Skip to main content

View Diary: Case for Adding TANG Forgeries to Fitzgerald's Brief (101 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  This sure stinks, but where are the links (none)
    to the Plame outing? Done, in part, by the same wrecking crew. But, except for the fact that TANG imbroglio whipped CBS into submission before (and so far, after) the election and so spiked the yellowcake story they were working on, where's the peg for Fitzgerald? A pattern of abuse by Rove? Maybe. But seems a bit of a stretch when Fitz has so much rich material to draw on. I'd love to see Fitz bring charges based on the TANG sting, but I ain't holdin' my breath on that.

    My hope is that Dan Rather is plotting cold revenge. He has lots of reasons to dislike the Bush clan.

    The name is not the thing named, the map is not the territory. -- Gregory Bateson

    by semiot on Sat Jul 23, 2005 at 10:29:25 AM PDT

    •  I gave you a 4 for a good job on the diary (1.00)
      but no recommend, because the advertised "case" was weak. Keep on working, though Sherlock. I always like to read your diaries!

      The name is not the thing named, the map is not the territory. -- Gregory Bateson

      by semiot on Sat Jul 23, 2005 at 10:32:44 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Hi Semiot! Actually the Special Prosecutor (none)
      has wide latitude to extend the reach of the case.  A panel of judges reviews his arguments for expansion and almost always grants it.  Look how Ken Starr went from WhiteWater to Monica.

      What was the link there?

      Fitz could add the TANG Forgeries if he wants.  Same people, same motive (influence the election) and the TANG story did stop the media in general from reporting on Bush, not just CBS on the Niger Story.

      I myself doubt he will because it's too much damn work--but it is actually his responsibility to do so, IMHO.

      •  Wrong (none)
        Starr was appointed under the Independendt Counsel statute which, with Democrats leading the way after the Clinton experience, was not reauthorized. Fitzgerald has no mandate for TANG. That is actually good for Democrats. Anyone who's read the appendix of the CBS report should be aware that the documents are forgeries. All the evidence points to Burkett, not Republicans. Why would anyone try to resurrect him as a credible source after he's been shown to have lied repeatedly? I don't think even Karl Rove would believe that rabid anti-Bush folks would let the forged TANG documents blow up in their face twice.
    •  It seems to me that the common beneficiary (none)
      of both crimes is the link.  Nobody in the world benefits from the forged TANG memo other than GWB.  Nobody in the world benefits from the outing of Plame and smearing of Wilson other than GWB.  The perpetrators of both crimes would have to be a person or persons whose job it is to benefit GWB.  It seems that when there are several crimes all with common beneficiaries, it becomes a criminal enterprise.  This diary certainly lists enough circumstantial evidence that there is a long-standing criminal enterprise.
    •  It's called ratfucking (none)
      None of the Leakers' exploits have to necessarily link to one another. Back in the Watergate days the Plumbers were involved in numerous and unrelated "ratfucking" schemes, everything from ordering pizzas and altering schedules to bugging offices and smearing their opponents with false information. It all tied together then with the slush fund that provided the cash for their wrongdoings and the president's men responsible for overseeing it.

      Of course, John Dean is right, this administration's ratfucking is a lot worse than Watergate because their ultimate ratfuck was lying about war and fixing the intel to the policy.
      Barry Sussman (WaPo editor circa Watergate era) summed it up then by saying (I'm paraphrasing) that the American people understand attempts to sway public opinion.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site