such a great word! and so appropriate! Shadenfreude I agree. Rimrocker gets the credit for the use of this word. What is it with this word? I never heard it until rougly the last year. Now everyone is trying to use it whenever they can.
Now that the revenge outing by the Bush Admin is revealed, it might encourage others in the security apparatus to come forward with more stories of the doctored case for the war.
One GOP take from Daniel Drezner: T]hey [The White House] need to get a senior Admin official in front of a friendly Congressional Chairman, admit that it was an innocent mistake, take the pain, and exit. "That won't fly, for the simple reason that high-ranking members of the Bush administration apparently know that it wasn't an "innocent mistake." By telling the Post, it's clear that some cabinet officials are not going to let this die quickly. To which I say, good. What was done here was thuggish, malevolent, illegal, and immoral. Whoever pedaled this story to Novak and others, in outing Plame, violated the law and put the lives of Plame's overseas contacts at risk. Compared to this, all of Clinton's peccadilloes look like a mildly diverting scene from an Oscar Wilde production. If Rove or other high-ranking White House officials did what's alleged, then they've earned the wrath of God. Or, since God is probably busy, the media firestorm that will undoubtedly erupt. Let me make this as plain as possible -- I was an unpaid advisor for the Bush-Cheney 2000 campaign, and I know and respect some high-ranking people in the administration. And none of that changes the following: if George W. Bush knew about or condoned this kind of White House activity, I wouldn't just vote against him in 2004 -- I'd want to see him impeached. Straight away."
Hmmm. Looks like this was one of three leaks that week: 1. Canadian Reporter is "outed" as a gay even though he was public about it in Canada. 2. WH tried to get Dick Durbin thrown off the Intel Committee, leaking (falsely) that he had leaked classified info. 3. Plame's an agent. Somebody was very busy at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
Josh Marshall makes the point that stonewalling may not be so easy... _____________ "Can't we just put The Weekly Standard on the case? Last week, and I quote, "At the request of THE DAILY STANDARD, White House staffers went through the logs to check whether [Wesley] Clark had ever called White House political adviser Karl Rove." Can we try that again? I don't mean to pick on any particular 'top White House official'. But the Standard's put Rove's name in the mix. And his phone logs seem readily searchable. So, just at random, let's try him. How many calls to Bob Novak, say in the second week of July. Presumably it can't be too difficult, take too long, or involve any issues of privilege since White House staffers did a similar search on behalf of a junior staffer at the Standard only a week ago. "
The thing that makes this situation different is the different layers involved. If the Bushies decide to sacrifice someone like say, Ari Fleisher or Andy Card and say that it was just a honest mistake or over sight, then the question would be how did he find out about Plame in the first place? It is not as if the White House has a whole list of CIA operatives in the drawer at all times so a special request had to be made to the CIA by someone who had the security clearance to do so. I don't think either Ari or Card could do so without raising a few eyebrows. Who made the request then? If the information request did not originate from the WH, then there may have been a friendly party in the CIA who relayed this information to Bush Admin figures and would be as indictable as the one who leaked the info to the press. Things are going to get alot more interesting before long...
What conclusion would you like us to make under these circumstances? It is pretty clear that someone at the White House (2 someones, actually) is in some pretty hot water. What conclusion would you come to if a Democrat (say, Clinton) were President?
Good grief! Was this part of an investigation into whether Clark was a "mole" of the GOP?? (insert roll-eyes here) And they checked? Well, heck... they sure can check the phone logs of anyone easy enough, if that's the case. Then why don't they ? Don't they want to get to the bottom of the Plame case? Oh! I forgot! The Justice Department is on the job now, so they don't need to. Instead, they'll wait to get a subpoena for them. Why be pro-active and forthcoming on a criminal investigation of treason... that's only applicable to tawdry digging around for possible muck on a political opponent. Silly me.
We would need to assume that Bush Admin supporters are capable of being fair minded and not given to bouts of gross hypocrisy and exaggeration to defend their leaders. Tall order.
Monday's story... _____________ Bush Aides Say They'll Cooperate With Probe Into Intelligence Leak By Mike Allen Washington Post Staff Writer Monday, September 29, 2003; Page A01 President Bush's aides promised yesterday to cooperate with a Justice Department inquiry into an administration leak that exposed the identity of a CIA operative, but Democrats charged that the administration cannot credibly investigate itself and called for an independent probe. White House officials said they would turn over phone logs if the Justice Department asked them to. But the aides said Bush has no plans to ask his staff members whether they played a role in revealing the name of an undercover officer who is married to former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, one of the most visible critics of Bush's handling of intelligence about Iraq. An administration official told The Washington Post on Saturday that two White House officials leaked the information to selected journalists to discredit Wilson. The leak could constitute a federal crime, and intelligence officials said it might have endangered confidential sources who had aided the operative throughout her career. CIA Director George J. Tenet has asked the Justice Department to investigate how the leak occurred. National security adviser Condoleezza Rice said on "Fox News Sunday" that she knew "nothing of any such White House effort to reveal any of this, and it certainly would not be the way that the president would expect his White House to operate." She also said the White House would leave the probe in the hands of the Justice Department, calling it the "appropriate channels now." White House press secretary Scott McClellan said the Justice Department has requested no information so far. "Of course, we would always cooperate with the Department of Justice in a matter like this," he said. Asked about the possibility of an internal White House investigation, McClellan said, "I'm not aware of any information that has come to our attention beyond the anonymous media sources to suggest there's anything to White House involvement." The controversy erupted over the weekend, when administration officials reported that Tenet sent the Justice Department a letter raising questions about whether federal law was broken when the operative, Valerie Plame, was exposed. She was named in a column by Robert D. Novak that ran July 14 in The Post and other newspapers. CIA officials approached the Justice Department about a possible investigation within a week of the column's publication. Tenet's letter was delivered more recently. The department is determining whether a formal investigation is warranted, officials said. The officials said they did not know how long that would take. Democratic lawmakers and presidential candidates seized on the investigation as a new vulnerability for Bush. Sen. Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.), who has been pushing the FBI to pursue the matter for two months, said that if "something this sensitive is done under the wing of any direct appointees, at the very minimum, it's not going to have the appearance of fairness and thoroughness." From the presidential campaign trail in New Hampshire, Rep. Richard A. Gephardt (Mo.) called it "a natural conflict of interest" for Justice Department appointees to investigate their superiors, and said congressional committees should step in to try to determine what happened. Former Vermont governor Howard Dean said Attorney General John D. Ashcroft should play no role in the investigation and should turn it over to the Justice Department's inspector general, who operates independently of political appointees. "President Bush came into office promising to bring honor and integrity to the White House," Dean said. "It's time for accountability." Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (Conn.) said the investigation "must be conducted by an independent, nonpartisan counsel." Although the Independent Counsel Act, created after the Watergate abuses, expired in 1999, the attorney general can appoint a special counsel to investigate the president and other top government officials. Special counsels have less independence from the attorney general, but proponents of the system said that makes them more accountable. More specific details about the controversy emerged yesterday. Wilson said in a telephone interview that four reporters from three television networks called him in July and told him that White House officials had contacted them to encourage stories that would include his wife's identity. Novak attributed his account to "two senior administration officials." An administration aide told The Post on Saturday that the two White House officials had cold-called at least six Washington journalists and identified Wilson's wife. She is a case officer in the CIA's clandestine service and works as an analyst on weapons of mass destruction. Novak published her maiden name, Plame, which she had used overseas and has not been using publicly. Intelligence sources said top officials at the agency were very concerned about the disclosure because it could allow foreign intelligence services to track down some of her former contacts and lead to the exposure of agents. The disclosure could have broken more than one law. In addition to the federal law prohibiting the identification of a covert officer, officials with high-level national security clearance sign nondisclosure agreements, with penalties for revealing classified information. Wilson had touched off perhaps the most searing controversy of this administration by saying he had determined on a mission to Niger last year that there was no clear evidence that Saddam Hussein had tried to buy "yellowcake" uranium ore for possible use in a nuclear weapon. His statement led to a retraction by the White House, and bolstered Democrats' contention that Bush had exaggerated intelligence to build a case against Iraq. The yellowcake allegation became known as "the 16 words" after Bush said in his State of the Union address in January that the British government had learned that Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. An administration official said the leaks were "simply for revenge" for the trouble Wilson had caused Bush. Wilson said that in the week after the Novak column appeared, several journalists told him that the White House was trying to call attention to his wife, apparently hoping to undermine his credibility by implying he had received the Niger assignment only because his wife had suggested the mission and recommended him for the job. "Each of the reporters quoted the White House official as using some variation on, 'The real story isn't the 16 words. The real story is Wilson and his wife,' " Wilson said the journalists told him. "The time frame led me to deduce that the White House was continuing to try to push this story." Wilson identified one of the reporters as Andrea Mitchell of NBC News. Mitchell did not respond to requests for comment. Wilson has suggested publicly that Bush's senior adviser, Karl Rove, was the one who broke his wife's cover. McClellan has called that "totally ridiculous" and "not true." Secretary of State Colin L. Powell said on ABC's "This Week" program: "The CIA has an obligation, when they believe somebody who is undercover was outed, so to speak, has an obligation to ask the Justice Department to look into it. But other than that, I don't know anything about the matter." Democrats also questioned why Bush's aides had seemed to show little interest in the disclosure before the CIA request was made public. McClellan was asked about the Novak column during briefings on July 22 and Sept. 16. He replied that no one in the White House would have been authorized to reveal the operative's name and that he had no information to suggest White House involvement. Democrats e-mailed a quotation from former president George H.W. Bush, a former CIA director, who said in 1999 at the dedication of the agency's new headquarters that those who expose the names of intelligence sources are "the most insidious of traitors."
Here's a story about how in July, the WhiteHOuse tried to initmidate and slander a US Senator in the early days of the coverup over this story of blowing the Agent's cover for political revenge. I particularly like old Orrin Hatch's no comment nonsense. Maybe for grins someone can ask him again. BTW has anyone else been following this story for a couple of months in the Nation Magazine and other sources. It is wierd how it always takes the mainstrem media months before they will report this type of story. ******* Senator fights leak allegation By Sarita Chourey The longstanding debate between Congress and the administration over how much classified information it should share with lawmakers flared anew yesterday when Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) defended himself against charges he leaked sensitive information. Durbin took to the Senate floor to deny accusations that he disclosed classified information on Iraq after CIA Director George Tenet briefed the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence last week. Durbin, a member of the panel, accused the administration of intimidating individuals who have spoken out against the its use of intelligence to justify military action against Iraq. His speech came after he sparred with new White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan over criticism of President Bush’s claim, made in a 16-word sentence in his January State of the Union speech, that Saddam Hussein had tried to buy uranium from the government of Niger. According to Durbin, an unnamed staffer in the White House press office told reporters that some senators were disturbed by his public statement blaming White House staffers for not removing the claim despite warnings from the CIA. He said that the “White House press operation started floating the story that there were senators … who were asking for my removal from the Senate Intelligence Committee because [of] the statements that I made.” But Durbin said that he never disclosed the name of a White House staffer who was involved in the preparation of Bush’s speech and that he doesn’t know of any senators who want him to be removed from the panel. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) appeared to support Durbin’s claim. He told reporters yesterday that “no one has come to me as majority leader asking that he be removed. Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) said, “I don’t know who is trying to intimidate … [Durbin], but I know that efforts are being made from various sources to undermine his credibility and to deny him the responsibility and, I would say, the support that he needs to continue his work.” In his speech yesterday, Durbin cited the case of Joseph Wilson, former U.S. ambassador to Gabon, who was asked by the CIA to investigate reports that Niger in the 1990s sold Baghdad processed uranium that could be used to make nuclear weapons. Wilson concluded that “some of the intelligence related to Iraq’s nuclear weapons program was twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat.” Durbin suggested that the administration itself had leaked classified information about Wilson’s mission to journalists in order to discredit his conclusion that the African uranium story was dubious. Durbin said any information he discussed was already unclassified or had been made public before he used it. He said he refused to name the White House staffer involved and that “the number of suspected Iraqi [weapons of mass destruction] sites — 550 — which I disclosed on the Senate floor had been declassified this year in June. It is public information.” He said that syndicated columnist Robert Novak and Time magazine both reported that administration officials “told them they believe Mr. Wilson had been chosen [for the mission] through the influence of his wife, whom they identified as a CIA operative.” Speaking to reporters after his Senate remarks, Durbin said, “If a member of the Senate is going to be subject to this kind of effort from the White House to discourage our responsibility … and goes to the point of questioning the integrity of my service on the Intelligence Committee, that is a serious as it gets.” “Sadly, what we have here is a continuing pattern by this White House,” he declared. “If any member of this Senate, Democrat or Republican, takes to the floor, questions this White House policy, raises any questions about the gathering of intelligence information or the use of it, be prepared for the worst.” At Durbin’s request, the Intelligence Committee will investigate whether administration officials compromised the identity of Wilson’s wife. Durbin said he understands that the chairman and ranking member of the Intelligence Committee, Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) and Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), respectively, intend to call White House staffers before the committee “to ask what led up to this situation and why we’re in the position that we’re in today.” The White House did not return calls requesting comment. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), who also sits on the Intelligence Committee, said he does not know enough about the charges against Durbin to comment. link
I agree with bigtexxx, we really need to pay careful attention and watch as the real facts emerge. I for one will be vigilant.
Now the AP is on the case. The WH seems really sure Rove was not involved, but they can't figure out who was? Interesting. __________________ White House: Rove Not Involved McClellan Asserts President's Belief That Rove Did Not Reveal Identity of CIA Operative The Associated Press Monday, September 29, 2003; 11:19 AM WASHINGTON -- The White House on Monday emphatically denied that President Bush's chief political strategist was involved in revealing the identity of a CIA operative, in possible violation of the law. A Democratic senator has asked Justice Department to appoint a special counsel to probe the matter. The naming of the intelligence officer's identity by syndicated columnist Robert Novak came shortly after her husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson, had undermined Bush's claim that Iraq had tried to buy uranium in Africa. Wilson has publicly blamed Karl Rove, Bush's top political adviser, for the leak, although Wilson did say Monday he did not know whether Rove personally was the source of Novak's information. "He wasn't involved," White House press secretary Scott McClellan said of Rove. "The president knows he wasn't involved. ... It's simply not true." "It's a serious matter and it should be looked into," McClellan said. Asked whether Bush should fire any official found to have leaked the information, McClellan said: "They should be pursued to the fullest extent by the Department of Justice. The president expects everyone in his administration to adhere to the highest standards of conduct -- and that would not be." Schumer, D-N.Y., said matter should be investigated from someone outside the Bush administration. "If there was ever a case that demanded a special counsel, this is it," he said. "This is a very serious national security matter where there is a clear conflict of interest for the attorney general because it could involve high-level White House officials." The Justice Department had no immediate comment on Schumer's request. On Sunday, Bush national security adviser Condoleezza Rice said she was unaware of any White House involvement in the matter. "I know nothing of any such White House effort to reveal any of this, and it certainly would not be the way that the president would expect his White House to operate," she told "Fox News Sunday." Secretary of State Colin Powell also denied knowledge of the matter. The flap began in January when Bush said in his State of the Union address that British intelligence officials had learned that Iraq had tried to purchase yellowcake uranium in Africa. In an opinion piece published in July by The New York Times, Wilson said he told the CIA long before Bush's address that the British reports were suspect and the administration has since said the assertion should not have been in Bush's speech. A week after Wilson went public with his criticism Novak, quoting anonymous government sources, said Wilson's wife was a CIA operative working on the issue of weapons of mass destruction. The Washington Post on Sunday quoted an unidentified senior administration official as saying two top White House officials called at least a half-dozen journalists and revealed the identity and occupation of Wilson's wife. Disclosing the name of an undercover CIA agent could violate federal law. "I know nothing about any such calls and I do know that the president of the United States would not expect his White House to behave in that way," Rice said on NBC's "Meet the Press." Wilson said Monday he believes the White House leaked his wife's name "to intimidate others and to scare them and to keep them from coming forward and speaking." Wilson had said in a late August speech in Seattle that he suspected senior Bush adviser Karl Rove. But on ABC's "Good Morning America" Monday, he backtracked somewhat from that assertion. "In one speech I gave out in Seattle not too long ago, I mentioned the name Karl Rove," he said. "I think I was probably carried away by the spirit of the moment. I don't have any knowledge that Karl Rove himself was either the leaker or the authorizer of the leak. But I have great confidence that, at a minimum, he condoned it and certainly did nothing to shut it down." The White House has denied that accusation. Powell told ABC's "This Week" that he thought that if the CIA believed the identity of one of its covert employees have been revealed, it had an obligation to ask the Justice Department to look into the matter. But he added: "Other than that, I don't know anything about the matter." Rice said the matter has been referred to the Justice Department and "I think that's the appropriate place. ... Let's just see what the Justice Department does." Pressed whether anyone at the White House raised concerns that the Wilson matter posed a problem for the administration, she replied: "I don't remember any such conversation." Wilson said Monday that if the administration actually took an intelligence asset "off the table," that would have been "a dastardly deed ... coming from an administration that came to office promising to restore dignity and honor to the White House. It was contemptible."
Hmmm... Precedent. _______________ Sources close to the former president [George H.W. Bush] say Rove was fired from the 1992 Bush presidential campaign after he planted a negative story with columnist Robert Novak about dissatisfaction with campaign fundraising chief and Bush loyalist Robert Mosbacher Jr. It was smoked out, and he was summarily ousted. "Why Are These Men Laughing?" Ron Suskind Esquire January 2003
Hum.... The president <b>knows</b> Rove wasn't involved? Are we to assume if he <b>knows</b> he wasn't involved, that he <b>knows</b> who is?
