Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Worse than Watergate

By Arianna Huffington, Huffington Post. Posted October 26, 2005.


Here's a quick cheat sheet to keep you up to date on all the lies spewed in the burgeoning Valerie Plame scandal.
Advertisement

It's getting hard to keep track of all the lies we've been told. Here's a quick cheat sheet:

We now know that Cheney lied to the American people about his involvement in the effort to smear Joe Wilson.

Three months after reportedly receiving a briefing about Wilson's trip to Niger from George "Slam Dunk" Tenet, and then telling Scooter Libby that Plame may have helped arrange her husband's trip, the Vice President went on national TV and told Tim Russert he didn't have a clue about the situation: "I don't know Joe Wilson ... I don't know who sent Joe Wilson ... I have no idea who hired him and it never came up."

We now know that Karl Rove lied about his involvement, too.

Back in September 2003, when Rove was asked if he had "any knowledge" about the Plame leak, he answered with an unambiguous "No."

Since then, we've learned that Rove was actually up to his Turd Blossom in Plamegate, discussing Plame and her role at the CIA with Matt Cooper and Bob Novak, and taking part in what a source familiar with his four visits to the grand jury characterized as "an aggressive campaign to discredit Wilson through the leaking and disseminating of derogatory information regarding him and his wife."

We now know that Scooter Libby also lied about his involvement.

Libby told Pat Fitzgerald that he first learned Plame's identity from Tim Russert. But his own notes show that it was actually his boss, Dick Cheney, who first clued him in about Plame. (Russert, of course, has said he learned of Plame's identity by reading Novak's column, but that's a conundrum for another blog!).

And we now know that Rove and Libby also lied to Scott McClellan, who then -- knowingly or not -- lied to reporters about the two men's involvement.

When pressed today about the fact that in October 2003 he had "categorically" assured reporters that Rove and Libby "were not involved" in the Plame leak, McClellan made it clear that he was just passing on "the assurances that I had received on that." In other words, I only lied to you because they lied to me.

Potential Bonus Presidential Lie: In June 2004, when asked whether he stood by his promise to fire anyone found to have leaked Plame's identity, President Bush (taking a cue from Rove) answered with an unambiguous "Yes." But the New York Daily News reports that Bush knew that Rove was involved in the leak two years ago. So why, a year later, was he still acting like he had no idea who'd been involved?


Digg!

Find more Arianna at the Huffington Post.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
What gives?
Posted by: Bic Pentameter on Oct 26, 2005 1:57 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It sure is frustrating to type in a comment, choose your words carefully, check your spelling - only to have it evaporate in cyber-space.

Must go where the socks go when you lose them in the dryer.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What gives? Posted by: nellyman
» Conspiracy theory? Posted by: exhibit
» RE: Conspiracy theory? Posted by: Pepper
test
Posted by: exhibit on Oct 26, 2005 6:32 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
sorry, a test

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

gerdhansel
Posted by: gerdhansel on Oct 27, 2005 10:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Picture this scenario:

Fitzgerald issues indictments for Rove and Libby. The ball of twine begins to unravel, and after several furious weeks of bad press coverage, Dick Cheney resigns, ala Spiro Agnew.

Bush appoints a replacement VP, ala Gerald Ford. Weeks later, Bush resigns “for health reasons.” Untainted by the scandal, the new president declares “our long national nightmare over,” and proceeds to pardon Bush, Cheney, Rove, Libby and the rest, ala Gerald Ford once again.

End of Plamegate, and history repeats itself as farce. The Republicans figure what worked in 1973 can work again in 2005.

But like Gerald Ford in 1976, the Republicans are voted out by a scandal-weary nation in 2008, and the Democrats regain the White House.

Lionized by the chattering classes in New York and San Francisco for single-handedly bringing down the Bush Administration and remembered for heroically standing up to Saddam Hussein during the 1991 Gulf War, Joe Wilson gets appointed Secretary of State by the new Democratic president.

Wilson brokers a miraculous peace deal in the Middle East, which resolves not only the Irag and Iran crises, but also brings peace to Israel and the Palestinians. He is Time Magazine’s Man of the Year.

During the State of the Union Address of 2010, Wilson is the cabinet member designated to hole up in the “secured location,” a common practice since September 11, 2001. The U.S. House of Representatives chamber is the epicenter for a portable nuclear device set off in the subway tunnels underneath the House Chamber. Next in line of succession after the sudden deaths of the president, vice-president, Speaker of the House and President Pro-Tempore of the Senate, Joseph Wilson IV becomes president.

Wilson’s leadership during the grave crisis that ensues inspires the nation, much like FDR during the Great Depression and World War II.

Only a few doubtful Cassandras have the temerity to point out that each of President Wilson’s names contain six letters.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: gerdhansel Posted by: Kevin R. Hoskins
» RE: gerdhansel Posted by: sisyphus.lives
» RE: gerdhansel Posted by: gerdhansel
» RE:god damn Posted by: montana freeman
» RE: gerdhansel Posted by: sidewinder
Adrianna: Do not forget about Israeli Lobby
Posted by: transatlantyk on Oct 27, 2005 12:11 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Lies of the White House gang about the Iraq were always transparent. But the biggest, and so far whispered only factor in this Iraqi/terrorism mess is virtual control of American Legislature, foreign policy and mass media by the Israeli partisans. Power of the Lobby shuts down any debate about the main (and stated by terrorists) cause of 9/11, which is occupation of the West Bank with US money and arms. 9/11 was in turn grabbed by the Lobby as an opportunity to destroy the most dangerous enemy of Israel - Saddam's Iraq, as advocated by the familiar characters for years before 9/11.

It is not a coincidence that the most vicious Iraq - bashers were Jewish: from Wolfowitz, Feith, Perle, Libby, and Abrams to Adelman, Brooks, Krauthammer, Safire, Judith Miller and Kristol, to name just a few of the countless activists. This fifth column must be exposed to prevent further damage to our treasure and life. Manipulation of intelligence and public opinion that went into this enterprise is nothing short of treason of historical proportions. And the Lobby was a crucial factor in ramming the war through. There were other powerful interests involved - emporium-builders/oil securing corporate types, crusaders and political opportunists like brains of our shrub. For the mass media overwhelmingly owned and staffed by the Lobby (vide NYT) a nice bonus was economic value of the reality show entitled The War.

To paraphrase: Never in the history of the mankind, so many across the world did not suffer so much for so few (fanatic settlers) to gain so little (land and water of the West Bank). Sure, there will be still plenty to deal with, but you cannot start making any progress without decisively addressing that glaring injustice.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» See what I mean..... Posted by: CatDad
» RE: See what I mean..... Posted by: Basenjis
» RE: See what I mean..... Posted by: transatlantyk
Jorge
Posted by: coyocar on Oct 27, 2005 3:02 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"No one died as a result of Watergate, but 2,000 American soldiers have now been killed and thousands more wounded to rid the world of an imminent threat that wasn't.

Could there be anything bigger?"

Not to be insulting to anyone, but common guys: 2000 dead? That is quite a small fraction if you compare how many have been lost in the wars being fought around the world. And there IS something worse: Go ask the people of Iraq? How many have they lost? Their country is in ruins, the little sovereignity they had is gone. The list could go on and on and on and on. I feel for the families and friends of the 2000 soldiers that have lost their life, but let's not go crazy on that "milestone." I would say that it is incredible that only 2000 have been lost, but whatever the number, the "coalition of the willing" will never defeat whatever it is they are fighting over there. Never!!! As demonstrated throughout history, guerrillas can't be defeated. Look at Colombia, remember Vietnam, the only thing that worked in Central America was a peace process, and now Iraq. It can't be done. It will never be done.
Don't fall in the same vice as all the corporate media conglomerate: Show some pitty and respect for those iraquies that have never been counted, that continue to fall, and at the hands of their muslim "comrades," even more now, then at the beginning of this thing.
Again, don't take this comment as an insult, just as constructive critique.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Jorge Posted by: Pepper
» Toll is greater than 2000 Dead Posted by: drobinson2
"turd Blossom"...
Posted by: adp3d on Oct 27, 2005 10:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...haha, I like that. Watch it Arianna, your true feelings are starting to reveal themselves...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: "turd Blossom"... Posted by: harpy
The bigger they are...
Posted by: fedupamerican on Oct 28, 2005 6:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the harder they fall, so it's said, and I hope this is the case.

I hope this investigation continues and does not get thwarted.
My bottle of champagne is waiting to be opened when the liars go down the slippery slope that they've created.

If we don't get the liars/lying/Iraq business "outed" and get our country back in order, I fear we, as a country, are also headed down that same slope even faster than we have been.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Plamegate worse than Watergate
Posted by: boing007 on Oct 28, 2005 7:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Plamegate is worse than Watergate because such illegal activities were supposed to have been firmly dealt with in the aftermath of Nixon's resignation, never again to return. Such activities never really go away, they are too ingrained in the power structure of United States politics, both nationally and globally. If you think a few indictments of President Bush's entourage will cleanse the corrupt body politic of the U.S.A. just read what's going on in New Orleans and Mississippi at this moment. It's business, as usual. Business with a capital B. If you think the Democrats will be that much different, think again. They won't.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Plamegate not worse than Watergate
Posted by: benrichmond on Oct 28, 2005 8:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Your points about the evils of the Bush cabal taken, I worry that there is a loss of historical memory: "Watergate was just a third rate burglary" was Nixon's line. Actually, Watergate was an unprecedented use of FBI and CIA resources to infiltrate, intimidate, and destroy Nixon's political enemies, including the national Democratic Party. He did this with illegal campaign contribution laundered through Mexico. Why did he do this? Nixon felt that he was under attack from the left, particularly the anti-war left -- and his "Watergate" subversion was intended to perpetuate his hold on power to acheive his so-called "peace with honor" in Vietnam. You speak of 2,000 U.S. troops dead in Iraq. Nixon's "peace with honor" cost almost ten times that number . . . all after he KNEW (following the 1968 Tet offensive) that there could be no U.S. victory there.

The only thing that the current administration had done that was close to the subversion Nixon perpetrated might be stealing the election(s) in Florida and Ohio. Plamegate is very serious but it pales in comparison to Watergate.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

one more point
Posted by: benrichmond on Oct 28, 2005 8:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I forgot to mention that one of the articles of impeachment against Nixon concerned his secret (read "lies") and illegal expansion of the Vietnam war to Cambodia and Laos. Congress dropped that article because both parties have no real desire to maintain the Constitutional duty to declare war in the Congress. That this article was seriously discussed should remind us of how pervasive the lies of the Nixon administration, and how costly in lives, and how serious in real terms "Watergate" really was.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: one more point Posted by: Cathyblj
Lost in Wyoming
Posted by: jpetty on Oct 28, 2005 9:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We are getting exactly the type of Government we dissirve

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"What about the maimed?"
Posted by: monkeywrench on Oct 28, 2005 9:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes, the Plame outing IS worse than Watergate: not only for the 2,000-and-counting official deaths of our soldiers (there's a rumor going around that the actual number is 4 times that...), but also because of the the other tens of thousands of our soldiers (not to mention Iraqis) who have been maimed for life, missing limbs – sometimes multiple limbs – eyes, hands, feet, their minds and for many, their souls.

The american people have not been allowed to see either the dead or the maimed in this "video game" war, and that is, in and of itself, a crime agianst democracy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"The First One Bites the Dust"
Posted by: monkeywrench on Oct 28, 2005 10:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ten a.m., PST, 10/28/05: "Scooter" Libby indicted on five counts of perjury, making false statements and obstruction of justice. And, of course, don't forget the legal troubles for Tom "Hot Tub" Delay and the insider trading scandal surrounding Bill "brain-dead diagnosis" Frist.

In keeping with Bush's famous deck of terrorist cards, should we start another one for the neoCONS, up to and including the joker in the White House?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What will prevent...
Posted by: surfreality on Oct 28, 2005 1:50 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Dubya from pardoning Scooter?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What will prevent... Posted by: owleyes
» RE: What will prevent... Posted by: errandchild
Thank you Arianna!!
Posted by: AmericanVictim on Oct 29, 2005 11:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ms. Huffington,

Thank you so much for staying on this Plamegate topic for all these months!!

Out of all the famous left wing blogs, yours is my favorite.

I don't have to blog, because you say everything that I would say!!

Best wishes,

Hannah Kennedy
Tennessee

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Sense Of Humor?
Posted by: SanFranDuke on Oct 29, 2005 2:15 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It makes me sick.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

TREASON!
Posted by: SanFranDuke on Oct 29, 2005 2:20 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is a pandemic of that goin around these days. I wonder if the federal government would run any better from one or more of our overfull Federal Prisons?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: TREASON! Posted by: ALANHESTER
pineyheart
Posted by: pineyheart on Oct 30, 2005 6:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
YES, THE REALLY BIG NEWS IS THAT THE LEGAL DOTS ARE NEARING A CONNECTION THAT COULD CHARGE BUSH AND CO. AS MURDERERS, ACCESSORIES, MASTERMINDS OF THE DEATH OF THOUSANDS! THE CHARGE, THIS EVOLVING FACT NEEDS REPEATING AND REPEATING.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Pray
Posted by: Germanicus on Oct 30, 2005 3:15 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Folks, I know I might sound paranoid, but do you think that these lunatics have come this far, spilt this much blood, stolen this much loot, only to have it all taken away from them because what they did was illegal?

These people clearly have no respect for the Constitution. Their allegiance is to the Project for a New American Century.

Beware the day when they begin treating political enemies the way they treat enemy combatants.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You can't ratchet this infinitely...
Posted by: dzzrtRatt on Oct 31, 2005 7:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"But what they were covering up was much more than the outing of Valerie Plame. They were covering up the way the White House had used lies and deception to lead us into a war that was reckless and unnecessary..."

I'm sorry. I know that's what you want everyone to think. They lied about the Plame incident, so therefore, everything else had to be a lie, too. That does not follow logically, and it's unfair and absurd.

It is time to credit the people of the Bush Administration for simply trying to protect the country. That was their only motive. Whether they made mistakes in execution is another matter. Certainly, the way in which they tried to discredit Wilson was one big blunder--although, they knew they were discrediting someone who clearly deserved to be discredited. However, they should not have publicized the name of a CIA agent to do so. They should have just engaged Wilson on the facts, which this scandal has conveniently allowed him to avoid. All he has to do is go "boo hoo hoo, my wife was outed," and his own misdeeds and lies are no longer the subject.

But my larger point is, you cannot credibly use Plamegate to discredit the war. Look at what's been accomplished. Consider the far worse brutality that has been avoided by our actions. Consider the stakes, given a WORLD that is indisputably loaded with WMDs. Engage the Bushies on those grounds, not on the childish continual evocation of a single scandal.

Scooter Libby deservedly will swing for the lies he told. Maybe Rove will, too, eventually. I'm not a Republican, so I don't really care. But I do care about the future peace of the world, and I believe my COUNTRY did the right thing in Iraq--Bush, Hilary, Kerry, all those who supported this noble and important cause.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Roselyn
Posted by: dayroe on Nov 4, 2005 1:15 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
IMPEACH BUSH

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: oselyn Posted by: ALANHESTER
Cheney lied? McClellan lied?
Posted by: jiminger on Dec 5, 2005 4:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Take note and do your homework. Click on the link that Ms Huffington provides when she refers to Cheney's lies during Tim Russert's MSNBC interview. Read what she left out in the ellipses.

Not only did he not say "he never had a clue about the situation," he clarified exactly what he meant by "I have no idea who hired him..." in the very next statement of the interview. In context he CLEARLY knew the CIA had sent him.

As I have pointed out in the past, "context" is rarely a friend to the columnists published on Alternet.

see my "The Plame Game" for another perspective and many details and links to source materials.

"McClellan made it clear that he was just passing on "the assurances that I had received on that." In other words, I only lied to you because they lied to me."

Huh? If some sort of intentionality is not part of what constitutes the moral prescription against "lying," what exactly is wrong with it? Indeed, does the label also qualify for the misrepresenter of Cheney's words - even if that misrepresentation was not intentional?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]