StudioGlyphic

"Your opponent cannot fold if you do not bet or raise." –Abdul

Dick Morris is dumb.

Posted on | September 30, 2003 | No Comments

DEAN’S E-REFORM

Indeed, the Dean campaign will likely mark the end of the big money era in our politics, when campaigns were dominated by ultra-wealthy donors or special interests contributing massive amounts of money.

Dean is proving that, through the Internet, he can mobilize large numbers of relatively small contributors, whose combined giving can overwhelm that of wealthy special-interest donors. In so doing, he’s also ending the oligarchy of monied power in the Democratic Party typified by Terry McAuliffe, the Democratic National Committee chairman whose sole qualification is his ability to raise big bucks.

He just doesn’t get it. You’re still going to have big-money campaigns. George Bush is running a big money campaign and is expected to haul in close to $50 million this quarter. You’re still going to have fundraising by face-to-face contact, direct mail, and telephone. Not everyone likes to use the Internet, and some people want to be able to see a candidate before supporting him. The Internet is not replacing anything. Combinations of all these communication tools and fundraising techniques will continue to be used for the next 10 years, at least.

What makes the Dean campaign different is that people are attracted to Dean and his message. And yes, they’ve been stirred up by their opposition to the radical Republicans in charge. But the Internet stuff is a symptom and not the cause of that grassroots support. It’s like saying that Dean is successful because he speaks to crowds of thousands of people, and that in the future, all candidates can become successful by speaking to crowds of thousands. Nice try, Dick.

Category: Politics

Media Storm Day 5: Justice Inquiry begins

Posted on | September 30, 2003 | No Comments

Washington Post:
Justice Launches Investigation Into Leak

Three weeks ago, intelligence officials said, the CIA returned to the Justice Department a standard 11-question form detailing the potential damage done by the release of the information. Officials said it may have been the first such report ever filed on the unauthorized disclosure of an operative’s name. Word of the Justice probe emerged over the weekend after the CIA briefed lawmakers on it last week.

Another journalist yesterday confirmed receiving a call from an administration official providing the same information about Wilson’s wife before the Novak column appeared on July 14 in The Post and other newspapers.

The journalist, who asked not to be identified because of possible legal ramifications, said that the information was provided as part of an effort to discredit Wilson, but that the CIA information was not treated as especially sensitive. “The official I spoke with thought this was a part of Wilson’s story that wasn’t known and cast doubt on his whole mission,” the person said, declining to identify the official he spoke with. “They thought Wilson was having a good ride and this was part of Wilson’s story.”

Washington Post:
Rarely Invoked Statute Could Play a Role

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 law says no person other than the one accused of leaking the information can be prosecuted, a provision that would protect journalists who report leaked classified information identifying a covert agent. But there is one exception to that protection.

The measure says people who engage in a “pattern of activities” intended to identify covert agents and who have “reason to believe that such activities would impair or impede the foreign intelligence activities of the United States” can be prosecuted. Smith said that language was aimed at the publishers of the Covert Action Information Bulletin and others who made it a practice to identify undercover CIA agents.

New York Times:
Justice Dept. Starts Inquiry on Leak of C.I.A. Officer’s Identity

LA Times:
Leak Accusation Stirs White House

It is a classic Washington whodunit, with speculation swirling around the Beltway on Monday over the identities of the “two senior administration officials” who passed the CIA officer’s name to conservative columnist Robert Novak.

But the time-honored game of guessing reporters’ sources has higher stakes in this case because it centers on the White House’s prewar claims about Iraq’s nuclear program, appears to have cost a CIA operative her clandestine career, and the culprits, if caught, could face up to 10 years in prison.

…

By some accounts, the administration approached a number of news organizations in July, dangling details on Wilson’s wife’s position at the agency. The Washington Post on Sunday quoted “an administration aide” as saying that six reporters received cold calls from administration officials.

The Post quoted Wilson as saying that NBC’s Andrea Mitchell got one of the calls. “I would not discuss sources,” Mitchell said when asked about that Monday.

But speaking on condition of anonymity, one top political and communications strategist close to the White House expressed skepticism that any senior White House officials leaked the information.

“It’s not how anybody leaks,” the strategist said. “You know us. We’re pros. If you want to leak, you call one reporter.”

Slate:
The Plame Game
By Jack Shafer

Given that the White House knows who the leakers are, I would surmise that the administration will staunch the damage—and still the scandal—by strongly encouraging the leakers to offer themselves up for sacrifice out of duty to President Bush. If I were Bush, I’d avoid anything that could be construed as a coverup and start rehearsing my address to the nation about how a tiny precancerous lesion has been removed from the face of the presidency.

…

The hidden bad news is that none of [the journalists] reported that the Plame information was being leaked by sources who wished to embarrass her and Wilson—which they could have legitimately done without burning their sources by name. In other words, they all protected the White House from its blunder.

Category: Politics, Uncategorized

Bush-Wilson-Yellowcake-investigation story makes front page again

Posted on | September 29, 2003 | No Comments

What’s more, there’s mention of independent counsels and this quote from the other George Bush in ’99 that those who expose the names of intelligence sources are “the most insidious of traitors.”

It’s always nice to start a new week with a shitstorm.

Monday’s Post: Bush Aides Say They’ll Cooperate With Probe Into Intelligence Leak

Sunday’s Post: Bush Administration Is Focus of Inquiry

It’s not just the Post, either. The New York Times, ABCNews.com, CNN.com, Yahoo! News are leading with this story on their home pages.

Category: Politics

Simplistic black and white view of the world

Posted on | September 28, 2003 | No Comments

CNN.com – Wesley Clark’s unlikely ally – Sep. 22, 2003:

“This war hurts and scares and pains me more than anything except combat,” he admits. Speaking almost sadly, [Rep. Charlie Rangel] tells of half a dozen nearly identical personal exchanges with President George W. Bush. Each time the president, with obvious sincerity, asks the same question: “Do you know, Charlie, why we’re hated so much?” After Rangel confesses, “I really don’t know, Mr. President,” Mr. Bush answers his own question: “Because they’re evil, Charlie. Because they’re evil.”

Category: Politics

Schadenfreude

Posted on | September 28, 2003 | No Comments

The Washington Post reports:

Leaders of the House intelligence committee have criticized the U.S. intelligence community for using largely outdated, “circumstantial” and “fragmentary” information with “too many uncertainties” to conclude that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and ties to al Qaeda.

This is bi-partisan criticism of the intelligence community. There is also some implicit criticism of the administration for playing up the level and quality of the intelligence.

Just the latest in a series of misfortunes for the Bush administration. In the past week to two weeks:

The CIA requested a Justice Department investigation into the White House for exposing the identity of an operative, in connection with the Niger Yellowcake story.

Sec. Rumsfeld and Dep. Sec. Wolfowitz got grilled for the $87 billion request by members of Congress.

Vice Pres. Cheney’s deferred compensation and stock options from Halliburton, the company that received billion dollar no-bid contracts for Iraq reconstruction, qualify as continuing financial interests according to a Congressional Research Service report, contrary to Cheney’s earlier claims on national television.

Pres. Bush and Sec. Powell made their cases to the UN and allies for internationalizing the financing of the Iraqi operation and the composition of the troops on the ground. They’ve made little headway.

The question is whether this will pick up the momentum required to get members of Congress to call for further investigations and demand the resignation of key administration officials.

Category: Politics
keep looking »

  • Recent Posts

  • Recent Comments

  • Archives