did Karl Rove commit treason?

[albed]

It's pathetic enough that the liberals think they can whine, bitch and nag Bush into doing their bidding.


But when they try to use his kids for leverage it's just disgusting.


The losers have lost again and still they just can't understand why.

[floydian slip]

Remeber this from last year???

http://www.p2p-zone.com/underground/...ad.php?t=19590

But (not surprisingly) Tenet and the CIA were and remain much better at covert operations and planning ahead than the Bush administration ever was. Tenet and Pavitt actually prepared and left a clear, irrefutable and incriminating paper trail which not only proves that they had shunned and refused to endorse the documents, the CIA also did not support the nuke charges and warned Bush not to use them.

Where are those documents now? They're part of the Justice Department Plame investigation - and they're also in the hands of the Congressman who will most likely introduce and manage the articles of impeachment, if that becomes necessary: Henry Waxman (D), of California. If you would like to see how tightly the legal trap has been prepared, and how carefully the evidence has been laid out, I suggest taking a look around Waxman's web site at: http://www.house.gov/waxman/.

Its a 2nd term thing. All of the admins in recent history have been taken down a notch or all the way out during the 2nd term.


Kennedy - Bang Bang Bang
LBJ - Vietnam and knew better and wouldnt run.
Nixon - Watergate
Raygun - Iran Contra
Clinton - Whitewater, Lewinsky, Jones and the other women, Lying.

They are all fucking liars. Hillary will suck too!
Meanwhile our leaders are letting the corporations sell us out to China and India while our southwest is being turned into Mexico. We all need to get together and realize that Democraps and Repuglicans are dividing us to control us.

anyway...
As soon a Fitzgerald is done investigating start looking for the name Henry Waxman in the newzzzzz. He will be the hangman.

[theknife]

Karl Rove's problems show no sign of diminishing - quite the opposite:

White House deputy chief of staff Karl Rove did not disclose that he had ever discussed CIA officer Valerie Plame with Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper during Rove’s first interview with the FBI, according to legal sources with firsthand knowledge of the matter.

The omission by Rove created doubt for federal investigators, almost from the inception of their criminal probe into who leaked Plame's name to columnist Robert Novak, as to whether Rove was withholding crucial information from them, and perhaps even misleading or lying to them, the sources said.

this supports supposition that Prosecutor Fitzgerald is looking beyond the original leak at charges ranging perjury to obstruction of justice.

meanwhile, in a desperate bid to drive the story from the front pages, the administration has accelerated the naming of the new Supreme Court Justice to replace Sandra Day O'Connor up to tonight, with a prime time splash:

Television outlets were asked to broadcast Bush's announcement live at 9 p.m. EDT from the White House. Traditionally, even major appointments are made in daytime ceremonies, but the White House decided to go all out for the first Supreme Court nomination since 1994. The big splash also might divert attention from Bush senior aide Karl Rove's involvement in the CIA leak case that has caused Republicans to worry about Bush's standing in opinion polls.

a logical move - might distract the public briefly, but it's not gonna stop Patrick Fitzgerald. however, McClellan can sure use the break.

[malvachat]

I hope it's not all covered up.
US governments covering up stuff is becoming boring.
But of course they don't do things like that.
Whatever gave me that idea?

[malvachat]

Originally Posted by albed

The losers have lost again and still they just can't understand why.

You haven't lost anything yet.
But if You do,you will understand.
We'll all help you.

Sorry to keep picking on you.
I just can't help it.
You started it.

[theknife]

a group of CIA veterans took issue today with the GOP talking points vis a vis the Rove security breach:

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Eleven former intelligence officers say the leak of CIA officer Valerie Plame's identity may have damaged national security and the government's ability to gather intelligence.

The former officers made their views known in a three-page statement to congressional leaders.

they particularly object to the various GOP talking heads' characterization of the leak as inconsequential - basically making the point that people who say that are ignorant morons who know zip about the spook biz. the long version is here:

CIA Agents Letter to US Senate and House


18 July 2005

AN OPEN STATEMENT TO THE LEADERS OF THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND THE SENATE.

The Honorable Dennis Hastert, Speaker, U.S. House of Representatives

The Honorable Nancy Pelosi, Minority Leader, U.S. House of Representatives

The Honorable Dr. William Frist, Majority Leader of the Senate

The Honorable Harry Reid, Minority Leader of the Senate


We, the undersigned former U.S. intelligence officers are concerned with the tone and substance of the public debate over the ongoing Department of Justice investigation into who leaked the name of Valerie Plame, wife of former U.S. Ambassador Joseph Wilson IV, to syndicated columnist Robert Novak and other members of the media, which exposed her status as an undercover CIA officer. The disclosure of Ms. Plame’s name was a shameful event in American history and, in our professional judgment, may have damaged U.S. national security and poses a threat to the ability of U.S. intelligence gathering using human sources. Any breach of the code of confidentiality and cover weakens the overall fabric of intelligence, and, directly or indirectly, jeopardizes the work and safety of intelligence workers and their sources.

The Republican National Committee has circulated talking points to supporters to use as part of a coordinated strategy to discredit Ambassador Joseph Wilson and his wife. As part of this campaign a common theme is the idea that Ambassador Wilson’s wife, Valerie Plame was not undercover and deserved no protection. The following are four recent examples of this "talking point":

Michael Medved stated on Larry King Live on July 12, 2005, "And let's be honest about this. Mrs. Plame, Mrs. Wilson, had a desk job at Langley. She went back and forth every single day."

Victoria Toensing stated on a Fox News program with John Gibson on July 12, 2005 that, "Well, they weren't taking affirmative measures to protect that identity. They gave her a desk job in Langley. You don't really have somebody deep undercover going back and forth to Langley, where people can see them."

Ed Rodgers, Washington Lobbyist and former Republican official, said on July 13, 2005 on the Newshour with Jim Lehrer, "And also I think it is now a matter of established fact that Mrs. Plame was not a protected covert agent, and I don't think there's any meaningful investigation about that."

House majority whip Roy Blunt (R, Mo), on Face the Nation, July 17, 2005, "It certainly wouldn't be the first time that the CIA might have been overzealous in sort of maintaining the kind of top-secret definition on things longer than they needed to. You know, this was a job that the ambassador's wife had that she went to every day. It was a desk job. I think many people in Washington understood that her employment was at the CIA, and she went to that office every day."

These comments reveal an astonishing ignorance of the intelligence community and the role of cover. The fact is that there are thousands of U.S. intelligence officers who "work at a desk" in the Washington, D.C. area every day who are undercover. Some have official cover, and some have non-official cover. Both classes of cover must and should be protected.

While we are pleased that the U.S. Department of Justice is conducting an investigation and that the U.S. Attorney General has recused himself, we believe that the partisan attacks against Valerie Plame are sending a deeply discouraging message to the men and women who have agreed to work undercover for their nation’s security.

We are not lawyers and are not qualified to determine whether the leakers technically violated the 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act. However, we are confident that Valerie Plame was working in a cover status and that our nation’s leaders, regardless of political party, have a duty to protect all intelligence officers. We believe it is appropriate for the President to move proactively to dismiss from office or administratively punish any official who participated in any way in revealing Valerie Plame's status. Such an act by the President would send an unambiguous message that leaks of this nature will not be tolerated and would be consistent with his duties as the Commander-in-Chief.

We also believe it is important that Congress speak with one non-partisan voice on this issue. Intelligence officers should not be used as political footballs. In the case of Valerie Plame, she still works for the CIA and is not in a position to publicly defend her reputation and honor. We stand in her stead and ask that Republicans and Democrats honor her service to her country and stop the campaign of disparagement and innuendo aimed at discrediting Mrs. Wilson and her husband.

Our friends and colleagues have difficult jobs gathering the intelligence, which helps, for example, to prevent terrorist attacks against Americans at home and abroad. They sometimes face great personal risk and must spend long hours away from family and friends. They serve because they love this country and are committed to protecting it from threats from abroad and to defending the principles of liberty and freedom. They do not expect public acknowledgement for their work, but they do expect and deserve their government’s protection of their covert status.

For the good of our country, we ask you to please stand up for every man and woman who works for the U.S. intelligence community and help protect their ability to live their cover.

Sincerely yours,



_____________________________________

Larry C. Johnson, former Analyst, CIA


JOINED BY:

Mr. Brent Cavan, former Analyst, CIA

Mr. Vince Cannistraro, former Case Officer, CIA

Mr. Michael Grimaldi, former Analyst, CIA

Mr. Mel Goodman, former senior Analyst, CIA

Col. W. Patrick Lang (US Army retired), former Director, Defense Humint Services, DIA

Mr. David MacMichael, former senior estimates officer, National Intelligence Council, CIA

Mr. James Marcinkowski, former Case Officer, CIA

Mr. Ray McGovern, former senior Analyst and PDB Briefer, CIA

Mr. Jim Smith, former Case Officer, CIA

Mr. William C. Wagner, former Case Officer, CIA

they also make the excellent and obvious point that any administration official who chats with the press about the identity of intelligence operatives should have been fired last week, regardless of how the finer points of Rove's actions are legally parsed,.

[theknife]

White House press gaggle, today:

Q Why does Karl Rove still have security clearance and access to classified documents when he has been revealed as a leaker of a secret agent, according to Time magazine's correspondent?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, there is an investigation that continues, and I think the President has made it clear that we're not going to prejudge the outcome of that investigation.

Q You already have the truth.

MR. McCLELLAN: We're not going to prejudge the outcome of that investigation through --

Q Does he have access to security documents?

MR. McCLELLAN: -- through media reports. And these questions came up over the last week --

Q Did he leak the name of a CIA agent?

MR. McCLELLAN: As I was trying to tell you, these questions have been answered.

Q No, they haven't.

MR. McCLELLAN: Go ahead, David.

Q And they most certainly haven't. I think Helen is right, and the people watching us know that. And related to that, there are now --

MR. McCLELLAN: Let me correct the record. We've said for quite some time that this was an ongoing investigation, and that we weren't going to comment on it, so let me just correct the record.

Q If you want to make the record clear, then you also did make comments when a criminal investigation was underway, you saw fit to provide Karl Rove with a blanket statement of absolution. And that turned out to be no longer accurate --

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, and there were preferences expressed by those overseeing the investigation that we refrain from commenting on it while they're continuing to look at -- investigate it.

Q White House officials have been very clear through their attorneys or through other leaks to make it known that it was essentially journalists who educated them about who Valerie Plame was, what she did, and her role in sending her husband to Niger. It has now come to light that in fact White House officials were aware, or at least had access to a State Department memo that the President's own Secretary of State at the time had with him when he was traveling on Air Force One to Africa, which indicated both who she was, what she did, and her role in the Niger trip. So did the White House, in fact, know about her through this memo, or not?

MR. McCLELLAN: I thank you for wanting to proceed ahead with the investigation from this room, but I think that the appropriate place for that to happen is through those who are overseeing the investigation. The President directed us to cooperate fully, and that's exactly what we have been doing and continue to do.

Q But you don't deny that attorneys for Rove and others in the White House are speaking about these matters, creating a lot of these questions, right, that you say you can't speak to?

MR. McCLELLAN: As I said, we're not getting into talking about an ongoing investigation. That's what the President indicated, as well.

[JackSpratts]

the white house is still leaking while it hides behind "investigations."

Q But you don't deny that attorneys for Rove and others in the White House are speaking about these matters, creating a lot of these questions, right, that you say you can't speak to?

MR. McCLELLAN: As I said, we're not getting into talking about an ongoing investigation. That's what the President indicated, as well.

cowards.

- js.

[theknife]

Originally Posted by JackSpratts

the white house is still leaking while it hides behind "investigations."



cowards.

- js.

ironic, ain't it?

as long as McClellan continues to try to feed this bullshit to the press corps, they have every right - even a duty - to fling it back in his face.

[theknife]

the Dems had their own little dog-and-pony show today, trotting out ex-CIA types to edify just how serious the Rove security violations really are:

"What has suffered irreversible damage is the credibility of our case officers when they try to convince an overseas contact that their safety is of primary importance to us," Jim Marcinkowski, a former CIA case officer, said.

He also criticized Republican efforts to minimize the damage caused by the leak.

"Each time the political machine made up of prime-time patriots and partisan ninnies display their ignorance by deriding Valerie Plame as a mere paper pusher or belittling the varying degrees of cover used to protect our officers or continuing to play partisan politics with our national security, it's a disservice to this country," he added.

meanwhile, the investigation appears to have mushroomed into other areas such as perjury and obstruction of justice. apparently, some administration officials may not have been entirely candid in thier interviews with the FBI and/or the grand jury:

Bush aide misled FBI, say reports

Julian Borger in New York
Saturday July 23, 2005
The Guardian

The investigation into the White House leak of a CIA agent's identity is now focusing on whether two top administration officials provided misleading statements to the FBI, it was reported yesterday.
According to press accounts, Karl Rove, the president's chief political adviser, and Lewis "Scooter" Libby, the vice-president's chief of staff, both provided testimony that was later contradicted by other evidence.

but even more interesting is this:

Meanwhile, a parallel investigation is under way into who forged the Niger documents. They are known to have been passed to an Italian journalist by a former Italian defence intelligence officer, Rocco Martino, in October 2002, but their origins have remained a mystery. Mr Martino has insisted to the Italian press that he was "a tool used by someone for games much bigger than me", but has not specified who that might be.

A source familiar with the inquiry said investigators were examining whether former US intelligence agents may have been involved in possible collaboration with Iraqi exiles determined to prove that Saddam Hussein had a nuclear programme.

the Rove investigation is a pandora's box for the administration - it should be a short, slippery slope from Valerie Plame to the fake uranium story to all the other tales they told in order to sucker the country into invading Iraq.

[daddydirt]

Originally Posted by theknife

a group of CIA veterans took issue today with the GOP talking points vis a vis the Rove security breach:

CIA veterans?
interesting how you characterized them tk.
some might call them ex-CIA analysts with an axe to grind against Bush & Co.

i see they're led by the very able Larry C. Johnson. maybe you should read the now infamous op-ed he penned in July 2001, to see why he's a Former analyst, CIA.

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/10/op...ays headlines

July 10, 2001

The Declining Terrorist Threat

By LARRY C. JOHNSON


WASHINGTON -- Judging from news reports and the portrayal of villains in our popular entertainment, Americans are bedeviled by fantasies about terrorism. They seem to believe that terrorism is the greatest threat to the United States and that it is becoming more widespread and lethal. They are likely to think that the United States is the most popular target of terrorists. And they almost certainly have the impression that extremist Islamic groups cause most terrorism.

None of these beliefs are based in fact. While many crimes are committed against Americans abroad (as at home), politically inspired terrorism, as opposed to more ordinary criminality motivated by simple greed, is not as common as most people may think.

At first glance, things do seem to be getting worse. International terrorist incidents, as reported by the State Department, increased to 423 in 2000 from 392 in 1999. Recently, Americans were shaken by Filipino rebels' kidnapping of Americans and the possible beheading of one hostage. But the overall terrorist trend is down. According to the Central Intelligence Agency, deaths from international terrorism fell to 2,527 in the decade of the 1990's, from 4,833 in the 80's.

Nor are the United States and its policies the primary target. Terrorist activity in 2000 was heavily concentrated in just two countries — Colombia, which had 186 incidents, and India, with 63. The cause was these countries' own political conflicts.

While 82 percent of the attacks in Colombia were on oil pipelines managed by American and British companies, these attacks were less about terrorism than about guerrillas' goal of disrupting oil production to undermine the Colombian economy. Generally, the guerrillas shy away from causing casualties in these attacks. No American oil workers in Colombia were killed or injured last year.

Other terrorism against American interests is rare. There were three attacks on American diplomatic buildings in 2000, compared with 42 in 1988. No Americans were killed in these incidents, nor have there been any deaths in this sort of attack this year.

Of the 423 international terrorist incidents documented in the State Department's report "Patterns of Global Terrorism 2000," released in April, only 153 were judged by the department and the C.I.A. to be "significant." And only 17 of these involved American citizens or businesses.

Eleven incidents involved kidnappings of one or more American citizens, all of whom were eventually released. Seven of those kidnapped worked for American companies in the energy business or providing services to it — Halliburton, Shell, Chevron, Mobil, Noble Drilling and Erickson Air-Crane.

Five bombings were on the list. The best known killed 17 American sailors on the destroyer Cole, as it was anchored in a Yemeni port, and wounded 39. A bomb at a McDonald's in France killed a local citizen there. The other explosions — outside the United States embassy in the Philippines, at a Citibank office in Greece, and in the offices of Newmont Mining in Indonesia — caused mostly property damage and no loss of life. In the 17th incident, vandals trashed a McDonald's in South Africa.

The greatest risk is clear: if you are drilling for oil in Colombia — or in nations like Ecuador, Nigeria or Indonesia — you should take appropriate precautions; otherwise Americans have little to fear.

Although high-profile incidents have fostered the perception that terrorism is becoming more lethal, the numbers say otherwise, and early signs suggest that the decade beginning in 2000 will continue the downward trend. A major reason for the decline is the current reluctance of countries like Iraq, Syria and Libya, which once eagerly backed terrorist groups, to provide safe havens, funding and training.

The most violent and least reported source of international terrorism is the undeclared war between Islamists and Hindus over the disputed Kashmir region of India, bordering Pakistan. Although India came in second in terms of the number of terrorist incidents in 2000, with 63, it accounted for almost 50 percent of all resulting deaths, with 187 killed, and injuries, with 337 hurt. Most of the blame lies with radical groups trained in Afghanistan and operating from Pakistan.

I am not soft on terrorism; I believe strongly in remaining prepared to confront it. However, when the threat of terrorism is used to justify everything from building a missile defense to violating constitutional rights (as in the case of some Arab-Americans imprisoned without charge), it is time to take a deep breath and reflect on why we are so fearful.

Part of the blame can be assigned to 24-hour broadcast news operations too eager to find a dramatic story line in the events of the day and to pundits who repeat myths while ignoring clear empirical data. Politicians of both parties are also guilty. They warn constituents of dire threats and then appropriate money for redundant military installations and new government investigators and agents.



Finally, there are bureaucracies in the military and in intelligence agencies that are desperate to find an enemy to justify budget growth. In the 1980's, when international terrorism was at its zenith, NATO and the United States European Command pooh-poohed the notion of preparing to fight terrorists. They were too busy preparing to fight the Soviets. With the evil empire gone, they "discovered" terrorism as an important priority.

I hope for a world where facts, not fiction, determine our policy. While terrorism is not vanquished, in a world where thousands of nuclear warheads are still aimed across the continents, terrorism is not the biggest security challenge confronting the United States, and it should not be portrayed that way.

[theknife]

Originally Posted by daddydirt

CIA veterans?
interesting how you characterized them tk.
some might call them ex-CIA analysts with an axe to grind against Bush & Co.

yup - eleven ex-CIA officers. so they all must have fiercely partisan axes to grind. all eleven of them so partisan that they were willing to go on record with thier wild accusations. all of them. eleven of them. pretty flimsy.

[albed]

Ex-CIA officers now. They must have gotten promoted by liberal propagandists.


And eleven, out of how many CIA employees? A few dozen? What a huge percentage.


And Valerie Plame seems to have been promoted to "case officer". Cleverly based at CIA headquarters.

[theknife]

eleven is apparently the magic number these days. Congressman Henry Waxman details 11 separate breaches of national security regulations on the part of Bush administration officials relative to the Valerie PLame case. other sources have noted that people of interest to prosecutors include not only Rove ande Scooter Libby (would you trust any secrets to a guy named Scooter?), but Ari Fleischman, Karen Hughes, and Robert Joseph among others. Waxman has detailed the following security violations, involving not only phone calls but top secret memos as well:

The Disclosures of Valerie Wilson's Identity

1. The Disclosure by Karl Rove to Columnist Robert Novak
In a column dated July 14, 2003, Robert Novak first reported that Valerie Plame Wilson was "an agency operative on weapons of mass destruction."1 Mr. Novak cited "two senior administration officials" as his sources.2 According to multiple news reports, one of these two sources was Karl Rove, the Deputy White House Chief of Staff and the President's top political advisor.3 During a phone call on July 8, 2003, Mr. Rove confirmed for Mr. Novak that Ms. Wilson worked at the CIA. During this conversation, Mr. Novak referred to Ms. Wilson "by her maiden name, Valerie Plame," and said he had heard she was involved in "the circumstances in which her husband … traveled to Africa."4 Mr. Rove responded, "I heard that, too."5 Mr. Novak's name also appeared "on a White House call log as having telephoned Mr. Rove in the week before the publication of the July 2003 column."6

2. The Disclosure by a "Senior Administration Official" to Columnist Robert Novak
In addition to his communications with Mr. Rove, Mr. Novak learned about Ms. Wilson's identity through communications with a second "senior administration official."7 Mr. Novak's second source has not yet been publicly identified. Mr. Novak has stated, however, that the source provided him with Ms. Wilson's identity. As he stated: "I didn't dig it out, it was given to me."8 He added: "They thought it was significant, they gave me the name and I used it."9

3. The Disclosure by Karl Rove to TIME Reporter Matt Cooper
During a phone call on July 11, 2003, Mr. Rove revealed to TIME reporter Matt Cooper that Ms. Wilson worked at the CIA on weapons of mass destruction.10 Mr. Cooper reported that this "was the first time I had heard anything about Wilson's wife."11 Mr. Rove provided this information on "deep background," said that "things would be declassified soon," and stated, "I've already said too much."12

4. The Disclosure by Scooter Libby to TIME Reporter Matt Cooper
During a phone call on July 12, 2003, TIME reporter Matt Cooper asked the Vice President's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby "if he had heard anything about Wilson's wife sending her husband to Niger." 13 Mr. Libby replied, "Yeah, I've heard that too," or words to that effect.14 Mr. Libby provided this information "on background."15

5. The Disclosure by an "Administration Official" to Washington Post Reporter Walter Pincus
On July 12, 2003, an "administration official" told Washington Post reporter Walter Pincus that "Wilson's trip to Niger was set up as a boondoggle by his CIA-employed wife."16 Mr. Pincus has not publicly identified his source, but has stated that it "was not Libby."17

6. The Disclosure by a "Top White House Official" to an Unidentified Reporter
In addition making disclosures to Mr. Novak, Mr. Cooper, and Mr. Pincus, White House officials may have had conversations about Ms. Wilson with three other reporters about Ms. Wilson's identity. According to the Washington Post, a "senior administration official" confirmed that "before Novak's column ran on July 14, 2003, two top White House officials called at least six Washington journalists and disclosed the identity and occupation of Wilson's wife."18 According to this official, "Clearly, it was meant purely and simply for revenge."19 Press reports suggest that one of these unidentified reporters may be NBC correspondent Andrea Mitchell.20

7. The Disclosure by a "Top White House Official" to an Unidentified Reporter
In addition making disclosures to Mr. Novak, Mr. Cooper, and Mr. Pincus, White House officials may have had conversations about Ms. Wilson with three other reporters about Ms. Wilson's identity. According to the Washington Post, a "senior administration official" confirmed that "before Novak's column ran on July 14, 2003, two top White House officials called at least six Washington journalists and disclosed the identity and occupation of Wilson's wife."21 According to this official, "Clearly, it was meant purely and simply for revenge."22 Press reports suggest that one of these unidentified reporters may be NBC Meet the Press host Tim Russert.23

8. The Disclosure by a "Top White House Official" to an Unidentified Reporter
In addition making disclosures to Mr. Novak, Mr. Cooper, and Mr. Pincus, White House officials may have had conversations about Ms. Wilson with three other reporters about Ms. Wilson's identity. According to the Washington Post, a "senior administration official" confirmed that "before Novak's column ran on July 14, 2003, two top White House officials called at least six Washington journalists and disclosed the identity and occupation of Wilson's wife."24 According to this official, "Clearly, it was meant purely and simply for revenge."25 Press reports suggest that one of these unidentified reporters may be MSNBC Hardball host Chris Matthews.26

9. The Disclosure by an Unidentified Source to Wall Street Journal Reporter David Cloud
On October 17, 2003, Wall Street Journal reporter David Cloud reported that an internal State Department memo prepared by U.S. intelligence personnel "details a meeting in early 2002 where CIA officer Valerie Plame and other intelligence officials gathered to brainstorm about how to verify reports that Iraq had sought uranium yellowcake from Niger."27 This "classified" document had "limited circulation," according to "two people familiar with the memo."28

10. The Disclosure by an Unidentified Source to James Guckert of Talon News
On October 28, 2003, Talon News posted on its website an interview with Ambassador Joseph Wilson in which the questioner asked: "An internal government memo prepared by U.S. intelligence personnel details a meeting in early 2002 where your wife, a member of the agency or clandestine service working on Iraqi weapons issues, suggested that you could be sent to investigate the reports. Do you dispute that?"29 Talon News is tied to a group called GOP USA30 and is operated by Texas Republican Robert Eberle.31 Its only reporter, James Guckert (also known as Jeff Gannon), resigned when it was revealed that he gained access to the White House using a false name after his press credentials were rejected by House and Senate press galleries.32 In a March 2004 interview with his own news service, Mr. Guckert stated that the classified document was "easily accessible."33 In a February 11, 2005, interview with Wolf Blitzer of CNN, Mr. Guckert said the FBI interviewed him about "how I knew or received a copy of a confidential CIA memo," but he refused to answer FBI questions because of his status as a "journalist."34 A week later, Mr. Guckert changed his account, claiming he "was given no special information by the White House or by anybody else."35

11. The Disclosure by a "Senior Administration Official" to Washington Post Reporters Mike Allen and Dana Milbank
On December 26, 2003, Washington Post reporters Mike Allen and Dana Milbank reported on details about the classified State Department memo, writing that it was authored by "a State Department official who works for its Bureau of Intelligence and Research."36 The Post story was attributed to "a senior administration official who has seen" the memo.37 The Post also reported that the CIA was "angry about the circulation of a still-classified document to conservative news outlets" and that the CIA "believes that people in the administration continue to release classified information to damage the figures at the center of the controversy, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV and his wife, Valerie Plame."38

it's kind of interesting that all the little quirks of the administration are tangled up in this, from the elaborate campaigns to destroy administration critics to the false and misleading information used in the case for war to the gay hooker/fake reporter they planted in the White House press corps and so forth. the tightly woven web that is the Bush administration appears a bit frayed around the edges.

[floydian slip]

They go to eleven.

[multi]

Originally Posted by Nicobie

U'd think this thread was about that bitch hillery (pls notice lack of respect given toward spelling & caps).

I really, really hate that slimey ####.

I betca she's pushed the button on more than one life.

http://www.michaelhodges.com/stuff/funny/2008cc1.swf

[malvachat]

Here's something interesting I've just read.
Quite a bit of interesting stuff here.
The Jon Stewart with Bernie Goldberg thing is funny.
Hey Nic whoever wrote this hates Hilary too.

http://www.bushflash.com/index.html


"Okay- alone amongst the progressive/liberal blogosphere, I'm going to have to break the sad news, to those sharks swimming around the recent "Rove-gate."

You've fallen into another distraction, here. Rove is laughing at us, and at you.

This is the Bush/Rove tactics at their most transparent.

I'm not diminishing the outing of Plame, in any way, in saying this. What Rove did was unconscionable, treasonous, and criminal- but ya know what?

This is the way Rove does things- notice that, in recent months, scandal after scandal has been pouring out of the republicans and the Bush bowl? First it was Tom Delay- then it was the Downing Street Memo- now, it's Rove.

They know how the american media works, and are well aware of how short the american attention span is. Yes- all the chickens are coming home to roost, and while we on the left enjoy seeing this happen, Rove and the Bush crime family are sitting back, and letting at all unfold- they know they'll never be called to account...

Why? Because the way the media works. Let's go back in time, for just a bit....

Delay's corruption scandal was trumpeted by the left as a damning indictment of republican hubris- What did Rove and the republicans do? They spouted their soundbites, their talking points, and treaded water, until the media (and the sheeple) were distracted by Michael jackson, and the Downing Street memo.

Once the downing street memo arrived on the scene, the left trumpeted this as the "smoking gun", that would bring down the Bush administration. The republicans dug in, spun their wheels, spouted their talking points and soundbites, until the bombings in London swept everything away.

Rove, knowing that the DSM was enough of a powederkeg to survive this terrorist attack, decided to put his own wedding tackle on the chopping block, and provide the media with this newest scandal, knowing that the MSM (along with the progressive/liberal alternative media) would latch onto this story. Rove KNOWS damn well that he's a prime target, and doesn't mind one whit, putting himself on the line, as a temporary distraction, until the next story erupts, and we all go dutifully scrambling after the newest "scandal."

Why would Rove do such a thing? Well- ask yourself- how many times, in the last two weeks, has the Downing Street memo been mentioned, via the MSM (compared to daily mention, prior to this?) How much coverage has been given to Bush's refutation of greenhouse gas restrictions, just in the past 48 hours? How much coverage has been given to the continuing collapse of "No Child Left Behind", and the dozens of other failures that are dogging this administration?

None- not one, single word.

It's been "Rove, Rove, Rove", and while weightier issues have fallen by the wayside, issues that are far more important, and meaningful, Rove has been basking in the light of media attention, and laughing at us on the left, while we spend so much energy going after him, and giving far more important issues a pass, in our collective bloodlust.

Mark my words- in a few weeks, Rove will walk free of this, the next scandal will emerge, and the whole cycle will begin again.

Rove is laughing at us, people.

Just as I abstained from covering the fluff that was "Gannongate", I will not be covering Rove's latest subterfuge. In my mind, the Downing Street Memo is of far greater import, and far greater gravity, as an issue.

This is a severe and true test of the "new media" of the blogs and the internet- will we follow in the steps of the MSM, and follow the "scandal du jour", and thus, dance to the tune of Rove, and others who "manufacture consent", or will we focus on what's important?

I haven't much faith, by what I've seen, as of late...

No matter what Rove did- treason, crime, or whatever, it pales in comparison to the criminality exposed by the Downing Street Memo. Rove knows he'll ride this one out (just as Bush as ridden greater scandals out), and by the time the smoke clears, no one will remember the DSM....

We're being snowed, once again..."

[theknife]

the White House press briefings have become a daily game of dodgeball between McClellan and the press corps. the stonewalling on the part of the administration is so complete, the exchanges are hardly worth repeating...except for this:

Q I know that none of you are speaking about this because it's an ongoing investigation. Can you explain why Alberto Gonzales would go on TV yesterday and do that, and talk about it?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, what he said was already said from this podium back in October of 2003, and I don't think he got into commenting in any substantive way on the discussion. But the President has said that we will be glad to talk about this once the investigation has come to a conclusion, but not until then. And there have certainly been preferences expressed to the White House that we not get into discussing it while it is ongoing.

another excellent and obvious question: how come Attorney General Gonzalez, the highest-ranking law enforcement official in the country, can go on TV yesterday and discuss the case, but the White House can't?

HUME: You were in the White House as counsel at the time that investigation was initiated. Have you been asked to testify in this case?

GONZALES: I was asked to testify. This was over a year ago. I did testify before the grand jury, yes.

HUME: And, can you tell us if you at any time were aware of Valerie Plame, either by name or by identification with Joseph Wilson? Were you aware that she was in the CIA? And did you have — and if you were — did you have any idea what kind of work she was doing?

GONZALES: … I had no information regarding Ms. Plame and her role at the CIA.

McClellan has been stonewalling for weeks, citing "an ongoing investigation" meanwhile the AG is out there on multiple Sunday morning talk shows discussing the case - what's wrong with this picture? could it be because Gonzalez has no worries - his story is straight - while the White House is unwilling or unable to explain who was lying about what?

[albed]

Originally Posted by malvachat

Here's something interesting I've just read.
Quite a bit of interesting stuff here.
The Jon Stewart with Bernie Goldberg thing is funny.
Hey Nic whoever wrote this hates Hilary too.

http://www.bushflash.com/index.html

OMG. I see someone on the left actually does have a clue.

This is kind of scary but I'm sure it won't catch on.

Bloodlust and propaganda trump rational analysis and progressive solutions for their kind every time.

[floydian slip]

its just a rumor so dont get excited... ok...

A Chicago grand jury has indicted the President and Vice-President of the United States along with multiple high officials in the Bush administration

Chicago -- August 2, 2005 -- TomFlocco.com -- U.S. federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's Chicago grand jury has issued perjury and obstruction of justice indictments to the following members of the Bush Administration: President George W. Bush, Vice-President Richard Cheney, Bush Chief of Staff Andrew Card, Cheney Chief of Staff I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez, former Attorney General John Ashcroft, imprisoned New York Times reporter Judith Miller and former Senior Cheney advisor Mary Matalin.

There were no indications given as to whether the President and his top staff members would appear publicly before cameras at the grand jury proceedings, given the gravity of the charges.

Besides the Valerie Plame CIA leak case, the Fitzgerald probe is reportedly far-reaching and expanding much deeper into past White House criminal acts involving Bush-Clinton drug money laundering in Mena, Arkansas to White House involvement in 9.11; but also for sending America's young people to their deaths or to be maimed in Iraq and Afghanistan under false pretenses.

British Prime Minister Tony Blair was indicted for obstruction of justice and is reportedly consulting with members of Parliament and legal aides regarding how to avoid appearing in the U.S.A. for interrogation before Fitzgerald in Chicago.

The revelations emanated from sources close to the grand jury who spoke with federal whistleblower Thomas Heneghen in California who said White House Senior Advisor to the President Karl Rove was also indicted for perjury and was reportedly involved with Mary Matalin in a major Bush administration document shredding operation to cover-up evidence.

Heneghen had reported over ten days ago on a TruthRadio.com <http://www.truthradio.com> broadcast that his sources close to the grand jury said former Secretary of State Colin Powell had been subpoenaed and had testified against President Bush, telling the citizen panel that the President had taken the United States to war based upon lies--a capital crime involving treason under the United States Code.

Heneghen also reported a week ago that Gonzalez and Card had been subpoened and that Tony Blair had defied his subpoena after the response time limit had expired.

Sources close to the investigation report that members of the House, Senate, 9.11 Commission and other members of the media are also under investigation as potential targets by a grand jury regarding obstruction of justice and other oversight failures linked to the 9.11 attacks--indicating that citizen panelists working with Fitzgerald may be seeking a wholesale cleansing of what many have said is a crime-wracked White House and Congress.

Also last Monday, the whistleblower reported that Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts was planning to obstruct justice by calling Fitzgerald for Senate hearings to question the prosecutor's motives for the far-reaching investigation.

This, giving rise to questions as to whether Roberts and other Republican legislators--some now under secret investigation--would join President Bush in seeking to fire Fitzgerald in the same manner that President Nixon had fired Watergate Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox in order to obstruct justice and cut off further investigations into White House crimes.

Two weeks ago Heneghen said he had talked to sources just ten minutes prior to French and U.S. intelligence agents intercepting British intelligence agents who were attempting to bomb the subway underneath the Dirksen Federal Building where Fitzgerald was presiding over grand jury hearings.

Serious questions can also be raised as to whether intelligence forces linked to President Bush and Tony Blair had participated in a failed attempt to scuttle the Fitzgerald probe by literally blowing it up--at a time when UK reports reveal that military-grade explosives were used to blow up the London subway on July 7.

Sources say the alleged Chicago subway bombing attempt has been attributed to an underground and closeted enmity involving warring intelligence and military factions within the United States government.

Moreover, reports indicate that the disturbance occurred at the same time that the Chicago Tribune and local web blogs had reported that the subway had been evacuated for 45-50 minutes regarding a "suspicious package" late on Monday afternoon, July 18.

Also confirming the under-the-radar-screen hostilities involving agents loyal to the administration and others who are disturbed about the cover-up of government involvement in the 9.11 attacks was a recent contact made with this writer by a major New York media outlet which called seeking "names of those who could confirm its own reports of warring factions within the government which were threatening the safety of U.S. citizens."

developing.....please link or copy--and distribute widely.
_________________
TomFlocco