July 21, 2004

Leaks, Leaks, Leaks

Kevin Drum puts some distance between himself and TPM (lately less Talking Points Memo; more The Propaganda Machine) re: who might have leaked the Berger story...

A Dem, sayeth Kevin!

P.S. Perusing Drum's site, I see this.

Gee, is it really that bad over here?

Posted by Gregory at July 21, 2004 02:03 AM
Comments

Yes.

Posted by: demvet at July 21, 2004 02:36 AM | Permalink to this comment Permalink

demvet is right.

Posted by: Ben at July 21, 2004 02:44 AM | Permalink to this comment Permalink

No. BD is great.

Posted by: K at July 21, 2004 03:01 AM | Permalink to this comment Permalink

My, my our leftist friends are all in a tizzy. Their anti-American nature got inadvertently exposed - and just a week before the Democratic convention, how unfortunate.

First Joe Wilson is exposed and then Sandy Berger.

The only relevant questions are:

Who is next?

AND

How deep will the NYT bury this story?

Posted by: seismic at July 21, 2004 03:07 AM | Permalink to this comment Permalink

"First Joe Wilson is exposed and then Sandy Berger.

The only relevant questions are:

Who is next? "

and maybe the relevent questions are:

1. Why did the repubs smear Wilson? Who is Fitzgerald going to indict for outing Plame?

2. Was Bush asleep at the switch like Richard Clarke asserts? Did Clinton respond aggressively to a 1998 memo warning of hijacking while Bush ignored the summer 2001 PDB?

3. How many more kids will die in a war created on false pretenses? Four more marines today

Posted by: demvet at July 21, 2004 03:15 AM | Permalink to this comment Permalink

I find it funny that chickenhawks like seismic (what kind of name is that anyway) always smear critics of the Bush administration for being unpatriotic.

Maybe unpatriotic is hiding in the Air National Guard in Texas while some others served. Maybe unpatriotic is smearing a vet with three limbs missing like Max Cleland.

Maybe being unpatriotic is overstretching, overstressing the military in an unnecessary war.

Posted by: demvet at July 21, 2004 03:18 AM | Permalink to this comment Permalink

_________________
"Maybe unpatriotic is hiding in the Air National Guard in Texas while some others served. "
_________________


Maybe unpatriotic is being a draft dodger (Clinton) or smearing fellow vets as war criminals (Kerry).

Posted by: seismic at July 21, 2004 03:28 AM | Permalink to this comment Permalink

____________________
Why did the repubs smear Wilson? Who is Fitzgerald going to indict for outing Plame?
____________________


Wilson lied all by himself - Bush was right all along about the African yellowcake issue.

Wilson opened his mouth and put his foot into it.

Posted by: seismic at July 21, 2004 03:31 AM | Permalink to this comment Permalink

______________________
Did Clinton respond aggressively to a 1998 memo warning of hijacking while Bush ignored the summer 2001 PDB?
______________________

Maybe Bush should have bombed a pharmacutical factory instead?

Clinton talked tough, fired a few missiles then went back to his real calling (screwing interns). Bush on the other hand has changed the entire equation with regards to the failure that is known as the Middle East.

Posted by: seismic at July 21, 2004 03:36 AM | Permalink to this comment Permalink

Responded agressively? Let's see, he first asked permission of UBL's terror masters in Pakistan for overflight of their airspace for the cruise missiles. Then was surprised that he 'just missed' UBL.

Bush talked a little sense to Pakistan, such as pointing out, I suspect, that if they did not help us with our terror problem, India would certainly be agreeable and we would get to Afghanistan through Pakistan, nukes or no nukes.

Then he bombed an aspirin factory, for which the US ended up paying 26 million dollars US money in compensation to the owners.

So now there are three countries in the region that have switched sides in this war, although each has pockets of resistance still. Who has responded more effectively?

Oh yean, and I forgot Libya. That's four.

And TPM still amuses. Josh finds the whole Sandy Berger thing "inexplicable". Well there is one thing I have always said about Clinton and his crew, they only disappoint their supporters, never their enemies. If you find something 'inexplicable', it is likely that there is something missing from your world-view.

Posted by: moptop at July 21, 2004 04:04 AM | Permalink to this comment Permalink

Sometime before the switchover, CalAnimal's comment section went to hell in a handbasket.

Sorry about that. At least it's better than DU!

Posted by: praktike at July 21, 2004 02:00 PM | Permalink to this comment Permalink

Actually, there's no way it was a Dem.

USA Today: "Three government officials who have been briefed on the investigation said Berger was seen placing some of the material in his clothing "

Posted by: praktike at July 21, 2004 04:58 PM | Permalink to this comment Permalink

Praktike:

What makes you think there are no Democratic government officials still in office?

Notice that "government official" does not equate with "appointed by the current administration."

Alan Greenspan, frex, is a "government official," who was first nominated under Reagan, iirc, and kept on under Bush-I, Clinton and Dubya. Tenet, of course, was appointed by Clinton and kept on by Dubya.

Senior civil servants are not appointed, and are not subject to dismissal simply because of a change in the party in office.

Posted by: Dean at July 21, 2004 07:00 PM | Permalink to this comment Permalink

The head of the Chair Archivist at the National Archives was another Clinton holdover. Maybe he's the leak?

What's with these Clinton holdovers? It's like Bush managed to keep all the holdovers long enough to to get them to fall on their own sword.

Posted by: Brennan Stout at July 21, 2004 07:21 PM | Permalink to this comment Permalink

Well, one clue to consider would be: why is the DNC filing a FOIA request?

Posted by: praktike at July 21, 2004 08:07 PM | Permalink to this comment Permalink

Another clue: why did this story leak soon after the WH Counsel's office was notified of the DOJ probe?

Hmmm???

Posted by: praktike at July 21, 2004 08:29 PM | Permalink to this comment Permalink
Reviews of Belgravia Dispatch
"Awake"
--New York Times
"Must-read list"
--Washington Times
"Always Thoughtful"
--Glenn Reynolds, Instapundit
"Pompous Ass"
--an anonymous blogospheric commenter
Recent Entries
Search
English Language Media
Foreign Affairs Commentariat
Non-English Language Press
U.S. Blogs
Western Europe
France
United Kingdom
Germany
Italy
Netherlands
Spain
Central and Eastern Europe
CIS/FSU
Russia
Armenia
East Asia
China
Japan
South Korea
Middle East
Egypt
Israel
Lebanon
Syria
Columnists
Think Tanks
Security
Books
B.D. In the Press
Archives
Categories
Syndicate this site:
XML RSS RDF

G2E

Powered by