Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Probe On Leak of CIA Agent Name Widens
Twin Cities Pioneer Press via NYT ^ | 04/02/2004 | Micheal Burwell

Posted on 04/05/2004 9:58:13 AM PDT by tcuoohjohn

WASHINGTON — Prosecutors investigating whether someone in the Bush administration improperly disclosed the identity of a CIA officer have expanded their inquiry to examine whether White House officials lied to investigators or mishandled classified information related to the case, lawyers and government officials said.

The inquiry's original focus centered on a statute that makes it a felony to intentionally reveal the identity of an undercover intelligence officer, but prosecutors have now widened the range of conduct under scrutiny and raised the possibility of bringing charges peripheral to the leak itself.

The expanded inquiry comes as prosecutors appear to be preparing to seek additional testimony before a federal grand jury, said lawyers with clients in the case.

The probe's broadened scope is a potentially significant development that represents exactly what allies of the White House feared when Attorney General John Ashcroft removed himself from the case in December and turned it over to Patrick Fitzgerald, the U.S. attorney in Chicago.

Republican lawyers worried that the leak case might grow into a time-consuming and politically charged inquiry, like the sprawling independent counsel inquiries of the 1990s that distracted and damaged the Clinton administration.

Lawyers involved in the case and government officials say Fitzgerald is examining possible discrepancies between documents and statements made by current or former White House officials during a three-month preliminary investigation conducted last fall by the FBI and Justice Department.

The White House last year took the unusual step of denying any involvement in the leak on the part of several top administration officials, including Karl Rove, President Bush's senior adviser, and I. Lewis Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan has said repeatedly that no one wants to get to the bottom of the case more than Bush.

But Bush himself has said he does not know if investigators will ever be able to determine who disclosed the identity of CIA officer Valerie Plame to Robert Novak, who wrote in his syndicated column last July that Plame, the wife of former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, was a CIA employee.

Wilson was a critic of the administration's Iraq policies. Democrats have accused the White House of leaking his wife's name out of revenge. Wilson, in a July 2003 opinion piece in the New York Times, disputed Bush's statement in his State of the Union address that January that Iraq was trying to develop a nuclear bomb and had sought to buy uranium in Africa.

Fitzgerald also is reportedly investigating whether the disclosure of Plame's identity came after someone discovered her name among classified documents circulating at the upper echelons of the White House. It could be a crime to disclose information from such a document.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: chicago; cialeak; fbi; grandjury; plame
This thing is heating up a bit.
1 posted on 04/05/2004 9:58:14 AM PDT by tcuoohjohn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All

Help prevent this type of
Air Force One NIGHTMARE
from EVER happening again!


Support Free Republic!!!

Click Here to Donate to Free Republic By Secure Server

Or mail checks to:        
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794

Or you can use:                     
PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com

STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD-
Found in the breaking news sidebar!
Fawnn


2 posted on 04/05/2004 10:00:27 AM PDT by Support Free Republic (Don't be a nuancy boy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tcuoohjohn
Translation: No one violated the CIA statute so we're gonna try to set someone up for a false statement or obstruction charge. Classic prosecution tactic when they don't have a case.
3 posted on 04/05/2004 10:01:49 AM PDT by colorado tanker ("There are but two parties now, Traitors and Patriots")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: colorado tanker
It's just a gut feel but my money's on Dick Clarke being the leaker.
4 posted on 04/05/2004 10:04:31 AM PDT by Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: colorado tanker
Translation: No one violated the CIA statute so we're gonna try to set someone up for a false statement or obstruction charge. Classic prosecution tactic when they don't have a case.

Sounds familiar...

Signed,

Martha Stewart

5 posted on 04/05/2004 10:04:50 AM PDT by isthisnickcool (I'm isthisnickcool, and I approved this post!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: colorado tanker
The statute is a federal statute under 18 USC. I don't recall The CIA having legislative power.

6 posted on 04/05/2004 10:08:04 AM PDT by tcuoohjohn (Follow The Money)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Bob
If Clarke is the leaker you'll never hear about it on nbc.
7 posted on 04/05/2004 10:11:03 AM PDT by keysguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Bob
The investigation seems to be focued on the White House Communications Office. My guess would be one or two of Rove's over zealous deputies. Rove is much too savvy to do anything this dumb. At least I hope so.

Because this is a crimnal matter I doubt anyone is going to take a spear in the chest for anybody here. Getting fired the cause is one thing. Three or four years of prison SOS is another.
8 posted on 04/05/2004 10:12:34 AM PDT by tcuoohjohn (Follow The Money)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Bob
Yeah, let Dicky-poo eat yellowcake.
9 posted on 04/05/2004 10:21:03 AM PDT by colorado tanker ("There are but two parties now, Traitors and Patriots")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: tcuoohjohn
Nailed by the grammar police. I hate it when that happens.
10 posted on 04/05/2004 10:24:19 AM PDT by colorado tanker ("There are but two parties now, Traitors and Patriots")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: tcuoohjohn
I thought Plame was originally "outed" by Aldrich Ames?
11 posted on 04/05/2004 11:00:37 AM PDT by donozark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: colorado tanker
?......another,......'Wag the Dog' trek?
12 posted on 04/05/2004 11:03:41 AM PDT by maestro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: donozark
Nah...Plame was operating under State Department cover as a consular officer and wasn't in the Eastern Europe Russia Division line. She would have never come up on Ames screen. Had she done so Ames would have ratted her out. He networks remained intact the whole time. Because her networks were peripheral to Russian interests they would have been traded away very quickly. They weren't.
13 posted on 04/05/2004 11:16:22 AM PDT by tcuoohjohn (Follow The Money)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: colorado tanker
Actually your grammar was superb and your spelling was stellar. The downside is your facts were in error. Your English teacher would be thrilled. Your history teacher however, would be appalled.
14 posted on 04/05/2004 11:28:55 AM PDT by tcuoohjohn (Follow The Money)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Bob
FWIW...Rand Beers and Joseph Wilson both work on the Kerry campaign as political advisors... Clarke taught a college course with Beers. At first I thought that is how they were connected, but then I found the following article which states...

Clarke also mentions in his book "my friend Joe Wilson,"

15 posted on 04/05/2004 11:31:45 AM PDT by ravingnutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: tcuoohjohn
Valerie Plame, wife of Leakgate accuser Joseph Wilson, was outed as a CIA agent at least nine years before conservative columnist Robert Novak supposedly blew her cover three months ago in his column.

"The C.I.A. suspected that Aldrich Ames had given Mrs. Wilson's name (along with those of other spies) to the Russians before his espionage arrest in 1994," revealed the New York Times on Saturday.

In a column revealing the critical information for the first time since the Leakgate scandal exploded two weeks ago, Times columnist Nicholas Kristof explained that the Ames tip compromised Valerie Plame's undercover secrecy so thoroughly that "she was brought back to Washington for safety reasons."

At the time, he noted, Mrs. Wilson "was already in transition away from undercover work to management, and to liaison roles with other intelligence agencies. So this year, even before she was outed, she was moving away from 'noc' – which means non-official cover."

What's more, said the Times writer, Mrs. Wilson's intelligence connections became known a bit in Washington as she rose in the CIA - an assessment that stands in marked contrast to Mr. Wilson's portrayal of his wife's identity as being so secret that she was endangered when Novak revealed her name.

Concludes Kristof:

"All in all, I think the Democrats are engaging in hyperbole when they describe the White House as having put Mrs. Wilson's life in danger and destroyed her career; her days skulking along the back alleys of cities like Beirut and Algiers were already mostly over."

16 posted on 04/05/2004 11:39:37 AM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: tcuoohjohn
Please re-read the story. I could have written it, and put a different slant on it. No one is named, only "lawyers" and "government" types. This is the sort of report that should never pass an editor's scrutiny and serves as another example of the execrable condition of American journalism.
17 posted on 04/05/2004 11:40:07 AM PDT by gaspar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: tcuoohjohn
Please re-read the story. I could have written it, and put a different slant on it. No one is named, only "lawyers" and "government" types. This is the sort of report that should never pass an editor's scrutiny and serves as another example of the execrable condition of American journalism.
18 posted on 04/05/2004 11:40:08 AM PDT by gaspar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: tcuoohjohn
Boy, do you have a case of the Mondays. Did it ever occur to you that I was referring to a statute about the CIA, as in not disclosing agent names, and not a statute passed by the CIA since we all know the CIA does not pass statutes??? Sheesh.
19 posted on 04/05/2004 11:43:29 AM PDT by colorado tanker ("There are but two parties now, Traitors and Patriots")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Bob
That would be nice. However, I have a feeling it's more likely to be someone working as liaison with the media.
20 posted on 04/05/2004 11:59:20 AM PDT by expatpat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: kcvl
Apparently not. The CIA kept her in a clandestine role. If her cover was blown she would have been removed from operating as a field case officer. Had her cover been blown she would have been PNG'ed by the host country. Every foreign service officer serving in a hostile country is suspected of being a CIA officer. Being generally suspect as CIA and outed are very different matters.

In the end it doesn't matter. What does matter was Plame's status as clandestine officer. Whoever revealed her status, however alledgedly feeble or shakey, committed a crime. I make no excuses for crime, regardless of the good intentions or valorous motive.
21 posted on 04/05/2004 12:00:09 PM PDT by tcuoohjohn (Follow The Money)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: tcuoohjohn
I thought Bob Novak had already stated that it was NOT anyone from the White House who gave him the information.
22 posted on 04/05/2004 12:11:17 PM PDT by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tcuoohjohn
There is something about Novak I don't trust in this affair.
23 posted on 04/05/2004 12:23:35 PM PDT by John Lenin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bob
Another name that popped into the equation states:

In his new book "Worse Than Watergate," John Dean, of Watergate fame, says, "I've been watching all the elements fall into place for two possible political catastrophes, one that will take the air out of the Bush-Cheney balloon and the other, far more disquieting, that will take the air out of democracy."

Source (Krugman Barf Alert)

John Dean's book Worse Than Watergate: The Secret Presidency of George W. Bush just came out this month and Joe Wilson's book comes out this summer. This makes the "Watergate-like" burglary of Nicosi's records look suspicious. If you will remember, Kerry's brother Cameron was accused of a break in like that in 1972. Merely conjecture on my part, but it looks like a concerted effort to me. I have not been able to connect John Dean to the Kerry campaign yet.

24 posted on 04/05/2004 12:39:23 PM PDT by ravingnutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SuziQ
If Novak wishes to state something as fact then let him raise his hand before the grand jury in Chicago and say so.

If not then we can logically assume that Novak's statements are unsupported by evidence beyond his assurance.

For me that isn't quite enough.
25 posted on 04/05/2004 1:04:58 PM PDT by tcuoohjohn (Follow The Money)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: tcuoohjohn
Well, since you seem to be so persnickety at pointing out "alleged" misinformation like Colorado Tanker's I think it's only fair to point out to you that the grand jury is not in Chicago, it's in DC.

And since we're on the subject of misleading, it seems as if you and/or the source forgot to include pertinent information from the actual NYT article. For example:

"Mr. Bush's advisers have repeatedly urged White House employees to cooperate with the inquiry, and it is unclear whether Mr. Fitzgerald has made any decisions about whether to go forward or drop the case. On Thursday, Randall Samborn, a spokesman for Mr. Fitzgerald in Chicago, declined to discuss the case.

"Mr. McClellan said the White House was fully cooperating with the investigation, but he declined to comment on the latest developments.

"Mr. Fitzgerald, who has been in charge of the case for three months, has said he is nearing completion of the inquiry, the lawyers said. Some of them have suggested that he may be facing a problem if he declines to prosecute.

"Prosecutors almost never make public the details of cases in which they investigate, but bring no charges. Federal law bars prosecutors from disclosing information obtained through a grand jury, the legal vehicle Mr. Fitzgerald has used to conduct his inquiry.

"But in this case, being investigated in the heat of a closely fought presidential election, Democrats have been watching carefully for any sign that the prosecutor has favored the administration. Should Mr. Fitzgerald bring the case to a close with no indictments and no public explanation of his decision not to prosecute, he would almost certainly be subject to intense criticism from Democrats.

"Several lawyers said Mr. Fitzgerald could ask a judge to allow him to issue a report. Or, they said, he could seek to employ a rarely used provision of the Justice Department's guidelines for prosecutors allowing grand juries to issue reports. But those sections of the prosecutor's manual appear to relate to public officials in organized crime cases."

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/02/politics/02LEAK.html

Just in case you missed it: "Some of them have suggested that he may be facing a problem if he declines to prosecute." And "Should Mr. Fitzgerald bring the case to a close with no indictments and no public explanation of his decision not to prosecute, he would almost certainly be subject to intense criticism from Democrats."

To a person with at least normal intelligence it would be apparent that Fitzgerald, despite all the interviews, e-mails, etc., has no evidence to prosecute (which just hasppens to support Novak). But, since he is under pressure from lib Dems like you to find a scapegoat, he is trying to use whatever pressure he can.

By the way, your screen name is very similar to that of FR poster Tuco-Bad. Are you that person?


26 posted on 04/05/2004 1:34:35 PM PDT by Gothmog (The 2004 election won't be about what one did in the military, but on how one would use it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: ravingnutter
I have not been able to connect John Dean to the Kerry campaign yet.

It sounds like Dean was interviewed recently by Kerry's biographer Douglas Brinkley, judging by this passage in Brinkley's book:

It seemed as if a brutal showdown between the Nixon White House and VVAW would take place. But two White House advisors, Counsel John Dean and speechwriter Patrick Buchanan, wisely prevailed on the President to ease up on the hard-nosed tactics. As Dean wrote in an April 21 memorandum to Haldeman and John Ehrlichmann, Nixon's domestic policy advisor: "The policy--which the VVAW are totally unaware of--is that there will be no arrests made of VVAW who violate the order and it has been clearly and unequivocally given to the appropriate authorities. Decades later, Dean recalled that Nixon was "worried to death" about the VVAW. "He tried to pretend that the protests didn't bother him," Dean said. "But every half an hour--literally--he wanted an update."

(Douglas Brinkley, Tour of Duty: John Kerry and the Vietnam War, 365-366)

On a related note, while looking into a possible Kerry-Watergate connection last night, I noted that Daniel Ellsberg appeared with Kerry at a VVAW event back in 1971:

The rest of 1971 was one of nonstop locomotion for Kerry. . .he appeared at a winter soldier event held at Faneuil Hall in Boston, where Edward Kennedy, George McGovern, and Daniel Ellsberg participated.

(Brinkley, 404)

Brinkley also mentions that Ellsberg was originally planning to leak the Pentagon Papers to Senator Fulbright for use by George McGovern, but McGovern changed his mind before publication (391-2); meanwhile in April 1971, "VVAW had received fifty thousand dollars from United States Senators McGovern and Hatfield, who... obtained the money from an unknown New York source." (www.wintersoldier.com: Time Line); and that same April, Fulbright showed up at a VVAW fundraiser where he met Kerry, whom he had "already heard good things about from his colleague Ted Kennedy", and the next day Fulbright's aide called Kerry to ask him to testify to the Senate (Brinkley, 366-367). Also, Kerry's pre-VVAW political ally Fr. Robert Drinan (cf. Brinkley, 342: "It was while serving as chairman of Drinan's congressional campaign that Kerry first came to the attention of VVAW") was the Congressman who initiated the call for Nixon's impeachment (""I was the first to file the resolution of impeachment against Nixon," said Fr. Robert F. Drinan, SJ, former dean of Boston College Law School 1956-70 and current Georgetown law professor.": Remembering Watergate: BC alumnus and former law school dean started Nixon accusations in Senate 30 years ago). It sure looks like Kerry was pretty close to Nixon's enemies during Watergate. This raises my suspicion that it may be more than coincidence that Dean has recently crawled out of the woodwork to climb on the Kerry bandwagon.

27 posted on 04/05/2004 1:45:32 PM PDT by Fedora
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: tcuoohjohn
If Novak wishes to state something as fact then let him raise his hand before the grand jury in Chicago and say so.

What grand jury in Chicago? I thought this was some sort of Congressional inquiry. As far as any Grand Jury is concerned, if he's called to be a witness, I guess he'll have to go, but he could just not answer the question in order to protect a source. Other journalists have done it. He'd just have to decide whether or not he's willing to accept the consequences of that decision.

The only way you could 'logically assume' that Novak's statements are unsupported by evidence beyond his assurance is if you automatically assumed he lies when asked questions. If that's the case, then testimony under oath will be all that you'd probably accept.

28 posted on 04/05/2004 1:57:26 PM PDT by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Fedora
"VVAW had received fifty thousand dollars from United States Senators McGovern and Hatfield, who... obtained the money from an unknown New York source."

That $50,000 figure reached out and slapped me right in the face...think I found the "unknown New York source" (the time frame and the $ amount are right):

The protests were set for the week of April 20. Kerry spent some of his time at the Georgetown townhouse of his longtime friend George Butler, working the phones, trying to round up veterans. But the real problem was money. Kerry, who was not financially independent despite rumors to the contrary, was supposed to raise money to pay for buses that would transport the veterans.

He called his friend Walinsky, who had run unsuccessfully for New York attorney general and had excellent financial connections. Walinsky arranged a meeting of potential donors at the Seagram Building in New York City. Among those present were Seagram chief executive Edgar M. Bronfman Sr. and about 20 other New York businessmen who opposed the war. Kerry delivered a low-key speech about the importance of having veterans attend the protest. Then the businessmen were each asked to stand and declare how much they would contribute. "We raised probably $50,000," Walinsky recalled. "It took an hour."

Boston Globe

BTW, it is a very good article with lots of info.

29 posted on 04/05/2004 2:11:25 PM PDT by ravingnutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Fedora
Whaddayaknow...Fat Boy's name just came fell into the mix:

Through Teddy Kennedy, Kerry linked up with Adam Walinsky, a former speech writer for Robert F. Kennedy who was involved with Jane Fonda and a handful of left-wing Hollywood types who had funded an antiwar advocacy group called Vietnam Veterans Against War [VVAW].

Source

30 posted on 04/05/2004 2:26:18 PM PDT by ravingnutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Gothmog
Odd...You are the second person who has asked me that. No..I am not tucobad. Tcuoohjohn is a very diffrent spelling than tucobad.

Curious...who is or was tucobad?
31 posted on 04/05/2004 2:29:32 PM PDT by tcuoohjohn (Follow The Money)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: SuziQ
well...no..That is why I said " unsupported by evidence beyond his assertion". If I wanted to say he lied then I would say he lied. There is a distinction.
32 posted on 04/05/2004 2:31:49 PM PDT by tcuoohjohn (Follow The Money)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: SuziQ
I think you may be confusing the 9/11 inquiry with the seperate issue of the investigation of the Plame Affair.

John Ashcroft has recused himself in the Plame Matter and appointed Fitzgerald to conduct the special investigation regarding the Plame issue. The grandjury is hearing testimony regadring the matter and acording to the story the investigation has expanded to include allegations of false statements, obstruction and mishandling of classfied materials.

The other poster was quite right in pointing out that the GJ is in Washington. Fitzgerald was the US Attorney in Chicago.

Sorry for the confusion.
33 posted on 04/05/2004 2:37:54 PM PDT by tcuoohjohn (Follow The Money)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: ravingnutter
think I found the "unknown New York source"

I think you did! :) That sounds like what Brinkley might be alluding to on p. 367--this is from the paragraph right after a description of how Fulbright met Kerry after hearing good things about Kerry from Ted Kennedy. While Kerry was preparing his presentation for Fulbright's Senate committee:

Kerry spent most of the day pulling his most impassioned thoughts together. Dividing his time between VVAW headquarters, several media events, and the Mall, he made a series of afternoon telephone calls to friends, seeking advice and guidance. One such friend was Adam Walinsky, the former Robert F. Kennedy speechwriter who had inspired him to speak out when they joined the 1969 Moratorium.

Here's a few links with more background on Walinsky and his relation to the Kennedys and Kerry:

Adam Walinsky

Excerpt -- B.G. Burkett, Glenna Whitley, Stolen Valor, Verity Press, 1998, Chapter 6, Atrocities: The Good War Versus the Bad War, pgs. 130 - 137 (But years later, after his election to the Senate, Kerry's medals turned up on the wall of his Capitol Hill office. When a reporter noticed them, Kerry admitted that the medals he had thrown that day were not his. And Kerry's emotional, from-the-heart speech had been carefully crafted by a speechwriter for Robert Kennedy named Adam Walinsky, who also tutored him on how to present it. )

I also find interesting the mention of Edgar Bronfman, who has long been one of Kerry's major financiers. There was a good thead on this here:

Did Democrat Fat Cats Make John Kerry Famous? [Including Seagram's Bronfman]

The Bronfman family is also linked to Teresa Heinz-Kerry's Tides Foundation:

The Bronfmans (Tides is an umbrella foundation, which dispenses the philanthropy of members of the Bronfman family and Peter Buttenweiser (listed [by] Forbes as one of the world's richest people, and the 16th largest donor to the Democratic party in 1998).)

I'm currently trying to document links between the Bronfmans and Ted Kennedy--or for that matter Joseph Kennedy, who made his fortune in partnership with associates of Sam Bronfman's partner Meyer Lansky.

34 posted on 04/05/2004 3:02:49 PM PDT by Fedora
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: ravingnutter
BTW, on Fat Boy, he also made a cameo at the VVAW's Dewey Canyon III rally and talked to Kerry there:

Senator Edward Kennedy showed up unexpectedly, signing autographs, patting backs, and showing his complete solidarity with the Vietnam veterans. Ever since 1966, when he wrote an antiwar article for Look about his journey to Vietnam, Kerry had been a virulent critic of U.S. policy in Southeast Asia. . .When trying to educate himself about Vietnam, Kerry paid close attention to what Kennedy said or did. "It was the first time I really spoke to John", Kennedy recalled about the Dewey Canyon III campout. "He peeled off to the side and we talked about the veterans' movement."

Douglas Brinkley, Tour of Duty, 369

35 posted on 04/05/2004 3:33:47 PM PDT by Fedora
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: tcuoohjohn
tucobad was a fairly militant liberal who was around here before & during the 2000 election. He was actually quite intelligent for a liberal.

I always kinda liked him. :-)

36 posted on 04/05/2004 7:02:10 PM PDT by an amused spectator (FR: Leaving the burning dog poop bag of Truth on the front door step of the liberal media since 1996)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Fedora
Talk about revelations...John Dean showed up on Keith Oberman's show last night...he was vile!
37 posted on 04/06/2004 5:41:23 AM PDT by ravingnutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: an amused spectator
Egad..A " militant liberal"? Sheesh. Something is very amiss. I'm hardly a militant liberal. I haven't voted for a liberal in nearly forty years. Liberalism in my view is nothing more than a failed good intention ( and all the cliches that implies). Intentions and realities are very different. Liberals are not evil. They are just stunningly naive and awesomely thick headed.

I don't subscribe to any political philosophy that adopts any manner of cult like adoration as part of its method. That way madness lies. I believe in numbers and analysis. Anything less is the mindless bawling of a herd.

I support a policy because it is correct and doable. Not because it is politically correct and merely a single song in the ideological hymnal. When politics begins to resemble a religion it is time to pause and reflect on what that means. Politics is the art of the doable. Religion is the art of the impossible. Confuse the two and it results in disaster.
38 posted on 04/06/2004 8:40:32 AM PDT by tcuoohjohn (Follow The Money)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: tcuoohjohn
I agree with most of the rest of your post, with one exception:

Liberals are not evil. They are just stunningly naive and awesomely thick headed.

When liberals conspire to populate the grade schools and universities with ignorant clones of themselves in order to render our children illogical and illiterate, susceptible to political advertising disguised as "primetime sitcoms", they become evil.

Anyone who deliberately promotes ignorance is evil, in my book.

39 posted on 04/06/2004 9:30:18 AM PDT by an amused spectator (FR: Leaving the burning dog poop bag of Truth on the front door step of the liberal media since 1996)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: tcuoohjohn
I would like to see a timeline of the events surrounding Wilson's trip to Niger and the subsequent related events. When were the first WP and NYT articles citing intel officials who were antsy about the war in Iraq? When was Joseph Wilson's op-ed in the NYT? When was the Novak article? What other articles appeared that mentioned WH criticism of Joseph Wilson and his trip to Niger? How many folks resigned due to the war in Iraq? Who were they? What were their complaints? Etc. Etc.
40 posted on 04/06/2004 9:39:55 AM PDT by petitfour
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ravingnutter
John Dean showed up on Keith Oberman's show last night...he was vile!

John Dean has been missing the limelight, so he's trying to cash in on his Watergate notoriety again.

41 posted on 04/06/2004 11:36:32 AM PDT by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: ravingnutter
Talk about revelations...John Dean showed up on Keith Oberman's show last night...he was vile!

What did the sleazeball have to say?--any new talking points you noticed him spewing?

BTW, I found out what the Bronfmans' link to the Kennedys is last night: Joseph Kennedy's bootlegging partners included several of Samuel Bronfman's own bootlegging partners, notably Frank Costello, Abner Zwillman, and Joseph Reiner. The Edgar Bronfman, Sr. who hosted the VVAW fundraiser that Adam Walinsky arranged for Kerry ("Walinsky arranged a meeting of potential donors at the Seagram Building in New York City. Among those present were Seagram chief executive Edgar M. Bronfman Sr.") was the son of Samuel Bronfman. Both Bronfman and his son Edgar Bronfman, Jr. have been contributors to Kerry's campaigns.

42 posted on 04/06/2004 1:40:19 PM PDT by Fedora
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: petitfour
Easy to answer those questions..you got the net, archives and lexis-nexis. Should take you about two hours and about 18 bucks.
43 posted on 04/06/2004 1:54:06 PM PDT by tcuoohjohn (Follow The Money)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: tcuoohjohn
$18 bucks????? I don't think so. If I had the patience, I could do it, but I have to get up every five minutes to take care of children. Maybe tomorrow I'll be able to look all that up.

44 posted on 04/06/2004 1:58:13 PM PDT by petitfour
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Fedora
Here is the thread on it but there is not too much detail in that thread, no transcript provided. It was basically a vile recantation of earlier statements he made on Bill Moyers show a couple of days ago, when he called for Bush's impeachment. There is a transcript at that link.
45 posted on 04/06/2004 2:37:41 PM PDT by ravingnutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: ravingnutter
Thanks; reading the transcript now. Interesting that Moyers is getting into the act, too--he was also part of the anti-Nixon press during Watergate ("Where Edward R. Murrow had taken on Joseph McCarthy on See It Now and the agri-business industry in his famous Harvest of Shame documentary, Moyers examined the failings of constitutional democracy in his 1974 Essay on Watergate and exposed governmental illegalities and cover-up during the Iran Contra scandal.": MOYERS, BILL).
46 posted on 04/06/2004 3:00:07 PM PDT by Fedora
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson