Newsy Sunday

Interesting tidbits from todays perusal of the talk shows, blogs, and email: I've got to put this right up front. I got this powerful little message from a friend and I'm sending it out to all the (very few) bushies I know. Now, for the news, Condiliar Rice:

MR. RUSSERT: Let me ask you a couple of questions, domestic questions. Have you testified under oath in the CIA leak investigation? SEC'Y RICE: Tim, I'm not going to talk about an ongoing investigation. I've cooperated in any way that I've been asked to cooperate. MR. RUSSERT: Including testifying under oath? SEC'Y RICE: I've cooperated in any and every way that I've been asked to cooperate.

...and then....

"But the fact of the matter is that when we were attacked on September 11, we had a choice to make. We could decide that the proximate cause was al-Qaeda and the people who flew those planes into buildings and, therefore, we would go after al-Qaeda and perhaps after the Taliban and then our work would be done and we would try to defend ourselves. Or we could take a bolder approach, which was to say that we had to go after the root causes of the kind of terrorism that was produced there, and that meant a different kind of Middle East. And there is no one who could have imagined a different kind of Middle East with Saddam Hussein still in power."

Doesn't this sound an awful lot like it comes right out of the Project For A New American Century (PNAC) mission statment. Isn't this the same person who swore that they knew for certain that Hussein had WMD's and that we just had to get over there right away. Isn't she the one who uttered this famous quote?

"The problem here is that there will always be some uncertainty about how quickly he can acquire nuclear weapons. But we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud." - to Wolf Blitzer, Sept 8, 2002

What a reptilian scumbag she is. Then there was this really interesting analysis of the possibile scenarios that may come out of Judith Miller's testimony before Fitzgerald's Grand Jury. I'm hoping for indictments of Rove and Libby along with the mystery "I-don't-remember-where-it-came-from" person who prompted Judy to write the "Valerie Flame" entry in her notebook. She swears up and down that it wasn't Libby, so who was it? Speculation is that the "third (wo)man" could be Ari Fleischer, Fred Fleitz, Mary Matalin, Dan Bartlett, or one of a dozen other snakes that have taken up redidence in the White House. Be sure to read the comments. It's interesting to note that Fitzgerald agreed to limit his questioning to Millers conversations with Libby on the assurance from her that none of her other sources were relevant to the Plame investigation.

As she stood on the courthouse steps yesterday, Miller, 57, refused to answer questions about her testimony but said she hoped her days in the Alexandria Detention Center would build support for laws to help reporters protect their confidential sources. She stressed that she was willing to testify only after Libby personally wrote her and telephoned her in jail to make it clear she was free to talk, and after Fitzgerald agreed to limit his questions to her conversations with Libby.... ...Abrams said in an interview yesterday that Fitzgerald made a recent and important compromise. The prosecutor would narrow his questions to Libby, which he had not been willing to do when Abrams approached him about the idea last year. Sources close to Miller said she had numerous government sources she wanted to protect, but Libby was the only one relevant to the Plame investigation.

So let me get this straight, she makes a deal with Fitzgerald to testify under the condition that his questions be limited to her conversations with Libby, and gives Fitz assurances that Libby was "the only one relevant to the Plame investigation", and then she goes into the Grand Jury and says that she got the name Plame from someone else but she can't remember who it is? What is missing here? If you were Fitz would'nt this really burn your britches? Could she face charges for this?