-
Ambassador Wilson,
I wonder if we could get you to comment on a rumor that I read first on a blog. The story is so outrageous it is either complete bunk or something that changes the whole political landscape.
Many people have openly wondered why, if WMD in Iraq were so important to the neocon's goals, why didn't they just plant some in Iraq for the Army to "find" and that would have likely doubled their political standing. They obviously didn't do this, and few of us more strident Bush critics are willing to credit "ethical restraint" on their part as the reason.
So what would stop them? They didn't feel they could get away with it. And why not? Because CIA WMD intelligence operatives and analysts would find out, and if they could others would as well. Remind you of anyone?
So not only was your public debunking of some of their claims what caught their attention, but the secret work of Mrs. Wilson and her co-workers and contacts that were galling to them. They might not have ever seriously developed any plans to plant WMD, but very least accurate intelligence even if it was classified was never their friend. So is it possible that Valarie Plame was their target all along, even before wrote your fateful op-ed?
Posted at November 18, 2005 10:24 AM in response to If It's Good Enough for the Times ...
-
Any word on whether Earle successfully flipped the already-indicted co-conspirators on this case? This has been relatively quiet recently, and even the 5-page Salon article makes the case look like no sure thing.
Posted at November 15, 2005 12:14 PM in response to This Week in Corruption
-
I'm wondering one step ahead. I'm 95% confident there will be some indictments coming from Fitzgerald. If there weren't he wouldn't have bothered with forcing Miller's testimony.
What is happening is the Bushes are waiting to see how bad it will be, not whether anything will happen or not.
What I want to see is if Bush will have the gall to issue pre-emptive pardons for everything, and if he does what Congress will do. I think he will do exactly that if the indictments are severe and involve more than two people.
Posted at October 6, 2005 11:51 AM in response to PlameGate Update
-
Oh, I forgot. Russert and Matthews and all the "Today Show" type chorus will be bleating on about he "re-invented himself" again. Just you watch.
Posted at October 5, 2005 12:58 PM in response to Gore on the Threat to American Democracy
-
Of course as soon as they notice this, the right wing and the so-called Liberal media will start shrieking how delusional Gore is, how out of touch, how radical, and what a liar he is.
The did that prior to 2000, and he still won a majority vote.
I think it would be a big mistake for the Democratic Party not to nominate him, assuming he wants to go. A Gore/Clark ticket would be just about perfect.
Posted at October 5, 2005 12:56 PM in response to Gore on the Threat to American Democracy
-
I'm sure that Russert, Matthews, Fox News, and all of the MSM will give this the same attention they did to Hillary's stock trades, aren't you?
Posted at September 24, 2005 6:59 PM in response to Frist's Stock Windfall
-
<p>When I see flameouts like this on the part of employees I immediately suspect a morale problem. This happens for a variety of reasons, but my guess is that the individuals of the "team" don't see themselves as a team at all, plus they are working to different objectives and strategies. </p><p>So although I am always happy to see a Bush co-conspirator grilled on high roast, I can also understand that it might not be the best strategy for the Dems to follow, given how desparate the Repubs are to cast the Rove scandal as a partisan attack. I would forgo the pleasure of seeing Hughes squirm in favor of denying the Republicans one more talking point that gets traction with their brain-damaged but numerous base. </p>
Posted at July 22, 2005 4:44 PM in response to Party of (Feeble) Opposition
