H.Res. 505, calling for investigation of the White House Iraq Group, almost makes it out of the International Relations Committee
From GOP Whitewash of White House Continues
on The Huffington Post:
The Republican majority on the House International Relations Committee today again refused to investigate its own party. Barely.
With a 4-member advantage on the IR committee over the Democrats, the GOP managed to hang on to a 25 to 23 vote win, defeating H.Res. 505, Rep. Dennis Kucinich's attempt to actually investigate the secret activities of the WHIG, his Resolution of Inquiry (ROI) to look into the White House Iraq Group.
More than 100 House Democrats joined Kucinich in cosponsoring this resolution, even before it never made it to the floor!
Only 2 Republicans stood up for finding out the truth--Rep. Jim Leach of Iowa and Rep. Ron Paul of Texas. [...]
ONLY? The fact that any
Republicans supported any
Resolution by Kucinich is enough to strike fear into the electronic pump that replaced "Dick" Cheney's heart. And the fact that a Resolution by Kucinich got unanimous support from the Democrats on the Committee must be striking some fear into those in the stay-the-course pro-war wing of the Donkey Party.
Of course, because this Resolution had the audacity to mention the White House Iraq Group by name, the WHIG Subsidiary that publishes what used to be America's Liberal Paper of Record
, failed to mention these proceedings at all.
Labels: Dennis Kucinich, New York Times, WHIG, White House Iraq Group
A quick numerical update on a couple of WHIG questions
-- The current number of Congressional co-sponsors
for Dennis Kucinich's H.RES.505 (Title: Requesting the President of the United States and directing the Secretary of State to provide to the House of Representatives certain documents in their possession relating to the White House Iraq Group.)1
--Number of indicted White House Iraq Group members so far
-- The number of news articles mentioning the name "White House Iraq Group" or "WHIG" in the pages of The New York Times
How much pressure can any group of Representatives expect to put on the White House to release these documents if America's "liberal" paper of record doesn't even acknowledge the group exists outside the three recent mentions by Frank Rich and one letter to the editor?
Even though I wasn't in the New York area in 1971, I started reading the New York Times
regularly when I was in high school because they were the paper that released the stolen Pentagon Papers
on the front page, even though they needed to fight for their right to publish up to the Supreme Court
, because they felt the American people needed to know the truth about the lies that led us into Vietnam. Is their historical legacy vis à vis
this current war going to be that they were the Yellow Journalists screaming "Remember the Maine!"
When the FUCK are they going to do something dramatic to atone for their phony WHIG-generated "weapons of mass destruction" stories that may have tipped the balance for a number of intelligent readers on the Iraq war question? When are they going to apologize to these readers who had learned over the years to trust the Times
in matters of foreign policy? And they can't get off the hook by just blaming Judy Miller, but examining their employee's role in serving as a knowing or unknowing conduit for White House Iraq Group propagandists is probably the best place for them to start.
Labels: Dennis Kucinich, New York Times, WHIG, White House Iraq Group
Another WHIG (Hadley) and his actions during that key week in early September 2002
Though "White House Iraq Group" and "WHIG" have yet to appear in the New York Times' news pages,
they do often print key nuggets about the actions of individual WHIGs, like this mention of Stephen J. Hadley, and his meeting with General Pollari on 9/9/2002 (the day after the Judy Miller/Dick Cheney Iraq War Product Launch in the media, and three days before the Bush Product Launch at the UN). Here is the end of today's article, "Source of Forged Niger-Iraq Uranium Documents Identified" by Elaine Sciolino and Elisabetta Povoledo.
[...]a three-part series in La Repubblica, [...] said General Pollari had knowingly provided the United States and Britain with forged documents. The newspaper, a staunch opponent of Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, also reported that General Pollari had acted at the behest of Mr. Berlusconi, who was said to be eager to help President Bush in the search for weapons in Iraq.
Mr. Berlusconi has denied such accounts.
La Repubblica said General Pollari had held a meeting on Sept. 9, 2002, with Stephen J. Hadley, then the deputy national security adviser. Mr. Hadley, now the national security adviser, has said that he met General Pollari on that date, but that they did not discuss the Niger-Iraq issue.
"Nobody participating in that meeting or asked about that meeting has any recollection of a discussion of natural uranium, or any recollection of any documents being passed," Mr. Hadley told a briefing on Wednesday in Washington. "And that's also my recollection."
At the time, Mr. Hadley took responsibility for including the faulty information in Mr. Bush's State of the Union address.
This particular piece of the pre-war yellowcake puzzle might make much more sense to Times readers when considered in the framework and timeline of the White House Iraq Group, which is why this blog finds it so frustrating that that pre-existing narrative scaffolding is never used by the Times.Tags:white house iraq group;WHIG;WHIGgate;Hadley;yellowcake;Plamegate
The James Carville & Mary Matalin show wouldn't even be cute if they were played by Tom Cruise & Britney Spears in the post-Whiggate TV miniseries
The second post to appear on Whiggate Update
ended with the words: "So what did Mary's husband James Carville know about WHIG's activities? And when did he know it?
Today Arianna Huffington gives a much fuller appraisal of James Carville's role in actively drawing attention away from Mary Matalin's friends and co-workers "Scooter" and "Dick". Arianna ends a current blog entry, "Why the Dems Need James Carville to Take a Long, Long Vacation",
on the Huffington Post with these words: "It's time for him to take a long, long vacation from the spotlight. And he should take his Cheney/Libby-apologist, WHIG-war-salesman-wife with him.
September 8, 2002 ... September 8, 2002 ... Hardball is catapulting the propaganda back over the White House walls
OK, if you're looking for proof that this True Blue Liberal
is less than a true blue American, then here's your proof, and my confession: I don't have access to cable or satellite television, so I can't see Chris Matthews on MSNBC; I don't even currently have a television, but after reading this entry by Arianna Huffington on Chris Matthews and the Power of Repetition
, I almost
want one (not really, but it is good to see that the tube is being used to catapult some propaganda back over the walls
Sunday Sept. 8, 2002 was a red letter day in the White House Iraq Group’s efforts to market the war. That was the day the administration’s war salesmen scored one of their biggest propaganda coups.
That morning, the New York Times ran a front page story co-written by Judy Miller about how Saddam was trying to get a hold of aluminum tubes to be used in building nuclear weapons.
Perfectly timed to coincide with this planted (and bogus) info, the administration blanketed the Sunday shows with its big guns -- who all used the New York Times’ credibility to bolster their case against Saddam and scare the American people.
Over the last two weeks, Hardball’s Chris Matthews has been relentless in repeatedly bringing the significance of Sept. 8, 2002 -- and its larger implications -- home to his audience.
It’s been crusading journalism at its best. Making a crucial point by repeating the story -- and the facts -- again and again and again.
He is acting as a village explainer, using the dramatic example of Sept. 8, 2002 to simplify, clarify, and make memorable a very complex set of facts.
“Stories,” says Harvard professor Howard Gardner, “are the single most powerful weapon in a leader’s arsenal”. A journalist’s arsenal, too. Matthews should keep telling this one until the public takes it to heart -- and the White House war salesmen are forced to come clean.
The date in September 2002 that stands out in my mind is four days later, one day after the first anniversary of The
September 11, when George W. Bush used that anniversary, in New York City
, to desecrate the memory of those who died by going to the United Nations and calling for war against Iraq, based on the bogus intelligence that had been broadcast and amplified in the WHIG's media echo chamber on the previous weekend. As I said in my last entry, September 2002 is where all the real story is told. The outing of Ms. Plame Wilson in 2003 was just part of the cover-up.
WHIG of the Week -- Nicholas E. Calio, WHIG in charge of herding groups of rubber-stamp-wielding legislators in the march to invade Iraq
Often dismissed in the phrases "et al.
," "and the rest," and "others", with the likes of The Professor, Mary Ann, and James R. "Jim" Wilkinson
, Nicholas E. Calio
nevertheless did play some role in the White House Iraq Group (WHIG), and every one of the WHIGs will get their shot at being WHIGGATE Update's WHIG of the Week®. So it's the week for Nick
(known to his fans as "The Quiet WHIG") to take his turn in the spotlight. That spotlight is best shown not on current events around the White House Iraq Group in the Senate
or the House
, but on the events of September 2002, when Nicholas E. Calio's role, as Assistant to the President for Legislative Affairs, was to make sure that members of Congress (including dupes like John Kerry who should have known much better) were bullied into voting war powers to the President using the GOP's most effective weapon (until the coffins started coming home), beating war drums right before an election for electoral gain. Here is a rare published quotation from WHIG Calio in a Detroit News article, "Iraq Debate Turns to Rage" (26 Sept 2002)
"We ought not politicize this war," Daschle said in blunt remarks on the Senate floor less than six weeks before the midterm elections. "We ought not politicize the rhetoric about war and life and death."
The head of Bush's legislative team, Nicholas Calio, said there will be no apology because "there has been no attempt on (Bush's) part to politicize the war."
Speaking of a debate over legislation to create a Department of Homeland Security, Bush said: "The House responded, but the Senate is more interested in special interests in Washington and not interested in the security of the American people. ... ."
Another reason why it's important to go back to September 2002 again and again, when the WHIGs were first launching their "new product"
and beating the war drums loudly, is that there is a continuing serious attempt in the Administration, and among their media dupes and apologists, to spin our collective memories of that time, to try to convince us that we "all" thought Saddam had nukes and poison germ bombs (and that he planned 9/11, and sent those mysterious anthrax letters). We didn't all believe these White House lies. Some of us were willing to listen to Blix and El Baradei
. Some of us were willing to leave working UN inspectors on the ground in Iraq rather than threatening them with US Cruise Missiles and Smart-Brand Bombs. Some of us knew the WHIGs were lying all along, even though we didn't yet know the name of their little club.
Near the end of the same Detroit News article
, they solicit a quote from a local Detroit Congressman who is never easily fooled or bullied:
Tags:white house iraq group;WHIG;WHIGgate;Calio
Rep. John Conyers, D-Detroit, when asked whether Bush is politicizing the war, remarked, "is the sky blue?"
"That's all Bush and the vice president are speaking about at fund-raisers and speeches in the states with hotly contested races," Conyers said in a statement. "The White House has not been able to cite any major change in circumstances about Iraq different from six months ago that all of a sudden has created a sudden crisis. Why now, just before the election?"
Daschle's comments drew the support of several other Democrats, some of whom spoke in unusually harsh terms.
"It is despicable that any president would attempt to use the serious matter of impending war as a tool in a campaign year," said Sen. Robert C. Byrd, D-W. Va.
Despicable, but it worked.
Democrats Force Senate Into Closed Session to Discuss Iraq War (& the Role of the White House Iraq Group)
Here, from a link on Talking Points Memo
, are excerpts from Harry Reid's prepared remarks as the galleries were cleared, the lights were dimmed, and the Senate went into closed sesson this afternoon:
"[...]They [i.e., we, the American people
] also deserve a searching and comprehensive investigation about how the Bush Administration brought this country to war. Key questions that need to be answered include:
- How did the Bush Administration assemble its case for war against Iraq?
- Who did Bush Administration officials listen to and who did they ignore?
- How did senior Administration officials manipulate or manufacture intelligence presented to the Congress and the American people?
- What was the role of the White House Iraq Group or WHIG, a group of senior White House officials tasked with marketing the war and taking down its critics?
- How did the Administration coordinate its efforts to attack individuals who dared to challenge the Administration's assertions?
- Why has the Administration failed to provide Congress with the documents that will shed light on their misconduct and misstatements.
"Unfortunately the Senate committee that should be taking the lead in providing these answers is not. Despite the fact that the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee publicly committed to examine many of these questions more than 1 and ½ years ago, he has chosen not to keep this commitment. Despite the fact that he restated that commitment earlier this year on national television, he has still done nothing.
"At this point, we can only conclude he will continue to put politics ahead of our national security. If he does anything at this point, I suspect he will play political games by producing an analysis that fails to answer any of these important questions. Instead, if history is any guide, this analysis will attempt to disperse and deflect blame away from the Administration.
"We demand that the Intelligence Committee and other committees in this body with jurisdiction over these matters carry out a full and complete investigation immediately as called for by Democrats in the committee's annual intelligence authorization report. Our troops and the American people have sacrificed too much. It is time this Republican-controlled Congress put the interests of the American people ahead of their own political interests."[emphasis added]
Maybe tomorrow The New York Times
, in reporting the facts of this dramatic action by the Senate Democrats this afternoon, will finally
be forced to print the words White House Iraq Group and WHIG in its news pages
Give 'em Hell Harry!Technorati tags:White House Iraq Group;WHIG;WHIGgate;Harry Reid;Plamegate
Until further notice (or indictment), the phrase "Senior White House Advisor" should always be replaced with the words "Karl Rove"
from The Washington Post, "Trial Could Pit Libby's Interests Against Bush's"
"A senior White House adviser, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive topic, said the Bush team believes it dodged a bullet when Fitzgerald charged only Libby on Friday and then pointedly said in his news conference that the indictment should not be read as a condemnation of the war or its run-up."
Just once I'd love to see a sentence start with these words in the Post or the Times: "Karl Rove, speaking on the assumption that we would respect our 'promise' to protect his anonymity, ..." Is there ever anything that any anonymous senior advisors in any Administration (Republican or Democratic) reveals anonymously to their embedded media partners that isn't either a) a self-serving lie, or b) self-serving spin?