dr. elsewhere here
Apologies are in order. Chalk it up to large parts wishful thinking, and not just a little naivete.
Joe's astute cautions on the Jason Leopold stories regarding indictments issued last week appear to be the bottom line here. An excellent review of the entire situation is on Salon from Tim Grieve.
Truth be told, I have only vague memories of past Leopold issues with Salon and RawStory. And shame on me for not paying closer attention, as I so easily caution others to "consider the source." Those incidents occurred in my pre-blogging days, but that is actually a poor excuse. We should all exercise skepticism and scrutiny, even if we are just in it for the reading. It's sort of the scientific method applied to truth filtering. Pretty essential these days. And actually, that may be the kind of work it takes to keep a republic. Like, what Ben Franklin said.
In any case, Joe has more than redeemed himself for falling for a Hayden scandal by appropriately questioning the Leopold story. Me? I'm hearing the gravel in Mr. Field's voice as he chortles, "There's a sucker born every minute."
But none of this alters the fact that Rove remains in deep doggie do.
And none of it alters the fact that Fitz reportedly arrived in DC today; the GJ meets every Wednesday and Friday.
Keep your eyes open.
9 comments:
No need for apologies, doc. Something odd was and is going on here. Leopold spoke on Ed Schultz's show today, but I haven't yet had a chance to hear what that was about...
The Ed Schultz interview with Leopold can be found here:
http://audio.wegoted.com/podcasting/51605Leopold.mp3
Leopold says that his editors at Truthout confirmed the story by checking with the same sources. He also says that major news organizations have single source verification of the story.
Leopold also says that Rove was heavily protected by the Secret Service when he went to his lawyer's office on Friday. Does Rove officially get secret service protection these days?
joseph,
it seems that Bushco/Rove is stalling Fitzgerald, that Rove knows all too well that the indictments are coming but he continues to buy time.
It is shocking of course that the mainstream media hasn't issued a single story about the upcoming indictments.
Rove/bushco are acting like they are waiting for some other event to happen, like a big wedding II, which will make any indictments against Rove/Libby null and void, so why bother and give them the power to disregard whatever Fitzma comes up with anyway. they are just going through the motions of making it seem like they are complying. everything is about just buying time so their war plans against Iran, calling martial law, can be put into place.
What is the timeframe? Well the Bushco folks keep changing the timeframe. Originally it was set for late August, then it got moved to late July, then with Rove's Fitzmas' imminent and Bush's poll ratings sinking below 30%, it has now been moved to sometime in June.
again, this is my best guess. I don't have any access to any secret documents that cheney keeps locked up in his underground bunkers below the whitehouse/pentagon, etc.
Those warships now sitting off the coast of Iran/Iraq are waiting to provoke Iran into attacking them and theymay even lie about it and probably will to "get the ball rolling."
Once we engage in nuclear warfare against Iran, martial law will indeed be declared in this country, and liberals will be considered terrorists, or the new Jews.
god i just hope that the military folks out there are pissed off enough at Rummy/Rice to finally have the go-d-dammed balls to friggin stand down for once. f**uck if those air force trainee pilots during those simulated exercises on 9/11 had only refused cheney's direct orders to stand down and not shoot down the errant United/AA jetliners they would have never have crashed into WTC towers in the first place. bastards.
what gets me is that the rightwing sheeple have no idea how close this country is towards a martial law, a police state: they non chalantly dismiss it as "it couldn't happen here".
I hope I am completely off base, that I am completely wrong!
anon from SF
yes I also heard the interview on the Schultz show and he sounds sincere and well informed..and as the Salon article points out the indictment will be dated so we shall see.
joe, you're kind, and i do appreciate the latitude. i also agree that something weird is going on here. rove is being weird. he's been essentially silent for months, and suddenly he gives an interview about fall elections and does the aei talk. just weird.
but, the week is young. and fitz is in dc. and the gj meets tomorrow.
we'll see. i'll have to listen to that interview. thanks again.
Doc, you might be interested in the post and comments section of The Dark Wraith's "Inflammatory Opinion: The Gaming Game" at http://tinyurl.com/zf9yr
peter, just finished the dark wraith piece, and though i did not read the comments, i have two responses to the post.
one, he brings up points i'd forgotten, such as the possibility that judy miller had foreknowledge of plame's id. to my mind, that could be the piece that got novak off the hook; if she told him, he is not entirely culpable, especially if he cooperated. i'm reminded how vehemently he defended her when she went to the slammer. i'm also reminded that he was told by the cia not to publish her identity. and i'm also reminded of wilson's reaction, which may well be hyperbole, but interpreting it as self-serving is no more convincing than the possibility he is doing this for the express purpose to take heat off his wife. the man has been way too consistent in his position against the administration to really wonder if he's part of this game. but i point out an error in dark wraith's post: wilson was NOT dispatched to authenticate a document. he himself stated he never saw the document. he was expressly dispatched to determine if the rumors that hussein was seeking uranium from niger were plausible. he did just that, and he did have background to do that, given his many years as a diplomat in sub-saharan africa and his many contacts.
i could quibble about other points dw makes, but i'll cut to the one that completely turned me off, namely his signoff against fitz on the grounds that he has taken reporters to task.
dw misses the point of the first amendment if he would believe that the press should be immune. there are clear reasons why they - any more than anyone else in this country, including the prez - should NOT have complete immunity with regard to the fruits of their labors.
it seems to me that the role judy miller has taken on vis a vis the gubmint exposes the precise reason why reporters canNOT be given such immunity: such power would make them easy targets for power plays, just such as one we are suspecting in this recent scenario.
and the larger scenario that gave rise to it. the press has a responsibility that comes part and parcel to its role as the fourth estate. i'll actually be finishing up a post on just this issue soon. but in the meantime, please know that i'm actually inclined to believe that leopold is right about most of what is going down, and that rove is playing cat and mouse with fitz through these nefarious diversions with the press.
yet more signs of just how yucky sticky corrupt our system has become. i actually believe that the founders' intent for the role of the press is now the ONLY thing that keeps the adjective 'hopelessly' out of that understated phrase.
I believe Leopold was set up by the administration to cast doubts on any 'source' information given to reporters. Just another way to curb leaks. I think the same happened to USA Today's report on the phone companies and their records. Same MO, same conclusion....the public begins to doubt the reporters and the reporters begin to not seek sources.
The MSM reporters are scared and too intimidated to report confirm the same news that Leopold has had the guts to report on. The climate of fear and intimidation (i.e. there will be consequences for reporting any negative stories on Bush/Rove) is definitely ramping up in general in this country.
http://forum.truthout.org/blog/story/2006/5/17/125248/099
Update on the Rove Indictment Story
By Marc Ash,
Wed May 17th, 2006 at 12:52:48 PM EDT :: Fitzgerald Investigation
For the past few days, we have endured non-stop attacks on our credibility, and we have fought hard to defend our reputation. In addition, we have worked around the clock to provide additional information to our readership. People want to know more about this, and our job is to keep them informed. We take that responsibility seriously.
Here's what we now know: I spoke personally yesterday with both Rove's spokesman Mark Corallo and Rove's attorney Robert Luskin. Both men categorically denied all key points of our recent reporting on this issue. Both said, "Rove is not a target," "Rove did not inform the White House late last week that he would be indicted," and "Rove has not been indicted." Further, both Corallo and Luskin denied Leopold's account of events at the offices of Patton Boggs, the law firm that represents Karl Rove. They specifically stated again that no such meeting ever occurred, that Fitzgerald was not there, that Rove was not there, and that a major meeting did not take place. Both men were unequivocal on that point.
We can now report, however, that we have additional, independent sources that refute those denials by Corallo and Luskin. While we had only our own sources to work with in the beginning, additional sources have now come forward and offered corroboration to us.
We have been contacted by at least three reporters from mainstream media - network level organizations - who shared with us off-the-record confirmation and moral support. When we asked why they were not going public with this information, in each case they expressed frustration with superiors who would not allow it.
We also learned the following: The events at the office building that houses the law firm of Patton Boggs were not in fact a very well-guarded secret. Despite denials by Corallo and Luskin, there was intense activity at the office building. In fact, the building was staked out by at least two major network news crews. Further, although Corallo and Luskin are not prepared to talk about what happened in the offices of Patton Boggs, others emerging from the building were, both on background and off-the-record. There were a lot of talkers, and they confirmed our accounts. We do have more information, but want additional confirmation before going public with it.
THE 24 HOUR THING
We reported that Patrick Fitzgerald had, "instructed one of the attorneys to tell Rove that he has 24 business hours to get his affairs in order...." That does not mean that at the end of that 24-hour period, Fitzgerald is obliged to hold a press conference and make an announcement. It just means that he has given Rove a 24-hour formal notification. Fitzgerald is not obliged to make an announcement at any point; he does so at his own discretion, and not if it compromises his case. So we're all stuck waiting here. Grab some coffee.
Post a Comment