Author: Dean Pajevic

While U.N. Ambassador John Bolton was pushing unilateralism ideology for the U.N. in a speech today in London — and the U.N. is frantically attempting to help Sudanese while John Bolton ruthlessly short-circuits their efforts — Juan Cole published a blistering expose on the self-interest that led to Judith Miller and John Bolton using each other (amid hints that those two connivers may have shared more than we yet know).

Reports The Guardian, John Bolton, “set out the US [um, his?] vision for UN reform.”

“Reforming the United Nations is not a one night stand, reform is forever,” Bolton proclaimed. (And don’t miss — below Juan Cole’s rip-’em-a-new-one report — how Bolton is actively eviscerating the U.N.’s ability to respond to increasing catastrophe in Darfur.)

What Bolton wants is a smaller U.N.: “a reduction in the committees attached to the general assembly, a rethink of the role of some of the agencies and, as far as the development goals go, keeping trade negotiations firmly in the grasp of the WTO.”

One questioner asked if the US “should not pursue more than its national interest. Mr Bolton looked surprised. ‘Would you prefer that the US pursued its own interests or think for the whole world?’ he asked back. ‘I think if you think about it for a second you will say ‘Please pursue your national interest!’.”

Indeed…. pursue one’s own interests at all times. And it apparently suited Judith Miller to parrot John Bolton, writes Juan Cole:

‘ Miller began to uncritically parrot even some of the neocons’ loonier claims. On CNN’s “American Morning With Paula Zahn” for May 14, 2002, Miller explained the controversy that had broken out about allegations that Cuba had a biological weapons program. She told Zahn, “And there are a lot of very unsavory contacts, as the administration regards them, between Cuba and especially Iranians who are involved in biological weapons.” Such frankly weird assertions raise questions about where in the world Miller got her so-called information. No serious intelligence professional believes that either Iran or Cuba has a significant biological weapons program, much less that a communist Latin American dictatorship was being helped by a Shiite Muslim fundamentalist state with deadly microbes.

Miller’s statement only makes sense. … Continued below:

Read More

Having just been regaled by news via Jane Hamsher that Judy Miller “will pick up a First Amendment Award at the 2005 Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) Convention & National Journalism Conference on Oct. 18 in Las Vegas,” it was heartening to read A.P. reporter Pete Yost’s latest.

Yost’s article, posted minutes ago at the S.F. Chronicle site, is optimistically titled, “Prosecutor Nears Decision in CIA Probe.”

Yost reveals how Fitzgerald — who “has burnished his reputation as a tough, hard-charging prosecutor” — engineered the personal contact between Scooter Libby and Judith Miller.

It was Fitzgerald’s letter to Libby’s lawyer in September that helped resolve the impasse over Miller, resulting in her testimony.

Yost also sums up how the White House’s strategy has shifted
“[a]s the evidence has emerged.”

Bush now says he will fire someone only if the person committed a crime. Also, lawyers no longer contest that their clients discussed the identity of Wilson’s wife with reporters. Instead, the lawyers are trying to make the case that exposing her covert status was inadvertent and not part of a conspiracy.

About that tantalizing headline — “Prosecutor Nears Decision in CIA Probe” — Yost writes:

…[Fitzgerald] is nearing a decision on whether to file criminal charges after assembling evidence that top presidential aides had numerous contacts with reporters in the matter.

… Fitzgerald has a variety of options as he weighs whether anyone broke a law that bars the intentional unmasking of a CIA officer. Defense lawyers increasingly are concerned Fitzgerald might pursue other charges such as false statements, obstruction of justice or mishandling classified information.

Before those decisions are made, presidential confidant Karl Rove will make a fourth grand jury appearance, as early as Friday. …

Lest we get too elated, there are these sobering words from the ever-angry Moscow Times columnist, Chris Floyd … Below:

Read More

“The White House disregarded intelligence projections on post-Saddam Iraq according to a newly-declassified CIA report, Intelligence and Analysis on Iraq: Issues for the Intelligence Community, posted today on the website of the National Security Archive.”

It’s no shock to us, but worth noting that the “Kerr Report” finds that “intelligence analysts were under constant pressure to find ‘links between Saddam and [al-Qa’ida]’ causing them to take a “purposely aggressive approach” to the issue, ‘conducting exhaustive and repetitive searches for such links’.”

The press release I received from the National Security Archives notes that today’s New York Times carries a story on the Kerr report, written by Douglas Jehl. That it does: “Report Says White House Ignored C.I.A. on Iraq Chaos.”

But the NYTimes’ story today is so buried that I had to use its search engine to find Jehl’s review of the Kerry report. Not only is the story not listed on the home page, it is not even listed on the home page of the section (“International News”) in which it was dumped.

Isn’t that the darndest thing. And it’s odd that the story wouldn’t fit in the Nation or Washington sections of the ol’ gray girl. But what do I know. Could it have something to do with Judy’s WMD reporting?

Read More

The press conf. was on MSNBC… White House video and on C-SPAN. This is an OPEN THREAD!

Read More

Because of their less-than-forthright dealings with Judith Miller and her attorneys, Joseph Tate (Scooter Libby’s attorney) and Libby may find themselves accused of witness intimidation or tampering. Even if Patrick Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor in the CIA Leak case (aka Plamegate), does not press charges for witness intimidation, Tate may find himself the subject of a state or federal bar disciplinary investigation (depending on the jurisdiction).

Following Miller’s release, Floyd Abrams (the NYT/Miller 1st Amendment attorney) and Bob Bennett (Miller’s criminal attorney), appeared on Sept. 30 cable news shows. Both Abrams and Bennett emphatically said that Scooter Libby’s attorney did not give Judith full, unfettered permission — complaining constantly about the “coerced” waiver Libby was forced to sign by the government — UNTIL Libby sent Judy the now-infamous personal letter and called her at the jail. Both attorneys became testy about Tate’s comments after Miller’s release.

Abrams, who appeared Sept. 30 on his son’s MSNBC legal show, implied that Libby let Judith rot in jail until he finally did the decent thing. He snickered when his son Dan mentioned that Libby’s attorney expressed “surprised” that Miller took so long to agree because, Tate said, Libby had given her a green light.

It wouldn’t surprise me — based on my observations about Abrams’ anger with Tate, Libby’s attorney, and Murray Waas’s statements yesterday about Abrams — if Abrams himself contacted Patrick Fitzgerald to complain about the behavior of Joseph Tate.

It’s not a good thing when the nation’s most-respected First Amendment attorney complains about you to a special prosecutor and U.S. Attorney.

Bennett, with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer on Sept. 30, argued that Libby’s attorney did not call him until August 31, after Miller was in jail. Bennett edged towards anger, saying that Libby’s attorney and Libby knew where Judy was and how to reach her.

It’s also worth considering if Judith Miller and Bob Bennett — in reaction to the intimidation — “found” those additional notes that further implicate Libby, presented them to Fitzgerald, and testified again before the grand jury, after which she got her contempt charge lifted. (Fitzgerald, of course, may not have taken kindly to Miller’s 11th hour discovery of the notes, but is no doubt glad to get them and knows, from experience, what it takes to get Miiller’s cooperation. Smirk.)

Murray Waas, whose stories on the CIA Leak case have advanced our knowledge more than any other journalist’s, hinted at accusations of “witness intimidation/tampering” yesterday when he was interviewed yesterday on Democracy Now! by Amy Goodman.

MURRAY WAAS: Well, Judith Miller — there’s an issue that prosecutors are now looking and have been asking questions to Judith Miller, and that’s regarding whether Lewis Libby either directly or indirectly through her attorney attempted to discourage her to testify to the grand jury or cooperate in some other manner with Fitzgerald’s investigation.

Waas’s remarks continue below the fold.

____________

I’m sorry, PISSers, but you may have to wait just a teensy bit (LIKE WEEKS!) longer: “A source close to the Plame case is saying that Fitzgerald met alone with Judge Hogan yesterday, presumably to ask for an extension of the Grand Jury.” (FireDogLake via Crooks & Liars)

PISS = Pre-Indictment Stress Syndrome

Read More