Author: BooMan

Pro-Torture Cheney and the Doom of Darth

Posted by | Oct 25, 2005 |

October 7, 2003

Q: Mr. President, how confident are you the investigation will find the leaker in the CIA case? And what do you make of Sharon’s comment that Israel will strike its enemies at any place, any time?

THE PRESIDENT: This is the dual question. (Laughter.) I’m trying to figure out if I want to answer either of them, since you violated a major rule. (Laughter.) At least it’s not a cell phone. (Laughter.)

Randy, you tell me, how many sources have you had that’s leaked information that you’ve exposed or have been exposed? Probably none. I mean this town is a — is a town full of people who like to leak information. And I don’t know if we’re going to find out the senior administration official. Now, this is a large administration, and there’s a lot of senior officials. I don’t have any idea. I’d like to. I want to know the truth. That’s why I’ve instructed this staff of mine to cooperate fully with the investigators — full disclosure, everything we know the investigators will find out. I have no idea whether we’ll find out who the leaker is — partially because, in all due respect to your profession, you do a very good job of protecting the leakers. But we’ll find out.

Large administration: check
A lot of senior officials: check
Instructed the staff to cooperate fully: huh?

October 25, 2005

I. Lewis Libby Jr., Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff, first learned about the C.I.A. officer at the heart of the leak investigation in a conversation with Mr. Cheney weeks before her identity became public in 2003, lawyers involved in the case said Monday.

So, on day one, Dick Cheney could have told the President that he was the source of the information on Valerie Plame, and that his chief-of-staff was leaking her name to Judith Miller and other reporters. Libby and Hadley could have told the President that Karl Rove was in on the game. Karl Rove could have told the President that he was leaking to Cooper and other reporters. Well, either they told the truth to the President and he signed off on an extensive stonewalling campaign, or they lied to the President and launched an extensive stonewalling campaign.

In the former case, the President and Vice-President must be impeached. In the latter case, the Vice-President must resign or face impeachment, and the administration must be purged of all the people that have engaged in a cover-up.

It doesn’t matter whether or not Dick Cheney broke any laws when he passed on information about Valerie Wilson to Scooter Libby. He obviously did not offer that information voluntarily to the prosecutor, or Scooter Libby would not have told the prosecutor that he first learned of Valerie Wilson from reporter Tim Russert.

As for Cheney’s legal liability? Judge for yourself:

Mr. Cheney was interviewed under oath by Mr. Fitzgerald last year. It is not known what the vice president told Mr. Fitzgerald about the conversation with Mr. Libby or when Mr. Fitzgerald first learned of it.

Meanwhile (below the flip) Cheney is doing his best to assure that torture remains an instrumental tool in the War on Phantoms…er…I mean the war on al-Qaeda’s number three and Zarqawi’s number two…er…the perpetual war on everyone anywhere who doesn’t appreciate being tortured.

Read More

O’Reilly: Spanking Won World War Two

Posted by | Oct 24, 2005 |

This is too funny not to post. Media Matters reports:

From the October 20 broadcast of Westwood One’s The Radio Factor with Bill O’Reilly:

OREILLY: But if you’re beating a kid, there’s no excuse. Then you’ve lost control of the child, you’ve lost control of yourself. Here’s the litmus test: If you lose your temper, and then you do something to the kid physically, that’s abuse. If you lose your temper. Got it? That’s it. If you’re under control, it’s calculated, you’re disgusted, the kid knows, it’s tempered, absolutely your right as a child [sic]. Now in the Great Depression, every American got spanked. And those Americans went to war during World War II and won the very intense conflict and showed bravery across the board, the Greatest Generation. The Greatest Generation, almost down to the man, was spanked, ’cause that’s the way we did it in America. OK?

So I’m not believing all these sociologists, these fruitcakes, who run around going, you know, you look at a kid cross-eyed, he’s going to grow up to be a heroin addict. I’m not buying that. I think you have to do it responsibly, you have to do it in a way that the child understands what the boundaries are, and is given a choice. Stay within the boundaries, or you’re going to get punished. But I think that 90 percent of the time, you could find another way.

Want audio?

I want a falafel.

Read More

Debunking the Defense of the WHIGs

Posted by | Oct 24, 2005 |

The Wall Street Journal editorial board has presented Karl Rove and Scooter Libby’s defense. If this all they’ve got, they are going to be doing hard time. The WSJ should carefully consider testing their kool-aid, because I don’t think the best defense for lying to a grand jury is to lie to a trial jury. Let’s take a look at how many lies the WSJ is putting forth:

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

What I’ve Learned from George W. Bush

Posted by | Oct 22, 2005 |

My first experience with political disillusionment came during the late summer of 1988. Coming out of the Democratic Convention, Michael Dukakis had an enormous 17% lead in the polls over George Herbert Walker Bush. Bush was widely suspected of being implicated in the Iran-Contra scandal, he was seen as lacking leadership skills, he was unpopular with the Reagan crowd, and the biggest MSM talking point about him was that he was a ‘wimp’. Making matters worse for Bush, his selection of Dan Quayle to be his running mate was deeply controversial and prevented him from getting the usual bounce out of his own convention.

But then something happened that changed the minds of tens of millions of voters, virtually overnight.

The GOP started running commercials about the Massachusetts prison furlough program, focusing on one example of a furloughed black man who raped a white women.

Read More