What about our failing system of checks and balances? As you point out, because of Republican control of Congress the Clinton administration was under attack from day one over a variety of trivial issues. Now we have all three branches controlled by one party. Although the current administration's sins are more serious, with all of gov't under GOP control there is no way any useful investigation could even begin. Yes, the answer is to vote the evil-doers out, but eight years is a long time to wait for justice.

Here is a reminder of why this prosecution is so incredibly important; why it is essential for Fitzgerald, or someone, to get to the bottom of the run-up to the war:

http://greyhairsblog.blogspot.com/2005/10/gentle-reminder.html

I believe that you have hit the nail on the head. The Republicans have been extremely effective in framing ethics and accountability as a partisan political issue, completely unrelated to their self-proclaimed moral superiority. I am appalled by the arrogance and sense of entitlement that the leaders in the executive and legislative branches have displayed but I am even more disturbed by the public and media's willingness to so fully accept it.

If this indictment does not result in a bi-partisan demand for an open public and independent inquiry into the facts, then I hold out little hope that we actually still live in a democracy. The checks and balances built into our Constitution no longer exist when all of the power sits in the hands of colluded corruption. Accountability becomes dispensable. I fear that is where we are.

No, it is not good to rejoice when "Judgement comes on our enemies," and it is sick if we have come to the point where we consider the occupants of our white house as enemies.
But don't give me the moralizing speech. I've been wondering where help would come from and experiencing a churning stomach ever since the 3rd week of the administration when the national news programs showed us how the Vice Prisident, a former big oil VP, went into that secret meeting with the energy industry, and one week later sat on the sidelines and watched as an energy cartel played game theory on california and fiscally, forcefully raped the california economy.
My stomach has been, when I think of politics, churning for years as I watched the powerful taking more power through fear and deception and ruling through terror. To bring Dick Cheney back, I think watching Dick Cheney on national TV quite frothing white at the mouth in anger at the suggestion that congress might pass a law banning the already illegal torture that the white house has encouraged the military to use, and when defeated by the senate, to have the brass face to suggest personnaly to a known torture victim the "compromise" of exempting the CIA from being told not to commit already illegal acts of torture, thus implicitly arguing that despite previous claims, he is in fact in favor of torture, that seems, in fact, to ask of me on a whole different level than a churning stomach.
I've watched the patriot act be nearly indefinitely extended, I've watched the executive branch take the authority to detain without charge or trial, I've watched the President and the Congress impose a defacto national ID, I've watched them enact secret laws through the airlines, I've watched the supreme court strip the right to private property through eminent domain and effectively hand perpetual copyrights to big corporations, assuming the congress keeps doing its part of its bargain with Disney and Time Warner, I've watched the administration betray both the economic and the moral principles of conservativism (keep small and don't interfere with my life if you don't need to).
I do not rejoice in seeing the president's cabinet in danger of being punished. But really, spare me from being reprimanded for feeling relief so great that it is hard for a moment to distinguish it from Christmas. But then its still not so simple. The person bringing the charges is doing it through an attack on the secularly sanctified freedom of the press. So I do feel queesy, when it upset me that prosecutor Fitzgerald and the judges involved thought it was OK to eviscerate the freedom of the press to have anonymous sources, in the same breath as it comes to light that the "star reporter" of the respected but schadenfreude-inviting "liberal stronghold" NYTimes is busy recieving conspiratorial notes about aspen trees.
I wonder, as we feel sorry for Libby and poor Karl Rove and Cheney today, if it is merely an unintended coincidence that the trees are said to "turn."
My stomach has been churning for years as my government has betrayed the interests of the poor and the middle class and the simply decent, and I feel more ready to puke than to churn.

Knocking back the powers of a pretentious wannabe monarch is exactly what the founding fathers intended in our system of checks and balances. But no one said that it should "feel good" when it happened.

no, it doesn't "feel good"... but, considering how bad it's been feeling - it is understandable that we've confused a slight lessening of the pain with what's it's like to "feel good".

a moment of temporary relief and hope. but we are still fighting a colonial war in iraq... an american citizen is still locked up without charge... torture and disappearing our suspected enemies is still our policy... and we're still destroying the planet... the list goes on and on.

how can a moment of hope not feel good?

it's very interesting hear a call for further investigation coming from, of all places, the right... the american conservative has an article entitled, "Who was behind the Niger uranium documents?"

"The possible forgery of the information by Defense Department employees would explain the viciousness of the attack on Valerie Plame and her husband. Wilson, when he denounced the forgeries in the New York Times in July 2003, turned an issue in which there was little public interest into something much bigger. The investigation continues, but the campaign against this lone detractor suggests that the administration was concerned about something far weightier than his critical op-ed."

http://takeitpersonally.blogspot.com/2005/10/voiding-blank-check.html

http://www.amconmag.com/2005/2005_11_07/feature.html

Can you say "war with Syria"? And Iran is on the menu two: Blair has said directly that Britain is willing to invade Iran.
Expect those two developments, at which point the Bush administration will push novel legal theories that the White House must be exempt from prosecutorial oversight during a time of war.
Get real, guys.. the Bush team thinks BIG. Don't imagine that the Fitzgerald case will be decided in a court of law alone.
If it take Armageddon to get the investigation off the radar, then we will have Armageddon.

And let me add to the chorus of those who don't appreciate an inappropriate moralizing tone in your post, Steve. When evil is defeated or takes a body blow, it is only natural to cheer.
Sober reflection is unseemly at times like this.
HURRAH!

Thanks for your note Marky -- and your many posts -- but to be clear, my moralizing in this case is "my" moralizing on "my" blog -- and this is a reflection of my views and perspective as I see things. I'm glad we are achieving the 'beginning' of some new accountability in government -- but I think it's a mistake to be rejoicing in the streets. I think we should remain seriously resolved to reachieve a healthy civil society.

I like your posts a lot -- but I also need to remind you that when someone calls something I write here "inappropriate," I take notice. Feel free to disagree -- but you won't get far with me by impugning what I write or share with notes about how correct or incorrect my intentions are.

Best regards,

Steve Clemons

I don't find your post to be inappropriately moralizing as some of the other commenters do, but the deeds which led to this indictment (and many others which most likely won't lead to indictments) are what give me the sick feeling in my stomach. We should all feel ill about the behavior of our government whether or not their deeds are illegal and, if illegal, whether or not their actions result in criminal prosecutions.

Steve,
point taken.
You have a right to your opinion, and I shouldn't challenge that right.

I would be interested in your opinion of the situation with respect to Syria and Iran.
Did you read Blair's recent statements on Iran? He is not ruling out British military action against Tehran. I don't see how anyone can rule out the possibility that Bush and Blair will broaden the war, however crazy that may seem.
If Blair is willing to commit UK forces to attack Iran, then the strategy is doable, I would imagine.

Steve -- I have a procedural question for you or anyone tuning in who might have an answer.

Cheney gave testimony to the FBI, albeit not under oath, I believe. Is the Senate able to request/demand access to that testimony? Further: would, say, a group of Democratic Senators get anywhere with the Justice Department in something like that? Who is allowed to see that testimony and when? Does it fall into the deep well, made deeper by Bush's 2001 Executive Order effectively putting further limitations on access to presidential papers?

Thanks for your note Marky. You and I agree on a lot -- and you know that -- but I keep to some different lines than you do, which is OK by me. So, feel free to zap me when we disagree.

I do worry about Iran and Syria. I'll be posting something much longer on that soon -- and will. I have to run now, but will be back with more later,

Steve

Bush and Cheney are guilty of far worse than "misteps" and the skullduggery is all theirs to claim.

They are so disdainful of the Constitution, and everything it stands for, they consciously set out to deceive the nation, exploiting our patriotism, using our treasury and armed services to secure their own business interests.

Our reason for invading Iraq was Bush' favorite passtime, privatization. Under Saddam, the Iraqi oil industry was owned by the State. Well, they could hardly say we were invading Iraq so that American oil companies and a few from the coalition of the so called willing, like Italy, could take over the oil business in Iraq, so they used taxpayer money to pay $350,000/month and promised a leadership position to an Iraqi exile to say what we wanted to hear and ignored the eye-witness testimony of independant weaspons inspectors, who were also being paid with tax dollars. Talk about privatizing, Bush and Cheney think the US Treasury is their own little piggy bank.

But back to skullduggery. Their extreme reaction
to Joe Wilson's disagreement about the truth of the uranium from Niger claim, says to me that they are being ultra defensive, in other words, I think they are the authors of the forgeries and wanted to squash anyone who exposed them, again without regard for what was good for the country or how much treasury was wasted in outing Valerie Plame. If they were trully looking for reliable info on WMD's, hoping to not have to go to war, they should have been glad to hear that the Niger claim was false. War is a last resort, right?

Forget about the deaths and wounds. If they actually cared about our troops, they would never have sent them there to begin with and certainly not without adequate armor, nor would you feed them expired MRE's, like Halliburton did, cut veterans' benefits, etc. When you privatize, you only think about the bottom line, yours and your friends.

I've been sick about our country since 2000, and I'll only feel better if we, as a nation, vomit in unisson on the first Tuesday of Nov. 2006 and impeach the current occupiers of the Oval Office.

On Fitzgerald, he is a ray of hope that justice is potential. I think, in only indicting Scooter, he's going to roll his way up the ladder to the top of the totem.

With respect to the "American Conservative" quote above in ProfMarcus's comment, we have to remember that Valerie Plame's area of expertise was revealed to have been the Saudi royal family, oil, peak oil, and oil depletion. Given the Bush family's ties to all of the above, it would be impossible not to think that she might have had one or two big ones to hold over the Bush family's collective head.

I'm not the only one who thinks many of the White House's actions have had to do with earlier cover-ups. There's a piece by Robert Parry I quoted from, late last night, in my blog (see permalink below), about how necessary pardons will become to avoid any exposure of past sins. This in turn led me to an old editorial in the San Francisco Chronicle about the executive order (2001) which closed off access to presidential documents under certain circumstances.

For example:

"At the time, some suspected that then-Vice President George Bush, a previous head of the CIA, knew more than he let on about the illegal Iran-Contra scheme. The elder Bush, however, always protested that he 'was out of the loop.'

"Still, other historians think that the current Bush White House, deeply immersed in the war on terrorism, may be worried about fresh revelations that detail the Reagan administration's strong financial support of the Taliban as they rose to power."

So I think we are indeed looking at something which goes far, far beyond Plamegate. If nothing else, look at the continuum of personnel in and around the White House from the Nixon era onward.

PW, what is the source for your comments about Plame's area of expertise? I have seen many speculations about what she did. The most lurid theory is that she was on the trail of arms deals that were directly tied to Libby (via Marc Rich, perhaps), and that's why they outed her. I would definitely appreciate a good reference to back up your claim, if you have one.

Thanks

"For some time, I have been arguing with moderate Republicans and progressives and liberals that the only way to knock back the White House from its outrageous behavior was to (1) embarrass those in power with the spotlight of media attention on their most irresponsible and wrong-headed decisions and (2) to sue them in courts. "

You may be right, practically speaking. But what does the reliance upon #2 mean for democracy? After all, isn't the next president, even if they act above board in every way, going to be paralyzed by not only running a permanent campaign politically, but legally as well? When does it stop?

Accountability must occur with Congress. Therefore, my derision isn't directed at the media (okay, with one exception: Safire): they give the public what they want and more often than not they don't want news. My derision is focused on the Intelligence Committees, particularly Mr. Roberts and Mr. Rockefeller.

We need independent Senators, not yes men, in every era. Mr. Roberts in particular is going to be judged by what he has done over the last five years and over the next three. He may have a safe seat, but nothing about his place in history is safe.

"We should all fell sick about this. Out stomachs should churn with revulsion and anguish about what he has done -- and we should be careful with too much joy over this victory for accountability."

Well, Steve:

Speaking for myself, I felt utterly sick in 2000 when the Supreme Court handed the presidency to a man who did not win the popular vote, or even a majority of votes in FL (if they could have been recounted), I was sick when we were prohibited from finding out who served on the energy task force, I have been sickened over the relaxing and rolling back of environmental regulations, the misguided tax cuts, soaring deficits, constricted civil liberties, the promise to end Roe v Wade, the sweetheart contracts to corporations, the refusal to fund UN programs that help some of the world's poorest women and children, the constant diplomatic bungling, a premeditated attack on a country that posed no threat to us, the horrors of Abu Gharib and Guantanamo. The crimes committed by our government in our names goes on and on; I am not only sick, I am outraged.

Am I joyful over Libby's indictment? You bet I am! As an person who has been on the verge of losing faith in our democracy, Patrick Fitzgerald has given me a glimmer of hope that I am still living in a democracy and a nation of laws. He makes me feel that maybe, just maybe, I can get my country back.

By the way, I would like to recommend a great blog for discussion of the Fitzgerald case:

http://www.firedoglake.blogspot.com

I have to agree with what seems to me to be a sentiment underlying a number of the comments upthread.

I DO feel "good." I feel good because, to at least a limited extent, justice has been served. People entrusted with immense governmental power did evil things with evil intentions, and that evil now has not only been exposed but is subject to punishment. That's a blow for the white hats, and as much as we may feel "sick" about the facts of the existence of evil and the fight between good and evil, when in that context the white hats win, I say, hooray!

As to, "Will they admit missteps? Will they level with the American public?", I say, don't hold your breath. There has been no indication from any of them -- who know better than the rest of us what an ongoing catastrophe the whole Iraq adventure is -- that they believe their actions have been anything but righteous.

Whether Dick Cheney, in his heart of hearts, understands that he really screwed this up, we don't know, and we'll never know. He may or may not go to his reward believing he was right, but I'll bet my bottom dollar he'll go SAYING he believes he was right.

It's more likely in my view that, rather than offering any sort of public reckoning, they will intensify their attacks on the judiciary and on the processes and other institutions of law independent of their political control, the better to avoid this sort of unpleasant publicity in the future.

They're beyond hope. They're Nixonian, and worse, in their depravity. We shouldn't waste our breath -- or precious electrons -- hoping they'll do the right thing.

Cheney is probably literally deranged. Scowcroft says he doesn't recognize his old friend anymore.Someone with such serious, long-term heart problems most likely has suffered brain damage, and his congested arteries don't carry enough blood to his brain to allow him to think clearly.
In addition, many find it quite plausible that Bush has cognitive problems due to his earlier heavy drinking and cocaine use. In particular, cocaine use apparently permanently damages a person's ability to feel empathy.

I think candidates for the highest offices in the country ought to undergo mild cognitive and neurological testing in addition to taking a regular physical. Do you really think Bush has an adequately functioning short term memory? As far as I can tell, he can't keep a thought in his head for 30 seconds, and he has notable difficulty recognizing names... so that he frequently refers to people as "the governor", etc.

Don't rule out organic causes for character failure.

The reasoning of Safire and Brooks on Meet the Press was interesting. In effect, they concluded fallaciously from the true statement "Fitzgerald's findings do NOT include a statement that there was s sinister cabal" that "Fitzgerald's findings include a statement that there was NO sinister cabal." Even more interesting is that Russert and the other pundits didn't, apparently, notice the fallacy.

Marky - I've just tried to retrace my steps through Google and my own memory unsuccessfully, though I can understand your doubts having just noticed that the fringies connect Plame with Saudi! I was doing a memory-refresh this morning and of course the cw has been that Plame's work was about nuclear proliferation -- which I'd written about in my own blog in connection with the Bolton hearings some time back.

Somewhere -- I thought it was Kevin Drum's blog but still can't find it -- I'd read that more recently she'd been working on the Saudis and on oil depletion figures in particular. If I find the stuff in my own archives, I'll come back in and let you know! I'm glad you and others are working on digging this out. Because, indeed, there's more to Plame than meets the eye. Certainly it's fair to work on the assumption that the CIA pros, the working stiffs, have been utterly pissed off at the Administration and its political advisors and may well have been working against them, particularly since Central Intelligence got blasted with the "bad intelligence was responsible for everything" claim. It's an ongoing battle, an old one.

bleh >"...It's more likely in my view that, rather than offering any sort of public reckoning, they will intensify their attacks on the judiciary and on the processes and other institutions of law independent of their political control, the better to avoid this sort of unpleasant publicity in the future..."

Note this :

"...Let's agree on something else right now: Libby's case will never get to trial...It would be their worst nightmare to have their war machinations presented to a jury of 12 ordinary citizens in the District of Columbia (read: predominantly African Americans) who would be sitting as proxies for the families of 2,000 plus military fatalities in Iraq and the plurality of the country that opposes the war. The risk there is not just exposure to the possibility of conviction in Washington, D.C., but a subsequent prosecution in The Hague as well..."

BTW - I don`t share his belief that this will all work out just fine (but I do HOPE so)

The stakes in this frat rat game are too high for the "rat fu*kers" to ever back down

Show Me that democracy is actually going to work (I`ve not seen it do so in the last 40 years that I`ve been an adult...)

"Against stupidity, the very gods themselves must contend in vain." - Friedrich von Shille

Right on, Steve.

Hey Steve,
If any of your connections are willing to tell you what Plame did---even approximately---that would be a great scoop. As far as I know, there is only speculation at this point.

It will be interesting and important to see how Cheney and Bush respond. Will they admit missteps? Will they level with the American public?

Puh-leeze. At a certain point faux-naive, rhetorical questions lose their charm.

Here's part of what Cheney said about Libby's indictment:
"In our system of government an accused person is presumed innocent until a contrary finding is made by a jury after an opportunity to answer the charges and a full airing of the facts."

Yup. I'm sure Dick Cheney wants a full airing of the facts. Mmm-hm.

"Will they admit missteps?"

How about we start calling them LIES?

Nice crosscheck from Josh Marshall

(October 30, 2005 -- 02:16 PM EDT)
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/006893.php

Unfortunately, I think you people simply do not yet understand the gravity of our situation. In denial, you still cling to your patriotic vestiges of faith, denying that that is right before your very eyes. These people have taken control of the government of the United States of America, and will stop at NOTHING to to retain that control. They will, if necessary, murder a few thousand, if not a few HUNDRED THOUSAND of us to put us all back on the fear train. Read up on what a "red alert" actually empowers them to do. It amazes me that after the last five years of the BLATANT disrespect that this administration has shown for everything that this country stands for, that this one issue is viewed by so many of you as a catalyst for change. Good God, our soldiers have SODOMIZED prisoners in their custody at the behest of these criminals. Our nation is responsible for the UNLAWFUL removal of DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED world leaders, such as occured in Haiti. We have INVADED AND RAZED A SOVERIEGN NATION, resulting in the deaths of tens of thousand, perhaps HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS before it is over. We have had a gay pornographer and WHORE given access to state's secrets and The White House's hallways, if not it's bedrooms. We have an Attorney General that blatantly and brazenly LIED during his confirmation hearings, yetwas still put in the position of enforcing the laws of our nation.

When is it ENOUGH? When are we going to realize that Fitzgerald can only exact accountability if we rise up as citizens and take to the streets DEMANDING THE SAME?

Look people, we are in DEEP SHIT here. Do any of you honeastly believe that Fitz can do this alone with the law? Has the Bush Administration shown any respect for the law? If we want our country back, we will have to do it AS CITIZENS. There IS NO saviour riding to the rescue, the dragon is simply too huge. We need an ARMY of saviours. Thats US. It is the only way.

Army of saviours? Hey, that's our job. What's happening here is that we have a) a corrupted media, for the most part, not asking questions in return for having access to gov-speak; b) a corrupted voting system -- which we weren't using much anyway; and c) an attitude of aggrieved entitlement on the left (of which I'm a part)which has turned us into a bunch of butt-sitters complaining, signing a few petitions, holding up a banner now and then, and (of course) blogging incessantly. Understand that I know I'm part of the problem, as are you and you and you and...

So I agree with you, POA. One glimmer of hope: I think the continuing drumbeat from the blogosphere is indeed helping. The more questions we force the MSM to seek answers for, the better. Only in the past year, I think, have there been so many blog-watches strewn about the press and broadcast media.

Thanks POA

we agree

We are having to have too many people visit the electric fence too many times

"There are three kinds of men:
1. The ones that learn by reading.
2. The few who learn by observation.
3. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves." - Will Rogers

Well, watch Tweety on Hardball. He is the canary in the coal mine.. and he's covering Plamegate to the hilt these days.

I'm glad we are achieving the 'beginning' of some new accountability in government -- but I think it's a mistake to be rejoicing in the streets. I think we should remain seriously resolved to reachieve a healthy civil society.

Steve, it seems to me that while "establishment" progressives like yourself are willing to work "seriously" to achieve this goal, establishment conservatives like Brooks, Safire, et al (and not just the wingnut right) refuse to acknowledge the seriousness of the situation, and continue to spout White House talking points.

How do you reach consensus and compromise with automata?

Count me among those who are gleeful that Libby is going down, and see Fitzmas not as a sad day, but as a day for celebration, and not, as you put it, "a great national tragedy." The "great national tragedy" has been ongoing for five years now --- and it continues because the Brooks and Safires of the world, who might not be expected to see the Bush regime as a tragedy, prefer to spout pre-packaged blather rather than acknowledge the "tragedy" that is before their own eyes.

Steve, please call a kettle black - Cheney, Bush, Rove, Feith, Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld are war criminals. America's first.

I want more than an apology.

Understanderable that you have to maintain some reserve to continue your access to this adm...but the public doesn't have to be so restrained and frankly we don't give a fig for apologies...we want Justice. Period.

You are so right that they didn't do this alone.

The broadcast media helped -- the mainstream by not pointing out the lies or inconsistencies -- and that continued this am on both This Week and Meet the Press as the spin doctors asserted that Fitzgerald's failure to indict on the underlying crime meant that there was no underlying crime. And no one called them on that.

And now we have an entire broadcast news organization that serves as a kind of electronic Joe McCarthy, whipping up the masses. Example in point - Mary Matalin on Fox Friday night, saying that there was "something not right, something smelled wrong, things didn't hang together" in this indictment -- no specifics -- the indictment just "smelled" -- and since she knows she is in no danger of her auidience actually reading the indictment, she gets away with it.

Has anybody else noticed that the most temperate conservative on this issue (or more temperate than I ever expected him to be) is Tucker Carlson? Wonder if Jon Stewart's lecture gave him pause.

As a frequent (okay, several times daily) reader of this blog, I appreciate Steve's measured and "grown-up" tone in discussing highly partisan and/or contentious issues. I am one of those who take particular glee in the plight of those individuals who have abused their power and our trust. I take no pleasure, however, in the disintegration of our government through criminality, incompetence and cronyism. That is, indeed, tragic.

Earlier in the thread, the issue of Valerie Plame's role at CIA was raised. Ever since I read that she worked on WMD non-proliferation matters I've had a little question nagging at me. That she and Brewster Jennings were outed solely for political payback seems like a smokescreen. No, there is much more than meets the eye going on here. Libby, Cheney, Bush, Rove, et. al. don't operate like that. Did Plame have access to secrets they'd prefer to keep from public view? Are those secrets enough to motivate one to commit treason? Is that where Fiz is going?

Sorry for the tin foil hattery, but I'd appreciate any views from more informed readers/posters.

Safire, Brooks have an illogical argument. If a prosecutor has trouble getting to the facts of the case because of obstruction of justice, that is no reason do away with the prosecutor. Have patience--if given the time, Fitzgerald will prevail. This is an early inning, as we have witnessed in Chicago.

What is needed here is the Congress to get off its duff and finish the Intel hearings. If Rockefeller is not going to lead the charge on the Senate Intel Committee, he should be replaced.

Pissed off American

I am right there with you --

If this country can't manage to hold this group of malevolent clowns and schemers accountable, it will show that our system of checks and balances has been permanently poisoned by the glut of money pouring into the political arena and the endless demogogery of the Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh crowd ... not to mention the apparently bottomless gullibilty of their audience.

to wrap up a couple of threads, a question for the scotus nominee:

since national security is involved, could the special prosecutor employ 'special' interrogation techniques to find out if actions traitorous to the country happened when the administration, unable to argue on facts, employed the corporate complicit meadea to destroy the character of a critic ??

Libby resigning doesn't make me feel sick. The Bush administration is one of the most corrupt in history. These guys got where they are today by destroying the lives of others. They play harball. They have damaged our national security. They don't belong anywhere near the WhiteHouse.

If Bush were not so thick, the scandal would have been a wake up call to clean house. Our WhiteHouse needs a much more thorough cleaning than it did when Regan, Weinberger, North, Poindexter, Abrams (the criminal Bush rehabilitated) and the lot were booted out of Reagan's Iran-Contra WhiteHouse. Bush needs to clean out those officials responsible for the torture at Gitmo, Abu Graib and elsewhere,

The message the Libby resignation send to the country is that Republicans cannot be trusted to run foreign policy without getting involved in criminal activity. Reagan's presidency was more or less handed over to the receivership of Howard Baker. Bush would do well to fire Rove and the lot and find a new trustworthy advisor that could do a better job of running the country. Maybe it is time to bring in a competent elder statesman with experience in governing like Dick Lugar.

THere is one truth that is as evident here as ever. Power corrupts. If the importance of separation and balanace of powers is now not evident it never will be. In such situations as we have now , when the power is held by a single side, government ceases to function. Its no longer about governing, but a single minded goal of employ an agenda. At almost any cost.

ON a further note. I have seen a number of pundits speak as if they make one very naive assumption. Namely that the sum total of Fitzgeralds knowledge is reflected in his indictment. anyone with a background in prosecution will tell you thats rarely the case.

When you hold the bag of bones, you throw one out and see who bites.

mc >"...Did Plame have access to secrets they'd prefer to keep from public view?..."

Most likely connected with whatever has been going on since Iran-Contra; same game, same roster of players, same team organization, later innings

No telling what the details are; I`ve been wondering off & on since the 80`s

"Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob" - Franklin D. Roosevelt

Libby was scum. May he rot to a painful lonely death in Angola.

Washington "kool kid" Steve Clemons is, if not part of the problem, the sufficient cause of the problem. He wants to go to the right parties, be liked by the opposition and have those "moderate" Republican friends, maybe get hired to a good job, become a lobbyist DeLay would talk to, an analyst Britt Hume would hire.

I am gonna hate watching people like Klein and Yglesias get utterly corrupted in this way.

Who is Stuart Taylor (you guys probably already know -- I am new here) and why is he saying these terrible things about Joe Wilson at the National Journal site -- can he support them? For example, on what does he base his statement that Wilson's March 2002 report was "not very informative"? And what does it matter if Iraq "sought" uranium -- they probably did. Isn't the point that Wilson's report said that they could not have obtained it there given non-proliferation safeguards in place in that country.

Here's a portion of his article...

"The hollowness of former diplomat Joseph Wilson's bid for glory is more straightforward. His campaign to brand Bush's 16 words as deliberately deceptive would have been noble had he been right. But he was wrong, and deceptive to boot.

Wilson implied in his now-famous July 6, 2003, New York Times op-ed and in his appearance on NBC's Meet the Press that his own investigative trip to Niger for the CIA, in early 2002, had given the administration proof that Iraq had not sought uranium from Africa. But his not-very-informative March 2002 report to the CIA showed nothing of the kind. And contrary to many a news article, even Wilson's op-ed claimed only that Iraq had not purchased uranium in Niger. He did not explicitly assert that Iraq had not "sought" uranium there.

Indeed, Wilson's March 2002 report tended to bolster intelligence reports that Iraq had sought uranium in Niger. Or so concluded the Senate Intelligence Committee in July 2004. It said that Wilson had reported speaking with a former prime minister of Niger who "believed the Iraqis were interested in purchasing uranium," in part because an Iraqi delegation had suggested "expanding commercial relations." Uranium is Niger's only major export."

I imagine the current White House Administrators trying to apologize to me as I hold an ice pick to their temples. Of course they want to apologize now, I think, as I weigh the compassion I have for my fellow man against the hatred I feel for those who would enslave me once again.

Can't we sue these bastards for crimes against humanity? Hitler would have stood for trial at Nuremburg had he not been a coward. What is the difference between him and these ghouls? If any difference is found, it would have to be in Adolf's favor, since he did not start a war for PERSONAL GAIN.

If I went to the ACLU, could they help to prepare and prosecute a class action suit against them?

Yes, I'm serious.

I believe:

1. In the end, the whitehouse core will view Libby's fall as a battle casualty. A sad event, but one that occurs in war.

2. Libby will plea and be pardoned by Bush, perhaps at the last minutes of Bush's tenure, when the mists of time have cooled current feelings. Here, three years is an eternity.

3. This administration will never view the results of the Plame affair as a failing or fault on it's part. Rather, they will view it the same way a corporation views a lost lawsuit. Simply the high cost of doing business.

"If I went to the ACLU, could they help to prepare and prosecute a class action suit against them?"

"Yes, I'm serious"

Posted by Jerome Gaskins

How do you use the law against a regime that ignores it? That is why it is imperitive that the citizens of the United States speak loudly in ONE VOICE. We can no longer trust that our voice is heard through the vote, as the recent GAO report demonstrates, as does Bev Harris's efforts.

Our so called "leadership" on the left is a joke....

Kerry's balls are hanging in Kenneth Blackwell's office.

Conyer's, one of the few who is raising a bit of dissent is totally IGNORED by the press and by the White House.

Hillary is simply the same kind of political animal that got us into this mess.

Kennedy spent his credibility many years and many bottles ago.

Gore??? Who the hell knows.

Kucinich, another one with balls. But balls or not, the American people are simply not going to follow someone that looks like Alfred E Newman. Sad, but true.

Who's on the horizon??? No one.

Whose in control? Criminals.

Who will save our democracy???

Us. The citizens.

Or no one.

If there was no serious underlying crime in Plamegate, then why did Libby feel the need to lie?

POA, you've said it as well anyone I've come across in my meanderings through the internet. And this warning -

"If it takes Armageddon to get the investigation off the radar, then we will have Armageddon"

- utterly terrifies me.

And of course, now we're hearing all about those baaad Syrians. All I want to do is grab my 8 month old grandson and flee.

Half of liberals, including many on this website, are actually rooting for American enemies to win the War on Terror because they first and foremost hate conservatives in general and President Bush in particular. They are really no different than the Tories who sided with the Brits except that they are siding with regimes so much more evil than the Brits were.

The Iranian regime thanks you for your support.

I'll trust the Dems over a President who is PERSONALLY indebted to the family of our #1 enemy.

Pissed Of American,,,,your post was strong and correct but i have a Leader who can do some good.

NM Gov Bill Richardson,,,a leader who is fighting for Border Security and who was the first Gov in America to get additional Survivor benefits for NM National Guard Troops who died in combat.

Richardson, has the experience,,the knowledge and is positioned well to run in 08.

The indictment of Scooter Libby is only ONE BATTLE in a Larger War to take back our Country from the Neo-Cons who have arrogantly used our Country for their own Vested interest that has nothing to do with the American people or the Honor of America.

The Abuse of Power from the Thugs on the Right should be obvious to All Americans but sadly it's not.

We as Democrats,,,,have to Fight to save our Union. There is no amount of Chatter that these RW Radicals will accept. Make no mistake,,,We are at War,,,,both in the war on Terror but also with the Evil Doers of the Radical Right who look upon Middle Class Americans as beneath them.

A Leader,,,any leader, who thinks that Leading a Country by Dividing it,,has NO Honor,,,,Has NO Integrity and will Sell out his Country for loyality to his Delusional Ego.

We have the obligation to fight for our Country when we feel our Country is being Abused by Leaders who's only priority is to Rape and Steal from it's citizens.

Our Country used to be a Shining example of striving for a Higher Goal, today our Country is showing the World a arrogrance and hatred that harms all who strive for the Greater Good in our World.

This leader will be gone in 3 years but what kind of Scares will he leave behind, how badly will our Image be tarnished because of his Poor Leadership..

Great Men,,,,look to see what is good and what is right,,,,they have the vision to see what America could be. A lesser man has no vision,,only the short-sided view of Power as a Weapon to bend people to his will.. That is a False Victory and one that will turn to more enemies in the long run.

I heard of the indictment of Libby on my headphones while watching the Chicago White Sox victory parade. I had been waiting for 35 years to see the parade and it was ruined when I heard of the indictment. While one of the things I had hoped to see during my life had been fulfilled, it was negated by one of the things I thought I would never see. An Administration covering up, hiding and obstructing an investigation into the treasonous act of outing a CIA agent. Absolutely disgusting.

Watching the special report on Hardball tonight, it looks like the administration spin is going to be that the 16 words were the result of an honest disagreement over the WMD evidence between OVP and the CIA -- no one there was willing to say that the White House knew the their WMD evidence was false but deliberately used it anyway, knowing that it was easier to scare Americans into a war against nukes and terrorism than inspire them into a war for democratization of the ME.

I fear that the MSM are going to let this administration version go unchallenged in their attempt to be even-handed, fair and balanced.

eagleye >"...why did Libby feel the need to lie?"

We are all hoping to have that answered by Mr.Fitzgerald in the future

please stand by...

"Small men follow the letter of the law, great men seek justice" - Buck Rogers in The 25th Century (seriously !)

Right wing Republicans have been warring with CIA ever since Ellsberg released the Pentagon Papers. The GOP does not like hearing the truth from the CIA. This is why they demanded Team B analyses of CIA intelligence under CIA director GHWBush. It turned out that the CIA was mostly right and the Team B were completely wrong. Unfortunately, this is overlooked by the GOP. The GOP refused to believe the CIA about the Soviet threat and were livid that CIA was not more hardily supporting Reagan's military buildup. It was not surprising then that they missed the crackup of the FSU. The intelligence foretelling the crackup contradicted the cherished ideology of the GOP.

The same thing happened with Iraq intelligence. The CIA was not sufficiently supporting the cause for war in Iraq. So Cheney and Libby and the WHIG "fixed" the intelligence around the case to go to war. The "cabal" formed their own independent intelligence unit that circumvented the CIA and angered many analysists. Cheney and company were fighting a war against the CIA. They saw Wilson going public as the CIA firing shots at the Bush administration. So Libby fired back. Tenet was moved out of the way and Porter Goss sent to punish the miscreants.

The problem with the Bush administration is far larger than Libby. The problem is an ideology that is out of touch with the Middle East and the rest of the world. These are the guys that are making the new reality for journalists to report. With Libby it was just more political hardball infighting. Unfortunately for him, he crossed over the line and engaged in criminal behavior and got caught. Fortunately for us, there is some protection for patriots in government that stand up to abusive ideologues. The "sickening" part is that Bush is still as clueless as ever and we are no closer to extricating ourselves from the foreign policy messes this administration has created for us.

Drudge sez: "PROSECUTOR PLANS ON CALLING CHENEY AS WITNESS IN OPEN COURT; EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE FIGHT LOOMS"

i went through all 57 comments just to see if anyone was going to note that safire was lying: fitzgerald's scope (helpfully posted on his website) is not in any sense specifically related to the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. It's shocking that people are allowed on tv to tell complete and total lies likes this.

AJ, Stuart Taylor is sometimes worthy, sometimes a complete ass. This is a complete ass case.

The specific issue he is dealing with, often obfuscated, is this: there was a contact, in 1999, that Wilson reported on. This contact was between an Iraqi representative and some representatives of the Niger government. The ostensible purpose of the contact was to discuss "commercial relations." The prime minister at the time surmised - despite the fact that the word uranium never came up, the fact that no follow-on occurred, and the fact that the Prime Minister had no intention of following on because of the sanctions regime - that the "real" purpose of the "commercial relations" was to seek uranium.

Wilson having reported this, some of the yahoos at the CIA - presumably the nutcases who were stovepiping info to Cheney et al or who were intimidated by Cheney et al - therefore found that his trip "bolstered" the case for Saddam "seeing" uranium.

I ask you - is there any reason to take seriously anyone who would distort reality to such an astonishing degree? This is supposed to be the justification of the fabled "16 words," which is part of the line of defense of the lying scum.

This particular line of bullshit has been cast about by bush-enablers for a long time now, and they even got the cover-up artists in the senate report to include the "bolstered the case" line, but, of course, we now have the Duelfur report, which these people act as if doesn't exist.

Since the Duelfur report tells us that Saddam didn't have an active nuclear weapons program after 1991, and that he wasn't seeking uranium, it turns out that the prime minister's surmise was wrong, that Wilson was correct, and they Taylor should just plain shut the fuck up about this issue.

hope that helps.

"Half of liberals, including many on this website, are actually rooting for American enemies to win the War on Terror because they first and foremost hate conservatives in general and President Bush in particular. They are really no different than the Tories who sided with the Brits except that they are siding with regimes so much more evil than the Brits were"

"The Iranian regime thanks you for your support"

Posted by Dems_Cannot_Be_Trusted at October 30, 2005 09:03 PM

Actually, Iran thanks President Bush for HIS support, and the gift he has given them in putting Sistani in power in Iraq, and committing the very acts of aggression and depravity that the radical Muslims hate us for. Bush has even managed to offend and alienate the moderate Muslims that once stood for peace and co-existence. Are you really so God damned ignorant that you can't see how Bush has fullfilled Iran's wildest dreams? Have you paid no attention to events? Or do you just rattle this bullshit off as the lines are fed to you?

You know, the most terrifying aspect of this whole thing is that Bush has turned over the rocks that once concealed your brand of blind partisan ignorance, and that your kind of evil blind ignorance is actually in control. God help us.

BTW, what the hell does this cabal of thieves, criminals, and traitors have to do with "conservatism"???

AJ - "I fear that the MSM are going to let this administration version go unchallenged in their attempt to be even-handed, fair and balanced."

Yep! that's a shame that the MSM may try to be even-handed, fair and balanced.

"We as Democrats,,,,have to Fight to save our Union. There is no amount of Chatter that these RW Radicals will accept. Make no mistake,,,We are at War,,,,both in the war on Terror but also with the Evil Doers of the Radical Right who look upon Middle Class Americans as beneath them."

Posted by Bill at October 30, 2005 09:12 PM

NO!!!! We have to fight as AMERICANS. Your partisan CRAP is just as dangerous to our freedoms and our nation as the right's is. Do you REALLY think it is to our advantage to keep up this right VS left bullshit?? Thats exactly what they WANT us to do. It is EXACTLY what keeps us divided and ineffectual in our dissent. Until we stop playing the game by THIER rules, we cannot possibly hope to institute change. The danger to our nation transcends party alliances, both left AND right are being abused by the current system. I am an AMERICAN first. Not a democrat. Not a Republican. An AMERICAN. And make no mistake, it is AMERICA that it threatened here, and that includes every man, woman, and child, right OR left.

David Brooks is right, there isn't a cancer growing on the Presidency...the whole fucking Presidency *is* a cancer with a few healthy spost on it!

Howard - What are you drinking tonight? Of course Safire was right - The December 30, 2003 letter of appointment issued to Fitz by Deputy AG James Comey states:
"I hereby delegate to you all the authority of the Attorney General with respect to the Department's investigation into the alleged unauthorized disclosure of a CIA employee's identity, and I direct you to exercise that authority as Special Counsel independent of the supervision or control of any officer of the Department."

So what part of this statement did you not understand?

neocondan -

Perhaps you miss the point --

The media should be looking to find out the truth about what really happened --

Not worry about giving both sides the same amount of time to spin their versions of the truth

Thanks Howard

Sure looks like the July 2004 report of the SSCI made every attempt to discredit Wilson as well and that some of the negative stuff floating around about him is a direct result of their report -- of course Wilson's response to them (which I also read for the first time tonight) didn't get nearly as much play.

AJ - What would be the media's motivation in keeping the truth from the American people? Do you consider all of the media to be part of the vast-right-wing-conspiracy? It's been my experience that if you read and listen to all points of view you are in a better position to identify the facts from the fiction. The truth is seldom found in a chorus of information.

Neocon dan

Fitzgerald was authorized to investigate any violation of that law -- but he was not limited to violations of just that law -- he was authorized to follow his investigation after whatever criminal behavior he found.

neocondan, i'm sure it just slipped your mind that, according to Steve, and i quote:

"Safire said that we should all note that the crime that Fitzgerald was sent out to investigate: a violation of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, was not specified."

And you will note, now that i've reminded you what safire said, that Fitzgerald's actual task was, and i quote, "investigation into the alleged unauthorized disclosure of a CIA employee's identity."

Surely you understand the difference?

And let me note that Fitzgerald's task was explicitly defined, at his request, very early on, as including perjury and obstruction in the pursuit of investigating the unauthorized disclosure.

nice try, though.

AJ, there's no doubt that the Roberts report was intended, among other things, to slime Wilson, and that the enables all carry that report around with them. It's pretty much all crap, of course, as Wilson's response (not to mention familiarity with the details) makes clear.

Regardless, by the way, all the slimeballs had to do was to say "Wilson doesn't know all the information we do." They didn't have to say, "this is a phony boondoggle because his nepotistic CIA wife sent him," even to accomplish the supposed end they wanted, to combat Wilson's so-called "lies."

neocondan, don't be a twit.

The purpose of the media, like any other business in America, is to make a profit. Being an agency for truth-telling has nothing to do with it.

Oh spare me the lecture -- I get my news from all over -- print and broadcast, journals, books and the web.

The 24 x 7 broadcast media --whichi is what the vast majority of Americans rely on for news) is non-stop punditry spinning competing versions of the truth.

If you think Fox News is seeking the truth or simply presenting the facts (or Cnn or MSNBC for that matter), you need to buy a new brand of kool-aid.

AJ - Don't you think that Wilson did a lot to discredit himself when he based his conclusion that there was not any truth to the Niger story on the forged documents that hadn't surfaced until several months after he gave his report. Don't you think that's pretty damming of his motivations and his credibility?

So truth and accountability hang on the actions of one investigator investigating one incident? I'm hoping the geniuses that set up our system pondered the question - What if the Executive, Judicial, and representative branches are all controlled by the same corruptors? I'm hoping there's something we've missed - some loophole that will allow democracy to sneak away unnoticed and grow another day. Since there isn't an informed electorate anymore what hope is there?

Howard - you say "And you will note, now that i've reminded you what safire said, that Fitzgerald's actual task was, and i quote, "investigation into the alleged unauthorized disclosure of a CIA employee's identity."

You are drawing a distinction without a difference, since prior to the Intelligence Identities Protection Act it was not a crime to disclose the identity of a CIA employee.

Howard -- I read somewhere tonight that Jay Rockefeller is finally getting off his ass and trying to get that Phase II of the SSCI report rolling.

And you've really gotta wonder why the OVP didn't think they'd get away with the "Wilson doesn't know as much as we do" approach -- my thinking is that had they tried that, it would have put them into a direct and open conflict with Wilson in the MSM and they had reason to know that they could not win that (I think Wilson's letter to the SSCI pretty much shows that he had his ducks in a row)-- but they had a history of success with smear campaigns.

Neocon

read Wilson's letter to the SSCI

well, neocondan, now we know you're an ass - i was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt until your 11:30 posting.

The first time we hear from Wilson himself is his own oped, in which he makes specific reference to not having seen the documents.

Kristoff's first write-up makes reference to discrediting the forged documents, but Kristoff has confirmed to Wilson, in an email published in Wilson's book, that Wilson did not tell him that he'd seen the documents.

There is still some ambiguity about what he told Pincus that i've been meaning to look into further.

And then there's the tendentious Roberts committee accounting, which must be read in conjunction with Wilson's letter response.

More broadly, as it happens, as i mentioned up above, we now have the Duelfur report, so we know, in fact, that Wilson was correct: there was no attempt to purchase uranium, much less what he was sent to investigate, the forged documents claim that there was an actual sales agreement.

There is, of course, much more to be said about the forged documents, but they're not really germane to the direct matter of Wilson.

neocondan: untrue remark at 11:37. learn some facts before you go shooting off your mouth (you're turning out to be just another of the propaganda robots - how sad).

The Espionage Act, for instance, is a perfectly suitable vehicle for this matter, and (since i'm no expert on the penal code) there may well be other statues concerning the handling of classified information that were broken. Had the case been limited to the IIPA, certain standards and definitions come into play that the broader language clearly was meant to transcend.

so it is a distinction with a very important difference that safire, dishonestly, and you, out of lacking of information (i hope), didn't accurately portray.

AJ, i think "smear job" is the way these guys think, first time out of the chute.

given their long, long struggle with the cia, cheney and the folks around him have probably internalized a disdain for the cia to the point where the notion that "his cia wife sent him" is, in fact, in their minds, sufficient to discredit the message and not just the messenger.

i mean, these are crazy people, so there's no knowing for sure....

and i'll believe that rockefeller has a spine if he continues to speak out, but i'm not holding my breath. even if he does speak out, roberts will just issue a whitewash (and laura rozen did some reporting that roberts and the OVP are coordinating on the report).

Howard - You are as confused about the forged documents story as much as Wilson.
The United States government did not receive the forged documents until October 2002, some eight months after Wilson's assignment to Niger. The CIA did not determine that they were forgeries until March 2003. But I guess you and the ambassador were way ahead of the government on this one.

Howard - "The Espionage Act, for instance, is a perfectly suitable vehicle for this matter, and (since i'm no expert on the penal code) there may well be other statues concerning the handling of classified information that were broken."

In the euphoria of your gotcha moment your are grasping for straws. Would you care to enlighten us on what act of espionage has been committed by Libby, Rove, .....et.al.? I will grant you this - the special prosecutor has the authority to charge the cabal with j-walking if he finds evidence of such a crime, but it would still be a crime not associated with the original charge that he received. That was the point that Safire was making. You guys need to get off this Lie meme that you so obsess about.

Regarding "What the Fitzgerald Investigation is Really About: Truth & Accountability" I have to say that in my years on Earth and in my study of human history it strikes me that many a good action has some unintended unfavorable consequence.

So while I feel heartened by the law being used to bring criminals to justice in this case I remain cognizant of the possible unforeseen unpleasant results this good act may trigger.

For example the pullout of Vietnam was good I thought at the time but today's Vietnam is one of the least free, most repressive places on Earth. Not so good.

If you don't think that example works, think about it for a minute and I bet you could come up with many similar instances in history and your own life that do work.

So do we not do good because we fear the consequences? Of course not. But we do need to remember the rule of unintended consequences and have contingency plans in place. Rejoicing over a good act without taking into account the bad things that it could bring about is wrongheaded dangerous and decidedly unrealistic.

How do we prevent the abuses of power? Just tossing the scoundrels out will not work. We did that with Nixon. All that happened is the scoundrels have learned to cover their tracks better, to buy out or compromise the opposition (the press), and to be more ruthless.

The system is broken. But lets not think we have fixed it by changing faces. Putting our faith in persons is what got us collectively into this mess. The answer I think is in the path Fitzgerald himself has taken: accept only the truth and hold our leaders accountable to the standard that truth demands.

[Soapbox kicked over now.]

What a difference two indictments make in the Top 10 GOP Sound Bites.

Catapulting to #1 in the charts after the Scooter Libby indictment is Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison's smash hit, "No Underlying Crime (Perjury Technicality)." "Ongoing Investigation", the previous chart-topper from Scott McClellan and George W. Bush, dropped to #2. Moving to #5 is "Criminalization of Politics", as performed by Tom Delay, Ken Mehlman, Bill Kriston and Robert Novak.

Here's the complete list of:

The Top 10 GOP Post-Indictment Sound Bites...

While the legal story is still unfolding, it is critical to keep the significance of the CIA leak case front and center. The two key narratives here about the Bush White House:

- Protecting Fictional Iraq War Rationales
- The Bush Politics of Payback

For the full story, see:

"Indicting an Administration."

Once the umpire (Fitzgerald) finishes getting the sand out of his face (Libby`s lies) I`m sure he`ll get back to the task at hand (investigating the leak of classified information)

Time to sit back & watch the slow running fire works show

"Politics is just high school with guns and more money" - Frank Zappa

I think it's pretty telling that Miers was withdrawn RIGHT after Arlen Specter said he'd ask about Guantanamo. What is the specific aspect of Guantanamo that Bush is afraid of revealing?

http://irregulartimes.com/index.php/archives/2005/10/29/update-on-hr-952-the-stop-sending-people-to-be-tortured-bill-2/
http://irregulartimes.com

Take Action on Extraordinary Rendition

Urge these Reps. to cosponsor H.R. 952 and oppose Torture: Corrine
Brown, Lois Capps,
Ed Case, William Lacy Clay, Peter DeFazio, Rahm
Emanuel, Harold Ford,
Eddie Bernice Johnson,
Dale Kildee, Zoe
Lofgren, Nita Lowey,
Carolyn McCarthy, Dennis Moore, Charles Rangel, Linda Sanchez, Tom Udall.
Read More...

by Jim @ 9:44 am. Filed under War and Peace, Politics, Republicans, Democrats, Homeland Insecurity, Liberty, Moral Values

Some months ago, bloggers, editorialists and reporters connected the dots on the Bush administration’s policy of “extraordinary rendition.” Extraordinary rendition is the practice by which people are nabbed by the U.S. government, often on U.S. soil, and shipped off to foreign countries where they can be interrogated using means that would be against the law on U.S. soil. Let’s be blunt: those means are methods of torture.

There’s a bill before Congress right now that would remedy this situation. H.R. 952 is written simply, exactly and solely to end the Bush administration’s practice of “extraordinary rendition,” in which people are sent abroad to be tortured. As of today, only 64 members of the House of Representatives support H.R. 952. That’s a shameful 14.7% of House members who are willing to go on record against torture. It’s not only a shame; it’s a scandal! Doesn’t America stand for something better than this? Why is it that 371 members of Congress can’t be bothered to stand up to torture? I really want to know.

I would like to be able to say that the support of 64 members of Congress reflects some momentum. But since May 25, when Rep. Martin Meehan (D-MA) signed his name on as a cosponsor, only one other individual, Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (D-IL) has contributed his support to the cause by formally supporting the bill. The anti-torture bill is slipping off the radar screens of our nation’s legislators, replaced by bridges to nowhere in Alaska. The papers aren’t talking about this bill anymore either.

Even on the blogosphere, discussion of extraordinary rendition has dwindled. We are letting America stand for torture, and we aren’t even getting upset about it. Think about what this says about us.

On this site there is a list of all the Representatives who have not signed, their names are a live link to their government sites.

Please keep caring and writing to end the sickening torture.

Richard Sale is blaming Clemons for leading him astray on the expanded office space for the prosecutor. But while Clemons apologizes when he gets reporting wrong, Sale did not take responsibiility when he totally misled everyone on the indictments. Thanks, Clemons, for keeping it real and the great reports.

From the opposition to the Monarchy Party in the upcoming mid-term elections I will only vote if I hear that, if elected, they will impeachment and totally enviscerate the Imperial Branch of government, run the lobbyists out of town, and totally revamp electional laws. It is a tyranny of the People I long for; a Robespiere; a scaffold; a guillotine. I fear the only solution is violence, civil war, separation, if bold faced War Criminals cannot be brought to any semblance of Justice. When will the People finally wake and become a danger to this government's existence and the physical well being of all who support this tyranny?

Are they purposely goading us to violence knowing they have the guns; the militia organizations? Are we under seige, surrounded, and we don't even realize it as we are pushed to the edge? Why should they care one whit about democracy, checks and balances etc. if they are on the verge of becoming authoritarian dictators? Democracy only has appeal if you know you cannot be all powerful and must share power to keep some power. What is needed from Democrats now is radical revolutionary decrees to wrest power from the criminals now in control. A separate revolutionary investigatory and judicial apparatus needs to be set-up parallel from the current corrupted system. A revolutionary judicial calendar can be instituted using the following scheme:

Autumn:
Vendémiaire, starting Sept 22.
Brumaire, starting Oct 22.
Frimaire, starting Nov 22.

Winter:
Nivôse, starting Dec 22.
Pluviôse, starting Jan 22.
Ventôse, starting Feb 22.

Spring:
Germinal, starting Mar 22.
Floréal, starting Apr 22.
Prairial, starting May 22

Summer:
Messidor, starting Jun 22.
Thermidor,starting Jul 12.
Fructidor, starting Aug 22.

"Knocking back the powers of a pretentious wannabe monarch is exactly what the founding fathers intended in our system of checks and balances. But no one said that it should "feel good" when it happened."

Justice SHOULD "feel good." But I'm not nearly feeling as good as I should want. I long for the day that I feel so good that tears of joy are streaming down my face and I am once again proud to be an American. The War Criminals must be tried before the shame is lifted from this disgraced country, and God help us if justice be not done, for peace's sake.

Part of the frustration with Bush administration is that Bush operatives like Libby and Rove are masters at stifling debate. Matters that should have a public airing are made into partisan issues of "for us or against us" Anyone thinking that discussing our policy is a good idea must be unpatriotic. This lack of debate and failure to hold the Bush administration accountable for its actions has led them astray. Any administration should always be forced to justify its actions. The process of justifying actions alone imposes a clarity of thinking and careful analysis.

We now find that the Administration did too little careful analysis of Iraq and responded by villifying policy critics instead of clarifying their own thinking and planning. Eventually, their anti-democratic approach to governing ran afoul of the law.

In the past, it has been said about US foreign policy that "politics stops at the waters edge." This administration, by politicizing foreign policy, following an ideological path and hiding the truth from the American people instead of building concensus, has reached a point where the majority of Americans no longer support the foreign policy of the Bush administration. Mr Bush needs to clean house and bring in an elder statesman who is not an ideologue to get his policy back on track.

TWN is continuing to be a significant voice in this matter of such great importance. The spin masters will be hard at work to make this whole scandal about something other than what it is. Thanks, Steve, for writing so thoughtfully and passionately. SICK is the right word. Keep up your good work.

neocondan, sorry, you really don't know what you are talking about.

to address the forgeries first, i told you that there is a long story and i'm not going to spend the time here schooling you. nonetheless, the reason that wilson was sent to niger was because of a purported sales agreement. the sales agreement was a forgery. the forgeries surfaced in a variety of ways over time, but they were always, always the same forgeries.

since last night, josh marshall has begun a discussion of the history of the forgeries here:

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/006896.php

you might school yourself a little.

As for the espionage act, the first person to raise it was mark kleiman, and his brief summary still works to help you learn:

But Rove's conduct certainly meets the far less demanding elements of the Espionage Act: (1) possession of (2) information (3) relating to the national defense (4) which the person possessing it has reason to believe could be used to damage the United States or aid a foreign nation and (5) wilful communication of that information to (6) a person not entitled to receive it.

http://www.markarkleiman.com/archives/valerie_plame_/2005/07/the_plame_game_no_its_not_all_about_the_intelligence_identities_protection_act.php

The Espionage Act was used on the Rosenbergs and it was used on Larry Franklin and it's been used many times in between, so don't worry your pretty little ill-informed head, neocondan, it's more than jaywalking.

and try, in future, not to be confused: fitzgerald's job was not to pursue whether the IIPA was broken, it was to investigate the exposure of a CIA agent.

I'm glad I don't suffer your ambivalence. Life's too short not to celebrate such victories as we achieve.

Steve--

Very much appreciate your contributions to civil discourse.

How is your health?

The phenomena you are referring to regarding ignoring Bush's secrecy is a direct result of the Democrats not having a realistic foreign and military policy. Everyone looks the other way because the country is at war that came form a sneak attack and the result of that attack scared the S@#$ out of everyone. Even w/ almost everyone wringing their hands like Pontius Pilate in regards to Iraq few people are willing to committ to the Democrats without the policy. It will all fall like a sandcastle at high tide should a responsible policy come along.

Side note
Your spoke of Mr Brooks and Mr Safire pontificating on Meet the Press. Did you notice how silent Russert was. He did not even offer Fitzgeralds response, The investigation is not over as I've sand in my eyes. This trial should get most of it out and I will use any grand jury to continue to indictments as to the relev