DU: Blog Box on Rove

From the Blog Box on Democratic Underground:

Common Sense

I sat beside Ambassador Joseph Wilson at the "Forum On Alternatives To American Foreign And Domestic Policy Since September 11" conference in DC in July, 2003, mere days before his New York Times piece, "What I Didn't Find In Africa," (debunking BushCo's bogus yellow cake claims) was published.

This man is not a crackpot. Nor is he a raving partisan Democrat. Common sense should tell you that Ambassador Wilson is a brilliant, thoughtful diplomat, whose only political concern is, and has always been, to establish and maintain healthy relationships between the United States of America and its global sister nations.

Which is why Karl Rove had to destroy him, of course.

"Karl Rove," the search term, began at #8 and rose rapidly to its present number #2 position at Technorati.com this week. (Number #1 was some UK Vanna White game show chick, who's dealing with the sudden death of the show's host.) Thousands of bloggers are ripping KKKarl a new one, but Jane at firedoglake does it best:

As someone who is still choking on the bile that came up over a bunch of sanctimonious old hacks hijacking the constitution and sitting in judgment of Bill Clinton, I would personally like to invite every one of them to dine on a delightful repast of their own words. If revenge is a dish best served cold, you better eat fast, you bastards. This one's heating up. P.S. Oh, NYT, WaPo? You got scooped by the fucking McLaughlin Group. You should all be disemboweling yourselves in shame.

Thanks, Jane! I needed that! For leak updates, Miller-in-handcuffs news, and other play-by-play BushCo treason action, check out the mega-blogs Huffington Post, Daily Kos, Josh Marshall's Talking Points Memo and some blogs you should get to know, including Yatpundit, The Common Ills, Blue Meme, and the au (so) courant Best Of The Blogs. For the 411 on FOX News' strange silence on Rove, consult MoxieGrrrl.

After Judith (Chalabi-loving) Miller smiled for the camera on her way to jail for contempt of court, Ambassador Wilson posted his reaction at TPM Cafe.

Wilson speaks out on Miller sentencing

Former Ambassador Joe Wilson spoke to Dailykos about the sentencing of New York Times Reporter Judith Miller to jail time for refusing to reveal the source for the White House leak of the status of Wilson's wife as a CiA Operative.

The sentencing of Judith Miller to jail for refusing to disclose her sources is the direct result of the culture of unaccountability that infects the Bush White House from top to bottom. President Bush's refusal to enforce his own call for full cooperation with the Special Counsel has brought us to this point. Clearly, the conspiracy to cover up the web of lies that underpinned the invasion of Iraq is more important to the White House than coming clean on a serious breach of national security. Thus has Ms Miller joined my wife, Valerie, and her twenty years of service to this nation as collateral damage in the smear campaign launched when I had the temerity to challenge the President on his assertion that Iraq had attempted to purchase uranium yellowcake from Africa.

The real victims of this cover-up, which may have turned criminal, are the Congress, the Constitution and, most tragically, the Americans and Iraqis who have paid the ultimate price for Bush's folly.

Vyan

Rove in the Crosshairs

In the wake of the Supreme Court's decision to remand the case of Mark Cooper and Judith Miller and their confidential sources on the leaking the identity of CIA operative Valerie Plame back to the lower court, Newsweek has released information that Time Magazine documentation reveals that Senior White House Advisor Karl Rove was one of those interviewed by Cooper regarding the Plame manner, hinting that Rove himself may have been the source for the leak - as many people including Plame and her husband Joe Wilson have long suspected.

The Rove Factor?

Time magazine talked to Bush's guru for Plame story.

Andy Manis / AP 'CONCERN' AT THE WHITE HOUSE: Rove

By Michael Isikoff

Newsweek

July 11 issue - Its legal appeals exhausted, Time magazine agreed last week to turn over reporter Matthew Cooper's e-mails and computer notes to a special prosecutor investigating the leak of an undercover CIA agent's identity. The case has been the subject of press controversy for two years. Saying "we are not above the law," Time Inc. Editor in Chief Norman Pearlstine decided to comply with a grand-jury subpoena to turn over documents related to the leak. But Cooper (and a New York Times reporter, Judith Miller) is still refusing to testify and faces jail this week.

At issue is the story of a CIA-sponsored trip taken by former ambassador (and White House critic) Joseph Wilson to investigate reports that Iraq was seeking to buy uranium from the African country of Niger. "Some government officials have noted to Time in interviews... that Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, is a CIA official who monitors the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction," said Cooper's July 2003 Time online article.

Now the story may be about to take another turn. The e-mails surrendered by Time Inc., which are largely between Cooper and his editors, show that one of Cooper's sources was White House deputy chief of staff Karl Rove, according to two lawyers who asked not to be identified because they are representing witnesses sympathetic to the White House. Cooper and a Time spokeswoman declined to comment. But in an interview with NEWSWEEK, Rove's lawyer, Robert Luskin, confirmed that Rove had been interviewed by Cooper for the article. It is unclear, however, what passed between Cooper and Rove.

Read More...

According to the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982, leaking the name of an undercover agent is also a federal crime, punishable by up to 10 years in prison, under certain circumstances. When TV commentator Chris Matthews asked Republican National Committee chairman Ed Gillespie if he thought such a leak made by government officials was 'worse than Watergate,' Gillespie replied, 'Yeah, I suppose in terms of the real-world implications of it.'"

Vanity Fair, January 2004 via DailyKos

Vyan

George H.W. Bush's Physician speaks out on torture

From the Washington Post:

The Stain of Torture

By Burton J. Lee III

Friday, July 1, 2005; Page A25

Having served as a doctor in the Army Medical Corps early in my career and as presidential physician to George H.W. Bush for four years, I might be expected to bring a skeptical and partisan perspective to allegations of torture and abuse by U.S. forces. I might even be expected to join those who, on the one hand, deny that U.S. personnel have engaged in systematic use of torture while, on the other, claiming that such abuse is justified. But I cannot do so.

It's precisely because of my devotion to country, respect for our military and commitment to the ethics of the medical profession that I speak out against systematic, government-sanctioned torture and excessive abuse of prisoners during our war on terrorism. I am also deeply disturbed by the reported complicity in these abuses of military medical personnel. This extraordinary shift in policy and values is alien to my concept of modern-day America and of my government and profession.

The military prides itself, as do physicians, on being professional in every sense of the word. It fosters leadership and discipline. When I served as White House physician, my entire professional staff was drawn from the military, and they were among the best and most competent people I have met, without qualification.

The military ethics that I know absolutely prohibit anything resembling torture. There are several good reasons for this. Prisoners should be treated as we would expect our prisoners to be treated. Discipline and order in the military ranks depend to a large extent on compliance with the prohibition of torture -- indeed, weak or damaged psyches inclined toward torture or abuse have generally been weeded out of the military, or at the very least given less responsibility. In addition, military leaders have long been aware that torture inflicts lasting damage on both the victim and the torturer. The systematic infliction of torture engenders deep hatred and hostility that transcends generations. And it perverts the role of medical personnel from healers to instruments of abuse.

Today, however, it seems as though our government and the military have slipped into Joseph Conrad's "Heart of Darkness." The widespread reports of torture and ill-treatment -- frequently based on military and government documents -- defy the claim that this abusive behavior is limited to a few noncommissioned officers at Abu Ghraib or isolated incidents at Guantanamo Bay. When it comes to torture, the military's traditional leadership and discipline have been severely compromised up and down the chain of command. Why? I fear it is because the military has bowed to errant civilian leadership.

Vyan

Sandra Day O'Connor Retires from SCOTUS

AP Report: WASHINGTON

Sandra Day O'Connor, the first woman on the Supreme Court and a swing vote on abortion as well as other contentious issues, announced her retirement Friday. A bruising Senate confirmation struggle loomed as

President Bush pledged to name a successor quickly.

"It has been a great privilege indeed to have served as a member of the court for 24 terms," the 75-year-old justice wrote Bush in a one-paragraph resignation letter. "I will leave it with enormous respect for the integrity of the court and its role under our constitutional structure."

Little more than an hour later, Bush praised O'Connor as "a discerning and conscientious judge and a public servant of complete integrity." He said he would recommend a replacement who will "faithfully interpret" the laws.

<>O'Connor's announcement marked the first retirement in 11 years on an aging court. It came as a modest surprise, particularly since Chief Justice William Rehnquist has been the subject of retirement rumors for months. Rehnquist, 80 and ailing with thyroid cancer, has offered no hint as to his future plans.

O'Connor's decision capped a pioneer's career. President Reagan broke nearly 200 years of tradition when he tapped her — a top-ranked graduate of Stanford law school — for the high court.

Over time, she evolved into a moderate conservative, but more importantly, a majority maker.

She voted with a 5-4 majority, for example, on the case that effectively awarded the disputed 2000 presidential election to Bush. She was on the winning side again when the court upheld the right of women to have an abortion if their health were in danger.

She expressed her views pungently at times. Last week, in a dissent in a 5-4 ruling that let local governments take personal property to build malls and other businesses, she wrote that the majority had unwisely handed more power to the powerful.

"The specter of condemnation hangs over all property," O'Connor wrote. "Nothing is to prevent the state from replacing ... any home with a shopping mall, or any farm with a factory."

Bush pledged to send a nomination to the Senate in time for a vote by the time the court begins its new term in October. He said he and his administration would consult with lawmakers, and said "the nation deserves a dignified" confirmation debate.

<>One official said Bush's "short list" did not include any women, for example. O'Connor's retirement leaves Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg as the only woman among eight remaining justices.

Vyan

Inquiry of Delay finally moving forward

Posted by Kos:

DeLay inquiry will be moving forward in a couple of months.

Leaders of the U.S. House of Representatives ethics committee on Thursday cleared the way for a long-anticipated investigation of Majority Leader Tom DeLay by resolving a partisan staffing dispute [...]

The new accord will clear the way for the hiring of a nonpartisan staff, including investigators and a chief counsel, which could take a couple of months [...]

Under the deal, the committee's "nonpartisan staff" will be headed by a chief counsel-staff director accountable to the chairman and ranking Democrat.

Two "shared staff members" will have no managerial authority over the "nonpartisan staff," it added.

Hastings and Mollohan each appoint their own shared staff members, so named because they serve on the committee as well as in the lawmakers' congressional offices.

It may soon be time for DeLay to cash in his special card.

The best possible result we can expect from this investigation is that it exposes the total stink of curruption that has not only infected Delay, but also the entire Republican Caucus. If DeLay has knowingly accepted illegal campaign contributions from Foreign Governments and Lobbyists, how much of that money has been funnelled through ARMPAC? Currently all but five house Republicans have either accepted contributions from ARMPAC or given money to DeLay's criminal defense fund, or both.

If DeLay goes down, they ALL should go down with him. At which point we should give a great big "HELLO" to Speaker Pelosi.

Vyan

Conyers and Dems submit FOIA on DSM

RAWSTORY: BREAKING JUNE 30, DSM FOIA

"Representative John Conyers, Jr., (D-MI) House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member, along with 51 other Members today submitted a broad and comprehensive FOIA request to the White House, the Department of Defense, and the Department of State seeking any and all documents and materials concerning the Downing Street Minutes and the lead up to the Iraq war, RAW STORY has learned."

"In addition, the Members also formally requested that the House Committees on Judiciary, Armed Services, International Relations, and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence commence hearings on the Downing Street Minutes."

---

Mr. Brett Gerry
Office of Counsel to the President
Ms. Margaret Grafield
Information & Privacy Co-Ordinator
Mr C.Y. Talbott
Chief, Office of Freedom of Information & Security

June 30, 2005

Re: Request Submitted Under the Freedom of Information Act.

Dear Sirs and Madam:

This letter constitutes a request pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

Recently leaked memoranda from Great Britain indicate that the US and the UK may have engaged in communications over the use of Iraqi intelligence, the existence of weapons of mass destruction, and potential military action in Iraq throughout the summer of 2002. This is allege to have occurred long before the Administration sought Congressional authority to engage in such military action. Because these memoranda raise serious questions over when these important decisions were made, we seek the release of all agency records, including but not limited o handwritten notes, formal correspondence, electronic mail messages, intelligence reports and other memoranda, as described in the numbered paragraphs below:

1. All original statements, documents, press releases, and the like,. and copies of the same, publicly issued, or available related to the lead-up to military action in Iraq, beginning with President Bush's transition into office in 2000 through the present.

2. All original documents, and copies of the same, as well as statements related to the subject matter of the Downing Street Minutes of July 23, 2002 and all similar and related memoranda.

3. All records regarding the collection and analysis of intelligence related to Iraq and to whether it possessed weapons of mass destruction, the type of weapons of mass destruction Iraq possessed, and any ties between Iraq and al Qaeda for the last ten years, i.e. January 1, 1995 to the date of issuance of the records in response to this request.

4. All records relating to the planning and preparation for military action in Iraq available in any and all entities of the Executive Branch of United States Government for the period from January 1, 1995 to October 16, 2002.

5. all records relating to sorties flown over Iraq in which bombs were dropped and to the selection of targets for the dropping of such bombs for the period from January 1, 1995 to October 16, 2002.

Please include all applicable records which are:
* held by constituent entities of the agency,
* incorporated into the agency's files and read by the agency,
* held by entities within the Executive Office of the President and not otherwise protected from disclosure by the Presidential Records Act.

We request a waiver of fees on the grounds that disclosure of the requested records is in the public interest and because disclosure "is likely to contribute significantly to the public understanding of the activities or operations of the government and is not primarily in the commercial interest of the requester.

Numerous news articles reflect the significant public interest in the records we seek. Disclosure of the requested records will contribute significantly to the public's understanding of government conduct.

We recognize that several of FOIA's exemptions relating to the protection of national security interests and the government's deliberative processes may pertain to this request. Insofar as you feel these exemptions or criterion do apply, we respectfully request that you only redact sensitive information and still provide responsive memoranda, correspondence and other documentation in redacted form. This should include any e-mail correspondence as well, including the disclosure of the identities of correspondents, the mailing date for said correspondence, and the message's subject line, wherever possible. similarly, becaue the national security exemption only protects information whose disclosure would impair national security, we expect any documentation containing intelligence now publicly known to be released in its original form or redacted only as necessary to protect the disclosure of information still falling within the appropriate FOIA exemption.

If our request is denied in whole or in part, we ask that you justify all deletions, omissions, or denials by reference to specific exemptions of the FOIA. We expect you to release all sefrefable portions of otherwise exempt material. We reserve the right to appeal a decision to withhold any information of to deny a waiver of fees. As you know, FOIA provides that even if some requested material is properly except from mandatory disclosure, all segregable portions of the same must be released.

In addition, we ask that you exercise your discretion to release information that my be techinically expempt but where withholding would serve no important public interest.

If the requested records are not in the possession of your agency (agencies), we ask that you forward this request to any agency you believe may have the records that are responsive to this request. In the alternative, we ask that you inforrm us of other agencies that may have such records, to the extent of your agency's knowledge>

If you have any questions regarding this request, please telephone Stacey Dansky of the House Judiciary staff. We will be happy to discuss ways in which this request may be clarified or slightly adjusted to reflect the agnecy's filing system and to expedite the search, if necessary.

We look forward to your reply to this request within twenty (20) business days, as required under 5 U.S.C> 522(a)(6)(A)(i).

Thank you in advance for your prompt attention and response to this matter.

Sincerely,

signatories

John Conyers Jr.

51 other members of Congress

---

Factcheck on Bush Speach

Bush's Iraq Speech: Long On Assertion, Short On Facts

Bush says "progress is uneven" in Iraq, but accentuates positive evidence and mostly ignores the negative. June 30, 2005

Summary

Standing before a crowd of uniformed soldiers, President Bush addressed the nation on June 27 to reaffirm America's commitment to the global war on terrorism. But throughout the speech Bush continually stated his opinions and conclusions as though they were facts, and he offered little specific evidence to support his assertions.

Here we provide some additional context, both facts that support Bush's case that "we have made significant progress" in Iraq, as well as some of the negative evidence he omitted.

Analysis

Bush's prime-time speech at Fort Bragg, NC coincided with the one-year anniversary of the handover of soverignty to Iraqi authorities. It was designed to lay out America's role in Iraq amid sinking public support for the war and calls by some lawmakers to withdraw troops.

The Bloodshed

Bush acknowledged the high level of violence in Iraq as he sought to reassure the public.

Bush: The work in Iraq is difficult and dangerous. Like most Americans, I see the images of violence and bloodshed. Every picture is horrifying and the suffering is real. Amid all this violence, I know Americans ask the question: Is the sacrifice worth it?

What Bush did not mention is that by most measures the violence is getting worse. Both April and May were record months in Iraq for car bombings, for example, with more than 135 of them being set off each month. And the bombings are getting more deadly. May was a record month for deaths from bombings, with 381 persons killed in "multiple casualty" bombings that took two or more lives, according to figures collected by the Brookings Institution in its "Iraq Index." The Brookings index is compiled from a variety of sources including official government statistics, where those are available, and other public sources such as news accounts and statements of Iraqi government officials.

The number of Iraqi police and military who have been killed is also rising, reaching 296 so far in June, nearly triple the 109 recorded in January and 103 in Febrary, according to a tally of public information by the website Iraq Coalition Casualty Count, a private group that documents each fatality from public statements and news reports. Estimates of the total number of Iraqi civilians killed each month as a result of "acts of war" have been rising as well, according to the Brookings index.

The trend is also evident in year-to-year figures.

In the past twelve months, there have been 25% more U.S. troop fatalities and nearly double the average number of insurgent attacks per day as there were in the preceeding 12 months.

Reconstruction Progress

In talking about Iraqi reconstruction, Bush highlighted the positive and omitted the negative:

Bush: We continued our efforts to help them rebuild their country. . . . Our progress has been uneven but progress is being made. We are improving roads and schools and health clinics and working to improve basic services like sanitation, electricity and water. And together with our allies, we will help the new Iraqi government deliver a better life for its citizens.

Indeed, the State Department's most recent "Iraq Weekly Status Report" shows progress is uneven. Education is a positive; official figures show 3,056 schools have been rehabilitated and millions of "student kits" have been distributed to primary and secondary schools. School enrollments are increasing. And there are also 145 new primary healthcare centers currently under construction. The official figures show 78 water treatment projects underway, nearly half of them completed, and water utility operators are regularly trained in two-week courses.

On the negative side, however, State Department figures show overall electricity production is barely above pre-war levels. Iraqis still have power only 12 hours daily on average.

Iraqis are almost universally unhappy about that. Fully 96 percent of urban Iraqis said they were dissatisfied when asked about "the availability of electricity in your neighborhood." That poll was conducted in February for the U.S. military, and results are reported in Brookings' "Iraq Index." The same poll also showed that 20 percent of Iraqi city-dwellers still report being without water to their homes.

Read More at FactCheck.org

Vyan