Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

On German Shepherds and the Berlin Wall

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 01:33 PM
Original message
On German Shepherds and the Berlin Wall
"' "Wilson's wife is fair game." ' Those are fighting words for any man, and I'd just had them quoted to me by MSNBC's Chris Matthews. It was July 21, 2003, barely a week since a column by Robert Novak in the Washington Post had named my wife, Valerie, as a CIA officer, and now the host of Hardball was calling to tell me that as far as the White House was concerned, they had declared open season on my family.

"In his signature staccato, Matthews was blunt: 'I just got off the phone with Karl Rove. He says, and I quote, "Wilson's wife is fair game." ' Before abruptly hanging up, Matthews added: 'I will confirm that if asked.' As the head of the White House political office and one of President George W. Bush's closest advisor's, Rove was legendary for his right-wing zeal and take-no-prisoners operating style. But what he was doing now was tantamount to declaring war on two U.S. citizens, both of them with years of government service."
-- Joseph Wilson; The Politics of Truth; 2004; page 1.

Last Friday, MSNBC's Chris Matthews asked a guest if Judith Miller's grand jury testimony would make Lewis "Scooter" Libby and Karl Rove the new "Haldeman and Ehrlichman"? I found that question to be revealing. Let's take a closer look, to see what the implications are.

First, it is interesting to see Matthews conduct himself as if he has no first-hand knowledge about the case. Clearly, he does. It is safe to assume that Patrick Fitzgerald is aware of Rove's phone call to Matthews. Thus, one can conclude that the grand jury has heard Chris' description of the call.

Fitzgerald has requested that witnesses not speak publicly about about their testimony to the grand jury. As a witness, that could clearly explain Matthew's silence. Yet both Matt Cooper and Judith Miller have discussed their testimony in interviews with other media sources. Could there be another reason why Chris has been silent? And could his Haldeman - Ehrlichman statement hold a key?


"Several middle-level White House aides had assured Bernstein and Woodward that in the Executive Mansion there was little doubt that the Segretti-Chapin operation had been approved by Haldeman. ....

"Haldeman was held in awe throughout the administration. At the mention of his name, Cabinet officials would become silent and fearful. The few who would talk knowledgeably about him said they might lose their jobs if he ever found out. Tough ... pragmatic ... ruthless ... devoted only to Richard Nixon ... would stop at nothing. The descriptions were often similar and many quoted Haldeman's celebrated self-description: 'I'm the President's son-of-a-bitch.' But Haldeman was much more complicated than such descriptions indicated.

"One of Haldeman's methods of operation, the reporters knew, was 'deniability.' This was the device of insulating himself from controversial decisions by implementing them through others so that, later, he could deny involvement. ....

"Deep Throat .... would not name Haldeman himself. He shook hands with Woodward and left. Woodward was now more certain of two things: Haldeman was the correct name, and Haldeman had accumulated frightening power. Deep Throat did not scare easily."
-- Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward; All the President's Men; 1974; pages 171-174.

H.R. Haldeman was the White House Chief of Staff, and the top assistant to Nixon. John D. Ehrlichman was the Assistant to the President for Domestic Affairs. They were two of the most powerful figures in the Nixon administration, certainly of similar stature to Rove and Libby. Reporters called them "the German Shepherds," "the Prussians," and "the Berlin Wall," among other things.

Early in their investigation into Watergate, Bernstein and Woodward recognized that these two men were almost certainly involved in significant parts of the illegal activities that would come to define the corrupt administration. These illegal activities, and the conspiracy to cover-up the White House involvement, could only have been done with the okay of high-ranking officials. Getting a witness to discuss the involvement of the high-ranking officials was, of course, difficult.

Hugh Sloan, Jr., a former Haldeman aide and treasurer for the Committee to Re-Elect the President (CREEP), did speak to them. However, either the reporters made an honest mistake, or they were purposely misled about Sloan's testimony to the grand jury investigating the Watergate break-in and CREEP/White House "slush fund." In a Washington Post article, they mistakenly wrote that Sloan had testified about Haldeman's role. In fact, Sloan had not, though he had identified Haldeman's role to the reporters. Giddy about the paper's mistake, President Nixon spoke to Charles Colsen : "We're going to screw them another way. They don't realize how rough I can play. ... But when I start, I will kill them. There's no question about it." Luckily for us, Nixon recorded these conversations!


" 'Well,' Felt said, 'Haldeman slipped away from you.' Felt stomped his heel into the garage wall. The truth would never come out now, the error about Haldeman had sealed it, he said. He said that moving on the top man meant you had to be on the most solid ground. Felt cursed. He moved closer and whispered. 'From top to bottom, this whole business is a Haldeman operation. He ran the money. Insulated himself through those functionaries around him.' ....

"He gave me a little lecture about breaking a conspiracy like Watergate. 'You build convincingly from the outer edges in, you get ten times the evidence you need against the Hunts and Liddys. They feel hopelessly finished -- they may not talk right away, but the grip is on them. Then you move up and do it at the next level. If you shoot too high and miss, then everyone feels more secure. Lawyers work this way. I'm sure smart reporters must too.' I recall he gave me a look as if to say I did not belong in that category of smart reporters. 'You put the investigation back months. It puts everyone on the defensive -- editors, FBI agents, everyone has to go into a crouch after this.' "
-- Bob Woodward; The Secret Man; 2005; pages 90-91.

Chris Matthews is certainly aware of the history of Watergate, including the infamous error made by Bernstein and Woodward. He has not shared all that he knows about either the White House leaking Plame's identity, the conspiracy to cover their involvement up, or the grand jury hearings, with his Hardball audience. Hopefully, this article helps us to understand why he has reported on the case in the manner that he has.

More, it may help to shed light on exactly what Chris meant when he asked if Miller's testimony would make Rove and Libby into the new Haldeman and Ehrlichman. Felt's words may make it clearer how Fitzgerald has workered to expose the role played by the mid-level White House officials, in order to reach those at the top levels. For, as Joseph Wilson tells us on page 445 of his book:

"In fact, senior advisors close to the president may well have been clever enough to have used others to do the actual leaking, in order to keep their fingerprints off the crime. John Hannah and David Wurmser, mid-level political appointees in the vice president's office, have both been suggested as the source of the leaks. I don't know either, though at the time of the leak, Wurmser, a prominent neoconservative, was working as a special assistant to John Bolton at the State Department. Mid-level officials, however, do not leak information without authority from a higher level. They would have been instruments, not the makers, of decision."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 01:57 PM
Response to Original message
1. The lovable German Shepherds





The Weiner Dogs














Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. The more things change,
the more they call for impeachment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
burythehatchet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 05:35 PM
Response to Reply #1
14. Jeebus, that picture of Libby .... he's a reptile. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack from Charlotte Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 06:40 PM
Response to Reply #1
21. After his prison term, I grew to like Ehrlicman.....
He came clean and was quite candid about the whole mess. I also enjoyed his novels.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. Yep.
I admire John Dean now. He was a weasel in his Watergate daze. People can change.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack from Charlotte Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-07-05 10:13 AM
Response to Reply #22
45. From day one I admired John Wesley Dean III..... I'll explain....
Day one for me was when he turned on Nixon. Never heard of him until then. The entire White House spin machine attacked him as being the one who was REALLY responsible for not telling Nixon about Watergate. He testified under oath before the senate Watergate panel. He displayed an incredible memory. At the time he testified, it was not known that tapes were around to verify or disprove his account..... all the while the WHO was calling him a liar every day in the papers. When Alexander Butterfield revealed the fact that The WHO had tapes of every conversation..... I worried that any slight embellishment by Dean of a charge against Nixon in his previous testimony could sink the whole investigation..... Tapes corroborated Dean's testimony of conversations with Nixon almost verbatim. JED Io's memory of conversations that occurred years earlier sealed the deal.

See ya Dick.

Dean was only about 30 years old, too. Wonder if he's still married to that babe-es que wife? Was it Maureen? Mo Dean, as I recall?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 02:12 PM
Response to Original message
3. Some interesting parallels there but I notice one big difference
Nixon was nowhere near as paranoid as Bush.

:scared:

Seriously, they are so scared that their SC pick had to come from INSIDE the room they were sitting in.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 02:56 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. It never seemed possible
that there would be a president worse than Nixon. But it has happened.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheCentepedeShoes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #7
23. And back in the day
I was scared of Nixon. If I'd only known... Thanks for your work, H20 !
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 05:16 PM
Response to Reply #3
13. Bush is not paranoid. Bush is a sociopath. That is actually worse.
Edited on Wed Oct-05-05 05:20 PM by BrklynLiberal
Bush is a crueler, unkinder, less-feeling person. If there is no other way to judge, take a look at the lives of the children they raised.

I do not believe that Nixon's (who I detested) original intent was to undermine the US govt. Bush and his cronies had that as their ultimate goal all along.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 06:53 PM
Response to Reply #13
25. Many think he
is a sociopath. He appears to have some of the traits. Sociopaths can, of course, be paranoid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 07:16 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. I believe he is the worst of all combinations that are possible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 07:18 PM
Response to Reply #26
27. At least you
can see his good side. When I see him on the news chattering away, I can't be that objective. (grin)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The_Mule Donating Member (264 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 02:20 PM
Response to Original message
4. Thank you, H2O Man
I have learned so much from reading your posts.

Kicked and recommended.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. Thank you. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gold Metal Flake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 02:46 PM
Response to Original message
5. Didja see this thread?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 06:29 PM
Response to Reply #5
17. Yep.
I'll bet that old Dick Cheney is a fun guy to hang out with right about now!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Me. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 02:46 PM
Response to Original message
6. Deja Vu All Over Again
You know I heard Tweety say that about Haldeman and Ehrlichman but didn't connect the dots. Your post helps make clear what the strategy in both the Plame and AIPAC cases is. Course, the success of it depends on who the person in the cross hairs is most afraid of. Have we heard anything about Franklin showing up and taking the plea bargain today?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 04:15 PM
Response to Original message
9. Howard Dean is
kicking ass on Hardball! He is addressing Plame, etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Me. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 04:45 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. Don't Know About Anyone Else
but here in NYC the digital broke up and couldn't see it. If you wanted to give details I wouldn't mind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Me. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 05:04 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. Just Caught The Last Segment
and he said that Franklin did plead guilty today. Where's the media coverage?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Me. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 05:10 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Here's The Story
Franklin admits: I gave Israel secret material


“Former Pentagon analyst Larry Franklin admitted in court Wednesday he passed classified information to Israeli diplomat Naor Gilon and to two former AIPAC officials, Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman.

Franklin agreed in court to testify against the two AIPAC officials and to prove that he had indeed passed classified information on to them, and had told them clearly this information was classified.

This was the first time that Israel was explicitly mentioned in the courtroom and that Gilon's name was disclosed. When asked by Judge T.S. Ellis whether he communicated classified information to a foreign official, Franklin replied: "I met occasionally with Naor Gilon from the Israeli embassy." Cont…”

JTA reported that one of the US government officials is David Satterfield, then deputy assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs and now the No. 2 man at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad. The other is Kenneth Pollack, a Clinton-era National Security Council staffer and now an analyst at the Brookings Institution”cont…


http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1128478900053
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robertpaulsen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 06:21 PM
Response to Original message
15. Thanks for mentioning Wurmser at the end of your great column.
There have been a lot of rumors attached to names for future indictments (I'm sure you've seen them floating a lot today) but not one mention of Wurmser. Strange, as he's one of the strongest links connecting Plamegate with AIPACgate. And on the day Franklin starts talking.

So thanks for putting Wurmser's name back out there, I was wondering where he went.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 06:28 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. He will be
playing an interesting role. Count on it.

Great news that Me. Franklin pled guilty today.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Me. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 06:29 PM
Response to Reply #15
18. You're Right About Rumors
Just read that Rove is a target. Don't know if it's true and not taking anything for gospel until Fitz opens his mouth or plea bargains are entered.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 06:34 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. After Cooper testified
Rove's lawyer called Fitzgerald. This was reported in either Time or Newsweek. He asked if Fitzgerald needed to see Rove again? The report said Fitzgerald was very "to the point," and said he would be the one to contact Rove & Co.

Matt Cooper's testimony moved Rove from his "not a target" status, which was more accurately "a person of interest," to being a potential target. The change in his public role began then, if people think back. The president considered an attempt at "rehabing" Rove in the post-Katrina world, but that little plan seems to have been, er, aborted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Me. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 06:40 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. "aborted"
Elaborate please, you mean he's not going to be the NO czar? Missed that one. Also what do you think about Pollack's name coming up in the AIPAC matter?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 06:52 PM
Response to Reply #20
24. I think that
indicted White House officials will have to, at very least, take a leave of absence.

The AIPAC case is going to increase in volume soon. I think the public is going to be surprised some of the names that come up. If they had read Democratic Underground right along, they'd probably have been better prepared for the surprises to come.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robertpaulsen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 07:22 PM
Response to Reply #18
28. Exactly. Rove is not above using himself as a distraction.
Unfortunately, most DUers are falling for it, as well as the story about the Spy in the White House not named Rove. Franklin deserves the lion's share of attention for naming names in court. It makes me mad that he's not getting that attention here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 08:33 PM
Response to Reply #28
29. It will.
Remember, he only pled today. When the other trials come about, Mr. Franklin will testify. And when he testifies, people will begin to understand the implications of the case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Me. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 09:45 PM
Response to Reply #29
31. Do You Know When The Trial Is?
I know he gets sentenced in January?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-06-05 04:51 AM
Response to Reply #31
32. I think
that there will be more pre-trial hearings, if course, but that the AIPAC trials start in January. I am not sure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 08:44 PM
Response to Reply #15
30. Thanks robertpaulsen and H2Oguy
I am so upset about the distractions

I'M HAVING A HARD TIME NOT GETTING DISTRACTED!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-06-05 04:53 AM
Response to Reply #30
33. I think that we can
expect the administration to put "perception management" into high gear. I half way expect Bush to order Senator Byrd to be sent to the east of Cuba as a precaution for the flu outbreak.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Me. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-06-05 06:38 AM
Response to Reply #33
34. Or Declare That Clinton Outed Plame
and have him arrested
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-06-05 02:19 PM
Response to Original message
35. The paragraph
in which Woodward quotes the "little lecture" from Felt, regarding how a prosecutor/investigator "turns" a witness, should be of special interest to those following events in the Plame grand jury this weekend.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-06-05 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #35
36. Turns a witness
How about it KKKarl feel like a little spin?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-06-05 02:53 PM
Response to Reply #36
37. I remember last June
(2004) on the infamous Plame threads, discussing the acrimony between Rove and Cheney/Libby. I said that Karl was being targeted to be turned, because his personality make-up was such that he would always tattle on others, rather than risk being punished himself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Just Me Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-06-05 04:20 PM
Response to Original message
38. You are such a skilled essayist/writer, H20Man.
:yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-06-05 07:38 PM
Response to Reply #38
39. Thank you.
If more people thought like you, my threads would not sink so fast! Actually, I think this is an important thread. If one wants to know what will happen tomorrow, one needs to examine what happened yesterday.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coexist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-06-05 07:41 PM
Response to Original message
40. Great Stuff.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-07-05 08:12 AM
Response to Reply #40
41. I was hoping
that more people would think so! (grin) There is some important information here, that might help to explain why some journalists -- such as Matthews -- have failed the public they serve.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Me. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-07-05 08:47 AM
Response to Reply #41
42. What Do You Think Of The Info
(as supplied by Madsen) that Ari is a target? Personally I've felt his role in all this has been overlooked because he's "not a big fish", so I found it both interesting and credible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-07-05 09:22 AM
Response to Reply #42
43. I think he is
a snake. His role in this will be exposed as an actual axis of evil, because he was at the center of the communications between various forces within the administration. He could be seen as a genetically engineered offspring of the Watergate crew.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Me. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-07-05 09:55 AM
Response to Reply #43
44. Intriguing!
"genetically engineered offspring of the Watergate crew". Care to elaborate? Truly hope this one serves as an object lesson to all those mid-levelers looking to weasel their way up through arrogance and strong arm tactics. He has lon deserved a comeuppance. Wonder if he thought he was going to be able to fly under the radar with this and if that is why he quit?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oilwellian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-07-05 10:20 AM
Response to Original message
46. Great work H2O Man
I've always been a fan of your writings (particularly on Haiti) and have bookmarked your blog. :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thinkingwoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-07-05 10:33 AM
Response to Original message
47. spot on brilliant, as usual
I read this last night without comment...slept on it...came back and re-read it today. It's spot on brilliant, as your assessments normally are.

As a former journalist, I cannot tell you how many times I was in possession of information I could not prove six ways to Sunday and therefore could not nail higher ups with. So often laypeople and low level witness and sources would get frustrated with my reporting, accusing me of all kinds of things but usually of coddling the local administration.

Of course I wasn't. I wanted to nail their asses to the wall as bad as anybody. I just didn't want to fight lawsuits and other underhanded revenge tactics they would have hurled at me if I'd gone off half-cocked.

I left journalism without ever nailing my former local administration. Left town as well. Moved on with my life.

I remain frustrated to this day that they got away with so much corruption.

It's pervasive in this country today...perhaps it always has been. But so many people don't realize that in order to bring down an administration -- from local school board or small town to the federal government -- the method and constraints are the same. As you highlight, an ironclad case must be built from the smallest to the biggest fish. You can't skip ahead just because you know you're right. You must have a mountain of evidence just to advance one level...and then another mountain to get to the next.

Thanks for pointing that out to everyone again, and much more concisely than I could.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-07-05 10:57 AM
Response to Reply #47
49. I've had a close
working relationship with a number of local newspapers, and tv and radio stations in the past. And I always was aware that even a gutsy reporter had to deal with editors, who had to deal with management/owners. I provided information I knew would be reported, and plenty that I was aware would not be.

I have a relative who just got her masters in journalism at Syracuse, who is eager to conquer the world. I'm as proud as can be, of course. But I know she's going to find the real world much harsher than she thinks it will be. My brother (her father) often scolds her to listen closer to me, a sure way to prevent that from happening!

Matthews is an interesting case. I really wish he would speak out, but I know he saw what happened to Rather. It's a harsh world.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thinkingwoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-07-05 02:11 PM
Response to Reply #49
50. If he can't speak out
(and others in the know can't either) the least they could do is stop carrying water for the Administration.

I do see that slowing across the board. It's not uniform...and there's a 1 step forward 4 steps back feeling to all of it...but it is happening.

P.S. I wish your niece much luck and stamina.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-07-05 03:06 PM
Response to Reply #50
51. Another option
that John Dean suggested was that Chris could talk as an off the record source to another journalist. Interesting thought!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thinkingwoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-07-05 04:39 PM
Response to Reply #51
53. yes...and that would work
but could his ego handle it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-07-05 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #53
54. Perhaps too much
time has passed. It would be too obvious now. Still, I think there may come a day when he tells us what he knows. I find him an interesting character, and would really be interested in what he knows.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thinkingwoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-07-05 05:22 PM
Response to Reply #54
55. I agree
He is quite interesting.

I fear it will be a long time before we hear what he and many others knew and when they knew it and how everything behind the scenes shook out.

But I can wait. I plan on living a long time. :evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tsiyu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-07-05 10:48 AM
Response to Original message
48. I'm reading Wilson's book now
And I am outraged that he has been smeared and demonized by those who outed his wife's identity and those who support that crime.

Your comparison of the crime to the machinations of Nixon's staff during Watergate is an interesting one.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-07-05 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #48
52. Right.
Wilson is someone that both republicans and democrats should be abled to agree is an honorable man. And his wife wasn't in Central America raping nuns and shooting archbishops as they said mass. She was investigating the sale of WMD components. Everyone should be outraged.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 06:58 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC