Only partly relevant: in the mid-80s I was a guest at a party in Italy; one of the other guests was a Scot who assumed I was Italian (he complimented me on my English) and who admitted (or claimed) he was working as a front for American interests in Libya. There probably was a lot of that going on, waiting to be revealed 40 or 50 years into the future.
Posted by Brian Boru at May 31, 2005 09:19 PMIf Bolton provided classified national security information to any person without proper access, then its a crimial matter. And if I'm not mistaken (although I could be) the penalties for this this under the Patriaot Act would be stiffer than under previous statutes.
Now that would be a delicious irony, wouldn't it?
Posted by Dave Adams at May 31, 2005 09:27 PMI think it is pretty obvious that Cheney/Helliburton is on the list.
Posted by none at May 31, 2005 10:01 PMI'd love to think this will be the smoking gun. But there's already been enough revealed to impeach 10 presidents, and nothing ever happens. The MSM buries it on page A-11 and puts Michael Jackon on page 1 instead.
I've given up hoping that they'll notice that the president has been lying all along. But they don't care, do they? The president today stood there and smirked at them and lied and spoke incoherently and stupidly, and they didn't even notice.
It's embarrassing that he's our president.
Posted by allie at May 31, 2005 10:02 PMWhat happens?
Nothing.
Posted by craigie at May 31, 2005 10:18 PMIt's because we never get the smoking gun with the blood splatter on the shoes, and the reverb from the gunshot still echoing in the room.
Or, we never get the actual evidence, just redacted bits. Like cheney's energy meetings minutes. There's too much actual connections in stuff like that for them to give it up. I said that a while back somewhere about bolton.
He's dispensible. But who was being intercepted, what they were talking about, that's what bushco doesn't want out in the light. Not the evidence of what a lying prick bolton is, not even what dirty blackmail extortion work he was doing, but the connections, the context of who what where how and why.
We need a real free press, I was going to say news media but that's how they do it, not what they do. We need journalists and reportings digging up dirt. We need Deep Throat II and Carl Woodward and Bob Bernstein to get on the job.
Are there any young Sy Hersh's out there?
I sure hope so.
Posted by Duckman GR at May 31, 2005 10:27 PMAre there any young Sy Hersh's out there?
Maybe the Deep Throat revelations will stimulate conversation that will, in turn, re-awaken a nostalgia for real journalism? I'd love to see the rememberance and discussion of the criminality of the nixon administration spillover to the criminality of bush.
Posted by Jim Faith at May 31, 2005 10:55 PMI just don't see the White House turning over the documents. Hopefully I'm wrong.
Posted by jr at June 1, 2005 02:00 AMWhat a lovely irony: the identity of Deep Throat being used to obscure secrets.
Posted by sup at June 1, 2005 03:39 AMWe need to make sure the blogs focus totally on stories like this, especially the ones that are covered on Inside Politics and MSGOP. (Would that be "astro-turfing" ourselves?) They usually mention what the hot topics of the day are, so we need to decide which stories we want promoted and then talk about nothing else. That might be the only way to get the word out.
Posted by Susan S at June 1, 2005 05:06 AMWe shall see if the nomination is revoked due to the new spotlight being cast. Should be interesting...
Posted by Andy at June 1, 2005 06:04 AMRemember Saddam's WMD inventory back in 2002? The one the white house redacted to protect Halliburton & others? Bastards
Posted by darms at June 1, 2005 06:42 AMDeep Throat's identification is particularly interesting in this day and time. Firstly, those of us old enough to remember those times know that the country then was as divided as it is now, almost 50-50, sons vs. dads, peaceniks vs. Love it or Leave it's. The Repubs were oblivious to Nixon's crimes, just as they are Bush's now. Most, like my mother, still to this day are certain that the Democrats unjustly hounded Nixon out of office. Now knowing that the 2nd ranking FBI official was the whistleblower will make nary a dent in that belief. The difference then was that there was a legitimate Journalistic Media to expose the crimes. Nixon veterans Dick Cheny and Don Rumsfeld learned their lessons: if you want to take over a government, you better have complete Media Control. We, with Bush, have had plenty of Deep Throats -DeIullio,Clarke,O'Neill, to name a few- but they didn't reveal their knowledge in secret, but in public writings and testimony under oath. No, the difference is what was done with their revelations and the investigations they *should* have prompted. The Media has done everything from ignoring it to actually lying about it. Media Control - Dirty Dick and Rummy learned their trade under Nixon and now use it to do exactly what Nixon failed to do: control the elections and governance in the USA for the enrichment of the Corporate Barons.
Posted by T2 at June 1, 2005 07:04 AMAnd from today’s Washington Post:
“In March 1972, the (Nixon) administration was deeply embarrassed by the disclosure of a memo written by a lobbyist at telecommunications giant ITT. It stated that a $400,000 contribution to Nixon's reelection would cause the Justice Department to abandon an antitrust suit against ITT."
No documents-no Bolton!
That should be where the Dems keep the line drawn on this nonsense. Let's just see how bad they want to hide their crimes.
Hard to have bogeymen unless you sell them the nuclear equipment they need and then give generously to the political party that rattles sabers and makes proliferation a bogeymen while you and that administration profit from it in every sense of the word.
The only genious of the repugs is their ability to make money and political hay at the same time.
Was John Bolton just doing his job when he requested those NSA intercepts?
Maybe John Bolton got wind that people in the Bush administration, including the White House, we're doing business - illegal business - with countries that he hates with a rabid passion (Iran, China, Libya). Maybe he then requested those NSA intercepts in order to verify his suspicions. If so, then why didn't he spill the beans on this illegal activity?
Admittedly, this is speculation. But if not this, then what? I mean why did Bolton request those NSA intercepts? Up to this point, it's often been suggested or implied that Bolton was kind of going on a fishing expedition when he requested the NSA intercepts but maybe he had very specific reasons for requesting them.
Posted by Romdinstler Jones at June 1, 2005 08:06 AMI mean why did Bolton request those NSA intercepts?
How do you get an appointment as chief UN Ambassador when Diplomacy isn't your strong point? Extortion.
Posted by Osama_Been_Forgotten at June 1, 2005 09:28 AMWhat happens to Bush and the GOP if it turns out that major GOP contributors violated the export ban to China, Iran, Libya, and other countries?
Not a goddamn thing of course--what planet you living on anyway?
IOKIYAR
Not just a good idea, it's the law.
Probably not necessary to add, but what the hey:
If this is true, the Dems will cave on the documents. Why? Because they don't want to embarrass potential big-money contributors any more than the GOP does. Us lefties out in blogland may regard these mega-funders as the bad guys. For our "leaders," they are a resource.
Posted by DrBB at June 1, 2005 09:43 AMNo dems will not cave.
Personnel at companies can change. Even companies can be reformulated and change names. The Bolton story remains as a case of personal loyalties to the administration trumping national interest. Consistency will yeild big dividends to the dems for persecuting this.
Further these companies have over invested in republicans. By not pushing dems would be saying investments in their own party is not worth as much, as they will not pursue republican lobby groups. This is silly. Republican's bread and butter is beating up on entrenched dem interests like teachers, labor, and trial lawyers. Dems need to stay firm and hit back.
Posted by patience at June 1, 2005 10:17 AMCan anyone say "Carlisle group"?
Posted by BD in SF at June 1, 2005 10:33 AMNot only can I say it, I can spell it, too:
Carlyle Group
Posted by Buckethead at June 1, 2005 12:39 PMWhatever became of the concept of Obstruction of Justice? If I'm not mistaken, Congress is at or near the point where impeachment becomes possible.
Posted by les confoozed at June 1, 2005 06:50 PMWhen the cons were first trying to gin up the "UN Oil-for-Food Scandal" but refused to release the names of the companies on the list of those that had collaborated with Saddam, I KNEW then that most of those companies had to be US ones, and probably Texas oil companies in Bush's own backyard.
And I was right. (Oh, and did I mention that they donated mostly to the GOP over the last two decades?)
So of course the Bushistas want to hide the fact that it's their buddies doing the dirty deals. It's already been proved that Cheney's firm Halliburton had illegal dealings with Iran and Iraq all throughout the 1990s, yet the same news media that reamed out Clinton for pardoning Marc Rich didn't say boo when the Halliburton deals were unearthed.
Posted by Phoenix Woman at June 1, 2005 09:04 PMCan anyone say "tinfoil hat"? What a joke you nutjobs are.
Posted by Stan at June 2, 2005 04:49 AMOh man....
He got me.
Dang.
Posted by Andy at June 2, 2005 05:11 AMI heard Sen. Clinton speak at a dinner Tues. evening. She mentioned that the US borrows 50 million dollars a month to cover our deficit. One of the countries that she mentioned that we borrow from is China.
As she stated, how do you say no to your banker?
Poor Stan. Drive-By troll can't debunk our facts and cites, so he hurls a stink bomb that says more about him than about us. Awwwww!
Nothing you can say or do, Stan, will erase the fact that Cheney and Halliburton broke the law.
Posted by Phoenix Woman at June 2, 2005 09:55 AMIt's already been proved that Cheney's firm Halliburton had illegal dealings with Iran and Iraq all throughout the 1990s..."
Libya too. Evil Dick knows how to work those foreign subsidiaries like he knows how to work those government contracts.
Too bad loyalty to party trumps loyalty to country and respect for law. Remember, you can't spell greed, oil, and plutocracy without GOP.
Posted by David at June 2, 2005 01:15 PMGreed, Oil and Plutocracy=GOP.
I like it.
The democrats are truly lost...why isnt anyone raising a stink about this? Not even a mention on the news,the papers, newsmags..WTF is going on???We are so SCREWED!
Posted by modster at June 2, 2005 08:05 PMOh! A vision has come! Remember when Bush was told by God to go to war??? Well I just had a vision and it has Bush and partners impeached!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by Zo Daniels at June 6, 2005 08:00 PM