Bob Novak Is One Key to Libby’s Aspen Letter

Alright. Admittedly this discovery is rather dated. But hell–what are blogs for, if not to rehash that old Aspen letter Libby sent Judy in September 2005? Especially if, after rehashing the letter, you discover that Bob Novak may be there hiding among the Aspen trees?

Back when I first analyzed the letter, I compared how Libby’s description of the testimony of journalists matched up against published accounts about that testimony.

Because, as I am sure will not be news to you, the public report of every other reporter’s testimony makes clear that they did not discuss Ms. Plame’s name or identity with me, or knew about her before our call.

I compared that statement to the public reports from Tim Russert and Matt Cooper and agreed (after some coaching from readers), that Russert "did not discuss Ms. Plame’s name or identity with [Libby]" and Cooper "knew about her before [Libby’s] call." Surprise! Even in a cryptic letter, it appeared, Libby was being transparent and honest with Judy. Which struck me as rather suspicious–that Libby might tell such transparent truths in such cryptic language.

But I did that analysis a month before I first speculated that Libby had spoken to Bob Novak the week of the leak, and a full year before Libby’s and Novak’s conversation on July 9 was confirmed in court filings. That is, when Libby wrote the Aspen letter, we didn’t know that Novak was among the journalists who had testified about a conversation with Libby, but Libby knew it. And if my reading of the script Libby sent Judy via Steno Sue and Pool Boy was correct, then Judy would have known about the conversation, though not that Novak had testified. As a reminder, here’s how I first speculated that Libby and Novak had spoken:

Steno Sue’s Secret Message
The morning Judy testified the first time to the Grand Jury, one of Libby’s allies managed to get the following passage inserted into the newspaper that will replace the NYT as the nation’s newspaper of record.

[snip]

The Novak Surprise
Now we come to far and away the most curious part of this coaching session:

Libby did not talk to Novak about the case, the source said.

Is this still a message for Judy? Why would Libby’s friend need to remind Judy that Libby hadn’t spoken to Novak in the case? Unless she knew that he had spoken to Novak? I think it highly possible that Libby’s friend is telling Judy not to mention the fact that she knew Libby spoke to Novak about this case.

On the morning Judy testified, one of Libby’s friends inserted a script for Judy into the WaPo (which Judy testified at trial to preferring over the NYT), telling her not to let on that she knew Libby had spoken to Novak "about the case." Before trial, it was not clear to me exactly when Libby would have told Judy about his conversation with Novak. But since we learned that Richard Hohlt sent Rove a copy of Novak’s column on July 11–the day before Libby and Judy spoke twice by phone about these issues–it is possible that Libby told Judy about Novak’s column on July 12, warning her she had just a few days to scoop Novak on the Plame story he had given her earlier in the week.

With our knowledge now that Libby knew that Novak had testified and that public reports of Novak’s testimony protected Libby entirely, and the supposition that Judy knew Novak and Libby had spoken–but not that he had testified, read the passage from the Aspen letter pertaining to Libby’s earlier conversations with journalists.

As you know, in January 2004 I waived the privilege for purposes of allowing certain reporters identified by the Special Counsel to testify before the Grand Jury about any discussions I may have had related to the Wilson-Plame matter. The Special Counsel identified every reporter with whom I had spoken about anything in July 2003, including you. My counsel then called counsel for each of the reporters, including yours, and confirmed that my waiver was voluntary.

[snip]

As noted above, my lawyer confirmed my waiver to other reporters in just the way he did with your lawyer. Why? Because, as I am sure will not be news to you, the public report of every other reporter’s testimony makes clear that they did not discuss Ms. Plame’s name or identity with me, or knew about her before our call. I waived the privilege voluntarily to cooperate with the Grand Jury, but also because the reporters’ testimony served my best interests. I believed a year ago, as now, that testimony by all will benefit all. [my emphasis]

If you’re Judy, reading this in jail, you learn two vitally important pieces of information from this cryptic passage. First, that Fitzgerald had identified every reporter–everyone–that Libby had spoken to in July 2003. If I’m right and Judy knew that Libby had spoken to Novak, she would have known from this that Fitzgerald had discovered Libby’s and Novak’s conversation. In addition, Judy would have some reason to believe that Novak testified that he "did not discuss Ms. Plame’s name or identity" with Libby "or" that Novak "knew about her before our call." As it turns out, Novak both testified that he did not discussion Plame’s name or identity with Libby, and testified that he knew about Plame before Novak’s call with Libby. Now this passage seems to serve a hidden purpose more appropriate to its cryptic tone.

Particularly since Plame’s name and identity are two of the elements of Novak’s story that have changed over time, which are currently explained only through Novak’s dubious claims about "Who’s Who" and congressional campaigns in Wyoming. And particularly since we know that Libby was planting precisely that information–Plame’s name and identity–with Ari Fleischer a day before Libby spoke with Judy and two days before Libby spoke with Novak.

When Fitzgerald asked Judy about the Aspen letter, he focused on two passages in particular. There was the passage that said, "Out West, where you vacation, the aspens will already be turning," and which Judy explained away as a reference to a chance meeting she had with Libby in August 2003. If you read my book, you know that when I asked Judy whether she had also seen Cheney on that trip to Jackson Hole, she did not answer the question (it was the only question she did not answer at all).

But Fitzgerald also asked Judy about the line about Plame’s name and identity.

Mr. Fitzgerald asked me to read the final three paragraphs aloud to the grand jury. "The public report of every other reporter’s testimony makes clear that they did not discuss Ms. Plame’s name or identity with me," Mr. Libby wrote.

The prosecutor asked my reaction to those words. I replied that this portion of the letter had surprised me because it might be perceived as an effort by Mr. Libby to suggest that I, too, would say we had not discussed Ms. Plame’s identity. Yet my notes suggested that we had discussed her job.

If you didn’t suspect that Judy knew about Novak’s and Libby’s conversation, you might well believe that this passage was an effort to coach Judy to say Libby had not spoken about Plame’s identity–and it may well be that and nothing more, though that wouldn’t explain why Libby’s message here conflicts with the message in the Steno Sue/Pool Boy script. But if you suspected that Judy knew that Libby had told Novak Plame’s name and identity, then the passage might read like a code to tell her that Novak had managed to cover up Libby’s role in leaking Plame’s name and identity.

In either case, with the knowledge that Novak would have been included in that reference to "every reporter with whom I had spoken about anything in 2003," it sure does seem like Novak is one key to deciphering the Aspen letter.

Marcy has been blogging full time since 2007. She’s known for her live-blogging of the Scooter Libby trial, her discovery of the number of times Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was waterboarded, and generally for her weedy analysis of document dumps.

Marcy Wheeler is an independent journalist writing about national security and civil liberties. She writes as emptywheel at her eponymous blog, publishes at outlets including the Guardian, Salon, and the Progressive, and appears frequently on television and radio. She is the author of Anatomy of Deceit, a primer on the CIA leak investigation, and liveblogged the Scooter Libby trial.

Marcy has a PhD from the University of Michigan, where she researched the “feuilleton,” a short conversational newspaper form that has proven important in times of heightened censorship. Before and after her time in academics, Marcy provided documentation consulting for corporations in the auto, tech, and energy industries. She lives with her spouse and dog in Grand Rapids, MI.

    • emptywheel says:

      Black corvette slamming homeless people on his way to an Aspen convention.

      The brute.

      The “good” thing about black corvette is that he made clear last week he’s a liar who tries to evade responsibilities for his crimes.

      And, as always, he seems to succeed.

    • emptywheel says:

      Because he’s an accomplished liar who repeated the “I didn’t see the homeless senior splayed all over my windshield” enough times that the police gave up and let him go home.

      • PetePierce says:

        Saying you didn’t see what you hit and killed usually results in prison. In this case the pedestrian didn’t want to press charges, and whether the guy was hurt or not, time will tell if he hits Black Corvette (a great metaphor for the Administration running over your gutless Senators and Congress people) up for some PI money.

        Some day some of the truth will emerge in the Plame affair although the Wilsons have an uphill battle now with a DC circuit panel in recovering money they should get. And when it does it will best be read in a book by Marcy.

        I think Judy damn well knew and helped leak and was fed the leak as well as the lunches Scooter bought for her in D.C.

        When Judy talks, it’s difficult to know how much is truth and how much is fiction because she and Novak come from the same school of journalistic integrity.

        Come tomorrow night will Brett have suited up? Somewhere?

  1. Peterr says:

    Ah, back-bearings.

    But if you suspected that Judy knew that Libby had told Novak Plame’s name and identity, then the passage might read like a code to tell her that Novak had managed to cover up Libby’s role in leaking Plame’s name and identity.

    Yes, it certainly might.

    Who could have anticipated . . .

  2. MadDog says:

    EW, are you planning on doing a sequel?

    As time goes by, and as more interesting tidbits and their translations continue to surface out of the muck, it seems to supply more opportunity for a retelling.

    For example, I never completely understood this (via your Steno Sue leak link):

    …But Joseph Tate, an attorney for Libby, said yesterday that he told Miller attorney Floyd Abrams a year ago that Libby’s waiver was voluntary and that Miller was free to testify. He said last night that he was contacted by Bennett several weeks ago, and was surprised to learn that Miller had not accepted that representation as authorization to speak with prosecutors.

    “We told her lawyers it was not coerced,” Tate said. “We are surprised to learn we had anything to do with her incarceration.”

    If what Joseph Tate is described as saying was true, why on earth did Judy not testify and instead, much later than this apparent authorization occurrence, go to jail? What was the point?

    And a second question for you. You wrote:

    If you read my book, you know that when I asked Judy whether she had also seen Cheney on that trip to Jackson Hole, she did not answer the question (it was the only question she did not answer at all).

    I wonder if a “conversation with Cheney” is what Steno Sue is referring to here:

    …One lawyer involved in the case said Miller’s attorneys reached an agreement with Fitzgerald that may confine prosecutors’ questions solely to Miller’s conversations with Libby

    (My Bold)

    And while I’m busy pestering you with questions *g*, a minor typo in this sentence:

    In addition, Judy would have some reason to believe that Novak testified that he “did not discuss Ms. Plame’s name or identity” with Libby “or” that Novak “knew about her before our call.” As it turns out, Novak both testified that he did not discussion Plame’s name or identity with Libby, and testified that he knew about Plame before Novak’s call with Libby.

    Should be discuss, not discussion?

    • MadDog says:

      Ok, to answer my own question, I re-read your FDL piece from January 14, 2007:

      …When Miller got her subpoena, in the fall of 2004, she had Floyd Abrams, the Times lawyer, contact Libby’s lawyer, Joseph Tate, to inquire about a waiver from Libby. According to Abrams, Tate freed Miller to speak-but he added a detail that made Miller hesitate. Libby, Tate said, had testified that he had not told Miller of Valerie Wilson’s identity, and certainly not her covert status or name. The problem was, Miller had both the names Valerie Flame and Victoria Wilson in her notes of their meeting. “Did the references in her notes to ‘Valerie Flame’ and ‘Victoria Wilson’ suggest that she would have to contradict Mr. Libby’s account of their conversations?” Miller wondered.

      Miller believed that Tate was sending her a message: If she couldn’t corroborate Libby’s testimony, she should not testify. “Judy believed Libby was afraid of her testimony,” the Times reported Executive Editor Bill Keller saying. “She thought Libby had reason to be afraid of her testimony.” Abrams even claims that Tate explicitly warned him against Miller testifying. Tate disputes that he gave specific warnings, but he doesn’t dispute that he told Abrams how Libby had testified, a remarkable move. This was enough to demonstrate to Miller that truthful testimony would imperil Libby. She therefore considered the waiver to be coerced. So, in spite of the fact that Tate had given Miller the same waiver he gave three other journalists, Miller sat on that waiver and refused to testify…

      Doh! If only Judy, Judy, Judy wasn’t so smitten with Scooter, Scooter, Scooter. I wonder how long she’ll pine away?

      • bmaz says:

        A waiver is a waiver. At that point, even if you believe that a reporter, Miller, had an obligation to protect a source criminally manipulating her, the press and situation in general (and I certainly do not believe this would be proper source protection even it there was a complete shield law); that obligation was sufficiently removed. At that point, it was up to Judy to do her civic duty and tell the truth, or clam up as a false martyr and protect a criminal conspiracy. We know what choice she made.

        • sojourner says:

          I guess it is just more of the same: People who sell their souls can never own up to their folly — no matter how idiotic they look. All of these so-called reporters have allowed themselves to be sucked into the glamour and glitz of the power circles. Unfortunately, they can never back down or admit that they did wrong — particularly after they become a part of the story.

          If nothing else, maybe this all points up how cheap our primary news outlets are…

          • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

            All of these so-called reporters have allowed themselves to be sucked into the glamour and glitz of the power circles. Unfortunately, they can never back down or admit that they did wrong — particularly after they become a part of the story.

            Maybe a bit unkind to Sy Hersh, Ken Silverstein (Harper’s), and Jane Mayer, however ;-))
            Not everyone has sold out.

            And in case you hadn’t heard, the wonderful news is that McClatchey’s John Wolcott just received the I.F. Stone Prize (from Harvard) for his journalistic integrity, and that of his team, leading up to the Iraq War. More at the Nukes & Spooks website.

            • sojourner says:

              Sorry — don’t get me wrong! There are definitely still some very ethical reporters in the profession. It just seems that this administration has helped to blur the professional lines. On the other hand, maybe the Judy – Judies and the Robert Novaks never cared in the first place

              I have been very pleased to see McClatchy giving some light to some of the issues — but there are so many that no one can keep the focus on for very long.

              On a side note, I read earlier this evening that four people were arrested for attempting to perform a citizens’ arrest on Karl Rove in Iowa. They tried it before, apparently… From reading the story, I got the impression that they telegraphed what they were going to do to avoid any real confrontation. It just makes me wonder what happens the next time… Maybe a group will just walk in and take him to jail! It couldn’t happen to a nicer guy… Tar and feathers used to work wonders, as I recall hearing

              • Loo Hoo. says:

                I must have missed the article about Novak looking up the guy he plastered with his car to see how he’s doing and offering his support.

              • bmaz says:

                I think that it is so noticeable because of the indoctrination that has consumed the Post and the Times; then factor in that the Post is linked up with Newsweek and MSNBC, so they are all similarly compromised, and Time with CNN, and you get a whole lot of the major sources of hard news corrupted. Oh, and the LA Times has just flat gone to hell and fallen off the face of the earth. So much feeds off of just those clustered sources, that when they are corrupted, and they are, it spreads out like waves in a pond.

                • sojourner says:

                  Scottie McClellan apparently spilled some more beans today about the talking points that the White House feeds to Fox News. Somehow, I get the feeling that paybacks are hell… I just have to wonder what else he has up his sleeve that can embarrass the White House.

                  Some of you will recall the story a few years back that happened here in Fort Worth about the woman who hit a homeless man on the freeway and drove home with him impaled in the windshield. She didn’t know what else to do so she left him to die. Could Novak stoop that low? RoTL — I don’t think you missed a story….

              • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

                Yes, a few years back — or even in July 07 — I’d have read this as yet more evidence that the press was basically a shill outfit for the Bush Administration. But EW wrote:

                On the morning Judy testified, one of Libby’s friends inserted a script for Judy into the WaPo (which Judy testified at trial to preferring over the NYT), telling her not to let on that she knew Libby had spoken to Novak “about the case.”

                It’s an established fact that Scooter initiated a Two Hour Toast Buttering Extravaganza with Judy-Judy-Judy. On the orders of VP Richard Cheney. Involving information Libby was worried about leaking, so he’d checked with David Addington to ensure he was in legally safe territory. So off he went to butter Judy-Judy-Judy’s toast…

                But that begs the question: why wasn’t Scooter buttering the toast of all of the following…? They’re also respected reporters, and they all cover national security:
                – John Wolcott, or any of the McClatchey reporters
                – WaPo’s Dana Priest
                – WaPo’s longtime national security expert Walter Pincus
                – Timmeh, or any of the other MSNBCers (including Mrs [Andrea] Greenspan)
                – Sy Hersh (hahahaahah!! had to put Hersh in for laughs ;-))
                – Steve Clemons, or any of the ’security authors/writers’
                – TIME’s Mike Cooper

                What is it about Judy-Judy-Judy?
                Why dish to Judy? Okay, NYT is The Newspaper Of Record, but nevertheless… what was so almighty Top Super Duper Secret that he had to butter her toast for two hours?**

                When I stumbled on those notes of one year ago, I was dumbstruck by five things:
                (1) One year ago, the significance of ‘Hadley and Cheney selling nukes to Pakistan’ kind of went right by me. Not now.
                (2) Look at the fact that back as far as 20 years ago, Cheney (and Hadley) were destroying the careers of CIA nuclear weapons analysts. And note, it involves Pakistan.
                (3) Wurmer and Hannah, both of whom have been implicated in the AIPAC scandal passing classified info to israeli sources(IIRC) were both working for Cheney in July 2003 when Plame was outed.
                (4) Why was Libby tipping off Judy? There were plenty of other national security reporters in D.C.. But he wasn’t spending two hours buttering THEIR toast — only Judy-Judy-Judy’s
                (5) Look at all the neocons working for/with Cheney: Wurmser, Hannah, Bolton, Hadley, Libby… all in a flurry over Valerie Plame Wilson’s work on WMD and black market nukes in and around Iraq (which implies Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, the post-Soviet ‘Stans, Syria, Egypt, yadda, yadda). What were they so flipped out about?

                Then EW writes:

                If you didn’t suspect that Judy knew about Novak’s and Libby’s conversation, you might well believe that this passage was an effort to coach Judy to say Libby had not spoken about Plame’s identity–and it may well be that and nothing more, though that wouldn’t explain why Libby’s message here conflicts with the message in the Steno Sue/Pool Boy script. But if you suspected that Judy knew that Libby had told Novak Plame’s name and identity, then the passage might read like a code to tell her that Novak had managed to cover up Libby’s role in leaking Plame’s name and identity.[italics mine]

                FWIW, the notion of ‘code in plain sight’ has a history, including the odd story that on the day before D-Day, the London Times crossword contained clues for which the correct answers were: Omaha, Utah… the names of beaches in Normandy. (For accurate details, see: The Longest Day). So the idea of tipping Judy-Judy-Judy off via a WaPo article makes a creepy kind of sense. Was it tipping off others, as well? Did it mean anything special to Wurmser? To Hannah? To Bolton? To Hadley?

                EW seems to be implying something far darker and more sinister than simply a corrupt, feckless US press.

                Because EW has already said that the neocons and Cheney and GWB weren’t flipped out about leaking the NIE. They’d leaked it, and they weren’t in a panic to deny the fact. They were flipped out about Plame, a CIA analyst researching the movement and sale of nukes.
                And this is the same crowd that destroyed a CIA nuclear weapons analyst’s career (related to Pakistan) 20 years ago…?!

                I think Nancy Pelosi’s, “You don’t know the half of it” has more behind it than someone like myself can stand to contemplate.

                Personally, I’m rooting for McClatchey** to break the story if it ever comes out. They deserve a scoop. And I’d actually believe it if they printed it.

                SUMMARY: I don’t think this post is about the US press, per se.
                I think it’s about levels of weirdness that are truly creepy.

                Now… is that Ghorbanifar Timeline link fixed yet??
                Because IIRC, Harold Rhodes was in Iraq in the summer of 2003, and the FBI stumbled on Rhodes and Chalabi doing something that caught the attention of the feds. Were they planting bogus WMD to make the war look legit…?

                So this is about using the press to promote and enable conspiracy.
                Which is different from the press functioning as a PR arm.
                And darker.
                ==================
                final comment: I finally saw “Get Smart” and I swear whoever wrote the script has been lurking at EW’s and FDL, because there were some clever, snotty lines alluding to situations that mirror L’Affair Plame. Ewheelies might get a hoot out of it.
                ==================

                ** Those McClatchey reporters ought to be insulted, having to butter their own toast. Guess that’s what reporters of integrity have to do. To get your toast buttered over a 2 hour breakfast, evidently you have to suck up to Cheney a lot more than Wolcott and the McClatchey crowd seem to have done.

  3. Loo Hoo. says:

    What’s in it for Judy? Is she just protecting her sorry ass for having disclosed Valerie’s name? I mean, if she was given this info by top government officials, is it still her responsibility to hide it? Why not just come out with a best selling book with the actual truth?

    Is there money in it for her?

    Is she scared for her life?

    • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

      Pffft…
      LooHoo -that’s probably the tipmost millimeter of a very hideous iceberg.
      Judy-Judy had worked in Cairo, in DC, in NY, and one wonders who she actually worked for all that time she was getting a paycheck from the NYT.

      MadDogs, you’ve boggled my mind yet again.

      And yes, the tale keeps swirling and circling back to what Valerie Plame Wilson did for a living — work on WMD. And to the July 8th meeting (2 hours, was it?) when Scooter buttered Judy-Judy’s toast. The meeting where Libby almost certainly leaked something (although Addington never said ‘document’) that Cheney had GWB insta-declassify using Pixie Dust.

      But I recently stumbled on an old post-it from a year ago, referencing an EW post “Libby’s Secret Mission” (July 07, TNH). OrionATL had commented about a WaPo article regarding one ‘Richard Barlow’, who’d been a top CIA nuclear weapons analyst in the 1980s, but then moved to DoD in 1988. And who was the SecDef under GHWB in 1988? Richard Cheney.
      The plot thickens.

      And according to OrionATL’s comment, Mr Barlow had written an analysis at DoD stating that the notion of allowing the sale of ‘nuclear capable planes’ to P-a-k-i-s-t-a-n back in 1988 was a bad idea. Unfortunately, as Mr Barlow’s analysis went up the food chain at DoD, it landed on the desk of one Mr Stephen Hadley. And at some point around that time, Mr Barlow’s analysis was altered to state that the sale of ‘nuclear capable planes’ to P-a-k-i-s-t-a-n was in fact a fine and dandy notion.

      Upon discovering that his analysis had been fucked with revised, Mr Barlow apparently objected. And he was summarily fired.

      Let’s summarize, shall we?
      1988: A former CIA analyst working at DoD strongly argues against enabling Pakistan nukes, or their delivery.
      1988: This analysis reaches the desk of Mr Stephen Hadley at DoD, whereupon the recommendations to keep nukes out of the hands of Pakistan’s ability to deliver them by air arecompletely fucking over dramatically revised.
      1988: Stephen Hadley is in the food chain that leads to SecDef Richard Cheney.

      Also in the wad of old notes I discovered this a.m….. at TNH in July 2007, we also learned from a commenter — one I hope provided reliable and accurate info — that two people told Fitz that John Bolton told Cheney about Valerie Plame’s identity. Who might they be?

      Person #1: David Wurmser. Neocon, co-author of PNAC’s ‘A Clean Break’, co-founded Office of Special Plans within DoD (Dougie Feith’s rogue outfit, which reported to Cambone). OSP was the outfit that cherry picked the ‘yellowcake-16-words’ intel on WMD leading up to the Iraq War. And [surprise!] in July 2003, Mr Wurmser was Asst for National Security to VP Cheney. (IIRC, Wurmser has dual US-Israeli citizenship.)

      Person #2: John Hannah. Neocon. And in July 2003. he was Asst National Security Advisor to VP Cheney. He pled guilty in 2005 to passing classified info to 2 members of AIPAC. (IIRC, he also has dual US-Israeli citizenship.)

      Coincidentally, in July 2003, Hadley at NSA. And Hadley has been implicated in sheperding the ‘16 words’ into the SOTU. And Hadley was in contact with Bolton (who was busy at Dept of State undercutting Powell). Hadley is also a neocon, as is Bolton.

      Now… if Cheney (and Hadley) have been working since the 1980s to ensure that Pakistan can deliver nuclear weapons — presumably, weapons that Pakistan didn’t even possess at that time — one wonders what they’ve been up to all this time? Yes, arms sales are always a spur to the economy, but still… when they’ve basically fucked over and then fired a CIA nuclear weapons analyst who wanted to stop the flow of nuclear technologies to Pakistan… hmmmm….

      Kinda makes a person wonder if maybe Sibyl Edmonds ain’t so crazy after all…?
      Also makes you wonder how many CIA analysts these guys have screwed over.
      Also makes you wonder who they are really working for, and how much the US military knew about all this backing-and-forthing to enable Pakistan’s nuclear ambitions.

      That would be the same Pakistan that is extremely destabilized, has a growing population, can’t seem to find Osama bin Laden, and …. oh, nevermind. I’m starting to sound like a conspiracy-addled lunatic.

      • Loo Hoo. says:

        Also makes you wonder about the nukes flying out of Minot. Where were they headed, and who ordered it?

        • behindthefall says:

          I find that the question that bugs me is, “Where did the B-52 come from, where was it based, and who arranged the quote-bomb-disposal-unquote mission?” Apparently the Minot people had to work for some hours revamping the pylon mounting hardware on the plane’s wings, because the pylon with the weapons wouldn’t fit, and I’ve never gotten a sense of whether this is SOP or not; it smacks of improvisation and use of a plane that hadn’t been previously used for such a ferrying job.

      • Nell says:

        [John Hannah] pled guilty in 2005 to passing classified info to 2 members of AIPAC. (IIRC, he also has dual US-Israeli citizenship.)

        No and no. That was Larry Franklin who pled to the passing info.

        No elaborate Cheney schemes need be imagined to tie together the 1980s and the current regime. Cheney and his minions see themselves as a team whose opponents and enemies are within the bureaucracy every bit as much as outside the country. If you get in the way of whatever the current project is, then you’re “fair game” — your work product gets squashed, or you get reassigned, or… you get outed as a NOC, so your career’s over.

        The projects don’t have to tie together between the decades; the Cheney crowd can turn on a dime if need be. Just as long as the money rolls in to the right people.

      • Leen says:

        Yeah if it turns out that they had been feeding A Q Khan that could be just a bit difficult for them

  4. Rayne says:

    …I guess I shoulda’ closed my eyes
    When you drove me to the place
    Where your horses run free

    ‘Cuz I felt a little ill
    When I saw all the pictures
    Of the jockeys that were there before me

    Believe it or not
    I started to worry
    I wondered if I had enough class

    But it was Saturday night
    I guess that makes it all right
    And you say, Baby, have you got enough gas?
    Oh yeah

    Little black corvette
    Baby you’re much too fast, yes you are,
    Little black Corvette
    You need to find a love that’s gonna last…

    Perfect song for Bob “The Whore” Novak.

    I want to know exactly how “splayed” the pedestrian has to be before the police believe Novak is lying. Is it measured like torture — no organ failure or death, therefore no hit-and-run? And do other bystanders not have the same kind of special credibility that Bob “The Whore” Novak has questionably acquired?

    • bmaz says:

      Rayne, he was plenty splayed. But then you knew that. Novakula would have a hit and run charge set for arraignment in any jurisdiction I have ever seen in my life. And just so all are clear in what kind of break Bowl em over Bob is getting, he got a right of way citation that appears to have a maximum fine of $500, but a standard fine amount, that likely can be mailed in, of $50. If charged with hit and run, the penalty is

      upon conviction of the 1st offense, be fined not more than $500, or shall be imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both; and upon the conviction of his 2nd or subsequent offense, shall be fined not more than $1,000, or shall be imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both.

      That is in DC. But, in Arizona, and in many jurisdictions, it is a class 3 felony, with possible prison time, mandatory fines and mandatory 3 years license revocation.

      • Loo Hoo. says:

        That sounds mighty minimal for hit and run. $500/$1000?

        What are the odds of hitting AND running once, much less occasionally?

      • PetePierce says:

        This wasn’t handled via SOP because if it had been Novak would be facing trial/or a plea for hit and run and wouldn’t be driving the vette for long.

        1) No breathylizer
        2) Their was an attorney from a D.C./Penn law firm who witnessed the hit and run

        It’s a little reminiscent of Teddy Kennedy on the bridge or his son Patrick blaming the crash into the security barrier on Ambien or the best scate is maximum sentence Senator Shelby and his wife the physician’s son Claude being nailed by doggies at the Atlanta airport with 13+ grams of hash and DOJ who had the case quickly disposing of it once they learned it was “Senator family” and the case quickily disposed of in Clayton magistrate court with a small fine and Shelby continuing to push the legislation that has many many equal offenders in BOP cubes for greater than ten years–some first offenders in for near twenty years.

        Welcome to state and federal law as applied to the rich and famous. It ain’t on the same planet in addition to the legal expertise that they can afford. Law enforcement looks the other way with them as they did in these cases.

      • PetePierce says:

        In this county a homeless victim isn’t treated in the same way as a victim who lives in Bob Novak’s neighborhood.

        The witness on a bike was David Bono, a partner at Harkins Cunningham, who was on his way to work.

        Novak said he was “distracted by NPR.”

        If you or I were stopped by the cops after hitting someone, we’d get field sobriety tests and a breathalizer and would get charged with hit and run in D.C. or Arizona or anywhere else.

        Novak, who was citied for failing to yield, says he won’t fight the ticket, adding, “I assume witnesses are telling the truth.”

        I find it hard to believe you can have someone splayed on the hood of your Corvette and not know. Either way Novak deserves to lose his license and jail time. I guarandamntee you the most time Novak has spent on the case is inspecting the vette for scratches or dents.

    • MrWhy says:

      You just ruined that song for me, at least until I forget about Novakula and his black corvette.

    • MrWhy says:

      I’m going to suggest another parody.

      Take Monty Python’s “Lumberjack Song”, and substitute Patriot for Lumberjack. Works pretty well, especially if you change one line.

      I work all night and I sleep all day.

  5. MadDog says:

    Jiminy Crickets EW! Do you realize all the trouble you’ve caused?

    Why, I’ve spent the entire evening Googling all kinds of stuff about “The Plame Betrayal” that I didn’t know anything about.

    Jiminy Crickets EW, I may not be able to sleep tonight with all this stuff zooming around in my poor brain.

    Heh! Anyways, one of those thoughts was about how interesting a post would be pondering: “What were the questions that Fitzgerald asked Deadeye?”

    Let me explain myself a bit.

    Scottie McClellan, in a press gaggle on June 24, 2004 “announced” that Junya had been interviewed by Fitzgerald and Company:

    …The President met with Pat Fitzgerald, the U.S. Attorney in charge of the leak investigation, as well as members of his team. The meeting took place in the Oval Office. It lasted for a little more than an hour, probably about an hour and 10 minutes…

    ~snip~

    …Q Did the President answer every question put to him?

    MR. McCLELLAN: Well, Mark, the President was glad to do his part to cooperate with the investigation. The President was pleased to share whatever information he had with the officials in charge, and answer their questions.

    Again, I wasn’t in the meeting. It was Pat Fitzgerald, the U.S. Attorney, and his team; the President and the President’s lawyer, Jim Sharp. And that’s why I said I think that it’s best to direct further questions to the officials in charge, because this is an ongoing investigation and we want to do everything we can to help the investigation come to a successful conclusion…

    ~snip~

    …Q Was Gonzales in there?

    MR. McCLELLAN: No.

    Q No?

    Q Anybody else from the White House?

    MR. McCLELLAN: The President and Jim Sharp.

    Q That’s it?

    ~snip~

    …Q Can you walk us, once more, through exactly this — where was he and who was he with? Just his attorney, nobody else from the White House at all?

    MR. McCLELLAN: That’s correct.

    Q And who —

    Q Gonzales —

    MR. McCLELLAN: No.

    Q Do you have any reason to believe there will be another interview, or is this it?

    MR. McCLELLAN: Again, all those questions should be directed to the officials in charge of the investigation.

    Q Fitzgerald — any other people in the room?

    MR. McCLELLAN: Pat Fitzgerald, the U.S. Attorney, and his team…

    ~snip~

    …Q And has the Vice President spoken with Fitzgerald?

    MR. McCLELLAN: You can direct those questions to the Vice President’s office.

    Q Scott, when the Vice President was interviewed he was told he’s not a target of the investigation. Was the President explicitly told he’s not a target?

    MR. McCLELLAN: Again, those questions you can direct to the Vice President’s office. I’m not aware that they have publicly commented on any meeting that he has had…

    And before this gaggle, there was this reported in the NYT on June 5, 2004:

    Cheney Reportedly Interviewed In Leak of C.I.A. Officer’s Name

    Vice President Dick Cheney was recently interviewed by federal prosecutors who asked whether he knew of anyone at the White House who had improperly disclosed the identity of an undercover C.I.A. officer, people who have been involved in official discussions about the case said on Friday.

    Mr. Cheney was also asked about conversations with senior aides, including his chief of staff, I. Lewis Libby, according to people officially informed about the case. In addition, those people said, Mr. Cheney was asked whether he knew of any concerted effort by White House aides to name the officer. It was not clear how Mr. Cheney responded to the prosecutors’ questions…

    ~snip~

    …It is not clear when or where Mr. Cheney was interviewed, but he was not questioned under oath and he has not been asked to appear before the grand jury, people officially informed about the case said. His willingness to answer questions was voluntary and apparently followed Mr. Bush’s repeated instructions to aides to cooperate with the investigation.

    On Friday, a spokesman for Mr. Cheney declined to comment on the case. The spokesman, Kevin Kellems, referred questions about the vice president to Mr. Fitzgerald, whose office has declined to comment on the investigation. A telephone call to Terrence O’Donnell, the vice president’s private lawyer, was not returned.

    Mr. Bush has acknowledged that he had met with a Washington criminal lawyer, Jim Sharp, about the possibility that prosecutors might want to interview him about the case. So far, the White House has made no mention of Mr. Cheney’s interview or whether it influenced the president’s decision to meet with Mr. Sharp…

    A couple of points here:

    1. I wasn’t aware previously that Junya and Deadeye were interviewed separately. I guess I had swallowed that Toobz rumor that they were interviewed together and that Deadeye held Junya’s hand and corrected his answers (or simply answered for Junya, so that Junya wouldn’t get too confused, but much to the irritation of Fitz and Company).

    2. From the “timeline”, we see that Deadeye was interviewed first on or about June 5, 2004. Junya was not interviewed until several weeks later on June 24, 2004.

    One could reasonably infer that Fitz and Company spent some of that intervening time researching the answers that Deadeye had given, trying to corroborate them or refute them.

    Do you suppose that Fitz and Company were unable to corroborate some of Deadeye’s claims?

    Do you suppose that Fitz and Company asked Deadeye-related questions of Junya and were again, unable to corroborate some of Deadeye’s claims?

    Is this why Fitz, a man of very, very few public words, would make this enormous (for him) statement at the Libby trial:

    “There is a cloud over the vice president . . . And that cloud remains because this defendant obstructed justice,” Fitzgerald said.

    “There is a cloud over the White House. Don’t you think the FBI and the grand jury and the American people are entitled to straight answers?” Fitzgerald asked the jury.

    Is Chairman Henry Waxman is focusing on his subpoena for just Deadeye’s interview material and not Junya’s, because Henry believes there lies a smoking gun?

    So, what were those questions that Fitz and Company posed to Deadeye?

    There are the obvious questions like:

    1. Did you direct anyone to publicly betray Valerie Plame Wilson’s name and covert occupation?

    2. Did you, yourself, reveal Valerie Plame Wilson’s name and covert occupation to anyone not authorized to know this classified information?

    3. Did you, yourself, declassify the Iraq NIE?

    Some things that are not so obvious in Deadeye’s interview with Fitz and Company might be:

    1. Just who all was in the interview? Was it just Deadeye and his private attorney?

    2. Did Deadeye answer all the questions? For example, did he refuse to answer because of Security Classification? Did he refuse to answer because of Executive Privilege? Did he refuse to answer because of his 5th Admendment right?

    3. In the interval between Deadeye’s interview on or about June 5, 2004 and Junya’s confirmed interview on June 24, 2004, did Deadeye discuss his questioning with Junya?

    IANAL, but it is my understanding of Grand Juries, that witnesses are not prohibited from discussing and even making public, their GJ testimony. In the case of Deadeye’s and Junya’s interviews with Fitz and Company, this wasn’t even a Grand Jury, and the reports have it that neither was under oath.

    So did Deadeye get with Junya to coach inform him of the specific questions, and more importantly, the specific answers that Deadeye had given Fitz and Company?

    I wonder if Henry Waxman was a wee bit premature in passing, for now, on the subpoena for Junya’s interview material.

    In any event EW, Jiminy Crickets, you’ve really done it to me now!

    At the very least, you owe me/us a post now on all the possible questions that Fitz and Company asked Deadeye. Then we all can speculate on the what, why and how wrt questions and possible answers.

    • PetePierce says:

      It looks as if you’re never going to find out about Fitz’s interviews. Fitz lacks the balls to talk. Mukasey (aka Sylvio Dante) and a fan of the Soprano’s followed the script that he saw emerge in Season 5 where Soprano, Chris Multisanti and Tony Blundetto travelled to Uncle Pat Blundetto’s farm and moved a body and reburied it. Following the Script Sylvio Dante Mukasey buried the interviews and you ain’t going to be able to dig them up because you don’t know whose farm or whose junk yard Sylvio Dante Mukasey buried them under.

      • lllphd says:

        pete, i think it might be too early to tell if fitz will or will not talk.

        my sense is that he is, if nothing else, a letter or the law man. he is fully aware of all the avenues available for the process of exposing all that he has learned in his investigations. his talking is the absolute bottom of that list, and it would not come without consequences for him.

        i cannot imagine that he would compromise his own integrity – and disclosing those interviews against the express demands of the interviewees would do just that – without seeing that every single other possible angle has been attempted first. choosing to talk at that utterly final point would be a matter of choosing between the lesser of two evils for a professional in his position.

        of course, he may still balk even then, who knows. but i don’t think we are at the point where we can accuse him of not having balls. in fact, given his aggressive investigations, not to mention the savvy with which he has managed information across cases and opted for clever choices of battles, i’d say the guy got hisseff some pretty stout ones.

        but, that’s just me. IANAL, but i have had far more experience with the law than i would wish on anyone (i am also not a criminal, just to get that clear), and if i have learned nothing else, it is that justice is NOT swift.

        fitz does appear to be pretty patient; we should be, as well.

        • Minnesotachuck says:

          i cannot imagine that he would compromise his own integrity

          Fitzgerald appears to have a level of personal integrity in the league of that possessed by General George Marshall, who refused numerous offers to underwrite the publication of his memoirs. He responded by saying it would be improper for him to profit further personally from work he’d previously been paid by the government for doing. He also took the concept of military subservience to civilian leadership so seriously that he never voted in federal elections. He viewed his job as Chief of Staff to give the President the best advice and policy recommendations he was capable of, and then loyally implementing whatever choices the Chief Executive made to the best of his ability. But he also felt that to do so demanded an arms-length relationship with the people in the civilian leadership, including the president. Soon after Roosevelt jumped him over scores of more senior officers to appoint him Army COS in 1939, he was in a top-level meeting at the White House. At some point in the discussion FDR turned to him and said something like “George, what do you think of this?” Before responding to the question Marshall said “Mr. President, I’d prefer that you call me General Marshall.” One can only imagine the loss to the country that would have occurred if FDR had had the kind of Potemkin Village self-esteem of our current President and had been fired on the spot.

        • PetePierce says:

          Your opinion may well be correct. It is much like if not precisely the same one the one LHP has expressed when she has said that if Fitz intends on going further (and I have always been familiar enough with federal investigations, trials, etc. to appreciate this) he has to have rock solid evidence and he may only get one shot that has to be perfect.

          I have always been confused as to why in the hell Mukasey controls Fitz’s release of interviews of Bush, Cheney, and Rove (he conducted all three). Much has been written that Bush and Cheney were not under oath. Rove sure as hell was the six times he appeared before a GJ. I don’t undersand for the life of me why Fitz didn’t put Bush and Cheney under frigging oath before a GJ. Clinton was placed under oath by the Independent Counsil for sure although this was conducted by closed circuit TV that was encrypted.

          I don’t understand why the hell Clinton couldn’t haul his limoed ass downtown to Pettyman and I don’t understand why the hell Bush and Cheney couldn’t have hauled their asses down like any other citizen or non-citizen and placed under oath and made to testify before the grand jury.

          I don’t know what Bmaz or Marcy’s opinion on Fitz going further. It may well have been expressed in one or more of the blogs that overlaps this, and I may have forgotten it.

          I realistically see Rove, Bush, and Cheney slipping away from all responsibility for any crimse they committed. I bemusedly watch people here and other places beginning to demonize Obama and Cass Sunstein for this. I fully agree with Glenzilla’s positions in his recent debate against Sunstein and noted Jane Hamshire’s blog that Sunstein is not used to being [dismantled/taken apart/having his opinions dissected or words to that effect]. Actually if you read many of his law reviews or some of his prodigious productions of books, he seems a lot more resilient on the fly than I think Jane gave him credit for.

          But and however….

          It’s a little bit of jumping the gun and unfair to prematurely blame Obama or Sunstein who is only an advisor to Obama.

          Let me also make this clear. If you and many people here seem to be so I use you not to mean you specifically but generically if you are a person who expects the next administration to prosecute Bush, Rove, Addington or anyone else via some IG report etc. you are spittin’ in the ocean.

          The responsibility is this Congress overseeing this DOJ while Bush is in office and they are failing miserably because they believe as the insipid wimp Harold Fucking Ford believes that “the constitution doesn’t poll well.”

          Those are Ford’s exact fucking words. There were Congresses during Watergate who would have investigated this administration and held them accountable but not this one.

          See:

          The Bauer of Suggestion
          Our torture policy has deeper roots in Fox television than the Constitution.
          By Dahlia Lithwick
          Posted Saturday, July 26, 2008

          Did they fuckup with FISA? Of course. Also as Williams and Connolly’s Greg Craig ( a firm that Cheney has used to retain counsel and Bill Cliton used Greg Craig his old law school friend quaterbacked Clinton’s impeachemnt defense and his firm has clients who are powerful Democrats at the top and Republicans at the “top.” Craig provided Bill Clinton’s first shackup space with the Hillster Norma Rae Millionairess who was probably easier to take then with her 50 faces of Eve personas from petulant dillitante to activist rabble rowser).

          I have my own pet theory as to why so many people here myself included are frustrated as we read some great comments and blogging by Marcy as well as books by Greenwald, Shorrock, Krugman and Mayer as I am right now.

          It’s because these cynical calculating people who represent you (with a few exceptions, the one’s Marcy labled as dedicated progressives she said I would jettison when I criticized Levin because his Iraq resolution defferred to the UN that I would not jettison the Levin’s on some issues, Feingold, Kennedy, Dodd and a few in the House) believe enough of the American people are ignorant that they can get away with exactly what they’re doing.

          It’s captured here:

          Literacy Debate: Online, R U Really Reading?

          The generation before current teenyboppers in the US is a victim of lazziness and deliberate indifference exercised before Windows 95 got pcs on desktops and Apple rode piggyback onto that trend, and after. Their children by and large read next to no books. And both generations are (will be) easily manipulated by a Congress and a Senate that postures at leadership and representation and oversight.

          • lllphd says:

            whew, pete. yer shorts are in an even bigger wad than my own. and i hear ya.

            thanks for the support on the ‘patience’ thang (see reply to baystatelibrul). i also share your frustration with sunstein; a little scary, that one. talk about shooting from the hip.

            quick thought on the idea of using the UN for iraq: it’s been almost two years now since mcgovern unveiled his plan for removing our sorry selves from iraq, and if you have not read it, i highly recommend it. in a nutshell, two pieces are key, one is the UN has to take over the peacekeeping and we need to finance that. which is based on the other piece, which is to admit the mistake and own full responsibility for it and all the damage and recovery. our version of the truth and reconciliation tribunals in south africa. it just seems to me that is the only way we’ll recover our standing in the world. i fear obama has in mind that we must protect our oil interests there, while pulling out ‘most’ of our combat troops. that will never work, as it is THE problem itself. the war on terror will never be ‘won’ until we gain some understanding of what motivates the ‘terrorists’ (beyond radical islam blablabla) in the first place. parallel to the war on drugs. this is the highly progressive genius of mcgovern’s plan. and no one EVER mentions it, not even on the most liberal blogs. saddest thing in the world to me.

            i am not sure what to expect from EOP44, if it’s obama. we know mccain will swee all the corruption away, but hard to say what obama will do. he is, after all, a lawyer, and he may well be playing this whole thing very very savvy, very close to his chest, just getting in there in order to do what he can once he’s there.

            but, honestly, that feels a little TOO hopeful. (pun intended)…

            obama has said he will pursue any evidence of wrongdoing, or words to that effect. but his emphasis on healing and getting everyone to the table, etcadnauseamblablabla, i dunno. i’m a fan, and then he shifts gears, and i find myself in these damn head spins that just tick me off, frankly.

            which leads me to share my conclusion: we need to be the ones who demand the justice we crave. we will have to hold all their feets to the fire, and just demand it, dammit.

            but doing this successfully will require a different press, a real free press, not this boughtandpaidfor nightmare that would curl all three of ben franklin’ hairs. working on a ‘piece’ about that; so much we’re missing.

            don’t get me started about ford; i lived in memphis for way too many years, and he’s a slick one, i tell ya. better than his family, for sure, but how far from the tree do apples fall, after all? i mean, he learned well his family’s reputation had to be overcome, so he has done what it took to do that. but i have always felt his biggest lesson was just that, do what it takes. he does not show much adversity to taking advantage of the power and influence that his family has established, i will say that.

            again, don’t know how i would predict things will turn out for the cheneyroveaddington et al. crew. there is a part of me that wants to believe that, while the repugs are trying to let the clock run out, the dems just might – JUST MIGHT – be biding their time till they have the two branches in hand. what with all those powers bush has garnered for the prez, turning it on them would be deliciously tempting, no? but we can only hope that the dems reverse the trend, AND expose how it happened that we have come so far down this road to a fascist state. not holding my breath here, either; more feets to the fire.

            and i don’t really understand why you don’t understand why these imperialists, including clinton, could not behave like the citizens they are. including clinton, whose exposed ‘crimes’ are just plain silly by comparison, these guys were all accustomed to doing what they wanted and getting away with it. what makes these cheney et al. guys so formidable is that they have had such a frikkin’ conscious agenda to do just what they’re doing for so long, it is a machine that’s amassed frightening momentum since nixon.

            closest thing to evil i’ve ever experienced. though, truly, it exists in humanity everywhere, to some degree or other. i mean, witness novak’s crime! you’re right that it’s the culture that supports the kind of allowances for the richandfamous he enjoyed at this poor schmuck’s expense, which – along with the war crimes and the economy and the constitution’s destruction – makes us all culpable.

            what was the saying? we must be the change we wish to see in the world. i know we all do what we can here, and not pointing any fingers, not by a long shot. but truly, we all need to take some serious stock. right down to how seldom we buy locally, and how often we make a chinese purchase, and how mindlessly dependent we are on the grid. and on and on and on. feeding that monster is precisely what keeps these guys going; it’s their way of staying in control of us all. the only way to kill this beast is to starve it.

            remember the old question from my era, what if they made a war and nobody came? well, what if they made a consumer economy and everybody quit? few of us think about what many of us did back then, tuning out, but it really is doable. if you consider all the ‘things’ and ’stuff’ they’ve convinced us we really need, it’s no wonder they have us by the short and curleys. we just each of US have to have the balls to stop playing by their rules. which is not to say breaking the law; obviously that is THEIR MO. no, on a daily basis, stop feeding the monster, best we can, each and every decision.

            we’re all of us still getting up every day to an alarm clock and racing around like their marionettes (who used that image here??). in the french revolution, the first agenda was to destroy all the clocks, which were put in place to make sure all the laborers were to work on time and stayed there till bossman said go home. when that stops, the madness will stop. till then, we’re only putting bandaids on the booboos. and i fear we will ultimately require not just one but a series of major catastrophes to force us to put it all in perspective again.

            oh whew. just fell off this highandmighty soapbox. and i’d blame you for triggering it, pete, but not sure the charges would stick! forgive my leaving things so depressing, but that is actually where i garner my hope, that the madness WILL stop. not prettily, i fear, but it will STOP. nature will simply not allow us to continue this way, and will spit us out. unless we can start making ALL our decisions in synch with her.

            okokok. really off the soapbox now. please forgive; the world is just too much with us, eh?

            • Loo Hoo. says:

              Nary an Obama, Clinton or Edwards on the list…

              lllphd and RoTL, great work today. Thank you.

            • PetePierce says:

              As to Iraq, I was referring to the often talked about Section 4 of Levin’s amendment:
              that was highlighted when Howard Schuman, a sociology professor at the University of Michigan asked Clinton about her vote against it in a debate.

              Candidate Watch
              Clinton and the Iraq Vote

              Democratic debate, Hollywood, CA, Jan. 31 2008.

              “The way [the Levin] amendment was drafted suggested that the United States would subordinate whatever our judgment might be going forward to the United Nations Security Council. I don’t think that was a good precedent. Therefore I voted against it.

              –Hillary Clinton, Democratic Debate, Jan. 31. 2008.

              Howard Schuman, a sociology professor at the University of Michigan, asked me to look at Clinton’s response to a question he posed during Thursday’s Democratic debate in Hollywood. Here is Schuman’s original question to Clinton, which he submitted by e-mail. “Before the U.S. invasion of Iraq, you could have voted for the Levin amendment which required President Bush to report to Congress about the U.N. inspection before taking military action. Why did you vote against that amendment?”

              Clinton’s answer, quoted above, did not satisfy Schuman. In an e-mail to me this morning, soliciting my help, he described the New York senator’s reply as “incorrect and disingenuous.” He argues that the amendment “simply required the president to report back to Congress after U.N. action or inaction, prior to any invasion.”

              So who is right?

              The Facts
              The Levin amendment, available here, went a little further than Schuman suggests in either his question or his e-mail. Section 4 of the amendment granted “authorization for use of United States Armed Forces pursuant to a new United Nations Security Council Resolution.” Section 3 of the amendment urged the U.N. Security Council to demand unrestricted access to Iraq by U.N. Weapons inspectors and authorized “necessary and appropriate military force” by U.N. member states if the government of Iraq refused to comply.

              Another clause in Section 3 of the amendment (Para 3) “affirms that, under international law and the United Nations Charter, the United States has at all times the inherent right to use military force in self-defense.”

              Interpreted from legalese, the amendment made the Congressional authorization of the use of force in Iraq contingent on a U.N. Security Council resolution. On the other hand, there was nothing in the resolution that prevented the U.S. government or Congress taking whatever action it felt necessary in Iraq in accordance with the right of self-defense.

              As to China we have had our clock cleaned and two of the best ways to understand the extent to which we have are to read in this order:

              1) Fareed Zakaria’s Post American World

              2) Tom Friedman’s The World is Flat

              I’m glad I triggered your soap box, and I have one answer to your hope that “madness will stop.”

              They’re kickin’ the can down the road. Bush has ceased to be President. Obama is acting President now.

              • stryder says:

                I’ve only read a review but Superclass somehow evades the usual world gov conspiracy stuff and statistically points to the elites that have the most influence or effect on the institutions and governments that affect us.He even puts Bin Laden in this group which in alot of ways makes sense.The idea of benny and the jets as a tool for these people to break up the nation states and get rid of the boundaries to open up free trade has some value.Also the fact that Bush et al are doing their bidding fits too.I mean to say that Plame,knowingly or not, could have been right there in the thick of all this and fucked up their plans big time if the word got out about what they were up to
                Just a thought
                Here’s a review Rothkopf gave


        • BayStateLibrul says:

          Patience, patience, patience…
          I’m beyond patient…
          WTF?
          Those fuckers need to do prison time.
          I’ve always advocated “whistleblower” time…
          They are running out the fucking clock.
          We are stymied at each point.
          When you have a conspiracy, patience doesn’t work.

          • lllphd says:

            boy, do i hear ya, and i sure understand.

            but do read pete’s 65 assessment (and then if you’re really a masochist, my response, upcoming), as he emphasizes what LHP has also: these prosecutors know full well they cannot go into a GJ without air tight evidence to get the conviction. period. we all KNOW these guys are criminals, but part of their savvy is covering their tracks and their ass cracks. they do it exceptionally well, and it will require strategies similar to the feds’ ultimate use of tax evasion to nab mobster al capone. and i do not use that comparison to the mob lightly; these folks are nothing but a bunch of highly organized criminals, as in organized crime.

            still, we truly must be patient wrt these matters, as the last thing we want to do is shoot the proverbial wad, and blow all chances for future prosecutions, along with credibility. and it does seem to me that fitz has been exceedingly careful in keeping these issues in mind. that cloud over the OVP and EOP he did not mention lightly; this situation has him really really bugged, and i choose to believe at this point that he is really doing everything he can to do what he can get these bozos and make it stick.

            my last point on the matter is his stating publicly that he ‘owes’ congress the information he holds. he’s on top of this, and he knows full well where his allegiances must hold. not small potatoes.

            • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

              FWIW, my mental vision is of a group of Frankenstein’s getting larger by the day and lurching more menacingly about the world. Some are pollutants, some are corrupt banking systems, some are extortion… basically, we have a global economy with very weak laws and regulations. These are like thin threads trying to hold back Frankensteins.

              Disaster.

              The people who came out of the Straussian ‘let’s all revere Machiavelli because our ancestors were victims and the world owes us and we have to be tough-tough-tough to survive’ are an international pestilence. Whether they’re US, or Russian-Israeli, or Pakistanis, or Turks, doesn’t matter. Those attitudes in a shrinking world are toxins.

              The people influenced, as globalization and ‘Free Marketeers” were — by Milton Idiot Friedman’s notions that ‘the ONLY social responsibility a corporation has is to its shareholders’ is an 18th century head-up-the-ass form of willful blindness in a world where any one of us can fly NY London in about 6 hours or less.

              We’re in a world of outdated institutions, where deliberative bodies like the US Congress lose out to a ‘Commander-in-Chief’ in a 24/7 newzcircus simply because the timescales of Congress are still stuck in the era of the sail and the pioneers, whereas the criminals have all the high-tech gadgets and surveillance stuff. And the cops can’t keep up, and the prosecutors have too many obstacles to nail these bastards.

              But with all that said, humans need justice as badly as we need water.
              So something’s got to give.

              But more and more, Nancy Pelosi’s, “You don’t know the half of it” sure seems evocative. Doubt she’ll ever share. But recall that she did not want Steny Hoyer to be the Whip; she backed Jack Murtha, who lost out to Hoyer.

              All of which is to say that anyone who claims individuals can’t make a difference in this world is absolutely full of shit.

              • lllphd says:

                could not agree more! each point is so true, but in the larger scheme of things, i sometimes worry that we get caught up in these angels dancing on the head of pins while the big picture is totally lost, even to we progressives who think we have it all sized up.

                a special thanks for reminding us of pelosi’s comment and of her resistance to hoyer. she may well be biding her time…..

                we can dream, can’t we?

                • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

                  We gotta dream. We’re humans! Without dreams, we become listless zombies. Or war profiteers.

                  But anyway, that whole ‘Aspens Turning’ thing is still bugging me.
                  EW, I agree with MadDogs.
                  This was a most perplexing post — and on a weekend, at that!

                  So I clicked on over to “Aspen Institute” after it rolled around in my brain that PNAC co-founder Robert Kagen had been, or is, on the board…? or a member…? At any rate, here’s the list of Board Members. Perhaps someone can make heads or tails of the list.

                  Would any of THESE ‘Aspens’ have been turning back when Judy-Judy-Judy was helping Scooter hide whatever he told her and Novak about Plame…?

                  ASPEN INSTITUTE: BOARD MEMBERS
                  William E. Mayer– Chairman of the Board
                  Henry E. Catto — Vice Chairman
                  Lester Crown — Vice Chairman
                  Walter Isaacson — President & CEO
                  Active Trustees
                  *Madeleine K. Albright
                  Principal
                  The Albright Group LLC *Leonard A. Lauder
                  Chairman Emeritus of the Board of Directors
                  The Estee Lauder Companies, Inc.
                  Paul Anderson
                  Senior Advisor
                  Booz Allen Hamilton Elisabeth Lulin
                  President
                  Institut Aspen France
                  Mercedes Bass
                  Sid R. Bass Inc. *Frederic V. Malek
                  Chairman
                  Thayer Capital Partners
                  *Berl Bernhard
                  Chairman Emeritus
                  The Aspen Institute
                  Partner
                  DLA Piper US LLP

                  James M. Manyika
                  Partner
                  McKinsey & Company
                  Melva Bucksbaum
                  Martin Bucksbaum Family Foundation *William E. Mayer
                  Chairman of the Board
                  The Aspen Institute;
                  Partner
                  Park Avenue Equity Partners
                  *William D. Budinger
                  Founder, Former Chairman and CEO
                  Rodel, Inc. Bonnie Palmer McCloskey
                  President
                  Cornerstone Holdings, LLC
                  Stephen L. Carter
                  Professor of Law
                  Yale University Law School Anne Welsh McNulty
                  Managing Partner
                  JBK Partners
                  *Henry E. Catto
                  Former U.S. Ambassador to Great Britain;
                  Chair
                  Atlantic Council of the United States Eleanor Merrill
                  Publisher Emeritus
                  Washingtonian Magazine
                  *Lester Crown
                  Chairman
                  Henry Crown and Company
                  Vice Chairman
                  The Aspen Institute Karlheinz Muhr
                  Managing Director
                  Credit Suisse First Boston
                  F. Peter Cundill
                  Founder
                  Cundill Investments Research Clare Muñana
                  President
                  Ancora Associates, Inc.
                  Andrea Cunningham
                  Chief Executive Officer
                  CXO Communication Elinor Bunin Munroe
                  President
                  Elinor Bunin Productions, Inc.
                  Tarun Das
                  Chief Mentor
                  Confederation of Indian Industry Jerry Murdock
                  Managing Director and Co-Founder
                  Insight Venture Partners
                  **William L. Davis
                  Chairman and COO
                  WLD Davis Holdings, LLC Marc B. Nathanson
                  Chairman
                  Mapleton Investments
                  John Doerr
                  Partner
                  Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers William A. Nitze
                  Chairman
                  GridPoint, Inc.
                  Sylvia A. Earle
                  Chairman
                  Deep Ocean Exploration & Research Her Majesty Queen Noor
                  Humanitarian Activist; UN Expert Advisor
                  Michael D. Eisner
                  President
                  Tornante Company Jacqueline Novogratz
                  Chief Executive Officer
                  Acumen Fund
                  Leonhard Fischer
                  Chairman
                  Aspen Institute Berlin Olara A. Otunnu
                  President
                  LBL Foundation for Children
                  Alan Fletcher
                  President and CEO
                  Aspen Music Festival and School Elaine Pagels
                  Professor of Religion
                  Princeton University
                  Ann B. Friedman Michel Pebereau
                  President
                  BNP Paribas;
                  Chairman
                  Institut Aspen France
                  *Stephen Friedman
                  Senior Advisor
                  Stone Point Capital
                  Lord Charles Powell
                  Chairman
                  Sagitta Asset Management Limited

                  Henry Louis Gates, Jr.
                  W.E.B. Du Bois Professor of the Humanities
                  Harvard University
                  Michael K. Powell
                  Chairman
                  The MK Powell Group

                  Mircea Geoana
                  President
                  Aspen Institute Romania
                  *Margot L. Pritzker
                  Chairperson
                  Zohar Education Project Incorporative

                  David Gergen
                  Professor of Public Service
                  John F. Kennedy School of Government,
                  Harvard University;
                  Editor-at-Large
                  US News & World Report
                  Peter Reiling
                  Executive Vice President for Leadership Programs and Seminars
                  Executive Director, Henry Crown Fellowship
                  The Aspen Institute*

                  Alma L. Gildenhorn
                  Honorary Trustee
                  Kennedy Center
                  *Lynda Resnick
                  Co-Owner and Vice Chairman
                  Roll International Corporation

                  Jamshyd Godrej
                  Chairman
                  Aspen Institute India
                  Isaac O. Shongwe
                  Chief Executive Officer
                  DNA Supply Chain of South Africa;
                  Chairman
                  Letsema Consulting Company

                  *Gerald Greenwald
                  Managing Partner
                  Greenbriar Equity Group
                  Anna Deavere Smith
                  Institute on the Arts and Civic Dialogue

                  Patrick W. Gross
                  Chairman
                  The Lovell Group
                  *Robert K. Steel
                  Under Secretary of Domestic Finance
                  U.S. Department of Treasury

                  *Arjun Gupta
                  Founder and Managing Partner
                  Telesoft Partners
                  Andrew L. Stern
                  International President
                  Service Employees International Union

                  *Sidney Harman
                  Executive Chairman
                  Harman International Industries, Inc. Shashi Tharoor
                  Chairman
                  Afras Ventures
                  Hayne Hipp
                  Chairman and CEO
                  The Liberty Corporation Giulio Tremonti
                  Chairman
                  Aspen Institute Italia
                  Gerald D. Hosier
                  Law Offices of Gerald D. Hosier Ltd. Roderick von Lipsey
                  Senior Vice President, Investments
                  UBS Financial Services
                  Ann Frasher Hudson
                  Partner
                  Javelina Partners *Vin Weber
                  Managing Partner
                  Clark & Weinstock
                  Robert J. Hurst
                  Managing Director
                  Crestview Advisors, LLC Frederick B. Whittemore
                  Advisory Director
                  Morgan Stanley & Co., Inc.
                  *Walter Isaacson
                  President & CEO
                  The Aspen Institute Alice Young, Esq.
                  Chair, Asia Pacific Practice (U.S.)
                  Kaye Scholer LLP
                  Yotaro Kobayashi
                  Chief Corporate Advisor
                  Fuji Xerox Co., Ltd.
                  Ann McLaughlin Korologos
                  Chairman Emeritus, The Aspen Institute
                  Chairman, RAND Board of Trustees
                  Timothy K. Krauskopf
                  Principal
                  Round Lake Designs, LLC
                  * Executive Committee

                  ** Trustees on Leave of Absence

                  Lifetime Trustees
                  LIfetime Trustees consist of former board members and other prominent individuals who have been elected by a majority of the membership of the Board. Their mission is to create a more involved and informed way for retiring board members and other members to stay in touch with fellow trustees and with the work of the Aspen Institute. They are a key arm of the Institute, responsible for providing advice concerning strategic issues facing the organization.
                  James C. Calaway
                  Chairman of Lifetime Trustees
                  Prince Bandar bin Sultan
                  Former Saudi Ambassador to the United States Robert H. Malott
                  Retired Chairman and CEO
                  FMC Corporation
                  Keith Berwick
                  Keith Berwick Chair
                  The Aspen Institute
                  John P. Mascotte
                  Former President and CEO
                  Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City

                  John Brademas
                  President Emeritus
                  New York University
                  Robert S. McNamara
                  Former President
                  The World Bank

                  James C. Calaway
                  Chairman, Lifetime Trustees
                  The Aspen Institute Olivier Mellerio
                  Institut Aspen France
                  Interfinexa
                  Lisle C. Carter, Jr.
                  Attorney Hisashi Owada
                  International Court of Justice
                  William T. Coleman, Jr.
                  Senior Partner and The Senior Counselor
                  O’Melveny & Myers John J. Phelan, Jr.
                  Chairman Emeritus
                  The Aspen Institute
                  Retired Chairman and CEO
                  New York Stock Exchange
                  Al Dietsch
                  Chairman
                  Best Year Yet LLC Thomas R. Pickering
                  Vice Chairman
                  Hills and Company
                  William H. Donaldson
                  Chairman
                  Donaldson Enterprises
                  Warren B. Rudman
                  Partner
                  Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton and Garrison
                  James L. Ferguson
                  Retired Chairman and CEO
                  General Foods Corporation Jay Sandrich
                  TV and Film Director
                  Jacqueline Grapin
                  President
                  The European Institute Lloyd G. Schermer
                  Retired Chairman & CEO
                  Lee Enterprises
                  Irvine O. Hockaday, Jr.
                  Retired President and CEO
                  Hallmark Cards, Inc. Carlo Scognamiglio
                  Honorary Chairman
                  Aspen Institute Italia
                  Nina Rodale Houghton
                  President
                  Wye Institute Albert H. Small
                  President
                  Southern Engineering Corp.
                  Shirley Hufstedler
                  Senior Counsel
                  Morrison & Foerster Kathy D. Smith
                  Former Board Member
                  Daubert Industries
                  Jérôme Huret
                  Former President
                  Institut Aspen France Phillips Talbot
                  President Emeritus
                  The Asia Society
                  Robert S. Ingersoll
                  Former U. S. Ambassador to Japan Solomon D. Trujillo
                  Chairman, CEO and President
                  Graviton, Inc.
                  William N. Joy
                  Partner
                  Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers Paul A. Volcker
                  Former Chairman of the Board of Governors
                  Federal Reserve System
                  Henry A. Kissinger
                  Chairman
                  Kissinger Associates, Inc. Leslie H. Wexner
                  President and Chairman of the Board
                  The Limited, Inc.
                  Gerald M. Levin
                  Retired Chairman and CEO
                  Time Warner, Inc. Clifton R. Wharton, Jr.
                  Former Chairman and CEO
                  TIAA/CREF

                  Dolores Wharton
                  Founder and Chair
                  Fund for Corporate Initiatives

                  • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

                    Okayyyyy…. my sincere apologies EW, bmaz, and everyone 8(((

                    Obviously, I inadvertantly hit ’submit’ while trying to format.
                    Very, very sorry…

            • BayStateLibrul says:

              Good reply, but personally, I’m way over the edge on this.
              I see no rainbow.
              I see only obstruction.
              I see no resolution
              I see only fuckers, caustic, abrasive, uncompromising enablers.
              I admire Scott McClellan
              I abhor Mukasey…
              I’m not sure the Country will ever recover from this mess.

              • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

                Would it help if I left the old shopworn (but often true) canard that ‘It’s always darkest before the dawn”…?

                This crowd has screwed up the military, the economy, the legal system, and by doing all those things they’ve impacted American security. Justice isn’t swift, but hang in there. There’s gotta be more than one person following Scott McClellan’s path toward wholeness and sanity.

              • lllphd says:

                boy, i am so sympathetic. it’s just way too much.

                but i encourage you – and anyone else who’s willing to consider this thought – that another way in which the eastern mind keeps these things in perspective is to recognize that when things seem really really bad, the good stuff is just around the corner. and the reverse is also true.

                ipso facto, we should by rights be in for a damn renaissance any day now!

                i’ve often suggested to folks that there are many ways in which we will one day be grateful for this band of evil-doers. i mean, they have been operating under the radar for so long and getting away with it, this version has put it all up front here. we get a front row seat to the evilest of the evil, made manifest! hardly anyone misses it anymore, and when you think about how much against the media grain is public opinion on most every single point of interest and concern, there should be some reason for hope there.

                just a thought for you. you too, pete.

                please don’t accuse me of pollyanna here, but i would beg you not to despair the way you seem to be doing. first, that let’s them win; that’s just what they want, is the despair that allows them to control us. ditch that, pronto! second, you remove yourself from the solution when you become so cynical and desperate. it’s really hard to see clearly through such dark glasses. and we need you! we all need each other here, so please don’t bail, on yourself or us!

                these guys are pretty scary, no doubt, but fact is they’re not as bad as genghis khan or pol pot or stalin, though they might be if they could get away with it. in order for us to maintain the overall worldly trend toward improvement of our collective lot and lifting each other up by the armpits, we have to also recognize that the evil this crew exhibits is really no different from all the evil the world has ever seen. these guys just have deadlier toys. and in addition to that recognition, we must also acknowledge that this evil, like all evil, stems from deep fear. and as such, we are each of us capable of such evil ourselves.

                we should not be wasting a whole lot of time generating anger towards these creeps, as their behavior does not merit the expenditure of so much valuable energy. the most we should spend on them is pity. just and appropriat pity, but pity.

                remembering such notions of mercy will come in handy when (not IF!!) we are finally in the position of passing judgment on them. we will be best served by our own principles if we can manage that very tall order with the very grace and humanity we are demanding of them, seems to me.

                and OT, baystate meaning MA? where? i’m here, too.

                • lllphd says:

                  yikes!

                  bandar and kissinger and mcnamara, oh my!

                  but estee lauder???

                  and walter isaacson is the prez and ceo. reading his bio of einstein right now. marvelous (if repetitive), and particularly interesting for his apparent affection for albert’s extremely liberal – as in socialist – leanings.

                  fwiw.

                • BayStateLibrul says:

                  Thanks. I’m feeling better, the Sox are up 4-0 to the Yanks.
                  Better enroll me in anger management…
                  Whattsup with Manny… his final year with the Bosox?
                  (according to Gammons and Shaugnessy and just about every other
                  scribe).

        • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

          i don’t think we are at the point where we can accuse him of not having balls. in fact, given his aggressive investigations, not to mention the savvy with which he has managed information across cases and opted for clever choices of battles, i’d say the guy got hisseff some pretty stout ones.

          Appreciate the perspective and think you make an excellent point.
          We tend too often to equate ‘action’ with strength, but this is often an illusion.

          The river doesn’t shatter the stone, but over time, the water reshapes it.
          That’s a tougher, more resilient kind of ‘tough’ and we aren’t very good at spotting it in US culture.
          Eastern cultures are more familiar with this concept of strength as silence and resilient, patient waiting, IMHO.

          • Minnesotachuck says:

            The river doesn’t shatter the stone, but over time, the water reshapes it.
            That’s a tougher, more resilient kind of ‘tough’ and we aren’t very good at spotting it in US culture.
            Eastern cultures are more familiar with this concept of strength as silence and resilient, patient waiting, IMHO.

            This brings to mind Henry Kissinger’s anecdote about one of his early meetings with Zhou Enlai during his initial, secret trip to China. Making small talk during dinner, K asked Zhou what he thought of the French Revolution. Zhou silently puffed on his cigaretter for ten or fifteen seconds and finally said, “It’s too soon to tell.”

          • lllphd says:

            wow, thanks for this. i agree fully. (and in fact am penning a book that addresses the many differences btwn east/west thinking, among other larger points about the brain and culture.)

            i’m also influenced by the old hopi agenda to withhold all major decisions until the effects on the 7th generation forward are considered.

            sheez, we don’t even think about the effects on ourselves 7 seconds from now! how far we’ve fallen!

    • PetePierce says:

      How are Waxman and Conyers going to enforce any past or future subpoenas on anything substantive from this administration? It sure ain’t gonna happen in the trial court of John Bates. The little federalist martinette just as the other three federal judges exported from the Water Gate team has never seen a government position he wouldn’t rule for an put into a Fed. Supp. memorandum opinion. Not one–and he ain’t startin’ with contempt of Congress for the insipidly stupid Miers and Bolten.

      LOL Miers is the least competent and least qualified individual besides Thomas who was ever nominated to be an S. Ct. justice, She probably has a significantly better grip on federal law than Thomas although not much of one.

    • lllphd says:

      maddog, if i’m recalling correctly, the interview of junya and deadeye that occurred with junya on deadeye’s knee, charlie mccarthy style, was for the 9/11 interview.

      is that correct? would be easy enough to conflate the two.

  6. Loo Hoo. says:

    MadDog! You are one of my heros around this neighborhood. Good questions all, deserving of answers.

    Do you suppose that Fitz and Company were unable to corroborate some of Deadeye’s claims?

    Do you suppose that Fitz and Company asked Deadeye-related questions of Junya and were again, unable to corroborate some of Deadeye’s claims?

    Well, yes. Kinda like they spoon fed Alberto for a week, I’m sure that they hopelessly had to have W repeat the right answers over and over and over.

  7. Stormwatcher says:

    Sorry for the tangential topic, but didn’t Judy Miller call the AIPAC staff and tip them of an impending Fitz raid? Two staffers were being investigated for passing secrets to Ireal. Judy called “to get their opinions” of the charges, but Fitz was still in transit? This ring a bell with anyone here?

    • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

      Do you have a source? I’d no idea this happened, but if it did it’s more damning evidence that Judy-Judy-Judy was employed by someone other than the NYT.

      • rosalind says:

        the earlier incident between judy judy judy and fitz was centered on the holy land foundation. per wiki:

        Shortly after the September 11 terrorist attacks, the U.S. government was considering adding the Holy Land Foundation to a list of organizations with suspected links to terrorism and was planning to search the premises of the organization. The information about the impending search was given to Miller by a confidential source. On December 3, 2001, Miller telephoned the Holy Land Foundation for comment before the search took place. The New York Times published an article in the late edition papers and on its website that day. The next day, the government searched HLF’s offices. These occurrences led to a lawsuit brought by Patrick Fitzgerald.”

        • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

          Well, what an interesting specimen you’ve sent along. Thx.
          Combined with PetePierce’s first link, it’s even more interesting:

          May 29, 2003: the first inquiries into Valerie Plame’s role in sending her husband to Niger were being made, including by Walter Pincus

          June 3, 2003, when the Pentagon’s top Iran policy analyst, Larry Franklin met with Israeli diplomat Naor Gilon at the Pentagon Officers Athletic Club:

          “The discussion centered on a specific person, not in the United Status government, and her thoughts concerning the nuclear program of the Middle Eastern country and, separately, certain charity, efforts in Foreign Nation A [Israel].”

          [italics mine, as they appear to be relevant to rosalind’s info] Justin Raimondo stated he’d be willing to ‘bet the farm’ that “her” = Judy-Judy-Judy.

          June 12, 2003: Libby finally confirms Plame’s identity and background with Vice President Dick Cheney.

          It was then in Dec 2001 that Judy-Judy-Judy alerted the Israeli charity about a search, according to rosalind’s link.

          More tea leaves… will we ever get to see The Bigger Picture?

            • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

              Okay, thx for the correction.
              But the fact that’s it’s an Islamic charity is all the weirder, no…?

              I’m confused.
              Again.

              But those ‘aspens’ sure have multiple meanings.
              And I don’t think the signal was for Judy-Judy-Judy’s eyes alone.
              How many double-agents were reading the WaPo that day?

  8. PetePierce says:

    Video of Novak walking away from his car at a garage not leaking diddly or answering any questions after the hit and run

    The victim, Don Clifford Liljenquist, had an anterior shoulder dislocation and they are routinely easily reduced by having the patient lie face down on a table and putting 10 lbs. of weight in his hand or a manuever that looks like a full nelson only applied to the arm and shoulder. The posterior locations are routinely missed on X-ray and much more difficult to reduce and extremely relatively rare.

    Novak settled a suit filed against him for an undicsclosed amount when he ran a red light at Pennyslvania Ave. and 6th and hit Chad Clark.

    The suit in the amount of $100,000 was settled in 2006 and the filing contained PI boiler plate language alleging the victim “suffered “severe, painful and permanent injuries of body and mind.”

  9. BayStateLibrul says:

    New FISA Law:

    “Laws, like sausages, cease to inspire respect in proportion as we know
    how they are made.”
    –Lawyer-poet John Saxe

  10. klynn says:

    Hey one got through! Just wanted to say thanks for this Plame “Aspens” update.

    I agree there has always been an intended message in these notes and have been curious about them. Thank you for digging deeper into their meanings.

    My curiousness got to me about 6 weeks ago when I was quizzing my son for his finals and was covering his notes on the Iliad and the Odyssey. There was an interesting literature note about Aspens in the “fall” of Ajax.

    Both the “Aspens turning” and the “connected at the roots” comments have haunted me. After the Ajax reference, I recently reread your book.

    As someone at the UN wisely taught me while I was an intern, listen to the hidden meanings and be fluent in world literature as well as the meanings of plant, animal and color allegory/metaphor.

    After researching “Aspens turning” and related aspen references in literature, I have to admit, I think the Libby notes are not just a “code” to Judy but may have further dual meaning beyond what you noted above. Especially, looking at Judy’s life history and choices she made for early study and research in her life coupled with Libby’s policy views.

    Thank you for catching the subtle messaging EW.

    It’s difficult to prove perjury in cases like this. However, understanding the message often leads to blatant clues which then nail those who base testimony on obtuse meanings.

    • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

      klynn, I hope you come back because I’m ludicrously familiar with both the Iliad and the Odyssey, so I’d love more details on the connection you make about ‘ to the fall of Ajax.
      And IIRC, Scooter Libby was a Classics major at Yale, so it wouldn’t be surprising if the fall of the ‘mighty warrior’ Ajax (there were two: big, and little) has a resonance that at first glance most of us missed.

      And I’m totally with MadDogs @28 – EW, you’ve rattled my brain on this one till it’s squealing. In fact, I woke up in the middle of the night with the weirdest thought: didn’t Judith Miller cohabit with former Chair of the House Armed Services Committee (1980s? 1990s?) Les Aspen, Dem of Wisconsin?

      And so what does ‘Aspensreally mean in Libby’s letter?
      ‘aspens’ may refer to trees.
      or ‘aspens’ may refer to former House Armed Services Committee staffers…?
      or former ‘les aspen’ staffers…?
      or something related to ‘[les] aspen’…?
      But I don’t have a Lexis/Nexis setup, so can’t do the scouting.

      Neil @46, thanks very much for the correction. I’ll make a note so I don’t offer inaccurate info again 8((
      FWIW, I heartily agree with your synopsis that this cabal perceives ‘enemies’ within the bureaucracy, as well as externally. Creepy.

  11. Leen says:

    So if it is “business as usual” or standard practice in D.C. for those in government positions who want to pass classified intelligence onto co-operating Journalist knowing that there is no “officials secrets act” and it is tough to hold journalist accountable for being part of the team who outed Plame. Will Novak be held accountable in any way for his willful and slimy part in outing Plame?

    Where does Bob Woodward’s role fall into all of this?

  12. Leen says:

    Bob Novak

    “Wilson never worked for the CIA, but his wife, Valerie Plame, is an agency operative on weapons of mass destruction. Two senior administration officials told me his wife suggested sending Wilson to Niger to investigate the Italian report. The CIA says its counter-proliferation officials selected Wilson and asked his wife to contact him.”

    This would have been little more than your standard-issue leak but for one small fact: It’s a federal crime for a government official (say, Novak’s source) to knowingly disclose to the public the name of an undercover CIA agent. And while it was not illegal for Novak to publish Plame’s name, it was ethically questionable, according to former Washington Post ombudsman, Geneva Overholser.

    JOURNALIST LIKE NOVAK SHOULD BE DUMPED ON THEIR ASSES WHEN THEY KNOWINGLY AND SERIOUSLY UNDERMINE U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY.

    Novak should be behind bars

  13. Mary says:

    OT – but kindofa follow up to 18 “… the Post is linked up with Newsweek…”

    The crystal ball on why Chevron was so willing to make a place for person of interest in torture investigations, ex-DOD Gen Counsel Haynes, is getting a little clearer.

    (http://thinkprogress.org/2008/07/26/chevron-ecuador-lobbyists/) They are lobbying Bush heavily to help avoid having to pay the costs for toxic dumping in Ecuador.

    Isikoff reports for Newsweeek on it – (http://www.newsweek.com/id/149090)
    Political intervention in prosecutions? A Bush-Ashcroft-Gonzales-Mukasey specialty. “Chevron is pushing the Bush administration to take the extraordinary step of yanking special trade preferences for Ecuador if the country’s leftist government doesn’t quash the case. “

  14. Mary says:

    Depressingly, the fact that the “loyal opposition” is nothing more than the likes of Obama, Clinton, Schumer, Reid, Levin, Pelosi, Hoyer, Reyes, Rockefeller, etc. the Chevron crew can cheerfully come right out and say what’s going on out loud:

    “The ultimate issue here is Ecuador has mistreated a U.S. company,” said one Chevron lobbyist who asked not to be identified talking about the firm’s arguments to U.S. officials. “We can’t let little countries screw around with big companies like this—companies that have made big investments around the world.”

    Hear that you “little countries?” Oh, wait, that’s right – you already heard that when Obama and the Democrats took the same sentiment one step further with “We can’t let American citizens and courts screw aroudn with big companies like this – companies that have made big investments in buying the American political process and prosecutors.”

    Little countries, meet the little people. Versa, meet vice.

  15. PetePierce says:

    —-Greenbay Training Camp–One hour ago

    You’ll have to wait a couple days to see if GB is going to Favre or not Favre. They say Rodgers is their starter. I say Brett won’t be there because of this now.

    Favre delays arrival to Packers camp at GM’s request

    Brett Favre has signed his letter seeking reinstatement to the Green Bay Packers but may not send it to the NFL until Monday or Tuesday.

    Favre admitted in a telephone interview that he did not report to the Packers’ camp Sunday with the rest of the team in part because general manager Ted Thompson pleaded with him to delay his arrival.

    Such is the drama that continues to build around Favre.

    He offered to compete for his old job but was told that wasn’t possible.

    He admits he has spoken to Minnesota Vikings coach Brad Childress but says it wasn’t tampering.

    He’s open to a trade but not just to the New York Jets or Tampa Bay Buccaneers.

    He’s hoping commissioner Roger Goodell can mediate the impasse that he has reached with the Packers.

    “I asked Ted [Saturday], ‘Am I welcome in the building if I report?’ and Ted was just about shattered,” said Favre in a telephone interview. “He said, ‘Brett, you can’t do that — you’ll get me fired.’ I told him I’m not trying to get anybody fired. So Ted asked me to let the guys report and let’s try to resolve this over the next two or three days.”

    And there’s more in the article.

  16. Hmmm says:

    OT — Couldn’t help noticing in this article that the City of San Francisco IT architect who’s sitting in jail did this…:

    His superiors discover that Childs has taken over a room at the Technology Department at One Market Street Plaza and put in a rack of unknown computer equipment. They also realize that he has become the only person who has the passwords and usernames needed to access the network.

    …just a few blocks away from the AT&T switching office where Mark Klein spotted a locked room with strange equipment, and just a couple years later. Maybe nothing, but there goes history rhyming again.

  17. readerOfTeaLeaves says:

    Okay, this is it. I’m not doing this again at EW’s.
    It took too much time, and I’m not sure it was worth it.

    But that ‘aspens turning’ is still bugging me.
    Businesses and government leaders ought to get together, and where better than in the Mountain West, eh? And frankly, if I was invited to hobnob with Elaine Pagels, I’d pepper her with questions about the Gnostic Gospels, so I don’t see this list as a ‘bad’ thing at all.

    But it is interesting to see some of the names and institutions. (I’ve bolded several that may be of special interest.) I figured people wouldn’t click over to the Institute page, but I will not ever copy this much ’stuff’ over here and format it again.

    But could the ‘aspens’ of government and biz, or the military-industrial-financier-globalization sphere have been ‘turning’ around the time Libby wrote the letter that encoded the message to Judy-Judy-Judy and heaven only knows who…?

    William E. Mayer – Chairman of the Board
    Henry E. Catto – Vice Chairman
    Lester Crown – Vice Chairman
    Walter Isaacson – President & CEO
    Active Trustees
    *Madeleine K. Albright — Principal, The Albright Group LLC
    *Leonard A. Lauder– Chairman Emeritus of the Board of Directors, The Estee Lauder Companies, Inc.
    Paul Anderson — Senior Advisor, Booz Allen Hamilton
    Elisabeth Lulin — President, Institut Aspen France
    Mercedes Bass — Sid R. Bass Inc.
    *Frederic V. Malek — Chairman, Thayer Capital Partners
    *Berl Bernhard — Chairman Emeritus, The Aspen Institute; Partner, DLA Piper US LLP

    James M. Manyika — Partner, McKinsey & Company
    Melva Bucksbaum — Martin Bucksbaum Family Foundation
    *William E. Mayer — Chairman of the Board, The Aspen Institute; Partner Park Avenue Equity Partners
    *William D. Budinger — Founder, Former Chairman and CEO, Rodel, Inc.
    Bonnie Palmer McCloskey — President, Cornerstone Holdings, LLC
    Stephen L. Carter — Professor of Law, Yale University Law School
    Anne Welsh McNulty
    Managing Partner
    JBK Partners
    *Henry E. Catto — Former U.S. Ambassador to Great Britain; Chair, Atlantic Council of the United States
    Eleanor Merrill — Publisher Emeritus Washingtonian Magazine
    *Lester Crown — Chairman, Henry Crown and Company; Vice Chairman, The Aspen Institute Karlheinz Muhr — Managing Director, Credit Suisse First Boston
    F. Peter Cundill — Founder, Cundill Investments Research
    Clare Muñana — President Ancora Associates, Inc.
    Andrea Cunningham — Chief Executive Officer, CXO Communication
    Elinor Bunin Munroe — President Elinor Bunin Productions, Inc.
    Tarun Das — Chief Mentor Confederation of Indian Industry
    Jerry Murdock –Managing Director and Co-Founder Insight Venture Partners
    **William L. Davis — Chairman and COO WLD Davis Holdings, LLC
    Marc B. Nathanson — Chairman Mapleton Investments
    John Doerr — Partner Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers William A. Nitze; Chairman GridPoint, Inc.
    Sylvia A. Earle — Chairman, Deep Ocean Exploration & Research
    Her Majesty Queen Noor — Humanitarian Activist; UN Expert Advisor
    Michael D. Eisner — President Tornante Company
    Jacqueline Novogratz — Chief Executive Officer Acumen Fund
    Leonhard Fischer — Chairman, Aspen Institute Berlin
    Olara A. Otunnu — President, LBL Foundation for Children
    Alan Fletcher — President and CEO, Aspen Music Festival and School
    Elaine Pagels — Professor of Religion, Princeton University
    Ann B. Friedman
    Michel Pebereau — President BNP Paribas; Chairman Institut Aspen France
    *Stephen Friedman — Senior Advisor Stone Point Capital
    Lord Charles Powell — Chairman Sagitta Asset Management Limited
    Henry Louis Gates, Jr. — W.E.B. Du Bois Professor of the Humanities, Harvard University
    Michael K. Powell — Chairman, The MK Powell Group [former Chair of FCC?? rOTL note]

    Mircea Geoana — President Aspen Institute Romania
    *Margot L. Pritzker — Chairperson Zohar Education Project Incorporative
    David Gergen — Professor of Public Service John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, Editor-at-LargeUS News & World Report
    Peter Reiling — Executive Vice President for Leadership Programs and Seminars Executive Director, Henry Crown Fellowship The Aspen Institute*

    Alma L. Gildenhorn — Honorary Trustee Kennedy Center
    *Lynda Resnick — Co-Owner and Vice Chairman Roll International Corporation

    Jamshyd Godrej — Chairman, Aspen Institute India
    Isaac O. Shongwe — Chief Executive Officer DNA Supply Chain of South Africa;Chairman Letsema Consulting Company

    *Gerald Greenwald — Managing Partner Greenbriar Equity Group
    Anna Deavere Smith — Institute on the Arts and Civic Dialogue
    Patrick W. Gross — Chairman The Lovell Group
    *Robert K. Steel — Under Secretary of Domestic Finance U.S. Department of Treasury

    *Arjun Gupta — Founder and Managing Partner Telesoft Partners
    Andrew L. Stern — International President Service Employees International Union

    *Sidney Harman — Executive Chairman Harman International Industries, Inc.
    Shashi Tharoor — Chairman Afras Ventures
    Hayne Hipp — Chairman and CEOThe Liberty Corporation
    Giulio Tremonti — Chairman Aspen Institute Italia
    Gerald D. Hosier — Law Offices of Gerald D. Hosier Ltd.
    Roderick von Lipsey — Senior Vice President, Investments UBS Financial Services
    Ann Frasher Hudson — Partner Javelina Partners
    *Vin Weber — Managing Partner Clark & Weinstock
    Robert J. Hurst — Managing DirectorCrestview Advisors, LLC
    Frederick B. Whittemore — Advisory Director Morgan Stanley & Co., Inc.
    *Walter Isaacson President & CEO The Aspen Institute
    Alice Young, Esq. — Chair, Asia Pacific Practice (U.S.) Kaye Scholer LLP
    Yotaro Kobayashi — Chief Corporate Advisor Fuji Xerox Co., Ltd.
    Ann McLaughlin Korologos — Chairman Emeritus, The Aspen Institute Chairman, RAND Board of Trustees
    Timothy K. Krauskopf — Principal Round Lake Designs, LLC

    * Executive Committee
    ** Trustees on Leave of Absence

    Lifetime Trustees

    LIfetime Trustees consist of former board members and other prominent individuals who have been elected by a majority of the membership of the Board. Their mission is to create a more involved and informed way for retiring board members and other members to stay in touch with fellow trustees and with the work of the Aspen Institute. They are a key arm of the Institute, responsible for providing advice concerning strategic issues facing the organization.

    James C. Calaway – Chairman of Lifetime Trustees
    Prince Bandar bin Sultan – Former Saudi Ambassador to the United States
    Robert H. Malott – Retired Chairman and CEO FMC Corporation
    Keith Berwick – Keith Berwick ChairThe Aspen Institute
    John P. Mascotte – Former President and CEO Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City
    John Brademas – President Emeritus New York University
    Robert S. McNamara – Former President The World Bank
    James C. Calaway – Chairman, Lifetime TrusteesThe Aspen Institute
    Olivier Mellerio – Institut Aspen France Interfinexa
    Lisle C. Carter, Jr. -Attorney
    Hisashi Owada – International Court of Justice
    William T. Coleman, Jr. – Senior Partner and The Senior Counselor O’Melveny & Myers
    John J. Phelan, Jr. – Chairman Emeritus The Aspen Institute Retired Chairman and CEO New York Stock Exchange
    Al Dietsch – Chairman Best Year Yet LLC
    Thomas R. Pickering – Vice Chairman Hills and Company
    William H. Donaldson – Chairman Donaldson Enterprises
    Warren B. Rudman Partner Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton and Garrison
    James L. Ferguson – Retired Chairman and CEO General Foods Corporation
    Jay Sandrich – TV and Film Director
    Jacqueline Grapin – President The European Institute
    Lloyd G. Schermer – Retired Chairman & CEO Lee Enterprises
    Irvine O. Hockaday, Jr. – Retired President and CEO Hallmark Cards, Inc.
    Carlo Scognamiglio – Honorary Chairman Aspen Institute Italia
    Nina Rodale Houghton — President Wye Institute
    Albert H. Small – President Southern Engineering Corp.
    Shirley Hufstedler -Senior Counsel Morrison & Foerster
    Kathy D. Smith – Former Board Member Daubert Industries
    Jérôme Huret — Former President, Institut Aspen France
    Phillips Talbot — President Emeritus, The Asia Society
    Robert S. Ingersoll — Former U. S. Ambassador to Japan
    Solomon D. Trujillo — Chairman, CEO and President Graviton, Inc.
    William N. Joy — Partner Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers
    Paul A. Volcker — Former Chairman of the Board of Governors, Federal Reserve System
    Henry A. Kissinger — Chairmanm Kissinger Associates, Inc.
    Leslie H. Wexnerm President and Chairman of the Board, The Limited, Inc.
    Gerald M. Levin –Retired Chairman and CEO, Time Warner, Inc.
    Clifton R. Wharton, Jr. — Former Chairman and CEO TIAA/CREF
    Dolores Wharton — Founder and Chair Fund for Corporate Initiatives

    • behindthefall says:

      Given that list, it’s not so much the “turning” as the “connected at the roots” that stands out. Government is a tool to these people, I would guess, secondary to the primary mutual interests which bind them together. I also would guess that We The People barely matter to them. “[Government] is the opiate of the people”?

    • prostratedragon says:

      The former FCC chairman and Colin Powell’s son is Michael Kevin Powell, so maybe they’re the same.

      Interesting list. There’s a core group there for whom formalization into an institute would seem to be unnecessary or even counterproductive, so maybe part of the point is the extensions outside that group.

      Every time I watch Eyes Wide Shut I’m reminded that Stanley Kubrick was once a member of one of these types of things; when I’m feeling as industrious as RoTL I’ll dig it up.

      • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

        There’s a core group there for whom formalization into an institute would seem to be unnecessary or even counterproductive, so maybe part of the point is the extensions outside that group.

        Makes a ton of sense.
        Also, that list gives no sense of conference topics, subcommittees, etc, etc.

        But yeah, ‘formalization’ would surely be counterproductive for people who would prefer to remain out of sight.

    • Minnesotachuck says:

      Businesses and government leaders ought to get together, and where better than in the Mountain West, eh? And frankly, if I was invited to hobnob with Elaine Pagels, I’d pepper her with questions about the Gnostic Gospels, so I don’t see this list as a ‘bad’ thing at all.

      I tend to agree that it’s not a bad thing that there’s a broad cross section of the intellectual firmament. Given the thrust of Elaine Pagels’ work, however, it’s understandable that there don’t appear to be any names (at least ones that I recognize) of the Religious (i.e. Christian) Right.

      IIRC, I believe it was in the Aspen area (and for sure in Colorado) where her first husband, a theoretical physicist, met his end 25 or more years ago. He was out hiking in the mountains with a colleague and they paused briefly at a switchback to take in the view. They then continued heading up the exposed trail with Pagels a few feet behind the friend. The colleague stopped to pause again after a few minutes and Pagels was nowhere to be seen. His body was later found about a thousand feet down. His hiking companion never heard or saw a thing.

    • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

      (Blushing deeply): duly chastened.
      Message received.

      Plus, it took an absurd amount of my time.

      And yeah, VERY connected at the roots, them aspens…

      • bmaz says:

        Ya know know I still love ya though right? Because I do, and I’m saving the real barbs for the conference part of the Pac-10 schedule!

        • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

          Sincerely appreciate the forgiving remark.
          Glad somebody loves me ;-))

          As for the Pac-10 and Wazzu hopes… sadly, tales of recruiting and athletic conduct violations have been discouraging. Looks like we’ll be in the Deep Trenches of Pac-10 Loserdom again this year. So you won’t have me to kick around (ha!).

          BTW: My best guess would be that Scooter was signaling Judy-Judy-Judy about leaking Plame’s ID and job to Novak, BUT ALSO about leaking the information about “Brewster Jennings”.
          Remember how long Judy-Judy-Judy stayed in jail, with her attys cutting deals about what she **would** say (making the target smaller, so to speak).

          Was “Brewster Jennings” outside the scope of what Fitz could charge in the Libby trial…? But **if** Judy-Judy-Judy had admitted to learning of BJ that day from Scooter, then could Fitz have moved forward with IIPA and conspiracy charges…?
          (Sorry if this has already been covered elsewhere.)

          And massacio’s link to article on F1 was terrific.

  18. jackie says:

    Judy Miller also talked to Dr.David Kelly just before he was suicided*. She shows up in some interesting places.

  19. jackie says:

    Old article on Judy Miller
    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/7/3/17138/30618

    This re; Judy miller and Dr Kelly.
    ‘THE e-mail to a friendly American reporter appeared routine but there was one telling phrase.
    The impassioned writer spoke of “many dark actors playing games”. Moments later Dr David Kelly left his home on his final walk into his beloved Oxfordshire countryside. The respected scientist and father of three had decided to leave his fellow actors behind and exit the stage he had so reluctantly been forced to mount.

    The e-mail was sent on Thursday morning to Judy Miller,’
    http://news.scotsman.com/hutto…..2445253.jp

  20. bmaz says:

    I don’t know of any reason that Brewster Jennings would have been outside of Fitzgerald’s scope.

    Lewis Hamilton is quite a story. He is literally on the cusp of Tiger Woods status in the rest of the world, but, typically, the US has no clue. Here if it isn’t a bunch of yokels driving around in circles in NASCAR, it just doesn’t exist. For all the exceptionalism that America claims, we are a bunch of self centered hicks in a lot of ways.

    • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

      Here if it isn’t a bunch of yokels driving around in circles in NASCAR, it just doesn’t exist.

      F1 is lucky that such a grounded guy as Hamilton came along. Any sport benefits from a star who seems like a civilized person with brains. NFL could take a few tips and pointers on that topic.

    • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

      I don’t know of any reason that Brewster Jennings would have been outside of Fitzgerald’s scope.

      So okay, then. It’s now more clear
      1. why Libby was so flipped out that the CIA and FBI might learn that he’d leaked the name of an entire NETWORK of agents trying to track black market nukes, and also
      2. why the stakes were so high for Libby, Cheney, GWBush-Pixie-Dust-Specialist, Hadley, Bolton, Feith, et cetera.

      So if this hunch is correct, it’s quite clear why Scooter Libby was safely assured that GWBu$h would pardon him at the very first opportunity. (And sorry to be so late catching on, but this does show GWBu$h in an even more depraved light than seemed conceivable. Doh.)

      Interesting to see just how much was riding on Judy-Judy-Judy keeping her damn mouth shut about Scootie-Poot leaking the information of the entire network of CIA assets to her over toast.

      I’m really anxious for Karma to go into her Ruthless Bitch mode with these asshats.

      • bmaz says:

        And I think it may even go one step further than that. I hate pulling things out of the deeper recesses of my lame brain on the Plame leak facts because, you know, mom is kind of an expert and she raps my knuckles when I am wrong. As you can guess, I have a fistful of wounded knuckles. That said, I think that not only was Valerie’s group tracking nukes, but was also affirmatively feeding intentionally bogus info and/or goods to the Iranians through a program called Merlin to monkeywrench their program.

        • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

          Okay, she’ll prolly rap my knuckles, too.
          But damn, you’re onto something.
          Feeling kinda stoopid here for missing that step.

          Wonder whether klynn’s ideas about Ajax (Greater and Lesser) and the Iliad have any more clues we can ferret out…?

          LooHoo, don’t know about you, but the more these threads tease out the more respect and admiration I have for Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame Wilson. (And think about the implications of ‘network’: Pakistanis, Turks, and who knows was in that network, or how long it would have taken to create it? Talk about your ‘national security assets’!)

        • klynn says:

          I’ve also read that her group was tracking the nuke (and uranium) black market distribution from the Baltic and Turkey.

        • stryder says:

          Marcy covered this about Turky,Pakistan/Iran/Plame in a post I think didn’t she? maybe the spies for hire thing?

      • Leen says:

        Jason Vest was one of the first journalist writing about the Turkey, U.S. Israel (feith, Perle, Grossman) business deals
        http://www.thenation.com/doc/20020902/vest20020823

        The Men from Jinsa and the CSP
        http://www.thenation.com/doc/20020902/vest

        http://www.antiwar.com/frank/?articleid=12265

        http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..80077.html

        Let me help the Times here. The person against whom these allegations are being made is Marc Grossman. The Times could have published the name and also provided the denial from Grossman’s camp. I find it incredibly disturbing that they would not name the official.

        “She claims that the FBI was also gathering evidence against senior Pentagon officials – including household names – who were aiding foreign agents.

        “If you made public all the information that the FBI have on this case, you will see very high-level people going through criminal trials,” she said.

        Her story shows just how much the West was infiltrated by foreign states seeking nuclear secrets. It illustrates how western government officials turned a blind eye to, or were even helping, countries such as Pakistan acquire bomb technology.”

        Those senior DOD officials who are not mentioned in the Times article, all but one are no longer in government. They are alleged to be Doug Feith, Richard Perle, among others. There is also one person who is part of these allegations, still serving in a high level position at the DOD. His last name begins with an E.”

        Brent Scowcroft talks Turkey
        http://www.counterpunch.org/stanton11192005.html

  21. Loo Hoo. says:

    They’re kickin’ the can down the road. Bush has ceased to be President. Obama is acting President now.

    I hope you’re right. Somehow, though, I don’t see this group giving an inch when it comes to power.

    • PetePierce says:

      They’ll stonewall any attempts to uncover their criminality. They’ll stonewall subpoenas Loo Hoo. They have a little federalist martinette John Bates installed who will laugh at Conyer’s HJC contempt suit. Once Bates rules against them, I wouldn’t expect much help from a D.C. Circuit composed of about 18/21 federalist Bushie martinettes.

      But as to any meanningful governing, they will remain gridlocked. The Bush administration will keep stonewalling, but will get nothing done. They’ll scream the same stupid talkking points McCain is screaming–yelling about drilling and a gas tax holiday that would net you 5 Gummi Bears in the San Diego area.

      How Obama Became Acting President

      • Loo Hoo. says:

        Fantastic Rich article.

        Is there anything that can be done about the DC Circuit judges other than wait for them to die off? I mean what if they really screwed up several rulings?

        • PetePierce says:

          The only thing that can be done Loo Hoo when you get a district court level ruling you don’t like is

          a) Motion for Reconsideration or use a few other very abstruce motions in a similar vein that are never granted.

          John Bates who has that case always rules for the government.

          Once you are at the appellate level, you can motion for an en banc hearing which would mean for them to rehear an oral argument with all the appellate judges who are active and not taking senior status in a given circuit (about 19 in the D.C. Circuit give or take a couple).

          From there it’s on to the Supreme Court where it takes 4 Justices’ votes to grant cert. (take a case).

          As to replacing the judges, it’s attrition by death or retirement and you need a democratic president to change the composition which is why this election is crucial.

          As you know, we have only had Carter and Bill Clinton and the rest of the appointing power or Presidents have been Republican since Johnson.

          This has resulted in a huge republican slant:

          Stats in Republican Dominanted Federal Judiciary

          Bush has appointed 277 Judges or nearly 1/3 of the federal judiciary. Six of the federal circuits (and there are 12 that hear routine appeals) now have a 2:1 or greater Republican majority.

          I meant to include this article for you to look at along with the NYT article on the web helping to make kids book illiterate:

          Is Google Making us Stupid?

          I’m very aware search engines are putting a lot of information at our finger tips but as far as kids in high school, junior high or elementary school I think it is negatively impacting reading as is the net.

  22. Loo Hoo. says:

    I read far fewer books than I did before the blogs and online versions of MSM. I still haven’t finished The Dark Side…

    • PetePierce says:

      I understand the time that blogs can take since there are so many of them or if you concentrate a lot of your time on ones like this that have a lot to metabolize.

      But in your case your habits to read books may have happened (I don’t know ) when you were growing up and there was no Facebook and My Space and internet readily available.

      I think the NYT article made a point that has been worrying me for a good while and it drove it home well.

      We have a magnet school down the street from me meaning kids are interviewed before they get in and it has special tools, teachers, and equipment for subject areas. But I never ever see any of those kids with anything that would be considered a classic that were on high school reading lists for their parents. And when I talk to them, they aren’t reading jack when it comes to books.

    • PetePierce says:

      I haven’t finished it either. I have place markers in Krugman’s Conscience of a Liberal, Shorrock’s Spies for Hire, Microsoft 2.0, Greenwald’s Great American Hypocrits, and Lichtblau’s Bush’s Law.

      I unfortunately don’t get much fiction read and that’s a mistake.

      I meant to clarify to get an appellate rehearing it takes the votes of a majority of active justices. Most of the time you petition for it after an appellate ruling, but the Court can decide to jerk an opinion en banc on its own and that’s happened a few times recently in the Ninth Circuit when a particular liberal ruling has pissed enough people off.

      These rules are decided by FRAPs or Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure which are tweaked for each circuit and they are approved by a Judicial Conference that meets once a year in D.C. and they are backed by Congressional statute.

      Committees composed of judges from each Circuit tweak and perculate and shape rule changes which are made available for public comment which aside from occasional lawyer to judge communication have little impact on these rules.

      Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, Rule 35

  23. fahrender says:

    add my voice to those who believe that the Bush Administration will get away with practically everything they’ve done. our anger, and more importantly, the really thoughtful investigation by many of you who are definitely smarter and more disciplined than i am is to be commended. and you will, hopefully, continue this necessary work. we can at least take some solace in knowing that “the truth is out there.”

    assuming that Obama gets elected should not raise anyone’s hopes that justice will be served and those who perpetrated the crimes of the last seven and a half years will be brought to trial, much less convicted. the Republicans, plus many Democrats, to say nothing of the Neocons and their enablers, will see to that. i will be genuinely surprised if even a serious attempt is made to do anything. a “truth and reconcilliation” charade would be the maximum one could expect.
    every minute that goes by without something dramatically reversing the actions of the present Congress makes it less and less likely that even that will happen. you may be sure that the Republicans will indignantly protest and huff and puff at any such action and the Neocons will be behind the scenes causing every bit of trouble they can in an effort to prevent even the suggestion that anything even needs to be done other than keeping boots on the ground in Iraq for another ten years or more.

    i would love to be proven wrong. meanwhile i’m going to keep breathing.

  24. klynn says:

    Just some literature reference for ROTL regarding “Aspens turning” and “connected at the roots”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pando_(tree)

    Pando is a “single, male quaking Aspen.” Located in the Wasatch Mountains of Utah, south-central Utah not far from Idaho and Wyoming borders.

    “Quaking Aspen” in literature can mean “talking” and the leaf of the Aspen “quakes” or turns because of the design of the leaf. The leaf pivots in the stem tree branch connection, creating a turning motion which creates the distinct “rustling” or talking sound. So when one states Aspens are “turning” it may not mean turning color. When one is referencing in literature that the Aspens are turning together, they mean talking (rustling). When one references in literature “Aspens connected at the roots”, they tend to mean “one source” with many contacts. It is also symbolic of “women talking”

    http://www.2020site.org/trees/aspen.html

    http://plantguide.org/aspen-or…..-tree.html

    A well know holocaust poem:

    http://www.traumaresearch.net/focus2/lemke.htm

    The Aspen tree has also been a symbol of the Shoah in holocaust literature and can be a symbol of “shared human calamity.”

    Aspens are also cited in the Buddhist literature with multiple meanings.

  25. klynn says:

    O/T

    Meant to post this on Friday and forgot:

    http://www.bradblog.com/?p=6217

    POST-SHOW UPDATE: Arnebeck joined us for the first half-hour of the show and dropped a few interesting details during our discussion. Among them: 1) Bush can’t pardon someone convicted under a civil RICO case, which is what Arnebeck is compiling. (Also, can’t remember if it came up during the interview, but as some have suggested that Rove simply invoke Executive Privilege to avoid being deposed in this case, Exec Privilege does not come into play in such a case. It only refers to Congressional testimony.)

    • bmaz says:

      Klynn, I think you should be warned that there is some screwy stuff going on there in Ohio and these lawyers you are putting so much faith in are simply full of shit and from all appearances are malpracticing their case. I know everybody is all worked up over this, but I would be very suspect if I were you. This is way more goofy than it is earth shattering so far.

      • klynn says:

        bmaz, I am not putting any faith into the lawyers, simply relaying a real press conference about a real case, about a real request for witness protection for a whistleblower, in relation to Ohio election fraud. Some of the facts from the case are on public record and are interesting in terms of the bigger pictures that are addressed here at EW’s. IANAL, thus I cannot speak about what kind of job the lawyers are doing. But the case is real and the witnesses are as well. I cannot be a judge of “goofy” on this matter. I’ll leave that up to you.

        As far as Ohio and election fraud, the issue is real and still a cumbersome burden on the citizenry due to the political roadblocks that have come up along the way on many of the cases, especially from the FBI. As an Ohio citizen who waited almost five hours to vote, of course any news conference or public notice of a lift of a stay on a voter fraud case will catch an Ohio voter’s attention.

        I find the case interesting as a voter and the IT facts seem to line up with some interesting IT facts that have been discussed in the past here as well.

  26. 4jkb4ia says:

    Hooray, new post! In any event, roTL overlooked that Shashi Tharoor of the Aspen Institute is almost certainly the Shashi Tharoor who was subordinate to Kofi Annan at the UN and was a candidate for Sec. General against Ban ki-Moon. Also is this the current board of the Aspen Institute or the board at the time of Libby’s leak?
    Given the current composition of the board “the aspens are turning” could mean that elite public opinion is supporting Judy when she is in jail.

  27. 4jkb4ia says:

    The aspens/Ajax thing is definitely worth looking into. If I can get to the library I will see if there is a concordance to the Iliad.

  28. Leen says:

    Great read

    Intelligence Industrial Complex
    http://www.antiwar.com/engelhardt/?articleid=13214
    “The military-industrial complex has changed radically since World War II or even the height of the Cold War. The private sector is now fully ascendant. The uniformed air, land, and naval forces of the country as well as its intelligence agencies, including the CIA (Central Intelligence Agency), the NSA (National Security Agency), the DIA (Defense Intelligence Agency), and even clandestine networks entrusted with the dangerous work of penetrating and spying on terrorist organizations are all dependent on hordes of “private contractors.” In the context of governmental national security functions, a better term for these might be “mercenaries” working in private for profit-making companies.”

  29. 4jkb4ia says:

    On the front page of the Aspen Institute web page I see the Aspen Ideas Festival and a Palestinian economic initiative. This is simply not a neocon think tank of any sort. The question is then why it would be useful to Scooter Libby.

    • klynn says:

      The Aspen Ideas festival is listed as an AIPAC event on the AIPAC website.

      Additionally, AIPAC’s largest event annually is the AIPAC Aspen Cocktail event.

  30. 4jkb4ia says:

    I had to be reminded of this, but Judy Miller interpreted the “aspens” before the grand jury as a reference to her having attended a conference in Aspen and then seen Libby in Jackson Hole. Then it is significant that Walter Isaacson is the president of this outfit. Walter Isaacson represents the MSM which will turn in defense of Judy.

  31. bmaz says:

    When you have witness protection issues, you do NOT have press conferences and put it out into the ether. That is why I think this attorney is nuts. If there is a real witness safety issue, this attorney ought to be answering some very tough questions about his own conduct.

  32. Stormwatcher says:

    I found this article regarding Fitzgerald’s successful attempt to review Judy Miller’s phone records after she tipped off the charities under surveilance by Fitz.

    The case arose from a Chicago grand jury’s investigation into who told the two reporters, Judith Miller and Philip Shenon, about actions the government was planning to take against two Islamic charities, Holy Land Foundation in Texas and Global Relief Foundation in Illinois. Though the government contended that calls from the reporters tipped off the charities to impending raids and asset seizures, the investigation appears to be focused on identifying the reporters’ sources.

    Thanks for all the help to everyone here.