Come writers and critics
Who prophesize with your pen
And keep your eyes wide
The chance won't come again
And don't speak too soon
For the wheel's still in spin
And there's no tellin' who
That it's namin'.
For the loser now
Will be later to win
For the Times should be a-changin'.
--Bob Dylan

Good bye Sulzberger, Kellrr, and Miller.

Kellrr (sic)

Fitzgerald's response:

Come politician's, journalists
Please heed the call
Don't stand in the doorway
Don't block up the hall
For he that gets hurt
Will be he who has stalled
There's a battle outside
And it is ragin'.
It'll soon shake your windows
And rattle your walls
For the indictments they are a-comin'.

Let the blood soaked NY Times go down in flames with the rest of the MSM. They are an embarrasement and disgrace to the whole country. That is what happens when you print nothing but lies that end up causing the murder of thousands of innocent people and poisoning the worlds opinion of us.

I love Bob Dylan.

I don't think the NY Times realizes the long lasting memories that are being created right now. Think of the Washington Post and Deep Throat. That story became part of our history. It was part of watergate. The Washington Post gained a reputation for investigative reporting and guts in journalism. They made people want to go into journalism.
Anything to do with the Plame story will have a lasting ripple. The reputation you develop at this point is going to stick for a long, long time. Until the next gigantic story, the next political tidal wave. The NY Times, unfortunately has come to the same conclusion (I guess) that the White House has, the US has no long term memory.

I think, five years from now, these blogs are going to be regarded as something that helped shaped history. The news is recorded and it gets shared. Stories get dissected. Opinions are stated. Arguments are allowed. Discussion is welcomed. Our voices are heard.

I foresee hand cuffs, suicides, and a possible impeachment. Bloomberg
( http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000087&sid=aSuj1d8CcYAk&refer=top_world_news)

is reporting that Wilson is may seek a civil case against Bushie, which would haul them, presumably, before the SC...which would says something to the whole "stacking the deck" issues that were brought up last week Friday on Diane Rehm.

How come Judy isn't getting hauled back to jail? Wow! This is good stuff!

Happy Monday!

Click Me!

Away from the computer for a few days, time to catch up!

David thank you for admitting that you "went to easy on Miller and the Times". I have certainly thought that was the case..when you referred to Fitzgerald's efforts as excesses, I was stunned. Thank for looking at this objectively, and honestly.

I have never thought for one moment that Judy Miller was out of Fitzgerald's sights. She was a major player in the transfer of information and he knows it. And they have too much history. It is obvious he has been on to how Judy has mis-used information and abused her responibility to the public, and her security clearance status.

That phone call or calls to the supposed Islamist charity... informed the group of the upcoming F.B.I raid. I have read that the F.B.I. were furious. I am sure Fitzgerald wants to know where Judy got that tip.

I continue to make efforts to alert the public about PHASE II OF THE SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE THAT HAS YET TO BE IMPLEMENTED. Last week onn Diane Rehm I got on )kathleen from kilvert) and asked Scott ritter about this what I believe to be an important topic. Friday I was able to ask a Washington Post reporter whether they will be covering this important issue. Today I was able to get on the Diane Rehm show once again as (anna, my middle nam to ask Admiral Turner about Phase II of this committee.

David, from what I have read it seems important that Phase II be implemented...especially if Fitzgerald's investigation does not include having thoroughly investigated both the creation and dessimination of all of the false intelligence having to do with the claims about WMD's. How important do you think this is, and do you think it is worthwhile attempting the to get the media to cover the topic? I DO

Thinking about Judy Miller, in light of the new security clearance issues, take a look here at a billmon article from June 23, 2003.

Excerpt: The more I think about this story, the more insane it sounds. It looks like Miller became the neocons' "woman on the ground" with Alpha Team. So a New York Times reporter ended up with her own direct line to the Pentagon, allowing her to countermand the orders of commanders in the field????

Somebody please tell me I'm not the one who's going crazy!

******************

Your lies now are fallin' over you.
It's all over now for Judy, too.

In following judygate she should be tried for at least perjury. Five years in prison sounds right.

#7
Robert,
That was great!

Judygate

The whole Judith Miller fiasco has always seemed messy. She goes to jail for 85 days, comes out and has a million dollar plus book deal that is bankrolled by some conservative book publishing company. It is too bad that the Fitzgerald ends shop on October 28, 2005. There will probably be no indictments for Bush, Cheney, Rove, Miller, and a host of others. But, reading Fitzgerald's Grand Jury notes should be good reading for many law school students.

Hello!!!!
Goodbye. This administration is heading for the last round up.
Cheney May Be Entangled in CIA Leak Investigation, People Say

Oct. 17 (Bloomberg) -- A special counsel is focusing on whether Vice President Dick Cheney played a role in leaking a covert CIA agent's name, according to people familiar with the probe that already threatens top White House aides Karl Rove and Lewis Libby.

The special counsel, Patrick Fitzgerald, has questioned current and former officials of President George W. Bush's administration about whether Cheney was involved in an effort to discredit the agent's husband, Iraq war critic and former U.S. diplomat Joseph Wilson, according to the people.

Fitzgerald has questioned Cheney's communications adviser Catherine Martin and former spokeswoman Jennifer Millerwise and ex-White House aide Jim Wilkinson about the vice president's knowledge of the anti-Wilson campaign and his dealings on it with Libby, his chief of staff, the people said. The information came from multiple sources, who requested anonymity because of the secrecy and political sensitivity of the investigation....

It's "Miller Time" to do the time.

This one oughta make everyone feel better.

Beth Quinn "Crony in charge of protecting us from killer flu"

Open wide and say ahhh, shyt!

Mr. David Corn,

There is something going on and it is not what is being "reported".

Another good posts and I too tip my hat to you for your honesty.

Thanks

Kirk

Get readt for Terror Alert Level RED!! Distraction time.

Judith Miller, the Fourth Estate, and the Warfare State - By Norman Solomon

More than any other New York Times reporter, Judith Miller took the lead with stories claiming that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Now, a few years later, she's facing heightened scrutiny in the aftermath of a pair of articles that appeared in the Times on Sunday - a lengthy investigative piece about Miller plus her own first-person account of how she got entangled in the case of the Bush administration's "outing" of Valerie Plame as a CIA agent.

It now seems that Miller functioned with more accountability to US military intelligence officials than to New York Times editors. Most of the way through her article, Miller slipped in this sentence: "During the Iraq war, the Pentagon had given me clearance to see secret information as part of my assignment 'embedded' with a special military unit hunting for unconventional weapons." And, according to the same article, she ultimately told the grand jury that during a July 8, 2003, meeting with the vice president's chief of staff, Lewis Libby, "I might have expressed frustration to Mr. Libby that I was not permitted to discuss with editors some of the more sensitive information about Iraq."

Let's replay that one again in slow motion.

Judith Miller is a reporter for the New York Times. After the invasion, on assignment to cover a US military unit as it searches for WMDs in Iraq, she's given "clearance" by the Pentagon "to see secret information" - which she "was not permitted to discuss" with Times editors.

There's nothing wrong with this picture if Judith Miller is an intelligence operative for the US government. But if she's supposed to be a journalist, this is a preposterous situation - and the fact that the New York Times has tolerated it tells us a lot about that newspaper. [...]

[...]"WMD - I got it totally wrong," the Times quoted Miller as saying in a Friday interview. "The analysts, the experts and the journalists who covered them - we were all wrong. If your sources are wrong, you are wrong."

But analysts, experts and journalists were not "all wrong." Some very experienced weapons inspectors - including Mohamed ElBaradei, Hans Blix and Scott Ritter - challenged key assertions from the White House. Well before the invasion, many other analysts also disputed various aspects of the US government's claims about WMDs in Iraq. (For examples, see archived news releases put out by my colleagues at the Institute for Public Accuracy in 2002 and early 2003.) Meanwhile, journalists at some British newspapers, including the Independent and the Guardian, raised tough questions that were virtually ignored by mainstream US reporters in the Washington press corps. [...] more.

********

This is what drives me so crazy. The "Everybody thought he had WMDs" line that is repeated ad infinitum, and has been so wrong from the start.

Saladin,

Isn't that what the "bird flu" scare is? I mean, if these folks don't believe in evolution, why are they so concered about the H5N1 mutating into a virulant strain?

And, if there was true concern about biological risk factors, wouldn't the more effective response be Universal Health Care, which would include screening for contagions, diets which bolster immune systems, basic hygeine guidelines, etc.

The Heart of the Matter
By William Rivers Pitt

[...]Ambassador Joseph Wilson's public attack on Bush for using the now-rubbished Niger uranium evidence, his attack upon the entire rationale for invasion, was a direct and ominous threat to the latticework of disinformation and lies put forth by WHIG and OSP. They didn't attack Wilson's wife because they didn't like her, or because they were bored. They did it because Wilson could have almost singlehandedly dismantled the administration's case for war. They did it to warn any other insiders who might have wanted to talk that there would be serious consequences for public statements. The administration's case for war was championed not by Rove and Libby, but by Bush and Cheney. It was their party, and Wilson was looking to stop the music.

Two questions remain: why would the administration take such a fantastic risk in attacking Wilson, and where are Bush's fingerprints on this thing? Both questions can be answered by another tidbit that has fallen down the memory hole. On May 22nd, 2003, two months after the invasion of Iraq, George W. Bush signed an Executive Order titled "Protecting the Development Fund for Iraq and Certain Other Property in Which Iraq Has An Interest."

The so-called "Development Fund for Iraq" was, by the way, one of the most grandiose money-laundering schemes ever devised. All of the profits made from plundering Iraq's oil were to go into this fund, ostensibly for use by the Iraqi people. In fact, this was the clearing-house for payouts to companies like Halliburton and its subsidiary, Kellog Brown & Root.

The May 22 Executive Order reads:

I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, find that the threat of attachment or other judicial process against the Development Fund for Iraq, Iraqi petroleum and petroleum products, and interests therein, and proceeds, obligations, or any financial instruments of any nature whatsoever arising from or related to the sale or marketing thereof, and interests therein, obstructs the orderly reconstruction of Iraq, the restoration and maintenance of peace and security in the country, and the development of political, administrative, and economic institutions in Iraq. This situation constitutes an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States and I hereby declare a national emergency to deal with that threat.

I hereby order: Unless licensed or otherwise authorized pursuant to this order, any attachment, judgment, decree, lien, execution, garnishment, or other judicial process is prohibited, and shall be deemed null and void."

This Executive Order, declaring a national emergency, gave complete and total legal cover to Halliburton and every other petroleum and quasi-petroleum corporation currently operating in Iraq. No one can sue them, no one can touch them, no matter what they may do. By Executive Order, George W. Bush released Halliburton and the others from the need to display any kind of responsibility or legal behavior. Halliburton was removed from the sphere of civilization, and the laws that govern civilization, with the stroke of Mr. Bush's pen.

George W. Bush declared a national emergency in this Executive Order for one reason: to lock down the oil, and to give total legal cover to Dick Cheney's Halliburton, so they could do whatever they wanted to get their hands on it, and to get paid for it. Here we have Bush's fingerprints, and here is the reason for not only attacking Wilson, but for chucking up a war that was not necessary. [...] more.

**************

Bush & Cheney as unindicted, or actually named co-conspiritors?

Robert, I don't know if you caught the article I posted on the last thread called "Project Bioshield". You know whenever they slap a label like that on any of the neocons hairbrained facist ideas, it will have the exact opposite effect the name implies. The birdflu is just another excuse to force martial law down our throats and inflict untested vaccines on the population. It really is a frightening thought. But people will fall for it, just like they fell for the idiot 9/11 story and Iraq's WMD's. I think we WILL have universal health care, just not the way we ever imagined it.

on one note (Miers)...
Bush shows his own leadership/decision making and gets shot down by his brain trust

On another note...

He is still enabling his brain trust with foreign policy decision making...

So will USA get rushed into war with Syria and Iran in order to distract us from the Plame affair. I mean its the ultimate "Wag the Dog"... pursuing an armagaddeon scenario in order to escape judgment for injustice and wrongs at home.

In the early part of the war, Joshua Marshall wrote what I thought would become a prescient piece, "Practice to Deceive" and not enough people in the press were checking things out. Marshall's predicted scenario of the WH admin's tactic to get a war going with Syria/Iran did not occur but the strategy of the WH admin as reflected in Marshall's article still seems unchanged.

Saladin,

I fear you may be exctly correct - forced medication is not what I had in mind...

...and we can look at the military's previous use of troops as guiniea pigs for untested vaccines to see our own futures.

#19
Robert,
Amen.

David, I wonder what you thought of the Letters in the Times today. Given the extraordinary coverage over the weekend I was very curious to see what the TImes would print in Letters the day after. There is a "balance" of pro/con type letters, but I think the ones that excoriate the Times are pretty harsh. Reading btw the lines, I think the Times is trying to take their lumps--and that's good--by letting their readers do the whacking. The first letter whacks hard. Does this help repair the Times, at all, for you, David?

#20
Robert,
You are on a roll.
Can that order be made null and void?

Can that order be made null and void?
Jeanne

Ben Franlklin was supposed to have said, "A Republic, if you can keep it."

Only if we have.

Who can explain the procedure for the indictments? What role does Alberto Gonzales play in regard to Fitzgerald being able to move forward with whatever action he plans?

One wearies of saying things about The New York Times these days. It's as if we can talk them into being something they aren't anymore. They don't seem to know what we're talking about, indicating to me that their view of the Fourth Estate and their place in it isn't what we thought.

We're in the same boat with Bush and Company. We fallaciously thought that they had a similar view of the United States to that held by other presidents for the last 200 years. But they don't. They have some other view.

Both The New York Times and the Bush Administration operate on the principle that packaging is the most important thing. Give the illusion of being something, but do what you want behind closed doors.

It worked for a while. But there's now more than one Emperor with no clothes.

Kathleen,

Fitzgerald was appointed because Gonzales' predesessor, Asscroft, was too close to Rove to continue.

See also, the Saturday Night Massacre...

Writing a philosophy is one of the ideas I had but it reaches beyond my abilities. The name of the philosophy was to be Americanism. Most of my work on philosophy has been in existentialism and Tao. Americanism seems a done deal, needing to be written. The Part One title was Honor and Dishonor.

As I say, the deluge of the second half was more than I could handle so the project is shelved.

Have a nice day, all.

# 30 Robert, thank you for responding. although I know that Fitzgerald was appointed after Ashcroft left or was encouraged to leave.

My question is this...Gonzales is far more partisan than Fitzgerald. fitzgerald answers to Gonzales to some degree. Can Gonzales hang up the procees of indicting..or can/will or is he influential in just what charges to bring against the individuals under investigation?

Kathleen,

Fitzgerald was appointed while Ashcroft was still the Atty Gen.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said Friday he believes the investigation into who leaked the name of a CIA operative nearly two years ago is moving forward appropriately.

Democratic members of the House Intelligence Committee wrote Gonzales on Thursday asking him to "provide an explanation as to why no charges have been brought" against government officials who leaked the name of Valerie Plame.

It is illegal to reveal the names of covert operatives.

In response to the Democrats, Gonzales said he is confident that Patrick Fitzgerald, the U.S. attorney from Chicago who is the lead prosecutor on the case, is "proceeding on a basis that he thinks is appropriate and that at the appropriate time the matter will come to a head."

Gonzales noted that he recused himself from the matter after taking office. His predecessor, John Ashcroft, also recused himself in December 2003 after complaints from Democrats. Ashcroft's office said he took that step to avoid an appearance of conflict of interest. [...]

*********************

But, in the end, the President has the power to pardon...

The date of that article:

April 15, 2005...

Terror alert red? Good call, Cap'n! The Bush Mantra Repeat: Create a crisis, exploit the fear. Bird flu? Maybe they'll decide to report on that kid from Oklahoma? Gas shortage? Hmm...

The terror alert stuff is passe. It doesn't fly anymore. Now what they are going to do is just make America too busy to be able to react to piddley things like leaks and indictments. How will they keep us busy? Hmmm. Syria?

Vote Totals Under Inquiry in 12 Iraqi Provinces, Panel Says
By DEXTER FILKINS
Published: October 17, 2005
"Unusually high" vote totals in 12 provinces raised the possibility that the results could be called into question.
----------------
Congratulations Iraq! Democracy American style is an official success!

Good comments and links today. Go YOU Cornbloggers! And of course, it started with a good post by David. Thanks everybody.

David,

What did Judy and Scooter talk about in Wyoming? She reports it without a narrative. Surely it matters!

[more]

Great posts, esp. the Exec. order re: Iraqi Oil. A minor note about Miller and Libby's anonymous sourcing: You have to give the Times a break on this one as she didn't write the article, therefore the editor's didn't see the sourcing, therefore we don't know if they would have allowed this to go through. As I understand it, Miller promised Libby. The Times' editors, as far as we know, didn't see the product born of this promise. You can't hold them accountable. As for Miller, that is another story. She is NOT a journalist, she is a hack seduced by power. As for who she is protecting, history dictates that one protects people UP the food chain rather than down. Libby to Cheney or Rove is my guess. Keep up the good work,David.

It nice to know that I can count on FEMA in an emergency. Here's a new article on the mess they made of things.
-----
FEMA hampered with internal chaos as Katrina hit, memos show
WASHINGTON (AP) - FEMA struggled to locate food, ice, water and even body bags in the days following Hurricane Katrina, a frantic effort punctuated by bureaucratic chaos, infighting and concerns about media coverage, according to memos obtained Monday by The Associated Press.

Five days after the storm hit on Aug. 29, Michael Brown, then director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, e-mailed an aide saying there had been "no action from us" to evacuate storm victims using planes that airlines had made available.

"This is flat wrong. We have been flying planes all afternoon and evening," a subordinate, Michael Lowder, e-mailed in reply less than 30 minutes later.

A day earlier, a FEMA official in Mississippi received an e-mail asking for Brown's satellite phone number so a senior Pentagon official in the Gulf Coast could call him. "Not here in MS (Mississippi). Is in LA (Louisiana) as far as I know," FEMA official William Carwile e-mailed back, seemingly uncertain on the whereabouts of the administration's point man for responding to the disaster.

---------
FEMA is a very critical federal department and we have these clowns playing important.

But, Jeanne.

Good clowns have impeccable timing.

Jeanne, did you see this article? It is excerpts from a diary kept by a Missouri firefighter about what his time in the Gulf Coast looked like. This is such a joke and is light years beyond incompetent.

TRIBUNE COLUMN
Tale of the forbidden pillow offers insights into FEMA work

Lawyer-talk, The Times, and Judy Miller:
Both the article by The Times, and Miller's article, are "safe" articles, in the sense that they were vetted very carefully by their respective lawyers. There are unexploded minefields in the Miller saga, and my guess is the lawyers have tried to charter a course between as many of the minefields as they can identify as of this moment. So, a clear explanation, given the problems still lurking? Not likely. Just think for a moment of possible lawsuits to come, brought perhaps by those most harmed by the falsehoods the articles touch on. How many paid a price for the lies spread about WMD? And who thinks that - by simply saying "Let's put this behind us", or "finito" - that those hurt will be denied redress? The leakers of the identity of a CIA agent underestimated the long reach of the law; it is probable that others are doing so right now, as well. You are right, Mr. Corn: the story is not yet over.

Tomdispatch Interview: Juan Cole on George Bush's Iraq

A real must read!

Gee you'd almost think it was part of a vast right wing conspiracy to bring down the NY Times. Sorta like Dan Rather. Naaahhh... nothing to see here...move along.

CIA leak probe 'widening to include use of intelligence'
By Caroline Daniel and Edward Alden

Evidence is building that the probe conducted by Patrick Fitzgerald, special prosecutor, has extended beyond the leaking of a covert CIA agent's name to include questioning about the administration's handling of pre-Iraq war intelligence.

According to the Democratic National Committee, a majority of the nine members of the White House Iraq Group have been questioned by Mr Fitzgerald. The team, which included senior national security officials, was created in August 2002 to educate the public about the risk posed by weapons of mass destruction on Iraq. [...]

*******
The Financial Times, no less. A true left wing rag, them.

RE: GONZALEZ for JEANNE, ROBERT, et al. Sorry for screaming, but I wanted your attention. Gonzalez is not in charge of Fitz, Comey is. Gonzalez was removed and blocked from the case back when Ashcroft recused himself, and Comey picked Fitz, giving him near absolute freedom in pursuing the matter. Comey is a Law and Justice boy scout, like Fitz, who is described as apolitical and ruthless. There is a bit about this in comments at firedoglake, whose assessment of this situation is compulsively readable with educated, spot-on comments. Judy Miller = Mata Whori. Take a look. Thanks David. My sympathies are with the real reporters who could be doing a great job telling this "lawyers, guns and money" tale. What a waste.

"my understanding is that Fitz does not report to Gonzoles -- he's been Chinese-walled off from the investigation just like Ashcroft was, since Gonzales was WH Counsel at the time the leak occurred. Since Comey left, he's been reporting to the Asst. AG in charge of internal investigation matters -- another boy scout in the mold of Fitz and Comey, who was the one who told Ashcroft he had to recuse himself from the matter in the first place. Bloomberg got this wrong." from comments at firedoglake

Zennurse,

No need to scream. And I believe you're right, that the flow chart of responsibility from Fitzgerald goes through Comey. Though I couldn't find the Office of the Special Counsel on the Official DOJ Organizational Flowchart.

But, I'm still reminded of the Saturday Night Massacre; what would happen if Bush or surrogate tried to fire Fitzgerald?

Just listened to you David on "To the Point" and was so glad to hear you address the issue of Judy's agreeing to let Libby be referred to as "former Hill Staffer".

Here is a copy of a letter I sent the NY Times Public Editor (he represents the readers) yesterday morning regarding this issue:

Dear Public Editor,

Reading the Times' online account of the Judith Miller story and then Judy's own article about her grand jury testimony was very interesting, but it was not until I reached the sentence in Ms. Miller's article about how she agreed to attribute the remarks of Libby not to those of "a senior administration official, but to those of "former Hill staffer", that I became outraged and felt, that as a faithful reader of the New York Times, The Times owes me and all other readers a profound apology and a commitment to discontinue this practice immediately.

How dishonest is this? How widespread is its use? How many reporters, in how many instances have used this deceitful, misleading, and I believe, inappropriate use of what technically is not a lie, but certainly places the readers perceptions and reactions in a different light than what it would be if the source's true title were appropriately identified?

What General in the military, was not first a soldier? What University President was not first a student? What head of an agency, was not first a staff person in the agency? What Congressman or Senator was not first a businessman, lawyer or some other professional? In virtually all walks of a professional or political life, a person started somewhere else. To agree to attribute the remarks to a person whose title at an earlier point in time, virtually held no clout or importance, a bureaucratic non-entity, so to speak, when in truth, the person has risen to a position of high importance, power, and clout is just downright deceitful and outrageous.

Did the editors know that reporters were making these kinds of deals with their sources? Did the editors know that the reporters were misleading the readers? Did the editors know the true title of the source and yet still allow the reader to be misled? Whether the answer is yes or no, The New York Times has a lot to answer for.

VA Seeks to Punish Iraq War Veterans
By Gene C. Gerard

The Veterans Affairs Department is currently reviewing approximately one-third of the cases of veterans who are receiving disability benefits for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). After conducting an internal study, the VA believes that they were too lenient in deciding which soldiers were eligible for PTSD benefits. Last year, the VA spent $4.3 billion on PTSD disability payments and the VA hopes to reduce these payments by revoking PTSD benefits for many veterans. This will be the final insult to soldiers who were asked to fight a war in Iraq on false premises.

Owing to the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, the number of veterans receiving compensation for PTSD has increased by almost 80 percent in the last five years. By comparison, the number of veterans receiving compensation for all other types of disabilities only increased by 12 percent. Under the guidelines of the current review, soldiers who cannot prove that a specific incident, known as a "stressor" was sufficient to cause PTSD, their benefits will be revoked. Given the nature of warfare in Iraq and Afghanistan, it's not surprising that many returning soldiers are suffering from mental illness. [...]

[...]The study indicated that 95 percent of soldiers had been shot at. And 56 percent of soldiers had killed an enemy combatant. An estimated 28 percent were directly responsible for the death of a civilian. Equally grim, 94 percent had seen or handled corpses or bodily remains. Additionally, 68 percent witnessed fellow soldiers being killed or seriously wounded. [...]

*************

Bold highlight mine. This from the "Support our Troops" crowd. With support like this...

"In an interview yesterday, Wilson said that once the criminal questions are settled, he and his wife may file a civil lawsuit against Bush, Cheney and others seeking damages for the alleged harm done to Plame's career.

If they do so, the current state of the law makes it likely that the suit will be allowed to proceed -- and Bush and Cheney will face questioning under oath -- while they are in office. The reason for that is a unanimous 1997 U.S. Supreme Court decision ruling that Paula Jones' sexual harassment suit against then-President Bill Clinton could go forward immediately, a decision that was hailed by conservatives at the time."

Richard Keil in Washington at dkeil@bloomberg.net

From:Media Channel

To see them obviously Plamed Coulnd't help but make me feel ashamed To live in a land where justice is a game

My crystal balls say that Judy mentioned her "Scooter Crush" in Montana so the PTB's know she's taken his "aspen roots" deep into the folds of her own and WILL tell all, should anything untoward happen to her...

Scooter's "intertwining roots" comment was to remind her that if she does "tell all" they ALL go to the firepit.

-T

If you call yourself an American that means that you have embraced the constitution, because that is what an American is. A citizen of the United States of America is someone who has sworn an oath of allegiance to that document, to the words, to the ideals of that document. Right now we have citizens who don't even understand what that document is. Scott Ritter - June 23, 2005, Scott Ritter Traprock Peace Center at the Woolman Hill Meeting House

=
"Individual rights are not subject to a public vote; a majority has no right to vote away the rights of a minority; the political function of rights is precisely to protect minorities from oppression by majorities (and the smallest minority on earth is the individual)." (Ayn Rand)

=
They wrote in the old days that it is sweet and fitting to die for one's country. But in modern war, there is nothing sweet nor fitting in your dying. You will die like a dog for no good reason: Ernest Hemmingway

=
Our only hope today lies in our ability to recapture the revolutionary spirit and go into a sometimes hostile world declaring eternal hostility to poverty, racism, and militarism: Martin Luther King, Jr.

===

From ICH newsletter

capt

I think I just grossed myself out...eyeeewwww!

-T

3 more ER hours to go...

I was on the road for about six hours today. You guys are smokin!

Good to see you bloggin Robert Schwartz. Great riff on #7.

Whatever Judith Miller is, she's not a great reporter. And whatever she did her 85 days for it was more likely cash than concience. Can't remember, suffers from pre-alzheimers disease. I think her link goes over the top of Scooter Libby.

Time to call for fireworks. Fitz needs to empowered like Kenneth Starr was. This whole fraud started with Weapons of Mass Destruction that didn't exist and it's ending with Weapons of Miss Destruction.

I was reminded of the Pentagon Papers which were heroically leaked to the Times at the end of the 60s by Daniel Ellsberg. So I google Ellsberg and Miller and the shit hits the fan. So here's agood link to read on PressThink

http://journalism.nyu.edu/pubzone/weblogs/pressthink/2005/10/15/mlr_act.html

"From Judith Miller’s My Four Hours Testifying in the Federal Grand Jury Room come these passages suggesting she may:

… Mr. Fitzgerald repeatedly turned to the subject of how Mr. Libby handled classified information with me. He asked, for example, whether I had discussed my security status with Mr. Libby. During the Iraq war, the Pentagon had given me clearance to see secret information as part of my assignment “embedded” with a special military unit hunting for unconventional weapons.
Mr. Fitzgerald asked if I had discussed classified information with Mr. Libby. I said I believed so, but could not be sure. He asked how Mr. Libby treated classified information. I said, Very carefully.

Mr. Fitzgerald asked whether Mr. Libby had shown any of the documents to me. I said no, I didn’t think so. I thought I remembered him at one point reading from a piece of paper he pulled from his pocket.

I told Mr. Fitzgerald that Mr. Libby might have thought I still had security clearance, given my special embedded status in Iraq. At the same time, I told the grand jury I thought that at our July 8 meeting I might have expressed frustration to Mr. Libby that I was not permitted to discuss with editors some of the more sensitive information about Iraq.

Mr. Fitzgerald asked me if I knew whether I was cleared to discuss classified information at the time of my meetings with Mr. Libby. I said I did not know.

She did not know? I wrote this at PressThink on Oct. 13:..."

Going out of state for a few days and I'll try to read your comments. I do have an opinion though.....

Send them all to prison. Do not underestimate what they will do next. A Fake Red Alert? Maybe another real deal meal like 911. No accidents, no coincidences - (Like Hunter committed suicide when we had him shot, or Wellstone's plane crashed when we brought it down)

Send them to work on a chicken farm in Saigon. Let's see how intelligent design works for that one.

Send them all to prison - except the asshole! Send him to the asylum where he can spend his final days telling people "I really am the president of the United States. I'm not crazy. The liberals locked me up here. I am the president..."

Thanks Robert and Zen nurse for responding to question about the "flow chart of responsibility" in regard to indictments.

1. Does anyone know what Judy Miller's national clearance status was at the time of those conversations with Libby and the folks she conveniently can't remember?

2. I have not read whether Fitzgerald asked her if Libby asked her if she had security clearance or whether she offered that information to Libby.

3. We know that Fitzgerald has history with JM. Does Fitzgerald know how Judy acquired the information about the F.B.I. raid of the supposed Islamist charity? The F.B. I. understandably "pissed' with Miller about this. This charity (whether Islamist or possibly another organization). They were able to destroy documents before the raid , due to Judy alerting them.

4.Did Judy use her security clearance to access information about this F.B.I. raid?

I have never thought for a moment that Judy is off Fitzgerald's list. She has abused her position as a journalist. He is after Judy for her abuse (along with the rest of the group) for the serious abuse of national security intelligence.

Armstrong Williams contract referred to U.S. attorney

Questions about work for Education Department

Friday, October 14, 2005

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Investigators at the Education Department have contacted the U.S. attorney's office regarding the Bush administration's hiring of commentator Armstrong Williams to promote its agenda.

The action was disclosed by Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-New Jersey, who has pressed for a criminal fraud investigation focused on questions about whether Williams actually performed the work cited in his monthly reports to the Education Department.

Last month, congressional auditors concluded that the Education Department had engaged in illegal "covert propaganda" by hiring Williams to promote the No Child Left Behind Act without requiring him to disclose that he was being paid.

*****end of clip*****

Almost forgot about all of the overtly paid "news" shills.

capt

I go over to the National Review and Weekly Standard websites regularly. I especially like to read what Micheal Ledeen is saying. Still busy pushing for military action in Iran and Syria.

It is surprising how little there has been written about what is presently going on for the Bush administration at both of these sites. Although Stephen Hayes has just written an article called "The White Houae the Cia and the Wilson's". It is in the October 24th issue. It is well worth reading.

Besides, avoiding the topic of trouble in the White House, at these sites, this is a great example of how deep in denial they truely are.

The last sentence of the paragraph below struck me as awfully frank! This from the WSJ article:

"She said she found the notebook in her office. She reiterated that she couldn't recall who told her the name that she transcribed as "Valerie Flame." "I don't remember who told me the name," she said, growing agitated. "I wasn't writing a story, remember?" Asked if the other source was Mr. Rove, she replied, "I'm not going to discuss anyone else that I talked to."

Well then. We now know what to think of "I don't remember who told me," don't we?

We are far from through with Judy and the NYT.

The MSM is going to keep on until they are so not trusted that they may as well toss in the towel. By 2006, who in their right mind will trust them to tell the truth about anything.

This thread is getting hot, but the foreplay may be too aggressive; could cause a premature climax, and disappointment.

great links robert schwartz, all of the reports and opinions are good, glad i saw the news tonight,woops, missed the 6:30 networks...again

Oh boy. Oh boy! OH BOY!!!!!
New York Daily News source believes senior White House official has flipped in leak case

The case of outed CIA agent Valerie Plame is set to explode.

The New York Daily News is set to report in Tuesday editions that a well-placed source interviewed by the newspaper believes a senior White House official has flipped and may be helping the prosecutor in the case, RAW STORY has learned.

The Daily News will reveal that a top source believes that based on the questioning of Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald and his other contacts with the investigation, someone in the White House has turned.

All eyes are on Dick Cheney, the News says, as the investigation wraps up.

The piece follows on the heels of on a story by Bloomberg News and an article by RAW STORY last week confirming that the prosecutor is probing the Vice President.

Also under a microscope is the White House Iraq Group, an ad-hoc strategy group started by Bush chief of staff Andrew Card aimed at selling the war in Iraq.

Two officials close to Fitzgerald told RAW STORY they have seen documents obtained from the White House Iraq Group which state that Cheney was present at several of the group's meetings. They say Cheney personally discussed with individuals in attendance at least two interviews in May and June of 2003 Wilson gave to New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof and Washington Post reporter Walter Pincus, in which he claimed the administration "twisted" prewar intelligence and what the response from the administration should be.

DEVELOPING HARD...

Here's a pretty detailed article on the Identity Protection Act.

The Law is On the Side of Valerie Plame

by Larry Johnson

.....The law to "protect the identities of undercover officers, agents, and sources" is only one possible source of jeopardy for the White House gang. (The key parts of the law are reprinted below.) The important point is not that a law was broken, but that our country is in the hands of a President who is willing to tolerate people in his Administration who are admitted liars and who played a direct role in compromising our nation's security. President Bush is sending a clear message--it is more important to protect cronies than protect this country.
-----
And then the article goes on to state the law.

So great to see that justice may acutally be applied at some point in this case. I was sure hopeful that this investigation had expanded to the Osp and the WHIG...Thanks Jeanie Wayne Madsen has a lot to say today.

Jeanie what have you read about the possibility that some of the intelligence that Plame had been working on in regard to the acquisition of WMD's around the world..pointed back to individuals in the Bush administration who were involved with making money off of U.S. defense contracts. That there was possibly some personal vendetta against Valerie...not just her husband.

I had read something about this quite some time ago. What do you know about this if anything.

I haven't read anything on it but I suspect that this investigation is going to uncover things no one knew were happening. I think many in the congress are going to be shocked. I think the nation is going to be shocked.
And I don't want shoe shopping Condi for president. I don't want to see that smile every time I turn on the TV.
Let's see... what freaking Republican in the Congress is not up for indictment?
We have got an ugly, ugly mess on our hands. Hey, founding fathers what do we do when we screw up this bad?

More on the Cheney involvement.

Cheney's Office Is a Focus in Leak Case
Sources Cite Role of Feud With CIA

By Jim VandeHei and Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, October 18, 2005; A01

As the investigation into the leak of a CIA agent's name hurtles to an apparent conclusion, special prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald has zeroed in on the role of Vice President Cheney's office, according to lawyers familiar with the case and government officials. The prosecutor has assembled evidence that shows Cheney's long-running feud with the CIA contributed to the unmasking of operative Valerie Plame.

In grand jury sessions, including with New York Times reporter Judith Miller, Fitzgerald has pressed witnesses on what Cheney may have known about the effort to push back against ex-diplomat and Iraq war critic Joseph C. Wilson IV, including the leak of his wife's position at the CIA, Miller and others said. But Fitzgerald has focused more on the role of Cheney's top aides, including Chief of Staff I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, lawyers involved in the case said.

One former CIA official told prosecutors early in the probe about efforts by Cheney's office and his allies at the National Security Council to obtain information about Wilson's trip as long as two months before Plame was unmasked in July 2003, according to a person familiar with the account....

#52, I'm wondering who is saying that the VA was too lenient in granting disabilities? War is hell! Probably some chicken hawk who was never in the military!!!

I can't forget the clip from the previous post. I think it was #108. It had Bush speaking at the debates when he was running for governor of Texas and the debates in the last election. During the gubernatorial debate he sounded like somebody who had graduated from Yale and Harvard.
I remember not to long ago Panda had a clip of Bush as a wedding and I remarked that he sounded more coherent when he was drunk. Well the difference was he was younger.
Folks we have a serious issue with our president. He's got problems.
When you combine that with the Plame leak fiasco some very serious debates need to be happening in Congress.

That's Pande. Jeezzz. Sorry.

Good discussion re "Flamegate" on Charley Rose tonight.

Time and Bloomberg are both amazed at Judas Miller's inability to recall the key facts in the story of the year.

And then, as an added bonus, the White Stripes' Jack gives about the best insight into the creative process since Elvis Costello showed up on 2 and a Half men...Meg White gives a great reason not to book a talk show after an all-night NYC bender...

Catch it if you can.

-T

Wow!

Roberto en FUEGO!

First one's on ME! Pick your poison.

-T

Like Mr. Corn, I grew up admiring the NYTimes. I fondly remember the NYTimesMag and working the crossword with a pen, as the song goes. I was such an arrogant petzle back then (not the wonderloving dad that I am now). It was all pretense and show. It was a stoopid metro-symbol for my smalltown mind.

I've slowly weaned myself off of 'em. The pay-per-view firewall put the kibosh on the addiction.

Look at their science and tech sections to see how far they've fallen. Stories (that don't cite a single scientist!) questioning the science behind Global Warming theories. Stories glamorizing the hot new real estate to be found under the melting polar ice caps. Playing Dopes 'R Us in the whole creationism issue.

Look at today's Washpost Headline:
* Lawmaker's Abramoff Ties Investigated
* Messages Depict Disarray in Federal Katrina Response

E.J. editorial: 'Rule of Law'? That's So '90s

Yeah, Cohen is a total asswipe. But The Tim's (hey, Freudian slip, DOT? NYTime's columnist) Safire's bullshit eclipses Cohen's and Krauthammer's asswipery by several powers of ten. Judas Miller as White House odalisque is the death blow for the rag.

The press now breathlessly reports all of the weird angles in the Plame case. Even stupidity gets driven into the ground.

And what do you call a moron who's the last guy standing on the S.S. Titanic Failure? Murad. With poll numbers consistently in the 30's (and 2% support amongst Black folks), it's easier to find a three-legged albino chihuahua (I'm talking 'bout you Paggliacci, mwah, luv ya'!) than it is to find a dedicated Bushbot. I guess we just hit the jackpot.

Midnite madness. I'm off to bed now. I'm halfasleep already.

Wow lots is happening... on rawstory... Cheney's long-standing tensions with the CIA contributed to the unmasking of operative Valerie Plame

Cheney, the real president behind the curtain, may get indicted. Will this lead to Halliburton investigations? Hopefully people will realize his little vindactive act with Wilson is a systemic problem, and it also can't all be blamed on Cheney's personality or basic idealogy, but there is motivation behind his actions.... like profit.

Could it be the same one that motivated the VP's office to dictate a higher priority in the first 24 hours after Katrina to have the limited utility company resources in one county be directed to restoring power to a natural gas pipeline pumping station over hospitals and other emergency sites. The power company management said it amazed them, but it was a presidential order.

Come now folk, let's get real. Do you think anything will come of this Plame thing. How can a whore, whops I ment a reporter forget who they talked to? If you were fitzgerald wold you have accepted that answer? Would YOU have? This is just the smoke screen that will let this all blow away. There will be no indictments, just a white washed report similer to 911. This is just a case of the NYT takeing care of their corprat owners. You know; the same ones that own gwb.

In the FT article...

Mr Fitzgerald, who has been applauded for conducting a leak-free inquiry, has said little publicly about his 22-month probe, other than that it is about the “potential retaliation against a whistleblower”, Joseph Wilson. After Mr Wilson, a former ambassador, went public with doubts about the evidence that Iraq was developing nuclear weapons, the name of his wife, Valerie Plame, a CIA official, was leaked to reporters.

This "whistle blower" status which so many republicans dislike the idea of makes me think of the criticism that Colson and Liddy had about Mark Felt being "Deep Throat". Colson said Felt was no hero and should have gone straight to the grand jury, the FBI director and president with his concerns. Colson said "So I think if he handled it -- if he'd come and dealt with it man-to-man, I know everybody says there was a lot of paranoia in Washington those days, that's a lot of nonsense, people were, the whole government was functioning during this period of time, there was a grand jury sitting. He could have gone to the grand jury."

Well Chuck, what do you do if the VP is on it, and the P can't function without looking to the VP for help? I believe Wilson tried in private, and then he became a thinly disguised anonymous informant (which he knew the WH admin would be able to tell it was him), and then finally wrote an article for himself and went public, since the WH admin wasn't retracting the niger evidence. What man-to-man approach would Colson recommend to Wilson? This administration is vindicative and as John Dean says makes the abuses of the Nixon era seem paltry.... Nixon used the IRS, the WH destroys careers and reputations. I think Dean called the WH Admin a private corporation working within the framework of our government.

Hat's off to whistle blowers who really have the truth and are brave enough to put up with the threats and abuse of corrupted power. If Fitzgerald indicts... it will give hope to our country again, that in the end justice will prevail at least until the next corruption starts up. My theory in the past is that this WH admin got away with so much because George H W Bush pardon the Iran-Contra affair before guilt and convictions were established. I hope his son doesn't try that crap again... oh yea I guess Clinton's pardon of Rich was a real corruption according to many repubs... well how do you swallow this?

Judy Miller told the grand jury that Libby told her Valerie Plame worked for WINPAC. Well, there you go, Libby is innocent. *cough
Wonder who worked out that angle with her. Miller is saying, "see, Libby didn't know she was NOC so he didn't commit a crime." Did anybody else catch that?

To all of our like minded friends in California (and other interested persons) check out:

http://www.betterca.com/

I got it from Joetrippi.com which is also a good place to visit.

ALL GREAT POSTS Today! All of you guys have been ROCKING!

capt

Monitors in Iraq Review Votes Where 'Yes' Ballots Hit 90%

By DEXTER FILKINS and ROBERT F. WORTH

BAGHDAD, Iraq, Oct. 17 - Iraqi election officials said Monday that they were investigating "unusually high" vote totals in 12 Shiite and Kurdish provinces, where as many as 99 percent of the voters were reported to have cast ballots in favor of Iraq's new constitution. The investigation raised the possibility that the results of the referendum could be called into question.

In a statement on Monday evening, the Independent Election Commission of Iraq said the results of the referendum on Saturday would have to be delayed "a few days" because the apparently high number of "yes" votes required election workers to "recheck, compare and audit" the results.

The statement made no mention of the possibility of fraud, but said results were being re-examined to comply with internationally accepted standards. Election officials say that under those standards, voting procedures should be re-examined anytime a candidate or a ballot question got more than 90 percent of the vote.

*****end of clip*****

Seems a bit odd. Maybe the 90%+/- really want the US to get the heck out of their country.

capt

Sorry, but when taking notes THE VERY FIRST THING A WRITER DOES IS ASSIGN A SOURCE.

She knew, she signed something that did NOT ALLOW her to name the source. (Limited immunity) she needs to be questioned closely about this.

To take these notes and NOT assign a source would be against every journalistic credo.

She KNEW, she KNOWS who told her. She has been at best granted limited immunity for............PURJURY

A sin of omission............is still as sin.

She is an investigative reporter, who buy's that she forgot who told her?

And what was it again about the

" Aspen roots?" Is this right wing code for clam up or go down?(rIGHT WING equivalent of a horse head in the bed)?

Hell, I was a beaurocrat once, I never once saw anything that read like that. Either Scooter is so deeply enamored of Judy that he cannot resist breaking into prose, or it was code for LIMITED DISCLOSURE.

WANNA VOTE?

IS THE MOB IN CHARGE IN DC? AND IF SO, WHICH ONE, ITALY OR TEXAS?

DELAY you say.........wink wink nudge nudge....

Obfuscate................that would be Chaney/Rove.....et all.

Rats are beginning to bail............who knew?

This chick is NOT credible.

She is still another Bush plant.

Expecting anything resembling honesty from this Admin, is akin to expecting Diogenese to put that rock up the mountain.

Diminished expectations should be the norm. Look to W to screw the poor, and make the Middle Class slaves locked by glass of credit.

We do not build housing now.....we build Mansions and ..............Institutions.

Which way will YOU go?

Who can you afford to bribe? or intimidate?

The only son of my friend views the future landscape as one of Golf facilities...........and prisons. I can not yet dispute this dismal view.

Nobles Oblige..........and do NOT hold your breath waiting for compassion........or help NOBODY told us how alone we really are.

Sorry, but when taking notes THE VERY FIRST THING A WRITER DOES IS ASSIGN A SOURCE.

She knew, she signed something that did NOT ALLOW her to name the source. (Limited immunity) she needs to be questioned closely about this.

To take these notes and NOT assign a source would be against every journalistic credo.

She KNEW, she KNOWS who told her. She has been at best granted limited immunity for............PURJURY

A sin of omission............is still as sin.

She is an investigative reporter, who buy's that she forgot who told her?

And what was it again about the

" Aspen roots?" Is this right wing code for clam up or go down?(rIGHT WING equivalent of a horse head in the bed)?

Hell, I was a beaurocrat once, I never once saw anything that read like that. Either Scooter is so deeply enamored of Judy that he cannot resist breaking into prose, or it was code for LIMITED DISCLOSURE.

WANNA VOTE?

IS THE MOB IN CHARGE IN DC? AND IF SO, WHICH ONE, ITALY OR TEXAS?

DELAY you say.........wink wink nudge nudge....

Obfuscate................that would be Chaney/Rove.....et all.

Rats are beginning to bail............who knew?

David,

Just heard a spot of yours on AAR about the bigger mess made with NYT/Miler.

Good spot.

Thanks again for all of your work. We are all lucky to have you.

capt

fOR SURE NOBODY TOLD THE POOR OF NEW ORLEANS.
I for one will not sit silent while this passes.

THIS WAS WRONG, AND MORE THAN WRONG IT WAS HOSTILE, PREMEMTIVE....NOT UNLIKE BUSHE'S WAR.

Ari Fleischer Is The One Who Has Flipped (Here's Why) Isikoff.

I hear the investigators are using Computer Voice Stress Analysis and they know who is lying about what and when.

It is not about the crime it is about the lies.

Some media observers call NY Times leak report insufficient

By Richard Satran, Reuters | October 18, 2005

NEW YORK -- A long tell-all by reporter Judith Miller and The New York Times has done little to exonerate the newspaper for its handling of the case in which a CIA operative was exposed, media observers said yesterday, and raised new questions about journalistic ethics.

After the publication in the Times on Sunday of a 5,800-word account of the saga, some media analysts called on the influential newspaper to dismiss the reporter and others said it needs to give a fuller explanation.

Miller, who covers national security, spent 85 days in jail rather than reveal a source's name to prosecutors in the leak probe. Then a deal was worked out for her to testify before the grand jury in the case.

When she testified, Miller said she could not remember where she learned the CIA operative's name. In the published account, Miller said she ''didn't think" she was given the name by Lewis Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, who had been identified as her source.

Media critics said her explanation was hard to fathom and they criticized Times editors for what they called lack of oversight. The article also failed to explain why Miller tried to avoid testifying and why she never wrote a story about the events, they said.

''It's quite possible that of all the scandals and disturbances that the Times has gone through, this is the worst," said Michael Wolff, a media critic for Vanity Fair.

*****end of clip*****

"Some media observers" and "Media critics" next they will be using the term "partisan" and portraying the whole investigation as "attacks from the left."

It might not work for them this time.

capt

N.Y. Times' story on Miller draws questions, criticism

By James Rainey

Los Angeles Times

A story published by The New York Times on Sunday to clarify its coverage of the Valerie Plame leak case has instead raised a series of new questions and complaints about the newspaper's veteran reporter Judith Miller and her supervisors in the long-running controversy.

Critics inside the paper and in the wider journalism community said yesterday that they found particularly disturbing revelations that the newspaper's editors seemed unable to control Miller and that the reporter agreed to use a misleading identification to shield the identity of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff.

The rare degree of autonomy she seemed to have once prompted her to jokingly call herself "Miss Run Amok," the Times article said, and some of her colleagues refused to work with her.

Some of the critics were particularly harsh because Miller's work has been questioned before.

*****end of clip*****

"Critics inside the paper and in the wider journalism community " is a little better but . . .

The NYT's is suffering from self-inflicted wounds. That does not make anybody a "critic" just because they point out the errors and poor standards.

capt

I thought good reporting required a "critical" eye in every respect. Skeptics make better reporters than cynics and sell-outs.

We don't have reporters anymore they are shills, just repeaters of the big lie, so where do you get the information from? Got me. An uninformed public lets their government run over them. This little play is almost over one way or the other, not to worry it will all be written about in history books published by the winners.

Yeah, David, GEE, we're SO glad you finally realized you were to easy on Miller and the Times--that you were finally persuaded that you wasted your own journalistic opportunity to tell the truth because you were too busy cya-ing to catch all that actual journalism that was being waged by Arianna Huffington, the WSJ (shock) Jane Hamsher, Josh Marshall, Markos and others...How convenient for you that they provided the reasoning for your own re-do...

Bush's job rating continues to drop

Poll shows president's performance approval at low point

Tuesday, October 18, 2005

(CNN) -- President Bush's job approval rating continues to plummet, with 39 percent of Americans surveyed in the latest CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll supporting his performance, compared to 58 percent expressing disapproval.

The approval rating was the lowest the poll has recorded during Bush's presidency, down from 45 percent in a survey taken September 26-28, and the disapproval rating was up from 50 percent.

The latest poll results, released Monday, were based on interviews with 1,012 adult Americans conducted by telephone October 13-16. In both surveys, the questions on approval ratings had a sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

Bush has seen his approval rating steadily decline since he was sworn in for a second term in January, when 57 percent approved of his handling of the job and 40 percent disapproved.

*****end of clip*****

Interesting water-cooler chit-chat but I still believe Bunnypants could not care less.

capt

On our local news this morning I heard (again) "we just do not want our tax dollars to pay for an abortion."

When I hear that I always think: "we just do not our tax dollars to pay for war."

There are many things on which I do not want my tax dollars spent. The idea that how our tax dollars are spent should be open to discussion for every penny the federal government spends. I would settle for an honest accounting but even that is a dream.

I do not think the money spent on evoting is worth a wooden nickel.

I wonder if there was some outside "help" for the Iraqi election? I have noticed that a few polling companies are calling themselves "international polling" services.

I have no doubts that the companies working in Iraq are all hand picked by this misadministration so cronies and Reich-wing "pals".

Maybe the Iraqi's will accept the 90+/-% and maybe not. Just like our fake election results they may not have an option.

2006 will be the clincher. I major sweep for the GOP will be harder to accept as the public sours to the sound of war drums.

It is almost a given that even changing our figure-head or even a few of the high offices will have only a small impact on the BS that passes for lawmaking these days. We need a major change in the system but the "system" only allows us to chip away at the edges. *sigh*

capt

I wonder what Bush's 'God' is telling him to do now.

Tax Fraud

God: Stop Killing People and lying about it!

Georgie: I'd really LIKE to, big G, but I'm afraid it's already gone too far!

God: Uhm, Georgie, did you notice I've got another big storm swirling off your coast?

Georgie: Yeah, God, but did YOU notice how everytime you pull that old "Plague and Pestillence" gag, my net worth increases, like 300% due to bing in defence and security stocks up to my well-covered rectum?

God: How can you THINK like that? Didn't you inherit a SHRED of decency from your Fath... uhm, your Moth... Oh, nevermind. Maybe I'll send Junior back down there to try that "Peace, Love and Understanding" thing again...

Georgie: Bring 'im ON! He'll do just fine in Abu-Ghraib or Gitmo! Failing that, I'm sure we can give him a little case of Bird Flu or something...And uhm, God?

God: (disgustedly) Yeah, Georgie....

Georgie: Dickie wanted me to pass on a little message for him.

God: Go ahead...

Georgie: Dickie sez, "Nice planet you've made here...Sure would be a shame if something "HAPPENED" to it!" If you know what I'm saying....

HA!

Neo-Domino Theory

Somewhat lengthy but a very good article!

Unless the God he's talking to is Yog Sottoth, held within the boundaries of the Pentagon - in which case the conversation is closer to:

Yog Sottoth: Bring me more Souls!

W: Of course, master.

A friend sent me a computer clip! The road sign read, WELCOME TO CONNECTICUT, BIRTHPLACE OF GEORGE W. BUSH, WE APOLOGIZE

A friend sent me a computer clip! The road sign read, WELCOME TO CONNECTICUT, BIRTHPLACE OF GEORGE W. BUSH, WE APOLOGIZE

Miller finds another notebook.

Fitzgerald asked Miller about the letter's closing lines. "Out West," Libby had written, "where you vacation, the aspens will be turning. They turn in clusters, because their roots connect them."

On the back cover of the notebook is scribbled: Looter Scibbey?

A poem appears on the first page. Obviously a response to Scibbey's letter:

My Source

Hush, hush don't say anything,
I'll stay my friend
to hold you till the bitter end.

I was thirteen then;
I'm older now my friend,
I'll hold on, till the bitter end.

To the memory of you my friend
I vow: For Freedom and Sanity
I will work; and I'll hold on till
the bitter end.

So, hush, hush don't say anything
You my friend didn't lie in vain
Your memory will always be
my source of work.

Ironically, Miller may have plagarized the Global Anti-Nuclear Alliance [GANA]'s website, http://www.cornnet.nl/~akmalten/poem04.html.

Copyright: akmalten@cornnet.nl

Capt, I doubt that the dems, should they sweep the mid-terms, should the mid-terms actually take place, will stop any war drums from beating, they'll just say they can beat on em better!

American Soldiers

As Bush sits in comfort drinking Jack and Jim as well as snorting coke 2,221 American soldiers have been killed in Iraq and Afghanistan for Bush’≥ evil lies.

The Fourth Estate

# 90 Rabe...I thought Ari Fleisher flipped long ago. He sure left the Bush Administration mighty fast.

He was on AIR FORCE I with Colin Powell with the top secret documents with Plame's name in them.

I have always thought that he was the original source of the leak.

Why Democrats Support the War

It Haunts Me

Unfit to Print

The $700 Million Question

The story that so totally deserves to be a scandal.

By David J. Sirota
Web Exclusive: 04.23.04

The civics lesson of the Iran-Contra scandal was simple: No matter how powerful or well-intentioned, presidents cannot secretly fund wars without the consent of Congress. But according to Bob Woodward's new book, President Bush apparently never learned that axiom. And now, Congress must demand answers.

Woodward alleges that in July 2002, the president secretly began to finance the war in Iraq with no authorization from Congress. He says $700 million was siphoned from operations against al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and into planning an Iraq invasion. The president allegedly took the money from one of the two supplemental spending bills passed after September 11 and left lawmakers "totally in the dark."

If true, the president violated the spirit of the Constitution, which vests the power of the purse with Congress. But his most serious transgression would not be constitutional. As White House spokesman Scott McClellan accurately noted, the president was granted "broad discretion" to spend these emergency funds. The problem is that that "broad discretion" was not a blank check. The spending bills legally required him to notify Congress before diverting money.

As the post-9-11 emergency spending bill mandates, the president is required to "consult with the chairmen and ranking minority members of the Committees on Appropriations prior to the transfer" of any funds. But that never happened, according to Senator Robert Byrd, who as chairman of the Appropriations Committee at the time would have been informed. He said "the White House provided no consultations" about moving funds into Iraq operations. While the administration submitted reports to Congress, it used deliberately vague language, saying only that it was increasing "situational awareness" and "worldwide posture" -- but never mentioning Iraq.

The August 2002 spending bill is the same: while it afforded the administration wide latitude, it required the president to consult with Congress and give 15 days’†notice before moving any money. But as one top Democrat reported, "there was no consultation" -- and there is no evidence that Congress was notified.

*****end of clip*****

Maybe as the indictment come, a few "older" issues should be re-visited?

(I can wish anyway)

capt

Capt, I am waiting for the most important issue of all to emerge because this whole nightmare started there.

You mean THIS GOY

I thought the Pentagon has FIVE sides? Where's the other tentacle?

-T

It isn't just the companies working in Iraq that have been hand-picked.

Blackwater Tactical has people on the ground in New Orleans wearing balaclavas, driving unmarked vehicles, legally covered against negligence claims or any liability whatsoever.

How long before we start to see Wackenhut patches on the security forces who work in the US or Blackwater patches mixed in with the various police agencies at the scenes of "natural" disasters in this country.

And just as an after-thought: When is the last time not just one, but THREE major hurricanes not only threatened, but hit and made landfall in the Gulf of Mexico? Anyone starting to think that maybe Star Wars is about weather modification as a weapon?

Think long and hard about the timing of this coming Hurricane Wilma and the proximity of this weather event to the indictments expected in the near future, not to mention the uncanny appearance of H5N1 (which has killed about 75 people worldwide, much fewer than the regular strain of flu kills each year in the US alone), and the circus that promises to be the trial of Saddam Hussein on charges of killing people in Iraq more than twenty years ago.

Didn't John Negroponte get implicated in the deaths of more people than Saddam is accused of during that same time period while Ambassador to Honduras? Weren't Henry Kissinger and Gerald Ford complicit in the deaths of more than 75,000 people in Indonesia thrity years ago?

Why is Saddam being tried and, more importantly, why now?

Anmd, finally, do you think anyone will refrain from ever electing (or allowing the installation of) another member of the Bush Crime Family or its related crews and syndicates to any other national office? I mean, enough already.

I, too, grew up with a fondness for the NYTimes. In fact, a friend of my parents worked there, at the foreign desk, and once when meeting him downtown I got a chance to read a speech that George McGovern was about to deliver later that day. It was an eerie look into the world of journalism for a teenager.

So, here is a link to the old grey lady's John Burns take on the trial of Saddam Hussein which starts tomorrow. A quick excerpt of the 2 page article:

[...] While many Iraqis are eager for the moment when they see Mr. Hussein in the dock, Western human rights groups and legal experts have warned that the former dictator is unlikely to get a fair trial, and that the probable outcome, a death sentence, will be what the tribunal's harshest critics have described as "victor's justice."

Critics here and abroad have said that the proper forum for the trials would have been an international tribunal of the kind that has spent four years hearing the case against the former Yugoslav president, Slobodan Milosevic, in The Hague.

I was interested in the sense of irony here, in that as we will remember, John Burns was accused of being an agent of US intellegence by Saddam Hussein, and after the initial military victory Mr. Burns, in an appearance with Tommy Franks and the former President Bush, he mentioned that he had gotten his employment at the Times through (former CIA head) GHWB! I saw this on C-Span, and have never been able to find a transcript.

So, now we have the relevation that Judy Miller had special "security clearances".

Further keep in mind, that in a trial at a place like the Hague, Saddam would have opportunity to talk about little things such as the involvement of U.S. intellengence in the coming to power of the Baath Party in Iraq, the use of that party as a tool of assasination of the Iraqi Communists, as well, of course, as to the source of his original cache of chemical & biological weapons.

Certainly, this will not be allowed in the limited tribunal described by Mr. Burns.

Four White House Aides Testify on CIA Name Leak

Wednesday, February 11, 2004

Press Secretary Scott McClellan is one of the aides to have appeared before the grand jury.

"I obviously want to do my part to cooperate, and if there's something that can help those that are leading this investigation get to the bottom of it, I am more than happy to share that information with them," McClellan told reporters on Tuesday.

Another one of the officials known to have been called before the grand jury is Mary Matalin (search), former communications chief for the office of Vice President Dick Cheney. Adam Levine, who formerly worked in the press office, and McClellan deputy Claire Buchan have also testified.

Several other officials are known to have testified, though it is not known how many. The names were chosen by the grand jury based on e-mails handed over by the White House that included the aides' names.

Many other White House aides, including senior adviser Karl Rove (search), communications chief Dan Bartlett, former spokesman Ari Fleischer, Cheney spokeswoman Cathie Martin and Cheney chief of staff Lewis Libby (search), have all been interviewed by the FBI.

One person close to the investigation said that Levine may have been questioned because Fleischer and Bartlett were with Bush on a July 7-12 trip to Africa just prior to publication of