BRANDOLAND: Talking to God...For You!

Friday, July 22, 2005


"Joe Wilson. Who the fuck does he think he is?!"

"He's a career diplomat, sir. Plays both sides of the fence."

"Bullshit. I want a report - on every aspect of his miserable fucking life - on my desk - now!"

"Yes, sir."



"Interest. Are you interested? I know you are because it's fuck or walk."


For Two Aides in Leak Case, 2nd Issue Rises

WASHINGTON, July 21 - At the same time in July 2003 that a C.I.A. operative's identity was exposed, two key White House officials who talked to journalists about the officer were also working closely together on a related underlying issue: whether President Bush was correct in suggesting earlier that year that Iraq had been trying to acquire nuclear materials from Africa.
He wasn't "correct."
The two issues had become inextricably linked because Joseph C. Wilson IV, the husband of the unmasked C.I.A. officer, had questioned Mr. Bush's assertion, prompting a damage-control effort by the White House that included challenging Mr. Wilson's standing and his credentials.

People who have been briefed on the case said the White House officials, Karl Rove and I. Lewis Libby, were helping prepare what became the administration's primary response to criticism that a FLAWED PHRASE about the nuclear materials in Africa had been in Mr. Bush's State of the Union address six months earlier.
Flawed phrase?!

The phrase was WRONG!
They had exchanged e-mail correspondence and drafts of a proposed statement by George J. Tenet, then the director of central intelligence, to explain how the disputed WORDING had gotten into the address.
"Someone forgot to hit the 'delete' key thing?"

"That's a good one."
Mr. Rove, the president's political strategist, and Mr. Libby, the chief of staff for Vice President Dick Cheney, coordinated their efforts with Stephen J. Hadley, then the deputy national security adviser, who was in turn consulting with Mr. Tenet.

At the same time, they were grappling with the fallout from an Op-Ed article on July 6, 2003, in The New York Times by Mr. Wilson, a former diplomat, in which he criticized the way the administration had used intelligence to support the claim in Mr. Bush's speech.

The work done by Mr. Rove and Mr. Libby on the Tenet statement during this intense period has not been previously disclosed. People who have been briefed on the case discussed this critical time period and the events surrounding it to demonstrate that Mr. Rove and Mr. Libby were not involved in an orchestrated scheme to discredit Mr. Wilson or disclose the undercover status of his wife, Valerie Wilson, but were intent on clarifying the use of intelligence in the president's address.
What spin.

They were not a discredit Wilson...but intent on clarifying the African intelligence.

What the fuck does that mean?!

The clarified the intelligence by going after Wilson. That WAS the scheme.
The special counsel in the case, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, has been examining this period of time to determine whether the officials' work on the Tenet statement led in some way to the disclosure of Ms. Wilson's identity to Robert D. Novak, the syndicated columnist, according to the people who have been briefed.

It is not clear what information Mr. Rove and Mr. Libby might have collected about Ms. Wilson as they worked on the Tenet statement.
"Hmm. This is interesting. Joe is married."

"Damn. Was hoping he liked young dudes."
Mr. Rove has said he learned her name from Mr. Novak. Mr. Libby has declined to discuss the matter.

Here's the deal: The Neo-Cons were pissed that some people (Joe Wilson, Richard Clarke, etc) tried to call them out with FACTS...and went after everyone that did.

Again - that's how they tried to "clarify" their "use of intelligence."


Who else went digging?

Michael Isikoff and John Barry had this little piece from the May 9 Newsweek/MSNBC thing.
HEARINGS: Bolton Blunders

U.S. Senate Democrats, still trying to quash the U.N. nomination of John Bolton, are looking for ammo in Bolton requests for National Security Agency electronic "intercept" reports containing the names of U.S. officials. (NSA rules require it to delete names of Americans caught by its eavesdropping network, but officials can request that the names be disclosed if they have a "need to know.")

Bolton's request for 10 intercepts with U.S. names has set off a D.C. guessing game: Did he want info to undermine rivals like Korea expert Jack Pritchard, Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, or even Colin Powell? Was he trying to check up on U.S. representatives to nuclear talks between Iran and Europe? Hoping to find out what two members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee said to Iran's U.N. ambassador? Wondering what the NSA had on an unnamed U.S. journalist?

The NSA indicates it will this week deliver full documentation on Bolton's requests to the Senate Intelligence Committee, which then will have to figure out how to publicize the contents without leaking sensitive intel.
My point: Bolton and his loyal deputies went digging "before." To get info on "opponents."

I'm just saying.

Related to Rove-gate?



More later...


Post a Comment

<< Home