“I’m A Source Not A Target”
Yup. That’s what the button says.
I’m not kidding.
courtesy of the AP/Frankfurt Times via Crooks and Liars — go there for larger pic and full story.
.
"what digby sez..."
“I’m A Source Not A Target”
Yup. That’s what the button says.
I’m not kidding.
courtesy of the AP/Frankfurt Times via Crooks and Liars — go there for larger pic and full story.
.
President Barney
“What I’m telling you is that we’re focused here,” Bush said from the Port of Baltimore, where he got a waterside demonstration of cargo-screening techniques. “When you’re at war, you can’t lose sight of the fact that you’re at war.”
Among the state-of-the-art techniques Bush observed were computerized systems, sophisticated radiation detectors and advanced X-ray equipment.
“You can look inside in the truck, and you don’t even have to get in it,” Bush said afterward to an audience of state and local officials and port employees. “That’s called technology. And it’s working. It makes a big difference.”
What is he, 6?
Jesushchrist! What in the hell has happened to this country?
.
Yankee Doodle Judy
Gene Lyons has written an interesting column about Judith Miller and her crusade to protect powerful whitehouse souces who use the NY Times to destroy their critics. Lyons, many may recall, has some particular knowledge of the NY Times and its sources, having chronicled its massive journalistic failure in the Whitewater matter in his book “Fools For Scandal.” Let’s just say that the Times has a very credulous relationshihp with its sources. In fact, they’ve made a virtual fetish of being willing tools of lying Republicans over and over again.
Lyons says that Miller should testify:
In a haughty tone familiar to anybody who’s ever caught the newspaper with its metaphorical pants down, the editors reminded the prosecutor that they’re The New York Times, and he’s not. “Mr. Fitzgerald’s attempts to interfere with the rights of a free press while refusing to disclose his reasons for doing so, when he can’t even say whether a crime has been committed, have exhibited neither reverence nor cautious circumspection.”
What rubbish. Reverence, indeed. (To be fair, it’s an allusion to James Madison, not a demand to be worshipped.) In making its argument, the Times states it wouldn’t print information that “would endanger lives and national security.”
So here’s my question: In a post-9/11 world, what information could possibly be more sensitive than the identity of a covert agent charged with preventing nuclear proliferation?
Answer: None.
Let’s put aside the fact that Judith Miller has long been a passionately outspoken ally of Bush administration neo-conservatives who pushed for war with Iraq. She gave paid public speeches urging Saddam’s overthrow. Many journalists have asked why such a partisan was given the Iraqi WMD assignment to begin with. The answer? Access, access and access.
What everybody’s ignoring here is that Fitzgerald already knows Miller’s sources. That’s not what he wants to ask her. His prosecution brief urging her incarceration stipulates that “her putative source has been identified and has waived confidentiality.”
Even editor Bill Keller has conceded that there’s no imaginable journalist’s shield law that would protect her. It’s Miller’s patriotic duty to talk.
.
Along Comes Mary
Sorry for the non-existent posting. Busy day. But here’s a little Rovegate nugget to ponder: Mary Matalin was called to the Grand Jury to testify. I think we all assumed it was because she worked for Cheney and was a member of the iraq Group. But Mary Matalin left the White House at the end of 2002, six months before the Wilson op-ed and all the hoopla. (And you’ll notice that Karen Hughes, also a member of the Iraq Group, was not, to my knowledge, called to testify. She left in 2002 also.)Matalin was hired back after Novak’s column broke, specifically to handle the media on the Wilson matter.
He also subpoenaed the guest list for a White House party for Gerald Ford that took place on July 16th, days after the Novak column ran. I would take a wild guess that someone had told the FBI that Plame was mentioned (maybe as “fair game”) at the party and Fitzgerald wanted to talk to others who had attended to see if it was being spread around.
He subpoenaed the records of the Iraq Group from July 7th to July 30th, which includes the two weeks after the leak had already been out there.
This brings up one of the questions I think is being overlooked in the Fitzgerald investigation. He seems to have been quite interested in how the White House behaved after Novak’s column ran, which makes the most sense if he thinks there was a cover-up or that continuing to spread the information (as Rove admits to doing) was a violation of the law in itself. And, of course, people may have lied to the FBI or before the Grand Jury about all this, which would be criminal, but we don’t know.
It’s just a curiosity that I have long wondered about. It sure looks like he was thinking, at one point anyway, that he had a potential conspiracy case of some kind. I wonder if he still thinks so?
.
The Good Old Days
Via Think Progress, we are reminded of Ronald Reagan’s words upon signing the Intelligence Identities Protection Act
Whether you work in Langley or a faraway nation, whether your tasks are in operations or analysis sections, it is upon your intellect and integrity, your wit and intuition that the fate of freedom rests for millions of your countrymen and for many millions more all around the globe. …
Like those who are part of any silent service, your sacrifices are sometimes unappreciated; your work is sometimes misunderstood. Because you’re professionals, you understand and accept this. But because you’re human and because you deal daily in the dangers that confront this nation, you must sometimes question whether some of your countrymen appreciate the value of your accomplishments, the sacrifices you make, the dangers you confront, the importance of the warnings that you issue.
He continued
But that’s not true. As long as you are provably loyal to the Republican Party above all else and promise to fit intelligence to our preconceived notions, we appreciate everything you do. Otherwise you are fair game.
.
Back Scratch Fever
In case anyone is wondering if Roberts really is a partisan hack or not, Jeffrey Toobin’s book “Too Close To Call” sheds some light on that subject:
The president’s first two nominations to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia curcuit — generally regarded as the stepping-stone to the Supreme Court — went to Miguel Estrada and John G Roberts Jr., who had played important behind-the scenes roles in the Florida litigation.
“Some day, and that day may never come, I will call upon you to do a service for me. But, until that day, accept this justice…”
.
Up, Up And Away
A commenter asks why I think Clement was floated earlier in the day and it’s a good question. I don’t think it served any purpose. The only reason to float trial balloons on Supreme Court justices is to guage how they’ll be accepted. That is an irrelevant concern for this White House except for one consituency — the radical religious right. But they have a very direct pipeline to the the leaders of that constitutency and they don’t need to float a name publicly to find out how it will be seen by these people. They just have to pick up the Jesus phone.
I think it was a mistake. And I’m surmising that it might just be because things are breaking down a little bit in the vaunted white house message center. Perhaps people are a little bit distracted and not keeping their eye on the ball the way they should? Wonder why?
Honestly, I can’t think of a single good reason to do it.
.
Demographically Correct
Is it just me or is it a little bit odd that the allegedly liberal Washington Post is advertising on this conservative DC blog and not advertising on this liberal DC blog?
It seems particularly odd considering that the conservative blog gets only 1/6th the weekly traffic that the liberal blog gets.
That damned liberal media sure is biased.
.
White House deputy chief of staff Karl Rove did not disclose that he had ever discussed CIA officer Valerie Plame with Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper during Rove’s first interview with the FBI, according to legal sources with firsthand knowledge of the matter.
The omission by Rove created doubt for federal investigators, almost from the inception of their criminal probe into who leaked Plame’s name to columnist Robert Novak, as to whether Rove was withholding crucial information from them, and perhaps even misleading or lying to them, the sources said.
Also leading to the early skepticism of Rove’s accounts was the claim that although he first heard that Plame worked for the CIA from a journalist, he said could not recall the name of the journalist. Later, the sources said, Rove wavered even further, saying he was not sure at all where he first heard the information.
Martha knitted a lovely poncho and lost 25 pounds. Do you think Karl will make such good use of his time?
.
GOP Creature
My initial take on reading around the web on Roberts is that he’s a purely political choice — a Republican die-hard to the bone. This means that even if he isn’t seen as “ideological” in theory, he’s ideological in practice. They all are.
He’s spent his entire adult life in Washington. He’s been a judge for only two years. Before that he represented corporations and worked for Republican administrations. That’s it. He’s not a scholar or a prosecutor or someone who has ever worked in the trenches. He’s a creature of the radical right GOP establishment.
Good choice for Bush. He’ll take care of his friends. And he knows exactly what he’s supposed to deliver.
.