the Pres. front.

I agree that the bar is there to prevent having to be hassled with factual/litigation issues and that’s why I don’t think a straight retaliation claim, even with the 1st and 5th ramifications gets you anywhere if there is an absolute immunity bar.

The only crack I see is to go the next step and claim an actual criminal violation as the basis for the claim – and claiming the violation of the Intel Ident act, IMO, bolsters the property argument under the 5th as well – there was a contractual obligation of the govt to protect the covert status, reflected in a law passed by COngress making it a crime for GOv to blow that cover.

I do think that it makes for a suddenly much more compelling argument on the immunities front if the Wilsons go ahead and toss out the pitch that they are going to prove up criminal violation of the Act as a part of their civil action. There is certainly language in lots of cases and historic docs taht indicates that immunities may fall before a claim of criminal action. Certainly, Exec Priv. fell in the face of criminal actions for Nixon.

It would, if nothing else, be awfully interesting if things went down that path. I really want to see the argument that the President can conspire to kill babies for organ transplants commit a criminal violation that violates a citizen’s consitutional rights and puts them at risk, and not have to respond to legal process.

It does all go to CHeney more than Bush anyway – but I would consider making that dive (that we’ll go into the criminal violations of the Intel Ident Act) if I could pull research together. IMO – it makes everything stronger for them. And I like the language in Gavel discussing earlier cases, if the origination was Bush or CHeney — the fact that the order given was immune does not make the following of that order immune.

Stronger may not = winner, but it is pretty darn hard to argue that a)violating criminal law is an official act, and b) it is not an impermissible encroachment on separation of powers for the Exec. actors to violate the law, and conspire to violate the laws, passed by COngress, with impunity under claim of immunity, when such violation disenfranchises an American citizen of their constitutional rights.

IMO, implicit in the US v Nixon case on privilege is the holding that, if the Pres had not complied, he would not have had immunity for non-compliance. Otherwise, the ruling was without real basis or effect. ?

fwiw

I always go to Waas for the real story. But First Novak himself in his 10/1/03 column says that the official contact, which is Harlow, at the CIA says Plame is “covered”.

While the CIA refuses to publicly define her status, the official contact says she is “covered” — working under the guise of another agency.
Novak 10/1/03

In July, I was interviewing a senior administration official on Ambassador [Joseph] Wilson’s report when he told me the trip was inspired by his wife, a CIA employee working on weapons of mass destruction. Another senior official told me the same thing.
Novak 9/29/03

On to Waas

The two officials told investigators they warned Novak that by naming Plame he might potentially jeopardize her ability to engage in covert work, stymie ongoing intelligence operations, and jeopardize sensitive overseas sources.

[…]

Moreover, one of the government officials who has told federal investigators that Novak’s account is false has also turned over to investigators contemporaneous notes he made of at least one conversation with Novak. Those notes, according to sources, appear to corroborate the official’s version of events.

[…]

Shortly after his column appeared, Novak seemed to suggest that the information about Plame was planted as part of a White House campaign. In an interview with Newsday reporters Timothy M. Phelps and Knut Royce, he said, “I didn’t dig it out, it was given to me. They thought it was significant. They gave me the name and I used it.”

Then Novak started to backtrack, giving the impression that the leak was more the result of his own initiative than from a White House source. He also claimed the Newsday reporters quoted him out of context, an accusation both reporters deny. (Full disclosure: Royce is my longtime friend.)
Waas 3/8/04

Royce and Phelps are sticking with Novak quote, say it was in context.

Mary@138: War on Error was me this morning :))

Thanks for that emptywheel – I could only stomach the first half of the Hume interview via YouTube. [Figures too - such a dishonorable character would never admit to ever having made notes in the first place, after they had been destroyed…]

McGee – I think perhaps my op-ed reference is slightly inaccurate – again emptywheel probably has that quote pinned down better than I do, somewhere – I substituted the op-ed for what I believe Novak actually cited, which was Wilson’s Meet the Press appearance on the same day. But in the scenario you cite, the difference is important as to timing. So if it was MTP, not the op-ed, from which it was ‘just a few days’ – Monday gets a little less likely, but still not impossible, of course, as you point out.

melior (in Austin) #256 -

That is no “minor detail” you cite! Thank you for the link and quote. I think this real-time verification of the knowledge of Bob Novak is very, very important. Kudos to the heads-up Wilson friend who engaged Novak in conversation on Pennsylvania Avenue. In reading the excerpt from Wilson’s book – it’s not crystal clear how close to the White House they were walking. The friend was heading to Wilson’s office, which is located a couple of blocks from the White House [if I’m interpreting that sentence in his book correctly]. Novak was walking in the same direction, and the friend assumed it was toward George Washington University, for the daily taping of the former Crossfire program (but he didn’t verify that with Novak). They walked together for a block or so. And then the friend (a stranger to Novak) went straight to Wilson’s nearby office and relayed the details directly to Wilson, ‘hot off the press.’ Wilson had the foresight to have his friend write down the information he heard from Novak, then and there. And then Wilson immediately proceeded to call CNN to try to hold Novak to account (obviously without success).

By July 10, Novak was apologizing (twice) to Wilson on the phone for blurting this (irrelevant as Wilson tried to emphasize) alleged information about Valerie out to a stranger on the street, while simultaneously trying to get Wilson to confirm Valerie was CIA… And Valerie alerted the CIA’s press liaison (by July 10?) about these conversations, so by that point in time, at least, the CIA should have been on-guard for and prepared to protect against the ongoing effort to force out into the open the identity of one of our clandestine CIA Agents.

As to the activity by the plotters on Sunday, July 6th – note that it was, I believe (without checking), on Sunday 7/6, that Armitage (I believe) called Carl Ford (I believe) at home to ask him to retrieve the state department’s INR Memo for review by Colin Powell – which Ford subsequently did in time for it to be aboard Air Force One on its way to Africa the next evening, July 7.

Late getting to the party ( as usual ) I just finished Novack’s sorry intervue. All I can day is he;s a prick.

On other matters: It seems urgent to everything good in America that someone civil or criminal just has to get to discovery at least – trial would be best.

IMO just getting everything out in the open so America can see is enough. A place in hell already awaits em . . .

Speak of the dickens…:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/7/16/14732/3082

Looks like if we want to hang our hopes on Anne Kornblut being accurate when she (and only she) reported that Robert Novak has testified again since Libby’s indictment, we are on very, very thin ice. [Except for the fact that she sounds like she’d have excellent and willing sources among the plotters who would be in a position to know that such a thing happened… Perhaps some inside information slipped out in that article that wasn’t supposed to?]

Kornblut appears to belong to the Novak school of biased political party promotion mislabeled as the reporting of a free and objective press.

Excerpt from Sunday’s Meet the Press interview, courtesy of RawStory (ew – this may be where you heard the assertion by Novak that no notes were taken, unless the Hume interview also covered that):

MR. RUSSERT: What were the ground rules of your interview?

MR. NOVAK: I have interviews all — I’m a reporting columnist as opposed to a thumb-sucking columnist, and I have all kinds of interviews with people where there is a tacit agreement that now — that I will not reveal the name. I sat down with this source who was not a — as I have said many times — was not a political gunslinger. We had a long talk, an hour-long talk, we’re the only people in the room. I didn’t have a tape recorder, I didn’t take notes. It’s the kind of tacitly, not-for-attribution interview that I do constantly as part of my work for the last half-century in Washington.

Novak hung himself with that Aldrich Ames statement. As soon as the transcript comes out, look it up.

We all burst out at the same time, here in my house. Trying to paraphrase from memory, Bob Novak said that

1) Valerie Plame wasn’t really a covert agent, so it’s no big deal, and
2) Aldrich Ames outed her before as a covert agent, anyway, so who cares?

So if Aldrich Ames outed her, how can these pinheads keep saying she wasn’t a covert agent? It seems a contradictory position. Perhaps he means that she was a covert agent but her status wasn’t well-protected. Be that as it may, it doesn’t help for him to say she has been outed before, because if she wasn’t protected, there would be no big deal to Aldrich Ames outing her, either, now would there?

Basically, he’s saying he’s only the second traitor to out her. Which is a much better position to be in.

It was Tenet. That’s why he had to resign. It will all seem so obvious when we hear it. Then everyone will say, “Yes, I’ve always said it was Tenet”.