|Posted on Saturday, July 09, 2005 - 08:28 am: |
Judith Miller of the NY Tijmes was a stooge for the Bush administration during the days after 9/11 and in the early stages of the Iraq war. More than any other reporter, she showcased the WMD speculations and intelligence findings of the Bush administration and the Iraqi defector/dissidents. Our WMD expectations grew largely out of Miller's stories. So, along comes Robert Novak and outs Valerie Plume, identifying her as a CIA op, thus endangering her contacts, co-workers, etc. Plume is the wife of James Miller, a recently retired diplomat, who had just authored an op-ed piece in the NY Times that was decidedly anti-Bush. As a result a grand jury was thrown together to investigate. Novak wasn't called before it, but Judith Miller was, as was Newsweek reporter Matt Cooper. Miller was jailed for refusing to reveal her source, despite never having published an article on the story. Cooper, after a last-minute phone call from his "source," was given the go ahead to turn over his notes to the grand jury thus avoiding jail. Since Cooper's source is widely reported (and by authoritative sources) to be Karl Rove....Well, one hardly believes that a kindly soul like Rove would spare Cooper durance vile. Especially since outing a CIA op is a treasonable offense. So I look at all this and I have the intense suspicion that the American people are not being told anything approximating the truth about this story. What's Miller doing in jail? Having a fling with Rove? Receiving secret briefings on WMD in Cuba, a do-able war? This kind of crap is as disturbing in its own way as a bombing, because it demonstrates so clearly that, when it comes right down to it, our own governments are aligned against us.
|Posted on Saturday, July 09, 2005 - 02:14 pm: |
This story is huge, and The Media is doing their best to avoid it.
It deserves more attention.
We know that Rove, Liby, whoever, isn't going to have to pay the piper, but still--where are the headlines? What do you have to do in this administration to cause a sensation? Have consentual sex with an intern??
|Posted on Saturday, July 09, 2005 - 02:39 pm: |
Lucius: This is an interesting story. I've been following it and waiting for something to come of it, but... as you say. I believe her name, though, is Plame and her husband is Joe Wilson, for the record. Novak is such an overripe eggplant head -- that creepy little fucker. He should already be in jail just for being the shmuck that he is. Throw him in solitary with that asshole with the bow tie.
|Posted on Saturday, July 09, 2005 - 05:59 pm: |
Part of what has bothered me is the press coverageĖit has all been about ďJudith Miller taking a stand for the First Amendment.Ē Bullshit. She was called to appear before a Grand Jury inquiring about a criminal act, viz. outing an undercover agent. If her source was the one who disclosed the agentís name, then that source committed a crime: the act of giving information was criminal and itself caused danger to many people. The source gave the information by extracting a promise from Miller not to disclose his/her name. But under almost all of the shield laws in existence, a reporter can be forced to disclose his/her source if there is an overriding need for the information, or if the act of disclosing the information was a crime. No one, in any
profession, anywhere has an absolute privilege always, not even the President.
Miller claims to be engaging in civil disobedience. Again bullshit. Civil disobedience involves at least two aspects: first, that the cause is an overriding moral one, and second, that there is no real judicial recourse or the recourse is corrupt. Even if I grant her the first (which Iím not ready to do), the fact is she went through three layers of Federal Courts before she was jailed. This wasnít a case of a 1950s Mississippi local jurist issuing arbitrary bans based on the request of a racist sheriff. This was a judge who reviewed her case after she refused to testify before the Grand Jury, after the Court of Appeals found that she had no basis to refuse testifying, and after the Supreme Court refused to hear any more appeals. She isnít engaged in civil disobedience: sheís decided she doesnít agree with public policy as interpreted. Heck, I donít agree with all kinds of things issued by the federal bench, but as a strong believer in civil society, I abide by their decisions because otherwise our world would be chaos.
It particularly infuriates me that Millerís protection of her source is compared to Woodward and Bernstein's protection of Deep Throat/Felt. Felt was disclosing criminal behavior of others, a corruption of government, issues of unbelievable public importance. Millerís source disclosed information that was not of public importance and which was given in order to punish someone who spoke up against the government. I agree wholeheartedly with Lucius. Thereís a huge story here. Not the one being covered.
|Posted on Saturday, July 09, 2005 - 06:21 pm: |
I don't understand. Are we to assume that Cooper's source and Miller's source are not one and the same?
What happened to Novak? Did he get a free pass out of the frying pan?
My questions aren't rhetorical--help, please! If one of you has a good link for me, I'd really appreciate it. I've been rooting around archived news with some difficulty.
|Posted on Saturday, July 09, 2005 - 06:37 pm: |
"Bad case for a fight" - David Ignatius, Washington Post
but it goes beyond this case.
"US courts threaten right to keep sources secret"-Reporters Without Borders
Bill Moyers' speech to the National Conference for Media Reform
I diatribed myself on this issue on this board a few days ago, though with none of the elegance shown on this thread. Mine was just a vomited jellybean-mix of rages, though you might find the links that I put at the end of my chunder of interest.
|Posted on Saturday, July 09, 2005 - 06:48 pm: |
Thank you very, very much.
|Posted on Saturday, July 09, 2005 - 06:53 pm: |
The more vomited jellybean mixes of rage the better!
|Posted on Saturday, July 09, 2005 - 07:06 pm: |
Jeff, names...like Al Pacino said, So many names.
What people have said covers the rights issure, but not the Rove part. This White House, for arrogance and playing fast and loose with the law, makes the Nixon White House look like punks.
|Posted on Monday, July 11, 2005 - 08:44 am: |
It's like a reprise of All the President's Men, but with a complicit press...
|Posted on Tuesday, July 12, 2005 - 07:39 am: |
Well, the White House is admitting Rowe at least talked to Cooper. But the best thing yesterday was the pummeling the press sec took. Yow.
|Posted on Tuesday, July 12, 2005 - 10:10 am: |
Fuck dismissal/resignation/etc. Rove committed a treasonous felony. Let's string him up...
|Posted on Wednesday, July 13, 2005 - 06:03 am: |
It's not gonna happen. We're not living in the Watergate era anymore; we're not even in the Iran-Contra era anymore. Rove will pay no price for his crime; like all the rest of Bush's cadre of criminals, he will doubtless be rewarded. One good thing about this episode is that it has the potential at least to open some people's eyes about the extent to which the US has become a one-party state, pledging allegiance to Dear Leader all the way down the line. Even the aggressive grilling of McConnell by the press corps seemed too little, too late, and driven not by outrage at the whole pattern of lies, many of them more egregious and costly for the country, but by a sense of having been treated by Rove and the WH in a manner unbecoming their lofty stature as fellow aristocrats of the new regime. Maybe I'm wrong, and I certainly hope so, but I'm not holding my breath . . . only my nose.
|Posted on Wednesday, July 13, 2005 - 06:38 am: |
Paul: I have to sadly agree. How about that excuse that Rove never named who the CIA agent was, only that it was Joe Wilson's wife. I expect even my community college students to have better excuses than that when they blow off the homework assignment. The guy is so guilty that the only thing they can come up with as a defense is that weak sauce. Oh yeah, they are also saying that it didn't matter that Plame was outed because she wasn't in the field at the time. There's a solid excuse. Well, I guess she's never going to be in the field again, huh. Wonder what the American taxpayer paid to train her. I don't know how anyone can conceive of the idea that Rove and these other thugs in Washington are in any way interested in helping the American public. You've gotta be a real pin head to buy this bill of bullshit. As it turns out, Wilson was the guy who was telling the truth, as has been shown by the Downing Street Memo and by what has transpired in the past years. And our government is all about punishing him and his family for it. And you're right, Paul, people are just going to get on board with Rove's tissue-thin deception, wave their fucking flags and continue to drop their drawers for GW. Who said, "Never underestimate the stupidity of the American public?" Mencken, perhaps?
|Posted on Wednesday, July 13, 2005 - 09:48 am: |
I think it was Mencken -- or maybe Barnum.
What's also incredible to me is that, following London, people can still accept the fantasy that "we're fighting them over there so that we don't have to fight them here." I mean, you'd think at least Blair would wise up -- "Hey, y'know, when W says 'over there,' he means here!" Hell, as far as W is concerned, New York City is "over there"!
"The best lack all conviction, and the worst are filled with a passionate intensity." Boy, do I find myself thinking of those lines often these days!
|Posted on Wednesday, July 13, 2005 - 10:06 am: |
It was Mencken. Barnum was all about Foolin' some of the people...etc
And actually, the petty fallout to Wilson and his wife is almost meaningless, compared to all the potentially ongoing operations that were screwed. Anybody who had any kind of contact with her, ever, would be scrutinized to the nth degree by their government (if not summarily "removed"), thereby fuckin' up what could be ongoing operations that have a direct bearing on our national security. As someone who rides subways and trains daily, Rove should be hung for the traitorous prick that he is...
He committed a treasonous felony. Period.
I'm looking forward to seeing my family in early August, because I am just going to unload on them. Stupid fuckin' cows voting for this evil fuckin' coalition. I should probably eat my lunch and try to calm down.
|Posted on Wednesday, July 13, 2005 - 10:24 am: |
..."No one ever lost a buck by underestimating the intelligence of the American public..."
I'm not sure he'll skate. These guys are all egomaniacs, and they tend to fuck up. But yeah, it''s probable. The fucking country's brainwashed.
|Posted on Wednesday, July 13, 2005 - 11:19 am: |
On the other hand, we are about due for the standard second term of presidency scandals to break loose. One can hopes they stick a little better than Reagan & Clinton's
|Posted on Wednesday, July 13, 2005 - 11:45 am: |
The serious ones (treason, etc) don't stick as well as the sexy ones, it seems
|Posted on Friday, July 22, 2005 - 07:20 am: |
Did Novak testify and simply keep quiet about it? This article implies he did (read paragraph 3)
|Posted on Friday, July 22, 2005 - 07:28 am: |
Robert: There's some great stuff at King of Zembla about this story. Here's the link.
Just scroll down.
|Posted on Friday, July 22, 2005 - 11:58 am: |
Thing is - all right, suppose it gets so hot that Rove, by some bizarre miscarriage of injustice, has to spend a couple of months in a country club jail. "His political career is over"?! Not as long as he's got a phone in there.
Rove, like syphilis, isn't going anywhere. He, Rumsfeld, and the rest of the Mafia haven't run for so much as dog catcher in my lifetime and they don't have to as long as figureheads are elected to appoint them. "Term limits" are being turned into an illusion behind which a single cadre can continue to make policy presidency after presidency.
PaulW - Hell, as far as W is concerned, New York City is "over there"!
It's win-win for them. They get their pretext to turn the Orwell up to eleven, and nobody gets hurt but us faggot pinko gooks.
As for treason - breaking treaties (US did sign Kyoto, didn't it? signed plenty of treaties with the Native Americans ...) is treason. So is going to war under false pretenses as an especially bloody and nihilistic way to shift tax dollars into your company's coffers.
I think I've said it before - the Ceaucescus turned Romania into a living hell of police informers and torture. When the Romanians turned on the Ceaucescus, they tried them on live TV and then announced -
"We hereby officially abolish the death penalty ...
... effective immediately after your public execution."
|Posted on Friday, July 22, 2005 - 12:15 pm: |
Michael, I've been making that point about term limits ever since they were proposed -- glad to see somebody else can see through the scam. They are the true death knell of democracy. Although arguably the two-term limit for presidents is different, due to the power of the office. Personally, I don't think it is, but an argument can be made.
We signed Kyoto, but I don't believe it was ever ratified. So technically, we didn't break it; we just pulled out. Hmmm... Why does that sound like some kind of lame excuse a guy would make to his unexpectedly pregnant girlfriend?