Friday, February 10, 2006

Coverups Blown?

Two stories today appear to indicate that a couple of White House cover-ups may be falling apart.

After Katrina the administration talked about how 'everyone' thought New Orleans had 'dodged a bullet', going as far to claim it was a major newspaper headline (it was not). They claimed that the true situation was unknown.

They lied, and despite the efforts by Bush to prevent this, the facts are coming out.

Senate Democrats investigating FEMA's response to Hurricane Katrina say they have documented nearly 30 instances in which federal and local government officials gave early reports on Aug. 29 that levees had broken and that New Orleans was flooding, including one report at 8:30 a.m. the day of the storm.

And the Plame cover up has taken a major hit. It appears that Libby has testified that his 'bosses' approved he leaking of a a high-level intelligence report. This makes the idea of the leaking of the name of a covert CIA agent much more believable.

The disclosure in a legal document written by special prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald demonstrates one way in which Cheney was involved in responding to public allegations by Plame's husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, that the administration had exaggerated questionable intelligence to justify war with Iraq.

Mr. Libby was a very senior person in the White House, his bosses were, the Vice President and the President and maybe Karl Rove. If they approved leaking material for political gain once, why not twice.

It is coming clear that when the President denounced the treasonous outing of a covert CIA agent, and assured us that the person responsible would be identified and punished, he was lying.

This is something that most clear thinking people already suspected, and as more time passes, and more evidence comes out, it will become clear to all.



JFH said...

Geez, John, you obviously didn't even bother to read the article about Libby... no where does it mention that "Libby has testified that his 'bosses' approved he leaking of the name of a covert CIA agent." In fact, the article doesn't even make it clear that he was "leaking" classified material (that is if "leaked" declassified portions of the NIE it's really not leaking, is it?).

As to the first story, it reflects more poor management and poor communication to senior administrative officials (which the White House readily admitted) rather than lying and cover ups

John said...

While I did read the story, You are correct, I screwed up my response. I compressed my thought process and published giberish. A common error when doing 3 things at once.

I am correcting the post


And, this points out three things.

Wh have these cover-ups because the administration is both unable to do is't job, and willing to break laws to push forward it political goals.

Corruption and incompetence breed cover ups.