7/11: The Blame For Plame Falls Mainly On 'Fair Game'?

In today's edition: More Plamegate coverage than you bargained for; debate over Daily Kos' role in the conservative blogosphere; bad news for both of NY's senators, reactions to Oliver Stone's next movie; Andrew Sullivan defends himself; and, belatedly, a little bit about overrated songs. Let's go:

TRACKBACKS: Is Double Super-Secret Background Related to Double Secret Probation?

Where the blog swarm is headed, who's taking part, and what they're saying:

• Without question, the most-followed story this weekend was Michael Isikoff's "Matt Cooper's Source" in Newsweek, wherein a few details are released from Cooper's e-mails to Time editors about his "double super secret background" interview with WH dep. CoS Karl Rove. Isikoff: "Rove told Cooper that Wilson's trip had not been authorized by 'DCIA' -- CIA Director George Tenet -- or Vice President Dick Cheney. Rather, 'it was, KR said, wilson's wife, who apparently works at the agency on wmd [weapons of mass destruction] issues who authorized the trip.'" There seems to be general agreement across the right and left 'spheres that the truth remains elusive, but is clearer than before. One key dispute persists: liberals contend CIA agent Valerie Plame was exposed to intimidate husband Joe Wilson, while conservatives contend it was merely done to explain away Wilson's Niger trip.
  
  

  >> Liberal blogs were quick to respond to the Isikoff piece -- "Roger Ailes": "The only possible issue left is whether Rove knew Plame was a covert agent. The e-mail is silent on the matter -- although the fact that Rove didn't want his name connected to the leak strongly suggests his guilt in that regard." "Digby": "I think we may be getting close to a time where Karl Rove is going to decide to spend more time with his family. [Pres.] Bush is too politically weak to finesse this and the story comes awfully close to the Iraq lies to try to brazen it out." Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) offers commentary at the Huffington Post. Daily Kos' "Hunter," under the header "Rove Lied": "Rove claimed to the FBI that he only found out Wilson's wife was CIA from reading [Bob] Novak's column, and called reporters only after that point. Novak published on the 14th. Busted." (Hunter backtracks later, citing a scenario where Rove would have seen Novak's story before it went to print). Think Progress notices the time frame, too. Arthur Silber header: "CONTEMPTIBLE TRAITORS: GET THEM OUT OF GOVERNMENT -- NOW"
  

  >> Captain's Quarters was the 1st major conservative blog with a response: "Rove did not reveal Plame's name, nor did he tell Cooper that she was on a NOC list or performing any kind of covert work. Moreover, he told Cooper the truth, as the Senate Intelligence Committee found out. ... Patrick Fitzgerald has done nothing but embarrass himself by jailing a reporter and turning her into a martyr over something that probably doesn't amount to a prosecutable crime in the first place." Power Line: "The media feeding frenzy will, indeed, be massive. But absent a serious claim of a statutory violation or perjury, it's questionable whether anyone apart from liberal bloggers and other pre-existing Bush haters will partake in the media's dog food. This isn't a top presidential aide accepting an expensive gift, or engaging in lewd sexual conduct. It's a top aide providing truthful information to journalists in response to lies told to embarrass the administration and our government."
  

  >> A number of lefty bloggers linked to Nation DC corr. David Corn at his personal blog, who was tipped to the story's existence before it was published: "Even if it turns out Rove did not break the law regarding the naming of intelligence officials, this new disclosure could prove Rove guilty of leaking a national security secret to a reporter for political ends. What would George W. Bush do about that?" Cross-posted to Huffington Post. Kausfiles quibbles: "Corn got anticipatorily overexcited about the Newsweek story, arguing it offers 'proof that the Bush White House was using any information it could gather on Joseph Wilson -- even classified information related to national security -- to pursue a vendetta against Wilson, a White House critic.'... I would say it shows the Bush White House was using what it thought was relevant information -- but what it may not have known was possibly illegal information to disclose! -- in order to discredit (or spin) Wilson's report."
  

  >> Liberal Stirling Newberry at BopNews offers a complicated theory: "It is my belief that Plame was first made as 'chickenfeed' -- trading of off the record information between reporters and sources - and not for the purpose of vengeance, but before, when the White House was trying to establish a 'Niger connection' for the 'yellowcake' story." The Mahablog: "Frankly, I think the question of who authorized Wilson's trip is a lot less interesting than this indisputable fact: The White House was wrong and Wilson was right about the uranium." Laura Rozen, at War and Piece: "I find it fascinating that Rove was not only campaigning to discredit Wilson, but that he was pushing so hard to legitimate the bogus Iraq-Niger uranium information, just days before the administration capitulated and said it shouldn't have used that language in Bush's SOTU."
  

  >> Left-leaning Kevin Drum concedes, "much is still murky." Right-leaning Tom Maguire, in a typically lengthy post discussing MSM reports and blogger reactions, concurs with Drum's pronouncement, adding: "This Newsweek revelation may create some political heat for Karl, but it is far from clear that ... Rove had the intent and knowledge that are also elements of a crime under the Intelligence Identities Protection Act."
  

  >> More reax: Andrew Sullivan; Hugh Hewitt; Suburban Guerilla; The American Street; Eschaton; Wizbang; Moon of Alabama; Rising Hegemon; Skippy the Bush Kangaroo; BadPolitiks; Doug Petch; The Left Coaster.

LEFT VS. RIGHT: The Daily Kos Show

Last week we noted that whereas conservative blogs enjoy citing the more controversial statements from the comments on lefty blogs, liberal blogs don't do the same very much. Later that afternoon, lefty MyDD did exactly that, collecting comments from Little Green Footballs, where comment threads typically run into the hundreds. One: "Can we eradicate Islam now, please?" Another: "It is now time to force muslims to make a choice: Live peacefully or die. I prefer the latter." MyDD's Chris Bowers explains why many conservative blogs lack comments: "There is a concerted effort on the part of the right to prevent this sort of overt racism and fascism on the right from being given any sunshine." (Note: Some of Bowers' examples come from TBogg, who had posted on 7/7.)

• Little Green Footballs responds: "This is a great example of how far the left has devolved; London suffers the worst terrorist attack in her history ... and people like Chris Bowers are just horrified that anyone would react to such an atrocity with rage. In other words, react like human beings."
• We also missed righty Dean Esmay's post from 7/7, "Left-Wing Hate," which is also directed primarily at Daily Kos.
• Over the weekend, "Hunter" at Daily Kos noticed conservatives linking to the site: "When Democrats want to know what Democrats are thinking, they come to Daily Kos. When Republicans want to know what Democrats are thinking... they come here too."
• Conservative Balloon Juice recommends Daily Kos as the go-to blog for "what the other side is thinking."
• INDC Journal disagrees, saying the "analysis and ... judgment" there is "terrible" -- he recommends Josh Marshall and Matthew Yglesias instead.

On 7/8, Markos Moulitsas announced at Daily Kos: "Today I did something I've never done before (not even during the Fraudster mess), and wish I'd never had to do. I made a mass banning of people perpetuating a series of bizarre, off-the-wall, unsupported and frankly embarrassing conspiracy theories. ... You know the ones -- Bush and Blair conspired to bomb London in order to take the heat off their respective political problems. I can't imagine what f---ing world these people live in, but it sure ain't the Reality Based Community."

• Michelle Malkin is one of a few conservative bloggers to commend him, although she notes that "the purge did not last long," as "Kos" later updated to re-instate some accounts: "But good on Kos for finally drawing a line and publicly castigating the crackpots. For now. Wouldn't it be something if the Democrat Party took a hint and tried draining its own fever swamps, too?"

WHITE HOUSE '08: Finding A Winner

Ex-Spinsanity co-editor Brendan Nyhan analyzes Sen. Hillary Clinton's fav/unfav numbers using National Journal's Poll Track. He charts her progress, and summarizes: "The poll results suggest that perceptions of Hillary have improved since 2003, but only back to the levels of 2000-2001. Moreover, she remains highly polarizing, with unfavorable perceptions at or above 40 percent in most national polls." Coupled with perceptions of a "liberal track record," these numbers are "likely to be devastating to her chances" in '08.

Re: Dem strategy for '08, Western Democrat's Leo Brown looks at NV, CO and IA, noting, "the winning presidential candidate has always carried at least" 2 of the 3. All "have a balanced mix of urban and rural voters. Gay marriage and gun control are unpopular. Environmental issues could play well in these states. They have minorities, notably Hispanics in the West, but are they are not dominated by minorities. This suggests the following strategy: 1. Find a candidate who is from or who strongly appeals to this geography. 2. Find a moderate candidate who is comfortable in a mixed urban-rural environment and who is not vulnerable on the three G's (guns, God, and gays). Every 'dry land' Western Democrat Governor or Senator fits these two criteria. Now find a candidate who has a good record in office and proven campaign skills, and we have a winner."

SENATE '06: Will Schumer Hide This Progress Report From His Parents?

Swing State Project's Bob Brigham: "Well into the season for candidate recruitment, it appears that the DSCC under Sen. Chuck Schumer's leadership is doing a miserable job. Failing." He goes through the list: OH, NV, IN, ME, VA, MO, PA. Only in MT do the Dems have a "dream candidate." More: "Watching the DSCC flail and fail at candidate recruitment, I think it is clear that the top-down, Washington based days of candidate recruitment are over. It is time for the grassroots to run candidates..."

MO GOPer John Hilton speculates that IA AG Jay Nixon (D) pressured state Sen. Chuck Graham (D) to drop his '06 bid against Sen. Jim Talent (R) so '04 GOV nominee Claire McCaskill (D) will run for SEN and not GOV again -- so Nixon "won't have to worry about" her when he challenges Gov. Matt Blunt (R) in '06.

BLOGS VS. THE MSM: Building A Better Anonymous Trap

Last week, Eschaton announced a new daily feature: the "Ridiculous Anonymous Source of the Day," highlighting news stories where sources are "granted anonymity so that they can, under cover, push the administration message." Recent awards have gone to the Washington Post and New York Times.

Right-leaning Instapundit: "This is old news to most blog readers, but the Washington Post has a lengthy article on how London has become a haven for radical Islamists." Crooked Timber's Maria Farrell notes a similar story in the New York Times, and comments: "After the 2001 terrorist attacks, people who tried to blame the US for attacks against it were rightly condemned. So let's have a little equal treatment, please, a little respect. At least till the bodies are buried."

CULTURE WARS: Let He Who Is Not A Castro Chum Throw The First Stone

Center-ish bloggers Roger L. Simon, Mickey Kaus, Glenn Reynolds, Jeff Jarvis and Joe Gandelman all agree that Oliver Stone is the wrong person to direct a 9/11 movie, generally agreeing this is evidence that Hollywood is even further out of touch than they thought before.

• Vanity Fair's James Wolcott defends Hollywood and Stone, too: "Oliver Stone may be many bad things -- a bad friend, a bad tipper, a bad drinker, a bad dancer -- whatever George Costanza rollcall you want to make -- but one thing he is not is a bad filmmaker."
• Lefty Steve Gilliard agrees, and compares Vietnam vet Stone with bloggers: "You know they don't give out Bronze Stars for pithy comments."
• Jarvis responds to Wolcott, saying his concern is for "talent and taste and the truth," not politics. He calls Wolcott's post a "eulogy for ... Stone's career."
• Blogs for Bush thinks it could be a "cool thing" if Stone leaves his politics out of it.

BLOGGERS VS. BLOGGERS: Does The "Flypaper Theory" Explain Andrew Sullivan?

Centrist Andrew Sullivan, the recipient of much criticism from the left and right, responds to each side in back-to-back statements. Addressing his right flank, he distances himself from '02 comment appearing to tolerate prisoner abuse (something he has since crusaded against): "This was the Bush administration, people I trusted. I had no idea -- and perhaps I should be held responsible for my naivete -- that memos were being written allowing for torture and abuse to occur under the legal cover of a president's wartime authority." Addressing the left, he distances himself from his promotion of the so-called "flypaper theory" (see 7/8 Blogometer): "I'm not prepared to dismiss it out of hand; but the evidence against its efficacy also seems to me to have accumulated over the past couple of years."

Lefty The Poor Man does another Power Line parody -- calling it the "Power Tools Blog." It begins: "American journalist-hero Brit Hume is taking flack from terror-loving, success-hating liberals for admitting that the first thing he thought when he heard of the terrorist attack in London was that now would be a good time to buy futures. Of course, the first thing to cross the so-called 'minds' of hypocritical liberals was probably 'I hope no terrorists got hurt', but try getting the MSM to cover that story."

THE ECONOMY: Bad Like Good, Or Bad Like Bad?

Conservative Outside The Beltway on the BLS report of 146K new jobs (establishment survey) and 163K new jobs (household survey) in June: "Granted, the good news is diminished in comparison with even better forecasts. But a 5.0 unemployment rate is historically quite terrific." Liberal Econbrowser: "The primary concern seems to be that, although the unemployment rate has come down nicely from its peak during the last recession, the fraction of the population that is employed has failed to return to its values of 2000."

MISCELLANY: Collect 'Em All!

• The London attack has mostly fallen off the list of hot searches on Technorati. Meanwhile, "Overrated Songs" was in 1st at noon on 7/10. Shortly before our deadline today, it's in 2nd. The meme originated at BlogCritics, where contributor Robert Burke compiled a list of 13 such songs with the help of other contributors. The #1 overrated song, in their estimation, is 'American Pie.'" The choice was submitted by Thus Spake Drake, who makes his case against the song at his own blog.
• Lefty Oliver Willis announces his "new podcast (aka talk show)," "The America Show." Link for iTunes users; link for others.
• Atrios posts a lengthy excerpt from a Washington Post column by military historian Eliot Cohen, whose son is going to Iraq. Atrios comments: "I find it rather odd that the reason [to oppose the war] which was probably the most derided at the time -- the 'this gang can't shoot straight' reason -- appears to be the one which, over 2 years later, seems to be the most frequently cited 'I should have known' reason."
• Daily Kos announces that its 1st annual convo will be held June 8-11, 2006.
• On 7/19 the Electronic Frontier Foundation is sponsoring the "BayFF on Bloggers' Rights" conf. in San Francisco.
• Micro Persuasion links to a beta version of Yahoo's upcoming dedicated blog search. Yahoo! pulled its site offline a short time later. Here's a screenshot from before.
• Belmont Club's "Wretchard" sheds his anonymity: "Since the model of anonymity is failing, I'll disclose the boring details. My name is Richard Fernandez, of Filipino birth and Australian citizenship. My interest in history probably began at Harvard, from which I graduated with a Masters in Public Policy. Wretchard is the name of an imaginary cat, the symbol of that entire race of stoic, yet somewhat foolish creatures. Belmont is the name of a suburb I roomed in while at Cambridge, Mass."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Cut Him Off

NYU J-prof Jay Rosen: "I, for one, have had it with Robert Novak. And if all the journalists who are talking today about 'chilling effects' and individual conscience mean what they say, they will, as a matter of conscience and pride, start giving Novak himself the big chill. That means if you're a Washington columnist maybe you don't go on CNN with him -- until he explains. If you're a newspaper editor you consider suspending his column until he explains. ... If Novak says he can't talk until the case is over, then he shouldn't be allowed to publish or opine on the air until the case is over. He should know the rage some of his colleagues feel. Claiming to be 'baffled' by Novak's behavior may have been plausible for a while. With reporter Judith Miller now sitting in jail, and possibly facing criminal charges later, 'baffled' is sounding lame."

LEST WE FORGET: Toilet Humor

More fake news from Scrappleface's Scott Ott: "Law enforcement authorities in major U.S. cities put riot police on high alert today after recently-jailed journalist Judith Miller complained that prison guards had desecrated her copy of The New York Times. 'We know that journalists worship the Times,' said one deputy police chief, 'If they take to the streets in protest, things could get ugly fast.' Ms. Miller, who works for the Times' counter-intelligence department, told an unnamed visitor that her copy of the revered 'Gray Lady' had been carelessly tossed on the floor, handled by a conservative Republican jailer (who she called 'an infidel') and may have been used as a lining for a cat's litter box. 'They did everything but flush it down the toilet,' she said. 'They have no respect for the 'paper of record', may it publish forever, nor for the wise and powerful ones who create this daily miracle.'"

BLOGOMETER SPECIAL: Tired Of Retirement?

Last Friday, the retirement of Chief Justice William Rehnquist was widely believed to be a done deal, and the announcement was only a matter of time. Today it may still be a done deal, or not, and there has been no announcement. This means some backtracking is due from those who covered it most closely:

SCOTUSblog posted an 2 items claiming there would be no retirement. That post was subsequently removed, and an update from Tom Goldstein followed: "We removed [the posts] saying that Rehnquist wouldn't retire today. We may have a further post on why we did that, but I just wanted to put up a post to make sure that no one thought that we were trying to 'rewrite history.' I can say personally that the information I was able to gather throughout the day was that the rumors were inaccurate. And I'm not aware of people on the blog having contrary information."

This a.m., Erick Erickson of RedState writes: "What I am hearing is that some people really do think Rehnquist retired or intended to retire on Friday. Others, as you can imagine, do not believe it. A friend of mine close to the White House tells me that though the White House had no notice of a retirement, they had a good enough idea of who Novak's source was to believe it accurate. I'm also told that the White House has zipped up as many lips as possible regarding this discussion. Likewise, [Bob] Novak today is silent on the issue."

REHNQUIST: So You're Telling Me There's A Chance!

Ex-Sen./short-lived Dem '72 VP nominee Thomas Eagleton makes a "1000 to 1" prediction at Missourians Fired Up!: "I smell a deal being hatched. Chief Justice William Rehnquist can't seriously consider himself competent to serve as Chief Justice in his condition. But by delaying his resignation and giving the appearance that he might continue in office, he has some leverage with the White House about the appointment, not only of his successor, but perhaps also O'Connor's. ... I suspect that somewhere in Washington there is lurking a 'Deep Broker' who is the link between Rehnquist and the White House. That way, negotiations can be conducted discreetly and with deniability preserved for all. The question is: What kind of replacement would Rehnquist want? He is known to have a deep and abiding concern for the reputation, institutional well being, and status of the Court. He has written its history and would naturally be interested in his legacy. I think that argues for him to prefer a responsible conservative to lead the court as Chief, rather than one of the 'wackos.' That could be Roberts or maybe Gonzales. ... He will announce his resignation when the deal is made or, if there is no deal, he may be stubborn enough to try to continue."

LUTTIG: Stealth Moderate?

Centrist bloggers react to a Chicago Tribune piece on Michael Luttig, an "ardent conservative" known for his "independence," who stresses "intellectual honesty" and writes "crisp and clear" opinions.

• Althouse: "Can't filibuster that, can they? I mean, the filibuster compromisers can't legitimately say "extraordinary circumstances" here, can they?"
• AmbivaBlog: "[S]ounds unBorkable, and trustworthy, to me."
• Fearing that Luttig would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade, center-left The Reaction suggests Luttig might be "an acceptable replacement for a conservative justice like Rehnquist -- as long as he's twinned with a relative moderate like Gonzales to replace the relatively moderate O'Connor."

McCONNELL: Even Better Than Even Better Than The Real Thing?

Power Line's Scott Johnson defends judge Michael McConnell against his conservative critics: "Simply put: Michael McConnell would be the best defender of religious liberty against the power of government that the Supreme Court has ever known."

STEVENS: What Constitutes "Credible And Real" In The Blogosphere?

RedState's Erickson: "I am told that the rumor on John Paul Stevens is credible and real. I am told that as of last week there was nothing on the horizon, but in the last week all has changed. Supposedly Justice Stevens has recently taken steps to make arrangements for his personal affairs in such a way that those close to him think he is retiring. I'm also told that his health has begun to deteriorate."

ROE V. WADE: It Wouldn't Be Prudent At This Juncture

Yale prof Jack Balkin: "Liberals and Democrats alike are worried that the President will nominate someone who will vote to overturn Roe v. Wade. They needn't worry. That's not likely to happen. In fact, the only litmus test the President is likely to employ is whether a candidate promises *not* to overturn Roe. Here's why. Bush must decide if he wants to overturn Roe or preserve the Republicans as the majority party. With Roe gone, the pro-choice movement will be energized and Republican politicians will have to state on the record whether they want to criminalize abortion. Women, libertarians, and moderates may bolt the party, destroying Bush's winning coalition. Republicans may dislike Roe, but they may dislike losing elections even more." Supreme Court Nomination Blog finds his argument persuasive.

RedState, on the partial-birth/late-term abortion act's striking down being upheld by the 8th circuit: "The ruling in question apparently leans heavily on the Supreme Court's 2000 Stenberg v. Carhart decision as a matter of precedent. It is worth noting that Sandra Day O'Connor, as she often did, provided the majority vote for the liberals on this occasion, making her successor the likely deciding vote when and if this issue reaches the SCOTUS in the upcoming term."

THE FIGHT: Let's Get It Dionne

Washington Post's E.J. Dionne, on the SCOTUS nominations: "Should a temporary majority of 50.7 percent have control over the entire United States government? Should 49.3 percent of Americans have no influence over the nation's trajectory for the next generation?" Red Stater Randy Robinson replies: "Elections have meaning, and what they mean right now is that the Democrats are in a precarious position when it comes to filling Supreme Court vacancies. And deservedly so." So does NRO's Ed Whelan at Bench Memos: "The basic question Dionne ought to be asking, of course, is of a very different nature: Should five justices be free to invent 'rights' that have no legitimate basis in the text or structure of the Constitution and to deprive 300 million Americans of their constitutional power to set policy on those invented rights?"

FAMOUS LAST WORDS: Who Am I? What's My Name?

Veteran blogger Jeff Cooper, on 7/8: "I could have sworn that I read this morning that Chief Justice Rehnquist had resigned. Not that he was planning to resign, but that he had actually submitted his resignation letter. The memory is specific enough that I recall seeing an excerpt from the letter. And yet none of that has happened. Is it possible that the British beef I ate two decades ago is coming back to haunt me?"