Tim Cavanaugh | September 2, 2006
I don't think we've made any mention of the one-cheek-sneak ending of the Valerie Plame affair. Although the trial of "Scooter" Libby seems to be going ahead, it now looks like Richard Armitage, the Peter Boyle of the first GWB administration and a favorite of Bush critics because he wasn't an ideological, pro-war hathet man, is the main leaker. This anticlimax creates some legal and ethical issues around Patrick Fitzgerald's investigation, which The New York Times, for obvious reasons, is happy to jump on. I've never been terribly interested in Plamegate, beyond hoping that after all the time and energy expended we might get some entertaining fireworks out of it. The Judith Miller epiphenomenon was somewhat more entertaining, and you can read a variety of Reason coverage on that here. If you have strong opinions, modest opinions, or uninformed opinions (the truest opinions of all), you have the floor.
Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.
So, if I have this straight, Fitzgerald knew very early who the
leaker was, determined very early that there was no underlying
crime, but continued to run his office in hopes of tripping someone
into a perjury/obstruction type rap?
And with all that, the best he could do was the weak case against
Scooter Libby.
Who this poster predicts will walk. And deservedly so.
What a fargin' fiasco.
Bush called for the Plame investigation, and Armitage worked for
him.
Through skilled spinning, the Plame investigation has turned into a
Democratic witch hunt that has snared one of their own...
Hehe, damn, they're good!
There turned out not to have been any underlying crime in the
Imclone investigation, but Martha Stewart still went to Club Fed
for lying to a government investigator. Libby may still get the
same treatment.
Kevin
Interestingly, there's not a single post in the last two weeks
on DailyKos with the term "Armitage" or "Plame" in it. Far cry from
the umpteen million "Karl Rove must do the perp walk" threads from
earlier (ok, according to
Google, 388).
Rep. Louise Slaughter (D, NY), a Kos diarist, last year said
"It is time for the President to keep his word. Karl Rove should be fired and prosecuted to the full extent of the law," said Rep. Slaughter. "There can be no gray area here, regardless of how he phrased it, regardless of how much detail he provided, he revealed the identity of an undercover CIA agent. What Mr. Rove did is reprehensible. Putting the life of an undercover CIA agent in jeopardy can not be tolerated. He clearly deserves his pink slip," she continued.
Karl Rove might be Satan incarnate for all I know, but it's nice to see another Democratic Congresswoman go Cynthia McKinney on the world.
I too have scant interest. I detest the CIA so when one their
agents is exposed I have no fears about national security. After
all, what has the CIA done for my security? It sure does work for
the benefit of multinationals looking for client states to increase
their profit margins.
Is the real culprit Colin Powell via his undersecretary? The irony
is that reacting poorly to "leaks of classified information" seems
to be the prime tactic of the Bush regime when it comes to
revelation of embarrassing truths about their operations. The last
I knew Colin Powell was part of the Bush regime and probably left
post haste to preserve any semblance of integrity and personal
reputation.
Was the purpose of the investigation to draw out Democratic
hyperbole and associate any critics of Bush policies with those
comments? False associations seems to run a close second in tactics
with the GOP - although the Dems are a distant second in the use of
these lies.
I agree: the more blood of lying politicians on the floor the
better for the country. Unfortunately, until people stop wasting
their votes for "the lesser evil" and stop giving credence to any
reportage of the corporate media, that won't accomplish much. But
it might nudge the conversation away from the gatekeepers.
Wow, I didn't realize my Rep was a Kos diarist. Then again, given the painstakingly gerrymandered nature of my district, there's not much point keeping tabs on her.
I'm not a big fan of the CIA myself, though I'm not sure how
else to collect intelligence.
One thing I do think that an active CIA employee who uses their
position to influence domestic politics should go to jail.
For a very long time.
So I've always felt Valerie Plame should be in prison for exactly
that reason because whoever leaked what to whom, that's precisely
what she did.
Interestingly, there's not a single post in the last two
weeks on DailyKos with the term "Armitage" or "Plame" in
it.
What are you talking about, jf? There's one from Monday of this
week with the explicit title:
Newsweek:
Plame Outed By Armitage
Marcvs,
Obviously, the DailyKos search engine wasn't working when I
searched then, because I did a search for the last 2 weeks just for
the term "armitage" and got zippo. Maybe I needed the capitol 'A'.
Thanks for the correction.
Interesting, however, that the diarist who wrote the post you
linked to still thinks Karl Rove is somehow behind it. I wonder if
he uses a special glare-shield to keep the reflected light from his
tin-foil hat from interfering with the readability of his
monitor.
"One thing I do think that an active CIA employee who uses their
position to influence domestic politics should go to jail."
Which is utterly irrelevant in the Plame case, because she didn't
send her husband, and her husband was qualified for the job in his
own right.
The right person for the trip would be one with diplomatic
experience in both regions and has ties to the CIA.
Despite the mud slinging and outright character assassination by
the Bush administration, Joe Wilson was very qualified.
The right person for the trip would be one with diplomatic
experience in both regions and has ties to the CIA.
Despite the mud slinging and outright character assassination by
the Bush administration, Joe Wilson was very qualified.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245