The Get-Wilson Crusade, by David Corn

[G_j]

http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/19328/

The Get-Wilson Crusade

By David Corn, The Nation. Posted July 23, 2004.


Want to know why the conservatives are going after Joe Wilson? Just read the Wall Street Journal.

So this is what the campaign against former ambassador Joseph Wilson is about? In a long editorial yesterday, the hawks of The Wall Street Journal called for Patrick Fitzgerald, the US attorney investigating the Bush administration leak that identified Wilson's wife as a CIA officer, to "fold up his tent." The goal of the WSJ conservatives – and perhaps that of the other GOPers who have been bashing Wilson – is to get the Bush White House off the hook for the leak that outed Valerie Wilson (nee Plame). This leak, which appeared in a Robert Novak column a year ago, ruined the career of a government employee who worked to prevent the spread of unconventional weapons. It may have undermined national security by impairing her operations and threatening her contacts. And it was a possible violation of the federal law that prohibits government officials from disclosing the identities of covert government officers.

In other articles, I've addressed the campaign against Wilson. But let's zero in on the logic – or lack thereof – of the Journal's editorialists. They write:

"Mr. Wilson had been denying any involvement at all on Ms. Plame's part, in order to suggest that her identity was disclosed by a still-unknown Administration official out of pure malice. If instead an Administration official cited nepotism truthfully in order to explain the oddity of Mr. Wilson's selection for the Niger mission, then there was no underlying crime. Motive is crucial under the controlling statute."

Much is wrong in this short paragraph. First, Wilson did not deny "any involvement at all on Plame's part." He denied that she had specifically recommended him to be an envoy for the CIA. He has said she was involved in bringing him to a meeting at the CIA that led to his assignment. But Wilson and his detractors are now arguing over the details of this minor matter. But if there is going to be a nitpickfest, the Journal should be careful to get its facts straight.
..more..

[H2O Man]

1. Great article!

David Corn tells the truth in a wonderful way. He is doing more to make this important subject known to the general public than any other author. He does a great job. Thanks for posting this.

[yardwork]

2. The Republicans are morally bankrupt.

Would the Wall Street Journal have defended the Clinton administration for outing an undercover CIA agent?

[NewJeffCT]

15. ha!

They would have started impeachment hearings the next day, followed by a public death penalty trial.

[G_j]

3. kick

[G_j]

4. kick

[Killarney]

5. It's easy to debunk the WSJ

if there was no underlying crime... then why hide the names? Why not say, "I'm Dick Cheney and I did it and it's not a crime?"

[TacticalPeek]

6. It always helps when the WSJ and RW are blatant and brutal in their sins.

Usually they wear the mask of civility and reason, eschewing fire hoses, snarling dogs and assault as 'counterproductive'. But now, as they reach for the truncheon, their mask slips aside to reveal the wormy decay beneath.

From Corn's last graph:
"The Journal and other rightwingers, eager to strike an ideological foe and protect the Bush White House, are trying to recast the Wilson episode by blaming and impugning the victims (the Wilsons). In doing so, these law-and-order conservatives are mounting a disingenuous attempt to politicize ? and excuse ? possible criminal behavior."

At what point does their bad-faith distraction and dissembling become obstruction of justice, aiding and abetting the enemy, accessory after the fact of treason? And I'm not being entirely unserious. How much crime can one hide behind bill of rights' protection? It's not a suicide pact, you know. Law-and-order hypocrites.

[Mr.Green93]

7. what happened to Wilson's website, restore honesty.com?

[TacticalPeek]

8. Good question. Innocent screwup or reptile conspiracy?

I know, reptiles are our friends. They don't want my job or to marry my sister, etc., and even if they did, that's cool, etc.


But still, reptile conspiracy?! (It may explain Richard Perle AND Paul Wolfowitz.)

------------------

Practically everything at that site is on 'johnkerry.com'. It seems that the 'restorehonesty.com' link is becoming the default 'www.johnkerry.com' page. Maybe site maintenance has run amok, and someone needs to pull their coattail.

Anybody signed up at Kerry's site should let them know a wire or two are crossed. (Be watching for reptile deception, as always.)

[0007]

9. Excellent article

"The entire leak probe now looks like a familiar Beltway case of criminalizing political differences," the editorial maintains. This is the canard often pressed into service when Republicans are accused of illegal activity.

For years, the rightwing has dismissed the Iran-contra scandal as merely an instance of when political differences were "criminalized." And in the case of the Wilson leak, the use of this rhetoric is especially absurd. The probe was requested by the CIA. The Justice Department initiated it. Attorney General John Ashcroft recused himself, and his deputy handed the case to Fitzgerald, who set up a quasi-independent inquiry. Where are the political motivations in all this?"

[TacticalPeek]

10. Kick.

:kick:

[G_j]

11. kick

[TacticalPeek]

12. Kick.

:kick:

[G_j]

13. they were attacking him viciously

today on some news show (not familiar with cable so I didn't recognise the show or catch the network)
..two guys talking, both calling him a liar. It was pretty horrible.. :-(

[leftchick]

17. I caught Joe Wilson on PBS last week for a few minutes....

They had him on with Sen. Kit Bond (Moran!). It was pretty awful to see how slanted the interview was to Bond. The dumb-ass moderator kept cutting off Joe and giving all the time for bond to ramble on and on making no sense. Though Joe was able to make about two great points I was furious... :grr:

[yowzayowzayowza]

14. Another...

:kick: for the rest of the story.

[HFishbine]

16. Excellent

A real "must read!"

[TacticalPeek]

18. Criminal investigations for enablers, evaders and boosters of crime.

Let a jury decide obstruction, interference and corruption issues.

[KoolAidJones]

19. Why was Joe Wilson scrubbed from the Kerry website?

A search reveals zero hits.

[against all enemies]

20. The CIA staff will go nuts if this isn't allowed to be investigated.

The identification of CIA operatives should never be a political move, the Repukes have pissed off the professional staff, they must find the leak or risk losing support within the agency.

[Tellurian]

21. catched version of what Fitzgerald is up against...

Dissenting Views to H.Res. 499, Directing the Justice Department to Transmit All Documentation About the Leak of Valerie Plame’s Name and Undercover Status

Try this:

http://216.239.39.104/search?q=cache:ndPi3_6FoxoJ:www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/hres499dissenting108cong.pdf+grand+jury+determines+Novak+reveal+leak&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

[G_j]

22. couldn't get the link to work

[Tellurian]

23. working now..