It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Has anyone noticed that the coverup worked?
In his impressive presentation of the indictment of Lewis "Scooter" Libby last week, Patrick Fitzgerald expressed the wish that witnesses had testified when subpoenas were issued in August 2004, and "we would have been here in October 2004 instead of October 2005."
Note the significance of the two dates: October 2004, before President Bush was reelected, and October 2005, after the president was reelected. Those dates make clear why Libby threw sand in the eyes of prosecutors, in the special counsel's apt metaphor, and helped drag out the investigation.
As long as Bush still faced the voters, the White House wanted Americans to think that officials such as Libby, Karl Rove and Vice President Cheney had nothing to do with the leak campaign to discredit its arch-critic on Iraq, former ambassador Joseph Wilson.
And Libby, the good soldier, pursued a brilliant strategy to slow the inquiry down. As long as he was claiming that journalists were responsible for spreading around the name and past CIA employment of Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, Libby knew that at least some news organizations would resist having reporters testify. The journalistic "shield" was converted into a shield for the Bush administration's coverup.
Bush and his disciples would like everyone to assume that Libby was some kind of lone operator who, for this one time in his life, abandoned his usual caution. They pray that Libby will be the only official facing legal charges and that political interest in the case will dissipate.
You can tell the president worries that this won't work, because yesterday he did what he usually does when he's in trouble: He sought to divide the country and set up a bruising ideological fight. He did so by nominating a staunchly conservative judge to the Supreme Court.
Jack: Couldn't the republicans find somebody to show the new supreme court nominee around besides the guy who is under investigation by the SEC and the justice department. I mean Bill Frist has a rather large cloud hanging over his head based on--alleged insider trading deals..
Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
While I agree that lying and twisting the truth is bad (ie., politicians are bad), it is also a perversion of the truth to make it sound like James Bond was outed. Plame's friends and family members knew what she was, her cocktail party buds knew it, only us commoners were not told.
Seems to me there is a lot of political mileage being squeezed out of this non-issue. Only fair, though, as the Rep. side played it off until after the elections. Now, the other side gets to play a while.
Politics as normal. The sport is boring once you realize it is a sport, and is totally controlled.
Originally posted by Amethyst
I'd be willing to bet, though, that Hillary might actually get
(s)elected in '08. I'm not sure who's scarier--Hillary or Dubya.
Originally posted by FlyersFan
As far as Valerie Plame goes .... her husband 'outted' her years ago.
He chatted her up being CIA to everyone. It was DC's worst kept
secret. She hadn't been undercover in over 5 years either, so I
don't know how anyone can say that she had her cover violated.
Her radical left wing hubby is using this to further his own political
ideas and ambitions. If he really wanted to protect her identy,
he would have kept his mouth shut about her 'job'. He's just an