by Goldy, 07/25/2005, 10:11 AM

Some of the most illuminating writing on the outing of Valerie Plame and the ensuing cover-up, has come from NY Times columnist Frank Rich. This week he delves into the timeline of the scandal, and reveals that its first casualty may likely have been the Supreme Court ambitions of longtime Bush friend, Alberto Gonzales.

In the days following Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s retirement, the President’s vigorous defense of Gonzales, from attacks from both the right and the left, had many Washington insiders expecting the nomination of the nation’s first Hispanic justice. But as the conspiracy quickly unraveled over the past couple weeks, Gonzales’ own role in the scandal made the prospect of a confirmation hearing too much to handle for an already jittery White House.

As White House counsel, he was the one first notified that the Justice Department, at the request of the C.I.A., had opened an investigation into the outing of Joseph Wilson’s wife. That notification came at 8:30 p.m. on Sept. 29, 2003, but it took Mr. Gonzales 12 more hours to inform the White House staff that it must “preserve all materials” relevant to the investigation. This 12-hour delay, he has said, was sanctioned by the Justice Department, but since the department was then run by John Ashcroft, a Bush loyalist who refused to recuse himself from the Plame case, inquiring Senate Democrats would examine this 12-hour delay as closely as an 18

124 Responses to “What did the President know, and when did he know it?”

1. HowCanYouBePROUDtobeAnASS spews:

Flogging that dead horse again, eh? Whatever turns you on kiddo

2. windie spews:

I’m waaay too young for watergate, but its interesting to watch a similar scandal develop.

It worries me though, that maybe from now on, we’ll get a pattern of
<6-8 years of fairly clean politics> <10-20 years increasing corruption as people forget

That would be sad…

3. Roger Rabbit spews:

Keep telling yourself this is much ado about nothing, Ass! I’m going to ENJOY this, as it unravels … unlike Windie I’m old enough to remember Watergate like it was yesterday … and the Republicans of those days were as arrogant as the Bush crowd … but their very arrogance was their undoing. Wait and see, there’s a lot more than Valerie Plame. George W. Bush’s entire administration is a house of cards constructed of lies, chicanery, and greed — and it will all come tumbling down.

4. Dr. E spews:

Seems to me the stakes are pretty high for the GOP, otherwise they wouldn’t be behaving the way that they are. They’ve been waging a full-court press of distortion and obfuscation, trying to reframe the argument against them, viz. the brainless remarks Mehlman has been making about partisan political attacks, the “ongoing criminal investigation” defense of McLellan et al., etc.

If they truly had nothing to hide, they could simply lay all the cards (or documents) on the table and let the public be the judge. That is, if the documents haven’t already been shredded.

5. windie spews:

I actually want to see it too ;)

I grew up Republican, turned left watching them trash clinton, and only skewed further from the ‘family party’ watching the crap GW got away without any comment.

Watching the scumbags that almost ruined politics for my generation, and who are responsibile for far too many family arguments finally get caught for some of their treachery is a welcome, even enjoyable relief.

This is something like 11 years overdue.

6. windie spews:

@5–>for clarity.

Everyone I know my age is either far left or totally burned out on politics, and alot of it is due to the dirty-trickism by the neo-con right.

This is exactly the kind of trick that the reps have gotten away with for far too long, and alot of people my age have given up for seeing no consequences for their actions. Maybe this will change, now that things are happening.

7. christmasghost spews:

i wonder if someone will do a post on “what did goldy know and when did he know it?” after he “outs” the gay republican.
because as we all now know…he doesn’t have a problem with people outing other people for any reason……
and for the record…and for those of you who are either not old enough, or don’t read….watergate was the ultimate tempest in a teapot. unless of course you are going to start talking about clinton illegally having IRS records from people he didn’t like very much.
and i don’t suppose you are interested in doing that, now are you?

8. windie spews:

@7

Way to try to turn it around, but I’m just not buying it.

That was the whole point in bringing this up… saying “If the Reps are willing to out anyone whom they want to hurt, maybe turnabout is fairplay”.

To come back with the same argument strikes me as… weak argument at best.

Re: Watergate comment. I’m pretty well read, and I honestly can’t believe you just said that.

lets look at it again:
“watergate was the ultimate tempest in a teapot.”

You’re really on board, aren’t you?

Also, you can try (like always) to change the subject to clinton, and I suppose we should expect you to do it… But do ya really expect it to work?

here’s a hint: This has nothing to do with Clinton, you dumbass

9. Jimmynap spews:

That was comical @ 7. Very funny Watergate comment. Are you 12?

Did anyone read that Joshua Green article on Rove goldy posted Sunday? Watch out for the really dirty tricks to come. This Rove cat gets in a corner and he is mean shit. I hope he is hit by a car as he tries to escape.

Hey, lets just start the rumor now…. Is Karl Rove gay? Not that there is anything wrong with that of course ;)

10. sockpuppet spews:

11. sockpuppet spews:

(insert gay prison joke here)

12. Dr. E spews:

7

Take your outing comments to the other thread please.

13. Charmin (formerly known as dj) spews:

christmasghost @ 7

“wonder if someone will do a post on “what did goldy know and when did he know it?” after he “outs” the gay republican.”

Geez, those outing posts sure have your undies in a bunch, christmasghost, considering that Goldy has not outed anyone. In fact, Goldy’s original post on this topic was inspired by The Ethicist—a column in the national MSM.

Goldy knew plenty about this long before Cohen’s column (I even knew about it, albiet without names), but he chose to wait until the MSM picked it up before even discussing the topic. You are overreacting and your comments are irrational.

“because as we all now know…he doesn’t have a problem with people outing other people for any reason……”

Really? You’d better learn how to read. Goldy said no such thing.

“. . . watergate was the ultimate tempest in a teapot. “

Some of us who are old enough to remember Watergate AND read feel that Watergate pales in comparison. People didn’t die from Watergate; it was just an ugly political spying scandal—a President running amok with power. Leakergate includes a President running amok, but is much bigger than that. Who knows if any CIA agents are dead directly from the leak, but the bigger scandal is the pack of lies that led the U.S. to invade Iraq, and the 2,000 Americans who have died in Iraq (1750 solidier and ~250 contractors and private security personnel) and dead civilian Iraqis.

The price of this scandal has been the blood of innocent people.

“unless of course you are going to start talking about clinton illegally having IRS records from people he didn’t like very much. and i don’t suppose you are interested in doing that, now are you?”

Hey. . . there is room for more than one scandal at a time. If you want to go after Clinton, be my guest, and pack your blog full of that scandal. . . .

In the mean time, don’t bother yourself thinking about the reality of couple more dead U.S. soldiers every day.

14. Goldy spews:

Ghost @7,

“Tempest in a teapot?” … are you kidding? Watergate was fucking constitutional crisis! The Joint Chiefs were informally discussing what to do if Nixon defied Supreme Court! We had the military actually discussing which branch of government to take sides with!

15. Felix Fermin spews:

It is unsurprising to see the Yule Poltergeist make asinine statements such as the one about Watergate, when you remember his motto: IOKIYAR.

16. Dr. E spews:

I think we need some glasnost for these wingnuts and their revisionist view of history.

17. Puddybud spews:

Goldy is right about what Nixon was up to. Nixon was a boil that needed popping. His FBI use was disgusting. His henchmen tried to stifle all parts of government.

Back then in the 70′s I too was a democrat. When the wacko wing-nuts took over, I left the democratic party. I do not see the comparison today. The Erlichman, Haldeman, Colson group is much different from anyone from today.

18. pbj spews:

What did the President know, and when did he know it?

Goldy,

You have used this headline before. Can’t you come up with a new witty one? Or is the well all dried up?

19. Donnageddon spews:

Dr. E @ 16 Does “glasnost” mean “Tight Noose”?

20. IDGAF spews:

Great to see the absolutely predictable Goldy topic produced yet again after getting his marching orders delivered over the weekend from Moron.Org. Whats absolutely laughable is the best he could do was cut and paste another “opinion” piece from the New York Times, a newspaper who is so left biased trhat it’s subscription and advertising base is running away in droves. Oh well, in a few years it’ll be another left wing rag being kept alive by a JOA with the Post. When are you bitter, vitriolic conspiracy theory moonbats get it. You and your point of view represent at best, a little less than a third of the population in this country. Like I ve said before, you’re irrelevant and in some case, suffering from psychiatric disorders. (specifically the rabbit, donna and dj-what a bunch of pathetic LOSERS!)

21. Dr. E spews:

19

Let’s see if this displays:
?????????

meaning “opening”, as used by Gorbachev in the bad old Cold War days.

22. Dr. E spews:

Nope, guess it didn’t display; the definition is here, just FYI:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasnost

23. christmasghost spews:

wow…just like kicking an anthill. you come swarming out to protect your silly assumptions that “cia operatives died because of karl rove”
oh god…really. WHO?
and goldy…watergate was a tempest in a teapot. it was a second rate burglary…nothing more.do you really think that was the first time the military was having discussions like that? because if you do, i have some lovely swampland to sell you.
as far as anyone “outing” anyone….two wrongs don’t make a right. you show me where there is any credible evidence that karl rove actually outed a deskbound cia analyist[and btw...have any of you ever known any of these people? because we have and they are just like the dmv with different letters...okay? and don't all you libs hate the cia anyway? why the worry now?]
then i will be the first to slam him. and i will buy goldy as many beers as he likes, okay?
but we have to have real evidence…not rumors people.
and felix…love the “Yule Poltergeist”…that is very good.
can any of you kids here tell me what ss group himmler was most proud of?????
no???
okay…here it is. the muslims.
that’s right, the real fascist nazis…..
and do any of you realize that you are doing exactly what the al qaida handbook wants you to do?
turn on your own government in a time of war.

24. windie spews:

I just read 23…

and Xmasghost is totally insane, or the biggest contrarian troll this side of PBJ.

MIndless rhetoric does one good!

Keep thinking that way about Watergate, if it makes you feel better. To say you’re in the vast minority doesn’t really cover the scope of how much you’re in the minority.

Anything for the good ol’ GOP, eh?

25. christmasghost spews:

charmin…what part of goldy’s comment don’t you get by the way? i’ll refresh your memory for you…..

“Perhaps outings are never ethically justified… I’m still ambivalent. But in the context of what we see coming from the White House, a little turnabout is at the very least understandable, if not exactly fair play.”

hint hint…wink wink…i’m gonna tell……..
oh brother.
until all of you learn that the right thing to do is still the right thing to do even if you don’t like the person or other “side” very much you will continue down this rat hole called the new democratic party.

26. Dr. E spews:

20

Nope, you’re wrong. Need I remind you that this whole scandal is situated in the larger context of the Iraq war, and Bush is tanking on that:

Pew Research Ctr.:
“Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling the situation in Iraq?” — 57% disapprove

NBC/WSJ:
“In general, do you approve or disapprove of the job that George W. Bush is doing in handling the situation in Iraq?” — 55% disapprove

Gallup:
“Do you think George W. Bush does or does not have a clear plan for handling the situation in Iraq?” — 58% does not have a clear plan

And a related question from CNN/USA Today/Gallup:
“All in all, do you think it was worth going to war in Iraq, or not?”
— 53% not worth going to war

Now, let me ask you directly: when does 58%, 57%, 55%, or even 53% represent “less than a third of the population of the country”?

27. Jimmynap spews:

Hey 20… at least one third of this country isn’t fooled by this bullshit. There is another third that is oblivious and uninformed. They listened to the Rove (via Bush) hate speach and got scared, angry and incited not realizing what was really going on and put these folks in the WH. You can be fooled if you want but the truth is pretty obvious. These guys lied. It has happened before (see Watergate above) and to think this is just conspiracy is ignorant. There are a growing number of folks out there that are catching on and are calling for one thing… the TRUTH. Not speculation, not rumor, not spin. Just the truth. So if you want to blindly defend them go ahead.

28. christmasghost spews:

windie….now you see…you have that all wrong. you are the truly mindless one. going ballistic over R-U-M-O-R-S. and where did you get these rumors? reliable sources? no.
and here’s what i suspect is the biggest difference between you and i…..i don’t vote in party lockstep. and i’ll bet you do.
come on now…be honest.
i would love to see joe lieberman run in 2008…i would definitely vote for him. and i’ll bet you can’t say that about any republican, can you?

29. christmasghost spews:

and oh my god….dr.e is gloating about poll numbers [and we all know how reliable they are] that say that a majority of american citizens are not behind the president.
now…that is really something to be happy about, huh?
do any of you ever think at all? on your own?

30. Charmin (formerly known as dj) spews:

christmasghost @ 25

“charmin…what part of goldy’s comment don’t you get by the way? i’ll refresh your memory for you…..

“Perhaps outings are never ethically justified… I’m still ambivalent. But in the context of what we see coming from the White House, a little turnabout is at the very least understandable, if not exactly fair play.”

Did you actually read the fucking post or even the quote above? Hmmm. . . Goldy is talking about the topic of outings. What are you the fucking “subject police” now?

Didn’t you read the part where it said, “But in interviews, Goldstein and Jacobsen said they’d rather not be involved in an outing”? And, in fact, Goldy has not done so, even though is has the information to do so.

Calm down, christmasghost, you’ve become positively apoplectic! And, over nothing more than a discussion that originated in the national media.

31. christmasghost spews:

Jimmynap….can you honestly say that you had the same level of righteous indignation when the clinton white house was doing very similar things?

32. windie spews:

@28

Voted for McCain in the 2000 primary, dumbass.

Anyways, Newsweek, Time, the NYT, et cetera, aren’t reliable sources, I guess…

To a lunatic, only Fox News is *real* news.

33. Dr. E spews:

Xmasghost@23

“and do any of you realize that you are doing exactly what the al qaida handbook wants you to do?
turn on your own government in a time of war.”

Have a seat, son, and listen well.

In this country, there still is something called the Constitution of the United States of America. (You may remember this document, which was quaintly rendered with a lower-case “c” by the administration not too long ago, but I digress…) The first amendment states:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Understand?

Now, let’s take the issue of “turning on [one's] country in time of war.”

The Bush administration started the Iraq war. That much is indisputable. Whether you agree with the motives can be disputed. Expressing such disagreement is protected by the first amendment of the Constitution, above.

Period.

You might not like the fact that I (like, I presume, many moderately well-read individuals—not all of whom were liberals, I might add) saw right through the administrations case for war, which many of us held to be bogus. You also might not like the fact that many such people expressed these views, and mobilized in unprecedented numbers to try to prevent that war — which looked like it would be (and eventually did prove to be) a disastrously murderous military exercise. Expressing these views is our constitutional prerogative, as is the petitioning for a redress of such grievances.

Period.

Above and beyond and constitutional prerogatives was (and still is) the moral imperative that many of us feel to prevent such gratuitous insanity as an unnecessary and immoral war. That most certainly does not constitute “turning against one’s country in a time of war.”

Now, let’s consider Mr. Rove. If he did in fact identify a CIA agent working on WMD issues, as is alleged, that certainly would rise to the level of turning against one’s country in time of war. Why? There’s a war, and they started it, claiming WMD as a reason. Then, one or more of their own betray an intelligence professional working on that very issue: WMDs. Does that make sense to you?

Let me rephrase that in plain English: we’re going to fight a war to prevent the spread of WMDs into terrorist hands, so let’s identify a CIA agent working on WMD issues. I’m guessing that, in the private sector, you’d at least get fired for such behavior.

34. Dr. E spews:

Xmasghost@29

Not gloating, just pointing you toward publicly available information.

“poll numbers [and we all know how reliable they are]“

Yes, in fact, we do, that’s what the margin of error helps us to determine. In each case, the MoE was never greater than 4%, which would not negate the results of any of these questions.

“that say that a majority of american citizens are not behind the president.
now…that is really something to be happy about, huh?”

Personally, I don’t give a damn who’s happy or unhappy about this. An opinion poll is just that: a means to gauge public opinion. The numbers, and moreover the trend of those numbers over the past 18+ months is pretty indicative of the nation’s temperature on these issues. If you don’t agree, you’ll find your opinion represented (statistically) by the “approve” (“think it was worth it”, etc.) figures.

Guess I should have given you a link:
http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

“do any of you ever think at all? on your own?
That’s a pretty asinine question, don’t you think?

35. windie spews:

poor little christmastroll got bitch-slapped :p

Also, even if its Totally irrelevant, he needs to show us how Clinton did anything like lying to get us into a war that wasn’t necessary, or outing an undercover agent or…

Actually, nevermind. As I said, its totally irrelevant.

We know the republican playbook, you’ll have to do better than that here.

36. Gary spews:

You libs are fantastic, you string together a series of lies and because there is no real evidence, you invent a conspiracy.
1 Joseph Wilsons trip did not amount to an investigation. He went there, returned, and leaked the desired conclusions to the press. He apparently didn’t even file an official report.
2. Valarie Plame was not under cover, her employment in a desk job at the CIA was well known. She hadn’t worked under cover in over 5 years.
3. You make a big deal of a 12 hour time lapse, but you think the Clinton’s “losing” evidence for over 6 months was OK

37. Dr. E spews:

Gary 2 36

Spare me, please. Points 1 & 2 that you raise have been refuted, more than once. Indeed, many who are in fact in the know about such matters have already expressed their indignation at the type of widespread ignorance it takes to formulate such positions. Really, go read a little bit more.

As for your third argument, there are many problems. First, you’re ascribing the 12-hour time lapse that Gonzalez spoke of over the weekend to all liberals, suggesting that we all are making a big deal out of it. (Whether or not it’s a big deal can be argued later.). In a similar vein, you suggest that all liberals approve of “[Clinton] ‘losing’ evidence for over 6 months.” You offer no proof of either point, both of which you present as a statement of fact.

Moreover, you have made no effort to show that there is any causal relationship between x (12-hour lapse) and y (“losing” evidence) so that a belief in x falsifies the significance of y.

But, at least it’s the start of a fallacious (ad hominem) argument.

38. NoWonder spews:

Rove’s plan is to have the moveon.org / MSM spend the next year ratcheting the conspiracy up. Meanwhile Bush gets 2-3 seats on SCOTUS and can focus on mid-terms. 60+ seats in the Senate is the target.

I actually think that if Rove or Libby did something bad they should go to jail. Same for Miller, Cooper and Novak. If they did not do anything illegal or cannot be convicted, just remember Hillary. “Not enough evidence to convince a jury” was her break, yet she did stay on with the administration, if not with Bill. Actually, Rove will be much more dangerous to Dems if he ends up in the background again rather than front and center at the WH. Be careful what you wish for.

39. Charmin (formerly known as dj) spews:

Gary @ 36

“1 Joseph Wilsons trip did not amount to an investigation. He went there, returned, and leaked the desired conclusions to the press. He apparently didn’t even file an official report.”

Ummm. . . call it what you will. He was sent to Niger by the CIA to investigate the supposed attempt by Iraq to purchase Yellowcake. There has been no credible dispute of that.

Obviously, you have not read Wilson’s piece (come back when you’ve done your homework), because he states clearly that he was orally debriefed by the CIA and State Department.

He “leaked the desired conclusions to the press?” What does this mean? He actually published an op-ed piece—that ain’t a leak, you idiot!

“2. Valarie Plame was not under cover, her employment in a desk job at the CIA was well known. She hadn’t worked under cover in over 5 years.”

Really? Has the CIA leaked to you what her status was? Because, as far as I know, this information has not been made public by the CIA yet. What we do know is that she was working mostly stateside for a “front” company and was making occasional trips abroad.

We also know that the CIA took the White House leak very seriously. They filed a complaint, a grand jury was the result, the grand jury investigation is now 2 years old and a reporter has just been sent to jail for refusing to testify. Yeah, sure. . . keep on telling yourself that Plame just worked a desk job.

Oh, and her employment at the CIA was not well known. I challenge you to provide an authorative source that supports that “talking point”.

40. Dr. E spews:

As for the 12-hour lapse, which in actuality was more like 3 days from the original request for investigation made to the DoJ, given the gravity of the situation, it should be taken seriously.

Gravity of the situation: war.
Gravity of the situation: 1700+ US military personel dead.
Gravity of the situation: 24000+ confirmed Iraqi dead.
Gravity of the situation: untold lives destroyed due to injury, destruction of home, livelihood, etc.

Now that I’ve attempted to make the gravity of the situation clear, let’s talk about this 12-hour lapse. There are two main possibilities:
1. That the White House staff (excluding Gonzalez and Andy Card) was completely unaware of the request made by the DoJ.
2. That other members of the White House staff were aware of the DoJ request the evening it was made.

The rest is speculation upon the actions that may or may not have been committed, i.e.
1. The entire White House staff behaved in a completely legal and above-board manner, preserving all relevant documents and information pursuant to the DoJ request, or;
2. Some of that information may have been lost, due to the actions of one or more individuals privy to such documents/information.

I would think that most of us — liberals included — would hope that the WH staff did behave in a completely legal and above-board manner. Stating the possibility (or even suspicion) that one or more individuals may not have acted in such a manner does not assume guilt or presume evidence of obstruction of justice. It highlights the fact that any administration, Republican or Democrat, is still beholden to the law.

41. Dr. E spews:

no wonder @ 38

“just remember Hillary. ‘Not enough evidence to convince a jury’”

Please, let’s not go back to Whitewater. Then we’ll have to talk about R. Emmett Tyrell’s “Arkansas Project” (read: smear Clinton), and the extent to which the American Spectator was violating its non-profit status by engaging in opposition research. Right?

42. Donnageddon spews:

XmasG @ 29

“a majority of american citizens are not behind the president.
now…that is really something to be happy about, huh?”

Absolutely! When you have a failed and corrupt leader in power, you are joyous when the public begins to understand the problem.

On the other hzand only traitors to America and democracy would continue to support the inept and corrupt administration.

That about sums you up, XmasG.

43. BF spews:

How close are we to civil war?

44. Dr. E spews:

Don@42

I’d go one step farther and label this administration morally bankrupt.

45. GBS spews:

Dr. E @ 44

I’d go one step farther and label the entire REPUBLICAN party as morally banrupt.

46. GBS spews:

Bf @ 43

As far as I’m concerned, closer than most people think.

47. NoWonder spews:

Dr. E @ 41

‘Please, let’s not go back to Whitewater.’
Not a problem. Just noting that it can aid the opposition if the adminstration does a “moveon” and keeps the people in place when there is no conviction.

I think we would get way off topic to get into the Tyrell/Blumenthal antics. Perhaps another time.

48. Dr. E spews:

47

Just noting that it can aid the opposition if the adminstration does a “moveon” and keeps the people in place when there is no conviction.

Here I’d agree with you in principle, although I don’t think the Hillary/Rove situations are really comparable. But, yes, that’d be off topic.

49. christmasghost spews:

donna/dr.e/gbs……………
dr.e…”I would think that most of us – liberals included – would hope that the WH staff did behave in a completely legal and above-board manner. Stating the possibility (or even suspicion) that one or more individuals may not have acted in such a manner does not assume guilt or presume evidence of obstruction of justice. It highlights the fact that any administration, Republican or Democrat, is still beholden to the law.”
now, that is something we both can agree on. politicians are politicians….often more worried about their own behinds than the best interest of the country.
what concerns me even more is how easily our more ‘liberal’ citizens turn their attention away from the real problems we face [islamo-fascists] to turn on our government.isn’t this not only trite and short-sighted, but dangerous as well?
of course we need to question everything our government does….but without the theatrics and man-chews-off-own-foot mentality…that so feeds into the propaganda machine that is al qaida?
do you not think this just might be an important issue?
i have a good friend that i went to school with that lives in macedonia…he was a foreign exchange student.we recently had our reunion and he was denied a visa to enter the US. when i told him how pissed i was about the visa ‘situation’…i mean macedonia????, he said he wasn’t…since the US was at war. he understood.and he added that we would be shocked at how much everything in our newspapers, and all the press really, was being followed. and by alot of not so nice people.and how much ‘hay’ they were making of everything.his exact comment was “the liberals are doing most of the PR work for al qaida”
now…i don’t know if i totally agree with that…but it is something to think about.
the old adage about standing together or falling apart comes to mind.

50. YesAndNo spews:

Michael Barone is normally in the mushy middle. This story is pretty hard on the horsesass types however.

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/opinion/articles/050801/1barone.htm

Keep up the good work.

51. Donnageddon spews:

XmasG @ 49 “the old adage about standing together or falling apart comes to mind.”

Yes, let us quickly unite, rid ouselves of this inept, corrupt and anti-American regime, and get back to fighting the real war on terror!

Unite with us, XmasG!

52. Donnageddon spews:

I myself will never unite in support of these soldier-hating, murderers-for-money, democracy-loathing, shit-on-the-middle class, torch the constitution, but never burn a flag fascists in the Bush administration.

53. christmasghost spews:

donna……hey, i am completely with you. but you really have to stop misusing the word fascist. hitler was a fascist, the islamic terrorists are fascists….but even though you don’t like george bush, that doesn’t make him a fascist.
we do not have an anti american regime. for you to even use the word ‘regime’ shows a lack of understanding.
your whole post at 52 is unusual to say the least.
and the really sad part? you wouldn’t want me to be on your “side”…because if we were all on the same “side” [which we should be as adults] what would you have to bitch about?

54. Dr. E spews:

xmasghost @ 49

“what concerns me even more is how easily our more ‘liberal’ citizens turn their attention away from the real problems we face [islamo-fascists] to turn on our government.isn’t this not only trite and short-sighted, but dangerous as well?

The problem with “islamofascism” is largely a self-created one. Do you really think these people “hate our freedoms” or “hate our way of life”, and any of the other exceptionally trite explanations given by the GOP message machine over the past 4 years? The real reason is far more complex. It has much more to do US foreign policy, e.g. the continuing US position on Israel (and Palestine), with US support of autocratic, undemocratic Arab governments being a contributing factor. You cannot defeat “islamofascism” by obliterating an Arab nation that posed you no threat. Instead, you’ll end up fanning the flames of hostility upon which movements such as al-Qaeda feed. In that sense–and it’s a very real sense–the Bush adminsitration is helping their recruitment efforts. This is akin to spilling nefarious carcinogens on a cancer that was growing slowly. Idiotic statements like Tancredo’s this past week ensure that the cancer will metastasize.

If you want to defeat “islamofascism” you’ve got to do better than destroying a Muslim nation under the supposed aegis of “spreading democracy” and the like. You have to look for the cure to the problem, which lies first and foremost in US foreign policy. Until that changes, there’s no amount of wars fought, bombs dropped, or people killed that will destroy this cancer. As long as this country remains dependent upon foreign oil, it is unlikely that US foreign policy will change substantially.

Moreover, I’ve been watching the situation in central Asia (Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan in particular) for five or six years now, and I’m not surprised to see that area being dragged into the fray, as most likely will Iran, again for similar reasons. These foreign policy objectives, which have more to do with strategic control at the moment than unfettered access to petroleum, are short sighted and will be disastrous over the long term. Unless things change, we can be assured of more wars to come and more blood spilled by terrorists on our soil.

Now, it seems to me that if you love your country, which I do, then you must work to change the things that do it harm. The diseases are numerous, with both internal and external manifestations (foreign policy is only one) but they can be changed. The Democrats are not guiltless in the proliferation of these problems, but the greatest excesses are found among the ranks of the Republicans, who do not seem that they are being held accountable by their constituencies. If it sounds like liberals are targeting Republicans, that’s probably why.

55. Dr. E spews:

xmasghost @ 53

“even though you don’t like george bush, that doesn’t make him a fascist.”

You are absolutely right. Hatred of a sitting president does not make that president a fascist. The policies of that sitting president are what construe that president to espouse a fascist agenda.

The question of whether the Bush administration is fascist is much more complex, and lies at the heart of what defines fascism. The problem here is with the label, since fascism has meant and does mean different things over the decades (viz. the recent usage of “islamofascism”). Nevertheless, tendencies of more than one 20th-century fascist government can be seen in the Bush administration: the apparent desire to concentrate power in the hands of a very few, an embracing of nationalist fervor, and (probably most compellingly) the increased control of government by business interests. Nazism has arisen quite a bit in discussions on this topic recently, but I think that comparisons to Mussolini’s Italy are a bit more apt.

But remember, we’re talking about tendencies here, not foregone conclusions. And I think that’s why you hear the word “fascist” being bandied about in liberal circles: because the tendencies are pretty typical of fascism, and I don’t think any of us want to see this country going down that road.

56. Donnageddon spews:

XmasG @ 53 “you wouldn’t want me to be on your “side”…because if we were all on the same “side” [which we should be as adults] what would you have to bitch about?”

That is hilarious! You think this is about YOU? You are as insane as your posts make you out to be.

Some trolls are fools, some are just Neo-Con Symps, but you XmasG take the cake! “if not for me, what would you to bitch about?

You are a particularly sad creature.

57. Donnageddon spews:

Dr E @ 55 “(The tendencies of more than one 20th-century fascist government can be seen in the Bush administration: the apparent desire to concentrate power in the hands of a very few, an embracing of nationalist fervor, and (probably most compellingly) the increased control of government by business interests. Nazism has arisen quite a bit in discussions on this topic recently, but I think that comparisons to Mussolini’s Italy are a bit more apt.”

I would agree, I have posted before that the term Nazi, is counter productive, but the ideology of fascism is all over the Bush administration.

58. Dr. E spews:

Don @ 57

Just to be clear: I wasn’t implying anyone on this blog. My comment was intended to be more general: Nazism is a term that’s been thrown around quite a lot these days in a lot of different arenas. I agree, it’s pretty counterproductive.

59. christmasghost spews:

don….what a disappointing comment on your part as you completely misconstrue my meaning….probably [i hope ] deliberately.
yes, don, WHATEVER you do…do not raise the level of discussion but as always continue to use foul language and not-very-clever attempts at slams.
neocon symp, troll,insane. yes …it does take a large brain to bandy about words like that.
sadly…you do not even realize that you are part of the problem,do you?
until people talk to each other instead of acting like three year olds on sugar highs……..none of this will ever change.
and it appears that’s exactly what you would like.

60. IDGAF spews:

Dr E @ 26…
You just keep on sighting polls! They are all just as accurate as the all the polls showing Kerry would win right down to the exit polls on election day. The more I read the posts here, I realize just how much the Left wing of the Democratic party is void of resoning, logic, a definable position based upon an alternative plan, manner in which to implement, methodology and facts to back up their policies. The last election you got your asses handed to you by having nothing more than Bush bashing and you still haven’t learned that lesson. 2008 will be an even bigger repeat unless the Democrats learn from their past mistakes. But as of yet, there hasn’t been a shred of evidence to think the democrats have any plan other than smere, defame, attack. The majority of this country will never vote them on the platform of “we must be better than this, trust us” The first thing they need to do is tell Dean, Kennedy, Durbin, Schumer, Pelosi and Reid to SHUTUP! They have done more damage to the party then Karl Rove coulda ever hoped.

61. christmasghost spews:

dr. e…very interesting comments. do i think they hate our freedoms? partly…but as you say it is much more complex than that.go back to world war two and look at himmler’s favorite ss troops…..islamic fascists. they were on the same page. they both wanted to control, they both hated jews and anyone else they considered to be outsiders,and they had a violent past to fall back on for ideas.
hitler may be dead…but his ideas live on in these terrorists.mein kampf is the number one selling book in many islamic countries. we cannot ignore the warnings of history.
we did not destroy an islamic nation [i take it you are referring to iraq?]…..it was a vicious dictatorship and he murdered millions. would you still want him around, really?
we saved a nation. yes it cost in alot of blood…but to ignore the fact that he was rewarding terrorists is to make the same mistake as england did before ww2.
but do i want us to be the nosy world police? hell no. and that’s what we have been doing. we are like the annoying micro-managing boss that doesn’t really know what he’s talking about but does it anyway.our government [both parties] tend to ignore history and people’s natures and cultures and that’s were we really screw up.
my family lived in the middle east [libya] and i can say truthfully that when rumsfeld made the statement that the terrorists would only understand brute force[paraphrasing here]…..he was absolutely right. 1000%.
many liberal americans don’t realize this. they don’t know anything about the cultures these people come from….and that is one of our biggest mistakes.they think they can put the bad guys in “time out” or just talk to them and everything will be peachy.
israel is a complex problem. can we abandon them? no. can we always side just with them. i think that should be no too. i really beleive that we should hold our friends to the same standards as our enemies.
but the whole “this war is for oil” is so specious an argument as to be pointless. do we not buy the oil? do they not want to sell the oil? do you want to know what the middle east’s biggest fear is? that someone will come up with a substitute for oil.
this is like moveon’s claim that WE killed 100,000 iraqi citizens just because as americans we are obviously evil and always up to no good.
good grief…….
and for god’s sake…could the UN actually become a working body that accomplished anything other than scandals just for laughs for cripes sake? wouldn’t that take a load of burden off of us? they are taking up valuable real estate….you would think they could actually do something other than coffee-klatching.
and germany and france? so time to cut those parasites off….and we cannot worry about what they think. ask yourself this….when was the last time they were on the right side of history?

62. Donnageddon spews:

XmasG @ everywhere adds this to the debate ” ”

This is the mainpoint of the tresonous acts of the Bush administration.

1,782 and counting…

http://icasualties.org/oif/

Shame on you, XmasG, shame.

63. christmasghost spews:

donna says…….
XmasG @ everywhere adds this to the debate ” ”

This is the mainpoint of the tresonous acts of the Bush administration.

1,782 and counting…

http://icasualties.org/oif/

Shame on you, XmasG, shame.

need i really say more to prove my point?

64. Donnageddon spews:

No XmasG… I think you have proven your “point”.

65. Puddybud spews:

I ask the lefties this question? Knowing that the terrorists think that they are going to heaven to meet their 72 virgin girls; if the body parts are mixed with pigs, their body is defiled and oh no, no heaven, no virgins, per their Koranic teachings. The Russians did this to a terrorist killer’s family member who beheaded one of their Russian captives and their kidnapped comrades were returned. If you lefties would get off of your high horse and start dealing with these people on a level they understand, we can show them we mean business. But the Durbins, Kennedys, Clintons, Schumers, and Pelosis will claim that’s wrong.

What do you think lefties? Do you support this tactical attack? I don’t expect don*****don to comprehend being with 72 virgins, because he is not a MAN (per PacMan)!

66. Donnageddon spews:

Puddy, you are SOOO cute when you are repeating right wingjob lies!

67. RUFUS spews:

Donna-

That is scary. I never knew that over the 2 years and 4 month of fighting were were approaching 2/3 of the total casualties that happened on 9-11. This is not acceptable. We need to stop this horror.

68. Donnageddon spews:

It never ceases to amaze me how the Trolls never talk much about the troops other than to state how they do not feel the number dead is “so few: in their view.

Even reminding them that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 does not shake them from their horrific disrepect toward our soldiers who have fallen.

Uncomprehendible Horror from our trolls.

When will they be satisfied. 100,000 soldiers killed in a war that has nothing to do with the Saudi’s who attacked us? 2 Million?

Fuck you! You are not worth the spit needed to cover your vacant souls.

69. Donnageddon spews:

If you support the troops quit desrespecting their noble sacrifice you Fuckers!!!

70. christmasghost spews:

donna……..foul language and personal attacks are a sign of fear. so what are you afraid of here?
if you read your posts you will see why the majority of americans have stopped listening to the “liberal” side. you come across as childish, churlish and elitist.
and i’ve noticed that you can never answer a straight question….

71. Donnageddon spews:

What am I afraid of? YOU! and the mindless troop hating bastards that throw away our military men and woman’s lives and then make snide comments on how it is “not enough”!

I am very afriad of you XmasG, you represent everything I despise. Nationalism without patriotism, Warmongering against people who were no threat to us, holding a party line even when your party has been taken over by evil zealots.

But, I do find hope in the fact that most Americans aren;t like you. They can see the evil that is this administration and their policies.

You are going to be swept aside for the real America. For real Democracy. For what our soldiers have fought and died for.

Not for the Bush Administration and their fascist policies.

You are just a sad puppet of the Right Wing Echoe Machine.

72. Donnageddon spews:

And XmasG, if you ever ask me a “straight” question, I will be happy to answer. Always have been.

You have just been afraid of the truth.

73. Captain Pike spews:

……and where’s Osama bin Ladin? Why did Bush ground all airplanes but flew the entire bin Laden family out of the U.S.? The bin Ladens should have been the first to be brought to Gitmo. Saudi Arabia is our real enemy and all members of their royal family should leave the U.S., now.

74. Captain Pike spews:

Lincoln would be ashamed of the Republican party and how it has devoloved into a corrupt mechanism for the fascist uber rich. The communist revolution solved nothing, but I’ll bet it felt real good finally giving the royal family what they royally deserved. Fascism can happen anywhere— but so can the dethroning of the high and mighty—– and neither process is pretty.

75. RUFUS spews:

When will they be satisfied. 100,000 soldiers killed in a war that has nothing to do with the Saudi’s who attacked us? 2 Million?

I dont know… I often wonder how many innocent Americans have to be killed when the left realizes that we are in a war against terrorists and islamic facists (Sadam included).

76. Donnageddon spews:

How many innocent Americans did Saddam kill, Rufus?

And now that he is held by American forces, how many more American Soldiers need to die?

77. RUFUS spews:

How many american did Saddam kill… not many. How many innoccent Americans did Hitler kill before we invaded in 1944… not many. Oh I see, we should pull out of Iraq immediately but before we do.. just to be fair we shold apologize to Germany for attacking them in 1944. I get it!!

78. RUFUS spews:

I always wondered why we attacked Germany when they never really harmed us. We had a big Ocean between us and them and all we need to do is protect our shores. Who cares about Europe. I quess it just goes to show you that we never learn from our mistakes do we.

79. Donnageddon spews:

RUFUS, you forget yourself. You raised the question about “how many innocent Americans have to be killed when the left realizes that we are in a war against terrorists and islamic facists (Sadam included)”

Noiw you back peddle? Just like the Bush administration. It is no longer about how many Americans were killed, but how many other people were killed… you keep changing your argument!

Are you such a slave to the fascist regime that you will kill anyone, for any reason?

RUFUS… why do you spin your argument?

80. RUFUS spews:

There were no nuclear weapons back then and weapons of mass destruction were just in there infancy. What the hell were we thinking!!!

81. RUFUS spews:

Donna –

I am agreeing with you… you have changed my mind. We need to pull out of Iraq immediately. And we need send Germany war reparations immediately along with a national apology.

82. RUFUS spews:

Your right the 2,700 Americans killed on 9-11 had as much to do with Saddam as Hitler did with Pearl Harbor.

83. Dr. E spews:

IGDAF @ 60

Your comments indicate what seems to me a complete lack of understanding of the methodology of opinion polls and their usefulness. Further, your final “SHUT UP” comments seem to be coming directly from that paragon of GOP wisdom Rush Limbaugh. No further comment necessary.

84. Donnageddon spews:

RUFUS “I quess it just goes to show you that we never learn from our mistakes do we.”

Sadly we do not. Just as Vietnam had nothing to do with us, we will continue to fight in foreign civil wars and spill American blood for no reason.

Not your blood RUFUS. Not mine. Our childrens’s blood.

And make a mess of our economy… not that will effect us! But our children will pay. In HIGH taxes, disrepaired infrastucture, and lessened security.

I see where you are coming from, RUFUS.

I just do not want to leave such a tragedy for our progeny.

85. Donnageddon spews:

RUFUS : To every thing Spin, Spin Spin. Has a Season Spin, Spin Spin.

86. Dr. E spews:

xmasghost @ 61

Having never been to Iraq, I can only give my impressions, which indicate to me that there has been pretty heavy destruction of Iraq. I don’t really think that we can afford to be magnanimous in suggesting that we “saved” that country from an admittedly hideous despot at such a grotesque cost. If there were indeed some sort of imminent peril to the US then perhaps there would have been some justification, but the threat just wasn’t there.

This is where I begin to have problems with comparisons to WWII and Nazi Germany. Unlike Saddam, Hitler was on a systematic expansionist campaign and did need to be contained. The situation is just not equivalent.

Furthermore, the “war for oil” claims have been much trumpeted, but, as I tried to point out, I don’t think it is quite so simple. The ultimate point I was trying to make was that this seems to me to be a geopolitical ploy to control strategic oil reserves, i.e. the US need for such oil is indeed not imminent, and may never be, but the world demand (particularly in Europe) will come much sooner.

87. Dr. E spews:

RUFUS @ 77 (and other places)

I really don’t have the energy to point out the logical failures of every argument you’ve posted today. Take it on faith that you have not constructed a single cogent argument. But, I can at least illustrate your utter lack of logic at 77 with one of John Belushi’s best lines:

“Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?”

88. Donnageddon spews:

Nuff Said!

89. Jimmynap spews:

xmas ghost on 31.

The answer is yes. The more we demand the truth the more we will get it. The spin is out of control. Let Fitzgerald sort it out…. I have a feeling he will.

I refuse to parrot some bullshit I read on any blog, news story or anywhere else. Just like the misinfo on Plame above. There is no public information on what she was doing at the time of her outing…ie deskjob. Doesn’t fucking matter.

90. GBS spews:

Hey, Goldy!

We’re talking about George W. Bush here. Your question presupposes that at some point in the past Bush knew something at sometime about anyting.

Afterall this is the “Git-R-Done!” “Yahoo! I’m a real cowboy, mommy!” crowd and we can’t expect too much from that level of thinking.

91. Puddybud spews:

DR_E@54: Osama, Zawahiri, and Zarqawi have said they are launching jihad regarding our Western “decadent” way of life. So they are islamofascists. Zarqawi has publically stated anyone who supports the Iraqi democracy is his enemy. He has also stated that muslims who support democracy are his enemies and friends of the “Great Satan” USA. Better read some more bud!

Don*****don@ad_nauseum_&_71: Remember, your side lost the election and more senators. Looks like more of the same, since you get your marching orders from Moron.Org.

Captain_Pike@73: Your beloved Richard Clarke sent the Bin Laden family out on his own. He admitted it on Fox News as I remember. But then again you HA lefties don’t listen to “Faux” News, because you’d learn something from other than the WaPo or NY Slimes, so I use factcheck.org. You need to stop listening to Michael Mooron and Moron.org http://www.factcheck.org/article294.html

92. Dr. E spews:

92

“Osama, Zawahiri, and Zarqawi have said they are launching jihad regarding our Western “decadent” way of life. So they are islamofascists.”

Sorry pal, I have read, and read an awful lot. Your post only references statements from which you infer that their jihad is a result of our “decadent” ways. This is too simplistic, and fails to understand the causal relationship between the US and the jihadis.

Let’s suppose that there is a culture half way around the globe, the tenets of whose cultural norms you disagree with, and consider “decadent”, or “barbaric”, or “[insert negative/pejorative adjective here]“. This culture, however, due to its geographical distance from the US, has no means of interfering with our way of life. Would you (or your countrymen) feel compelled to launch a war just to set them straight?

Probably not. There would probably need to be some direct aggravation and/or threat before you would feel compelled to act. Seen from that point of view, it becomes fairly clear that there was probably some aggravation (or threat) or series thereof that caused these people to feel compelled to act. (This of course discounts the idea of jihad being an imperial movement, since I don’t really think that applies.)

Like I’ve said before, the situation is far more complex than trite statements such as “they hate our way of life” — even when you hear the jihadis make claims about Western “decadence”, you probably should infer some broader context. That’s where you might need to do more reading. The potential grievances of the Muslim world against the West are many and have spanned many centuries. The failure of Western civilizations to understand these grievances further exacerbates the situation.

On a separate (but related) point, your post seems to make a fallacious argument, i.e. the jihadis are fighting what they perceive as our “decadent” ways, therefore they are “islamofascists.” Sorry, that just is not a logical argument.

93. Dr. E spews:

Furthermore, let me just say that trite comments such as “they hate our way of life”, “they hate our freedoms”, “the evil ones”, etc., that have dribbled forth from the mouth of Bush (and by extension his administration) are extremely dangerous.

94. Puddybud spews:

No Dr E, you miss the point. I never said that their culture is barbaric? I also realize part of their problem is our support for Israel. Osama also hated that we were in SA for the Gulf War. Are you reaching like don*****don? Are you as dense as don*****don?

You can view those pronouncements on the Al Jazeera web site. You can Google Osama speak and find his “pronouncements” there. You can go to the Jerusalem Post and follow the links. Ever visited JP? I do every so often. Why is it that your side says it all comes from Bush or the Bush Administration? Are you really a doctor or do you fake one here on HA? BTW Dr. E, I have read Foxes Book of Martyrs. I have read about the Spanish, French and Belgian Inquisitions. I studied how Martin Luther was protected by the Prince at Wittenburg. I read about the crusades. http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/sbook1k.html So you are saying…

Why does the Arabic culture frown on women wearing skimpy clothing? Why did they frown when Nawal El Moutawakel became a track star. desmoinesregister.com/sports/extras/hall/nawal.html

Excerpt: “Next, this future superstar was reared in a culture where many women still wear veils in public. Exposing bare arms and bare legs for all to see, as is customary when training for and competing in foot races, was widely considered an invention of the devil.”

The R and X movies from Hollywood and the Valley are not allowed into these cultures. The hetero and homo porn sites are banned. You just don’t get it. Theirs’ is not a “free” society.

95. NoWonder spews:

Dr. E @ 92,93

I agree that it is not our “way of life” the terrorists hate. It is the fact that we do not want to succumb to an Islamic state that justifies their killing. Not one of any current terrorist organization is charging towards a form of democracy. They want strict Islamic law in the form they prefer, regardless of where they live. This explains why there will not be any negotiations for peace.

96. christmasghost spews:

donna@71…….WOW.
i am sorry that you scare so easily.
so….you are scared of me? and why would that be? after reading your somewhat hysterical post twice i kept thinking “has this twit read anything i have ever written?”
troop hating? fascist? un patriotic?
after reading all your posts for some time now i can honestly say that describes you much more than it does me.
hatred blinds…too bad you didn’t realize that before you caught it, huh?
the funny thing is…and this is almost always the case….is that you are exactly like the people you supposedly “hate”. you don’t think for yourself [that is obvious], you parrot all the far left’s talking points and you spew angry rhetoric at every turn.
i guess i should be flattered that i am your latest[but not last i'm sure] boogie man.
yup…me and karl rove.
i’ll be sure to tell him when we get together for coffee later today.heh heh heh
but i really am sorry that your comprehension skills are so flawed. perhaps the tin foil hat is too tight?

97. christmasghost spews:

dr.e…..you said…”This culture, however, due to its geographical distance from the US, has no means of interfering with our way of life. ”
really?
that’s funny because i happen to remember 9/11. now there are people starving in palestine, and other muslim countries [niger....hint hint] and yet osama’s top priority was to send homicide bombers to the US at great expense. not to mention buying all those weapons.
he is still buying weapons instead of food for HIS PEOPLE. and before you start that trite old argument about why hasn’t bush caught him….it’s because we are trying and he is hiding. unlike during the clinton years when countries were trying desperately to pawn him off on us.
but i guess bill was just too busy in the oval office with his pet projects.
“operation thong.”

98. Puddybud spews:

When the system verifies some of my posted links and words, it will be Post #94. I disagree with you Dr. E.

99. bill spews:

RUFUS @77 ummmm we never did. I know history is hard, but check any WW2 timeline:

Dec 7, 1941 – Japanese bomb Pearl Harbor; Hitler issues the Night and Fog decree.

Dec 8, 1941 – United States and Britain declare war on Japan.

Dec 11, 1941 – Germany declares war on the United States.

100. bill spews:

RUFUS @82

“Your right the 2,700 Americans killed on 9-11 had as much to do with Saddam as Hitler did with Pearl Harbor.”

I suspect you meant that sarcastically, but you are actually correct there. While checking on that timeline I just mentioned, you may want to check how historians view WW2, specifically the US involvement in the war in Europe. That declaration on Dec 11 is regarded as one of three ‘fatal mistakes.’ Had he not declared war, it is doubtful that Roosevelt could have gotten the US involved in Europe.

Japan had attacked us and that war was justified, but they could not sell a war with Germany till he declared war.

101. bill spews:

ACK!!! ‘He’ in the last two sentences are refering to Hitler. Sorry about that.

102. Dr. E spews:

96

I think you misread my post, I was posing a hypothetical situation there.

103. Dr. E spews:

94
“It is the fact that we do not want to succumb to an Islamic state that justifies their killing.”

Look, I’m not trying to refute how these people feel now, I’d rather examine how things got this way. Let’s put it this way: did these jihadis feel this way prior to, say, 1920?

104. IDGAF spews:

Bill Clinton Pardoned Nat’l. Security Leaker

No wonder 2008 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has been silent as a churchmouse about Karl Rove while her Democratic colleagues call for his prosecution for leaking classified information about CIA employee Valerie Plame.

Turns out – in the only case in U.S. history of a person successfully prosecuted for leaking classified information to the press – Hillary’s husband pardoned the guilty party.

On January 20, 2001, President Clinton pardoned Samuel Loring Morison, a civilian analyst with the Office of Naval Intelligence. In 1984, Morison had been convicted of providing classified satellite photos of an under-construction Soviet nuclear-powered aircraft carrier to Britain’s Jane’s Defence Weekly.
He received a two-year jail sentence.

In pardoning Morison, Clinton dismissed the advice of the CIA.

“We said we were obviously opposed – it was a vigorous ‘Hell, no,’” one senior intelligence official told the Washington Post at the time. “We think … giving pardons to people who are convicted of doing that sends the wrong signal to people who are currently entrusted with classified information.”

Morison is the only person ever successfully prosecuted under the 1917 Espionage Act, the law invoked by Democrats who want to nail Rove after it became clear that he didn’t violate the 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act.

But it’s going to be difficult for Dems to feign national security outrage over Plame’s outing when the husband of their party’s presidential front-runner let an actual convicted leaker off the hook.

Last week, when Sen. John Kerry called for Mr. Rove to be fired, with Hillary standing by his side, she nodded silently. When reporters asked her what she thought of the alleged Rove outrage, she offered only, “I’m nodding.”

No doubt while remembering her husband’s pardon of Mr. Morison.

105. Puddybud spews:

Oh no Mr. IDGAF you went to the Washington Post and not the NY Slimes, the bowels of leftyville knowledge. If it comes from any other source don$%*#@don and the gang will discount it!!!

106. Dr. E spews:

igdaf @ 104

How ’bout a link, rather than the whole article? I’d rather see where the article came from. That said, this is kind of begging the question, don’t you think?

So, we’ve got what appears to be (since I don’t have a link) the right-wing spin machine that says Dems can’t attack Repubs for undermining national security, since Clinton pardoned an intelligence analyst who had been convicted for releasing classified information. Is there a problem with this argument? Yes. The circumstances are different — not as to whether classified information was divulged, but that a pardon was given, whereas there has not yet been a pardon from the Repubs. for Rove et al. Further, there is no effort in the article to provide any background as to why Clinton issued the pardon.

It’s actually quite a poor argument both on its surface as well as in its substance.

107. Dr. E spews:

105

Pudd, I don’t care who published it. The substance of its arguments is still poor.

108. christmasghost spews:

dr.e….i understand your idea was hypothetical. but the realities of the islamo-fascists are not.i’m not sure about pre 1920. i would suspect that they hated the jews then too. it’s a theme for them.
some people run their whole lives based on what they ‘hate’. don for instance. mindless.
in this case we have a whole religion that does the same thing. are all muslims terrorists? no, of course not. but in their silence they might as well be.they hate us because we don’t hate jews.and i think a big part of their motivation is “theater”.bin laden is no different than hitler…and i am constantly amazed by how few people seem to recognize this fact.he is a power hungry monster that’s all.
we did not make them do any of this.
and the only thing that we could possibly do that might [and i mean might ] placate them for any length of time would be to start killing jews. do you want to do that to be liked?
as i have said before…and sadly since the teachers in this country do not seem to find it necessary to teach any history….everyone seems to be laboring under the delusions that there is something we could do to make these people like us.
i don’t know about you , but the people i know that are overly concerned about other people “liking them” are usually soul-less fools that should be avoided. no difference here.
the history is one of hatred that goes back for centuries.
and here are a few facts that should be considered by all.
* germany and france do not have a problem with what most islamo-fascists believe because they feel the same way. both countries are horribly anti-semitic.
*himmler’s favorite ss troops were the muslims…he admired them. do you really think that they just changed for him? they were already avid haters of jews and christians.
* it’s not about oil. if it weren’t for selling oil they would still be all living in tents and starving half the time. reality check. oil was the best thing that ever happened to them.
and i would love to see everyone try to do without it.you know that thing you are typing on? made from petrolium products.

109. IDGAF spews:

I have an all new found respect for Dr E…A leftist who actually “appears” to have a desire to at least look at the substance of the argument rather than just telling us were all F****D! While I disagree with most of his conclusions, his debates are what this country needs more of in an attempt to reach consensus. Unfortunetly, most on the Left has not developed this skill and neccessary componet to Democracy.

110. Puddybud spews:

DR.E: Google this: “pardoned Samuel Loring Morison”. I am sure you have the skills to pay the bills.

111. christmasghost spews:

IDGAF…….i have to agree with you about dr.e……it’s nice having an actual discussion with an obvious adult for a change. while we often have different points of view…it’s still nice to be able to discuss “amoungst ourselves” without the situation degrading to NAH NAH NAH and f&*k off.

112. bill spews:

Ghost @108

“are all muslims terrorists? no, of course not. but in their silence they might as well be.”

So, given that, do you also feel christians both individually and as a body are responsible for the Oklahoma bombings in 1995 and should apologize for them?

113. Dr. E spews:

110

Pudd, I did that, of course, but couldn’t find IGDAF’s original article and didn’t want to spend 10 minutes looking for it. I did, of course, manage to find an article from the WaPo on the Federation of American Scientists that does give at least some background to Clinton’s pardon:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2001/02/wp021701.html

I mean, if we’re talking “fair and balanced,” it would nice to have more than one take on the story.

114. christmasghost spews:

bill….no, i don’t think you could make that connection for a couple of reasons.and i’ll give the disclaimer right now that i am not a christian so i have no axe to grind.
the idiots that blew up the federal building are more akin to skinheads than christians.they were not practising christians at the time i don’t believe and the whole christian community came out loudly against the attacks. did they not?
that’s the difference i think. religions are like guns…by themselves they are not going to hurt anyone, but put them in the hands of a fanatic and katie bar the door. all hell will break loose.
the muslim community has been silent for the most part about all of this.unless of course you want to listen to louis farakhan…and doesn’t he just say it all?

115. Dr. E spews:

“in this case we have a whole religion that does the same thing [hate]“

I don’t agree with you here, Xmasghost, at least not in making such a blanket generalization. I’ve known an awful lot of muslim–shiite and sunni–in my life who contradict this; in fact, many of these people were among the most educated and intelligent people I’ve come across. “Hate” would not be a word I could attribute to these people. In fact, on 9/11 I prompty received emails form two of them: one Lebanese and one Iranian, both horrified and offering condolences. Incidentally, neither of these people hate Jews; in fact, in speaking to Lebanese acquaintances, I’ve often been struck by a lack of anti-Semitism, even though these people have got a pretty serious axe to grind with the Israelis. (They do, however, usually have issues with Zionism.)

Moreover, I’m not trying to suggest that we’re making them do this (i.e. Islamic terrorists attacking the US). I am suggesting that there are grievances that go back decades, and that some more militant, fundamentalist factions have decided to act on, among other things, those grievances. Now, here’s the tricky point (yes, it’s nuanced, to be sure): I’m also not suggesting that any of these grievances were deliberately caused by the US or other Western nations. What I am suggesting is that these grievances need to be understood, since some of the cures to this global disease could possibly be found there. It’s not about whether other people like us, admire us, etc., it’s about understanding — that’s the only way problems get solved and useful judgments are made.

As for your comments on Germany and France, I really have to disagree. I’ve lived in Germany, and the do have problems with “islamofascists.” Germans have real experience with fascism, and most Germans I know are disgusted by it, whether it be the Islamic or Skinhead variety. Moreover, I don’t personally know any anti-Semitic Germans; they of course do exist, but are not, in my experience, representative of the population.

As for the French, I’ve got too many friends over there that would contradict what you say. As a country that has suffered directly from Islamic terrorism, they do have problems with “islamofascists”.

And I do think it’s about oil, but again, as I’ve said before, it seems to me to be more about control of strategic oil reserves than it does with who happens to be making money off it right now.

116. Dr. E spews:

109, 111

I think you’ll find that open-minded, reasoned thought is actually pretty typical of liberals. There’s not much point in having an illogical, unreasoned argument if you really want to make progress. Sure, you can have a shouting match to let off steam (and a lot of that does go on in left- and right-wing blogs), but not much is accomplished other than blowing off steam. The best way to engage a liberal is not with Coulter’s proverbial baseball bat, but with a cogent argument. Show your intellectual opponent some respect, and you should be afforded the same.

117. bill spews:

a) The muslims also claim that the bombers were at best a fringe organization. This was a group of muslims, not a muslim organization, much as Timothy McVeigh was part of a group made up of christians, rather than part of a christian organization.

b) The muslim community did roundly condem the 9/11 bombings, exactly as the christian community condemed the ok bombing. Also, the muslim community did not apologize for the 9/11 bombing, as the christian community did not apologize for the ok bombing.

118. Dr. E spews:

Further to this thread, Conyers et al. have requested an investigation by the DoJ Inspector General, stating, among other things;

” Finally, on September 29, 2003-sixty-seven days after the initial concerns were expressed by CIA employees-the DOJ responded and advised the CIA that the Counterespionage Division had requested that the FBI initiate an investigation of this matter.”

The DoJ’s response time to the request to investigate the Plame matter can hardly be called proactive.

Conyer’s website is being updated, but the doc. is online at the link below (and probably several other places).
http://blog.dccc.org/mt/archives/003223.html
(yes, it’s a dem. website)

119. christmasghost spews:

dr.e@116……you said “I think you’ll find that open-minded, reasoned thought is actually pretty typical of liberals.”
where???? where????
although, thanks for the hearty laugh.
you seem to be one of the few liberals that doesn’t “liberally” sprinkle every sentence with foul language and personal attacks.
which makes you the ‘smart one’…….Hmmmmmmmm.

120. Puddybud spews:

Dr. E. You have earned my respect. Post #115 second paragraph was the most reasoned argument to date on HA regarding the reasoning of why the muslim extrememists attacked us. All we hear on this blog is the Bush Administration caused this, the United States caused that. Thank you Dr. E.

Many years ago I went to the Mediterranean to teach Egyptians, Palestinians, Jordanians, Dubais, UAE, Lebanese, Saudis, etc. the joys of computer systems. We all went out to dinner. There was one female engineer who was fully covered in a pant suit and head scarf with only her hands and face uncovered. We talked about the Koran vs. Christianity. I asked them why the woman is burned alive if she has premarital sex while the male is celebrated. I asked about their hatred for the Israelis. I asked for a history lesson from their point of view. I asked why they treat women as second class citizens. We discussed issues during dinner for over 6 hours. We talked about eating habits, drinking habits, etc. It was an enlightening conversation. The female engineer quietly said to me she appreciated me asking those questions she could never ask regarding women’s issues. I left the area with a better understanding of their issues, but I also asked them about killing innocent civilians to make their points.

Many of them revered Arafat and said he aided their stuggle. I told them I could not support him. I agreed with Bush calling Arafat a terrorist in 2001. Many lefties chastised Bush for calling a spade a spade.

121. Dr. E spews:

120

Well, if my nuanced position weren’t enough, I just want to clarify something here (I guess you could say commenting on your first paragraph):

Many of the grievances I talked about above are historical (although not that old). I am not discounting any grievances these people may have as a result of recent US foreign policy, and in specific that of the Bush administration, which I think is both murderous and disastrous. Those grievances will probably further compound previous grievances, which is precisely why I feel that any US administration must make an effort to both understand these grievances (historical and current) as well as the cultural milieu of the Arab world.

In my view, this has been one of the greatest failures of the Bush administration: instead of taking the opportunity to do something constructive, we instead “brandish steel” (per Rove) and frame the issues in the uncertain, simplistic terminology of blacks and whites. That is dangerous and irresponsible, and is among the reasons why I could never support the current administration.

122. Donnageddon spews:

Dr. E @ 121

“Those grievances will probably further compound previous grievances, which is precisely why I feel that any US administration must make an effort to both understand these grievances (historical and current) as well as the cultural milieu of the Arab world.”

Wow. You are of course correct, but the “scortch the Arab world” repugs, will just call you a “blame America first” lib for that bright thinking.

I sometimes think we humans are just too stupid to survive.

123. Puddybud spews:

Don*****don@122: Us on the other side won’t accuse Dr. E. of that. We will only accuse you. You are the one who loves to call people names during a cogent issue discussion. Thanks again for your “nuanced” view don*****don.

124. christmasghost spews:

don…speak for yourself as far as “too stupid to live”. every generation since the beginning of time has probably thought the exact same thing..but we keep surviving and doing stupid things.