War-Gate

War-gate
The scandal that could bring down a President
by Justin Raimondo
In the run-up to war the sheer volume of lies produced by this administration was meant to overwhelm Congress, the media, and the people with its inventiveness. In a veritable frenzy of prevarication, the War Party came up with some real whoppers – and one howler that has not only come back to haunt them, but which very well may prove to be their undoing.

In his State of the Union address, George W. Bush made the claim that Iraq had sought to procure the means to assemble nuclear weapons in "an African country." This assertion puzzled former U.S. ambassador to Gabon Joseph C. Wilson, who had been sent to Niger earlier in 2002 by the CIA on a mission to track down rumors that Saddam's agents had sent an emissary there in search of weapons grade uranium. Ambassador Wilson used his connections to get word to National Security Advisor Condoleeza Rice that her assertions that the Niger uranium claim was based on facts garnered somewhere in the bowels of the bureaucracy was in error. The message he got back was: thanks, but no thanks.

Wilson went public with his charges that the administration had relied on information it knew to be false to make the case for war. The administration struck back swiftly, and with potentially deadly accuracy: in addition to contacting columnist Robert Novak, two top White House officials called at least six Washington journalists, denigrating Ambassador Wilson as the beneficiary of "nepotism" because his wife, Valerie Plame, is a CIA agent working on nuclear nonproliferation. Not only did Wilson have a political agenda, they charged, but it was only through her good offices that he was sent to Niger. As one source told the Washington Post:

"It was unsolicited. They were pushing back. They used everything they had."

But this volley backfired almost immediately. Robert Novak's now infamous column, in which he identified Plame, citing administration sources, caused a furor. Would the War Party stoop to this – outing and potentially endangering an undercover CIA agent, and all her contacts – in their zeal to discredit their enemies?

For months, John Ashcroft sat on this investigation, and very little was heard of it. Then, suddenly, he recused himself, and gave the job to one of his subordinates, who promptly appointed a special counsel: Patrick J. Fitzgerald. As someone familiar with Fitzgerald's reputation in law enforcement circles put it:

"I'm sure the word is going out that the bulldog has arrived in town."
link

Everyone should read this. Raimondo is brilliant.


fixed and shortened link

[edit on 16-7-2005 by DontTreadOnMe]

Good catch ECK, is nice to see how the pieces to the puzzle are coming together.

But I go a littler bit farther, perhaps the reason why Mr. Ashcroft got our of it was due to his links to another member of the Bushes men entourage.

What you think?

I was just thinking how interesting this whole thing is. Rove may in fact, not be the target of this whole investigation. What if the actual lead was none other than John Bolton? (He's Bush's nominee for UN Ambassador. ) In that case, both Rove and Bolton's careers would go down in flames.

I tell you what, if the right people in congress was doing the right thing it would be so much pressure on these people to make one littler bird start singing against the others.

But these people are protected with an all Bush presidency backed Congress we may not see anything until the next president comes and by then they will be all gone with "presidential pardons" like Clinton did.

As older friends of mine point out, it could also go the way of Nixon's second term. Big success at first, then cataclysmic failure. Hurting the Republican party for years.

Whats with all the "gates"?

Why does every scandal have to be a gate?

Seems odd...... but then, US politics all over seem very odd from an outside perspective...

Originally posted by stumason
Whats with all the "gates"?

Why does every scandal have to be a gate?

Seems odd...... but then, US politics all over seem very odd from an outside perspective...

You're right it is very odd. The Nixon scandal was called Watergate because that is the name of the hotel where the Democratic National Committee headquarters was located (and broken into).

It has just become kind of a funny way to say 'scandal' or conspiracy.

And trust me, US politics seem very odd from the inside, too!