Agreed with everything you said except in your footnote. bin Laden did pull it off. Administration incompetence played a role in allowing it to happen, but he did do it.
I hate to say it, but your footnote sounds almost as nutty as the PNAC/neocon crowd's contention that bin Laden couldn't have done the '93 bombing without a state sponsor. The history of humanity shows that the human species is very creative when need be.
Regarding everything above that, I largely agree. Don't think we'll get Bush, though. They might've told him, but he's too stupid to have been actively involved, and therefore, will get off.
Posted by Tony Shifflett at July 15, 2005 12:20 PMThe dots connect to the dead CIA operatives and double-agents from the outing of Plame, this is a murder investigation with various levels of collusion at it's core. These people are cop-killers, with all that entails. The neo-cons and republi-cons must be pleased.
Posted by phidipides at July 15, 2005 12:21 PMTony -- I didn't say that OBL didn't pull it off. Lots of people beat the odds. But at a minimum, you have to admit that the WH response to this brilliant criminal mastermind is at least a bit odd?
Posted by Marie at July 15, 2005 12:29 PMosama pulled it off for sure..but he certainly had help from this administration...who knew for sure something was coming..and did very little to stop it...richard clarke tried to warn them..they didn't want to hear it...i believe they wanted iraq...9/11 gave it to them....they just had to tweak it a bit with manufactured lies to fabricate a reason...bush is a fraud who was installed..it was all his dad's old men who did it..cheney rumsfeld..jim baker played a big part ..and still does...
Posted by dennis at July 15, 2005 12:45 PMTalk about low expectations. Things are so bad these days I actually think Hastert would be a good caretaker president -- moderate by today's rabid GOP standards, open to compromise, savvy enough to survive both Gingrich and Bush, maybe even competent. Hell, I like that idea a lot. Damn you, Left Coaster, for getting my hopes up.
Posted by dagarg at July 15, 2005 12:51 PMRe: 9/11 - I think that the administration deliberately made terrorism a low priority, because fighting Al Qaida was a high Clinton priority. They didn't really believe or care that Al Qaida was a threat. They wanted to oust Saddam and build their Missle Defense Shield.
Anything that Clinton considered a high priority was automatically a low priority for the Bush administration. They were viscerally opposed to doing ANYTHING that Clinton did.
Also, if a terrorist attack DID happen, they knew they could use it as an excuse to go after Saddam. They intentionally ignored the various warnings and intentionally did nothing on the Al Qaida front. They didn't plot 9/11, but they didn't do anything to stop it either.
I think that they had an inkling that some kind of hijacking was in the works, but they didn't think it was going to be anything as spectacular as what did end up happening. That's what that look on George's face was on 9/11 - "Oh shit, Dick and Karl didn't say it was gonna be THIS bad!"
Posted by Dave in CA at July 15, 2005 12:52 PMDave, good synopsis. Spot on.
Posted by benjoya at July 15, 2005 01:15 PMDave, your hypothisis remains as mine has been ever since 9/11:
Bush & Co. knew something was coming but never imagined that it would be so large and so successful. They probably figured another embassy bombing in another country, maybe another ship bombing, but I'm sure they were convinced in their pre-9/11 mindset that no one could touch America.
Posted by ann at July 15, 2005 02:01 PMto Ann and the rest....52 FAA warning about hijacking that summer went unheeded. Several other intel units were using the "hijacking" word over and over. The FBI stonewalled investigations revealing the Flight Training of guys who turned out to be the hijackers. The "something" was obvious to many, many people.
But, even BinLaden himself said he never expected the Towers to collapse. That was a freak. No one could have predicted that. Nevertheless,even if the planes crashed in NYC, thousands would have been killed. But thousands of GI's have been killed in Iraq, for nothing, so if losing a few hundred/thousand Americans was the price one had to pay to advance a takeover of the US......
Dave, that's exactly what I think too.
I've felt this way from almost the day it happened and only felt more sure of it as we have all learned more and more about this band of ruthless criminal thugs.
Marie, thanks for your post. I always enjoy reading your perspective and analysis.
Posted by John B. at July 15, 2005 02:37 PMThanks, everybody! I'm glad people see it similarly. Over at some other lefty blogs, there's a lot of stuff about demolition blasts going off in the towers before the planes hit, that it wasn't an airliner that hit the Pentagon, all kinds of stuff, that, BTY doesn't add up. And that just works to undermine the credibility of our side. (Sometimes I think some of the more elaborate 9/11 conspiracy theories are planted by the right in order to get the left to undermine itself. But, then again, every one of the 9/11 conspiracy theories has someone selling a book or DVD behind it, so maybe it's just good ol' fashioned money making.)
What I posted above, and what you guys added, all adds up to the Bush administration willfully ignoring warnings, in order to let something bad happen, without actually being involved in the planning.
Which is still criminal, of course.
Posted by Dave in CA at July 15, 2005 03:29 PMAnother similarity with Watergate is that Watergate (the break in) happened before Nixon's second-term re-election. But it didn't really affect the election because it took a while before it got investigated and the coverup was brought into the light. Same thing with Bush - he got re-elected while various scandals were still percolating under the surface but hadn't yet emerged into public consciousness. It's a pity.
Posted by Leslie Turek at July 15, 2005 03:49 PMMarie:
(the network news programs are covering Rove but are going out of there way to minimize the seriousness of the leak and Rove’s complicity in it)
One of us is delusional. And it isn't me.
Love,
Toby
p.s. You misspelled their.
Posted by Toby Petzold at July 15, 2005 04:38 PMDave in CA:
(Sometimes I think some of the more elaborate 9/11 conspiracy theories are planted by the right in order to get the left to undermine itself.
But you still wish to thank these people for not propagating weird ideas that, uh...don't make you...seem crazy...ummm....?
But, then again, every one of the 9/11 conspiracy theories has someone selling a book or DVD behind it, so maybe it's just good ol' fashioned money making.)
Yeah, that's probably all it is. Just that goofy sorta disinterested, non-propagandizing impulse to libel Jews and conservatives as treasonous mass murderers. You know: where the easy money is.
Posted by Toby Petzold at July 15, 2005 04:48 PMI believe that there was a meeting at the WH to discuss "outing plame" and someone has told Fitzgerald. I also suspect that Judith Miller is an Administration stooge. I think she is going to jail for a real crime and she is claiming freedom of the press so she doesn't incriminate herself. It's hard to know where the investigation is right now but Fitzgerald will get to a point where he will have enough info to start telling Administration insiders that the jig is up, and that is when the house of cards will fall. There is always a turning point where someone turns against his boss to save his own ass. I don't think that has happened yet . . but it will because I DO believe Fitzgerald must have some very damning evidence or the'Circle of Rovians" wouldn't be in such damage control. With Watergate, the dam burst with John Dean.
Posted by RCD at July 15, 2005 04:53 PMI just heard Lou Dobbs railing on about how "the real victim here is Judith Miller." Um, how about the real victims here are the other undercover agents who t worked with Valerie Plame and are now exposed? Or, say, how about the people who might suffer from the next terrorist attack which might have been stopped by the spy work of some of her associates?
Posted by Alexandra at July 15, 2005 05:09 PMComparisons with Watergate are somewhat apt, especially with Cheney, Rumsfeld, and a Bush still roaming the halls of the White House. But I think this whole thing deserves comparision to the The Tea Pot Dome Scandal during poor Warren G. Harding's administration.
Both involve oil, no bid contracts, greedy fixers operating out of the executive, and an inept President more than willing to delegate authority and not prone to carefully monitor the goings-on. Also, the general public was largely indifferent to the whole matter until finally enough evidence was brought forth that it became obvious not only had underhanded dealings been going on, a deep and damaging coverup, complete with perjury, jury tampering, and contempt of court, had been underway as well.
There are also some cute Enron parallels to boot. In the end, the whole Bush presidency is a continuation of the corporate scandals anyway. He said he wanted to run government like a corporation and he did. But he ran it like a corrupt corporation.
Posted by obelus at July 15, 2005 05:10 PMtoby
did the white house lie to the american people regarding karl rove involvement in the plame affair??
if the answer is yes..why?
Hey Folks, check this link out, something from our friends at ABC. It will open in one of your media players. It is a newscast story from 1999.
http://www.mediaresearch.org/rm/cyber/2004/binladen061704/segment1.ram
Dennis:
did the white house lie to the american people regarding karl rove involvement in the plame affair??
I think Karl Rove lied to Scott McClellan, who then misled the press. Rove did this because he understands that most people are too stupid to realize that his "involvement" in mentioning Plame (if not by name) was not a criminal act and, so, tried to throw people off a non-story to save himself some aggravation.
And now what we have is a perfect and predictable demonstration of that stupidity.
The Democrats already realize that there's no indictable offense here, so they have turned up the political heat as high as it can go. If they can persuade enough dumbasses in the media to spread a false premise, then the White House will be put in the position of having to prove the negative.
It's enormously chickenshit, but so was Rathergate. And that one didn't turn out very well for your coreligionists, either.
Posted by Toby Petzold at July 15, 2005 05:49 PMtoby, shame on you for criticizing another's typing. If there is a chronic problem ok carp, but with Marie there is not. Also, please leave your prejudices/chips on the shoulders/paranoia at the door. Lastly, lay off the hard stuff. It kills brain cells.
Posted by caroline at July 15, 2005 05:59 PManyone wanna start a pool on the first appearence of the phrase "Fitzgerald is a partisan Democrat"?
Posted by benjoya at July 15, 2005 06:00 PMI think Karl Rove lied to Scott McClellan, who then misled the press. Rove did this because he understands that most people are too stupid to realize that his "involvement" in mentioning Plame (if not by name) was not a criminal act and, so, tried to throw people off a non-story to save himself some aggravation...
Holy shit. Now, on top of all the other stuff I have to do this weekend, I have to find Toby's comment from a few months back where he told us all how terrible it was that some unidentified person in the White House had exposed an agent.
Ah, winger bullshit.
Posted by Matt Davis at July 15, 2005 06:18 PMtoby
i thank you for admitting that karl rove is a liar...but i think you give his intellect way to much weight..he is not a genius ..he is a thug who will destroy anyone that need be..in the end it will be patrick fitzgerald who decides if there are indictable offenses here..someone clearly set out to destroy joe wilson...why?..ask yourself why?...
Posted by dennis at July 15, 2005 06:19 PMBe very quiet...if you listen, you can hear the bleating of the yellow-bellied, shitlicking Toby. This specimen differs only slightly from the Ditto-headed Toby, in that the latter prefers rolling in excrement rather than licking it. Both species has a call that can be comical at times, yet is nearly always quite repulsive. Their numbers are dwindling, even though the shit seems to be piling higher. Anthropoligists believe the cause of this attrition may lie in the fact that the females of their species shun the company of the males, as do most other animals in its vicinity. In addition, the growing populations of its natural enemies such as gays, liberals, and the truth are "thinning the herd." Sadly, no one seems willing to take up the plight of the Toby, as it adds no value to its environment other than its ghastly odor.
iamcoyote:
Be very quiet...if you listen, you can hear the bleating of the yellow-bellied, shitlicking Toby. This specimen differs only slightly from the Ditto-headed Toby, in that the latter prefers rolling in excrement rather than licking it. Both species has a call that can be comical at times, yet is nearly always quite repulsive. Their numbers are dwindling, even though the shit seems to be piling higher. Anthropoligists believe the cause of this attrition may lie in the fact that the females of their species shun the company of the males, as do most other animals in its vicinity. In addition, the growing populations of its natural enemies such as gays, liberals, and the truth are "thinning the herd." Sadly, no one seems willing to take up the plight of the Toby, as it adds no value to its environment other than its ghastly odor.
Man. That was a long way for nothing, wasn't it?
Posted by Toby Petzold at July 15, 2005 06:24 PMDavis:
Now, on top of all the other stuff I have to do this weekend, I have to find Toby's comment from a few months back where he told us all how terrible it was that some unidentified person in the White House had exposed an agent.
That doesn't sound like me.
Then again, I never thought I'd see Leftists defending the sanctity of CIA agents' secret identities.
By the way, do y'all suppose that Judy Miller's current incarceration is just practice for the big house?
As a trained anthropologist, I must verify coyote's analysis. I was only trying the mothering approach -- like when your 10 year old comes in stinky and you tell him to get to the tub and he thinks it's not necessary, and so on. My bad for trying to nurture the poor toby. I just have this bleeding heart and can't help myself.
Posted by caroline at July 15, 2005 06:34 PMThanks for the caprolyte analysis, Caroline. I especially like the insinuation that I am a drunk and not, say, merely right.
Posted by Toby Petzold at July 15, 2005 06:37 PMOh, Toby, it's not that you're a drunk.
It's just that you're a loser.
Posted by Matt Davis at July 15, 2005 06:44 PMDavis, you're not even trying anymore.
BTW, have you explained to these people yet that Rove is not guilty of violating the IIPA? I know that if you did it, it would make it easier for them to accept.
Posted by Toby Petzold at July 15, 2005 06:58 PMIt's entirely possible that Fitz can't pin IIPA violations on Rove, or anyone else in the administration for that matter.
But you're showing your pasty, white non-law-talking ass, Toby. Once a grand jury has begun, the prosecutor is allowed to follow up on new crimes.
I think Fitz may have found some of those...
Posted by Matt Davis at July 15, 2005 07:01 PMAfter the 1993 trade Center bombings, we did what the British has done just now, we conducted a criminal investigation and went after the masterminds and we solved the crime.
From that point forward we hooked up with all the foreigh intel available and especially during the millineum celebrations, we actually thwarted plans for mayhem. At some point, well meaning, kind, generous and loving people have got to acknowledge that evil lives in their sphere.
There was so much information, we now know, that pointed to what was planned and subsequently happened on 9/11. And yet there was no preventative action taken. And I totally agree with Dave up post. GWB's look that AM in that school room in Florida says it all. It was not a deer caught in the headlights look, it was more like the look of someone ten years old, that shows up for a surprise party for themselves that they already knew about, and they were trying to look like they didn't know about it, but they didn't know it was going to be such a BIG PARTY, so they were surprised anyway. "If I look totally stoned faced, I can pull off the bluff."
Go forward very fast to the day Bagdad fell, and in the mass confusion and looting, did that look like an invading army expecting weapons of mass destruction. And the answer would be no. They already knew there were none, would not have invaded if there were, and they proceeded accordingly. And if you think Osama Bin Laden has evaded our missions to find him, that would make you an idiot. If we found him, and as a BIG capture would result in a very public trial, well, that would not make us look too good-because he might name names that were too sensitive to "National Security"-current people in and around the White House.
Posted by Mary at July 15, 2005 07:04 PMWatch carefully as the shitlicker Toby puffs up when startled. Its gibbering is an ineffectual show of bravado, as it pecks at the predator's barbs with devolved arguments. The Toby's antics have often been compared to that of the Great Drunken Imbecile, whose habitat is exclusive to the DC area Fox News affiliate; the two have often been mistaken for each other. In actuality, the Ditto-headed Toby is a talented mimic, depending solely on the RNC talking points for subsistance.
Posted by iamcoyote at July 15, 2005 07:06 PMAnd what's the deal with y'alls comment posting, anyway? It's taking like half an hour for it to go through. Well, maybe more like a couple of minutes, but still!
Posted by Toby Petzold at July 15, 2005 07:09 PMDave, you summed it up and well.
Posted by Judith at July 15, 2005 07:11 PMIt's taking like half an hour for it to go through.
I feel the same way every time I try to explain "human rights" to a right-winger...
Posted by Matt Davis at July 15, 2005 07:15 PM(And I apologize for making so many posts with references back to that period...
Thanks for the apology but you guys haven't ever really left that period. Either its the Nixon/Bush comparison or its the Iraq War/Vietnam comparison. I think maybe those were your glory days, eh?
What did you get out of that backlash, again? Oh yeah, Carter. Nice one.
Posted by Mike at July 15, 2005 09:18 PMHey Folks, check this link out, something from our friends at ABC. It will open in one of your media players. It is a newscast story from 1999.
http://www.mediaresearch.org/rm/cyber/2004/binladen061704/segment1.ram
Posted by peter at July 15, 2005 09:27 PMDennis has a very clear picture of the disgraceful Bush Iraq scam. The Daily Kos blows away the current republican smoke screen by clearly articulating where Bush's attack on truth tellers stand at this point.
We now know Karl Rove was one of the sources in Novak's column. We know he talked to Novak on the 8th, two days after Wilson's op-ed appeared that rocked the White House and caused them to admit, on the 7th, that the uranium claims the President cited in his case for war, were false.
Nevertheless, for the last two years the White House claimed repeatedly that Karl Rove, by name, was not involved with the case. We know know that to be patently untrue.
So the question remains. There remain only two possibilities: either the President of the United States knew about Rove's involvement with the Plame case, and lied to the country, or Karl Rove lied to the President about his involvement.
Posted by smootn at July 15, 2005 10:08 PMWMD, WMD, WMD...The cry for war was heard. Iraq could possess weapons of mass destruction. Well, certainly they possessed tabun (a nerve agent), mustard gas, sarin, VX. Hell, they used it at Halabja, right? Only West Germany, France, and the good ole United States had provided the means (and in the case of the U.S.) the targeting to deploy these weapons. Did Iraq possess WMD? Hell, yeah. The ones we sold them!
Bush needed a casus belli and he fell upon WMD. Maybe Saddam had a nuclear program, he offered.
He didn't.
The Iraq Survey Group proved conclusively (and with loss of life) in January of this year that the place was clean. The intelligence that somehow suggested otherwise now becomes suspect. The whole bloody war is based on a lie. Members of the intelligence community and members of the armed forces know it was a damn lie. All the prevaricating in the world does not change it one iota.
The ones who still attempt to spin their way outta this must realize that they are selling the integrity and prestige of the United States down the drain. Hell, the whole world knows. We have fooled no one in this mess.
We fueled Saddams agression towards Iran and then we turn around and declare him a threat to international stability. It is the United States who has consistently threatened geopolitical stability for the last 50 years. We are paying the price for it right now. We will continue to pay the price until we offer terms of peace.
We haven't offered a peace deal in quite some time. Bush has never put forth terms of settlement. He has made peace with no one since he has been in office. We all know he can shitcan treaties; can he build one?
Posted by obelus at July 16, 2005 12:18 AMWhat Rove did "was not a criminal act?" That's funny.
The law will determine that, not us.
The law will not care about the chattering on the TV and comments in the media about this grand jury investigation.
The law is a blunt instrument, and it makes no distinction between things like "only" confirming a story for a reporter/talking head/columnist/whatever, and naming a deep cover CIA agent. That sort of fine tuning and legal relativsim is only good for a prosecutor figuring out which is the stiffest crime they can charge and reasonably expect a conviction on, and for sentencing, the kind of stuff a parole office digs up for recommendations during sentencing. As far as the law is concerned, identifying is identifying. Confirmation of a story on an undercover CIA agent is the same as calling a reporter up and saying, "This person is a super secret spy, write a story about it."
Make no mistake, Rove is fucked.
He may or may not be convicted, but let's not be dense. He is in for a world of lawyers and courts and trials and deal-cutting and just plain getting beat down by the blunt instrument that is our legal system. I almost feel sorry for him. Almost.
Rove is no longer invincible. Hell, at this moment he's too busy defending himself to be of any use for leading the offense on the right-wing's agenda. You notice his spin agenda these days is why he's not guilty, not why homos are evil or why Iraq is a success? He's an outright albatross hanging around Bush and the right's collective necks. Yeah, he's going to be a little busy keeping his chubby white ass out of jail. All that's left with Rove are the details.
The pertinent question now is where else is this investigation going. Which is the exact same topic with which Marie started this.
Posted by Brian Bell at July 16, 2005 03:02 AMThe biggest difference between Watergate and now is that during the Nixon years the press was an enemy to the Administration. Truth was reported in the news media and the American people reacted with outrage. Remember the "Saturday Night Massacre" and the fallout from that one event?
The media had everything to do with Nixon's downfall as much as anything else. Today, the press is controlled by this WH. Today we have paid by the WH reporters, friendly calls from the WH to favorite reporters (Novak), WH faux reporters (Gannon), corporate controlled media with an agenda, and news agencies to afraid to print the truth or cannot print the truth. In today's world, Nixon would never have been impeached, even with the tapes.
wow, peter's link is very revealing; apparently all arabs are alike, and that whole secular/fundamentalist divide is a ploy to steer us away from the fact that saddam personally planned 9/11 (and OK City, too!)
Posted by benjoya at July 16, 2005 07:32 AMthat whole secular/fundamentalist divide is a ploy
told you so. those dozens of americans who have made the ultimate sacrifice in iraq have done so to keep you whiny little liberals safe.
Posted by wolfowitz at July 16, 2005 07:34 AMThe Democrats already realize that there's no indictable offense here
Yes there is. In fact, there are several. And I think it's simply juicy that a Republican (and maybe Fitz is a real Republican, not a republi-con like most of those posting on these lame administration supporters we see posting on these threads) is the one to do the prosecuting.
As John Dean (you remember Mr. Dean, from the Nixon Administration. He knows all about about having Federal Statutes applied to a person) indicates:
"He could be, well, converting government information to his own political uses and putting it out, and that is a violation of the law. It could be the statute that got a lot of those of us involved in Watergate, which is if he is conspiring with others to do what he's not being paid as a government employee to do, which it would be in this instance, to leak information for political purposes. That in turn, could be a violation as well." John Dean on CNN
It's like all the neo-cons, republi-cons and TaliEvanFundies. These peoples have committed acts of sedition in their attempts to promote the overthrow of the exisiting Constitution in creating a one-religion basis for governmental actions in the United States. I can't wait for their respective turns to appear in the dock.
Gee, Phid, that quote from John Dean couldn't be more conditional and subjunctive if it tried. What a lot of rank speculation.
Posted by Toby Petzold at July 16, 2005 09:35 AMit's quite apparent to any reasonable person...that a conspiracy was in place to discredit joe wilson..and in doing so national security..at least on some level... was tampered with..you can couch it in the lexicon any way you wish..but a wrong was done..and perhaps a crime...saying karl rove didn't tecnically break the law isn't going to cut this time...we already know he is a liar...you said so yourself toby..they've got some serious problems
Posted by dennis at July 16, 2005 10:01 AMThe reason Watergate is such a guidepost here is that THE SAME PEOPLE WHO DID IT ARE INVOLVED NOW.
CHENEY
RUMMY
WOLFOWITZ
All involved in Nixon's failed Imperial Presidency.
If this all looks too familiar, it's because it's the same pattern of "ratfucking" dirty tricks, misuse of public office AND CLASSIFIED INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION for POLITICAL purposes and then,
THE COVER UP (playing now at a government office near you, with a stunning supporting cast of thousands of compliant marketing and advertising degree-holders masquerading as "journalists."
This is WATERGATE II -- FOR REAL.
Only this is where Nixon's presidency would have gone had the criminal conduct remained unchecked.
THe unholy three have been involved in subverting our government for FORTY YEARS. They have a plan to dominate the world. Read about it:
http://www.newamericancentury.org.
Posted by marblex at July 16, 2005 10:12 AMWhile not on topic, it seems that a whole lot of us read GWB's expression on the morning of 9/11 in exactly the same way. At an intuitive level, we really know that BushCo was not surprised by the attacks, except for maybe by the scope of damage. There's a PBS (maybe BBC) review of that day that I think airs next Tuesday. I want to watch it again to make sure I got the facts right before I begin saying things that will appear nutty to most people.
Judith - Let's not romanticize the quality of the press back in Nixon's day. Even though the journalistic skill level back then was higher, they were also highly cynical. If they had treated Nixon with half as much disdain and loathing in their reports as Nixon claimed they did, he would never have made it to the WH. They pretty much ignored the Watergate story until it became red hot with the Congressional investigations. What they didn't do was use WH talking points to try to minimize the seriousness of what the Nixon gang had done. OTOH, they didn't exactly report the full scope and seriousness of it.
Posted by Marie at July 16, 2005 11:30 AMMarie's right. The press will never live up to the rhetoric promising that a free press is the guarantee of good government. Cooptation is too easy.
My spidey sense is certainly tingling, though. I'm not willing to bet on indictments straight up yet, but anybody who thinks Karl Rove has nothing to worry about is profoundly deluded. Frankly, given just the facts that are publicly known, I'd guess that numerous administration figures may have conspiracy charges in their futures.
Posted by Matt Davis at July 16, 2005 11:51 AMCan't count on the corporate marketing and advertising media to to what's right. That's not what they're paid for. Many networks are owned by defense contractors and folks who profit from the war.
The court system is the last bastion of sanity in this country. Schiavo proved that. Naturally the GOP is trying to destroy it.
Let's hope they continue to FAIL.
Though do note: all this bloviating about Rove v Wade is ignorant. Roe is in no more danger of being overruled than you are of winning the lottery 12 times in a row. Abortion is too good a core issue to keep the base fired up. Should Roe be overturned, momentum automatically would swing WITH the 68% of Americans who like Roe and want it left alone.
The real danger in any SCOTUS appointment is that WE ARE ONE VOTE AWAY FROM A COURT APPROVED POLICE STATE THAT PERMITS ILLEGAL DETENTIONS AND DISAPPEARANCES, WITHOUT ANY PROCESS AT ALL.
It's starting to happen now. Court of Appeal upheld der Shrubenfuehrer's fake trials.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/15/AR2005071500757.html
Matt: My spidey sense is certainly tingling, though
As well it should be. Rove and the WH have their spin machine on overdrive. And in the public sphere they aren't doing all that badly considering that they haven't a shred of truth with which to work with on their side. Rove knows that he had some legal liability, and must be hoping that any charge Fitzgerald can come up with is minor enough that his propaganda campaign will be the difference between surviving and slinking out of DC. But what most of us are sensing is the fear in the WH.
Posted by Marie at July 16, 2005 12:35 PMMarie, the response was odd because Bush is incompetent. Pure and simple. He doesn't have leadership skills, so they did the chicken with its head cut off thing for awhile.
Just my view. Thanks for your post.
Posted by Tony Shifflett at July 16, 2005 12:56 PMConditional-shmishminal, Toby, like Dean's careful wording has any bearing on two simple facts:
People saw Powell walking around Air Force One with a memo in his hand.
And they could see what the memo was about?
Jesus! Powell's about as careful with classified information as Sandy Berglar is.
Posted by Toby Petzold at July 16, 2005 02:07 PMDavis:
I'm not willing to bet on indictments straight up yet, but anybody who thinks Karl Rove has nothing to worry about is profoundly deluded.
Y'all are getting frog-marched straight into a major rat-fucking.
If the American people ever find out just how much Joe Wilson has lied to them, it may be just the thing that will restore public opinion on the justifications for the War for Iraq. I see this as a tipping point where all of the things your side has tried to flush down the memory hole come rushing back up to carry you away.
Posted by Toby Petzold at July 16, 2005 02:19 PMBrian: We're all wondering just how far up this goes.
Not me. I know how far up it goes and only wonder how far up Fitzgerald can take it and nail the SOBs.
Posted by Marie at July 16, 2005 02:38 PMIf the American people ever find out just how much Joe Wilson has lied to them...
That may just be the stupidest thing anyone, anywhere, ever wrote.
Posted by Matt Davis at July 16, 2005 02:42 PMtoby
are you familiar with the downing street memos?
do you know there implication?
do you know the reasons we were told why we were going to war?
do you know they turned out not to be true?
can't you see this bunch for what they are?
what in gods name is the matter with people like you??..it's as plain as the nose on your face.
Posted by dennis at July 16, 2005 03:25 PMMatt,
Talk about making your sides split! I fell out of my chair laughing at the stupidity of that comment!
Anyhow, a fundamentalist like Toby can't separate fact from fiction. He still thinks that Sadaam had WMD's!!!!!!!!!
Posted by Ga6thDem at July 16, 2005 03:31 PMBetter keep Hastert healthy! Doesn't Frist come after him if Bush, Cheney, and Hasstert all fall off their perches without nominating a new vice-president?
Posted by duvidil at July 16, 2005 03:32 PMDennis,
He's a fundamentalist that can't separate fantasy from reality. It's really that simple.
toby
what were joe wilson's lies ?
and don't say dick cheney asked him to go because he never said that
what were his lies and what was his agenda?
did you know he was a twenty two year diplomat through republican and democratic administrations?
What specifically did he lie about...you were kind enough to admit that piece of shit rove was a liar...now kindly inform us morons what wilson lied about..thank you
dear toby
just a footnote..this investigation..you know the one ...been going on for two years now...guess what... they're not investigating joe wilsons lies..just in case you weren't aware of that..because based on the jist of a lot of your comments you don't really seem to know what they are investigating
Posted by dennis at July 16, 2005 04:12 PMWatergate is relevant. Rumsfeld and Cheney were around at the time and I have always had the feeling in the last five years that these two are convinced that if Nixon had been a little more disciplined and a little bolder he would have gotten away with his nonsense. They think they can out-Nixon Nixon. And they have the full enthusiastic participation of George W. Bush and Karl Rove.
Posted by Craig at July 16, 2005 11:29 PMCraig,
You're right. When Felt announced that he was deep throat the MSM brought Colson and Liddy of all people out to tar him as the true bad guy. Considering that, is there any wonder why the MSM is acting Orwellian on Rove's self made troubles?
Posted by sage at July 17, 2005 08:57 AMshow confidence voting should be incorperated in our govt.if we hAD THIS GWB'S ASS WOULD HAVE BEEN KICKED OUT LONG BEFORE ABLE DANGER SURFACED,HOWEVER IF WE STILL HAVE EVOTING, THE NEXT ELECTION, HIS COHORTS IN CONSPIRACY WILL SURVIVE.
Posted by wm.purser at January 25, 2006 07:13 AM