Amid all the debate over the indictments and now the Supreme Court nominee, let’s not forget the Italian forgeries. I was just watching the Countdown, and a writer forThe American Conservative, Phillip Giraldi, was on promoting his new piece in the upcoming issue. It should be noted that it was written before the indictments were handed down on Friday. The article is very important for two reasons, one shows that some conservatives still care about governmental accountability, and two the writer is a former CIA officer. The article is very meticulous and walks us through the events surrounding the forged Niger documents day by day.

In February 2002, Pollari and Berlusconi resubmitted their report to Washington with some embellishments, resulting in Joe Wilson’s trip to Niger. Wilson visited Niamey in February 2002 and subsequently reported to the CIA that the information could not be confirmed. Enter Michael Ledeen, the Office of Special Plans’ man in Rome. Ledeen was paid $30,000 by the Italian Ministry of the Interior in 1978 for a report on terrorism and was well known to senior SISMI officials. Italian sources indicate that Pollari was eager to engage with the Pentagon hardliners, knowing they were at odds with the CIA and the State Department officials who had slighted him. He turned to Ledeen, who quickly established himself as the liaison between SISMI and Feith’s OSP, where he was a consultant. Ledeen, who had personal access to the National Security Council’s Condoleezza Rice and Stephen Hadley and was also a confidant of Vice President Cheney, was well placed to circumvent the obstruction coming from the CIA and State. The timing, August 2002, was also propitious as the administration was intensifying its efforts to make the case for war. In the same month, the White House Iraq Group (WHIG) was set up to market the war by providing information to friends in the media. It has subsequently been alleged that false information generated by Ahmad Chalabi’s Iraqi National Congress was given to Judith Miller and other journalists through WHIG. On Sept. 9, 2002, Ledeen set up a secret meeting between Pollari and Deputy National Security Adviser Hadley. Two weeks before the meeting, a group of documents had been offered to journalist Elisabetta Burba of the Italian magazine Panorama for $10,000, but the demand for money was soon dropped and the papers were handed over. The man offering the documents was Rocco Martino, a former SISMI officer who delivered the first WMD dossier to London in October 2002. That Martino quickly dropped his request for money suggests that the approach was a set-up primarily intended to surface the documents.

These three paragraphs are perhaps the most important because they paint the picture that is often unreported. Most importantly it discusses the White House Iraq Group, a group that took over the intelligence gathering process for the White House in the march to war, and disagreed often with CIA estimates. Not only that but it further implicates Judith Miller as one of the reporters that was used to slip the false information into the papers and the public.

Prior to presenting these forgeries the new Italian Prime Minister brought with him, in his visit to America after 9/11, intelligence his country had gathered. It suggested for the first time the link between Niger and Iraq, but people in our government new better.

But the Italian information was inconclusive and old, some of it dating from the 1980s. The British, the CIA, and the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research analyzed the intelligence and declared that it was “lacking in detail” and “very limited” in scope.

Why is that so important? We are often quick to criticize the CIA and our intelligence after 9/11 and while there were problems, they remain largely on point, they were able to see right through this sham. Then why did it end up in the State of the Union? Is it, as we were told the fault of the CIA, the fault of George Tenent? No, it most certainly was not:

On Jan. 28, 2003, over the objections of the CIA and State, the famous 16 words about Niger’s uranium were used in President Bush’s State of the Union address justifying an attack on Iraq: “The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.” Both the British and American governments had actually obtained the report from the Italians, who had asked that they not be identified as the source. The UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency also looked at the documents shortly after Bush spoke and pronounced them crude forgeries.

Again, our CIA did the job, then why did Tenent take the blame? We can’t be sure, but we do know this for whatever reason George drank W’s kool-aid, and as a result the American people came to further distrust the CIA and place more trust in the White House, and when we think about it that’s what this whole leak, this whole case, it’s what everything is about.

Why else would the White House take the time and energy to discredit a critic of the Administration, they went after no one in the way they attacked Joe Wilson. Wilson was attacked, his wife’s name was leaked, because he posed a threat to the plans of the White House Iraq Group, he was able to begin poking holes into why we were in war in the first place, and now despite the CIA once taking the blame, the truth begins to come out. Yes the case is about what Libby did before the Grand Jury, but on the periphery and as a result of this case the truth in why we are in Iraq is coming out.

In short this White House has done the unthinkable, not only did they bring us to war under false pretenses, they used forged documents, they took over the job of intelligence gathering from the CIA, they caused the American people to lose faith in the CIA, and blamed all of the problems on George Tenent. And now their House of Cards is coming down.

Just to offer some more on the bizare endorsement the Star Ledger made for Forrester. Why Bizarre? Well, it’s half-hearted, incomplete, and highly contradictory as a writer at BlueJersey.net has pointed out. Probably my favorite passage:

Somehow, the skills required of a United States Senator are irrelevant to New Jersey politics. Perhaps if New Jersey was such an exemplar of Democracy and politics, there would not be the corruption and budgetary shortfalls the editors are whining about. Yes, Forrester’s experience as mayor of a rich town in New Jersey, must by all means supercede [sic] the lawmaking skills acquired in our nations capitol.

What it comes down to is for some reason the SL saw it unfit to endorse Corzine, even though they’re fine with endorsing a Republican while that party is engaged in turmoil, corruption, cronyism, and everything that exemplifies bad government, more so than we could find in the darkest back room of New Jersey politics, the SL is going to have some explaining to do, especially when Corzine is elected next Tuesday.

Alito has been on the bench for many years, with good credentials and considerable experience. No doubt Alito will produce a fight over ideology and interpretation, but it is a fight that Bush has calculated he can will. The fight and the victory gives him distraction from the other scandals and a successful conservative nomination. However, it will get interesting.

Beyond this brief introduction, I have little to say on the matter currently.

Slate has a good article on how its the batter we’ve been waiting for. And on how he tried to restrict Roe

The TImes has a look at his legal career.

WaPo on reactions.

The BBC has one of the better articles on the matter.

And a must read article at the economist:

In nominating Mr Alito so soon after the indictment was announced, the president is seeking to seize the headlines back from Mr Fitzgerald. He certainly needs to do something. Last week saw not only the Miers withdrawal and Mr Libby’s indictment, but the number of American troops killed in Iraq cross the 2,000 mark. Mr Bush’s poll ratings lurk at the lowest levels of his presidency. Conservatives, including his evangelical base, had begun to get uneasy even before the nomination of the not-right-enough Ms Miers. Rather than reaching across the aisle with his latest Supreme Court pick, it seems that Mr Bush has now put repairing his conservative base first. If he can succeed in getting Mr Alito confirmed, he will have won his first big victory for some time. But the Democrats, sensing a weak administration, will do what they can to make the process as painful as possible.

Jeff Berman and Ed Kilgore discuss the implications of Alito’s nomination at TPMcafe.

This article in the Washington Post is ridiculous. Earlier this fall Merck came up with a vaccine that is 100% effective against cervical cancer. Health groups want to add this shot to the mandatory list of immunizations given to young girls before reaching puberty. Yes, finally we’ve made an advance that can help us stop cancer, and who opposes it, conservatives.

Conservative medical groups have been fielding calls from concerned parents and organizations, officials said. “I’ve talked to some who have said, ‘This is going to sabotage our abstinence message,’ ” said Gene Rudd, associate executive director of the Christian Medical and Dental Associations. But Rudd said most people change their minds once they learn more, adding that he would probably want his children immunized. Rudd, however, draws the line at making the vaccine mandatory.

There you have it, part of the social conservative strategy to keep abstinence only education is to scare girls with cancer. This is absolutely shameful, you want to teach abstinence that’s fine, but to oppose a drug because it would save lives and save women the unfortunate fate of cervical cancer if they made a mistake is ridiculous. That is a campaign of fear, not education, and after all isn’t that what the abstinence only movement’s strategy has been all along anyway, don’t give all the facts, just the ones made to intimidate. Why equip our children to be able to make intelligent and informed decisions about sex when we can just scare the shit out of them.

The Hotline has been reporting today that in most polls Corzine is leading in the race for Governor, and any momentum Forrester appeared to have in October seems to have come to a screeching halt. Which brings back what has been my favorite topic to debate recently, who Corzine should/would pick to fill his seat upon taking office as the Governor? Early on I suggested Codey and have largely stuck by that for a number of reasons, additionally in the running are Representatives Holt and Menendez.

Menendez appears to be an early favorite, he has lobbied hard for Corzine during this entire race, and has been filling his campaign coffers. In last quarter’s report, ending September 30th, Menendez has this year raised about $3.3 million, and has near $4.1 million in cash on hand. A friend of mine who worked for Menendez over the summer stopped into his congressional office back in September as the end of the quarter results were coming in. According to him everyone in the office seemed really positive, the over all impression was that Menendez is going to be Corzine’s pick, and they have the money to show the DSCC that they can raise. Also keep in mind that national Democrats like Menendez, a lot, he’s currently the caucus chair in the House and often seen as an up and coming star in the party. Additionally Menendez comes from a safe district, one that party Democrats would not mind putting into contention in 2006 since they should be able to easily win it back, Menendez has held his seat since 1992.

The other often floated name is Rush Holt. Holt is perhaps best known for the campaign sticker that reads “My Congressman is a Rocket Scientist”. Holt has a great record and is well respected in New Jersey and by the party, but he has a few stumbling blocks if he were to be picked for Senate. First, his district is the home of Republican candidate for Governor Doug Forrester, and is anything but safe. In a year where keeping the seats we have and building upon them is important, I imagine there will be intense lobbying from national Democrats for Holt to stay put, and wait his turn, when Lautenberg retires again. Additionally, Holt is made all the more unattractive because in comparison to Menendez he can’t raise money nearly as well. At the end of the last quarter, Holt has raised only $440,553, and his cash on hand totals only $400,677. With two strikes against him Senator Schumer and the DSCC would probably rather him not run. However, there’s often speculation in the op-ed pages that Corzine may choose Holt because of his reserved style, similar to his own. However, true as that may be, this choice will probably in large part be dictated by what Schumer wants as well, after all with everything going on we need to put our best feet forward for 2006.

So why Codey? Why should Corzine pick the man who was once only the state’s Senate President and claims to want nothing more? A lot of reasons, frankly. First, the benefits to Corzine are pretty clear. Codey is hugely popular in New Jersey, entering office after McGreevy and being in the same party still able to restore trust in the Governor’s office. Codey has managed to work positively for New Jersey and gain huge support from the people. The Newark Star Ledger in an Op-Ed on Sunday in which they endorsed Forrester said:

Like many of you, we’ve come away from this gubernatorial campaign with little affection for either candidate. Candidly, we’d rather vote for acting Gov. Richard Codey and call it a day.

People believe that Codey would be better suited to stop corruption, and think Corzine will have a tough time dealing with the party machines, also revealed in that endorsement. Codey’s popularity would make him a key force to be dealt with if he returns to the NJ legislature, and Corzine would rather not have someone contesting him in the state for popularity and power.

Earlier this year Codey was forced to step a side for Corzine in the 2005 run for the party’s nomination for governor. Corzine, who funded himself, simply had more money and more resources than Codey could match at the time. Additionally, I speculate that Codey knew he had the popularity to raise the money if necessary, and use the podium of the governor for the same, but Codey must’ve made some kind of deal with Corzine to step aside. It’s worth noting that until recently Codey also remained silent in support for Corzine during the campaign, after recent talks however, Codey has been on the trail supporting the Democrat for office.

Finally, the Democrats realize just how popular he is it’d be a way to keep a senate seat that will be contested by a formidable Republican, Tom Kean Jr., and keeps all of New Jersey’s democratically held House seats safe. According to the Hotline,

At a recent event, Codey says DSCC chair Chuck Schumer (D-NY) pulled him aside to whisper in his ear: “The most popular one always becomes the candidate.”

It appears as though the ball is very much in Codey’s court, and I predict he will be the first name called by Governor Corzine if he wins the election. Corzine would be repaying Codey for his help, getting a political opponent out of the state, and not be forced to make a king between other candidates who have expressed great interest; much of Codey’s appeal after all is his humility. We’ll soon find out, but as I’ve said, don’t be surprised to see Senator Richard Codey coming to DC soon.

The Washington Post has the President at his lowest approval rating ever, at 39%. However, what’s more important is what else the poll says about the indictments and what is going on recently.

41. As you may know, a federal grand jury has indicted Lewis “Scooter” Libby, chief of staff for Vice President Dick Cheney, on charges of obstruction of justice and perjury in connection with the case in which the identity of an undercover CIA agent was disclosed to news reporters. Libby has resigned his White House position. In your opinion, do you think the charge against Libby represents (a serious) crime, or (a minor or technical) one?

68% said a serious crime, only 26% called it minor or technical. Another question provides results that give excellent light on the current situation; the President is polling behind Clinton in the ethics question.

38. How would you rate Bush’s handling of ethics in government - excellent, good, only fair or poor?

34% say excellent or good, while 65% say fair or poor, in the fair and poor breakdown poor out weights the fair at 35%. Clinton at the end of his term on this question polled at 37% in excellent or good, and 62% in fair and poor. Not only have Bush’s numbers sank to an all time high, but they are lower than Clinton’s after the scandal when it comes to governmental ethics.

Give be a break, two Bush I and Reagan lawyers, David Rivkin and Lee Casey, argue for the end of the Special Prosecutor. In there eyes, he was set to prosecute a crime, didn’t find the crime and should have stopped, but instead because he’s a special prosecutor had to prosecute something. Their position here is totally bankrupt and based only on a shill defense, for something they very well know is an appropriate use of power.

It is clear that, at least by sometime in January 2004 — and probably much earlier — Fitzgerald knew this law had not been violated. Plame was not a “covert” agent but a bureaucrat working at CIA headquarters. Instead of closing shop, however, Fitzgerald sought an expansion of his mandate and has now charged offenses that grew entirely out of the investigation itself. In other words, there was no crime when the investigation started, only, allegedly, after it finished. Unfortunately, for special counsels, as under the code of the samurai, once the sword is drawn it must taste blood.

Not a covert agent? That’s not fact, that’s disputed, the reason the indictment doesn’t include that is because it requires so many levels, knowingly did this and that, in order to prosecute. And most importantly, if it weren’t for the perjury and obstruction of justice Fitzgerald would have been able to indict on that crime, as he said in the press conference.

Also, another part to take issue with is they’re continuing the lie that Wilson was asked by Cheney’s office to make this investigation, as has been said many times, the inquiry came from the Vice President’s Office to the CIA, who then tapped Wilson for the job, and not a bad pick considering his experience with Iraq and Africa.

Finally though, as much as the GOP is going to try to spin this away, deep down inside they know what every person inside the beltway knows, you can’t change the subject on indictments in the White House. I would go so far as to say that Fitzgerald has showed the American people what an effective, honest, and accomplished special counsel can do, get to the bottom of what happened, prosecute the crimes, and not turn it into a book or make press statements every day. Fitzgerald is treating this in the most professional of matters, showing true respect for the Majesty of Law, he should be commended, and any special counsels to follow should take to his example.

It’s also time to remain focused on the other big news in Washington right now; who will the President tap to the Supreme Court. It’s obvious that this time the President has to go for greatness, he needs a quick confirmation instead of getting into a whole different mess of problems. Some leading contenders for the seat are:

Judge Samuel Alito, 54, of the 3rd circuit is nicknamed “Scalito;” noted dissent in Casey argued that PA had rational reasons for requiring women to notify their husbands before seeking abortions; wrote majority opinion in Shore High School BOE v. PS 381, holding that a student’s right to a free public education under the Ind. with Disabilities Act was violated because “itt failed to protect the student from bullying by fellow students who taunted the student based on his lack of athleticism and his perceived sexual orientation.”

Judge J. Michael Luttig, 51, of the 4th circuit, ex-Scalia, ex-Berger clerk appt. to the court in 1991. Dissented in Hamdi, favoring broad executive powers to determine whether a detainee is an enemy combatant. Conservative rulings in endagered species act cases have endeared him to activists. Is well-known by the DC legal establishment; considered one of the best minds of his generation.

Judge Michael McConnell, 50, of the 10th circuit. Considered one of the most brilliant legal minds of his generation; well-regarded by even liberal law professors. Believed majority in Bush v. Gore ruled incorrectly. Has written extensively on legal prohibition of abortion, leaving something for opponents and supporters of abortion rights to chew on. Personally opposes abortion; he signed a pro-life petition in ‘95.

If the President is to nominate some one like a Priscilla Owens or another radical choice that prompted the original filibuster debate, I think the Democrats need to welcome the challenge, the President is in a weakened position, which should allow us to get at least an excellent justice with the quality of John Roberts, or a more moderate choice that would still appease the conservatives.

Quickly though, I’d like to point out that the withdrawal of Miers and the support it’s received from Republican Senators is not wholly a function of the right wing, I still feel that part of it was here incompetence at returning a new questionnaire, answering questions, and showing a vast knowledge of the issues. Because of that, I think the Democrats can force a more moderate justice than the Religious Right would prefer, and most Republicans would support him/her, because they want to move what has been a slow second term along.

This morning it be came clear that Official A, repeated throughout the indictment, is Karl Rove. This just furthers my speculation, what did Karl Rove do or say to not be named directly in the indictment? Or as Fitzgerald said at the Press Conference he refused to comment on Rove, becuase of ongoing investigations, perhaps he wasn’t named directly for the same purpose.

Over at TPM, Josh notes directly from the indictment that they knew Valerie Plame was undercover.

On or about June 12, 2003, LIBBY was advised by the Vice President of the United States that Wilson’s wife worked at the Central Intelligence Agency in the Counterproliferation Divison. LIBBY understood that the Vice President had learned this information from the CIA.

That’s important if one knows what the CPD does:

This is a crucial piece of information. The Counterproliferation Division (CPD) is part of the CIA’s Directorate of Operations, i.e., not the Directorate of Intelligence, the branch of the CIA where ‘analysts’ come from, but the DO, where the spies, the ‘operatives’, come from.

Both men, know what this means, and know it means she comes from the department of the CIA that provides spies. So why no indictment? During the Press Conference I heard loud and clear that the reason they can’t indict on that crime was because of perjury and because of obstruction of justice, that is also why Fitzgerald remarked to re-empaneling the Grand Jury if necessary, and must be hoping to work a deal to get more evidence.

Interesting point that was just made while watching the television, Rove made a fourth apperance in front of the Grand Jury on his own accord. Apparently if you return to the Grand Jury to clear up mis-statements made under oath, it becomes an affirmative defense against perjury, perhaps explaining why Rove is not being charged.

Before we get to far ahead of ourselves here, I think a few things need to be said. According The Hotline, for those of you with a subscription, Alan Colmes, you know him that great voice of liberalism on the Fox News Channel, had some choice words for fellow liberals:

“As a liberal, I don’t think this is good for the country. I don’t … rejoice in this. I hear conservatives say liberals think it’s ‘Fitzmas’ … when the indictments come out. We’re all excited about it. I think this is very bad for where we are as a country that we’d be doing this. This is not a good thing for us. Why would anybody take any joy in this?”

I feel as though, as someone who gladly called it Fitzmas, this needs addressing. No, I do not take joy in the fact that we have a White House where a man is being indicted for five felonies. I don’t take any joy in the fact that this case proves that a White House could be this corrupt. But I do take joy that this is how corruption and deceit are rectified, that it may lead to a greater debate about the intelligence surrounding the Iraq War, especially the role the Vice President’s office and Libby played in analyzing pre-war intelligence, intelligence which by and large has been proven wrong. On that note, also from the National Journal:

Waas reports that Cheney and Libby, “overruling advice” from some WH political staffers and lawyers, decided to withhold crucial documents from the Senate Intelligence Committee in 2004 when the panel was investigating the use of pre-war intelligence that erroneously concluded Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction,” sources said. Among the WH materials withheld from the cmte were “Libby-authored” passages in drafts of a speech that then-Sec/State Colin Powell delivered to the UN in 2/03 to argue the Bush admin’s case for war with Iraq. The withheld documents “also included intelligence data that Cheney’s office — and Libby in particular — pushed to be included in Powell’s speech, sources said. The new information that Cheney and Libby blocked information to the Senate Intelligence Committee further underscores the central role played by the vice president’s office in trying to blunt criticism that the Bush administration exaggerated intelligence data to make the case to go to war.

The lies and the deceit go straight back to the lead up to war and the mishandling of intelligence. What other motive did the Vice President’s office have in releasing Plame’s name and attacking Joe Wilson? If, as the Vice President’s office and the mea culpa in 2003 are true, then the missteps in intelligence came not from the White House but from the CIA. The actions taken by Libby and Cheney show a different story.

So I take no joy in the fact that these lies and this corruption are running around in the halls of the White House. I take no joy in knowing that 2,000 are dead on false information. I agree with Colmes, this is terrible for the country that all this is going on. That is also where I disagree with Colmes, because the indictments are a positive thing for the country.

These indictments show the American people that the system of justice that we place our faith in works, and works at all levels. They show that there is no division in the American people, and that we must all abide by the same laws, and the deceit and corruption will not go unpunished. I think it’s appropriate to rejoice in that, to know that the system is working, albeit slowly. I think it’s proper to take joy in the fact that crimes are being prosecuted, that the FBI is intensifying its investigation into the forged Niger documents, and that Congress is demanding further investigation. That is what I take joy in and that’s why I’m fine with joking around and calling it Fitzmas.

Instead of Colmes trying to assert some high ground and seem like a “good liberal” in the eyes of Sean Hannity, he should be a real liberal, and also applaud what is happening here. I take joy in knowing that justice is working, that corruption is being exposed, and the media are asking better questions. If that’s not something for a liberal to be happy about, then maybe someone should ask Alan to turn in his card.