Novak’s rebuttal (of himself)

The transcript is finally up from today's Crossfire on CNN. Here is what Bob Novak had to say about Wilsongate: Nobody in the Bush administration called me to leak this. In July, I was interviewing a senior administration official on Ambassador Wilson's report when he told me the trip was inspired by his wife, a CIA employee working on weapons of mass destruction. Another senior official told me the same thing. As a professional journalist with 46 years experience in Washington, I do … [Read more...]

Wilsongate Update

Josh Marshall has posted excerpts of this morning's press gaggle with White House spokesman Scott McClellan. You can smell the panic and flopsweat even through the online transcript: QUESTION: Yes, but I'm just wondering if there was a conversation between Karl Rove and the President, or if he just talked to you, and you're here at this -- McCLELLAN: He wasn't involved. The President knows he wasn't involved. QUESTION: How does he know that? QUESTION: How does he know … [Read more...]

Heads will roll

Earlier today, while some of us were still sleeping or watching the Eagles game, more responsible bloggers were already kneedeep in posts about today's big news -- which is sure to be big news for many days to come. Mike Allen and Dana Milbank of The Washington Post have dug deep and discovered an honorable official in the Bush administration. The bombshell of the week was this report from, revealing that the CIA had formally requested the Justice Department to investigate the … [Read more...]

A backwards “K” at the U.N.

After two days of meetings at the United Nations, the Bush administration came away with no new pledges of international troops or funds to assist with the securing and rebuilding of Iraq. White House officials hastened to say that this wasn't a failure because the administration never actually tried to recruit new aid. "The president did not come here to ask people for troops," one unnamed aide said. If you don't actually try, the reasoning seems to be, then you can't … [Read more...]

Friedman, Will and Rumsfeld

Something strange happened last night on the op-ed pages of The New York Times and The Washington Post. I suspect the work of pranksters who somehow hacked into the system. At the Times these mischief-makers deleted Tom Friedman's column -- perhaps the next installment of his "because we could" argument for war on Iraq -- replacing it with what appears to be a column by Arianna Huffington. Over at the Post, meanwhile, the hackers supplanted George Will's next attempt to smear … [Read more...]

How (not) to win friends and influence people

From Dana Milbank in today's Washington Post: Just before [French President Jacques] Chirac addressed the assembly, Bush and his top aides -- Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice and U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John D. Negroponte -- left the hall. Chirac sat with the French delegation during Bush's speech and politely applauded. Classy. They could have at least left Negroponte behind -- it's his job to be there, after … [Read more...]

The hobgoblin of small minds

Thanks to Buzzflash I find this item from the Australian press. Aussie investigative reporter John Pilger cites both U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell and National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice arguing -- in early 2001 -- that Saddam Hussein's Iraq does not pose a threat to his region or to the world. "Hmm," I think, "This is strong stuff. Pilger's really been doing some digging." But then I learn -- via Atrios, via Lean Left -- that the Powell speech Pilger … [Read more...]

Homophonia revisited

Back before the war began I had a little bit of a problem with homonyms -- questioning in one post whether or not Iraq posed an "immanent" threat to America's national security. Brendan Lynch pointed out that I had confused "immanent" with "imminent" -- rightly guessing that my theology studies contributed to the mix-up. (The kingdom of God, you see, is both immanent andimminent. Or is it imminent and immanent?) To clarify (from Webster's New World): im ma … [Read more...]