Thursday, October 06, 2005

So good it must be fattening :)

The indictments are coming! The indictments are coming!

No, not those indictments.

Or this one.

Or this one.

These ones :) The CIA leak case is wrapping up and, despite what Judy-half-a-martyr-Miller would have you believe, there will be indictments forthcoming. Raw Story is reporting that Rove's lawer, Luskin, will no longer deny that his client is a potential target of the investigation. Pardon my schadenfreude, but this could be like Christmas & Birthday for some of us. Oh baby!

Meanwhile, Saint Miller-full-of-Crap is busy whoring it up for a book deal and basically hoping that we'll all forget that this leak case is not about her 1st Amendmenthood. It's about Iraq. Those pretty poems and sweet nothings from Scooter Libby aside, I'm sure that those two talked about some heavy yellowcake and aluminum tube action, back in the day.

Think Judy was but a bit player in the run-up to war? Michael Massing wrote an article in Feb 2004, "Now They Tell Us" (NY Review of Books) but it's behind a subscription-wall now; here's his interview with the wonderful Amy Goodman, instead.

Update [2:30 AM, Oct 6]: Anyone confused about Miller's role in the leak case (that includes me, too) should treat themselves to this summary. David Fiderer offers a fantastic run-down of Miller's statements vs. facts-on-record. The best part is that his way-back-machine travels allllll the way back to the bogus Niger uranium docs and Cheney's slander of the UN/IAEA:

e.g. just prior to the invasion of Iraq, Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, called bullshit on those "documents" used as proof of a Niger uranium sale to Hussein: 'they were "not authentic." Sources cited "crude errors," like a "childlike signature" and stationary from a military government that had been out of power for over a decade.' Cheney's response? "Mr. ElBaradei frankly is wrong. And I think if you look at the track record of the International Atomic Energy Agency and this kind of issue, especially where Iraq's concerned, they have consistently underestimated or missed what it was Saddam Hussein was doing. I don't have any reason to believe they're any more valid this time than they've been in the past."


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home