Now correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the Office of the Vice president escape congressional oversight?

I wonder how these revelations will affect that loophole, especially since Cheney has vastly increased the scope of his office since entering power... creating an office that by all accounts is larger than the original National Security Council.

That Cheney isn't aware of this, if not in on it from the beginning, is an incredible stretch. Question is, will either Libby or Rove roll over on Cheney?

(Although this has no bearing on the present subject, yet, it does - Let us keep in mind that when Bush was questioned(?) about his roll previous to 9/11, he had to have Cheney go in with him to talk (and hold his hand) with the congressional "investigators" and no notes were allowed to be taken - i.e., let's keep our stories "straight").

A "deal" will be cut for either one or both, Libby and Rove (and others?).

And there's always that Presidential Pardon blowing in the wind.

Proffesor Bainbridge has indicated that only sitting presidents are not "subject to indictment and criminal prosecution". See his statement

http://www.professorbainbridge.com/2005/10/can_a_vp_be_ind.html

Claiming executive priveledge is not going to help here.

If you start with the creation of the Niger forgeries and their route to our State Department, allegedly John Bolton was the first to receive them in D.C., then their involvement has been since they took office and began to manufacture reasons to invade Iraq. Who else had a motive to create those forgeries?

If Bush were impeached, could he be indicted after he left office? I'm going to read the professor cited above.

A couple of unasked questions. Who forged the Niger papers? I've heard rumours that they were fairly crude.

Would the attacks on Joe Wilson show a larger plan to purposefully mislead public perception to support a war that would otherwise be considered unpopular or illegal?

Any indictment at upper levels would seem to open a pandoras box of problems for the administration.

It is still a very big problem if Rove simply lied to the president. An uninformed president is bad enough, one who is being lied to by his highest advisors cannot do his job.

Why haven't any journalists asked him this? How can he tolerate being lied to on such crucial issues?

Sorry...this is off topic.

I'm not sure how many of you saw Keith Olberman's recent comparison of Bush problems overlayed with the "sudden" announcement of terrorist threats or raising the terror alert status of the country.

Anyway, in the spirit of that, I find it interesting that today there is news coming out that Harriet Miers opposed abortion rights in the late '80s. Now, lo and behold, the government has shutdown a major tunnel in Baltimore due to very iffy threats received several days ago about a possible terrorist act.

Focus on the left hand...so you can't see what the right hand is doing.

Kathleen and Don,

Re: the origin of the Niger forgeries, see Steve's post from 8/17.

It's also interesting to note that Ledeen had close ties not only to Doug Feith's (former) office in the Pentagon, where he was a paid consultant in 2001-2002, but also to Karl Rove.

I'm also from RI and I tend to agree with Shawn.

The timing of the recent NYC scare was also VERY beneficial to Mayor Bloomberg. He announced the threat hours before missing a debate in Harlem--something for which he had been taking a significant amount of (probably undeserved) flak in the media. Then, in comes the terrorist threat--deus ex machina--and Bloomberg's political problems are resolved. His opponent's team had been quoted as trying just to "win each daily media cycle" but they've definitely been losing them since that point.

As for Miers, I'm still waiting to see a political cartoon showing Bush as a crappy sideshow magician doing the ball and cup trick.

Before Nixon went down to ignominy, Agnew bit the dust. A review of that historical fall would be edifying in light of current developments. While Agnew's crimes were real, they would hardly raise an eyebrow in the moral cesspool that Washington is today. As examples, Arnold Schwarzenegger has certainly exceeded the crimes of Agnew in terms of inflation adjusted dollars and yet there is no thought of prosecution from California's A.G., Secretary Mineta has no fear of being prosecuted for openly offering millions of federal tax dollars to state legislators in exchange for state legislators voting for laws to his liking.

A historical source for those too young to remember '72-'74:

http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history
/common/generic/VP_Spiro_Agnew.htm

U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 4 reads: The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribes, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

Agnew resigned on October 10, 1973 and pleaded no contest to charges of federal income tax evasion. He was sentenced to three years’ probation, fined $10,000, and in 1974 he was disbarred in Maryland.

Interestingly, had Nixon been as corupt as Bush the 1st, he'd have finished his term, he simply would have pardoned all the perps who could be used to testify against him.

For some interesting views of Bush the 1st's pardons see:

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2001/021901a.html

http://www.dkosopedia.com/index.php/Iran/Contra

[pdf warning]
http://www.onlinejournal.com/archive/11-17-99_Binion.pdf

[Note the 3rd and 2nd Last paragraphs]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article
/2005/08/24/AR2005082402016_pf.html

http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/05/07/con05249.html

The moral decay of Washington is spreading and will lead to the inevitable historical decline of empires who lack self discipline. Like Rome, Athens, or countless others, Washington is rotting from within and the progressive policies started by Teddy Roosevelt and led to a century of progress are all but dead. The country has neither policies nor people who can govern in the long term. We have traded our empire for a tax policy that has shifted the burden away from those can and should pay and a bloody desert war. Our forefathers would curse us for our profligacy of their inheritance to us, our children will curse us for our self loving greed. It is clear to me that those who rule in this time do not believe in a just afterlife, as hell would be their only possibility.

Prediction:

Pardons will be used by Bush the 2nd to obstruct justice...an apple doesn't fall far from the tree

No way in heck Cheney didn't know what was going on. I just don't believe that - this is Cheney we are talking about. ... not so sure about but not because I am giving him the benefit of the doubt. I have a feeling that there is a lot of stuff in the West Wing that would normally go before a president that doesn't in this president's case. I have heard several times no one likes to be the bearer of bad news to him specifically. Then there is the fact that this is Bush we are talking about - no one has ever said he is knowledgable or even hands on (the MBA president meme). And remember he picked Cheney and has Rove for a reason.

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Cheney_aide_cooperating_with_CIA_outing_1018.html

Somebody flipped... an aide to Cheney... on loan from John Bolton's office. Doh!

I love Guillotines in the spring time
I love Guillotines in the fall
I love Guillotines in the summer when it sizzles
I love Guillotines in the winter when it drizzles

I love Guillotines every moment
Every moment of the year
I love Guillotines, why oh why do I love Guillotines
Because Washington is corrupt to the core

This is all going to get very messy. Careers may be lost, vast monies spent in trials and more back stabbing, recriminations and despair spread around than many can absorb or tolerate. Could it be so bad in its potential somebody may wonder “How much worse could it get if Fitz had an ‘unfortunate accident’?”

Breaking news

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/051018
/18whwatch.htm?track=rss

"vast monies spent in trials"

$1.4 billion dollars of Exxon Mobil were sold today in a single block trade. Somebody, or some single entity dumped a blockbuster sale of Exxon Mobil on the Goldman Sachs. These types of sales are usually done in increments, not all at once, to spread out the effect of the sale on the market. Exxon Mobil dropped 4.5% on the sale. Somebody or something needed money immediately.

Will the money from this sale be used to lawyer up for the long haul the numerous indictees in the Bush administration?

That Exxon trade was most likely a large institutional investor. Highly unlikely there is any correlation.

On a second note: Can someone here in the know give us the scoop on John Hannah?

"only sitting presidents are not 'subject to indictment and criminal prosecution'."

So what's the statute of limitations?

If he resigns, can he be prosecuted?

It's always amused/enraged me how official public discourse gives any credence whatsoever to the notion that the top people may not know about the nasty things their underlings are doing. That being said, in the case of GWB, it's actually plausible, since he is in fact NOT the top dog but a 'useful idiot' of Cheney, Rove et al.

Everytime I see Bush go thru the motions I am reminded of Jim Carey's character in The Truman Show, the poor sucker who unknowingly lived in a phony world of his TV producer's making. I mean, Bush frigging admitted to Fox News, ne, BRAGGED about the fact that his sole source of news was what his staff tells him!!

Might the Exxon Mobil big block share sale serve as proof to those that got a heads up on it and are potential indictees that they will be financially covered and not to sweat their potential financial demise, the pressure of which might make them make a deal with the prosecutor and turn state's evidence, i.e., flip.

From Talk Left: http://talkleft.com/new_archives/012778.html

"Reuters is speculating that Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald may be offering putative defendants one last chance to make a deal in the Valerie Plame investigation.

'[Reuters]The prosecutor investigating the outing of a covert CIA operative has yet to say whether he will bring charges, but he has decided to announce decisions in the case in Washington rather than Chicago, where he is based, his spokesman said on Monday....It is unusual for Fitzgerald's office to offer comment on any aspect of the case and Monday's statement led some observers to wonder if it might be a signal that a decision was imminent or that Fitzgerald was trying to increase pressure on potential targets to cut a deal.'

"It has to be a tempting offer for several of them.

"The first reason is the expense of an Indictment. Those under the gun are not elected officials. Unlike Tom DeLay, and perhaps Karl Rove, for whom the radical right might spring to life, they may not be able to raise a significant amount of outside defense funds. It's one thing to represent someone pre-indictment in a criminal investigation. It's another to represent them post-indictment. I would guess anyone indicted in this case is looking at a minimum of hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees. Many will be tempted to cut their losses now, particularly if they can plead to a misdemeanor, rather risk a felony conviction and mortgage their families' future."

A few interesting things for all those Bolton watchers that inhabit the comments section of this site. Rawstory is reporting that John Hannah, who was on loan to Cheney from Bolton's Arms control shop at State has possibly made a cut a deal with Fitzgerald in exchange for his complete cooperation with the investigation. Also, over at Washington Monthly, Kevin drum remarks about the continuing connections of Bolton, Fred Fleitz, and Judith Miller. It hinges on the game of telephone leading from a discussion about "so and so's wife works at WINPAC" back to Miller. Im my opinion getting an criminal investigation going into Bolton's dirty laundry would basically blow this open. Time and some good investigative reporting will tell.

Some interesting speculation at:
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/themix/#27010

"Can someone here in the know give us the scoop on John Hannah?"

Juan Cole wrote this about Hannah in 2004:

John Hannah Allegedly Focus of Plame Probe

"Richard Sale, respected intelligence reporter for UPI, has given credibility to a story that had been rumored for several weeks . It is that the FBI investigation into the outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame is increasingly focusing on two officials in the office of Vice President Dick Cheney, Lewis "Scooter" Libby and John Hannah. Sale assures me that the information is solid.

Last summer, former ambassador Joseph Wilson went public about his 2002 report refuting the allegation that Saddam tried to buy Niger uranium. Someone in the Bush administration attempted to punish him by identifying his wife, Valerie Plame, as a CIA operative involved in trying to prevent proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The information was given to the press, but only one reporter, CNN commentator Robert Novak, was sleazy enough to publish it. (Outraged readers should please email CNN demanding that they fire Novak for having wilfully damaged US national security). Novak did not commit a crime. But whatever Bush administration official leaked the information to him did.

Libby and Hannah form part of a 13-man vice presidential advisory team, sort of a veep NSC, which helps underpin Cheney's dominance in the US foreign policy area. Hannah is a neoconservative and old cold warrior who is really more of a Soviet expert than a Middle East expert. But in the 90s he for a while headed up the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), a think tank that represents the interests of the American Israel Political Action Committee (AIPAC). Hannah is said to have been behind Cheney's and consequently Bush's support for refusing to deal with Yasser Arafat. But he was also deeply involved in getting up the Iraq war.

If Hannah and Libby initiated the outing of Valerie Plame, why? Of course, both their involvement and their motives can only be speculated about at this point. But on December 9, Newsweek reported that:

"a June 2002 memo written by INC lobbyist Entifadh Qunbar to a U.S. Senate committee lists John Hannah, a senior national-security aide on Cheney's staff, as one of two 'U.S. governmental recipients' for reports generated by an intelligence program being run by the INC and which was then being funded by the State Department. Under the program, 'defectors, reports and raw intelligence are cultivated and analyzed'; the info was then reported to, among others, 'appropriate governmental, non-governmental and international agencies.' The memo not only describes Cheney aide Hannah as a 'principal point of contact' for the program, it even provides his direct White House telephone number. The only other U.S. official named as directly receiving the INC intel is William Luti, a former military adviser to former House Speaker Newt Gingrich who, after working on Cheney's staff early in the Bush administration, shifted to the Pentagon, where he oversaw a secretive Iraq war-planning unit called the Office of Special Plans."

It is possible that Wilson posed a special danger to Hannah, since Hannah was at the center of the "cherry-picking bad intelligence" effort that led Cheney to maintain that Saddam and Bin Laden were Siamese twins and that Iraq was floating in biological and chemical weapons and within 3-5 years of having an atomic bomb. (All of these positions, which Cheney has repeatedly alleged, are completely false and were known to be in 2002 by anyone not wearing ideological blinders). Hannah had fingers in all three rotten pies from which the worst intel came--Sharon's office in Israel, the Pentagon Office of Special Plans (for which Hannah served as a liaison to Cheney), and fraudster Ahmad Chalabi's Iraqi National Congress. Hannah had probably been the one who fed Cheney the Niger uranium story, triggering a Cheney request to the CIA to verify it and thence Joe Wilson's trip to Niamey in spring of 2002, where he found the story to be an absurd falsehood on the face of it.

The WINEP pro-Likud network, which includes Paul Wolfowitz and Doug Feith in the Pentagon as well as Libby and Hannah at Cheney's office, has virtually dictated Bush administration Middle East policy. Wilson's debunking of one of its central claims might well have led Cheney to fire Hannah or to disregard his opinion. The WINEP crowd takes no prisoners and is very determined, over decades, to get its way. (Josh Marshall notes that they are already trying to protect Hannah with denials he could possibly have been involved, presumably meaning that they would be willing to throw Libby to the dogs.) Wilson had to be punished, from their point of view, and if possible marginalized, to protect Hannah's position. Being male chauvinist pigs, they appear to have hoped to show that Wilson's trip was the result of nepotism or of female influence, and that Plame had recommended her husband for the job (an unfounded charge). Somehow they seemed to think that this allegation would help discredit Wilson, but to this day I haven't figured out their weird reasoning on the matter.

It is also possible that they were worried that Wilson's opinion piece might encourage more whistle blowers to step forward. Hannah and the Iraqi National Congress are being accused of peddling patently false "intelligence." This is a criminal enterprise, and there was always the danger that others in Plame's department at the agency, which specializes in preventing weapons proliferation, might be tempted to find ways of revealing the extent of Hannah's bad faith. Hannah may have wanted to send a clear signal that whistleblowers would have their careers ruined, as Valerie Plame's was, as a way of ensuring that the details of his operation did not become public."

http://tinyurl.com/csnjf

Man,

Why would "a large institutional investor" blind side the market with such a big block demand to sell, and not make their large sale in the customary way, that is, over a longer period of time that doesn't jolt the market. Large institutions have a stake in keeping the markets orderly and don't mass sell in one fell swoop unless something dire is in the wind. What would make a large institutional investor loose its cool steady hand and bailout on Exxon Mobil in one trade like it was Oct. 1929?

Aren't we being too polite using the term "leak"? If it was intentional the term would be "betrayed". Valerie Plame was betrayed by White House staff.

Where do I go to send my talking points for liberal bloggers?

Adding to the "pardon me" that is the hallmark of the Family Bush. I found this on Roberts:

http://corrente.blogspot.com/2005/07/scotus-watch
-stealthy-john-robertsmade.html

I like the part:

"...what I would like to know is what advice Stealthy John the "political deputy" gave when Bush the First decided to give Caspar Weinberger a Christmas present in the form of the pardon that enabled Weinberger to avoid trial in the Iran-Contra affair"

Yep...packing the court with Bush Family cronies and Washington [the town] sees nothing wrong...go figure.

How's this for a strategy for the Dems: Draw out the Miers nomination for as looooong as possible, then vote her down. Do the same for the next nominee if at all possible (assuming s/he will be as bad or worse anyway).

The longer all this takes, the worse the Bush League woes will get, reducing if not eliminating their clout. And if we're really lucky, nothing will happen till after the '06 election and we'll have a Dem Senate.

California dreaming I s'pose.

Who forged the Niger papers?

Justin Raimundoof antiwar.com:

Niger Uranium Forgery
Mystery Solved?
The Fitzgerald/Plame investigation goes in a new direction
by Justin Raimondo

"...According to a source in the Italian embassy, Patrick J. "Bulldog" Fitzgerald asked for and "has finally been given a full copy of the Italian parliamentary oversight report on the forged Niger uranium document," the former CIA officer tells me:

"Previous versions of the report were redacted and had all the names removed, though it was possible to guess who was involved. This version names Michael Ledeen as the conduit for the report and indicates that former CIA officers Duane Clarridge and Alan Wolf were the principal forgers. All three had business interests with Chalabi."

Wow, just read the Justin Raimondo piece you quoted, susan. Here's the link.

Is Raimondo credible? I hope so, because his article presents a conclusion I like to believe myself in my wildest ruminations about all this:

"Before Fitzgerald is done, we'll see the warlords of Washington hauled before a court of the people. We'll hear the whole sordid story of how a band of exiles, at least two foreign intelligence agencies, and a cabal of neoconservatives inside the Pentagon and the vice president's office bamboozled Congress and the American people into going to war. As the indictments come down, so will the elaborate narrative so carefully constructed by the War Party in the run-up to war be exposed as a tissue of fabrication, forgery, and fraud."

I just posted at Kevin Drum's site stating a similar hope, but more as a fantasy than a forecast. Raimondo ain't dreaming, he's flat out predicting it.

I'm getting excited.

Oh yeah, I made the same fantasy projection right here, too, a coupla posts above the last one. Getting TOO excited I guess. And too tired.

Oh man, wrong again. Time for bed. Less scotch next time. Sorry 'bout that. Carry on.

Slush Fund,

If you are long a large block of stock and wish to part with it entirely, you are not concerned with the price once your sale is complete. However, if you work this through the market over a period of time in small increments, you leave your remaining balance exposed to market fluctuations. In addition, if you leave footprints, the gunslingers will figure out what you are doing and short the stock in front of you driving down the price. If you can find a broker willing to commit their capital and take the entire block off your hands at a price, you eliminate that risk. The broker insists on a discount to offset the risk they are taking on. You move your entire block in one trade by selling at a discount. This particular case may not have been the smartest move since it's a very liquid stock, but it still may have taken a few days to move it.

My God, Steve,

Haven't we gotten far enough along that we aren't obligated to take the gratuitous slap at Clinton EVERY TIME we are talking about criminal and treasonous activity at the highest levels of government? No one feels obligated to recall Reagan's infamous "My heart and my best intentions still tell me that's true, but the facts and the evidence tell me it is not."

I can understand the Republicans trying to keep that bogeyman alive, but normal people? Let it go! We've seen more than seven years of Republican lying and corruption, money laundering, insider trading, treason, and what not. Yet we still have drag out the ole "I didn't have sex with that woman" as if it were in any way equivalent? Please.

Man,

Whatever, but that is not how business is transacted on Wall St. By your rationale there would be weekly bombshell big block trades roiling the market. The Exxon Mobil $1.4 billion sale yesterday was remarkable because that trade was not the usual way business is conducted, they are more subtle so as not to screw other clients with a 4.5% loss while getting a big block across at much better prices. They prefer to ease the sale into the market, reduce volatility, and have everybody happy instead one one client happy and the rest mad as hell. They ain't afraid of the shorts, they hedge them away.

Slush Fund: I'm not going to argue with you. Good day.

Man: You are truly a Man for conceding. G'day to you too, and to all a good night.

Isn't it a "hoot" that Bush said that he looked into Putin's soul also. As it turns out Putin and his government is now backing Iran within the UN and refuses to play ball with the US on the question of Iran's nuclear program. I wish Bush would stop looking into souls and start taking a look at what is going on around him. Or at least stop ignoring it.

Thank you Gregg and Susan for the links. I feel like Xmas is coming and Santa has some mighty curious stocking stuffers on his list.

Thank heaven for the triumph of the truth.