Stop Making Scottie McC Rich!!
Cannonfire is right. People have gotten way too excited over this Scottie McC "revelation." I’d advise you all to look closely at what John Dean had to say about the flap on Olbermann:
Dean: Well, there’s very little that’s specific in this. I actuallythought about calling the publisher today. He’s a very ablepublisher–Peter Osnos, Public Affairs, good journalist. He knowsexactly what he’s doing. But if he says there’s not much more, andthat’s the indication, I think that’s maybe why they put this out as agood tease, to get bookstores interested in the book. [my emphasis]
Scottie McC’s publisher has pulled off quite the coup–taken a detail that was, largely, already known, and used it to cause a stir about a book that will not yet be published for another 6 months. Already, Dodd is calling for an investigation, folks are calling for HJC or Waxman to hold a hearing. What the left has done is read one publishing blurb designed to generate this kind of buzz, and played right into the plan. Congratulations. You’re all making Scottie McC rich.
What Scottie Said
That said, I guess it would pay to look more closely at what we know, so that everyone can calm down and stop putting dollars into Scottie McC’s pockets. Let’s look again at what Scottie says (and has said before, and his spokespeople have said since).
The most powerful leader in the world hadcalled upon me to speak on his behalf and help restore credibility helost amid the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. So Istood at the White house briefing room podium in front of the glare ofthe klieg lights for the better part of two weeks and publiclyexonerated two of the senior-most aides in the White House: Karl Roveand Scooter Libby.
There was one problem. It was not true.
I had unknowingly passed along false information. And five of thehighest ranking officials in the administration were involved in mydoing so: Rove, Libby, the vice President, the President’s chief ofstaff, and the president himself. -from What Happened
Or, to translate:
- It was not true that Rove and Libby had nothing to do with the leak of Valerie Wilson’s identity.
We’ve know this detail–that Rove and Libby were involved in leaking Valerie Wilson’s identity since Fall 2005 and earlier.
- Scottie unknowingly passed on false information.
Scottie has been saying this for years, as well, ever since his tiny credibility took a hit when it became clear his public exonerations were false. In other words, Scottie still maintains that he, at least, had no idea the public exoneration was false.
- Rove, Libby, the Vice President, Andy Card, and the President "were involved" in having Scottie "unknowingly pass on false information."
Please note (again, as Cannonfire points out), Scottie says nothing about the President being "knowingly" involved. He doesn’t even detail how the President was involved. Given the way this Administration builds in plausible deniability, and given the degree to which the leak of Valerie Wilson’s name included a "secret mission" (as Libby lawyer Bill Jeffress called it) involving just Bush, Cheney, and Libby, I’m not sure that Scottie McC would know even if Bush were the mastermind of this leak and cover-up.
And he certainly doesn’t say so in this excerpt.
What We Already Know
As I said in this post and Jeff said in the comments,the only thing that is sort of new is the involvement of Bush and AndyCard in getting Scottie to publicly exonerate two people who had beenlying about their involvement in the leaks about Valerie Wilson. That’s because we already know that Cheney and Libby conspired to get Scottie to give Libby a public exoneration (and frankly, as you’ll see below, we knew of Card’s role, too).
For example, here’s a passage from the trial in which David Addington–David Addington, of all people!!!–explained how he discovered that Cheney had done something that even he, Mr. Unitary Executive, thought was improper: push Scottie McC to publicly exonerate Libby.
Fitzgerald: The thrust of what you recall is that ScottMcClellan, the Press Secretary for the President of the United States, had gone out andmade a statement exonerating Karl Rove of any misconduct in connection with thecontroversy surrounding the disclosure of the fact that Mrs. Wilson worked atthe CIA, correct?
Addington: Yes, and essentially—the reason this sticks in mymind is I had a conversation not too many days later with Dan Bartlett, who wasthen the assistant to the President for communications. And by this point,something had been said—I frankly don’t remember what—again, by the pressoffice, and it included Mr. Libby this time. And I made the comment to Mr.Bartlett, you know, I don’t know why you are making these statements about, youknow, this case—and I will explain why in a second.
But his reaction was, “Well, your boss is the one that wantedus to do it.†And then I shut up.
[snip]
Fitzgerald: And when Mr. Bartlett said your boss wanted him todo that, your boss is Vice President Cheney, right?
Addington: Yes sir.
And here is the part of the note recording the conversation between Libby and Cheney that show Cheney’s notes making clear that he’s going to knock some heads to make sure Libby gets his exoneration.
There are several key points about this note. First, as I said, it makes it crystal clear that Cheney is going to knock some heads together to make sure this happens. But the other key point is what Cheney stops short of saying:
Not going to protect one staffer & sacrifice the guy
the Presthat was asked to stick his neck in the meat grinder because of the incompetence of others.
In other words, when Cheney was preparing to knock some heads together, he was thinking specifically about how unjust it was for Libby to be accused considering Cheney’s understand that the President asked Libby to stick his neck in a meat grinder–presumably, meaning Bush asked Libby to lead the response to Wilson. This is consistent with the fact that, just before OVP started investigating the Wilsons with new vigor on June 9, 2003, Bush told Libby he was concerned about the Kristof allegations. Cheney stopped short of describing Bush’s involvement in writing. But there’s at least a good case to be made that that’s what Cheney was thinking: When Cheney prepared to knock some heads together, he did so keeping Bush’s role in mind.
One more thing about Cheney. We know that his lifelong acolyte, David Addington, recognized his actions here as incriminating as soon as he saw the note.
Wells: And, in fact, when you saw that particular document, youpicked up the telephone and called Terry O’Donnell, counsel to the VicePresident and told him about the document?
Addington: He and I may have communicated about it. Whether itwas a telephone call or not, I can’t say. I might have phoned him. I might haveshown it to him. I think probably a phone call.
Addington sees the notes, and contacts Terry O’Donnell, suggesting Addington saw the note as evidence that might incriminate Dick.
What We Already Know about Bush and Card
Now, there’s even been evidence that Bush and Card were involved in this process. For example, when Libby explained the public exoneration in his grand jury appearance, he described Card’s involvement.
A. If memory serves, and it doesn’t always, I think I was at the — the, the first time this sort of came up, I was at the — at the White House, I think, and this came out and believe I went to talk to Andy Card and Scott McClellan about the time it came out. I’d have to check the dates, but I’ll explain as best as I recall it, if that’s okay. And Scott said, well, we don’t want to go down the whole list. And Andy said something about the same. And I said, you know, I didn’t feel that was quite right since I didn’t talk to Novak [ed. though of course Libby did speak to Novak] and I didn’t think it was fair that they were saying Karl Rove didn’t speak to Novak but not saying I wasn’t the one who spoke to Novak.
But at least according to the convicted perjurer Libby, he didn’t tell Scottie or Card that he and Rove had both spoken to Novak.
Q. And when you spoke about the fact that Mr. Rove had been cleared did you indicate to either one of them that in fact Mr. Rove had spoken to Mr. Novak some time prior to July 14th?
A. No, I don’t think I did.
Q. Was there a reason you didn’t share that fact with them?
A. It wasn’t what I was most concerned about. What I was most concerned about was getting them to say something I about that I had not been the one that spoke to Novak.
[snip]
Q. In your conversations with Card and McClellan or lanyone else did — as far as you know, did anyone else in the White House know that Mr. Rove and Mr. Novak had spoken before
July 14th?A. Not that I know of.
Q. As you sit here today do you know if anyone in the White House besides you and Mr. Rove is aware of the conversation that took place between Mr. Rove and Novak prior
to July 14th?A. I don’t think so.
Libby’s testimony, whether it was true or not, would corroborate the notion that both Scottie and Card had no clue that Rove and Libby were talking to Novak.
Now, Libby gets all hazy when Fitzgerald asks him about how Cheney ensured that Libby was indeed exonerated.
Q. And you wouldn’t remember if the Vice President told you, hey, I just picked up the phone and called Andrew Card or Scott McClellan and you’re being taken care of?
A. As I say, I,think, I think he did do that at one point and I just don’t remember whether I actually tried with him fruitlessly the first time when they didn’t change it or
if it was the second time.
It’s not clear whether he’s protecting Cheney–or Bush. But he definitely backs off confirming details of Cheney’s involvement in the public exoneration. That’s a point that remained unclear up until and during the trial, when, after claiming Cheney got Scottie to exonerate Libby in his opening statement, Ted Wells included Bush in the mix in an attempt to prevent the video of Scottie exonerating Libby from coming into evidence (thanks to Jeff for pointing me back to this citation, which he found while working on his book).
THE COURT: Does theVice President sort of become his surrogate to deliver the message to the WhiteHouse press people to get them to act? Iguess we would need –
MR. WELLS: I don’tknow. That’s what I mean, you are goingdown a road where, put it like this. First –
THE COURT: There maybe a link because I guess we would need the Vice President’s testimony as towhat he did that then resulted in McClellan, if that’s true, making the statement.
MR. WELLS: Whateverthe Vice President did, he did not do it as Mr. Libby’s surrogate. The Vice President did what he decided on hisown.
THE COURT: If he didit at Mr. Libby’s behest, I mean –
MR. WELLS: That’swhere I’m drawing the distinction. Ithink what that rule is about, if somebody is your agent, but I think the VicePresident made his own –
[snip]
MR. WELLS: I don’tthink the transcript is going to answer it because I don’t think anybodyknows. I think you would have to talk toPresident Bush because he’s probably somewhere in that chain.
MR. FITZGERALD: YourHonor, I think the transcript both in the Grand Jury and in Mr. Wells’ openingsays that the Vice President did this for Mr. Libby. And the note, it just says it right
THE COURT: Theopening statement is not evidence.
MR. FITZGERALD: Butit is uncomfortable when someone takes an evidentiary position inconsistentwith how they opened. As far as theWhite House, the White House was throwing Mr. Libby under the bus. Mr. Libby is trying to save himself throughthe Vice President. Now we’re getting animplication that it must have been the President involved in this. Thetestimony in the Grand Jury is that Mr. Libby went to people to get theclearing statement. Then he went to theVice President. And that he understoodthe Vice President interceded for him. We’ve heard evidence, not from opening statementbut from Mr. Addington, that when he went to Mr. Bartlett and said you peopleshouldn’t basically be making these statements, Mr. Bartlett says, thatdecision was your boss, your boss, meaning the Vice President. That was yesterday. We have the note, that’sGovernment’s Exhibit 532 in evidence, from the Vice President: Has to happentoday; call out the key press, saying same thing about Scooter as Karl. This is not –
THE COURT: What dateis that?
MR. FITZGERALD: It’snot dated but it’s prior to the statement. So it’s probably around October 4. This is what Mr. Cheney, the Vice President, wrote. It’s not a request to the President. It’s a direction, and my understanding is theVice President spoke to Mr. McClellan.
THE COURT: Who’s thatto? Does it say who he gave those to?
MR. FITZGERALD: No,but Mr. Libby testified in the Grand Jury that these are the words he wantedMr. McClellan to issue, and Mr. McClellan then made a statement. We have evidence from Mr. Addington on crossexamination yesterday, that when he made a comment to Mr. Bartlett about whythis statement was made, Mr. Bartlett responded "That was your boss."I think there is no dispute here that the decision to issue that statement didnot come from the President. It camefrom the Vice President. There is nodispute that Mr. Libby asked the Vice President to intercede. Mr. Libby alsoasked Mr. McClellan to intercede. It got done. I think that’s right down smack down the middle of a statement by aperson authorized by a party to make it.
MR. WELLS: I do notbelieve those are the facts. I do not believe the evidence will show that VicePresident Cheney went to Andrew Card. Ithink maybe we ought to wait until the Vice President gets here to find outwhat happened. But I do not believe his recitation is based on the facts or isfactual. [my empahsis]
In other words, Ted Wells wants to muddy the issue by suggesting that Bush was in the chain of command between Cheney and Andy Card. Yes, McClellen’s comments seem to confirm that–but they in no way confirm that Bush knew that Libby had been leaking Valerie Wilson’s identity, and they certainly don’t confirm that McClellan knows whether Bush knew of that fact.
Hearings and Investigations
But if anyone is going to do some investigating, they should do so on the premise that Scottie’s book is one weak piece of evidence–from among a sea of much stronger evidence–that Cheney, at least, was involved in the leaking of Valerie Wilson’s identity and the cover-up of that leak. We’re not going to get Bush until we go through Cheney, anyway, and with Cheney, there is already clear evidence of his foreknowledge and involvement, which we don’t have with Bush, probably not even if Scottie testifies.
And for chrissake, can we avoid playing into the publicist’s game and making Scottie a mint off of this?
To that end, I’d respectfully suggest that instead of saying:
Omigod! Scottie says Bush was personally and knowingly involved in the cover-up of the leak!!! Call Congress! Call the cops!!
Can we try this:
Scott McClellan’s book apparently provides more evidence–on top of existing compelling evidence–that the knowledge of the Valerie Wilson leak and cover-up of that leak extend far beyond Scooter Libby. His book invites Congress to hold a hearing on what he knows. But along with McClellan, any hearing should include other key witnesses, including Dan Bartlett and David Addington, who can speak directly to the intentionality of this cover-up.
Congress didn’t do so great with their commutation hearing. Let’s not set them up for failure and disappointment with underwhelming Scottie testimony.
Says something about the right-wing welfare program, though, doesn’t it?
Scottie’s been cut off if he’s got to rely on buzz about his book to put food on his household.
Or maybe the Regnery hand-biters already bit off enough of the hand that fed them with their suit, to the point where their bulk buyer of books (read: winger welfare and major supplier of remainders for Dollar Stores) won’t even buy new books like Scottie’s…
Whatever the case, starve ’em.
Oh, forgot to add the other two cents that occurred to me about this hard court press to sell Scottie’s book…
Does the White House want Congress to investigate this mess, at the risk of Congress screwing up the outcome a la Iran Contra, rather than allow USDOJ under Mukasey to do so? Is that another reason why MSNBC, home of Cheney’s favorite tool Timmeh Russert, was so breathless this morning as it covered Scottie’s ersatz revelation?
once again the best fact reporting can be found here at TNH. I just made a rare trip to CNN to see what they were saying about Joe Wilson’s comments (I guess) this morning on their broadcast. Was surprised to see virtually every commenter calling for impeachment of both Cheney and Bush. Wow. Perhaps the populace really has had enough finally. That’d be a good thing.
I hold out little or no hope that our Congresscritters â€get it†enough or even at all to re-examine the Valerie Plame Wilson betrayal. Cowering under the bedsheets is all too comfortable.
Twill sadly be one of those Congressionally unexplored nuggets of history that only us, the devout Plameologists, have observed.
Oh for a Pat Fitzgerald-like Congresscritter.
Great stuff, totally agree with all of this. One minor point: it is probably not clear – especially since Wells calls him â€counsel to the Vice President†– that Terry O’Donnell is Cheney’s personal lawyer, i.e., as Addington explained on cross-examination when Fitzgerald got him to clarify the point, the lawyer with whom Cheney would have to confront potential criminal liability, because Addington’s (at the time actual Counsel to the Vice President) communications with Cheney were not covered by attorney-client privilege.
Also, it’s always seemed very odd to me that Addington shared all the documents OVP was turning over to the prosecution with Gonzales before turning them over. It effectively meant that the President could keep track of what the investigators knew as far as documentation went.
One other odd little Addington tidbit: what on earth were the documents in the envelope that were the only OVP documents produced to investigators that Addington himself did not see?
Well, I think the whole McClellen dust up is interesting, but really changes nothing. I was one of the apparently many people that emailed EW when the initial report came out. But I emailed her the Atrios report on the initial AP article because it had this quite true and hilarious line regarding the title of McClellen’s book, â€Big Giant Tool of Corrupt Assholes is the title, I think.â€, not because it was particularly earth shattering. I would be literally shocked if this vague blurb by McClellen changes the course of view on the part of either Congress or Fitzgerald. Ain’t happening; and by the time the DC crowd gets back from the holidays, they will not even remember this.
Why doesn’t someone in congress or the press get an advance copy so they can see what Scott really says? And why doesn’t anybody give Scott a hard time for not speaking up sooner? What’s happening with the Plame lawsuit, anyway?
Really great summary, as always.
EW- do you think the entire word â€pres-ident†was written by Cheney- isn’t the space after suspect? Also, the grammer is wrong- â€the guy the pres that was asked,†it seems that â€the pres (space)†was doctored in some way.
â€the guy that was asked…†makes sense
Thanks in advance.
As far as the commentators calling for impeachment, we know that isn’t going anywhere; we can’t even get a wiretap-free FISA bill through the Senate, let alone a voluntary commitment to end the (undeclared)(illegal) â€warâ€. A call-for-impeachment play could allow the Republican candidates to separate themselves from Bush and Cheney while still singing all the best songs from their hymnbook. The press discussions and he-said/she-said would be all about the call to impeach, and not about the criminal policies.
Oh, and by the way, this does not help the Wilsons one iota as to their lawsuit; whoever started that meme ought to be clocked. The Wilson suit was dismissed on sovereign immunity grounds; it would not matter how true McClellen’s quote was, it has no bearing whatsoever on the grounds of the dismissal.
eyes
There’s no sign of tampering, but I’ve only seen a PDF. I always thought that Cheney was going to write, â€the president asked†but that after he thought better of writing â€president†he turned it into a passive to hide the actor.
eyes — i, too, think EW has
it exactly right — cheney
stopped his note in mid-title,
halfway through â€pres[-ident]â€,
then revised the balance of
the sentence BEFORE he even
wrote it. i am grateful that
he used a fountain-pen, which
leaves us the evidence of the
â€
pres†— so much so, thati decided to make it my mast:
the writing scribbled on the
top of cheney’s forehead, in
the right margin, on my site.
it was plainly top
of his mind. . .
yes — all here, assembled, are right — this
is scarcely news, but it makes great theatre;
and theatre sells many advance copies of books.
p e a c e
won’t be buying the book….
Funny thing this morning in the Ralph’s parking lot a guy set up a little stand..
â€Impeach Cheneyâ€â€¦I thought to myself a little late isn’t it?
…also just happened onto this webpage and laughed my heiney off…
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/
Alyx
better late than never…Conyers wants phone calls,letters, signatures from citizens regarding impeachment.
Hmmm. I going to disagree a little with some of the comments. I agree that Scottie’s little â€revelation†isn’t anything new. Nevertheless, it’s quite significant, because it’s put the whole scandal back in the headlines. The presidential candidates (on both sides) are talking about it, so the media is obligated to report on it, and it’s getting harder and harder for them to avoid the fact that neither Bush nor Cheney has come clean on their role in the whole scandal. Scotty has pretty much said that both Rove and Libby lied to him, and Bush, Cheney, and Card were all â€involved†in having Scotty repeat those lies to the public. Cheney’s â€involvement†is documented in his own handwriting. Even the densest White House reporter is going to want to ask: â€When did Cheney find out that Scooter was lying? And what, if anything, did he do about it?â€
shut up shuttin up
Bmaz you may want to call Joe â€I ain’t seen nuttin in Niger†and tell him off
The book excerpt could strengthen that case, which is currently on appeal, according to Wilson.
â€The argument that we’ve made in our civil suit is that public officials were abusing the public trust in the exercise of their official duties in support of a private political vendetta,†he told CNN. â€I think what McClellan says certainly makes that very clear. At a bare minimum, for openers, I think it’s incumbent on the president and vice president now to release the transcripts of their statements to the special prosecutor so that we now have a fuller understanding of what they knew, when they knew it and what they said to Justice.â€
I totally agree with Frank Probst’s comment. I don’t think there is anything new, but for my money it brings all that suspicion into the limelight, the truth about this seems to come out in layers. That is, I think the press did a great job of preventing the true story from getting out. I was amazed at how ignorant Larry King, Tweety, Russert were about the facts. I mean, you all on this site know better than most how totally out of it they were. We were getting facts, but the american people were getting a muddy mess of information. I think the mud is settling. I still think Bush is guilty, but I keep saying that I get it that we can’t prove it.
I think the American public is just â€getting itâ€. At the time of the Libby trial it was all about how it was only a lie. I think Scotty’s statement makes it clear that it was more than the fact that Libby lied. That a crime was truly committed but it was a crime that Fitz couldn’t prove. He’s saying, â€I didn’t feel good about it. I lied.â€
I think it is just dawning on a lot of ignorant folks that a real bad thing happened. It wasn’t spin. It was the truth. They heard from Valerie and she was pretty believable just a few weeks ago as she told the nation that she was covert, that damage was done, that she worked in WMD proliferation, that indeed these guys admit to talking about her status with the press. I just really don’t think most americans got this picture before.
â€Oh, and by the way, this does not help the Wilsons one iota as to their lawsuit; whoever started that meme ought to be clocked.â€
I saw a film clip this am of Joe Wilson starting it from Utah. I assume the family is on a skiing vacation. Joe didn’t mention the case had been dismissed and failed to heed emptywheel’s excellent advice: â€Let’s not set them up for failure and disappointment with underwhelming Scottie testimony.â€*
I’m not going to buy Snottie McMuffin’s book, but I see it as a net win for progressives. As Bush’s former Press Secretary, he has an imprimatur with MSM editors and the GOP that progressives lack. The MSM will print as â€new,†what emptywheel and others have been writing about for years, solely, because Scottie said it. That discredits the Bush administrations and all their policies. So what if Scottie thinks he carved out a safe place in his book for King George. His book still fires kill shots at DeadEye, Libby, and Rove, while confirming that Cheney is really the Chief Executive.
Another crucial issue is that Scotty’s book is post Libby commutation. It’s that profoundly self-interested act which will link Scooter to George just as Jimmy Hoffa is linked to Nixon. Carving out a safe place for George was a lot easier before Bush commuted Libby’s sentence.
Also, what’s really driving the political agenda is the price of oil. A lot of the GOP and Vichy Dems are searching for a chance to distance themselves from the Bush administration. Snottie just gave it to them.
*As a matter of law bmaz, I’m sure you’re correct that Snottie’s book has no bearing on the jurisdictional issues that caused the dismissal of the Wilson’s civil suit. But, as we know, bad judges frequently ignore the 4th Amendment, the great writ, and centuries of legal precedent. There’s no reason they can’t do that now and reinstate the Wilson’s civil suit.
Boo – I didn’t realize it was Joe Wilson that said that, although I saw someone on one of the cable shows musing about it yesterday as well. I have nothing but the utmost respect for both of the Wilsons; so I will sheepishly retract the â€ought to be clocked†part of my comment. As many will recall, I had some issues with how the complaint was tactically pled in the Wilson civil case; I would give anything to have read the complaint in time to have actually tried to help them, but that was not the case. I would also give anything for the McClellen bit to actually help them, but I cannot see how it will. I wholeheartedly agree with Joe when he says â€I think it’s incumbent on the president and vice president now to release the transcripts of their statements to the special prosecutor so that we now have a fuller understanding of what they knew, when they knew it and what they said to Justice.†Boo, It is great to see you again. Am working hard to not respond to troll.
As an aside, I’ve always been drawn to Deadeye’s final comment in that note: â€because of the incompetence of others.â€
Is Deadeye miffed because these â€incompetent others†couldn’t shaft Joe Wilson as Deadeye himself planned?
They got their marching orders from Junya? Deadeye? Both together, and they bungled the smear?
And just who would be these â€incompetent others†that screwed up the hit job? Rove, Bartlett, Card, Fleischer, Armitage?
It seems pretty clear from Deadeye’s comment, that a few â€somebodies†did not accomplish the task that was ordered.
It’s Nuremburg!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
aren’t mr. mclellan and mr. fitzgerald in communication with one another? Since Mr. Fitzgerald now has an FBI that isn’t as corrupt as it was the day before yesterday, it is possible he has been provided with more information for the pending indictments?
EW, I think you really should change the title of your post to â€Stop Making Scottie McC Cry.â€
oldtree
I strongly suspect that Scottie would never publish anything that he hadn’t already told Fitz–and he sure as hell wouldn’t publish anything to contradict what he had already told Fitz.
So I think it’s safer to assume Fitz thought this was non-prosecutable than to believe there will be more indictments.
An interesting perspective might be what happens at the â€publisher†between the pre-release cite this week, and the actual distribution of the book six months from now, as if the JNix lession that books are writeable in a much more abbreviated timespan existed in some parallel world. McClellan knows that TNH and dKos both have dozens of old threads transfixing his knowledge coordinates in this matter throughout his tenure in the press official position. But surely he and his publisher as well as the $20. million donors to the freeLibby defense fund also have chronicled the matrices of his instantaneous knowledge quotient, or flow diagrams which limit divergence at each fork. Ultimately Scot was less than the wordmagic expert he had tried to become for this secretive administration, and was replaced by the loquacious fellow from PoundRidge high school. The publication of the actual book should be an interesting infusion in the election seasion of 2008.
Fitzgerald used an argument from time to time in the Libby trial that went something like:
Libby had a reason to lie bc the President said he would fire anyone who leaked this information
All in all, it was a pretty funny argument but it’s one I am very sure he would NOT have made if anyone had told him, on the record under oath, that the President knew Libby was one of the leakers when the President made that statement. Even if he thought the person wouldn’t carry the day for evidentiary purposes – I don’t think a good and careful prosecutor (kind of like Tinkerbell – clap harder if you still believe in them) would make that argument if they had under oath testimony that said what they were trying to â€shade†that McClellan had said.
I always thought it was like poking a dog with a stick every time the argument was made – kind of a, ’unless you want to say that the President DID know, after all’ stick.
What I do think is that Scottie and the Pres are formally formerlies (try saying that out loud) or he wouldn’t have let the shading take place.
Goldsmith and Tenet were taken care of when they left – not so much Scottie.
I’m not buying any of their books.
bmaz – I left a link on the Fieger thread for you.
Apparently one judge at least is thinking of a new trial bc of the ridiculous rigamorole on secrecy from Gov.
She hasn’t gone so far as to say DOJ lawyers should be required to wear a Scarlett F (for Fibber – why, what were you thinking?) in her courtroom, but kinda close.
Hey EW,
Did you see this yet: Wilkes trial may move to East Coast
EW,
Thanks for laying all of this out.
But I’m kinda with Frank Probst. Congress is waiting for a certain level of public interest before it will act. What drove the Nixon resignation was the Saturday Night Massacre– and then the public was reacting not to evidence of an illegal act, but a conspiracy to conceal evidence. In other words, the SNM fanned the flames of â€What is he hiding?†So it is not necessary that Scottie’s book provide new evidence, but only raise public interest in â€What is he hiding?†sufficiently to demand an investigation. So if the price of raising public clamor to the level of instigating the investigations that push the tipping point, then I don’t mind of Scottie’s book makes more money– because he’s probably looking at a perjury or obstruction of justice rap anyway. So I say, fan the flames! Man the blames! or whatever.
Bob in HI
Mary – Yes, I saw that and thank you. This will be a real shocker (not), I think Brinkema ought to consider dismissing the case as a punitive sanction. I kind of like the scarlet â€F†idea, and I wasn’t thinking that it stands for fibber. Perhaps some pointy dunce hats would be appropriate too…..
hey EW I have a big roll of duct tape here for rePugfunk….snickering…
Thanks to EW, everyone at this blogsite knows one thing with certainty – the CIA Leak Case isn’t over, but rather a case of Justice deferred!
Scooter obstructed Justice to protect his bosses – Bush and Cheney – and for his services as a Loyal Liability-Catcher, Bush sprang Libby out of doing time for his obstruction with a commutation, at Cheney’s behest!
The ’secret mission’ that Jeffress described reveals Cheney representing to Libby that Bush has declassified â€something†[strongly suspected to be Valerie Plame Wilson’s classified CIA Employment] that Cheney then orders Libby to show to none other than Judy Miller – half a day before Armitage leaks to Novak.
Libby KNEW what he was about to do was way ’over the line’ – as a Senior Government Official with the highest clearances, he knew declassification was normally a very formal, methodical process. Right after he was given the ’secret mission,’ a concerned Libby went straight to Addington (who ’knew’ what Libby was referring to) to clarify the President’s ’insta-declassification’ authority, and then launched off for the St. Regis Hotel to meet Judy.
Libby the Perjurer said he showed Judy parts of the then-still-classified NIE, but there is no doubt that Fitz was certain that Libby also delivered the â€something†to Judy – which Fitz showed Libby (and Libby only) on an index card, and Libby said, â€Yes, that’s what I was authorized to reveal.â€
To cover his tracks after the ’secret mission’ to Leak to Judy, Libby then employed what appears to have been an Addington-designed/vetted Compartmentalization Scheme (Treat as Secret, Treat as Top Secret, etc) to hide the â€something,†and the missioning, and the meeting with Judy from Investigators.’
Where the business of Justice in the CIA Leak Case has been left is with Libby’s Obstruction to protect Bush and Cheney.
It’s unfinished.
Ok, I am happy! (Thanksgiving)
Anyway, a little tongue in cheek from the Great â€Vast Right Wing Conspiracy†to emptywheel and her warning about making the Right even richer–
â€All your base are belong to us…â€
Happy Thanksgiving All!!
: )
Jodi
Fickin Shit Stain Jodi has to politicize Thanksgiving. Up yours.
Our forefathers taught us to put principles above fear and above personalities.
It’s not win at any cost. It’s principles first. That’s what the revolution was about and for that today, I am grateful. I intend to honor the concepts for which others gave their lives.
It sad that our current president does not share or role model that sentiment.
I believe the universe takes care of effectiveness. It protects the behaviors that work and grave consequences occur for the behaviors that don’t work.
Money is not the ultimate reward. It is a false god. The ultimate reward, is that the very principles that are effective in maintaining the human race and the universe…never die. They just keep living for eternity. That’s the reward.
One thing that really doesn’t work is the worship of money. The confusion of money with effectiveness. The universe knows even if all of humanity forgets.
I am very thankful for your work, EW.
You are a foremost authority on this subject and it is vitally important that you be given a national platform to speak.
I call on ALL who use EW’s work to have the courage to give her a platform and ample time.
To not call on her because she has in any way offended you – I’m especially addressing those of the Press and those who do more than read the teleprompters – to look beyond this.
This is fast becoming one of the most important chapters of our modern history. Marcy Wheeler has written many of those pages.
She has paid her dues.
To listen to people as â€experts†and not hear them push back or bring in important connections has been disappointing and then, infuriating.
This subject is too important to allow the failings of those who did not follow journalistic principles as
we were drawn in war, privatization of vital governmental agencies, and loss of our civil liberties to dictate who will be given the important public platform of big media now.
Now – as wider interest builds.
Now – as the election draws near.
Now – as this administration has nearly succeeded at tamping down the coals of this administration’s consuming fire.
If you are reading this and use her work, do the right thing.
Those of us who know better are waiting. Real journalism is a noble thing.
Practice it, please.
Again, this subject is too important to allow the failings of those who did not follow journalistic principles – as we were drawn into war, as our vital governmental agencies were privatized or simply corrupted, and as we lost our civil liberties – to dictate who will be given the important public platform of big media now.
I just don`t get it. When this whole issue first hit the airwaves, what this meant to me was simply the WH administration had exposed one of their own covert operatives. Then I was given the impression that this was done to smear Joe Wilson because he had exposed the lies the WH was putting forward to con the American people into what we now know was an illegal war. Plain and simple this outing was a angry vendetta by the WH, composed by a conspiracy including the decider, to show anyone that tried to foul-up their evil plans for war would be hurt bad. Does anybody believe that just one of these cronies will someday have to answer for any of this catastrophic mess. When this whole issue is reported on the news rarely do networks connect the dots for Joe-Six Pack who needs help in understanding the big picture and that is the illegal war. This McLair story only impresses Joe-Six Pack that the Shrub and his buddies are liars but not what they are lying about and why. By the way I consider myself a Joe-Six Pack duh.
Steve Elliott,
perhaps you had the wrong inpression, and that your plain and simple isn’t what most people think.
TROLL ALERT: JODI IS A REPUBLICAN Operative hired to interrupt
the activities on this site. DO NOT FEED THE STOOGE!!!
>>WELLS: I do not believe those are the facts. I do not believe the evidence will show that Vice President Cheney went to Andrew Card.
Hmmm. This coming Monday is the 2 year anniversary of Card’s emergency landing at Nashville..
NASHVILLE, Tenn., Nov. 26 (AP) – A small, twin-engine plane carrying Andrew H. Card Jr., the White House chief of staff, made an emergency landing in Nashville on Saturday after smoke began pouring into the cockpit, officials said.
Mr. Card and the 12 other people on board, including Secret Service agents, were not injured when the Gulfstream 4 plane landed at Nashville International Airport around 4 p.m., said Lynne Lowrance, an airport spokeswoman.
â€They thought they could be having some trouble with the avionics instruments,†Ms. Lowrance said, â€but they weren’t sure what was causing the smoke.â€
~All the answers are in the timeline.
Here’s a question. Assuming that Bush affirmed to McC the (false) position that Rove was involved, then doesn’t it follow that either Rove lied to Bush or that Bush affirmed Rove’s putative non-involvement to McC without ever asking Rove?
Here’s an excerpt from what I diaried under the title â€Libby’s B*tches†over at Talkleft (no nasty words there) back in July, to note the commutation of Scooter and what it meant (to me at least):
the link: http://www.talkleft.com/story/2007/7/8/11522/16030
Part of the core excerpt (I did, indeed, wax lyrical, but it’s good lyrical, so go there):
But, no one’s commenting on the elephant in the living room here. Regardless of whether Bushie was protecting himself by tossing Cheney under the bus, just responded to Libby’s chorus of supporters or he had another Road-to-Damascus moment at Kennebunkport last weekend resulting in his sudden conversion into Bush The Merciful, giving Libby a commutation indicates two things and presages two.
First, the grant of the commutation indicates that Libby, a convicted perjurer, has successfully blackmailed the President and the Vice President. It’s just that simple. Under any definition one might choose to use, responding to threats of exposure of damaging information by giving something of value – here, a commutation – is succumbing to blackmail. ….
And, skilled, convicted liar that he is, Libby can pick and choose whom to inculpate and how by shaping his story.
It is, indeed, ironic in the extreme that a jailhouse snitch is the one person the President and Vice President need to fear most. ….
Second, the most powerful man in Washington now is Scooter Libby, a lying felon. Scooter has the whip hand over both the President and the Vice President, and appears to be exercising it. He can still choose, any time he wants, to pick up the phone to Fitzgerald and ask to come over for a talk. And both Bush and Cheney know that. After all, blackmailers don’t go away – they come back for more. And all this deprives Bush and Cheney of their paramount position at the apex of power.
Scotty McC’s book is, IMHO, a pastel-colored imitation of Scooter’s red-meat capacity for blackmail. And, unlike Scooter, Scotty seems to have folded like the lawn furniture after running up the trial balloon of â€Bush Lied†and getting his smackdown. He’s just whining and trying to put some credibility into his career chances, after having whored it out. Not likely to work, that.