Dodgeblogium has the latest Carnival!
Information | ||
ARCHIVES
April 2024
January 2024 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 |
By Steven Taylor
Dodgeblogium has the latest Carnival! Filed under: Uncategorized | Comments Off|
By Steven Taylor
Andrew Sullivan’s post on his basic position on the Plame story fits my own quite well: I’m not downplaying the gravity of this Wilson/Plame affair. I’ve already said that if someone leaked the name of an undercover agent, he/she should be fired and prosecuted. If true, it’s appalling. I’m just mystified by many details, I’m suspicious of multiple agendas swirling around, and think we know very little that’s categorical at this stage. This isn’t like the Trent Lott affair, when all the facts were available from day one. It’s murkier and, I’ll bet, will get murkier still. So let’s wait and see what comes out. Okay? Indeed. I agree that the person who leaked the information should be fired, and prosecuted if appropriate. The main thing I continue to want to know is: what was/is Plame’s exact status vis-a-vis this story and what damage was done? Before we can determine what the punishment should be, it would be nice to know exactly what harm was done. The law in question was written to protect peoples’ lives. Were lives threatened by this? Were precious intelligence sources compromised? Was this just inconvenient? It is impossible to know at this point. Defenders of the administration shouldn’t be dismissive, but those scraping for a fight have to realize that this is hardly Watergate. Or do people really think that this goes to the President? It seems rather unlikely, quite frankly. I will grant, if Karl Rove was in fact involved, that would be major. However, there is no evidence there, either, save for Wilson’s accusations, which hardly constitute anything approximating hard data. Indeed, from the very beginning I have thought that part of what turned this all into a feeding frenzy for those wishing political harm on the Bush administration was the whiff of a possibility that they could take down Rove, who is clearly one of the Democrat’s least favorite administration figures. The politics go further, in fact, because the situation gives them the chance to criticize the DoJ, and another of their least favorite types: John Ashcroft. Filed under: Uncategorized | Comments/Trackbacks (4)|
By Steven Taylor
Rather than respond in the comments section, here’s a response to some of the commentary on the Plame affair–aimed at JohnC mostly, but to a more general audience as well: If you read carefully what I have written you will note that much of my discussion of the law and the DoJ investigation have hardly been doctrinaire. I initially saw reports of 50 or referrals to the DoJ and took that to mean similar types of problems (and as I noted, I was unsure if that was the case, but the reportage seemed to indicate it was). When it was cleared up by WaPo this morning, I cleared it up on my blog. I really don’t think I can be accused of being dismissive of the gravity of this situation, but rather have been engaged in wondering what was really going on. But trust me on the CIA investigation angle–if they really knew who it was, he/she would be in cuffs by now. They know that there was a leak–but they don’t know who leaked it. This is clear. And I haven’t ascribed any motives to the CIA-although I saw several TV pundits doing so this evening. And yes, the CIA full well knows Plame’s exact status. I have only been asking on the Blog as to what that status was/is. There has been some contradictory reporting on this subject, but as things have settled out, it seems clear she was undercover. Ok, but that still doesn’t answer the question of what that means in this context–i.e., the exact amount of harm done. I am not defending the leak, nor have I done. Mostly I have asked questions. Some have been answered, others not. To summarize some of my recent postings: Really, I am not sure how any of this qualifies as “spin” or how it places me in the rabid right-wing blogger camp. Mostly I have reported the story as it has unfoled, analyzed the info at hand, and asked questions. On balance I am only sure of two things: 1) This ain’t Watergate II, and it won’t bring down the Bush administration, unless there is some shocking ramification of this leak we are unaware of. and 2) Someone did do something wrong, and should be appropriately punished. Filed under: Uncategorized | Comments/Trackbacks (5)|
By Steven Taylor
Via CNN, here is part of a transcript from an interview with former CIA Director, James Woolsey. The first snip underscores what I said in a comments section a little earlier today: leakers are rarely caught: WOOLSEY: [...] CIA refers crimes report over about once a week to the Department of Justice whenever there’s a leak or any other potential violation of law that they come across. Also of interest: HEMMER: What does it mean if she’s an analyst or operative and not a spy? Is that less serious? Is that the suggestion? Filed under: Uncategorized | Comments/Trackbacks (7)|
By Steven Taylor
I just came across this piece (A War Is Nice on the Résumé, but It May Not Get You the Job) from Sunday’s NYT on generals in politics–a nice little read. Filed under: Uncategorized | Comments Off|
By Steven Taylor
Daniel W. Drezner has more on the Plame affair, specifically info on the now full-fledged Justice Department investigation. He also provides a link to a WaPo story which discusses the relevant legal issues. Some of the basics: The statute includes three other elements necessary to obtain a conviction: that the disclosure was intentional, the accused knew the person being identified was a covert agent and the accused also knew that “the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent’s intelligence relationship to the United States.” The article answers one of my basic questions: while memos requesting investigations of breach of classified information are common, the specific type of incident here is not common. Indeed, The CIA makes about one referral a week to the Justice Department concerning possible unauthorized disclosure of classified information, according to officials. However, my other main question remains: and that is the exact (not the inferred) status of Ms. Plame, as it bears not only on the overall affair, but to the legal questions specifically. Although one would think from this In mid-September, the agency sent follow-up material that answered a series of questions such as whether the officer’s identity was already in the public domain, according to a U.S. intelligence official. that is, if her name was in the public domain, then this would have been dropped. Of course, a fundamental question is going to be: who initially let the cat out of the proverbial bag, as it may be that the “leaker” got the info from another source, who be the actual person who committed a crime. At any rate, accusations of guilt, or statement of exoneration would both be premature. Filed under: Uncategorized | Comments/Trackbacks (5)|
By Steven Taylor
PoliPundit points us to Arianna’s latest online ad. Filed under: Uncategorized | Comments Off|
By Steven Taylor
Jack Shafer has a piece in Slate on everyon’e favorite budding scandal. He reaches this conclusion, which I suspect is correct: But unless some startling news surfaces about the leakers, their identities, and their motives, I doubt this summer scandal will ripen into delectable fall fruit. And has this to say about Plame: Who exactly is Valerie Plame? Corn writes that she “is known to friends as an energy analyst in a private firm,” which is not as convincing as Corn writing that she is an energy analyst in a private firm. (It sounds to me as if “energy analyst in a private firm” is the polite cover all of her friends use, knowing that she works at the CIA. It could be that Plame’s “secret” is no secret at all.) I find no mention of her on Nexis prior to the current scandal, and the only pre-scandal mention I found on the Web was Wilson’s bio sheet on the Middle East Institute’s Web site in which she is described as his wife, “Valerie Plame.” The whole piece is worth a read. Filed under: Uncategorized | Comments Off|
By Steven Taylor
Guantanamo Translator Is Arrested A physician working as a translator at the U.S. prison camp for terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, was arrested Tuesday, a federal law enforcement official said. Filed under: Uncategorized | Comments Off|
By Steven Taylor
David Brooks piece in the NYT’s today is worth a read. The money paragraph: The fundamental argument in the presidency wars is not that the president is wrong, or is driven by a misguided ideology. That’s so 1980′s. The fundamental argument now is that he is illegitimate. He is so ruthless, dishonest and corrupt, he undermines the very rules of civilized society. Many conservatives believed this about Clinton. Teddy Kennedy obviously believes it about Bush. Howard Dean declares, “What’s at stake in this election is democracy itself.” Filed under: Uncategorized | Comments Off|
|
blog advertising is good for you Visitors Since 2/15/03
|
Powered by WordPress