October 20, 2005
10/20: The Vice Squad
The Plamegate rumor mill is churning overtime, with not one but two aides to VP Cheney said to have been flipped by special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald. But that's just the surface. An e-mail circulating among lefty bloggers contends that ex-Sec/State Colin Powell shoots the smoking gun linking Cheney to the whole affair. It is greeted with considerable skepticism, but also considerable interest.
Meanwhile, members of the House GOP meet today with conservative bloggers to discuss spending issues; in the wake of Katrina, a number of bloggers on the right organized to pressure Congress to cut spending. Is this a sign they've had an impact?
Plus, you'll be kicking yourself if you miss our latest Blogger Spotlight.
PLAMEGATE I: Hannah Storm
One day after reporting that Cheney aide John Hannah is cooperating with the Fitzgerald probe, Raw Story now reports that "those close to the investigation say" Cheney aide David Wurmser "has agreed to provide the prosecution with evidence that the leak" of CIA operative Valerie Plame's name "was a coordinated effort by Cheney's office to discredit" ex-Amb. Joe Wilson. Like Hannah, Wuermser came to the WH on loan from the State Dept., where they both worked for now-UN Amb. John Bolton. Wurmser "likely cooperated because he faced criminal charges." Raw Story's "sources say that Hannah and Wurmser were given orders by senior officials in Cheney's office in June 2003 to leak Plame's covert status and identity in an attempt to muzzle Wilson." Also of note, Hannah apparently "was not given immunity, but was likely offered a 'deal'" in exchange for testimony. 
Left in the West's Matt Singer: "Let's just look at it this way, two of Cheney's aides are cutting a deal and not for immunity either. That means they were in serious trouble. It also means that they have information worth letting them off the hook. This doesn't all add up to no story." Liberal Booman Tribune collects information on Wurmser and also on onetime Cheney spokesperson Cathie Martin, now an aide to Pres. Bush, and wife of FCC commis. Kevin Martin. Conservative Tom Maguire keeps an open mind -- especially because of the Bolton connection -- but adds: "My advice to excitable lefties -- take a breath. One might perfectly well headline a story screaming that [Cheney CoS Scooter] Libby and [WH dep. Cos Karl] Rove are cooperating with the investigation, since they have been."
PLAMEGATE II: Let's Be DeFrank About This
New York Daily News's Tom DeFrank reported 10/19 that Bush knew of Rove's involvement in the Plame matter 2 years ago, and that he "rebuked" him. Said a "presidential counselor": "He made his displeasure known to Karl. He made his life miserable about this." Right-leaning Bloggledygook: "Yes, but he didn't fire him, although he said publicly that he would fire anybody who had participated in the CIA leak." More: "Going after Joseph Wilson's credibility isn't against the law. Doing it by 'outing' Plame may or may not be illegal, but it certainly was stupid. And not very effective." In an entry at Huffington Post, Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) gets Watergate-esque, asking: "When Was the President Told?" Conyers points out: "Yet, just last year on June 11, 2004, the President responded affirmatively when asked if he would 'fire anyone found to' have leaked the agent's name." Josh Marshall suggests the story is probably worth buying a) because DeFrank has been close to previous GOP admins, and so has "unique" access, and b) DeFrank's relationships to these GOPers may have become "more strained or perhaps attenuated" recently. AMERICAblog's John Aravosis lays out a res ipsa loquitor case all in the header: "Bush knew Rove was the leaker in 2003. Lied in 2004 when he said he didn't know who leaked. Obstruction of Justice." Conservative Say Anything calls it "just another rumor to add to the growing list surrounding the Plame investigation ... These are all interesting to talk about, but I wish Fitzgerald would wrap things up already."
CAP's Think Progress notes that in the televised 10/19 briefing, WH spokesperson Scott McClellan wouldn't reaffirm what sounded like an earlier denial at the non-televised gaggle earlier in the day. For a transcript of McClellan haggling with reporters over whether he disputed the Daily News story's accuracy, see Talking Points Memo.
In recent days, NRO's The Buzz had floated rumors going around that ex-RNC chair Ed Gillespie would be a possible replacement for Rove, should he be indicted. But now a source tells Buzzer Eric Pfeiffer that he won't be: "He made a financial sacrifice to run the RNC. The partners in his new contract made an exception to allow him to temporarily return to the White House to assist in the Miers nomination. But his contract won't allow him to remain ... Besides, he is anxious to get back to the private sector."
PLAMEGATE III: Believe It ... Or Not!
Liberal Agonist Sean-Paul Kelley writes about the email going around the liberal blogosphere that "supposedly came from Wall Street," detailing the extent to which Plamegate may result in "the biggest White House shakeup since the Iran-Contra scandal." It claims that Powell confided to Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) his impression that Cheney is at the heart of the leak. Kelley: "I want to state that while I think the email is probably incorrect in most, if not all the particulars, it's general thrust is [eminently] 'plausible.'" Read on for the details.
Andrew Sullivan: "The rumors are now swirling. ... If that pans out, we could be about to hit Plamegate pay-dirt; and the Bush administration could be headed into a political Katrina. But this is still just Capitol Hill buzz; and my sourcing is still light."
Lefty Billmon calls it a "very detailed but almost certainly very fake e-mail," and writes: "The idea that Powell would spill his guts -- and his grand jury testimony -- to a loose cannon like John McCain is about as farfetched as the claim that Hillary murdered Foster and then stashed his body in a secret White House safe house." He adds: "And since all of us on the left -- even the animal lovers -- badly want to believe that the beast is down on its knees ... it's easy to see why the bogus tale is getting so much attention." And if Cheney is indicted: "Well, I guess that's when we'll find out if the dagger in the veep's back really does have the initials C.P. on it."
PLAMEGATE IV: The Leaks Continue ... And Other Minutiae
Last a.m., the New York Times concluded a story on the investigation: "Officials who testified or were questioned by investigators also included John Hannah, Mr. Cheney's principal deputy national security adviser." Tom Maguire: "Did they randomly mention this name from amongst multitudes of witnesses? Presumably not. Do they hint at *why* they mentioned this name? No."
Based on this morning's new AP report, Carpetbagger Report wonders: "Is Rove hanging Libby out to dry?" More: "(D)etails about Rove's latest grand jury testimony, which were probably leaked by his lawyers, seem to focus around the idea that Rove knew about Plame, but only because Libby talked to him about it. A desperate attempt to save Rove's butt and hang Libby out to dry?" John Cole writes: "If this story is true, things ARE going to get real ugly within the WH."
Greg at The Talent Show attempts to reconcile a report in National Journal by Murray Waas that Rove lied to Bush with this report, which suggests he lied to Fitzgerald and not Bush. "A single saved email along these lines and some fibbing by the President about what he knew and when he knew it could be all the rope Fitzgerald needs to hang Bush out to dry."
WMD INTEL: Cabal Cabal, How Could They Know?
On 10/19, ex-Powell aide Lawrence Wilkerson spoke at the New America Foundation, where he delivered a speech excoriating the WH's pre-war decision-making: "What I saw was a cabal between" Cheney and Defense Sec. Don Rumsfeld, "on critical issues that made decisions that the bureaucracy did not know were being made." As the Financial Times reports, Wilkerson "said his decision to go public had led to a personal falling out" with Powell, though Wilkerson still said: "I admire this in him, he is the world's most loyal soldier." Most bloggers pick it up from the Financial Times, which also posted a transcript, via Drudge Report or Political Wire. Video is available from the New America Foundation. NAF's Steve Clemons, author of The Washington Note, promises readers: "It blows the roof off of the White House." Among the top-tier bloggers mentuioning it, Brad DeLong, Kevin Drum, and Josh Marshall all post excerpts without much comment -- so do many others below their threshhold. GWU prof Henry Farrell, at Crooked Timber: "I suspect we'll be seeing a lot more score-settling speeches like this as message discipline among former administration types breaks down irrevocably." Tim Dunlop, at The Road to Surfdom: "As much as I'm happy to see these high-level people coming out and calling a spade a spade in regard to the Bush administration, it would've been nice if they'd had the decency to spill the beans a couple of years back, back when it really mattered."
American Prospect's Laura Rozen writes at War and Piece: "Off and on the past couple months, I have been talking to staff" on the Senate Select Cmte on Intel (SSCI), GOPers and Dems, "trying to figure out what's really happened with the promised Phase II SSCI report, that was supposed to examine US government officials' use of the intelligence." She has learned that SSCI chair Pat Roberts (R-KS) "has literally been coordinating" with Senate Maj. Leader Bill Frist and Cheney's office "very closely on many aspects" of the cmte's "supposed investigation of the intelligence, and in particular, working closely with Cheney's office on crafting the language defining the terms for the as-yet unfinished Phase II report." Although it is "hardly is surprising that Cheney took a big interest" in the investigation, she notes, when "Congress is in cahoots with the administration in stifling oversight, who can investigate the investigators? Unfortunately, it's not in Fitzgerald's mandate."
SPENDING: Northern Exposure
Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) has introduced an amendment to HR 3058 -- the heavily-criticized bill that allocated funds for the building of a bridge in AK -- and redirect said funds to rebuild the Twin Spans Bridge connecting New Orleans to Slidell. PDFs of the amendment and and Coburn's letter to colleagues are available via Instapundit. GOP activist Mike Krempasky, at RedState: "Make NO mistake -- the establishment Republicans are terrified of this bill. The chutzpah of the little people demanding an end to one of the most immoral acts of Congress -- earmarked pork spending -- has got some in quite the tizzy. Word is that some are trying to stop the Coburn Amendment from even reaching the floor for a vote." Power Line: "The Coburn Amendment may prove to be a historic rallying point for the forces of limited government and fiscal sanity. Then again, it may not. But it's a good place to start." Mark Tapscott titles his related post: "Mr. Smith is back in Washington, and his name is Tom Coburn."
The amendment comes at a particularly interesting time -- in the aftermath of the right-blogosphere's anti-pork uprising, the Porkbusters effort, created by Instapundit's Glenn Reynolds and The Truth Laid Bear's N.Z. Bear. It also comes as House GOPers prepare to meet today on Capitol Hill with conservative bloggers; because that meeting has been called specifically to discuss econ. issues and spending, the sense around the blogosphere is that it is a direct response to that effort.
Instapundit suggests: "Perhaps tomorrow at the big Capital blog event would be a good time to ask some questions?" Blogs For Bush's Matt Margolis, who is traveling down from Boston for the meeting, has been accepting questions from readers for him to ask at the meeting. TTLB has created a page that will track posts by bloggers attending the event. The Blogometer will be there, too; we'll post our coverage in this space tomorrow.
THE MIERS NOMINATION: A Second Chance (Or Is It A Third? We're Losing Track) For A First Impression
The major dirt relates to reports that the Senate Judiciary Cmte is asking Harriet Miers to resubmit her questionnaire because her responses "inadequate," "insufficient" and "insulting." PoliBlog's Steven Taylor quips: "Funny, that largely sums up my overall view of the Miers' nomination." James Joyner at Outside The Beltway points out, however that "These questionnaires are often fishing expeditions. Given that nominees have ... been instructed by the appointing administration to be as vague as possible, they are unlikely to elicit much in the way of useful." NRO's Jonathan Adler at Bench Memos adds that it should be "put in perspective. First, and perhaps most important, no nominee's questionnaire is complete and error-free. ... Second, it is likely that Senators (and others) are going over Miers's answers more critically than they reviewed [now Chief Justice] Roberts's answers. Of course the reason for this is that there are more questions about Miers's qualifications. No one doubted that John Roberts was qualified." Blogenlust writes: "At first, I thought it would be worth breaking up the GOP alliance for the Democrats to quietly oppose, but not block, Miers' nomination ... . But with each passing day, it's becoming obvious that this woman is not even close to being qualified for the job."
Hugh Hewitt responds to Judge Robert Bork's OpinionJournal op-ed (see 10/19 Blogometer) in a lengthy blog post -- cutting time out of his vacation to do so -- calling it "an intemperate essay, quite extraordinary and unpersuasive. But like most of the arrows being fired at Miers now, it was not intended to persuade anyone at all but rather to inflame the anti-Miers crowd into a great frenzy of head-nodding murmuring." More Hewitt: "I prefer the anti-Olympian Judge Bork, the one who would not be dismissive of careers as distinguished though non-judicial as Harriet Miers' or as contemptuous of her faith as the Wall Street Journal essay clearly is."
Weekly Standard's Jonathan Last writes at Galley Slaves: "Those who voted for George W. Bush were promised a mind like Scalia's for the Supreme Court. Instead, they've been given a mind like George W. Bush's."
Ann Althouse starts a list of reasons why some people might support the "embarrassing selection" of Miers. A brief rundown: "Some folks must just love Bush, the man. They're fans!"; "Some people think it serves the overall good of the country" to support the pres.; "Some people think it serves the good of their party to support the nominee" -- both GOP and Dem; "Maybe some people just don't think the Supreme Court matters very much and, when a slot opens, it can be filled with just about anybody"; "Some people think the Court matters a lot, but they want the conservative side de-fanged"; "Some people feel sympathetic toward Miers, the woman."
DELAY: Warrants Little Attention In The 'Sphere
DeLay-critical org. PCAF's Daily DeLay blog posts the image of ex-House Maj. Leader/Rep. Tom DeLay's arrest warrant. Swing State Project posts a "Wanted Poster" of its own.
BLOGS VS. THE MSM: The Passion Of The Crisis
Liberal magazine journalist Matt Yglesias: "Remember the Social Security crisis? Isn't it a bit, um, interesting that the president suddeny stopped thinking it was critical to do something about the program once it became clear that his preferred changes weren't going to be adopted? But let's leave Bush out of it -- he's got plenty of his own problems. What happened to all the media hecklers? You know the ones. The ones slamming the Democrats for "irresponsibly" refusing to negotiate with Bush unless he took privatization off the table. That was, supposedy, irresponsible because of the looming crisis. ... Funny how not only Bush, but huge swathes of the press, suddenly lose interest in this purported crisis if it can't be "solved" in a way that redistributes wealth upward. I'm just saying."
Slate's Mickey Kaus: "The essential mistake was thinking you could replace a centralized, dictatorial regime with a looser decentralized regime and not have old power centers rise up and sow mischief and chaos -- resulting in something close to civil war. ... But I've written enough about the New York Times under Bill Keller."
ABLE DANGER: Careful, They Might Just Hold You To That
Syndie columnist Michelle Malkin: "Watching C-SPAN right now. Rep. Curt Weldon [(R-PA)] is on the House floor blasting the Defense Intelligence Agency and vigorously defending Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer. He says he will resign from Congress if it refuses to investigate the government's smear tactics against Able Danger whistleblowers." Political Teen has audio.
Possible whistleblower Shaffer, says Weldon received boxes of his personal items in through the mail from DIA; he box contained classified documents, which is considered a felony. According to Weldon, the DIA has "'conducted a deliberate campaign of character assassination' against" Shaffer. Captain's Quarters asks: "How inept has the DIA been in its campaign against Shaffer? They have hung up his clearance over a series of offenses that go back to his teenage years, events that had to have already been reviewed for clearance renewals over and over again. ... If the DIA really has resorted to these tactics, then it only demonstrates even more that they fear Shaffer and the rest of the Able Danger revelations. What has them so afraid?"
MIDTERMS '06: Will Dean Face More Complaints Over DFA's Activities?
Democracy GuyTim Russo points out that OH SEN candidate Paul Hackett (D) has posted a message to the Democracy for America website asking readers "to only support candidates who" oppose the war and call for a "responsible exit plan." Russo asks: "Does that rule out Sherrod Brown?" He adds: "DFA is Howard Dean's operation, lock stock and barrell. His brother runs it. Dean himself is listed as "founder." Does that mean Howard Dean, the CHAIRMAN OF THE DNC, endorses Paul Hackett in a contested US Senate primary?"
REDISTRICTING: When You Work Out Where To Draw The Line ...
Charging RINOJeremy Dibbell posts a brief e-mail interview with moderate TN Dem Rep. John Tanner, the chief sponsor of a bill to reform the how CDs are "drawn by implementing an independent commission system in each state rather than the partisan processes we see in most states today." Tanner, on how the commis. would be chosen: "The commission would be appointed in a bipartisan way. A commissioner could not have been recently involved with a political party and could not run for Congressional office in the state until after the next redistricting cycle, 10 years later. There are other things we spell out, but that's the jist of it." From Dibbell's conclusion: "Obviously I wasn't out to trip him up, and I'm not going to disguise the fact that I am a strong proponent of the bill. I make no claims whatsoever of objectivity, but I certainly appreciate the Congressman's efforts and his willingness to share his views."
BLOGGER SPOTLIGHT: Ann Is In The Althouse
Today the Blogometer talks to Univ. of WI-Madison law prof Ann Althouse, who writes Althouse.
What is your full name?
Ann Althouse. Well, Ann Adair Althouse, really. I never use that, somewhat to my regret.
What is your age?
Since I'm constantly revealing my age by remembering things from the Sixties, I'll admit to it: I'm 54.
Where did you grow up?
I was born in Wilmington, Delaware, and lived there until I was 13. Then, I lived in Wayne, New Jersey, until I went away to college (in Ann Arbor, Michigan).
Where do you live now?
I've lived in Madison, Wisconsin, since 1984, after ten years living in New York City.
What is your occupation? Have you ever worked on a political campaign or for the mainstream media?
I'm a professor at the University of Wisconsin Law School. I've never worked on a political campaign or in mainstream media.
When did you start blogging and why?
I started blogging on January 14, 2004, purely out of a desire for personal expression. I wanted to live freely in writing.
What has been your favorite post, or favorite story to write about, in that time?
My favorite post is "Tattoos remind you of death."
Describe your typical blogging schedule. And what is your average output?
I write several pages a day, usually 5 to 10 posts. I sit down with my newspaper and my laptop every morning and blog as I read the paper. I might have several other points in the day when I'm inspired to write something, and sometimes there's a special event, like the recent hearings on John Roberts, that I'll follow along in close to real time.
Who is your favorite political blogger? Favorite non-political blogger?
Political: Instapundit. Nonpolitical: About Last Night.
Who is your favorite mainstream media columnist?
Christopher Hitchens
What is your favorite television news program, either network or cable?
"Meet the Press"
What MSM-produced websites (i.e. newspapers, magazines) do you visit on a daily basis?
New York Times, Washington Post, CNN.com, BBC.com.
What non-MSM websites (i.e. blogs) do you visit on a daily basis?
Instapundit, About Last Night, Volokh Conspiracy, Metafilter, Throwing Things, Richard Lawrence Cohen, The Other Side of the Ocean, The Conglomerate, Kausfiles.
How often, or do you ever, read a newspaper in its dead-tree (i.e. print) form?
I have the paper NYT delivered to my house, and I read it every day.
How do you see the new media and old media affecting and influencing each other in the next five years?
I think we'll be less antagonistic. They will get used to being monitored and criticized, and we will come to terms with how much we rely on them for material.
THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Maybe Baker Is His Godfather?
Marshall Wittman suggests "that it may soon be consigliere time." ... "This is a time of crisis for a Bush. And who comes to the rescue when the family gets in trouble? James Addison Baker III, that's who. ... If stuff happens (in the immortal words of Rummy), whatever the direct role of the consigliere, expect that the hand of 41 will be at the rudder for the remainder of 43's term. It will be decided in Kennebunkport that the boy can't handle it -- he's in over his head."
LEST WE FORGET: The Powerball And The Glory
Lotto fever may have subsided, now that an as-yet unknown individual in OR won the Powerball jackpot of gazillion-dollars or so, but even the political blogosphere was not immune to its effects. A few of the dreamers:
Balloon Juice's John Cole makes a preemptory announcement to his readers: "If this is the last post ever at Balloon Juice, it is because I defied everything I ever learned in math and statistics courses and went ahead and bought some lottery tickets for the $300+ million powerball. So, if you never hear from me again, it is because I am on a beach somewhere in the Carribean, where my only worries are booking flights to my other beach house when hurricanes ... might come too close to my primary beach house. Oh -- and folks at the lottery commission -- I refuse to do any press conferences. I don't want criminals to know what my newly rich ass looks like." Later, he updates: "I didn't win. Press conferences remain a non-existent worry."
Liberteaser's Greg Newburn: "I blew it today, and failed to get tickets for tonight's $340 million powerball jackpot. Since I can't buy a ticket, I'll post the numbers I would have played. If they win, you can find me at my apartment. I'll be the guy with the shotgun in his hand, lying lifeless next to four hungry animals. Please feed them for me." (Newburn didn't win, either.)
NRO's Jonah Goldberg might need that shotgun: "Outrageous!!!! I did not win Powerball! Clearly the fix is in. The bad news is I've already spent half the money."
NOTES AND ERRATA
Questions, comments, reservations? Drop us a line at blogometer@nationaljournal.com.
Posted by at October 20, 2005 01:24 PM
The Watergate · 600 New Hampshire Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20037
202-739-8400 · fax 202-833-8069
NationalJournal.com is an Atlantic Media publication.
