home

Wednesday Open Thread

By Jeralyn, Section Blog Related
Posted on Wed Jul 20, 2005 at 09:27:51 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

There's plenty to talk about today, including the hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee on the Reporter's Shield law. But, topics are open.

< Impending Vote On Student Aid Ban For Drug Convictions | Hearing Set on Disclosure of Covert Officers' Identities >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Wednesday Open Thread | 36 comments (36 topical)
    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#1)
    by desertswine on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:25 PM EST
    Goodbye Scotty.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#2)
    by swingvote on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:25 PM EST
    For anyone still interested in the question of whether the FBI is surveilling certain groups, and if so on whose orders, OPJ has an interesting article on the infamous Hoover files and what was in some of them.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#3)
    by MikeDitto on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:25 PM EST
    With the blessing of Iran's new fundamentalist leadership, two gay teenagers were hanged in the public square yesterday to the cheers of onlookers (Warning: includes picture). Meanwhile, closer to home, the father of the gay teen sent to brainwashing camp went public last week on Pat Robertson's TV network. The story has been covered by the New York Times and in a four-part series on Salon.com (Part 3 ran today).

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#4)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:25 PM EST
    et al: This Bud's for you.
    we now know for certain that Wilson was recommended for the job not by the Vice President but by his own wife, the aforementioned Plame -- whom Wilson has always vehemently denied had anything to do with his assignment. Plame told CIA director George Tenet, in an interagency memo which has been made public, that her husband was the man for the Niger job because he "has good relations with the both the PM (prime minister) and the former Minister of Mines (not to mention a lot of French contacts), both of whom could possibly shed light on this sort of activity." The deeper scandal, thus, doesn't involve Rove but the CIA itself: How did Plame manage to wangle an assignment of such magnitude for her husband?
    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#5)
    by MikeDitto on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:26 PM EST
    PPJ, not to get bogged down in the details, but Wilson never said Cheney recommended him for the job. That's a lie that's being perpetuated by Rove defenders. What Wilson said was that the Vice President asked the CIA to check out the Niger story, and the decision to send Wilson was internal to the CIA, which of course Valerie Plame was a part. And there is no doubt that Wilson was totally qualified, if not most qualified for the job.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#7)
    by Quaker in a Basement on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:26 PM EST
    The article you link to, Jim, contains serious misrepresentations.
    It was Wilson, recall, who claimed in July 2003 op-ed for the New York Times that the agency had dispatched him to Niger -- at the personal request, he insinuated, of Vice President Cheney -- to look into the Iraq-Africa connection.
    Let's be clear about what Wilson has and hasn't said. Go back and read his NYT op-ed. He says that he was told by the CIA that Cheney had questions about the Niger uranium rumor. He further says the CIA asked him to investigate those rumors. At no time does he claim Cheney asked the CIA to select him for the job. This is consistent with the Senate Intelligence Committee report on the matter. As for Plame's involvement in Wilson's selection, it's not a mystery. It's not even in dispute. Once again, you can read the Senate Intelligence Committe report and see the undisputed facts. The CIA decided to act on Cheney's request. Plame suggested Wilson for the job because of his work history in central Africa and in Iraq. Although she offered his name, it appears she had no role in his selection. Wilson is on the record as claiming Plame had "nothing at all" to do with his selection. Either he's engaging in some ludicrous hair-splitting, or he's flat out misstated her role. However, Goldblatt baldly misleads his readers. How Wilson came to be selected for the job isn't a mystery. His selection wasn't even inappropriate. (OT: I'm curious about Goldblatt's tagline. What can you tell us about his "satire" on black, urban culture?)

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#8)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:26 PM EST
    Michael D writes:
    And there is no doubt that Wilson was totally qualified, if not most qualified for the job.
    Michael, if he was the most qualified why don't we just turn the CIA over to the State Department? More from the article:
    It's not as if Wilson was sent off to investigate the impact of reggae on Niger's music industry. He was looking into the possibility that Saddam had sought to acquire uranium for WMDs. So Plame put in a good word for her husband. How rampant is nepotism inside the agency? So Wilson had contacts in Niger. Whatever happened to psych profiles? Heads should have rolled at the CIA, chief among them Tenet's, the moment Wilson published his loopy Times op-ed.
    Quaker writes:
    As for Plame's involvement in Wilson's selection, it's not a mystery. It's not even in dispute.
    Would you mind telling everyone that? Somehow I don't think the Left has got the message.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#9)
    by scarshapedstar on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:26 PM EST
    Earth to Jim: 75% of Americans, and 71% of your fellow Republicans, think the Bush administration is not cooperating in the investigation. The same number also believes that if Karl Rove is involved in the leak - not "convicted under the Espionage Act" - he should be fired. Please come back from the fringe. We miss you.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#10)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:26 PM EST
    Quaker - I don't know see for yourself. Since he's a tenured college professor he has the absolute right to say whatever he wants, even if it insults everyone and their dogs, too.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#11)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:26 PM EST
    scar - Given the inaccurate and biased press coverage I am amazed the number isn't 100%.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#12)
    by Jlvngstn on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:26 PM EST
    Still waiting for an elected official from the Republican party to declare Valerie Plame was not worthy of the agent identity protetction status. Perhaps I missed them saying it in public as opposed to leaking it to Rush et al but I will continue to monitor the news.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#14)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:26 PM EST
    Jim, How did Bush's criminal energy buddies become White House insiders, crafting national energy policy, otherwise known as extortion? Washington is an INSIDER'S town, don't pretend you don't know that. A guy like Bush never ascends past town clerk without his family name and insider connections. Don't be daft, it doesn't become you. The deeper, more thoughtful question, is thus: is the Wilson case one where his wife's influence was anything approaching the deciding factor in his being sent. I've seen nothing to suggest it. Could she have answered someone's question about it? Could she have thought him able and qualified (which he was and is)? Could she have even recommended him? Of course. OF COURSE!! Does any of this constitute the kind of nefarious conspiracy between the two you believe? Do I really need to answer? Probably, so...NO!! You believe the yellow-cake story was true and a sign of impending human catasprophe, fine. But there's a big difference between that and accusing a reputable, public serving couple of the kind of personally vindictive, selfish, and criminal conduct. You should be calling for their execution if you stand by what you're presenting as your belief. But logic does not follow from your belief. If your simple scenario were the truth, it is highly unlikely, if not entirely not possible, that Fitzgerald's investigation would've gone this far and in this direction. You have to read the writing on the walls. I try hard to get into your mindset, bud. Times like this make it next to impossible. So I'll ask again: Astros or Rangers? Kenny Rogers for Sherrif. Or not. There's a big difference between

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#15)
    by Quaker in a Basement on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:27 PM EST
    Since he's a tenured college professor he has the absolute right to say whatever he wants, even if it insults everyone and their dogs, too.
    Wouldn't have it any other way, Jim. Just curious about a white guy who writes "satire" on black culture. If he has a special insight into black culture, that's interesting. If he doesn't, that's interesting too.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#16)
    by Quaker in a Basement on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:27 PM EST
    Quaker writes:
    As for Plame's involvement in Wilson's selection, it's not a mystery. It's not even in dispute.
    Would you mind telling everyone that? Somehow I don't think the Left has got the message.
    Well, anyone can read the Senate Intelligence Committee report. Goldblatt is still distributing taffy. The selection of Wilson for this mission was not and is not a mystery or a scandal. Further, it's irrelevant to the question of who revealed Ms. Plame's identity.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:27 PM EST
    anyone else see Jeralyn on MSNBC today? Great job!

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#18)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:27 PM EST
    Wow...Republicans are lying to cover their own asses...damn that's BREAKING NEWS innit? Well, to PPJ anyway...

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#20)
    by roy on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:27 PM EST
    We get speculation over timing every time anybody says anything about anything. Meanwhile, there's always something going on that someone would like to obscure and something else they'd like to promote. If they say something positive (or just interesting), it's to distract from something negative. If they say something negative, it's timed to be obscured by something positive.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#21)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:27 PM EST
    shermbuck, if true, I must tell you I am shocked, shocked, that there's politics going on in DC.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#23)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:27 PM EST
    Despite the fact you bring up the Clinton travel bureau business as an example, which I'm not at all impressed with as a choice, it still makes my point for me. It's an insider town, and every case needs to be examined in its own context, on its own merit. "TravelGate" was decided long ago, and it cannot seriously be compared to the situation we have now, much less the energy insiders example I gave. Both of those affected many innocent people, in the case of the energy boondogle millions of people were theived from. But TravelGate? Come on. Accepting the worst scenario for the sake of argument, it doesn't even merit more than a laugh in comparison. As for the Wilsons, I find your assessment of their actions and motivations to be much less than persuasive. As for the British, they've made their own bed, now they're sleeping in it. Blair knew what he was getting into, knew the American b.s. behind it, knew the possibilities for blowback, and now bad policy is reaping horrendous results. And personally, I don't buy the British believe the yellow-cake story. May have been the opinion of someone, some group of people, in British intelligence, but Wilson was more in the know on this issue than almost anyone. This part of Africa was his SPECIALTY.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#24)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:27 PM EST
    Last entry meant for PPJ. Sorry.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#25)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:27 PM EST
    Dadler - No names, no games. No links, no blinks. And the fact that his specialty was that part of Africa? That is meaningless, big guy. He wasn't an agent. The CIA should have used professionals. They didn't. Shame on them. Shame on Mrs Plame-Wilson for her part in that. What was she doing? Getting the guy out of the house? Hey, I understand. Wives marry husbands for better or worse, but not lunch everyday at home.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#26)
    by MikeDitto on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:27 PM EST
    PPJ - Do you have firsthand knowledge that Wilson is not an agent with official cover? If not, you can't really state that he is not an agent. If so, then get ready cuz Fitzgerald's gonna come a-knockin'.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#27)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:27 PM EST
    The only former cia agent that has claimed Plame wasn't undercover is an agent who hasn't worked with her for 15 years, and has a private sec firm in FL that relies on gov't contracts. Every other cia person has confirmed she was under unofficial cover, which means the possibilty of being shot if caught. It's a shame the wingers on this site aren't as brave and patriotic as she is. Now you can prove that you are because the DoD just raised the age for recruitment ... again. BTW, on this date in 1969 we LANDED ON THE MOON! Surely that should receive some attention on an open thread.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#28)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:27 PM EST
    Michael D - I'm ready to rat out anyone... But if I go to jail I hope it is Gitmo... The food is so much better... ;-) And if Wilson was, he's blown his own cover... Sailor - All he claimed was the facts. i.e. Been in US over 5 years...

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#29)
    by Quaker in a Basement on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:28 PM EST
    As for Plame’s influence, etc., the answer is simple. She should not have brought her husband in. Period. End of report. And when she did, senior management should have shut her down right then and there. Period. End of report.
    Maybe you should have a peek at that Senate Intelligence Report yourself, Jim. Plame suggested his name, but had nothing to do with the decision to send him. Is this where I'm supposed to say, "Period. End of report."?

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#30)
    by MikeDitto on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:28 PM EST
    "BTW, on this date in 1969 we LANDED ON THE MOON! Surely that should receive some attention on an open thread." No we didn't, that was all done on a set in Hollywood. :-)

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#31)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:28 PM EST
    This thread is typical of how the Left allows the Right to redefine the tone of an argument.
    The deeper scandal, thus, doesn't involve Rove but the CIA itself: How did Plame manage to wangle an assignment of such magnitude for her husband?
    Really? That is a deeper scandal than the outing a NOC? Now PPJ has got you all arguing about the merits of sending Wilson to Niger instead of focusing on the leak. If things were the other way round, the Right would only have one talking point and they will hammer on it till everyone comes round to their way of thinking. "Is it right that a CIA official is outed because a family member criticised the administration?" That is the crux of the matter, people! Not Wilson, not the CIA, not Niger and certainly not coloured Cakes!! Don't worry if they go after the CIA; Langley can defend itself. They can bite back too. I mean, don't be surprised when a video clip surfaces showing Scooter Libby slamming an Analyst against the wall, screaming "What do you mean there isn't any evidence of WMDs? Make some damned evidence!!" With Cheney sitting in the foreground nodding quietly.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#32)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:28 PM EST
    Quaker writes:
    Plame suggested his name, but had nothing to do with the decision to send him.
    Uh, so if she hadn't suggested his name, he would have been picked? You do understand "cause and effect," don't you? London_Man - This, as you may not have noticed, is an open thread. Which means, you pick'em. And yes, the issue as to why the CIA sent a none agent on a sensitive mission needs to be discussed. At the best it is another instance in which the Agency looks bad to the public. At worst it raises the possibility of internal CIA political agendas. When you add in the fact Wilson was not made to actually write a report, something that could be examined later, it smacks of, again at best, gross mismanagemnt. As for someone asking "withering" questions, I am LOL.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#33)
    by Jlvngstn on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:28 PM EST
    Posted by Jlvngstn at July 20, 2005 01:51 PM Still waiting for an elected official from the Republican party to declare Valerie Plame was not worthy of the agent identity protetction status. Perhaps I missed them saying it in public as opposed to leaking it to Rush et al but I will continue to monitor the news.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#35)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:28 PM EST
    Jim, Saying Wilson wasn't qualified is just deluded. Come on, man, you disagree with him for whatever reasons you have. Where are you every time Bush gets one of his buddies a gig? Nowhere. So this argument of yours doesn't fly with me, since you've pulled it out for this issue, then put in back in your pocket for others. The Bush Retardation Machine was going into Iraq whether it was factually a good thing to do or not. That's what they did, it was an extrememly stupid, lazy and ignorant thing to do, and now we're all paying. Suggesting this all comes down to a wife illegally getting her husband an assignment is, well, nuts. You're not that dumb, I know it. Stop the rationalizing and THINK!!

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#36)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:29 PM EST
    Jim, "And I find it interesting that Wilson wrote an op-ed a week after Bush’s SOTU, and never mentioned yellowcake." Amb. Wilson actually believes that the SOTU reference was to OTHER intel, Brit. intel, as you say, involving ANOTHER COUNTRY, and not the Italian conjob forgery involving Niger. So that's a MUCH better piece of distraction for you, Jim, and I don't really understand why you flog LIES instead. Why not say, Yeah, but even Amb. Wilson thinks that the SOTU treason was based on MI6 lies, and not on Italian lies. It just rings so much better, and you get another piece of newsprint to put into the holes in your shoes.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#37)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:29 PM EST
    Dadler: "The Bush Retardation Machine was going into Iraq whether it was factually a good thing to do or not." Installing airbases by force is not particularly 'retarded,' except that it violates the UN Charter, US treaty law, the Constitutional war powers, and the oath of office. Other than that, what's the hang? The soldiers' blood? The blood of innocents? Pshaw. Good money to be made on soldiers' blood. Bush has to take another month-long vacation just to count the cash he's made making military orphans. He still hasn't been to a single military funeral. That would be a DOWNER!

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#38)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:29 PM EST
    Posted by justpaul: "OPJ has" That was the only part of justpaul's post which contained any facts, including the linked material. And even the 'has' looks suspicious.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#39)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:29 PM EST
    Paul, By retardation I was referring to the belief this administration has in their own delusions, including the idea those bases are going to be anything but very large targets and very small aids to "freedom". I'm having trouble with clarity today. Thank god it's...thursday? Sigh.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#40)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:30 PM EST
    I do understand. Those bases will be targets, that's for sure, but based on a genocidal policy like Bush/USPNAC's, attacks on US invaders supplies genocidal motive, as it has in Fallujah and Al Qa'im. These bases are a fait accompli. It's well past time for people to (grrr) 'get over' the mythmaking about democracy or 9i1, and press the point about how illegal and immoral this invasion for airbases has been and is. After all, USPNAC existed well before 9i1, Bush has stolen TWO elections to carry it through, and the 'bringing democracy' rhetoric is so old Bush laughs with the press corps whenever anyone takes it seriously. Both invasions are racist pogroms, specifically hatched by oil companies and rightwing fundie billionaries like Scaife. On a side note, I protested a Navy Seal just back from there yesterday (after his 'Kill them all' statement), and he readily admitted that US forces (CIA) burned the Koran-Torah Repository to the ground. He said that genocide was fundamental to US foreign policy, which I thought was rather 'cheeky' of him. That repository reportedly held the oldest Koran known. Are we making friends yet?

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#41)
    by kdog on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:31 PM EST
    NYC to start random bag searches on subways, or in other words, NYC to start violating the 4th amendment. Am I the only one that prefers being free to being safe? We are becoming a nation of cowards and fraidy-cats.

    Wednesday Open Thread | 36 comments (36 topical)