Skip to main content

View Diary: Tenet, Anyone? 9/28/03 WAPO Source Rovelation! (must-read!) (101 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  could be... (4.00)
    But Tenet's motive here seems pretty weak to me...
    •  Supposedly the day before Tenet resigned (4.00)
      he and Bush had a shouting match.  And Bush said he was surprised that Tenet resigned.  Bull.

      Pavitt's resignation was said to be a mere "coincidence", a planned retirement, also for personal reasons.  

      All obvious baloney.

      •  Why Tenet and not Pavitt (none)
        Pavitt could have talked to the WP instead of Tenet. He was in charge of all spies in the agency so he had a bigger ax to grind than Tenet, who had to play politics more than Pavitt. By the way, Pavitt took retirement, and it was reported that his retirement was arranged weeks ahead of Tenet's firing.
        •  I would have to agree, it could be Pavitt (none)
          but "Pavitt, Anyone?"  just doesn't have the same ring to it!

          I think it's Tenet, because his temper is well-known and he was the one publicly blamed and he was the leader at CIA.  Unlikely Pavitt would have gone around him, although he might have done his bidding.

          •  What I will say... (4.00)
   that Tenet has plenty of motive. He was the political condom between his analysts and the Bushistas, and he failed after the first few strokes.

            A lot of people - Ray McGovern, Larry Johnson, Milt Bearden - have said that they both blame him and empathize with him over the punching bag he became in the run-up to Iraq. His analysts were mad that he couldn't keep Cheney off their backs. Cheney was mad that he couldn't produce the sexy stuff. Powell dragged him to the UN to back up the very shit his people had been debunking for years. He became EVERYBODY'S ASSHOLE during the runup to Iraq, and it never woulda happened to him had the neocon freaks not been given the keys to the family truckster.

            If you read Bush at War - the first Woodward book - you'll see that Tenet was one of very few people with half a clue after 9/11. He was putting Jawbreakers on the ground in Afghanistan while Rummy was still whining about targets. What a culture shock it must have been to work for these goosestepping morons after years of Clinton - a guy who would actually invite his people to debate him in the Oval Office.

            Tenet HATED these guys. So, any analysis that casts him as a quiet source against the Bush Administration smells about right to me.

            I know very little about Pavitt, so I'll keep my mouth shut about him until I do.

      •  The day the other shoe dropped (none)
        It ought to be suggested that the shouting match of June 2, 2004 was triggered after Tenet had knowledge (published June 4) that Bush indeed knew very well who the leaker was, despite his many denials. source: Capitol Hill Blue

        When Tenet finally saw that the treason went all the way down the rabbit hole, he said something that apparently enraged the President.  In addition to which he probably told him he was through, just as he had told his senior staff that same day.

        The following evening (June 3) he goes to Bush and makes it formal.

        But don't forget, Tenet had already tried to resign in the late summer of 2003, after the Plame outing occured.

        From the MNBC article linked in the diary:

        A senior aide to Tenet told NBC News that Tenet, who made his final decision to leave over the holiday weekend and informed his senior staff Tuesday, had wanted to resign last summer or fall but that with the intelligence investigations coming up, Bush persuaded him to stay.

        "He was talked into staying and then did the responsible thing by doing the heavy lifting - - testifying, suffering all manner of fools," the aide said. "Then, within the last month, he started thinking about it again."

        PS: I like Pavitt as the foot-soldier for his boss, as suggested in the comment above.

        Be all that you can be: Work for peace - - Jesus (Mt.5:9)

        by Upstream Review on Thu Jul 07, 2005 at 12:15:45 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Capitol Hill Blue (none)
          Careful using Capitol Hill Blue as a source, they have been considered highly suspect in the past
          •  seek the truth again, polly (none)
            Capitol Hill Blue was only the first source I found.

            I note that Bush consulted his lawyer on the allegations the day after they were whispered (and remember, CHB was only reporting the thing, they are not the sole source).

            Nobody in the White House ever feels the need to get defensive about pure bullshit.  They usually let everything (even the substantial) roll off their backs and depend upon the media to handle the clean-up for them.

            Are you implying Tenet was clueless about the White House gang?

            Your swipes at CHB come with no substantiating material.  Are you willing to bring CHB to greater general awareness by laying out an argument?

            And your FauxNooze references (checked your diary track) don't seem to have enough snark in them to indicate that you are fully awake (apologies if I am wrong, it's a difficult matter of taste).

            Offhand you seem to be telling me "move along, these are not the droids you're looking for," and expecting me to follow with "let's go, these are not the droids we're looking for."

            This is a tactic they teach at the "Conservative Leadership" seminars on blog warfare, is it not?

            Gosh, I used to be a trusting soul.  Hope you can clear this up for me.  I really didn't have time to examine your diary/comment spin very closely.  I'm probably just being edgy because you so blithely trashed my source without further comment.  have a nice day.

            Be all that you can be: Work for peace - - Jesus (Mt.5:9)

            by Upstream Review on Thu Jul 07, 2005 at 07:54:23 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Have a nice day (none)
              First of all, you made no mention of Bush consulting a lawyer in your original post.

              Second, in the June 3rd (not June 4th) Capital Hill Blue article that I think you meant to reference The article does state that :

              Sources within the investigation say evidence points to Rove approving release of the leak. They add that their investigation suggests the President knew about Rove's actions but took no action to stop release of Plame's name.

              This is the only article to my knowledge that quotes any sources saying that Bush knew before hand. The rest of this article essentially has what every other paper had that day, that Bush lawyered up. This is not news.

              Third, I know of no news source that mentions a shouting match between Bush and Tenet. If you have a source for this claim please post it.

              Fourth, I made no reference to any part of your post except to caution you about Capital Hill Blue. I did not imply in any way that Tenet was clueless.

              Fifth, down thread, another poster made the same observation about Capital Hill Blue that I did.

              nota bene said

              Treat anything from CHB as rumor (at best). Don't believe it until it gets confirmed someplace else.

              Sixth, The rest of your response appears to be a personal attack. I hope I've cleared that up for you.

              On June 4th 2004 Capital Hill Blue published this little gem.

              President George W. Bush's increasingly erratic behavior and wide mood swings has the halls of the West Wing buzzing lately as aides privately express growing concern over their leader's state of mind.

              In meetings with top aides and administration officials, the President goes from quoting the Bible in one breath to obscene tantrums against the media...

              Here's another good one from Capital Hill Blue July 2004

              President George W. Bush is taking anti-depressant drugs to control his erratic behavior, depression and paranoia, Capitol Hill Blue has learned...

              "Keep those motherfuckers away from me," he screamed at an aide backstage. "If you can't, I'll find someone who can."

              •  Thank you (none)
                I'm not here to brief a case, but to enlarge my understanding of our plight as a nation.  So I feel free to extend my sources of information to arenas that perhaps would not cut muster in court.  Is this the spirit of your caveat?

                On the subject of serious, I realize it is a waste of time to seek the bottom of the rabbit hole until after the Rover is indicted.  But I believe Tenet saw down into it.  That's all I was trying to suggest.

                The first I heard of the shouting match was from Sherlock's post above.  I was merely joining up some personal dots.

                But my copy of the lead into the June 3 CHB article runs a little more credibly than yours:

                Witnesses told a federal grand jury President George W. Bush knew about, and took no action to stop, the release of a covert CIA operative's name to a journalist in an attempt to discredit her husband, a critic of administration policy in Iraq.

                Their damning testimony has prompted Bush to contact an outside lawyer for legal advice because evidence increasingly points to his involvement in the leak of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame's name to syndicated columnist Robert Novak.

                The move suggests the president anticipates being questioned by prosecutors. Sources say grand jury witnesses have implicated the President and his top advisor, Karl Rove.

                This is not mere child's play.

                But has Thompson juiced up the original since you grabbed your rather innocuous byte from him?  Or are you quoting downstream recaps and second-hand spin?

                I appreciate your need for utter accuracy.

                Be all that you can be: Work for peace - - Jesus (Mt.5:9)

                by Upstream Review on Thu Jul 07, 2005 at 09:30:54 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I was trying (none)
                  to give you a head's up with the caution about CHB. There are a couple of other sources on the left that are also considered unreliable. Wayne Madsen is another guy who is considered less than reliable.

                  You cannot go wrong with the big news outlets..  NYT, WAPO, CNN, AP..ect. Kos and most bloggers use the main news sources for their blogging citations.

                  Link to the article and show the quote you want to disscuss.

                  Basically, if you are stating your opinion, say so. No problem

                  If you are speculating, guessing or getting theories from the mother ship just say so. Lots of people do.

                  Things can be loose around here but if you read carefully you will see most posters sourse their factual remarks.

                  I showed the last part of the CHB article because it mentioned sources. The article as I said is mostly what appeared in the main news cycle at the time.

                  The material in this article that is different than what was been widely reported, is that witnesses have implicated Bush. This may be true, but I have not seen this claim reported anywhere else.

                  You are right about my wanting accuracy. I like to speculate as much as the next guy, but when I want to discuss something in the news I almost always link to an article and show a quote.

                  It occurs to me that you may not know how to show an active link or block a quote, if that is the case I would be happy to show you how it's done.


                •  Take a look (none)
                  at this thread.

                  This is an extreme example of people going to far with conspiracy theories. I am NOT saying you are doing anything like this... as a matter of fact every so often I like to speculate. I just thought you might find this interesting

                  I made a mass banning of people perpetuating a series of bizarre, off-the-wall, unsupported and frankly embarassing conspiracy theories.

                  I have a high tolerance level for material I deem appropriate for this site, but one thing I REFUSE to allow is bullshit conspiracy theories. You know the ones -- Bush and Blair conspired to bomb London in order to take the heat off their respective political problems. I can't imagine what fucking world these people live in, but it sure ain't the Reality Based Community.

                  So I banned these people, and those that have been recommending diaries like it. And I will continue to do so until the purge is complete, and make no mistake -- this is a purge.

                  This is a reality-based community. Those who wish to live outside it should find a new home. This isn't it.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site