• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Consistently wrong since 2002

Battle won, war still ongoing.

Conservatism: there are some people the law protects but does not bind and others who the law binds but does not protect.

Insiders who complain to politico: please report to the white house office of shut the fuck up.

“Everybody’s entitled to be an idiot.”

A Senator Walker would also be an insult to reason, rationality, and decency.

I was promised a recession.

“More of this”, i said to the dog.

Republican obstruction dressed up as bipartisanship. Again.

You cannot shame the shameless.

I’d hate to be the candidate who lost to this guy.

I did not have this on my fuck 2022 bingo card.

A sufficient plurality of insane, greedy people can tank any democratic system ever devised, apparently.

My years-long effort to drive family and friends away has really paid off this year.

Schmidt just says fuck it, opens a tea shop.

I really should read my own blog.

You can’t love your country only when you win.

Americans barely caring about Afghanistan is so last month.

A dilettante blog from the great progressive state of West Virginia.

Proof that we need a blogger ethics panel.

Nancy smash is sick of your bullshit.

Not all heroes wear capes.

Pessimism assures that nothing of any importance will change.

In my day, never was longer.

Mobile Menu

  • Winnable House Races
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • Balloon Juice 2023 Pet Calendar (coming soon)
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • War in Ukraine
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • 2021-22 Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Politics / Cheney, Too?

Cheney, Too?

by John Cole|  October 17, 20059:50 am| 159 Comments

This post is in: Politics

FacebookTweetEmail

This is interesting (and for the WH, terrifying):

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.

This is a longarticle, and this excerpt does not do it justice, so check out the whole thing.

*** Update ***

This Tom Maguire post is well worth your time.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Awful
Next Post: Good News- Maybe »

Reader Interactions

159Comments

  1. 1.

    Jimmy Jazz

    October 17, 2005 at 10:17 am

    The larger issue that will be exposed as a result of the indictments which I am about 90% sure are on the way is that the press will finally, finally have to address the fact that the PR for Iraq essentially amounted to a psy ops campaign against the American people.

    They have failed to do so before now because they were complicit in the campaign.

    “How we get out of Iraq” will be the only campaign issue of ’06. Sadly this may not work to the benefit of the Democrats.

  2. 2.

    Dexter

    October 17, 2005 at 10:55 am

    Rumors of Cheney’s demise are greatly exaggerated. What’s to stop Bush from pardoning Rove, Libby, Cheney, etc.? It’s hard to believe that a case this complicated, and having so little to do with the initial charges will resonate with the public.

    The Democrats have been calling this Treasongate. More like BadMemoryGate. It sounds like the whole case hinges on small discrepancies. When people see what this is all about, Pelosi & Co. are going to have egg on their faces. After two years of screaming about treason, I just don’t see how an indictment on a technicality will get anyone upset.

  3. 3.

    EL

    October 17, 2005 at 11:06 am

    After two years of screaming about treason, I just don’t see how an indictment on a technicality will get anyone upset.

    I see how. Because whether it’s a crime or not, the public will see leaking the name of a CIA agent to get back at your (truth-telling) opponent as despicable. So indicting those involved on perjury will resonate. IMHO, the reason the public was so little bothered by Clinton’s perjury was that it was about a personal matter, and one that most people could see themselves not wanting to tell the truth about.

    The Plame case is about a serious matter, and the public can’t see themselves acting this way. Whether legal or not, the leak comes across as nasty payback, going after the whistleblower; and as putting partisan politics above the country. I expect most people will think an idictment on perjury well-deserved.

  4. 4.

    Jcricket

    October 17, 2005 at 11:06 am

    Yeah, intentionally conducting a campaign to out a non-official cover (i.e. really secret) CIA agent for political gain sounds like “small discrepancies” to me. You keep believing that. Perhaps it would be helpful to remember that three senior white house officials called at least six reporters trying to shop this story around.

    The whole Plame case, and right-wing reactions to it, show how the Republican party was hijacked by criminals and theocrats, right from under the “true conservatives” noses’. There’s simply no behavior, no actions that you won’t excuse if there’s a Republican accused.

    And, for the record, I think Bill Clinton lying under oath is unaccaptable (not to mention having an affair being unacceptable from the start). But, to keep it in perspective, Republicans currently have the following people under investigation for far worse: House and Senate majority leaders, chief and deputy of staff for both the President and Vice President, senior procurement officers, investigations for major fund raisers and GOP operatives (Abrahamoff, Reed, Norquist). And that’s just off the top of my head. So, keep on believing it is Democrats who will have egg on their faces at the end of this.

  5. 5.

    Dexter

    October 17, 2005 at 11:24 am

    IMHO, the reason the public was so little bothered by Clinton’s perjury was that it was about a personal matter, and one that most people could see themselves not wanting to tell the truth about.

    You’ve got it backwards: The public *was* greatly bothered by Clinton’s lying precisely *because* it dealt with a personal matter. The public does not like immoral leaders. But they understand that politics can be a tough business and sometimes you have to play hardball with liars who have have the ear of the media, like Wilson did.

  6. 6.

    Gold Star for Robot Boy

    October 17, 2005 at 11:27 am

    The public does not like immoral leaders.

    Which is why Clinton’s poll numbers tanked, to the point where he was getting only 60 percent approval.

  7. 7.

    ppGaz

    October 17, 2005 at 11:36 am

    You’ve got it backwards:

    Why do you pimp a website that presents a “National Debt clock”, and then support a government that is running the country into a deep and wide ditch of crushing debt? How many spending bills has this president vetoed in five years?

  8. 8.

    CaseyL

    October 17, 2005 at 11:38 am

    Which is why Clinton’s poll numbers tanked, to the point where he was getting only 60 percent approval.

    Bwahahaha.

    60% approval, and that was while the GOP was running the Monica Show 24/7.

    Approval ratings Bush would sell his soul for at this point, if only he had one.

  9. 9.

    feral1

    October 17, 2005 at 11:38 am

    You’ve got it backwards: The public was greatly bothered by Clinton’s lying precisely because it dealt with a personal matter. The public does not like immoral leaders. But they understand that politics can be a tough business and sometimes you have to play hardball with liars who have have the ear of the media, like Wilson did.

    Dude,

    You’re embarassing yourself. Stop the madness.

  10. 10.

    Lines

    October 17, 2005 at 11:39 am

    and if not for that little pesky 22nd amendment, it would hail to the Clenis.

    I love Dexter’s version of history, its like taking all of that first hand knowledge of those years, putting it in a blender and then giving to the dog. Ignore reality folks, we have Dexter here to tell us how it REALLY was.

  11. 11.

    Shygetz

    October 17, 2005 at 11:39 am

    You’ve got it backwards: The public was greatly bothered by Clinton’s lying precisely because it dealt with a personal matter. The public does not like immoral leaders. But they understand that politics can be a tough business

    So let me get this straight–the public hates personal immorality that does not affect their lives one bit, but condones professional immorality that hurts their nation. If that’s true, the George Bernard Shaw was right–we do get the government we deserve.

  12. 12.

    Krista

    October 17, 2005 at 11:41 am

    Approval ratings Bush would sell his soul for at this point, if only he had one.

    Maybe if Cheney goes to jail, he’ll have to give Bush’s soul back…

  13. 13.

    ppGaz

    October 17, 2005 at 11:47 am

    Remember, talk is cheap. But when it involves law enforcement authorities, it may cost you, or someone close to you, dearly. Remember the 5 words — “I HAVE NOTHING TO SAY.” It has worked for us many, MANY times. And it will work for you.

    So, Dexter, your website sports a page which is aimed at what I would call “planned noncooperation with law enforcement”, containing the blurb quoted above. The point seems to be that the authorities have no power over you unless you give it to them. “I have nothing to say” is the theme.

    What are you doing here, commenting on what may very well turn out to be the biggest story of our time in terms of prosecution of high officials in the federal government? Are you representing a point of view that not only citizens, but our paid government employees, have no duty to cooperate fully with law enforcement, and be held full accountable for their actions?

  14. 14.

    Tim F

    October 17, 2005 at 12:01 pm

    If the “public” was bothered by Monica and supported Clinton by 60-35, then imagine how bothered they are when shrub breaks 40-60. The White House better get that pitchfork-detecting radar installed, STAT.

  15. 15.

    Mike S

    October 17, 2005 at 12:03 pm

    The public was greatly bothered by Clinton’s lying precisely because it dealt with a personal matter. The public does not like immoral leaders. But they understand that politics can be a tough business and sometimes you have to play hardball with liars who have have the ear of the media, like Wilson did.

    Ahh yes. The New Republican Party’s new meme. “Of the people party. By the people party. For the people party.”

    I think Hunter at dKos summed it up nicely.

    Party over country. You can hear it in Miller’s accountings of her conversations with Libby; you can hear the “crimes aren’t crimes if they’re done for the sake of politics” meme from pundits like Chris Matthews and William Kristol; you can hear it everywhere in Washington, for that matter. Lying about sex had many of these same pundits foaming and frothing at the outrage of it all; compromising our intelligence assets against weapons of mass destruction, at the very same time the government is warning us to stock up on duct tape and watch out for swarthy bearded types holding glow-in-the-dark suitcases, is considered too shallow a crime to pursue — if a Republican does it.

  16. 16.

    Rome Again

    October 17, 2005 at 12:09 pm

    You’ve got it backwards: The public was greatly bothered by Clinton’s lying precisely because it dealt with a personal matter. The public does not like immoral leaders. But they understand that politics can be a tough business and sometimes you have to play hardball with liars who have have the ear of the media, like Wilson did.

    No dear, YOU have it backwards. The public was not greatly bothered by Clinton’s escapades, only the “religious right” was. In case you haven’t realized, “The Public” does not equal “Conservative Christians” a/k/a Dobsonites.

    Clinton was impeached for lying about a blowjob (an act of aggrandizement that did absolutely nothing to hurt this country’s domestic or foreign policies), yet Bush and company can do any number of things that CAN hurt this nation’s foreign AND domestic policies (such as starting a war based on lies – if Wilson was lying, where exactly ARE those WMD anyway?) and you give them a pass, and try to act as if you are the moral thinking one in the room. What drugs are you on?

  17. 17.

    Dexter

    October 17, 2005 at 12:26 pm

    Regardless of the short term affect the Lewinsky affair had on Clinton’s approval rating, it left a stain, and not just the one on the blue dress. There’s a reason Al Gore wasn’t elected.

  18. 18.

    Gratefulcub

    October 17, 2005 at 12:32 pm

    Yes, there was a reason. Al got more votes, but W was appointed.

  19. 19.

    Gratefulcub

    October 17, 2005 at 12:36 pm

    Just no plea bargain please. This is the story journalists were supposed to cover before the war, but they didn’t. We need a public trial that will force reporters to dig into the the prewar stories. Force them to make ammends and cover the story right the second time around.

    And, it is so much fun to watch republicans claim that perjury in this case is no big deal. As we all knew then, and we all know now, it wasn’t the lying, it was the sex.

  20. 20.

    slide

    October 17, 2005 at 12:36 pm

    There’s a reason Al Gore wasn’t elected.

    yeah, it was called the Supreme Court

  21. 21.

    ppGaz

    October 17, 2005 at 12:42 pm

    Regardless of the short term affect the Lewinsky affair had on Clinton’s approval

    Why is anyone talking about Clinton here? This case does not involve Clinton.

    If you want to compare to a historical context, compare to Nixon. That’s a case where you have a corrupt group within the White House plotting against its enemies. That’s an apt comparison.

  22. 22.

    Rome Again

    October 17, 2005 at 12:43 pm

    Regardless of the short term affect the Lewinsky affair had on Clinton’s approval rating, it left a stain, and not just the one on the blue dress. There’s a reason Al Gore wasn’t elected.

    Really? A stain? What stain might that be? I don’t see a stain. I see a man who not only is still considered to be one of the best financially responsible presidents of recent history by the Democratic party; but a man who was courted by the current Republican president to gain support from Democrats as well.

    Bill Clinton was rubbing shoulders for quite a while with both George Sr. and George Jr, up until recently. What exactly was that stain that you’re talking about and why didn’t it affect the way both George Sr. and George Jr. dealt with him? If the stain you mention exists, it would seem to me that rubbing shoulders with the man would have been political poison. It wasn’t, Republicans still accepted the Bush presidency, despite Clinton’s presence.

  23. 23.

    John Cole

    October 17, 2005 at 12:47 pm

    DougJ is Dexter. And Elinor. And Comcon.

    Damnit DougJ- just stick to one name and stop being such a putz.

  24. 24.

    Rome Again

    October 17, 2005 at 12:47 pm

    There’s a reason Al Gore wasn’t elected.
    ————————————-
    yeah, it was called the Supreme Court

    Where exactly in the Constitution did the rule that the Supreme Court picks the President come from anyway? I don’t remember seeing that part.

  25. 25.

    ppGaz

    October 17, 2005 at 12:48 pm

    DougJ is Dexter.

    He bagged me again! DOHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

    You will pay for this, DougJ. YOU WILL PAY.

  26. 26.

    Jimmy Jazz

    October 17, 2005 at 12:51 pm

    DougJ is Dexter.

    Shocking.

  27. 27.

    Rome Again

    October 17, 2005 at 12:52 pm

    DougJ, you’ve been caught, now go sit in the corner and take a time-out!

  28. 28.

    Lines

    October 17, 2005 at 12:54 pm

    I’m not buying the Dougj -> Dexter link. I need a bit more proof than a first accusation.

  29. 29.

    Joey

    October 17, 2005 at 12:54 pm

    Where exactly in the Constitution did the rule that the Supreme Court picks the President come from anyway? I don’t remember seeing that part.

    That’s funny, neither do I. I thought that’s why everybody was so pissed about it, because they AREN’T, yet they DID. But, this isn’t about the follies of our political process or the electoral college. It’s about watching people get what they deserve. I’m gonna enjoy the next several months.

  30. 30.

    slide

    October 17, 2005 at 12:55 pm

    Dick “Big Time” Cheney in Fitzgerad’s sights. I’ll remind you of a semi-prediction I posted over two weeks ago here that was wildly derided:

    Slide Says:

    Speculation today that both Bush and Cheney may have been in on the orchestrated Wilson smear. Conspiracy? Unindicted co-conspirators? hmmmm… the mind boggles.
    October 2nd, 2005 at 6:02 pm

    Un-indicted co-conspirator has such a nice Watergate sound to it, don’t ya think?

  31. 31.

    Tim F

    October 17, 2005 at 12:57 pm

    The Watergate prosecutor named unindicted co-conspirators because he was confident that Congress would take a hint and impeach, thus putting off the question of whether a sitting president can be indicted directly. It’s safe to say that Fitzgerald cannot count on that result today.

  32. 32.

    demimondian

    October 17, 2005 at 12:57 pm

    DougJ is Dexter. And Elinor. And Comcon.

    Actually, DougJ’s repeated shenanigans have had a good effect, at least on me. When an utterly ridiculous moron crops up sporting a new nick…I assume he’s DougJ and am at least polite.

    Now, John, are you going to own up to being “Ray” last week?

  33. 33.

    Krista

    October 17, 2005 at 12:57 pm

    He bagged me again! DOHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

    You will pay for this, DougJ. YOU WILL PAY.

    ppGaz – well, you DID taunt him the other day when you exposed him as Elinor, the day that I told him to STFU. I guess he saw it as a challenge issued.

  34. 34.

    Mike S

    October 17, 2005 at 12:59 pm

    Now Dexter makes sense. Thanks John.

  35. 35.

    Tim F

    October 17, 2005 at 12:59 pm

    I need a bit more proof than a first accusation.

    John can track the IP address of people who visit the blog and post.

  36. 36.

    demimondian

    October 17, 2005 at 12:59 pm

    I’m not buying the Dougj -> Dexter link. I need a bit more proof than a first accusation.

    Cole’s got access to the server logs — he reads the IP addys.

    Hey, DougJ? You know, you can always use an anoymous proxy if you want to outwit John. (Or, if you’re behind a proxy rerver, you can use the fact that all outbound traffic from my site goes through a single IP address.)

  37. 37.

    ppGaz

    October 17, 2005 at 1:08 pm

    Fleas will infest the groin of DougJ.

  38. 38.

    Rome Again

    October 17, 2005 at 1:12 pm

    Fleas will infest the groin of DougJ.

    YIKES! Is that just a wish or did you do an incantation? LOL

    Remind me not to piss you off PPGaz.

  39. 39.

    ppGaz

    October 17, 2005 at 1:16 pm

    He should be thankful I called for fleas. It could have been leeches.

  40. 40.

    Rome Again

    October 17, 2005 at 1:17 pm

    I’m gonna enjoy the next several months.

    Me too, yet, it is sad that our country has been ruined. Schadenfreude has such a sour aftertaste.

  41. 41.

    DougJ

    October 17, 2005 at 1:20 pm

    It could have been leeches.

    Fine by me. You know I believe in faith-based medicine.

    I’ve thought about hiding behind a proxy server or something like that. But I feel like it’s John’s site and he has the right to out me when he feels like it. After all, that’s what Republicans do, now, out secret agents.

  42. 42.

    Krista

    October 17, 2005 at 1:20 pm

    It could have been leeches.

    That would suck.

  43. 43.

    Lines

    October 17, 2005 at 1:22 pm

    Ah, somehow I missed that it was John exposing the DougJ -> Dexter link

  44. 44.

    Krista

    October 17, 2005 at 1:23 pm

    it is sad that our country has been ruined

    You guys are made of stronger stuff than that…I’m not worried about the U.S. — it’s survived worse and come out the better for it.

  45. 45.

    ppGaz

    October 17, 2005 at 1:24 pm

    Me too, yet, it is sad that our country has been ruined

    But their party is over now. From here on out, I don’t think this administration will be able to sell a balogna sandwich to a german shepherd. Once the public gets a good wind of the White House Iraq Group and what it really meant, we are going to see the term “lame duck” given a whole new set of meanings.

  46. 46.

    Tim F

    October 17, 2005 at 1:25 pm

    Tom Maguire always makes sound arguments based on what we know, but he never takes sufficiently into account that Fitzgerald knows more than we do. How much did the leak damage US intelligence operations? Fitz knows, we don’t. A star went up on the wall at Langley soon after the leak. Did the leak cause that? Fitz knows. These things would dramatically impact the Grand Jury’s decision to bring or not bring indictments.

    In other basic details of fact we only know what reporters have coughed up and what the targets’ lawyers revealed publicly or leaked privately. In other words, what they want us to know. Thin gruel on which to hand one’s credibility.

    Fitz shows an enthusiasm for the case that suggests he’s after something big and the comments of appelate judges, who also had access to what Fitz knows, seem to agree with that.

  47. 47.

    John Cole

    October 17, 2005 at 1:36 pm

    Tom Maguire always makes sound arguments based on what we know

    There were so many snarky things I could have said to that, but my circuitry sort of just overloaded…

  48. 48.

    demimondian

    October 17, 2005 at 1:40 pm

    Fine by me. You know I believe in faith-based medicine.

    If you ever have a digit reattached surgically, you’ll sing the praises of leeches in modern medicine, dude. We can’t yet build a system which pull excess fluid out of a wound as effectively and cleanly as a leech.

    Eyeuch.

  49. 49.

    Rome Again

    October 17, 2005 at 1:40 pm

    But their party is over now. From here on out, I don’t think this administration will be able to sell a balogna sandwich to a german shepherd. Once the public gets a good wind of the White House Iraq Group and what it really meant, we are going to see the term “lame duck” given a whole new set of meanings.

    Only to see a resurgence in about 30 years when the nostalgia comes about. I can see it now:

    Young teenager 2035: “My grandfather was a Republican, he says they were the only ones who cared about values in this country. I’m going to be one too. I’ve heard that Republicans have secret meetings and are looking for more people to join their cause. Want to come?”

  50. 50.

    Tim F

    October 17, 2005 at 1:52 pm

    There were so many snarky things I could have said to that, but my circuitry sort of just overloaded…

    Knock yourself out.

  51. 51.

    Kimmitt

    October 17, 2005 at 2:14 pm

    This Tom Maguire post is well worth your time.

    Which is not to say that Cole endorses its content. ;)

  52. 52.

    demimondian

    October 17, 2005 at 2:22 pm

    Schadenfreude has such a sour aftertaste.

    But it goes really well on blogna and sauerkraut sandwiches.

  53. 53.

    Cyrus

    October 17, 2005 at 2:24 pm

    Dammit, DougJ, leftist kook to leftist kook, can’t you warn us?

    Well, now I feel stupid after I spent all that time mocking your “Islamofascists like Saddam” line a couple threads ago. You’ve had me fooled in most of your incarnations. Sometimes I get to thinking that I’m too gullible, too quick to think the worst of right-wingers. Not fair enough.

    And then I realize that some of the real right-wingers around here defend your incarnations, and I feel more justified in my assumptions. I mean, they can’t all be your creations, can they?

  54. 54.

    slide

    October 17, 2005 at 2:24 pm

    You know the one “silver lining” to Bush’s re-election was that he (and the GOP) were going to have to live with the mess they created. Had Kerry been elected we would still have a mess in Iraq and all the right wing blowhards would be blaming him somehow. Decisions have consequences. And now the proverbial “chickens have come home to roost”. We see the incompetence… the corruption… the naviety… the cronyism and the utter dishonesty of this administration.

    The Rove/Liddy/Cheney matter is just a little window into the dishonest world of those that were going to restore honor and integrity to the white house.

  55. 55.

    DougJ

    October 17, 2005 at 2:32 pm

    Dammit, DougJ, leftist kook to leftist kook, can’t you warn us?

    I’m actually not a leftist, I’m a disenchanted former Republican. The extreme mocking tone is a hallmark of my tribe. I don’t like Ann Coulter, but when I read her recent pieces on Harriett Miers, I can see that she and other social conservatives now feel the same betrayal at the hands of the Bush administration that people like me felt when we realized that we were lied to during the run-up to the war in Iraq and that the budget deficit was going through the roof. When you’re stabbed in the back like this, the only thing you can do is laugh.

  56. 56.

    Bob

    October 17, 2005 at 2:41 pm

    Anyone got a hint as to who leaked Plame to Gannon?

  57. 57.

    Rome Again

    October 17, 2005 at 2:44 pm

    I’m actually not a leftist, I’m a disenchanted former Republican. The extreme mocking tone is a hallmark of my tribe. I don’t like Ann Coulter, but when I read her recent pieces on Harriett Miers, I can see that she and other social conservatives now feel the same betrayal at the hands of the Bush administration that people like me felt when we realized that we were lied to during the run-up to the war in Iraq and that the budget deficit was going through the roof. When you’re stabbed in the back like this, the only thing you can do is laugh.

    So why all the shenanigans? You have the ability to wake so many more people up by talking more about this than playing games with names. DougJ, I know that when I first encountered you, you seemed very right-wing to me. I think that was pre-conversion. Now when you talk, you sound so much more reasoned. I personally think the voice you have as DougJ can do a whole lot more good than playing right-winger extremist, but that’s just my take on the whole thing.

  58. 58.

    DougJ

    October 17, 2005 at 2:50 pm

    Rome, whenever I hear the phrase “reasonable debate”, I reach for my revolver.

    There is no effective way to discuss the sickness of the Bush/Rove/Dobson/Fox News propaganda machine other than to make fun of it.

  59. 59.

    Mac Buckets

    October 17, 2005 at 2:50 pm

    Anyone got a hint as to who leaked Plame to Gannon?

    The New York Times.

  60. 60.

    Tim F

    October 17, 2005 at 2:50 pm

    Honestly, I like Tom Maguire. I don’t think that logic is his problem, in fact I think that he does as good a job as anybody at sourcing his points authoritatively, it’s that he makes assumptions about the things that we don’t yet know and so do we. The problem comes when his assumptions run in the other direction from our assumptions, which is almost always. I take things for granted that make the Plame story practically an entirely different genre from the story painted by his assumptions. Sure they seem like no-brainers from my perspective, but stranger things have happened.

    At the very least he deserves credit for acknowlegding immediately when the facts land on his arguments and squash them flat, as with Murray Waas in the last post.

  61. 61.

    Rome Again

    October 17, 2005 at 2:56 pm

    There is no effective way to discuss the sickness of the Bush/Rove/Dobson/Fox News propaganda machine other than to make fun of it.

    Pardon me for pointing this out DougJ, but it seems to me that what you are doing with these names is reinforcing the kool-aid effects, not tearing them down. You DO want to make this nightmare go away eventually, don’t you?

    Also, am I correct, when I first encountered you, was that pre-conversion? I’m just curious. You seemed very right-wing, and you were under your own name. If so, can I ask, what exactly was the breaking point for you? Was it Miers? Was it the pork-ridden budget? What exactly?

    All I know if that I’m happy to see that you woke up.

  62. 62.

    DougJ

    October 17, 2005 at 3:06 pm

    I have never been right-wing. I have about the same politics as John. I think the best way to dampen the kool-aid effect is via reductio ad absurdium. I also think it is important for those who oppose the kool-aid crowd to learn to stay calm and approach things with a degree of humor.

  63. 63.

    Frank

    October 17, 2005 at 3:08 pm

    Gotta say I’m delighted by this thread. Maybe reality is finally begining to sink in for the conservatives.

    The Republicans aren’t a party they are a criminal organization.

  64. 64.

    DougJ

    October 17, 2005 at 3:08 pm

    I like Tom Maguire a lot. I don’t think he is the *most* insightful person commenting on this, but he’s the only person who doesn’t hate Bush who is making a solid effort to keep with the investigation.

  65. 65.

    DougJ

    October 17, 2005 at 3:12 pm

    The Republicans aren’t a party they are a criminal organization.

    That’s going too far. The top layer right now is very corrupt for sure, but once they’re all deposed that will start to chance.

  66. 66.

    Tim F

    October 17, 2005 at 3:17 pm

    I also think it is important for those who oppose the kool-aid crowd to learn to stay calm and approach things with a degree of humor.

    &*(#$^@*!

  67. 67.

    ppGaz

    October 17, 2005 at 3:36 pm

    That’s going too far. The top layer right now is very corrupt for sure, but once they’re all deposed that will start to chance.

    Sometimes you are just a parody of yourself, Dougster.

    “The top layer” runs the party, AND the country. It’s not like we are talking about strawberry shortcake here.

  68. 68.

    Rome Again

    October 17, 2005 at 3:39 pm

    I have never been right-wing.

    Oh, you must have been in the middle of impersonating a Dobsonite when I encounted you the first time then, my apologies.

  69. 69.

    Bob

    October 17, 2005 at 3:43 pm

    Frank, what government wasn’t to some degree a criminal organization? Governments oversee unequal distribution of wealth, kill people, too.

    I’ve always laughed when people decry the corruption of third-world countries. The only difference between there and here is that we have more wealth overall and they have more people close to the edge.

  70. 70.

    Rome Again

    October 17, 2005 at 3:45 pm

    “The top layer” runs the party, AND the country. It’s not like we are talking about strawberry shortcake here.

    Not only that, they also have had quite a bit of control over much of the media (at least up until recently), and the way lower-level Republicans think. Fox News is still poisoning the minds of our countrymen. There are some local businesses here that I tried to patronize, but I found I just couldn’t, because whenever I went to those places (a local restaurant and a local auto shop) Fox News was playing on their televisions. I don’t support Fox News watchers who are intent on screwing up my country, sorry.

  71. 71.

    DougJ

    October 17, 2005 at 3:45 pm

    Ppgaz, do you think Rudi Giuliani, Chuck Hagel, Lindsay Graham, and former New Jersey governor Keane (the guy who headed up the 911 commission) are all criminals? I mean what I said about the top layer. You could say the same thing about the top layer of Serbia under Milosevic or Russia under Stalin if you want to make it sound more damning.

    There is simply no point in saying “the other side is all bad guys”. It is never true. It is not constructive. And it is not the way forward for the country. I’ll grant you that maybe of the 20 most powerful Republicans in Washington right now, about 18 are criminals. Maybe of the top 100, 75 are criminals. But once they’re gone, and I hope they will be, you’ll be left with a lot of people you may not agree with but who are essentially decent human beings.

  72. 72.

    ppGaz

    October 17, 2005 at 3:55 pm

    There is simply no point in saying “the other side is all bad guys”

    They are either for the good guys, or for the bad guys.

    When your “top layer” is corrupt and entrenched, the other layers either have to step away from the thing, or go down with them. In a zero-sum two-party game, you can’t be “a little Republican”. If the Dems were corrupt and entrenched, the same would be true of Dems.

    Live by party loyalty, die by it. That’s the way it is … and should be.

    What I am saying here is the basis for the struggle for control of the Democractic Party right now. What good is a Joe Loserman who would say exactly what you said, above? Fuck him and the horse he rode in on.

    It is possible to have politicians who are not mealy-mouthed lying sons of bitches, Doug. But you have demand them before you can get them.

  73. 73.

    Rome Again

    October 17, 2005 at 3:58 pm

    But once they’re gone, and I hope they will be, you’ll be left with a lot of people you may not agree with but who are essentially decent human beings.

    The thing I find most disturbing is that there are millions upon millions of ordinary Republican Americans who weren’t outraged when much of this criminal activity has been going on. They seem to be of the mind that if these men at the top could get away with it, all the better for their party.

    I don’t think all Republicans are criminals, but I do think quite a few of them would rather look the other way and allow criminal activity in their party to happen than to be honest, forthright and demand accountability.

  74. 74.

    Frank

    October 17, 2005 at 4:00 pm

    Bob- I’m not making a philisophic point. Democrats have been corrupt no doubt, but never on a scale remotely approaching where the Republicans are right now.

    Republicans generaly seem to think burning American covert agents is ok if you are a Republican. Republican corruption is a threat to the foundations of America. We will have a Federal National debt of over 10 trillion dollars by the time GWB is out of office. Reagan ended the cold war for just 4 trillion. What are we getting for the other 6 trillion dollars? Just making Republican cronies rich is my answer, yours may differ.

    DougJ As far as most Republicans being good people you might want to google Neal Boortz. In my experience he is fairly representative of the Republican view.

  75. 75.

    Rome Again

    October 17, 2005 at 4:01 pm

    Thank you ppGaz, I think we were on the same line of thinking, and I didn’t realize you wrote that. What you said only seems to reinforce what I say, and vice versa.

  76. 76.

    Darrell

    October 17, 2005 at 4:21 pm

    Republicans generaly seem to think burning American covert agents is ok if you are a Republican

    Hey no need to wait for facts and evidence, you kooks are ready to smear without basis. Oh and since only Republicans can be corrupt, any of you jackasses care to explain all those all those FBI files illegally obtained by the Clinton WH on their political enemies? I’m sure you all were so terribly outraged over that abuse.. right?

  77. 77.

    ppGaz

    October 17, 2005 at 4:23 pm

    illegally obtained by the Clinton WH

    Clinton is not president any more, Darrell. Give it up.

  78. 78.

    Darrell

    October 17, 2005 at 4:33 pm

    but I do think quite a few of them would rather look the other way and allow criminal activity in their party to happen than to be honest, forthright and demand accountability.

    You loons could be taken more seriously if you hadn’t defended Clinton’s taking FBI files to use againt his enemies, his pardoning of scumbag Marc Rich, Sandy Berger stuffing security documents down his pants and shredding them with tiny scissors, etc, etc, etc. You hypocritical scumbags were either silent about it, or you defended it. It’s the kind of people you are

  79. 79.

    Darrell

    October 17, 2005 at 4:34 pm

    Democrats have been corrupt no doubt, but never on a scale remotely approaching where the Republicans are right now.

    Says it all

  80. 80.

    ppGaz

    October 17, 2005 at 4:40 pm

    You loons could be taken more seriously

    By whom? You? Nobody here cares what you “take seriously”, Darrell.

  81. 81.

    Tim F

    October 17, 2005 at 4:41 pm

    As I recall the Clinton haters had a prosecutor of their own. Quite a zealous chap with a blank check and an open brief to investigate whatever he felt like investigating. Remind me how that turned out. With all of that illegality the Clinton White House must have been positively swimming in indictments. I’m sure they had at least as many indictments as Reagan. Right?

  82. 82.

    Darrell

    October 17, 2005 at 4:50 pm

    Tim F Says:

    As I recall the Clinton haters had a prosecutor of their own. Quite a zealous chap with a blank check and an open brief to investigate whatever he felt like investigating. Remind me how that turned out.

    I’ll tell you how it turned out: 14 convictions or guilty pleas including 2 Clinton business partners. I believe there were even more convictions involving Clinton Agriculture Secretary Mike Espy’s bribery and fraud dealings. And boy, that Hillary really knows how to invest in pork futures, huh? I’m sure all you upstanding lefties put country ahead of party though in opposing those Clinton outrages.. didn’t you?

  83. 83.

    Tim F

    October 17, 2005 at 4:54 pm

    14 convictions or guilty pleas including 2 Clinton business partners

    Don’t make me start listing criminal Republicans

    outside of government

    . Remind me again how many members of the Clinton administration ended up under indictment. Surely they beat Reagan, right?

  84. 84.

    Tim F

    October 17, 2005 at 4:55 pm

    blockquote, italics, same diff.

  85. 85.

    Frank

    October 17, 2005 at 4:59 pm

    Darrell- Are you seriously trying the “they do it too” defence? LMAO

    Heck I wasn’t even a Democrat until 2003. Even if the Clintons had done anything as bad as Bush, and they didn’t, and even if “Democrats” were as determined to defend Clinton as you Republicans are to defend Bush, which they weren’t/aren’t, You’d still be pretending its ok that you are a traitor, because someone else once was.

    You make me sick.

  86. 86.

    Darrell

    October 17, 2005 at 5:02 pm

    Johnny Chung: Clinton campaign contributor and frequent visitor to the White House. Guilty of campaign money laundering, tax fraud, bank fraud and funnelling Chinese govt money to Dems

    Doing what Dems do best. Care to see the list of convicted Clinton cronies? Country before party, right kooks?

  87. 87.

    Darrell

    October 17, 2005 at 5:04 pm

    Darrell- Are you seriously trying the “they do it too” defence?

    Read the thread jackass. Typical half-wit hypocrites asserting that Repubs are the only ones guilty of corruption. talk about “LMAO”. Doubt me? Re-read the thread

  88. 88.

    Tim F

    October 17, 2005 at 5:07 pm

    Darrell,

    Shortbus punditry. You must have missed the part where I asked for people in the Clinton administration. There’s no way a great president like Reagan would have had more indictments than Clinton, right?

  89. 89.

    ppGaz

    October 17, 2005 at 5:08 pm

    Typical half-wit hypocrites asserting that Repubs are the only ones

    Cite a post or passage which asserts that, Darrell.

  90. 90.

    Darrell

    October 17, 2005 at 5:17 pm

    Cite a post or passage which asserts that, Darrell.

    You wrote it yourself ppgaz:

    When your “top layer” is corrupt and entrenched, the other layers either have to step away from the thing, or go down with them. In a zero-sum two-party game, you can’t be “a little Republican”. If the Dems were corrupt and entrenched

    And then there’s this:

    After all, that’s what Republicans do, now, out secret agents.

    More hypocritical self righteousness here

    I don’t think all Republicans are criminals, but I do think quite a few of them would rather look the other way and allow criminal activity in their party to happen than to be honest, forthright and demand accountability.

    And this

    The Republicans aren’t a party they are a criminal organization.

    I believe those are enough examples for now

  91. 91.

    Frank

    October 17, 2005 at 5:20 pm

    Darrell- :) Nice examples. When you learn how to read come back and let us know.

  92. 92.

    Sojourner

    October 17, 2005 at 5:23 pm

    Oh and since only Republicans can be corrupt, any of you jackasses care to explain all those all those FBI files illegally obtained by the Clinton WH on their political enemies?

    A list of the people who belonged to these files was published a while ago. Turns out the files were for White House staff, and included James Carville.

    So much for that conspiracy.

  93. 93.

    Sojourner

    October 17, 2005 at 5:25 pm

    I’m really disappointed that DougJ outed himself. Frankly, I found his posts absolutely hilarious. I had suspected for a while that he was mocking the right but I loved the illusion.

    John: Please let DougJ pick another identity. I miss him.

  94. 94.

    Krista

    October 17, 2005 at 5:31 pm

    The problem is not necessarily Republican or Democrat. The problem is when the government is comprised too heavily of one party. When that happens, party loyalty gets prioritized over the crucial job of imposing checks and balances. I wonder if an overhaul of the voting system might be called for…

  95. 95.

    Darrell

    October 17, 2005 at 5:35 pm

    A list of the people who belonged to these files was published a while ago.

    Yeah, and they included hundreds of Republicans.

    Turns out the files were for White House staff, and included James Carville.

    Many of the files were requested by WH staffer Anthony Marceca. Are you suggesting that Carville himself initiated the request for these FBI files?

    Most importantly, if it was all simply an innocent mistake, why not immediately return those files back to the FBI instead of putting them away in a SAFE so that they could be combed for “derogatory information”. It’s how the Clintons operated. Dems put party ahead of country in defending that sort of sleazy corruption

  96. 96.

    ppGaz

    October 17, 2005 at 5:35 pm

    Thanks Darrell, you just made my point for me.

    You are without a doubt the biggest idiot I have ever seen on the Internets.

  97. 97.

    pleasewakeupy'all

    October 17, 2005 at 5:36 pm

    Does anyone see the irony of Darrel asserting that “kooks” only seek to “smear” the administration, while this whole sorry saga–politics and legalities aside–sprung from the repugnant yet typical smear tactics employed by the administration’s chief political advisor?

  98. 98.

    Vladi G

    October 17, 2005 at 5:36 pm

    Man, Darrell is one dumb motherfucker.

    Oh, he’s also a serial liar.

  99. 99.

    Darrell

    October 17, 2005 at 5:38 pm

    Vladi G Says:

    Man, Darrell is one dumb motherfucker.

    Oh, he’s also a serial liar.

    You lefties are all class..

  100. 100.

    ppGaz

    October 17, 2005 at 5:39 pm

    Okay, clearly Darrell is going to adopt an All Clinton All The Time strategy for the coming Plame wars.

    I move (suggest, plead, etc) that we simply agree to either completely ignore him, or else abandon all threads contaminated by him, until further notice.

    Thoughts, ideas?

  101. 101.

    Vladi G

    October 17, 2005 at 5:40 pm

    You lefties are all class..

    First honest thing Darrell has ever posted.

  102. 102.

    Halffasthero

    October 17, 2005 at 5:48 pm

    Darrell, I don’t agree with your logic but I am always impressed with your conviction. I read your thread and it was the “they do it too” defense. Right now, no one has been indicted, much less convicted for the whole Plame mess but at this point, it is a far stretch for the WH to maintain that they did any sort of reasonable investigation into who was behind this whole fiasco. Considering who is looking to have been involved, they would never have made any attempt because the elephant appears to have been in the room.

    You can criticize Clinton all you want, but that is water under the bridge and entirely beside the point. This has nothing to d with being “left or right” except for the fact that, naturally, the Dems want to see the Republicans squirm. The issue is that a law or series of laws may have been broken. You want to defend that with your line of argument, then you are basically saying that there should be no laws because everyone does it.

  103. 103.

    Darrell

    October 17, 2005 at 5:54 pm

    Right now, no one has been indicted, much less convicted for the whole Plame mess but at this point

    Yes, which is why it’s so outrageous when your side makes accusations like this:

    Republicans generaly seem to think burning American covert agents is ok if you are a Republican

    and again:

    After all, that’s what Republicans do, now, out secret agents.

  104. 104.

    DougJ

    October 17, 2005 at 5:58 pm

    After all, that’s what Republicans do, now, out secret agents.

    Darrell — that was an obvious joke. I was referring to myself as a “secret agent” there.

  105. 105.

    DougJ

    October 17, 2005 at 6:03 pm

    Sojourner, thanks. I never should have outed myself. That was a mistake on my part. I was very upset about the flooding in New Orleans and experienced temporary insanity.

  106. 106.

    Vladi G

    October 17, 2005 at 6:03 pm

    Darrell—that was an obvious joke. I was referring to myself as a “secret agent” there.

    See, told ya he was dumb as a post.

    And a serial liar.

  107. 107.

    Darrell

    October 17, 2005 at 6:05 pm

    I read your thread and it was the “they do it too” defense.

    You read wrong. If Plame was knowingly outed by someone in the WH in retaliation for the lies spread by her jackass of a husband, that person deserves to be hung out to dry. Since the left is trotting out their ‘party before country’ bullshit, it’s fair to point out how few Dems there were willing to criticize Clinton for all those ill-gotten FBI files on Clinton political enemies. That was the context of several of my prior posts. And if the Clinton is off limits for comparisons, tell me, did any Dems have enough principle to go on the record criticizing Sandy Berger’s theft and willful destruction of national security documents to protect Clinton?

  108. 108.

    Darrell

    October 17, 2005 at 6:07 pm

    DougJ Says:

    After all, that’s what Republicans do, now, out secret agents.

    Darrell—that was an obvious joke. I was referring to myself as a “secret agent” there.

    Ok then, DougJ is officially exculpated. But we still have this insightful comment from the left

    Republicans generaly seem to think burning American covert agents is ok if you are a Republican

    and this one

    The Republicans aren’t a party they are a criminal organization.

  109. 109.

    DougJ

    October 17, 2005 at 6:08 pm

    Darrell, you’re mixing two different talking points there: (1) the “Clinton did it too” talking point and the (2) smear Joe Wilson talking point. That undermines the coherence of your post.

    BTW, Darrell, are you going to smear Fitzgerald if he indicts? I don’t think you will, I think you have too much class for that. I’m wondering which Bushites will. Should be interesting.

  110. 110.

    Darrell

    October 17, 2005 at 6:14 pm

    (1) the “Clinton did it too” talking point and the

    There is no “Clinton did it too” talking point. The only reason I brought up Clinton was because the lefties were suggesting that only Repubs are corrupt.. the party of crime and all. My intent was only to point out the significant corruption when Dems were last in the WH, and how few voices on the left were critical of that sleaze. Party before country

  111. 111.

    ppGaz

    October 17, 2005 at 6:17 pm

    Plame was knowingly outed by someone in the WH in retaliation for the lies spread by her jackass of a husband,

    If Wilson is a jackass, where are the nuke works, and the WMDs, Darrell? It looks to me and to everyone else in the world who can read like Wilson was right.

    Besides, why would a government that is interested in doing the right thing send a known and trusted (Bush I administration) servant over there to report, and then try to TRASH HIM for reporting what he found? Why would they do that, unless they are corrupt?

    Don’t bother answering Darrell … we know your answer, and we know the real answer, already.

  112. 112.

    ppGaz

    October 17, 2005 at 6:18 pm

    the lefties were suggesting that only Repubs are corrupt

    Liar.

  113. 113.

    Vladi G

    October 17, 2005 at 6:27 pm

    Liar.

    Told ya. Darrell is a serial liar.

  114. 114.

    rayabacus

    October 17, 2005 at 6:34 pm

    If Wilson is a jackass, where are the nuke works, and the WMDs, Darrell? It looks to me and to everyone else in the world who can read like Wilson was right.

    Wilson simply told a pack of lies, several times. Hell, he was even caught in them via the time line.

    Look at this article. It lays out an excellent timeline for the whole “Niger/Plame” thing.

    http://weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/006/217wnmrb.asp?pg=1

    Here is a quote from that article.

    July 7, 2004. On that date, the bipartisan Senate Select Intelligence Committee released a 511-page report on the intelligence that served as the foundation for the Bush administration’s case for war in Iraq. The Senate report includes a 48-page section on Wilson that demonstrates, in painstaking detail, that virtually everything Joseph Wilson said publicly about his trip, from its origins to his conclusions, was false.

    This is not a minor detail. The Senate report, which served as the source for much of the chronology in this article, is the definitive study of the events leading up to the compromising of Valerie Plame. The committee staff, both Democrats and Republicans, read all of the intelligence. They saw all of the documents. They interviewed all of the characters. And every member of the committee from both parties signed the report.

    No matter which side of the debate you are on this article is a good, factual read.

  115. 115.

    Vladi G

    October 17, 2005 at 6:43 pm

    Wow, speaking of lying:

    They interviewed all of the characters. And every member of the committee from both parties signed the report.

    Hmm, guess they didn’t have room to say that the Wilson portion of that document was in the “additional comments” section, which to which no Democratic member of the committee signed on, and includes blatant falsehoods like this little nugget:

    First conclusion: “The plan to send the former ambassador to Niger was suggested by the former ambassador’s wife, a CIA employee.”

    Funny how they came to that conclusion, since no one involved in the decision has ever said that was the case, including the folks in the CIA who made the decision.

    Pretty much what I’d expect from the Weakly No-Standards.

  116. 116.

    Darrell

    October 17, 2005 at 6:47 pm

    and then try to TRASH HIM for reporting what he found? Why would they do that, unless they are corrupt?

    Looks like the Washington Post “TRASHED” Wilson too as they point out that virtually everything Wilson had said about his trip to Niger was a LIE.. I suppose the WP is part of the rightwingconspiracyofcorruption(tm) too.. right kooks?

    He said then that he concluded the Niger intelligence was based on documents that had clearly been forged because “the dates were wrong and the names were wrong.”

    “Committee staff asked how the former ambassador could have come to the conclusion that the ‘dates were wrong and the names were wrong’ when he had never seen the CIA reports and had no knowledge of what names and dates were in the reports,” the Senate panel said. Wilson told the panel he may have been confused and may have “misspoken” to reporters.

    Oh my, he was ‘confused’.. he may have ‘mispoken’. No, Joseph Wilson is a lying sack of shit who got caught red-handed doing what lying sacks of shit do. It still doesn’t give anyone the right to knowingly out his wife’s cover in retaliation for his lies, IF that outing was ever done..

  117. 117.

    Vladi G

    October 17, 2005 at 6:51 pm

    Oh my, he was ‘confused’.. he may have ‘mispoken’. No, Joseph Wilson is a lying sack of shit

    I’d trust Darrell on this one. He has a long history of being a lying sack of shit.

  118. 118.

    ppGaz

    October 17, 2005 at 6:53 pm

    Wilson simply told a pack of lies

    So, the yellowcake deal was real, and Hussein had a nuclear weapon works ready to crank out the mushroom clouds?

  119. 119.

    rayabacus

    October 17, 2005 at 6:59 pm

    So, the yellowcake deal was real, and Hussein had a nuclear weapon works ready to crank out the mushroom clouds?

    Is that what I said? If i’m not mistaken, those “16 words” everyone talks about was an attempt by Iraq to acquire yellowcake. Apparantly, even Wilson concedes that that was the case.

  120. 120.

    ppGaz

    October 17, 2005 at 7:00 pm

    Joseph Wilson is a lying sack of shit

    So then there was a proximate Iraq nuclear threat? Wilson was wrong about the Niger deal?

    If that was the case, why didn’t the non-corrupt Bush government get the facts and present them to the public, instead of engineering a character-assassination campaign against Wilson?

    If Wilson was a “lying sack of shit” then why did Bush’s father praise him for his service to his country?

    Wikipedia:

    He was hailed as “truly inspiring” and “courageous” by George H. W. Bush after sheltering more than one hundred Americans at the US embassy in Baghdad, and mocking Saddam Hussein’s threats to execute anyone who refused to hand over foreigners.

    If Wilson was wrong about nukes, why did your lying sack of shit president make a “funny” video about looking for the weapons under the sofa cushions in the oval office?

  121. 121.

    ppGaz

    October 17, 2005 at 7:05 pm

    an attempt by Iraq to acquire yellowcake.

    So we have a war three years long with no apparent end in sight, costing just short of a billion dollars a week, because Hussein might have attempted to buy yellowcake?

    That’s the mushroom cloud? How the fuck can you sit there and peddle that horseshit with a straight face?

  122. 122.

    rayabacus

    October 17, 2005 at 7:10 pm

    If that was the case, why didn’t the non-corrupt Bush government get the facts and present them to the public, instead of engineering a character-assassination campaign against Wilson?

    First of all, I didn’t call him a “lying sack of shit”. I try not to get in the gutter and wallow around. I said he told a pack of lies, as evidenced by the 911 commission report. As far as Bush I praising Wilson, that is up to Bush I, and you forgot to mention, how many years before his Niger trip that was.

    It is simple: what he said about his “Niger Adventure” and the subsequent circulation of his “report” (there wasn’t one) was and still is not true.

  123. 123.

    ppGaz

    October 17, 2005 at 7:13 pm

    So there you have it. The response to this grotesque episode of criminal behavior in the White House is going to be “Wilson lied” and “Clinton was worse.”

    And these assholes wonder why we are ready to launch a civil war against them.

  124. 124.

    Darrell

    October 17, 2005 at 7:19 pm

    And these assholes wonder why we are ready to launch a civil war against them.

    The mindless raging anger of so many on the left. So full of themselves. So now you kooks talking about “launching a civil war”, eh? I guess you loons will just have to ‘bring it on’, huh?

  125. 125.

    ppGaz

    October 17, 2005 at 7:30 pm

    So full of themselves

    That’s right, you stupid moron. Your White House is about to turn into a police lineup, and you are standing here defending them at every turn … but we’re “full of ourselves.”

    You’re an ass, Darrell.

  126. 126.

    Vladi G

    October 17, 2005 at 7:36 pm

    I said he told a pack of lies, as evidenced by the 911 commission report.

    rayabacus, please stop being stupid. It wasn’t “evidenced by the 9/11 report.” It was evidence by a bunch of crap that Senators Hatch, Roberts, and Bond pulled out of their asses and added to the Senate Select Committe on Intelligence report, which no one agreed to add except them.

  127. 127.

    Tim F

    October 17, 2005 at 7:39 pm

    Darrell did not answer my post and that makes me sad.

    Then I visited the global kitten picture clearinghouse and I’m not sad anymore. Kittens are funny that way.

  128. 128.

    DougJ

    October 17, 2005 at 7:45 pm

    Darrell, I have a question for you about Scooter Libby: what are we to make of the whole “aspens are turning” thing? To me, there’s no way Libby would have written that kind of coded Godfather sort of thing unless he had something to hide. I’m asking you, because you’re the most reasonble pro-Bush person I know of.

  129. 129.

    Darrell

    October 17, 2005 at 7:47 pm

    Tim F Says:

    Darrell did not answer my post and that makes me sad.

    Ok, ok, I’ll answer. Web Hubbell, appointed by Clinton to a top position in Justice Dept. Guilty mail fraud, tax evasion, plead guilty to a felony charge of lying. Satisfied?

  130. 130.

    DougJ

    October 17, 2005 at 7:59 pm

    Could you answer mine too? I’m not trying to be a smartass — I’d like to know what you think.

  131. 131.

    Tim F

    October 17, 2005 at 8:00 pm

    Satisfied?

    I got tingly all over.

  132. 132.

    ppGaz

    October 17, 2005 at 8:05 pm

    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.

    Posted today on the CNN website.

    In the latest poll, Bush’s support appeared to have eroded even among suburban residents, who had been among his strongest backers, falling from 51 percent in last month’s poll to 41 percent in the latest survey.

    Among urban residents, his approval rating did not budge from 34 percent, and among rural residents it was almost the same, 44 percent versus 45 percent last month.

    What do the Bushmonkeys do when it looks like somebody is going to take away their bananas?

    “Clinton!”

  133. 133.

    Darrell

    October 17, 2005 at 8:13 pm

    DougJ Says:

    Darrell, I have a question for you about Scooter Libby: what are we to make of the whole “aspens are turning” thing? To me, there’s no way Libby would have written that kind of coded Godfather sort of thing unless he had something to hide. I’m asking you, because you’re the most reasonble pro-Bush person I know of.

    Could you tone down the phony patronization just a tiny bit? Libby does appear to be stressing over something with that stupid ass reference to aspens turning.. that or he wants to intertwine his ‘root’ with her. We’ll see what the investigation turns up.

  134. 134.

    a guy called larry

    October 17, 2005 at 8:26 pm

    scumbag Marc Rich

    Client of ‘the-worm-turns-at-midnite-in-the-aspens’ I. Lewis ‘Scooter’ Libby.

  135. 135.

    DougJ

    October 17, 2005 at 8:50 pm

    Darrell, it’s not phony. I do respect the way you take on five opponents at once in this comments section. Honestly.

  136. 136.

    Krista

    October 17, 2005 at 8:52 pm

    …he wants to intertwine his ‘root’ with her

    Tee hee…pervert.

  137. 137.

    Slide

    October 17, 2005 at 9:03 pm

    Its really humorous to hear the right try to spin this as Wilson being the liar. So Iraq WAS trying to purchase yellowcake from Niger? Why would they be doing that when, according to the Duelfer report, they had no nuke program?

    Charles A. Duelfer, whom the Bush administration chose to complete the U.S. investigation of Iraq’s weapons programs, said Hussein’s ability to produce nuclear weapons had “progressively decayed” since 1991. Inspectors, he said, found no evidence of “concerted efforts to restart the program.”

    And, can anyone tell me why there were forged documents trying to make it seem as if Iraq was trying to buy yellowcake? Who forged those documents? For what purpose would someone do so? Do any of you brain surgeons on the right have any analytical thinking abilities whatsoever? Can’t you admit that this administration was trying to convince Americans that Iraq was a nuclear threat when they very well knew they weren’t? Wilson blew the whistle on their lies and guess what my dim witted right wing kool-aid drinking wingnuts? Its all going to come out in the open. Oh boy, how exciting!

  138. 138.

    Slide

    October 17, 2005 at 9:16 pm

    Oh, oh… according to Raw Story, the Daily News is going to report that someone “flipped” in the White House and is assisting Fitzgerald in the Plame investigation. Oh oh. Bad news for the bushies. Having been in law enforcement for many years, someone ALWAYS flips. Self preservation.

  139. 139.

    demimondian

    October 17, 2005 at 10:27 pm

    Oh, oh… according to Raw Story, the Daily News is going to report that someone “flipped” in the White House and is assisting Fitzgerald in the Plame investigation.

    Yeah, but slide? _Raw Story_ is about as reliable a news source as _The 700 Club_. I’d love to see the followers of bushie-do nailed, but…

  140. 140.

    eastriver

    October 17, 2005 at 10:55 pm

    I can’t tell you how happy it makes me to see the tighty-righties taking it in the teeth on this site.

    And the fun is just beginning.

    Bets on when Shrubby starts drinking in public? He’s gonna snap. Oh, yeah. Just a matter of when and to what level of personal and national embarrassment.

    All of this is warming me to such a degree I won’t need to wear a sweater until January.

    The Worst President Ever. The Best Reality TV Ever.

  141. 141.

    anon

    October 17, 2005 at 11:04 pm

    ppGaz Says:

    So there you have it. The response to this grotesque episode of criminal behavior in the White House is going to be “Wilson lied” and “Clinton was worse.”

    And these assholes wonder why we are ready to launch a civil war against them.

    Yeah? What ya got for an army, you old douchebag.

  142. 142.

    DougJ

    October 17, 2005 at 11:05 pm

    Raw Story is pretty reliable. And, in all fairness, I’ve watched the 700 Club a few times, and while it has a definite slant, I’ve never seen anything on there that wasn’t factually true.

    The New York Times, on the other hand…

  143. 143.

    demimondian

    October 17, 2005 at 11:58 pm

    Hmm. Doug, have you read the _Raw Story_ item in question here? It reports that the _Daily News_ is going to publish a story tomorrow in which an anonymous source says that somebody in the White House has turned. It’s sn effectively unsourced report on an unsourced report about things which an officer of a court allegedly said… That’s what, third hand?

    Look, I’d love it to be real. I doubt it is.

  144. 144.

    ppGaz

    October 18, 2005 at 12:23 am

    I’ve watched the 700 Club a few times, and while it has a definite slant, I’ve never seen anything on there that wasn’t factually true.

    Good work, Dougie!

    700 Club Facts:

    In Ezekiel, there is a reference to the “young lions of Tarshish looking on” while there seems to be an invasion of Israel by Gog and Magog, the people to the north of Israel. Tarshish was a seaport town along the Atlantic Ocean, not far from what is now Cadiz, Spain. Settlers from Tarshish went to England and to Ireland, and it is believed that some of them eventually made their way to the United States. As such, “the young lions of Tarshish” could apply to America.

    During the final conflict when Israel is invaded by this hoard from the north, the young lions ofTarshish are standing by saying, “What are you doing?” They aren’t necessarily in the war, but they are somehow monitoring the situation. That is the only real reference that may possibly apply to the United States.

    Other than that, you might think of the United States as the last of the great, enduring, Gentile powers, as noted in Nebuchadnezzar’s vision in the Book of Daniel? We are the successors to the Roman Empire, the last of the Gentile powers that come down from Greece and Rome.

    Some Bible students theorize that when Revelation describes “the mystery of Babylon, mother of harlots, who made the nations of the world drunk with the wine of her fornication,” it may be alluding to New York or Hollywood, or other powerful cities in the United States that have exported our immorality to the world.

  145. 145.

    DougJ

    October 18, 2005 at 12:27 am

    Demi, it doesn’t seem that far-fetched to me that someone flipped anyway.

    I’m a believer in the Card is cutting Rove and Cheney out of the loop theory. Why wouldn’t a Cardite rat out a Cheneyite or a Rovite? It makes perfect sense to me.

    If Bush is smart, he’ll cut Rove loose and bumble along as a 35% approval president for a few years. Worse things could happen. Throw Libby and Rove to the media, that will keep everybody at bay for a while. If Bush fights this too hard, he’ll end up out on his ass. He has enough instinct to know this.

  146. 146.

    demimondian

    October 18, 2005 at 12:39 am

    I’m a believer in the Card is cutting Rove and Cheney out of the loop theory. Why wouldn’t a Cardite rat out a Cheneyite or a Rovite? It makes perfect sense to me.

    I’m having a hard time not snarking about academic politics at its very best. Speaking of which: did you get that grant proposal done?

    I think that Andrew Card has every reason to flip on Rove and Cheney if he assumes that he’s going down himself, and his career is over anyway. (And look at Chuck Colson if you think that taking a hard fall ends your career with the Republicans.) My thinking, however, is that nobody in the inner circle is that desperate, and so nobody in WHIM or its equivalent has turned _yet_. If anybody’s turned, it’s somebody in the second circle, and they’ll have a hard time keeping any credibility after Rove gets done with them.

  147. 147.

    anon

    October 18, 2005 at 12:44 am

    DougJ Says:

    If Bush fights this too hard, he’ll end up out on his ass.

    What – you think a Republican Congress is going to impeach W because he has low poll numbers?

    BWAHAHAHAHA!

    Pleasant wet dreams, Moonbat.

    P.S- Get a life/job/whatever and quit spending your entire life here on this blog. John Cole doesn’t, and I’m sure he won’t be upset if you don’t either.

  148. 148.

    demimondian

    October 18, 2005 at 1:02 am

    you think a Republican Congress is going to impeach W because he has low poll numbers?

    I think that’s more likely than impeaching him for something, like…conspiracy to obstruct justice. You know, a real impeachable offence?

    I’m not holding my breath. The Publicans haven’t done anything about Tom (You’re DeLier, you’re DeLoser, you’re) DeLay, so I doubt they’ll do anything about Shrub.

  149. 149.

    anon

    October 18, 2005 at 1:32 am

    Demi,

    I have no idea where you are getting the idea that W, personally, has anyting to do with PlaneGate. But you never know as your favorite race baiter mitght say: Keep Hope Alive!

    As far as Delay is concerned, because of House rules passed when Gingrich et al, were elected as the majority party in 1994, Delay is required to step down as majority leader as a result of his current legal problems. (indictment)

    If the indictments hold, and if the bug man is convicted, then the House (Republican or Democratic majority) will probably expel him from the House (see: U.S. Constition)

    It all comes out in the wash.

    What you dems have to worry about is finding a candidate in 2008 that can be elected President in 2008.

    Be self critical

    You lost to W twice(:

  150. 150.

    aop

    October 18, 2005 at 2:39 am

    You’re all a bunch of doody-heads

  151. 151.

    Slide

    October 18, 2005 at 4:12 am

    Hmm. Doug, have you read the Raw Story item in question here? It reports that the Daily News is going to publish a story tomorrow in which an anonymous source says that somebody in the White House has turned. It’s sn effectively unsourced report on an unsourced report about things which an officer of a court allegedly said… That’s what, third hand?

    Hey listen EVERYTHING about this story is second and third hand information. This is reading tea leaves about what the tea leaves say. That being said, two points, 1) Raw story has been dead on on this story from the beginning and have often been first to point to other news agencies with breaking news.

    2) lets not forget that the Washington Post reported a long long time ago (September 2003) that an administration source had told them (Pincus at Wash Post) that:

    Yesterday, a senior administration official said that before Novak’s column ran, two top White House officials called at least six Washington journalists and disclosed the identity and occupation of Wilson’s wife.

    “Clearly, it was meant purely and simply for revenge,” the senior official said of the alleged leak.

    The official would not name the leakers for the record and would not name the journalists. The official said there was no indication that Bush knew about the calls.

    It is rare for one Bush administration official to turn on another. Asked about the motive for describing the leaks, the senior official said the leaks were “wrong and a huge miscalculation, because they were irrelevant and did nothing to diminish Wilson’s credibility.”

    So, back in September there was someone in the administration that was not happy about the Wilson smear and had discussed it with Pincus at the Washington Post. Does anybody not think this very same individual, that apparently has very inside information, would not tell Fitzpatrick what he knows? I don’t know why this hasn’t gotten more attention, but the fact that there is someone in the White House’s inner circle that is talking about this is very very significant. Remember, the key piece of information is when and how did Rove, Libby and others find out about Plame’s identity. They are claiming they heard it from reporters. This source may very well be in a position to say otherwise. These guys are in big big trouble.

  152. 152.

    Slide

    October 18, 2005 at 4:27 am

    Raw Story getting some acknowledgement:

    Raw Story gets it Right on Cheney

    Hat tip to the Raw Story for scooping everyone on the Dick Cheney connection to the Plame investigation. Mike Allen used them as a source on Hardball today and it was nice to see.

    .

  153. 153.

    Slide

    October 18, 2005 at 4:44 am

    Well, Raw Story was dead on again, this just out from the New York Daily News:

    Cheney’s name has come up amid indications Fitzgerald may be edging closer to a blockbuster conspiracy charge – with help from a secret snitch.

    “They have got a senior cooperating witness – someone who is giving them all of that,” a source who has been questioned in the leak probe told the Daily News yesterday.

  154. 154.

    Slide

    October 18, 2005 at 4:49 am

    last comment: Insomnia sucks.

  155. 155.

    pleasewakeupy'all

    October 18, 2005 at 8:43 am

    rayabacus Says:

    No matter which side of the debate you are on this article is a good, factual read

    .

    Went, read, conclusion.

    Two possibilities exist for rayabacus:

    1)Too busy to engage in critical thought.
    2)Dumb as a stump.

  156. 156.

    DougJ

    October 18, 2005 at 12:17 pm

    Slide, my belief is that blogs like rawstory are generally reliable because their credibility is on the line in a way that established media’s isn’t. But then again, I’m a libertarian, anti-media, pro-blog fanatic.

  157. 157.

    DougJ

    October 18, 2005 at 12:19 pm

    Speaking of which: did you get that grant proposal done?

    Yes. I ended up doing two, in fact. This garbage posting really loosens up the mind’s writing muscles. It was pretty painless except the proofing.

  158. 158.

    Tim F

    October 18, 2005 at 2:43 pm

    DougJ,

    Humanities? Hard science? Social science?

  159. 159.

    DougJ

    October 18, 2005 at 3:17 pm

    Mathematics.

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

2023 Pet Calendars

Pet Calendar Preview: A
Pet Calendar Preview: B

*Calendars can not be ordered until Cafe Press gets their calendar paper in.

Recent Comments

  • raven on On The Road – BigJimSlade – Hiking in the Alps, Chamonix and Grindelwald 2022, Planpraz to Le Brévent (Feb 2, 2023 @ 6:21am)
  • Baud on Wednesday Night Fights Open Thread: The Sacrificial Warm-Up Rounds Begin (Feb 2, 2023 @ 6:19am)
  • TKH on On The Road – BigJimSlade – Hiking in the Alps, Chamonix and Grindelwald 2022, Planpraz to Le Brévent (Feb 2, 2023 @ 6:18am)
  • JPL on Wednesday Night Fights Open Thread: The Sacrificial Warm-Up Rounds Begin (Feb 2, 2023 @ 6:17am)
  • JPL on On The Road – BigJimSlade – Hiking in the Alps, Chamonix and Grindelwald 2022, Planpraz to Le Brévent (Feb 2, 2023 @ 6:15am)

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
We All Need A Little Kindness
Favorite Dogs & Cats
Classified Documents: A Primer

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup

Front-pager Twitter

John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
TaMara
David Anderson
ActualCitizensUnited

Shop Amazon via this link to support Balloon Juice   

Join the Fight!

Join the Fight Signup Form
All Join the Fight Posts

Balloon Juice Events

5/14  The Apocalypse
5/20  Home Away from Home
5/29  We’re Back, Baby
7/21  Merging!

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2023 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!