Jump to content
The Education Forum

A New Watergate?


John Simkin
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 83
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

These people are going to remain in power. They didn't steal it for nothing. The worse things get politically for Bush, the more dangerous they get for the American people and the rest of the world. There is no poll numbers problem that another terrorist attack, worse than 9/11, couldn't solve, followed by martial law. Everyone should hope Bush gets through this CIA payback with minimum damage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These people are going to remain in power. They didn't steal it for nothing. The worse things get politically for Bush, the more dangerous they get for the American people and the rest of the world. There is no poll numbers problem that another terrorist attack, worse than 9/11, couldn't solve, followed by martial law. Everyone should hope Bush gets through this CIA payback with minimum damage.

Maybe, but hopefully a comprehensive shellacking in the mid-term elections will temper their hubris.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are several reasons why I believe the Plame Scandal has the potential to be more damaging than Watergate. The main reason is that at the core of this story is the way the Bush administration lied about the reasons for invading Iraq. As this war has resulted in the deaths of over 2,000 Americans, this is about as serious as it gets.

In his address to the nation in January 2003, Bush lied to the American people about attempts by Iraq to buy uranium in Niger. Joseph Wilson was one of many people who knew Bush was lying. However, he was the only one with the courage to come forward and say it as he did in his article in the New York Times in July 2003.

Bush’s reaction was the same as that of Nixon. He instructed Karl Rove to begin a dirty tricks campaign against Wilson. Unfortunately for Bush, as with Nixon, his aides went too far. By telling a small group of loyal journalists that Wilson’s wife, Valerie Plame, was a CIA operative, they committed a serious felony.

These were the same journalists who published false stories about WMD. They also willingly published these stories about Wilson and Plame. In doing so, they also committed a serious felony.

These journalists have all done deals and are likely to give evidence in Libby’s trial. It is not clear what names they gave Patrick Fitzgerald. However, we do know that one of them gave Libby’s name. At the moment, Liddy has only been charged with taking part in the cover-up: lying to the grand jury, lying to federal investigators and hindering a grand jury investigation into the leak.

Why then has Libby not been charged with the far more serious offence of disclosing that Valerie Plame was a CIA operative? I believe the reason is that Fitzgerald is trying to do a deal with Libby. He will only charge him with the lesser offences if he gives the name of the person who told him to do it. In other words will he become a John Dean or a Gordon Liddy. If Libby becomes a Liddy then only one man will go to prison. However, if he decides to become a Dean, he will bring down Rove and maybe even Bush.

There are also several journalists, including Robert Novak, Matt Cooper and Judith Miller, who also know a great deal about this story. I know they are all right-wingers but one might decide to really break this story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thought JFK members would be interested in this defence of Rove and Bush posted by Tim Gratz on another thread. It seems that the right-wing Republicans are feeling the pressure:

So I assume John you will be able to show where you ever wrote anything critical of Phillip Agee for revealing the names of hundreds of CIA covert operatives around the world? What he did was of course a hundred-fold worse than whoever revealed Plam's status, given the number of agents he "outed".

I too noticed that no one has been charged with the offense of revealing that Plame as a CIA agent. Libby was only charged with obstructing justice etc. by allegedly giving false information to investigators and to the grand jury. What bothered me was (according to news commentators) the allegedly false information that Scooter gave was so easily refuted by others that he must have been a complete idiot to think he could get by with it. I really no little about Libby but presumably no one who rises to a position as high as the one he held lacks intelligence.

I assume most members have heard the commentary that analogizes the indictment against Libby with the offense for which Martha Stewart was convicted. She was not convicted of illegally using any inside information but only of lying to investigators about the incident.

But once again your post is replete with lies. (What else can you call a factual assertion that has no support in fact?) You wrote: "Bush’s reaction was the same as that of Nixon. He instructed Karl Rove to begin a dirty tricks campaign against Wilson. Unfortunately for Bush, as with Nixon, his aides went too far. By telling a small group of loyal journalists that Wilson’s wife, Valerie Plame, was a CIA operative, they committed a serious felony."

What evidence if any do you have that Bush issued any such instructions to Rove? Without any such evidence, how dare you make such a statement? And as long as we are it it, you claim the disclosure of Plame's identity was a "serious felony". Just so we understand where you are coming from, perhaps you can identify several felonies that you consider "non-serious".

More on this later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I question whether Bush gave Rove instructions for a dirty tricks campaign against Wilson. I say this not because I agree with Tim, which I don't. I say it because Bush is an empty suit who does or says what his handlers tell him. So I imagine it was Rove's or Cheney's idea and Bush simply said okay, if Bush was even told about it.

There are those who suspect that Nixon himself had no idea what the Watergate burglary was about. Similarly, Bush may have had no idea that Plame was going to be outted by his handlers. The only grounds for thinking that Bush had any hand in the decision is that it was a stupid thing to do. But even intelligent people can do stupid things, particularly when they have the power to do anything they want. And I can understand why Bush may be angry and frustrated nowadays, going to bed pouting if not plastered every night, because he doesn't have more of a say-so around the White House.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Stephen Turner
I can understand why Bush may be angry and frustrated nowadays, going to bed pouting if not plastered every night, because he doesn't have more of a say-so around the White House.

Ron, being "plastered" in these neck of the woods translates as being falling down drunk, Are you saying that Bush has fallen off the wagon? I tried to imagine having a conversation with a drunk GWB, but it refuses to compute.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stephen,

There is tabloid gossip that Bush is on the booze again and that Laura has to go around the White House looking for hidden bottles. If true I doubt that it's anything new, since it was a couple of years ago that Bush "choked on a pretzel" and passed out, bumping his widdle head.

The idea of conversing with an intoxicated Bush is indeed intriguing. I suspect that the effect of booze on Bush is the opposite than for most people. The drunker he gets, the more he actually makes sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Stephen Turner

LOL, Classic. I find your comments earlier about the worse it gets for Bush, the nastier the Administration will get chilling, I cant shake this image of Chaney sitting somewhere deep in the bowels of the Whitehouse, stroking a white cat and cackling insanely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These people are going to remain in power. They didn't steal it for nothing. The worse things get politically for Bush, the more dangerous they get for the American people and the rest of the world. There is no poll numbers problem that another terrorist attack, worse than 9/11, couldn't solve, followed by martial law. Everyone should hope Bush gets through this CIA payback with minimum damage.

This is a very important post. I agree 100% Ron.

Scary times these. Your post sums up the situation perfectly, imo.

Dawn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone think it's possible that the real reason behind Tenet's resignation was related to this?

I wish that anyone who reads this thread (and I am sure there are) watched Larry King (speaking of ghosts of JFK, Eh) Oct 27, 2005 when he had a panel type discussion with Bob Woodward, David Gergen, a former White House adviser to president's Nixon, Ford, Reagan and Clinton; Newsweek's investigative Michael Isikoff; Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. and, Sen.Christopher Dodd, D-CT, and Robert Bork.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0510/27/lkl.01.html

The 64 dollar question about the "Plame affair" is whether evidence that Fitzgerald has or will obtain will lead to a resurrection of the WMD issue, which for the most part seems to have disappeared from the media, which I think, is a sad commentary about the electorate. I personally believe that between drowning in cynicism and suspecting the worst about "our government" many American's are so unaware of the co-opted media (see Pres. Reagan vetoing of "Fairness in Media Act" to become Federal Law link http://www.twf.org/News/Y1997/Fairness.html)

that the problem in restoring some semblance of reality to America's democratic process, is pre-empted by the fact that media has been asleep at the wheel for a couple of decades now. How can you solve problems in this country, when the electorate is basically sedated watching Nancy Grace and Hollywood Scandals Volume 12. IMO there is appx. a minority of Americans who realize that the Republican vs. Democrat battle royal is really more of a sideshow to the very real FACT that American government needs to "be reformed."

Bad things seem to happen to people throughout American history who have "a vision" that does not fit in with the status quo, see

MLK's "Re-distribution of Wealth, Poor People's March on Washington."

A kinder, gentler Malcolm X who seemed ready to "join forces with MLK."

RFK's - "Healing the rifts between black and white, young and old, pro or con over Vietnam and civil rights."

And so it goes....as Fearless Leader once said "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, er ah #%&* can't get fooled again."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I interpret Tenet as being the fall guy, i.e. the closest thing there has been to anyone at all being held accountable for the blanket government "incompetence" of 9/11. Of course a resignation for "personal reasons" two or three years after the fact was a pretty weak show of accountability, indeed virtually imperceptible from an administration PR standpoint. But I imagine the CIA didn't take this backstabbing of the agency kindly, even though it was probably pleased to see the Bush lackey Tenet go. This scapegoating plus the Plame affair called for some payback, which Bush is now experiencing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I see it happen then I will believe it.

Bush keeps covering up all of his wrongful doings. So, when? His fathers has all of his records covered up and that was a long time ago.

Sad, they both get away with so much.

So, for me, it is don't count your chickens before they hatch. Like to see this one hatched, should have been a long time ago. NEver even to get to the point of 9/11 ever. Should never have happened and yet it did. Smiles on Bush's face are always at the wrong times, everyone in America should have picked up on that also a long time ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...