
I hate the word "frame" but Alterman points us to a quote by Elizabeth de la Vega that puts the current leak issue in very succinct terms:
Is a President, on the eve of his reelection campaign, legally entitled to ward off political embarrassment and conceal past failures in the exercise of his office by unilaterally and informally declassifying selected -- as well as false and misleading -- portions of a classified National Intelligence Estimate that he has previously refused to declassify, in order to cause such information to be secretly disclosed under false pretenses in the name of a "former Hill staffer" to a single reporter, intending that reporter to publish such false and misleading information in a prominent national newspaper?
The answer is obvious: No. Such a misuse of authority is the very essence of a criminal conspiracy to defraud the United States. It is also precisely the abuse of executive power that led to the impeachment of Richard M. Nixon.
All this talk about "does he or does he have the right to declassify" is, as I've argued before, quite beside the point. Bush did what he did for political gain as Murray Waas's article of March 30, 2006 makes clear:
Karl Rove, President Bush's chief political adviser, cautioned other White House aides in the summer of 2003 that Bush's 2004 re-election prospects would be severely damaged if it was publicly disclosed that he had been personally warned that a key rationale for going to war had been challenged within the administration. Rove expressed his concerns shortly after an informal review of classified government records by then-Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen J. Hadley determined that Bush had been specifically advised that claims he later made in his 2003 State of the Union address -- that Iraq was procuring high-strength aluminum tubes to build a nuclear weapon -- might not be true, according to government records and interviews.
Only dupes like Fred Hiatt are suckered into believing the duplicitous lies contained in this "leak" had anything to do with high-minded notions of public service. It was all about making sure George Bush got re-elected, no matter the cost.
How very Nixonian. From Wikipedia:
The White House Plumbers or simply The Plumbers is the popular name given to the covert Nixon White House Special Investigations Unit established July 24, 1971. Its job was to stop the leaking of confidential information (hence the "Plumbers" title) to the media during the Nixon administration. Its members branched into more nefarious projects working for the Committee to Re-elect the President (CRP, or the more derogatory CREEP) including the Watergate break-ins.
They're using the Nixon playbook. It's really quite simple once you boil off the bs.
Login Here
Share This
Spotlight
Firist!
fitz - the de-creeper
FITZ…Please , please do something about Rover!
I agree that the legality of it is beside the point.
But I still want somebody to ask Mr. McClellan about that stamp because…….
What if the CinC didn’t leak?
What then?
I mean they’re using Lance Link as the ultimate cutout - but what if he’s not?
.
You will likely be completely unsurprised to hear that the administration stooges are now using Fred’s editorial as “proof” that the president did the right thing.
ThinkProgress has the details
How convenient is that! Hiatt’s envelope is going to be a pretty fat one this week.
The only difference is that Nixon was caught by an independant press, while our current right wing corporate press has Bushes’ back.
Gryn–
This is my point exactly.
.
Jane,
This picture is worth a thousand words. You ladies sure make the graphics fit the threads.
I sure hope that Leopold article is accurate denying Bush the firewall that he so desperately seeks in this mess.
Can you say holy friggin’ crap?
I thought you could.
I like the final sentence especially:
Read the whole thing and make sure you have a pillow under your jaw.
Thanks Jane, you continue to outflank Rove. He’s counting on us forgetting the context in which these leaks occured.
OT fubar has a fitting bodyslam/visual of Fred Hiatt:
http://www.needlenose.com/
And the most reliable WaPo apologist Howie the Putz stepped up to plate today in “Media Backtalk”
We did our job correctly! Both sides are critical! Facts are for suckers when you have the truthiness of he said/she said journalism.
When the AP is calling you the “leaker-in-chief”, I’d say the BS isn’t working.
Next attempt at spin: Valerie Plame was really a double-agent! She was discovered when George W Bush, listening in on international phone calls to Osama bin Laden, heard a woman speaking Arabic with a blond accent. His photographic (and photophonic?) memory allowed him to deduce that the voice in question belonged to Plame, who he met at a party thrown by Dick Cheney called “Women Who Look Like My Wife, Only Younger and Prettier”. Bush then ordered patriot Scooter Libby to neutralize the threat by blowing Plame’s cover to the media. See? There’s a simple, honest explanation for all of this!
Correct, I think FDL and links hit the nail on the nead. I think public sees it too. (though if press and Dems did their jobs, more would see it more quickly). Check pollkatz over next two weeks. I predict a few more “points off” and even mendatious WaPo editorials can’t stop it.
I remember in HS PE class, we always got points off for breaking the rules. Since my class was particularly unruly, the wonderful memory of the gym teacher shouting “You! Points off!” every few minutes rings in my ears. What fond memories. I think public sentiment is beginning to generate simiar chants out of the collective consciousness now. And WaPo will not be able to stop it. If only we could make Bush and Cheney, Rum and Rice and the whole sick crew run around the backstop too.
Is a President, on the eve of his reelection campaign, legally entitled to ward off political embarrassment and conceal past failures in the exercise of his office by unilaterally and informally declassifying selected — as well as false and misleading — portions of a classified National Intelligence Estimate that he has previously refused to declassify, in order to cause such information to be secretly disclosed under false pretenses in the name of a “former Hill staffer” to a single reporter, intending that reporter to publish such false and misleading information in a prominent national newspaper?
Dang. Where can I fetch them compound, complex sentences? I’m still werking on subject, predicate.
If anyone reading this blog has NOT cancelled your subscriptions to the Washington Post or Newsweek…what the hell are you waiting for?
-GSD
This administration is going to go down with a scorched earth policy. The latest Rove Riposte on the “electoral system” in some areas being akin to places where men in uniforms wear “mirrored sunglasses” is the starting gun. They are setting up their faithful for the “stolen election” gambit.
I also find Rove’s attack a bit on the racial profiling side……I don’t think he is talking about places like Nantucket.
Nope….you folks with darker skin..yep…Latinos and blacks…you are just like your partners in your native lands in Africa and South and Central America according to Karl Rove….you don’t know how to be honest in an election.
Sick fucks with big plans.
-GSD
Some one needs to invent and justify a new term for what Bush did. It was not merely declassifying. It was continuous selective secret deep background off the record implicit retro and pro-active de- re- and meta-re-classification of selective sentences, phrases, words, and punctuation, as political purposes required (everyone else’s fault, no matter what).
Is there a word for that.
Clusterfuck out giving speeches again–he’s been doin the same thing for months now- and the resultes are—-new lows in the polls. He doesn’t know what else to do- so he keeps doin the same dumb shit. Pathetic.
“Drain the swamp.”
(Dear reader, Washington D.C. was built on a swamp.)
Very interesting, Zergle. Wouldn’t it be delicious if Fitz has Bush lying in his testimony? Bush wasn’t under oath, though, was he?
Even so, this has abuse of power written all over it. It looks like the media is starting to sink their teeth into this one. At some point it becomes hard for Republicans to sweep this under the rug.
Not to mention NOT declassifying everything else in the NIE that said the opposite. Like a 92 page document, or whatever, and leaking page 27 thru 30, and keeping everything else classified. Only hardcore Bushcultists are left. Reminds me of Saturday nite, everybody out, nearest exit.
Jenny - CSpan Video=
the young man is Jaime Contreras - Pres. of Capitol Immigration Coalition
thinking of our Pachacutec as I watch, suspect even the most objective observer must feel the fire at rallies like this
My favorite nightmare is that this has all been carefully choreographed to both provide cover and utterly destroy the crediblility of the opposition. I just finished reading Bad Boy, the bio of Lee Atwater. I just wouldn’t put this past Rove, Atwater’s waterboy.
Problem for Bush is that most normal Joe and Josephine Bush sympathizer having harder and harder time seeing Bush as being “on their side” THEY were the marks this time. (What going in mind of hard core base, I can’t imagine). I made similar comment on previous thread. They are lost and going down, only question is how much damage they do in death throes.
“…in order to cause such information to be secretly disclosed under false pretenses in the name of a “former Hill staffer” to a single reporter…”
Hold on a minute. Didn’t Judy Miller say her source was a “former Hill staffer”, or I am reading this wrong? Because if that’s the case, then she lied about her source.
RWCole,
Like the repetative behavior of a patient in a mental hospital.
Charlie Cheswick is our Commander in Chief.
-GSD
“Oil Climbs to Record in London on Concern About Iran Conflict”
http://quote.bloomberg.com/app.....refer=home
IMO, Rove knew his saber rattling about using nuclear weapons against Iran would drive up the price of oil and hurt the World and US economies. He just didn’t care. He did it to force the corporate media to cover something else besides the Leaker-in-Chief.
wesgpc says:
April 10th, 2006 at 1:17 pm
Is there a word for that.
Yes - double secret declassification
Thank you sir may I have another?
Jane sez: Only dupes like Fred Hiatt are suckered into believing the duplicitous lies….
I think we’ve gone long past dupes, Jane. Willing aiders and abetters more like.
Would be interesting to see the numbers on how many $$$ WaPoo and GE/NBC and others have taken in from Bushco pork.
GSD #15
Hopefully Rove will be able to view the election results while under indictment for his role in Plamegate. I would love to have said from behind the bars of a prison cell, but we know that will take some time for the justice system to prevail in good over evil.
mommybrain–
either would I.
and don’t forget, Mr. Ailes is very likely at the tap.
.
If anyone reading this blog has NOT cancelled your subscriptions to the Washington Post or Newsweek…what the hell are you waiting for?
-GSD
———————————————————-
I realize that they’re co-owned by the same people, but I’ve found “Newsweek”’s coverage of this scandal to be far superior to WaPo’s. And of (what I think of as) the Big Four–”Time”, “Newsweek”, the NYT, and the WaPo–”Newsweek” is the ONLY publication that hasn’t gotten caught up in this scandal itself (yet).
I disagree that the question of whether Bush has the right to declassify information in the manner that he did is beside the point. It is a point. I think he does have that right, and he abused it. The rules of classifying government information affect the workings of the Departments of Defense, Justice, Homeland Security, and Energy, at a minimum. In addition to affecting millions of government employees, it also affects what information citizens are able to access.
There is also the question, as I’ve mentioned before, of whether Bush or other members of the administration attempted to keep some information in the NIE classified to avoid embarrassment or charges of incompetence, which is illegal according to Bush’s own EO 13292. As potential grounds for impeachment, this also strikes me as important.
Perhaps these points pale in significance compared to the question of whether the Administration withheld this information to trick us into war, but it is important, and I think if there is honest debate on that issue, then it’s possible that classification procedures can be made more responsive to the needs of the public.
Whoever wrote that WaPo editorial (many folks are assuming it was Fred Hiatt, and I have no idea who it might be) is a putz. He started with a valid point about declassification procedures and proceeded to ignore the implications of what was declassified and for what purpose. He also failed to examine the implications of cloassified information being handled that way in the future. Then, he proceeded into the ozone regarding the Plame/Wilson affair. This doesn’t mean, however that classification and the President’s powers in that area aren’t important.
watertiger swats bugman.
http://www.derenegade.blogspot.com/
Casper,
The stories about the nukes are the result of an article by Sy Hersh. I don’t think Rove had a hand in the timing of the release whatsoever.
Remember, the Boy Genius has his superstar at 33% in the polls.
-GSD
Hold on a minute. Didn’t Judy Miller say her source was a “former Hill stafferâ€, or I am reading this wrong? Because if that’s the case, then she lied about her source.
———————————————————-
Scooter is a former Hill staffer. She’s misleading, not lying. My little brother was a master at this. Of course, the rest of the family had caught on to it by the time he was 8, but still.
Oilfieldguy –
Whatever you do, ignore the John Kerry style manual for complex sentences — in 2004, he launched hundreds of them, where the subject is still searching for the verb, with the object lost in a parallel universe black hole.
I read the Leopold article linked in Zergle 9.
What’s wrong with this sentence, “Attorneys close to the case said that Fitzgerald does not appear to be overly concerned or interested in any alleged discrepancy in Bush’s statements about the leak case to investigators.”
WTFN?
I don’t believe it matters if you are under oath when you are talking to federal investigators. At the absolute least it’s obstruction.
If this article is true (and I believe the author has a good track record) and Bush has been lying through his teeth, on the record, all this time…then he’s got a lot more than censure to worry about.
Seems Leaker-in-Chief is calling reporting on US planned Iran attack “wild speculation.”
Note that this phrase does NOT constitute a DENIAL.
I’d be careful citing Wikpedia.
Their entry on the word “wingnut” suggest that it refers to lefties.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wingnut_(politics)
truthiness, nay sooth
corporate shill prejudge;
thy Hiatt is uncouth &
Howie “putz” of the month
nary a sin these thugs begrudge!
T- @ 1:29 pm (#37) - I think what that says is that it wasn’t important in determining whom to prosecute (why that might be, I don’t know), and that any information implicating the President would just have to be handed off to Congress, anyway. Oh, and since I haven’t written this in a couple of days, IANAL.
EPU’d, my rant on slave labor. Think I’m kidding?
Republicans feel they are paying too much for immigrant labor. Better to have it for free: slave labor. Halliburton $385,000,000 to build “prison camps†for civilian labor. Unclassified Army document: Civilian Inmate Labor Program. http://www.army.mil/usapa/epubs/pdf/r210_35.pdf
SLAVE LABOR. Arbeit Macht Frei.
The slaves, sorry, workers that are not needed will be deported, “100% of them.†“Detention and Removal Strategic Plan, 2003-2012: ENDGAME”
http://www.ice.gov/graphics/dro/endgame.pdf
NEW YORK - U.S. retail gasoline prices rose about 7 percent over the past two weeks, but consumers may soon see some relief as gasoline supplies are expected to increase, according to an industry analyst.
The national average for self-serve regular unleaded gas was $2.665 a gallon on April 7, up about 16.51 cents per gallon in the past two weeks, according to the nationwide Lundberg survey of about 7,000 gas stations.
In the past six weeks, prices have surged about 42.
MSNBC
Yeah, he probably isn’t “concerned” about it because he knows he doesn’t really have to make an effort to proove it.
I see Fitz looking at Bush the way most look at their 3yr old trying to pull a fast one about the cookie jar.
“speaking Arabic with a blond accent” - funny, Frank Probst; okay if I borrow that one?
T- says:
April 10th, 2006 at 1:29 pm
I’ve been wondering (when time permitted) about that sentence.
Christy - when you have a chance to look at the story to which T- is alluding, please tell us what you think about possible interpretations of that sentence.
washinton post, washington times, same crap, same people in charge now. anyone else noticed we don’t have any real news papers any more?
there are no legitimate news companies left now, so we get what congress took bribes to create, a media empire with no relation to the public, and no laws governing them.
goodbye america
Prairie Sunshine @ 1:24 pm (#28) - I’m inclined to agree. It’s hard to imagine how you can look at this situation and not see something seriously wrong with what the Administration did, even if you accept that there were no crimes committed.
OT but not, bc it is all related.
I went ahead and EPU’d a post at the end of the propaganda thread with portions of the national security act that make it illegal to engage in covert activities to influence domestic politics, etc. and also the Gonzales response to DiFi when she asked him if the President could violate that provision.
Gonzales told her hey - that’s a hypothetical - I don’t do windows and hypos. Also, you’re talking about laws that might make the President tense and I’m the President’s player when it comes to Congress creating tension with the Prez (ok, maybe he said is slightly different, but still)
So - ya think some of the Hadley, Rice, Cheney, Rove shenanigans, if they took place, might not also constitution a whole, separate violation (other than the Intel. Iden. Act) of the Nat. Sec. Act prohibition on covert actions to influence domestic politics?
Hmmmm?
Impeachment count on google
searching for “Bush” “Impeachment”
Results 1 - 10 of about 12,400,000 for bush impeachment. (0.32 seconds)
hmmm….
Vermont calls for impeachment …
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/040906B.shtml
prolly gonna get EPU’d but I thought this was interesting, if not news.
One nitpick re the conclusion of the de la Vega piece, that this “is also precisely the abuse of executive power that led to the impeachment of Richard M. Nixon” — Nixon was never impeached. It was all but certain that the House would impeach and the Senate would convict him, but he resigned first.
egregious @ 1:36 pm - Hardly free, I’d say. When you add up the cost of housing them, feeding them, and making sure that they don’t run away, and subtract the taxes they’re no longer paying, it would probably be less expensive to allow them to continue to work for the minimum wage.
Hrm…could it be that Fitz sees Bush as just another guy in the room? That is, he knows that Cheney is the real leader/player/executor of the conspiracy whereas Bush is just the guy who wanted the political cover. Ya know, Cheney is the hired gun that commited the crime and Bush is just a guy with some of the data.
Gryn 11 - Kurtz seems to gloss over the diff between an op ed and a new piece, doesn’t he? It’s almost as if he’s saying the news piece WAS just plain old opinion, no facts.
Really? WaPo agrees with his analysis on that? Here I thought the reporters there tended to feel that there should be a distinction - some big brouhaha comes to mind - I must be mistaken.
T-says at 39
A president cannot be indited for crimes commited while in office, he must be impeached instead of/or first (some debate about that, no case has ever gotten that far).
It would make sense that Fitz, who seems to have afull plate with the folks he CAN INDICT, is focusing on doing his own job and minding his own business re: Congress’s job–rolling out articles of impeachment.
He is wisely FOCUSSING.
Assuming that the info in the Leapold article is correct.
wesgpc 16
Disinformation
Instead of hearing this from our “leaders” in mid-2003…:
“The 2002 National Intelligence Estimate led the country astray. We invaded Iraq based on misleading and now-disproven ‘intelligence’ about an alleged nuclear weapons program (see the NIE’s ‘key judgements’) that we now know does not exist.
We take full responsibility for, and will request a full and independent investigation of, the gross failures of our $44 BILLION dollar-a-year intelligence agencies and their work product, and have commenced planning for the withdrawal of our Armed Forces from Iraq, in consultation with the Congress, forthwith.”
…Our “leaders” were anonymously saying this to the media:
“There really IS a sentence or two somewhere in that 96 page really, really important Top Secret NIE report and ‘annex’ (compiled under intense political pressure from us to ‘get it right’), that ‘proves’ we have good faith and were honest when we told America about Niger and Iraq, and Mr. Joe Wilson is a lying, ignorant SOB to try and tell America that there wasn’t any such sentence, just cause he happened to go to Niger a year ago. So there.”
The answer is obvious: No. Such a misuse of authority is the very essence of a criminal conspiracy to defraud the United States. It is also precisely the abuse of executive power that led to the impeachment of Richard M. Nixon.
excuse me, but at best, this is a tortured question and answer.
this president can say and do anything at all, he can unilaterally declare powers that don’t exist, he can make whatever claims he likes and then have congress, the senate and the supreme court agree with him
he makes the claim that he is entitled to do what other presidents are not entitled to do by virtue of his “war president” status.
we HAVE GOT to stop assuming the rules apply for this adminsitration, in thier minds, no rule appies…corporate media will have his back, the republican conress will have is back, the senate will have his back and the the supreme court will have his back.
there is really only one thing we can do, make the the general public aware what is happening to their country, through the internet while it’s still available, and hopefully through the election provess we will be able to bring an oversight back to this once proud democracy.
if the repuke licans are able to steal the nlocal elections the way they were able to steal the grand election we are dooned.
we MUST make sure there is NO electronic voting, we have to make ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN there are exit polls, conducted by legitimate organizations that will NOT bow to the will of the neo cons that will twist arms.
we are in a crisis that may not have an avenue to circumvent the reinvention of what was once America
Mary, Mary, Mary,
Nice pick up. You have a prosecutor buried in you my girl.
justbrowzing says:
April 10th, 2006 at 1:18 pm
“Drain the swamp.â€
(Dear reader, Washington D.C. was built on a swamp.)
Joel says:
This is actually a myth perpectuated by second-rate tourist guides. DC was not built on a swamp.
– a D.C. native.
jane,
i’m surprised that you refer to fred hiatt as “a dupe”. he is a willing and deliberate conspirator. calling him a dupe implies that he doesn’t know what bush is up to. not possible!
ck@#36
And the Thurston Howell accent. Geez. Prolly uses “summer” as a verb. ie “I think I’ll summer in the Hamptons.”
Mary @ 1:45 pm (#58)
I’d go with “double-secret declassification”.
Re: ck #36 –
Mark Twain and a friend go to a play in Germany; although both know enough German to follow the play, it’s not a very good one, and at the intermission Twain’s friend asks him if he wants to leave. “No,” says Twain, “I think I’m going to wait around for the verb.”
Joe Wilson coming up live in the Situation Room with Wolfie.
Cujo359 @ 1:26
“He started with a valid point about declassification procedures and proceeded to ignore the implications of what was declassified and for what purpose.”
Cujo, could you clarify what exactly the valid point about declassification procedures was?
De la Vega is always on point- I wish we could see her more on shows like Wolf Blitzer and other MSM outlets because she has a way of articulating exactly what the issue is in a way everybody can understand.
The dems should hire her as a spokesperson :)
Anybody who can claim that a) Bush’s declassification was just an ordinary old presidential prerogative; b) it was justified to “rebut” Wilson and his critics and c) it was NOT an abuse of the declassification process, clearly has their heads up their collective asses. (hear that, WaPo?)
What seems lost on most in the media is that JOSEPH WILSON WAS RIGHT. What about that don’t they get? After Wilson’s editorial appeared the admin. was forced to publicly denounce the infamous “16 words”- it doesn’t get much more obvious than that, does it?
Bush abused the declassification process not only to play politics, but to mislead the American people- that is unacceptable.
The media keep forgetting that while Bush was selectively declassifying parts of the NIE, he was purposefully keeping parts of it classified for purely political reasons and that much of the administrations claims were apparently called into question in other parts of the NIE.
Who among the dems have the guts to hit this one out of the park, day after day. Reid has issued a strong statement but they need to keep the pressure on. If anything should bolster Feingold’s call for censure, it’s this revelation.
Egregious 44, is this what red-faced nutjobsurferboy Rohrabacker was talking about last week? He roared, “We have prisoners, we can use prison labor. Send those brown people back.” (paraphrasing) Anything he thinks is a good idea, I’m agin’ it.
Have you seen the video (I lose track of where I see things) of the prisoner depot? It’s pretty scary - lots of barbed wire and numbered spots for people to line up, right next to the gate that leads to the train tracks. And they’re just not sure where all those gas lines lead to…
oilfieldguy #14 - I read somewhere (see above) that Clusterfuck scored dead last of all presidents ever measured on comprehension of complex sentences. Or did you guess that already?
Mary #58 and Cujo359:
Mary implicitly makes a good point with her suggestion. I forgot to add the qualifers “which may or may not be true, and may or may not be known to be true, or known not be true, and for purposes either to make public beleive what is not true, or true not true”
OK, there. Sorry for the omssion. My Bad.
GSD, you may well be correct in 34.
My sense is the New Yorker went with the story, because they thought a nuclear strike could be imminent, or they thought that someone else might use Seymour’s sources first. Either of those could have come from Rove (or more likely his minions) and imo did.
IMO Rove also had a lot to do with the corporate media coverage that everyone gave to Hersh. It’s the New Yorker Magazine, not widespread readership, and a lot of people have been talking about nuclear bunker busters in Iraq. Corporate media never gave it this much attention before.
IMO Rove goes to the Leaker-in-Chief every day and tells him, I can have this headline on the front pages tomorrow or this headline, which one do you want? Bush told him he wanted anything, except “Leaker-in-Chief.” That’s why Bush keeps Rove around. When he goes to sleep at night, he already knows what he’s going to be reading the next day.
JMO.
“Who among the dems have the guts to hit this one out of the park…”
How does that saying go? If I had a dime for every time…
Cujo - no votes for good old “strategerizing” *g*
I’m still playinig with why we got “wild speculation” and not something “plainspoken” from the good ol boy from Texas like -
What you are hearing is :
lies?
wrong?
false?
not true?
etc.
Seemed like a lot of trouble to go to - using a four syallable word and all.
lhp - *g*
“Wild Speculation” - Rove’s Phrase of the Day(TM)
How many others will repeat those two words? Lets count shall we?
KM @ 1:54 pm (#68)
While I don’t agree that the criticism is either hypocritical or hyperbolic, it certainly is criticism that resulted from the handling of that declassification. The adjective I would have chosen was “valid”.
I believe Rove behind the scenes has done everything he could do to fuel these massive rallies.
See the MSNBC poll:
Massive turnout at immigration rallies: Are you more sympathetic to their cause? * 9937 responses
Yes
24%
No
76%
Rove doesn’t care any more about the wider Republican party, he’s spliting them wide open on this. He just wants to keep the “Leaker-in-Chief” insulated and right now, corporate media has to cover these rallies which imo really hurt all the more reasonable legislative alternatives.
looseheadprop says:
April 10th, 2006 at 1:45 pm
Are you quoting an opinion written by Robert Bork in 1973 when he worked in the Department of Justice? What else do we have to go on?
John Casper - diversion, diversion, diversion.
Yep, that sounds about right.
I haven’t seen them yet, but apparently Joe DiGenova and Scott McClellan have both cited the Washington Post editorial to support the leak. So this is how Administration truthiness is born. It’s a loop — manufacture at the White House, feed to access-addicted newspaper, disseminate through Republican talking heads, point at it and say, “see, it’s true!” Game over. Next war!
wesgpc@#16
Retrounitariredecounterinteltruthiwilsonnelson.
(might be too compound/complex, ya think?)
Mommybrain@#70
I heard someone say that the reason Bush describes his policies in simplistic terms is because that’s the way they are explained to him.
I read the Leopold article linked in Zergle 9.
What’s wrong with this sentence, “Attorneys close to the case said that Fitzgerald does not appear to be overly concerned or interested in any alleged discrepancy in Bush’s statements about the leak case to investigators.â€
WTFN?
———————————————–
I wouldn’t be overly concerned about the fact that Fitz “does not appear to be overly concerned or interested”. Fitz does not take his eye off the ball, and the ball in this case is, “Who leaked Plame’s identity?” and “Was it a crime?” The “Who?” part is taken care of. Fitz seems to know everybody who directly leaked Plame’s identity. The “Crime?” part is pretty obvious at this point. Fitz just needs to prove it. Libby lied to him to prevent this, so now he needs to flip Libby. Rove lied to him, too, so he needs to flip Rove. Or maybe he HAS flipped Rove. The ultimate goal is to nail whoever gave the order to betray Plame. Right now, it looks like it was Cheney, so I would expect that that’s what Fitz has his eye on.
Jane,
IMO the real legal question isn’t about Bush’s right to declassify. It’s whether or not he did in fact officially declassify the portions of the NIE Libby showed to Miller and Woodward prior to Libby having done so (i.e. 27 June 2003 at the latest).
As I keep insisting, just because Bush had the right to declassify the NIE doesn’t mean he actually did so prior to Libby’s leaks. Did he officially declassify the relevant portions of the NIE, or did he just direct Libby to go leak classified information?
We know that on 18 July 2003, the day that declassified portions of the NIE were publicly released, Scott McClellan said that they had been declassified that very day. So if the portions released to the public were, as Libby has suggested (and I think he’s lying), those very same portions which he had earlier leaked to reporters, then we know for a fact that it was an illegal leak of then-still-classified information.
McClellan’s adamant refusal to specify the actual timing of the declassification, and his patent attempts to muddy the waters and conflate the Libby leak with the public declassification of 18 July, makes me very suspicious that Bush never officially declassified anything before ordering Libby to do his leaking.
I hate that whole concept of “framing” too. The original Lakoff idea is fine, but I get really tired of people blathering about how we “frame” the issues. Like that’s really the only problem we as a nation face–the dems don’t frame properly. Whatever. Some folks have taken too many communications theory classes–and I say this as an English professor.
A good and interesting post. Thanks, Jane.
wesgpc, 16
Some one needs to invent and justify a new term for what Bush did….Is there a word for that?”
Yes, maybe not a word, but a phrase, and it’s not new:
“..treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”
And yes, it is in the Constitution, Article II, Section 4: “the President, Vice President, and all civil officers of the United States shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”
Seems like the Founding Fathers anticipated your question. And yes, apparently there is no bar to impeaching both the president and the vice president concurrently.
But that would make Denny Hastert president. Feel better? I didn’t think so.
Cujo #76:
There’s no doubt that Presidents are authorised to declassify sensitive information. The question is whether Bush actually declassified the information he apparently told Libby to leak to reporters.
Joe Wilson is on CNN smacking down Wolfie on the Leak/declassifcation issue…
And doing a mighty fine job, pb!!!
Mr. Wilson– still thinks Rove should be frogged marched out of the WH– with or without cuffs. What a gent he is!
Found these nuggets while perusing the washingtonpost.com website
Extra, Extra! WaPo outed as lovechild of Pravda and The Onion.
Posted by: rascalsout | April 10, 2006 01:20 AM
the president’s defense for cherrying picking intelligence and then covertly handing it to selected (friendly) journalists is that he can do that because he is the President….
but like with all his other excuses for breaking our laws he seems to want to erase the rules for declassifying intelligence…..
Classified Intell can be declassified as long as it’s not to:
(1) conceal violations of law, inefficiency, or administrative error;
(2) prevent embarrassment to a person, organization, or agency;
(3) restrain competition; or
(4) prevent or delay the release of information that does not require protection in the interest of the national security
the Washington Post can spin it, dice it or slice it …they can declare it a good leak (whatever the heck that is) but it sure looks like Dubya once again broke our laws and then LIED about it and the wapo editors are once again complicit in protecting and defending the lies and the liars that make up the WORST Administration in our nation’s History.
Posted by: RealityCheck | April 10, 2006 03:25 AM
Mary 58:
Or, in the original Russian, (transliterated) “dezinformatsia.” Which reminds me, why is it, I wonder, that everything WaPo prints these days on Bushco sounds as though it came straight from Pravda, or worse, the Voelkische Beobachter?
CNN doesn’t seem to be buying it, either:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITI.....index.html
Bush didn’t declassify anything. They ran a hit on Wilson, got popped, and Libby is trying save himself, Dick and the Chimp at the same time. Like any group of third rate criminals, their after the fact stories smell. They’re cornered and they know it. I’m really going to enjoy the next few months.
Here’s a letter I sent to the WaPoo –
“It is never too late to be what you might have been.”
– George Eliot
So, Dear Publisher, Editors, and Reporters at the Washington Post –
I am not going to write you off into the dust bin of history just because you ran one of the most malinformed and mendacious editorials in the history of journalism this Sunday.
I do, however, suggest that you summarily fire the person responsible for penning (or urinating) “The Good Leak.”
Evidence seems to point in the direction of one Mr. Fred Hiatt, but then again, he may be plagiarizing from one Ben Domenech, who flamed across your pages recently.
Whoever it is, he’s obviously a “useful tool” for Karl Rove and a total toadie for the Bush Administration, which succeeded (with your editorial help, I might add) in misleading, if not outright lying our country into a bloody, disastrous and expensively unnecessary War on Iraq and then into scaring our citizenry into re-electing that same incompetent, “all-war, all-the-time” President in 2004.
If that was your and his intention, then you’ve gotten what you wanted.
However, I do not believe that we the American people have gotten what we deserve.
It’s too late to ask George W. Bush and his administration to take back their lies. They’ve already inflicted too much blood on us and the world. They’ve already stuck each American child with a “birth tax” of over $30,000 per child to pay for their misbegotten war and their tax cuts for millionaires.
However, it’s not too late for you to apologize for your misrepresentations or lies. It’s not too late for you to fire the sycophantic sophist who regurgitated malodorous, cheap-shot Republican talking points onto your editorial pages. It’s not too late for you to remember the late, great Katharine Graham and to restore a sense of truth and honor to the pages of the once-great Washington Post.
The American people await your response. As George Eliot said — “It is never too late to be what you might have been.”
Sincerely,
I just watched a clip by David Shuster on Hardball that was just brilliant about the “Leaker-in-Chief.” If anyone else saw it, I would appreciate their opinion. I hope Crook’s and Liars gets it.
Well, all this flap over the NIE and rights of disclosure is still only one degree away from who leaked the name of a CIA NOC. That’s what’s on the minds of those watching what the administration says about the NIE business, because the administration is actually trying to make its case, obliquely, with regard to the real issue–Plame’s exposure.
When I looked at the law (50 USC §421), it does not give the President, or anyone, preferential rights to disclose any such identity. The law says “Whoever….” Period. Whether Bush can override law on his own as a supreme authority on classification is going to be irrelevant to the public if it comes to see him as using Plame for political purposes.
Fitzgerald may know that Bush authorized this, but he’s powerless to do anything about it–it’s up to Congress to impeach him for it (as with all the other usurpations in which Bush has engaged for the sake of the “unitary executive”). But, if Bush lied to Fitzgerald about it, I’ll put even money on a future indictment of someone naming Bush as an unindicted co-conspirator. If Congress doesn’t act then, we’re probably doomed.
Look at the damage from the WaPo editorial:
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/.....d-into-cv/
If it wasn’t clear before that the WaPo carries Bush’s water and seems to exist to promote the administration’s propaganda, that link above makes it crystal clear today.
Was this all part of the plan? The administration is running around touting the editorial in support of its factually-impaired argument and all the wingnut talking heads who spend much of their time claiming that the WaPo is a liberal rag are now talking about the brilliant editorial yesterday.
They have told so many lies and spun so much spin, that even they cannot tell you where it begins and ends. Much like wiping your ass on a wagon wheel.
By way of Raw Story:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200.....ne_jamming
KM @ 2:26 pm (#86) - If he said he did it, I think we have to assume that he actually did. There’s an expectation folks here seem to have that declassification is a formal process. The “formalities”, in my experience, are mostly record keeping and re-editing or changing the marking of the classified materials. In a sense, once the classification authority says the document is no longer classified, then it is no longer classified. Proving it, and proving that the declassification happened at such-and-such a time, requires the record keeping.
In truth, the burden of proof, should previously classified information get out, is generally on the classification authority to show that the information was declassified. The record keeping, IOW, is as much for the protection of the classification authority and his subordinates as it is for anyone else. How this might apply in the President’s case, I’m not sure. Each agency has its own rules on these matters, and he is the head of the government, after all. Usually, folks are willing to take the President at his word.
I’ve never handled Top Secret materials, so whatever extra rules might apply there are beyond my ken, but that’s how it works for lower classifications.
SAIS has the whole speechy thing from W today up and separately the Q & A. The Q & A is worth seeing, imo– the disparity between the student’s intelligence and chimpy’s is absolutely riveting.
Audio and transcript up now– video to follow.
http://www.sais-jhu.edu/index.html
Hiatt-Wormtoungue has now provided fodder for CNN to claim that an “article” in the Washington Post found the intelligence leak to be in the national interest. I’m sure Fox is pulling the same crap. I can’t watch.
Joe Wilson is Keith’s guest tonight on Hardball.
“Wild Speculation†- Rove’s Phrase of the Day(TM)
How many others will repeat those two words? Lets count shall we?
So far today I’ve seen both Scotty and Bush say it, repeatedly, the clips are getting lots of coverage. Complete with big graphic letters banner style on CNN and I think MSNBC, exactly as you have it with quotation marks in one I saw: “Wild Speculationâ€. Complete with Bush heh heh heh’ing like Precious Pup. Oh it’s the new meme, big time, getting shoved down America’s throats.
Oy, my face is red. I meant Countdown.