Month: October 2005

This is a Dangerous Moment

Posted by | Oct 23, 2005 |

As anticipation grows that Bush administration heavies will be indicted this week, there are all kinds of strong feelings.  Some, including many who read this site, are experiencing euphoria.  So this is a plea not to let these feelings cloud continuing vigiliance.

Because the Bush administration is not feeling euphoria, nor is the primary feeling now likely to be shame or repentance.  The Bush people are under increasing attack from all sides.  They are probably feeling cornered.

People, like other animals, can be very dangerous when cornered.  Especially when these people have a military.  When they have their fingers on the thermonuclear buttons.    

It’s not like this hasn’t happened before.  And only a few people perhaps prevented a political crisis from turning into a a major catastrophe.

Read More

CIA Leak Storm Set to Break ¶ 1st Amendment Not a Defense to Espionage – Updated

Posted by | Oct 23, 2005 |

      Update [2005-10-24 01:00AM PST by Oui]:

Washington On Precipice as CIA Leak Storm Set to Break

WASHINGTON (AFP) – Rife with rumors, Washington is braced for a political earthquake over an intricate CIA leak scandal, with a special prosecutor apparently narrowing in on key aides to President George W. Bush and the office of VP Dick Cheney.

  «« click on pic to link to DoJ website
U.S. Attorney Patrick J. Fitzgerald,
pictured August 2005.  
AFP/Getty Images/File/Tim Boyle

LAATSTE NEWS plus BLOGS ::
1. Legal Problems Dog Bush’s Inner Circle – How To Fill the Void
2. Special Counsel Fitzgerald in CIA leak Case Seen as Incorruptible
3. The Huffington Post

More to follow below the fold »»

Read More

As Indictments Loom: Old Hands Pile On Cheney

Posted by | Oct 23, 2005 |

Reuters gives the latest skinny on the upcoming indictments of the warlords:

The lawyers [involved in the case], who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter, said Fitzgerald appears likely to bring charges next week in the nearly two-year leak investigation.

The grand jury, which expires on October 28, convened on Friday with two of the lead prosecutors present, but it was unclear what issues they were working on since the panel appears to have completed hearing from witnesses.

Fitzgerald is expected to meet with the grand jury early next week for a possible vote on indictments.

One of the lawyers said prosecutors were likely starting to present their final case to jurors, either for bringing indictments or to explain why there was insufficient evidence to do so.

“I would be hesitant to say it’s a sign one way or the other,” the lawyer said.

After the grand jury broke up, the two prosecutors, lugging giant legal briefcases, left the federal courthouse without comment.

While Fitzgerald could still charge administration officials with knowingly revealing Plame’s identity, several lawyers in the case said he was more likely to seek charges for easier-to-prove crimes such as making false statements, obstruction of justice and disclosing classified information. He also may bring a broad conspiracy charge, the lawyers said.

From public information, we know that Rove and Libby are both exposed to charges of perjury. Libby is also exposed to charges of suborning perjury. Miller has already testified about Libby’s letter:

Mr. Fitzgerald asked me to read the final three paragraphs aloud to the grand jury. “The public report of every other reporter’s testimony makes clear that they did not discuss Ms. Plame’s name or identity with me,” Mr. Libby wrote.

The prosecutor asked my reaction to those words. I replied that this portion of the letter had surprised me because it might be perceived as an effort by Mr. Libby to suggest that I, too, would say we had not discussed Ms. Plame’s identity. Yet my notes suggested that we had discussed her job.

We have published reports that two Cheney aides, John Hannah and David Wurmser, have been cooperating with the prosecutor.

Andrew Sullivan has reported rumors than Colin Powell has also been cooperating. It wouldn’t be too surprising in light of Larry Wilkerson’s (Powell’s former chief-of-staff) recent comments:

“What I saw was a cabal between the Vice President of the United States, Richard Cheney, and the Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, on critical issues that made decisions that the bureaucracy did not know were being made.”

Those sentiments are echoed in a new piece in the New Yorker, where Poppy’s best friend, Brent Scowcroft says:

“The real anomaly in the Administration is Cheney,” Scowcroft said. “I consider Cheney a good friend — I’ve known him for thirty years. But Dick Cheney I don’t know anymore.”

Not quite “he’s dead to me” but close. Elements within the CIA have been gunning for Cheney for three years, but now everyone is distancing themselves. There is no better indication that Beltway insiders think Cheney is going down than this sudden airing of dirty laundry. It looks like the GOP Establishment (the old hands) are ready to cut Cheney loose and blame him for the Chimpadeer-in-Chief’s misguided foreign policies.

Read More

The Many Adventures of Perkie Kohl – Miers OK’d Infamous SOTU?

Posted by | Oct 23, 2005 |

cross-posted from dembloggers and my blog

Perkie is my little nickname for Harriet Miers.  So I’m easily amused; don’t begrudge me that.  It’s one of the few things keeping me relatively sane.

Anyhoo, back to Perkie…it seems she failed her first Senate test – her questionnaire answers have received dismal reviews from all quarters, even the Moonie Times.  The Senate Judiciary Committee has requested that she do some of the questions over; it would appear that, contrary to some reports, her attention to detail is somewhat lacking.

Except when it comes to shrubya, of course.  On that score – and if anybody keeps score, it’s cronies and toadies – she seems to be involved at every turn.  When his questionable military service record endangered his bid for re-election as governor of Texas, it was none other than Perkie who was charged with the task of <s>scrubbing</s&gt investigating his military service records for the case.  

Read More

Scotland to Investigate US Torture Flights

Posted by | Oct 23, 2005 |

The US government’s practice of flying terrorist suspects oversees to be tortured by willing regimes is about to come under investigation in Scotland. The policy, framed by the innocuous phrase extraordinary rendition has escalated since 9/11 under the guidance of President Bush and his legal advisers, most particularly Alberto Gonzales. It would be interesting to ask Harriet Miers about her views and input to Bush about this issue if she makes it to the upcoming hearings.

Back to Scotland: following an investigative report by Scotland’s Sunday Herald columnist Neil Mackay on October 16, 2005 in which he noted these details, the Herald is now reporting that the Scotland police have launched their own investigation:

The programme is reviled by human rights groups around the world, but the UK is a keen supporter. Since 9/11, the CIA’s 33-strong fleet of planes, which is used to fly its human cargo of alleged terrorist captives around the globe, has stopped off for refuelling and other logistical support at UK airports on no less than 210 occasions.

Nearly 20 British airports have been used, with Prestwick and Glasgow the favoured destinations. Prestwick has received 75 CIA rendition flights and Glasgow 74. Other airports used include Luton, Heathrow, Gatwick and Belfast.

The Scottish police have the authority to board the flights bringing in suspects:

Craig Murray, former British ambassador to Uzbekistan, said : “Once these planes land on British soil, they have no immunity. If they touch down at a civilian airport they are under civilian jurisdiction. This would allow the police to do their job fully and to board the plane and question those on board.”

And, this is one CIA official’s reaction:

The CIA refused categorically to comment. One CIA official merely laughed when told that Scottish police were to investigate.

It is exactly that attitude that shows everyone that it’s Bush’s policies, not those of a “few bad apples”, that are the driving force behind violating international laws – most particularly the ban against torture.

The practice began during the 1990s under the auspices of the CIA but was reportedly rarely used until Bush declared his war on terror and began stripping away almost every possible civil and international right that citizens had up until that point.

more…

Read More