posted 07-12-2003 05:07 PM            

WASHINGTON, July 10, 2003

CIA officials warned members of the President’s National Security Council Staff the intelligence was not good enough to make the flat statement Iraq tried to buy uranium from Africa.

(CBS) Senior administration officials tell CBS News the President’s mistaken claim that Iraq tried to buy uranium from Africa was included in his State of the Union address -- DESPITE OBJECTIONS from the CIA.

Traveling with the president in Africa, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice on Friday said that the CIA had cleared the reference to the attempted uranium purchase.

Before the speech was delivered, the portions dealing with Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction were checked with the CIA for accuracy, reports CBS News National Security Correspondent David Martin.

CIA officials warned members of the President’s National Security Council staff the intelligence was not good enough to make the flat statement Iraq tried to buy uranium from Africa.

The White House officials responded that a paper issued by the British government contained the unequivocal assertion: “Iraq has ... sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.” As long as the statement was attributed to British Intelligence, the White House officials argued, it would be factually accurate. The CIA officials dropped their objections and that’s how it was delivered.

“The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa,” Mr. Bush said.

The statement was technically correct, since it accurately reflected the British paper. But the bottom line is the White House knowingly included in a presidential address information its own CIA had explicitly warned might not be true.

Today at a press conference during the President’s trip to Africa, Secretary of State Colin Powell portrayed it as an honest mistake.

“There was no effort or attempt on the part of the president or anyone else in the administration to mislead or to deceive the American people,” said Powell.

But eight days after the State of the Union, when Powell addressed the U.N., he deliberately left out any reference to Iraqi attempts to buy uranium from Africa.

“I didn’t use the uranium at that point because I didn’t think that was sufficiently strong as evidence to present before the world,” Powell said.

That is exactly what CIA officials told the White House before the State of the Union. The top CIA official, Director George Tenet, was not involved in those discussions and apparently never warned the President he was on thin ice.

Secretary Powell said today he read the State of the Union speech before it was delivered and understood it had been seen and cleared by the intelligence community. But intelligence officials say the director of the CIA never saw the final draft.
http://www.cbsnews.com

©MMIII, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved.

posted 08-09-2003 12:21 AM            

"Sticking It To The Poobahs"

By Sherman H. Skolnick

From: skolnick@ameritech.net www.skolnicksreport.com www.cloakanddagger.ca

Sticking it To The Poobahs by Sherman H. Skolnick

7-31-3

Breaking News.....Bush ponders arrest of alleged plotters who seek to arrest him for treason....Facing possible arrest according to sources are Albert Gore Jr., Senator Bob Graham and an unnamed Pentagon general...

BACKGROUND

George W. Bush Denuded

Eight days before Commander-in-Chief/President Nixon was stripped of all authority, the indication of it in the top most circles was that the football' was taken away from him. That is the term used for the nuclear code briefcase always carried next to the President by a Marine Guard. In Nixon's case, White House Chief of Staff General Alexander Haig, was ordered to do so by a Jesuit relative. Thus the Pentagon could not carry out the orders of President Nixon since he had been divested of all authority.

On the same day that George W. Bush verbally announced that "we are not leaving Iraq" a top group in the U.S. military has let it be known that Bush no longer has authority as Commander-in-Chief. Those well informed on the subject contend that three symbols of his authority were shorn from Bush's presence.

U.S. Senator Bob Graham (D.-Fl.) in recent days confirmed that Bush may have him arrested for violating national security in releasing 9-11 U.S. documents, which tend to incriminate Bush with treasonous prior knowledge. On the same day as Bush's Press conference, the media announced that Al Gore was running for President. One commentator, stating that Gore may run to be re-elected President sarcastically implied that Gore is already the actual President but not inaugurated as a result of the strange 2000 election.

As a result of financial emergencies and impending military disasters, Gore s confidante's contend that he may appear as part of a three part group of emergency administrators of the Central Government called a troika. For that purpose they are whispering Gore and Graham may return to military uniform along with another U.S. military General who is a member of an opposition group to Bush in the Pentagon. In the past Bush failed to show up for military service unlike Gore and Graham who served in the military.

Some key Democrats and Republicans privately accuse Bush of treason giving U S. military secrets to the Red Chinese, a sworn enemy of the United States, who are reportedly blackmailing Bush on his alleged sordid private life traveling around with a male sexmate. To try to counter this Bush at his press conference said : "I believe marriage is between a man and a woman, and I believe we ought to codify that one way or the other, and we have lawyers looking at the best way to do that."

posted 08-09-2003 03:25 PM            

AHEM ! that was clinton ! clinton did that already...

a sworn enemy of the United States, who are reportedly blackmailing Bush on his alleged sordid private life traveling around with a male sexmate.

ok I stopped laughing...lemme get this straight...the chicom's are black mailing bush because of a male sexmate eh ?

clinton's not there anymore dude...the chinese don't have access like they used to...and I don't believe the allegation for one momment...damn funny though that some people believe this shit LOL !

posted 08-09-2003 04:18 PM            

It would not suprise me in the least if FACTION THREE took the "football" away from Dubya.

He is a dangerous SOB.

You can call it a lie if you want...I thought it was worth posting.

You assume that FOX (faux) news is telling you the complete story...well Uhhh sorry..
you are NOT.

posted 08-09-2003 05:49 PM            

and let's clarify...mech...

I am a retired small business man, electronics technician (componet level skilled)...active in politics for 15 years...and a (income) tax payer...oh yeah I majored in common sense...

stay at home Dad sounds better to me...

you may enjoy this mech...

posted 08-10-2003 11:07 AM            

WaaaaaaAAAAAA!!!

Gimmie back my football!!!!

Too late George..you know what's coming next!

posted 08-10-2003 12:26 PM            

"I don't know what we are going to do...FACTION THREE has taken Executive contol..now the illuminati families here and abroad are panicing."

ATTN:

The ROCKY AND SHRUB-WINKLE SHOW HAS NOW GONE DOWN!!!!!!

posted 08-11-2003 03:29 PM            

That's funny...from what i've been hearing...Shrub stands a good chance of being ousted in the next 20 days.

They already took the "football" away from him.

Impeachment is usually the next step.

posted 08-11-2003 03:48 PM            

clinton was impeached and served out his term...I don't think you or the one's that are pulling your chain know what impeachment is...

I still have a cool hundred that says it never will happen...

no takers as of yet....

posted 08-11-2003 05:50 PM            

It depends on how world affairs play out.

He will be gone before 2003 is out..this much is certain. Impeachment is imminent.

posted 08-16-2003 12:12 AM            

http://images.indymedia.org/imc/mayday/impeachw.mp3

posted 09-21-2003 07:32 AM            

Is Bush Facing Arrest?

http://www.themedianews.com/DAGGER/Front%20Page/middle00.htm

Foreign invaders most always come to ruin. Napoleon found that out the hard way. In the worst winter up to then, the route of retreat from Moscow was littered with six hundred thousand French corpses, some not thawing out for months. (Another historic terrible winter helped crush Hitler's army at Stalingrad.)

A small group of U.S. Admirals and Generals, called "flag officers", vowed to arrest their Commander-in-Chief Bill Clinton, for treason as authorized by the Uniform Military Code. If arrested for mutiny, and not immediately assassinated, they were prepared to defend themselves with proof of his treachery, meeting with the head of the Red Chinese Secret Police, Wang Jun, in the White House, and selling and conveying U.S. MILITARY, industrial, and financial secrets to the Red Chinese, sworn enemies of the U.S.

As detailed elsewhere, ten U.S. Military brass were murdered and the patriotic effort doomed. Click for documents

Now, a much larger group in the U.S. Military has been apparently planning as well, to arrest or otherwise block or seize their current Commander-in-Chief, George W. Bush. Among the charges they are prepared to prove against whom some call "Bushfraud":

[1] That as arranged by his father and others, all with prior knowledge of 9-11, Bush went along with high-level treachery, orchestrated within the U.S. government, and with a faction in the Aristocracy, and within the U.S. and British Financial Establishment, and with connivance of big-timers on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, murdering three thousand persons on U.S. soil and falsely blaming the deed on patsies, "The Arabs".
[2] Causing great bloodshed to both Americans and Iraqis, George W. Bush ordered the invasion of Iraq, without a Declaration of War, and falsely contending the Baghdad regime was threatening the U.S. by preparing to use Weapons of Mass Destruction.

As a stooge and scapegoat for a crazed faction within the Aristocracy and the U.S. Bureaucracy, and instigated and promoted by Queen Elizabeth II, jointly in a massive account with the Bush Crime Family and funds of the Saddam Hussein partnership, in the British Monarch's private enterprise, Coutts Bank London Click; and as supervised by Daddy Bush and on behalf of Daddy, Bush, Jr., set about, for the second time in twelve years, to start up with his father's disgruntled former private business partner Saddam Hussein, the oily, sneaky creation of the Secret Political Police, the American CIA. All for the purpose of stealing Iraq's treasures, such as oil.

[3] Called by some by his middle initial, Dubya aranged to heavily bribe the iraqi military elite in advance of the invasion, and had them and their families safely removed to the U.S., to go along with and assist the treasonous scheme. All the while, a U.S. Military cargo plane whisked Saddam out of Iraq, parking him at a U.S. jurisdiction site. Click

[4] That because of knowledge of George W. Bush's past and current sordid relationship with his long-time male sex-mate, the Red Chinese Secret Police have been enabled to blackmail out of the Bush White House, U.S. MILITARY, industrial, and financial secrets.

And the oil-soaked, spy-riddled American monopoly press, with full knowledge of all this, have censored the same.

posted 10-02-2003 11:59 AM            

By Caren Bohan

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The White House on Thursday gave no ground on Democratic calls for a special counsel to investigate the leak of a CIA agent's identity, despite a poll showing most Americans want such an independent probe.

The controversy surrounds allegations that someone in the White House blew the cover of CIA operative Valerie Plame in retaliation for her husband's criticism of the way intelligence was handled in the run-up to the Iraq war.

According to a Washington Post/ABC News poll, nearly seven in 10 Americans favored the appointment of a special counsel in the case that is now being investigated by the Justice Department.

Asked about such support for an independent probe, White House spokesman Scott McClellan maintained that the Justice Department was capable of handling the investigation.

"The Department of Justice is the one who makes those decisions. The Department of Justice has publicly said that all legal options remain on the table," McClellan said.

"Keep in mind that the Justice Department, the career professionals who are overseeing the investigation, want to get to the bottom of this," he added.

Galvanized by the poll numbers in support of a special counsel, Democrats pressed the issue.

"I don't think we should take that first no for an answer," said U.S. House of Representatives Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, a California Democrat.

Under regulations adopted in 1999, a special counsel can be appointed by the attorney general when the investigation or prosecution would present a conflict of interest for the Justice Department or when it would be in the "public interest" because "extraordinary circumstances exist."

Justice Department spokesman Mark Corallo has declined to rule out the possible appointment of a special counsel in the future. "We are not closing any doors," he said. "No legal options are closed."

A CONFLICT OF INTEREST?

A Senate Republican aide said he did not now expect any Republican on Capitol Hill to join Democrats in the call for a special counsel.

"I believe, out of a sense of loyalty, Republicans will stand with the White House for now," the aide said, speaking on the condition of anonymity. "Besides, I don't think the political pressure has reached that point yet."

Still, the aide said he expected Attorney General John Ashcroft to soon recuse himself from the case, turning it over to a deputy because of the "perceived conflict of interest" based on his ties with White House political adviser Karl Rove.

On Monday, McClellan denied that Rove, top political adviser to President Bush, was behind the disclosure to reporters of the undercover agent's name. Revealing classified information is a federal crime punishable by up to 10 years in prison.

The New York Times reported on Thursday that Rove was a paid consultant to three of Ashcroft's political campaigns in Missouri.

Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer of New York said he would urge Ashcroft to recuse himself from the CIA case.

"It's a mystery as to why Ashcroft hasn't yet removed himself from (the) investigation," Schumer said in a statement.

The Washington Post/ABC News poll found that 81 percent of Americans viewed the CIA matter as serious, and 72 percent thought it was likely a White House official was behind the leak.

Plame's identity was disclosed by columnist Robert Novak a week after her husband, Joseph Wilson, wrote an opinion piece in The New York Times accusing Bush of exaggerating the Iraq weapons threat.

posted 10-02-2003 01:31 PM            

Your arguments are great, your articles speak volumes and here's another to add to your thread of impeachment as many turn to the light! All of you who continue to believe in this administration are blinded fools -- I'm sorry! You are my brothers and sisters, but indeed you reject the truth of the matter, even on the most obvious levels.

Clinton - impeachment on personal indescretions

G.W.Bush -- impeachment on treason, Constitutional trashing, murder, lying to the people, and flagrant ignoring of international signed treaties ....

Hmmm, which one is more deserving of impeachment? Gee, I wonder!

And as far as Ritter, he's ruined his reputation in a personal way, but how do we know this is true? Could be Rove's spreading of lies, too. William Rivers Pitt is the bulldog writer who wrote with Ritter about Iraq and that all of you sleeping sheep need to read. Find him at http://www.truthout.com

God help us all to have no fear in the quest for the truth. Please help us open to facts and realize that those in power who do not reflect the integrity and respect of our laws and freedoms need to find work elsewhere. Help us to see the truth!

Peace,

BC

Soros calls for 'regime change' in US


Soros's Foundations Network works throughout the world
Billionaire philanthropist George Soros has called for an end to the Bush administration ahead of next year's presidential elections.
Mr Soros - whose Foundations Network has given $1bn around the world to various causes to help tackle poverty and disease - told BBC Radio 4's United Nations Or Not? programme that the US would only stop pursuing "extremist" policies if there was a change at the White House.

"It is only possible if you have a regime change in the United States - in other words if President Bush is voted out of power.

"I am very hopeful that people will wake up and realise that they have been led down the garden path, that actually 11 September has been hijacked by a bunch of extremists to put into effect policies that they were advocating before such as the invasion of Iraq."

Imposing power

Mr Soros added that there was a "false ideology" behind the policies of the Bush administration.

The US is now discovering that it is extremely painful and certainly costly to go it alone

George Soros
"There is a group of - I would call them extremists - who have the following belief: that international relations are relations of power, not of law, that international law will always follow what power has achieved," he said.

"And therefore [they believe] the United States being the most powerful nation on earth should impose its power, impose its will and its interests on the world and it should do it looking after itself.

"I think this is a very dangerous ideology. It is very dangerous because America is in fact very powerful."

He added that he felt US actions in the build-up to the war on Iraq was evidence of an extremist element in the Bush administration.

"Probably President Chirac would not disagree with this philosophy but he is not so powerful - so I am not so worried about what France is doing," Mr Soros said, referring to France's opposition to the war.

"But America being really the dominant power to be in the grips of such an extremist ideology is very dangerous for the world and that is my major concern."

However, he added that he felt the rift between the US and the United Nations over the war - which President Bush referred to as a "difficult and defining moment" for the UN - had in fact strengthened the UN, rather than weakened it.

"I think that the United States has over-reached," he said.

"What happens to extremists is that they go to extremes and the falsehood in their ideology becomes apparent.

"In a democracy the electorate - which is not extremist - will punish them and they know it, so they have to retreat.

"I think there is a good chance that the US will yet turn to a greater extent to the United Nations because they are now discovering that it is extremely painful and certainly costly to go it alone so in the end the outcome may be to strengthen the United Nations."

State interests

Mr Soros was, however, critical of the UN for what it sees as its inability to function well as a collective of states.

Soros only once gave money to the UN - in Bosnia
"The United Nations is not an organisation that is terribly effective in promoting open society because it is an association of states... states always put their national interests ahead of the common interest.

"So it is not a very effective organisation for changing conditions inside states."

Mr Soros has a history of donating great sums of money to areas in need around the world - but only once has he done this through the UN.

"In Bosnia we gave it to UNHCR - but that was really quite the exception.

"We do interfere in the internal affairs of states, but based on supporting people inside the country who take a certain stance.

"We have actually been quite effective in bringing about democratisation, democratic regime change in Slovakia, Croatia and Yugoslavia, but that's by helping civil society in those countries to mobilise."

Positive response

Mr Soros is highly critical of much government bureaucracy, preferring to make his donations directly to those in need as much as possible.

In June this year he announced he would be drastically cutting back the money he gave to Russia.

And he said that money his fund was pledging to the fight against HIV/Aids would be "more effective" because it was going "only through a governmental organisation."

He conceded too that President Bush's policies on the HIV/Aids pandemic were positive.

"There is some response in America, in the Bush administration, to pressure from some of their constituencies - so there is the Millennium Challenge account, the contribution on fighting HIV/Aids," Mr Soros said.

"Those are positive aspects of the Bush administration. I am very supportive of the Millennium Challenge account - this is the new development aid that they are putting in - and I am very supportive and delighted that President Bush is willing to contribute to the global fund on Aids.

"So I am critical on some aspects of the Bush administration but not every aspect - and here I am actually very supportive."

posted 10-02-2003 01:52 PM            

Military Families Unhappy with Iraq Deployments
Wed October 1, 2003 04:15 PM ET


http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=SQ5JPIK0BB1V0C RBAEZSFEY?type=reutersEdge&storyID=3542520

By Sue Pleming
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Families of some U.S. troops in Iraq, especially those mobilized as military reserves, said on Wednesday they felt betrayed by extended deployments and feared this could weigh heavily on morale in the field.

Relatives are e-mailing Congress to voice frustration, have set up web sites and are writing petitions to demand shorter deployments, a more predictable rotation of troops and fixed homecoming dates.

Families of "weekend warriors" -- Army Reserves and National Guard members more accustomed to devoting a weekend a month and two weeks summer training rather than a year in the desert -- are particularly bitter by extended call-ups.

"There are single parents, business owners, employees and new fathers in our unit. The reserve system is not designed to supplement the military for such an extended period of time," says a petition set up by families of the 129th Combat HET Transportation Company Reserve Unit in Kansas.

The web site for the petition (http://www.129bringthemhome.com) said Army Reserves families were disillusioned by a decision to keep reservists on the ground beyond 12 months.

"Morale is absolutely pathetic," said Rachel Trueblood, whose husband, a staff sergeant, is based in Kuwait. "Some of the guys out there are saying 'Let me get out of here, we are sitting out here doing stupid stuff and risking our lives."

Trueblood said it was unclear when her husband would be home. "We are meant to be the back-up force not the active one," she said.

A spokesman for the Army Reserves acknowledged some troops were "surprised" by how long they would be deployed but he said morale was high and troops wanted to do their duty.

"The policy is clear. It says boots on the ground for one year," he said. "It possibly could have been communicated a little bit better up front. We want everyone to know that when you mobilize you will spend a year in theater and that is probably going to mean 14-16 months."

ABSENCE OF MANY TROOPS FROM OTHER COUNTRIES

In the absence of many troops from other countries, the U.S. military is relying on National Guard and Reserve Troops to bolster its 130,000 troops in Iraq. About 20,000 Reserve and National Guard troops are in Iraq and nearby states.

Military families understand troops must serve during times of war but complain of being told their loved ones are coming home only to then have leave canceled.

"They just shouldn't be jerking these guys around. It's a real morale buster," said Daphne Smith, whose son-in-law is a pilot in Iraq and returned home from Afghanistan only to turn around a few weeks later to go to Iraq.

"We don't want to seem like we are whining, but we are afraid that mistakes will start to happen if morale is low because they are there too long without a break," she said.

Former Desert Storm planner retired Gen. Daniel Christman, who is on standby reserve status himself, said the key to keeping up troop and family morale was predictability.

"Families need to have the basis for personal planning and once that has been announced the military needs to stick to that," said Christman, now with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Employers of military reserves, he said, also needed an accurate timetable to enable them to plan their own staffing. Christman said he feared army recruiting and retention could be affected by the long deployments.

Army officials said they have to date seen no adverse impact on recruiting and retention in the Guard and Army Reserves despite the large numbers of troops deployed.

Rep. John Murtha, the ranking Democrat on the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, grilled Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on Tuesday about overextended U.S. troops.

Rumsfeld replied nothing was more important to the military than its people and they were working hard to find a balance.

Not to mention Veteran's for Peace.

Rovegate: (just my pet name!)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29560-2003Oct1.html

Many will be in favor of impeachment when all has come out!

posted 10-02-2003 02:10 PM            

quote:

---

Excerpt:
"Given the obvious conflict of interest, however, it should be an independent counsel,
and not you, who exercises such discretion."
-- Orrin Hatch (R-Kinky Sex) to Janet Reno

---

quote:

---

"The preliminary investigation of Gore represents progress, however slight. Appointment of an
independent counsel to investigate both the president and the vice president is inevitable.
The longer her delay in doing this, the longer it will take to get answers the American people deserve."
-- Henry Hyde, with another man's wife sitting on his lap

---

quote:

---

"At some point questions must be answered, if only to build confidence that a rigorous investigation
is underway and that Justice isn't merely circling the wagons to defend the White House."
-- Trent Lott (R-Racist Pig)

---

They KNEW their witchhunt would come back to haunt them, but they hated Clinton so much, they framed him.

Now the shoe's on the other foot and they claim there's "no need" to have serious felony investigated, but when it was
Clinton's sex life, they said that was the most important thing in the world. The GOP pulled FBI agents off the hunt
for Osama to chase Arkansas girls all the way to fucking Japan because they HAD to get Clinton.

Thank you, Orrin Hatch, for sending those FBI agents to Akansas.


Thank you, Henry Hyde, for looking for me inside Clinton's zipper.


Thank you, Trent Lott, for keeping America's attention on Monica, not terrorism.


Thank you, Newt Gingrich, for keeping impeaching Clinton while you were banging your secretary.


Thank you, Tom Delay, for the partisan bickering that gave us our chance to attack.


Thank you, Supreme Court, for installing a lazy and stupid president that we could outwit

http://www.bartcop.com/

Seen on the streets of Germany

BC

posted 10-02-2003 02:18 PM            

Sherman Skolnick, Lenny Bloom

Nixon White House aide John Dean, to no avail, told Tricky Dick, there was a cancer on the presidency. That was the Watergate debacle.

By 2003, the malignancy has spread to Congress, the U.S. Supreme Court, and the White House. Some examples. There is a demand for investigation that Judges of the U.S. Supreme Court and the Chicago Federal Appeals Court have themselves committed a fraud upon their own court. Details of the corruption overlap can be examined.

Some folks still remember how the 5-judge majority on the High Court, in Bush versus Gore, usurping State Law authority, arbitrarily installed George W. Bush as the occupant and resident of the Oval Office. This Military-style Court Junta, so unsure of their ruling, ordered their decision never to be used as a precedent in any other case. Gore was the elected President. He just was not inaugurated. Now there are whispers that three of the dissenting High Court Judges are threatened with physical harm.

And, it is no secret. BOTH houses of Congress are for sale. Sort of a two-for-one cheapo deal by lobbyists. And in some foreign languages, the word "lobbyist" is the same as bribe-carrier or bagman.

The Bush White House is a terminal case, stemming from the looming U.S. Military dishonor disaster, called Iraq. A symptom of a rapidly failing American Imperialism, a U.S. blood disease.

posted 10-02-2003 03:39 PM            

1. "two top White House officials" and "Purely and simply for revenge":
BUSH ADMINISTRATION IS FOCUS OF INQUIRY
By Mike Allen and Dana Priest, Washington Post, 9/28/03 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A11208-2003Sep27.html

2. Leak was published in scores of newspapers in early July:
MISSION TO NIGER
By Robert Novak, multiple papers, 9/14/03 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A30055-2003Oct1.html

3. Bush has no plans to ask his staff:
BUSH AIDES SAY THEY'LL COOPERATE WITH PROBE INTO INTELLIGENCE LEAK
By Mike Allen, Washington Post, 9/29/03 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14909-2003Sep28.html

4. Ashcroft employed Karl Rove; signs of room for a cover-up:
ATTORNEY GENERAL IS CLOSELY LINKED TO INQUIRY FIGURES
By Elisabeth Bumiller and Eric Lichtblau, New York Times, 10/2/03 http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/02/politics/02ASHC.html?hp

5. 7 in 10 Americans want a special prosecutor:
OUTSIDE PROBE OF LEAKS IS FAVORED
By Dana Milbank and Mike Allen, Washington Post, 10/2/03 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29560-2003Oct1.html

6. "A single allegation can be most worthy of a special prosecutor":
CNN’s Evans and Novak, 10/4/97

7. Joe Wilson's New York Times editorial:
WHAT I DIDN'T FIND IN AFRICA
By Joseph C. Wilson 4th, New York Times, 7/6/03 http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0706-02.htm

8. "I have nothing but contempt and anger":
REMARKS BY GEORGE BUSH AT THE DEDICATION CEREMONY FOR THE GEORGE BUSH CENTER FOR INTELLIGENCE
26 April 1999 http://www.cia.gov/cia/public_affairs/speeches/1999/bush_speech_042699.html

posted 10-03-2003 12:19 PM            

Don't you love the cartoon? Two wolves? And notice they're not in sheep's clothing, but in suits, representing what? Corporations with a dash of military (police) accessory. ACCESSORY as in crime?

Skolnik may be a scout and a sniffer and on the paranoid side, but his sniffing and searching is needed in this society. One can read with discernment, as always.

BC

posted 10-03-2003 12:38 PM            

The Ties That Blind
The Ashcroft-Rove Connection
By AMY GOODMAN and JEREMY SCAHILL
(and the Staff of Democracy Now!)

There's an old saying that you should never let a fox guard the henhouse. The same could be said of the investigation into the latest White House scandal. Attorney General John Ashcroft is refusing to appoint an independent prosecutor to investigate who in the administration leaked the name of a CIA operative to journalists. This despite the fact that Ashcroft has long-standing ties to one of the main suspects: President Bush's top political advisor Karl Rove.

"I think it's very difficult on its surface for John Ashcroft to be taken seriously as an investigator," said James Moore, author of Bush's Brain: How Karl Rove Made George W Bush Presidential/, in an interview with Democracy Now!. "In this case, there is a close relationship between someone who is a high profile suspect and the individual who is leading the investigation of him. And it immediately goes to the question of credibility and validity of that particular investigation."

Rove has been accused of leaking the identity of CIA operative Valerie Plame, in retaliation for her husband, veteran diplomat Joseph Wilson, blowing the whistle on the Bush administration's charge that Saddam Hussein attempted to import uranium for nuclear weapons from Niger.

Rove is best known as the driving force behind Bush's taking of the presidency, but he also worked for Ashcroft over the course of two decades.

"It goes all the way back to the mid 1980's when John Ashcroft first ran for governor and then when he ran for the United States Senate against Mel Carnahan," says Moore. "Karl was so intimately involved."

Not only did Rove work for Ashcroft in the 80s, but he was one of the main forces behind Ashcroft's controversial appointment to the job he currently holds, attorney general. Rove lobbied intensely for his former employer's nomination after Ashcroft lost his senate seat to a dead man, the late Mel Carnahan.

While Ashcroft was not Bush's first choice for attorney general, Rove reportedly told Bush that spilling some blood over the nomination of the fiercely right-wing Ashcroft was "a no-lose proposition."

Just as George W. Bush profited handsomely from the building of a stadium for his Texas Rangers baseball team, Karl Rove cashed in from the successful campaign in St. Louis to get a stadium built. The governor who signed the legislation?

John Ashcroft.

Now attorney general, Ashcroft is refusing to hand over the reigns of the criminal investigation of his political ally, former employee and longtime advisor, Karl Rove.

For the past several days, the White House has been besieged with questions on the "burning" of CIA operative Valerie Plame. Scott McClellan, the press secretary and other officials have offered only carefully worded and non-specific responses to reporters' questions as to who leaked the identity of Wilson's wife.

"It is impossible for any of us to believe that this happened without Karl knowing about it," says author James Moore. "When you cross this man in the political arena, he gets even; and he gets even in a way that he doesn't just defeat you, he is compelled to destroy you. He doesn't know how to do a measured response when he is angry, and so he leaks information about people that destroys them."

According to the latest Washington Post-ABC poll, 69% of Americans believe there should be a special counsel independent of the administration investigating the White House leak. Yet, in his only news conference to date on the issue, Ashcroft stood firm that his office will oversee the investigation. "The prosecutors and agents who are and will be handling this investigation are career professionals with extensive experience in handling matters involving sensitive national security information and with experience relating to investigations of unauthorized disclosures of such information."

At the Justice Department news conference, a reporter attempted to question Ashcroft further, "Can you at least say what assurances you can give people that the matter will be handled independently without... "

Ashcroft interrupted, "Are there other questions today?"

Yes there are. But an independent counsel should be asking them.

Democracy Now! is a daily national grassroots radio/tv newshour. Research assistance for this article was provided by producers Mike Burke and Sharif Abdel Kouddous. www.democracynow.org. They can be reached at: jeremy@democracynow.org