Wha?

A brief chronology:

June 12-15, 2003: Plame's name starts to be circulated from the administration to Bob Woodward (the same Woodward who was responsible for exposing Watergate.)

June 23, 2003: Libby tells Judith Miller wherein he discloses that Plame *might* be working for the CIA.

July 7, 2003: Libby tells then-White House Press Secretary Ari Fleisher that Plame works for the CIA, but that information is not "widely known."

July 8, 2003: Libby was authorized by Bush and Cheney to reveal previously classified documents to the public to counter-act anyone who opposed the war.

July 8, 2003: Judith Miller meets with Libby for a 2-hour breakfast. Libby divulges Plame's name as working for the CIA.

July 30, 2003: Letter sent to CIA criminal division outling a possible crime had occurred.

September 14 & 16: White House begins denying having knowledge of the leak.

September 16, 2003: CIA concludes its investigation and refers it to the FBI for a "full criminal investigation.."

September 28, 2003: Bush adamant to go after anyone who had a part of the leak.

October 2, 2003: White House changes tone, saying they had no idea a covert agent may have been involved.

December 30, 2003: Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald is appointed head of the investigation.

January 6, 2004: The administration starts offering "no comment to an ongoing investigation" sound clips.

October 28, 2005: Scooter Libby is indicted on charges (the next day, he resigns)

April 10, 2006: Bush said today: "I wanted people to see what some of those statements were based on. I wanted people to see the truth,"..

Okay..

Let's back up a second..

Does Bush have the right to de-classify information? Technically, it appears he has the legal right to do so..

Did the CIA know about Bush's declassification of the Plame-CIA documentation? It's unclear.. The inference from Fitzgerald's response to a Discovery motion lends the possibility that Bush and Cheney gave "blanket authority" over intelligence-leaks to the press.. His response does not make mention that Bush or Cheney gave their "blanket authority" as to the Plame leak..

That's significant - even though Libby's lawyers are apparently contending that there was a "'a strong desire by many, including multiple people in the White House," to undermine Mr. Wilson."

Was the "blanket authority" intended?? Apparently it was - because the administration came out over the last few days confirming that Libby had authorization to release declassified information.. Even if the outing of Plame was "purely by accident," the act itself remains negligent.. Because at some point this administration would've had to say: "Bad bad, Libby.. We told him not to do it.." But they didn't.. Moreover, when Bush admitted today that he personally authorized "information" to be leaked and declassified attempts the repercussions are slowly emerging..

Okay, okay - Bush gave the greenlight, get over it.. Even with Bush's speech today stating how he "... wanted people to see what some of those statements were based on. I wanted people to see the truth," Consider that on July 8th, 2003 - Libby supposedly gets the green light to leak declassified information.. Information that this administration said did not happen, then later it was not known that a covert spy was exposed.. Regardless - a greater question remains:

did anyone from this administration think to tell the CIA the information was no longer classified??

The CIA investigated the leak starting July 30, 2003 until September 16, 2003 when they hand the case over to the FBI for criminal charges. Patrick Fitzgerald wasn't given the case until December 30, 2003 - another 3 1/2 months after the fact. Moreover, Fitzgerald has been investigating this matter going on 2 years, which begs an even greater question:

why would there still be an investigation if the information was previously declassified by the President??

What would the point be to this whole investigation if the information was declassified?? Why didn't the administration come right out in the beginning to say: "the information is declassified, here's the memo" - move on..

No..

They didn't..

I'm sorry..

It wasn't declassified information..

It was classified..

Bush knew it.. Cheney knew it.. The CIA knew it.. Afterall, they investigated it for two weeks before turning it over to the FBI.. It wasn't for another 3 1/2 months later when Patrick Fitzgerald was called in to investigate it.. They had an opportunity to air their "declassification" stance for over 6 months and they didn't..

...and even if it wasn't classified - Plame's identity was now exposed.. It's been widely reported that Valerie Plame's identity entailed working as a front in what was supposed to be a spying operation into Iran's nuclear program.. Even if she wasn't working on collecting evidence on Iran's nuclear program, whatever protection she had, her front, the company, the intelligence she had collected - all of that was now gone.. Moreover, if her identity wasn't all that secret and if she was nothing more than a desk jockey -- then why not come out and say exactly what she did, what was her involvement and what about her role was with the CIA?? If her involvement with the CIA was so minimal that the information could be declassified and her identity revealed Mr. President - what did she do for the CIA?? Evidentially her role was a bit more substantial than is being revealed so far.. Evidentially the CIA felt that the breach was important enough to investigate criminal charges and pass it along to the FBI and a special prosecutor for further investigation..

...and even if it wasn't classified - Bush admits that the information was being leaked so that it could be used as a weapon against anyone who came out against the justification for the war in Iraq.. A weapon for those who would refute the WMD claims Bush laid out in his justification for the war in Iraq.. A slander war.. Because Wilson had the facts, his claims were supported and verified.. Bush had a slander war to attempt to smear Wilson and his wife as collaborating in an effort to undermine the American war effort in Iraq..

(problem is, Wilson had verifiable facts, Bush didn't and still doesn't..)

Consider that we have an administration that used information in retaliation against someone who was doing his job.. Joe Wilson, like him or hate him - was doing a job to try to find any sort of nuclear link between Iraq and Niger.. When he found none, he spoke out.. When he spoke out - the administration sought revenge against him and his family..

Remember when there were the voices screaming out to be absolutely sure we know what we were doing when we went into Iraq?? Remember what those voices were saying, how we should let the inspectors complete their job and how we should be patient with the process?? Why didn't we listen??

What kind of country do we live in when we're afraid of the truth, or when it guides us to destroy those who try to report the truth when it flies in the face of this administration's policies??

Is this the type of role-model, is this the type of morality we want govern over us??

Torpedoed

The events of last week -- finally -- revealed the inner self-defeating mechanism that this administration is employing.. Lewis "Scooter" Libby was indicted for his role to conceal the truth from the grand jury investigation.. As Prosecutor Scott Fitzgerald revealed - it has been incredibly difficult to reveal what was truthful about the outting of an active CIA agent.. Lewis Libby did his part to attempt to assure that the administration was insulated..

The problem being - the more you conceal the truth - the more it comes out.....

Libby resigned amidst indictments made on him by Fitzgerald.. Rove remains under investigation, and today (Sunday) there were calls from Harry Reid (D-Nevada) that Rove should step aside.. That sentiment was reiterated by Bush's own Trent Lott (R-Mississippi) believes that Rove's dismissal would invigorate "new blood, new energy, qualified staff" into the Bush administration...

Read into that a little bit more..

It's a Republican openly admitting that this administration lacks the fortitude and conviction to secure a qualified staff during this current administration.. It's the first time in a long time that I heard anyone in the Republican party openly expressing concerns about the people that Bush has surrounding him.. It's the first time that I've heard anyone openly admitting that key positions in this White House need to be re-evaluated..

Coming from within the party..

That speaks volumes..

Whether this administration heeds those calls remains an unanswered question.. But when Bush declares Rove to be "the architect," I'm inclined to believe that George will not heed the advice from Senator Trent Lott..

Clearly, it's growing apparent that Bush surrounded himself, insulated himself with people that encouraged the war in Iraq.. Up until this scandal, I've never even heard of Scooter Libby.. Now that all is said and done, it's apparent that Libby was incredibly instrumental in the role of National Security.. He also played a crucial role in the ''selling" and "implementation" of the Iraq conflict.. With Libby being Cheney's "architect" and with Rove being on the same radar screen - it's apparent that this administration reveled in its own blindness for the "sake of the nation.."

I dismiss the pundits and the belief that the current investigation is irrelevant.. That's absurd when we had a President impeached for exposing his personal life.. When we have an administration who is ultimately responsible for the deaths of so many in a conflict that was installed under false pretenses, then scrutiny is not only required, but necessary..

Keep in mind that I'm not debating the fact that Saddam is a bad man..

I am debating (again) that this administration went to war for all of the wrong reasons.. Now, more than ever - it's apparent that when there is such blindness and faulty information - it's remarkable that Bush has any credibility at all.. Finally, we're at a stage of this administration's tenure where the American people can see exactly how the insulation of this administration is seriously flawed in ways that are just coming out..

Libby was one of the major players in favor of the Iraqi invasion.. Rove can't be too far behind - especially since when so many ploys have the earmarks of Karl's ultimate design.. The name slandering, the scorn of disagreeing with this administration, the "you will fall in line with our platform" mentality.. Rove's signature can be felt..

And more importantly, the party supporting this administration is saying that Bush is in need of something new.. Wow.. That's really profound.. I don't doubt Lott's office got a phone call from someone from the White House or other "in-line" people that follow the "Bush-line".. It's my hope that Lott will continue his criticism of Rove, but my fear is he will eventually fall "back in line" and come out in support for Rove..

I can still hope though - that he stays where he is, because if anything - this signals a major policy shift in certain issues surrounding this administration.. If that happens, then it's a start..

I've said this probably 30 times before, but we do live in some very interesting times..

Finding the right time....

Scott McClellan's press conference 07-11-05:

Q Do you stand by your statement from the fall of 2003 when you were asked specifically about Karl and Elliott Abrams and Scooter Libby, and you said, "I've gone to each of those gentlemen, and they have told me they are not involved in this" -- do you stand by that statement?

MR. McCLELLAN: And if you will recall, I said that as part of helping the investigators move forward on the investigation we're not going to get into commenting on it. That was something I stated back near that time, as well.

Q Scott, I mean, just -- I mean, this is ridiculous. The notion that you're going to stand before us after having commented with that level of detail and tell people watching this that somehow you decided not to talk. You've got a public record out there. Do you stand by your remarks from that podium, or not?

MR. McCLELLAN: And again, David, I'm well aware, like you, of what was previously said, and I will be glad to talk about it at the appropriate time. The appropriate time is when the investigation --

Q Why are you choosing when it's appropriate and when it's inappropriate?

MR. McCLELLAN: If you'll let me finish --

Q No, you're not finishing -- you're not saying anything. You stood at that podium and said that Karl Rove was not involved. And now we find out that he spoke out about Joseph Wilson's wife. So don't you owe the American public a fuller explanation? Was he involved, or was he not? Because, contrary to what you told the American people, he did, indeed, talk about his wife, didn't he?

MR. McCLELLAN: David, there will be a time to talk about this, but now is not the time to talk about it.