Last Plame Post for a While

I am going to let the left continue with their tizzy over the Plame affair, but before I make any more statements about this issue, I want a few questions answered. They are as follows:

1.) Who was the administration official that Novak was interviewing in July when he found out this material?

2.) There are reports of two officials shopping this info to six reporters, one of whom was Andrea Mitchell. Were they shopping this information BEFORE or AFTER the Novak column that ‘outed’ Plame?

3.) What was the exact role of Plame with the CIA?

4.) When Novak called the CIA, and they did not try ‘hard enough’ to get him to not print her name, were they not trying hard enough because she really is a nobody at the CIA, or because they were afraid thast if they tried hard enough it would blow the ‘super-deep’ cover the left would like us all to believe she had (you would think this woman was Jane Bond with all the leftwing hyperventilating- I will make my judgement when we know more than vague assertions in hastily written newscolumns).

5.) Is there anyone who thinks that if the CIA had told Novak that she was a real deep cover agent, he would have printed her name anyway?

6.) Why is Joseph Wilson repeating lies about Karl Rove with no evidence, and why is the press not calling him on it?

7.) Why was Joseph Wilson sent in the first place? Why is his clear political agenda not being questioned?

8.) Why does the left seem to think that Bush needs to get involved in this- my guess is so that anything he says can be scrutinized and distorted so later on they can treat it as a lie or as evidence of a cover-up.

9.) If these two officials were shopping the name to the six reporters AFTER the Novak column, under the impression Plame was not a deep cover operative (thanks, CIA), did they break any laws.

10.) When all the evidence is out, and it turns out that the President had little to do with this (assuming there was wrongdoing) and fires the individuals involved and has Justice proceed with criminal prosecution, will Kevin Drum, Dan Drezner, and all the others who have jumped on this like white on rice devote 1/10th the column inches they have spent to date clearing Bush’s name?

Like I stated a few days ago- if someone within the White House, and I don’t care how senior, intentionally leaked information that would endanger the lives of undercover agents, it was not only illegal, unthinkable, and evil, it was treasonous in my eyes. Put em in a cell next to Aldrich Ames for all I care. What does bother me is the glee with which some seem to think this is going to ‘bring down the President.’ If Bush is involved, I say fuck him. But right now, what I see and what I have read is a lot of garbage, speculation, and hyperventilating (and that is just from the press- let alone the left wing bloggers). When some of the questions I have asked above are answered, then I will weigh in on this issue again.

▲

When Opinion Becomes Fact

We really don’t need an investigation into the Plame affair- all we need to do is hang the guilty and impeach Bush- at least according to the Calpundit:

None of this matters, though. Novak is trying to get himself off the hook for bad behavior which is fine, since it’s the leakers who are at fault here, not the journalist who reported the leak but the basic facts remain the same. Multiple people in high places exposed a covert CIA analyst and did it for crass and truly idiotic reasons of political intimidation. Dumb. Very dumb.

That’s his story and he is sticking to it. Someone in the Bush White House did wrong- because he thinks someone did wrong- good luck changing his mind. Life must be easy when your worst suspicions can masquerade as an objective truth.

Like I said earlier, if this was done intentionally and by White House officials, it is time for a perp walk. But as faras people like Kevin are concerned, this is nothing more that confirmation of his suspicions- read this post and tell me Kevin is going to think any differently about the White House with or without the Plame affair.

BTW- I am not trying to pick on Kevin- there are plenty of lefties who have made far more ridiculous and over the top accusations. It is just I read Kevin frequently, so I comment on it more frequently.

▲

In Other News

While everyone has their knickers in a twist regarding the Plame affair (which I think would be a great title for a book), the administration is busy prosecuting some of the corporate criminals who operated carte blanche uder the previous administration’s ‘miracle economy’:

- Three trials involving top executives accused of fraud or obstructing justice got under way on Monday in cases that could set the tone for possible prosecution in the spate of financial scandals that have swept Wall Street and corporate America in recent years.

Jury selection began in Manhattan Supreme Court in the trial of former Tyco International Ltd. (TYC.N) executives Dennis Kozlowski and Mark Swartz, who stand accused of looting the conglomerate of $600 million to finance their lavish lifestyles.

Just blocks away, jury selection began in the trial of former Credit Suisse First Boston investment banker Frank Quattrone, who is accused of interfering with probes of his high-flying stock-offering business.

And in federal court in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, opening arguments in the trial of Franklin Brown, the former chief counsel of Rite Aid Corp. (RAD.N), began. The trial involves one of the largest corporate fraud scandals in U.S. history.

The two Manhattan trials could set the tone for cases of corporate malfeasance such as Enron Corp. (ENRNQ.PK) and Adelphia Communications (ADELQ.PK), which are expected to follow, though prosecution is far from assured in either trial.

Long periods of time in tiny jail cells. I hope.

▲

Novak on Crossfire

If what Novak has said on Crossfire is true, it appears there will be a whole lot of Democrats eating crow. Although, in all likelihood, they will not be as concerned with the ‘facts’ should they vindicate all members of the White House, to include Bush. Then, the story will change to cover-up, or the Bush cabal pressuring the Justice Department or muzzling the CIA.

▲

Democrat Hyperventilating

There are a lot of things to be angry about the Plame affair, if it turns out that senior white house officials are outing voert CIA agents. I will wait for the investigation before I make any real statements, but I must point out that the liberal hyperventilating is getting amusing.

Please, guys- there are a number of things that you can say about the Plame affair- but the one that just makes me giggle is the assertion that the ‘President just doesn’t care.’

▲

Perp Walk

If Josh Marshall is right about the CIA being convinced White House officials blew the cover of Valerie Plame out of retribution, it is indeed time for a perp walk.

▲

The War On Your Neighbor

Nothing infuriates me more than the abuse/misuse of legislation:

The Bush administration, which calls the USA Patriot Act perhaps its most essential tool in fighting terrorists, has begun using the law with increasing frequency in many criminal investigations that have little or no connection to terrorism.

The government is using its expanded authority under the far-reaching law to investigate suspected drug traffickers, white-collar criminals, blackmailers, child pornographers, money launderers, spies and even corrupt foreign leaders, federal officials said.

Sure, the Patriot Act was pased to fight terror and wassn’t just a prosecutorial power grab. Assholes.

▲

Look At Me, Look At Me!

Apparently two of the Democrats campaigning for President never had civics classes:

Democratic presidential hopeful Howard Dean called on Friday for Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to resign, citing a “pattern of deception” in his statements on Iraq and a failure to plan for the postwar period.
Dean is the second Democratic candidate for the 2004 presidential nomination to seek Rumsfeld’s resignation as critics of the Bush administration turn up the heat on the Pentagon amid continued violence in Iraq.

Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry called on Thursday for Rumsfeld to step down, saying he proceeded in Iraq “in an arrogant, inappropriate way that has frankly put America at jeopardy.”

Hey guys- You have to get elected President and THEN you get to choose who the cabinet officers are.

Seriously, though. The best thing about this election is that the Democrats are frantically out of power. They don’t control the House. They don’t control the Senate. They don’t control the White House. They are ABSOLUTELY frothing at the mouth desperate. Then you add to that the fact that there are TEN candidates running, and what it boils down to is that they will say or do ANYTHING to get noticed.

I expect, because of these conditions, Democrats are going to say and do some of the most outrageous things ever seen in an election. Should be fun- didn’t you enjoy the circular firing squad debate the other day?

▲

Media Bias, Cont.

I can’t wait for the villifciation of this guy as nothing more than a right wing hack:

Auxiliary Bishop Andraos Abouna of Baghdad said he believed media were running a propaganda campaign to discredit the American-led coalition that ousted Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and now runs Iraq.

Bishop Abouna, a Chaldean Catholic, told the Catholic Herald in London that the situation in Iraq is steadily improving rather than descending into a morass resembling the Vietnam War, as often depicted by media outlets.

“It’s getting better but still there are many problems,” Bishop Abouna said. “The first problem is that they need security, then they need water and electricity—and all these things are getting better.”

“The media are exaggerating a lot of things. They should be realistic about the situation in Iraq. Newspapers and television are saying a lot of things that aren’t true. When they go there they can see everything (is changing),” he said.

Liar- it is a quagmire! The left and RW Apple said so! Bush is a warmongerer! We are losing! Vote Dean!

▲

Oh No, Not Again

Charles Krauthammer is busy crushing Teddy Chappaquiddick’s dissent:

“There was no imminent threat. This was made up in Texas, announced in January to the Republican leadership that war was going to take place and was going to be good politically. This whole thing was a fraud.”
—Sen. Edward Kennedy

The Democrats have long been unhinged by this president. They could bear his (Florida-induced) illegitimacy as long as he was weak and seemingly transitional. But when post-9/11 he became a consequential president—reinventing American foreign policy and dominating the political scene—they lost it.

Kennedy’s statement marks a new stage in losing it: transition to derangement…

Politically, the war promised nothing but downside. There was no great popular pressure to go to war. Indeed, millions took to the streets to demonstrate against it, both at home and abroad. Bush launched the war nonetheless, in spite of the political jeopardy to which it exposed him, for the simple reason that he believed, as did Tony Blair, that it had to be done.

You can say he made a misjudgment. You can say he picked the wrong enemy. You can say almost anything about this war, but to say that he fought it for political advantage is absurd. The possibilities for disaster were real and many: house-to-house combat in Baghdad, thousands of possible casualties, a chemical attack on our troops (which is why they were ordered into those dangerously bulky and hot protective suits on the road to Baghdad). We were expecting oil fires, terrorist attacks and all manner of calamities. This is a way to boost political ratings?

Whatever your (and history’s) verdict on the war, it is undeniable that it was an act of singular presidential leadership. And more than that, it was an act of political courage. George Bush wagered his presidency on a war he thought necessary for national security—a war that could very obviously and very easily have been his political undoing. And it might yet be.

To accuse Bush of going to war for political advantage is not just disgraceful. It so flies in the face of the facts that it can only be said to be unhinged from reality. Kennedy’s rant reflects the Democrats’ blinding Bush-hatred, and marks its passage from partisanship to pathology.

Talk about dry drunks…

▲