Ms. Wilson was compared to James Bond in the early days of the scandal, but it turns out she had been working for years at C.I.A. headquarters, not exactly a deep-cover position. Since being outed, she’s hardly been acting like a spy who’s worried that her former contacts are in danger.
At the time her name was printed, her face was still not that familiar even to most Washington veterans, but that soon changed. When her husband received a “truth-telling” award at a Nation magazine luncheon, he wept as he told of his sorrow at his wife’s loss of anonymity. Then he introduced her to the crowd.
And then, for any enemy agents who missed seeing her face at the luncheon but had an Internet connection, she posed with her husband for a photograph in Vanity Fair.
Mr. Wilson accused the White House of willfully ignoring his report showing that Iraq had not been seeking nuclear material from Niger. But a bipartisan report from the Senate Intelligence Committee concluded that his investigation had yielded little valuable information, hadn’t reached the White House and hadn’t disproved the Iraq-Niger link - in fact, in some ways it supported the link.
Mr. Wilson presented himself as a courageous truth-teller who was being attacked by lying partisans, but he himself became a Democratic partisan (working with the John Kerry presidential campaign) who had a problem with facts. He denied that his wife had anything to do with his assignment in Niger, but Senate investigators found a memo in which she recommended him.
Karl Rove’s version of events now looks less like a smear and more like the truth: Mr. Wilson’s investigation, far from being requested and then suppressed by a White House afraid of its contents, was a low-level report of not much interest to anyone outside the Wilson household.
So what exactly is this scandal about? Why are the villagers still screaming to burn the witch? Well, there’s always the chance that the prosecutor will turn up evidence of perjury or obstruction of justice during the investigation, which would just prove once again that the easiest way to uncover corruption in Washington is to create it yourself by investigating nonexistent crimes.
For now, though, it looks as if this scandal is about a spy who was not endangered, a whistle-blower who did not blow the whistle and was not smeared, and a White House official who has not been fired for a felony that he did not commit. And so far the only victim is a reporter who did not write a story about it.
Courtesy of the New York Times, fresh crow–or newt, as it were–is now being offered for all of you who have been up in indignant arms about Karl Rove and the Valerie Plame kerfuffle. As usual, the line forms on the Left.
July 16th, 2005 at 7:41:11 pm
As usual, the line forms on the Left.
Cause, you know, its not like the White House didn’t have anything to say about this. The Bush adminisration never made it seem like this was serious at all, nope, they never did anything like that.
Seems to me Andrew that this wasn’t just trumped up by the left like you so blindly claim it is.
the easiest way to uncover corruption in Washington is to create it yourself by investigating nonexistent crimes.
Hey, atleast we found out Karl Rove would break his confidentiality agreement, and then lie about it. Just waiting for the Bush administration to live up to its promises in getting rid of him. I won’t be holding my breath though, as they are not exactly good at being honest and truthful.
July 16th, 2005 at 7:42:13 pm
Oh, and for someone who was bitchin and moanin in a previous post about jumping to conclusions before an investigation has finished, you seem more than willing to do it now.
July 16th, 2005 at 8:57:57 pm
David, I more than look forward to the conclusion of the investigation. Meanwhile, why don’t you go wipe that egg off your face?
July 17th, 2005 at 12:41:11 am
<i>As usual, the line forms on the Left.</i>
Cause, you know, its not like the White House didn’t have anything to say about this. The Bush adminisration never made it seem like this was serious at all, nope, they never did anything like that.
Seems to me Andrew that this wasn’t just trumped up by the left like you so blindly claim it is.
<i>the easiest way to uncover corruption in Washington is to create it yourself by investigating nonexistent crimes.</i>
Hey, atleast we found out Karl Rove would break his confidentiality agreement, and then lie about it. Just waiting for the Bush administration to live up to its promises in getting rid of him. I won’t be holding my breath though, as they are not exactly good at being honest and truthful.
July 17th, 2005 at 12:42:13 am
Oh, and for someone who was bitchin and moanin in a previous post about jumping to conclusions before an investigation has finished, you seem more than willing to do it now.
July 17th, 2005 at 1:57:57 am
David, I more than look forward to the conclusion of the investigation. Meanwhile, why don’t you go wipe that egg off your face?
July 17th, 2005 at 2:16:34 am
From what exactly Andrew? I have never at any point said Rove WAS guilty, I was waiting for the evidence. He does appear to be guilty however of breaching confidentiality and of lying about being involved.
July 17th, 2005 at 7:16:34 am
From what exactly Andrew? I have never at any point said Rove WAS guilty, I was waiting for the evidence. He does appear to be guilty however of breaching confidentiality and of lying about being involved.
July 17th, 2005 at 11:20:09 am
Rove, Rove, Rove, Rove, Rove.
You can tell it is a political (not legal) scandal by the fact NO ONE mentions the name of the other leaker, eventhough they too have been outed by the media for their role. It’s all about Rove.
He should probably take it is a compliment. If the leaker was just some other White House staffer without political portfolio (as is the case) no one would really care. Oh, that is the case–no one cares about the other leaker, eventhough they are as guilty (if not more so) than the “evil” crimes of Rove.
I’m shocked to find there is gambling going on….
July 17th, 2005 at 2:45:19 pm
no one cares about the other leaker, eventhough they are as guilty (if not more so) than the “evil” crimes of Rove.
If both are guilty, then both should be punished. And even if not guilty of that very narrowly-defined crime, there is no doubt whatsoever that both breached the agreements they signed in order to get White House security clearance.
I hope you can excuse everyone from wanting to see Rove tarred and feathered (politically-speaking, of course). The man is a career political operative with a long history of hurting people who get in his way, including other Republicans (including but limited to Robert Mosbacher and John McCain.) He is a soulless, Machiavellian beast, and while that may make him well-suited to a career in the Bush White House, I’d prefer that he remain outside the halls of government.
July 17th, 2005 at 3:53:26 pm
Andrew L, I don’t think your analysis is correct at all.
First, we don’t know who the other leaker is yet.
Second, Rove is a highly public figure, and as Craig has pointed out many feel is a very unethical, dangerous man.
I mean, if Brendan Loy and Al Capone were caught in some crime together, say using a stolen credit card, don’t you think people would be more focused on being able to prosecute the carreer criminal than the poor blogger who lost his way?
July 17th, 2005 at 4:20:09 pm
Rove, Rove, Rove, Rove, Rove.
You can tell it is a political (not legal) scandal by the fact NO ONE mentions the name of the other leaker, eventhough they too have been outed by the media for their role. It’s all about Rove.
He should probably take it is a compliment. If the leaker was just some other White House staffer without political portfolio (as is the case) no one would really care. Oh, that is the case–no one cares about the other leaker, eventhough they are as guilty (if not more so) than the “evil” crimes of Rove.
I’m shocked to find there is gambling going on….
July 17th, 2005 at 6:28:49 pm
I think I’ll just stay in the middle of the road if you don’t mind, Andrew. You should try it sometime.
I love the DEEP DEEP kerfuffles that send an administration running for the “no comments” of an ongoing investigation. Of THEM.
July 17th, 2005 at 7:45:19 pm
<i>no one cares about the other leaker, eventhough they are as guilty (if not more so) than the “evil” crimes of Rove.</i>
If both are guilty, then both should be punished. And even if not guilty of that very narrowly-defined crime, there is no doubt whatsoever that both breached the agreements they signed in order to get White House security clearance.
I hope you can excuse everyone from wanting to see Rove tarred and feathered (politically-speaking, of course). The man is a career political operative with a long history of hurting people who get in his way, including other Republicans (including but limited to <a href=”http://craiggie.blogspot.com/2005/07/rove-fired-in-92-for-leaking-to-novak.html”>Robert Mosbacher</a> and <a href=”http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/08/28/moore_rove_swift_boat/index_np.html”>John McCain</a>.) He is a soulless, Machiavellian beast, and while that may make him well-suited to a career in the Bush White House, I’d prefer that he remain outside the halls of government.
July 17th, 2005 at 7:49:15 pm
The middle of the road is for carrion.
The “No comment” lines have a very calculated effect: They cause the liberals to stoke their anger and get increasingly worked up and agitated, so that when the truth finally comes out, the administration’s opponents look even stupider than if they had just waited patiently for the investigation to conclude on its own. After repeated occurrences, the administration’s opponents become less and less credible in the eyes of the voters, strengthening the administration’s hand in future political clashes.
July 17th, 2005 at 8:35:15 pm
Or perhaps Andrew, the middle of the road is for those of us who believe that the answer lies IN THE MIDDLE. Just because we aren’t party ideologues like yourself doesn’t mean we aren’t taking a position, we just think both sides are messed up.
“Lower taxes!!” cries the right
“Raise taxes!!” cries the left
“Um how about we find something in the middle that works” says the sane people.
You really should try the whole not being a blind partisan thing sometime, you might actually learn something.
July 17th, 2005 at 8:53:26 pm
Andrew L, I don’t think your analysis is correct at all.
First, we don’t know who the other leaker is yet.
Second, Rove is a highly public figure, and as Craig has pointed out many feel is a very unethical, dangerous man.
I mean, if Brendan Loy and Al Capone were caught in some crime together, say using a stolen credit card, don’t you think people would be more focused on being able to prosecute the carreer criminal than the poor blogger who lost his way?
July 17th, 2005 at 10:08:52 pm
Incidentally, David, though I know you meant to respond to Andrew Leyden, “Andrew L” could still refer to me.
The point, David, is not that people who take the middle of the road are less sane than those who don’t, but that they are liable to become political roadkill.
July 17th, 2005 at 10:54:24 pm
Yes, well the political system is broken and needs fixing and its not looking like either side is going to make it happen on their own.
July 17th, 2005 at 11:28:49 pm
I think I’ll just stay in the middle of the road if you don’t mind, Andrew. You should try it sometime.
I love the DEEP DEEP kerfuffles that send an administration running for the “no comments” of an ongoing investigation. Of THEM.
July 18th, 2005 at 12:40:11 am
No, Andrew. It’s not Clockwork Orange yet. We still vote and everything (although the high court did hijack that once). And as I said, try it sometime. It’s quite sane and balanced there.
July 18th, 2005 at 12:49:15 am
The middle of the road is for carrion.
The “No comment” lines have a very calculated effect: They cause the liberals to stoke their anger and get increasingly worked up and agitated, so that when the truth finally comes out, the administration’s opponents look even stupider than if they had just waited patiently for the investigation to conclude on its own. After repeated occurrences, the administration’s opponents become less and less credible in the eyes of the voters, strengthening the administration’s hand in future political clashes.
July 18th, 2005 at 1:35:15 am
Or perhaps Andrew, the middle of the road is for those of us who believe that the answer lies IN THE MIDDLE. Just because we aren’t party ideologues like yourself doesn’t mean we aren’t taking a position, we just think both sides are messed up.
“Lower taxes!!” cries the right
“Raise taxes!!” cries the left
“Um how about we find something in the middle that works” says the sane people.
You really should try the whole not being a blind partisan thing sometime, you might actually learn something.
July 18th, 2005 at 3:08:52 am
Incidentally, David, though I know you meant to respond to Andrew Leyden, “Andrew L” could still refer to me.
The point, David, is not that people who take the middle of the road are less sane than those who don’t, but that they are liable to become political roadkill.
July 18th, 2005 at 3:54:24 am
Yes, well the political system is broken and needs fixing and its not looking like either side is going to make it happen on their own.
July 18th, 2005 at 5:40:11 am
No, Andrew. It’s not Clockwork Orange yet. We still vote and everything (although the high court did hijack that once). And as I said, try it sometime. It’s quite sane and balanced there.
July 18th, 2005 at 8:46:05 am
We still vote and everything (although the high court did hijack that once)
Ugh… you just couldn’t resist, could you Mom?
The Supreme Court should not have intervened in the Florida election dispute, but they most definitely did not “hijack” anyone’s right to vote. Nor did they change the result, which would have been exactly the same if the controversy had been resolved the way it should have been (with Congress, rather than the Court, settling the dispute over the statistically tied state of Florida).
July 18th, 2005 at 1:46:05 pm
<i>We still vote and everything (although the high court did hijack that once)</i>
Ugh… you just couldn’t resist, could you Mom?
The Supreme Court should not have intervened in the Florida election dispute, but they most definitely did not “hijack” anyone’s right to vote. Nor did they change the result, which would have been exactly the same if the controversy had been resolved the way it should have been (with Congress, rather than the Court, settling the dispute over the statistically tied state of Florida).
August 13th, 2005 at 2:01:34 am
Testing
August 13th, 2005 at 2:02:59 am
testing 2
August 13th, 2005 at 2:07:41 am
testing 3
August 13th, 2005 at 8:01:16 pm
testing 4
August 13th, 2005 at 8:31:00 pm
Brendan is a right winger who thinks “Rush is Right.”
August 13th, 2005 at 8:32:02 pm
It took about 15 sec. for the comment to post.
August 13th, 2005 at 10:21:04 pm
Testing, testing, 1-to-15
August 13th, 2005 at 10:22:36 pm
Took even longer than 15… about 18 sec.
August 13th, 2005 at 10:24:36 pm
going to try to strace it now…
August 13th, 2005 at 11:01:02 pm
testing again with some slight changes to the system — although I think this is an issue somewhere on the border between MT and MySQL.
August 13th, 2005 at 11:46:03 pm
foo. bar. fubar.
August 14th, 2005 at 12:00:06 am
22 sec., Reliably.
Two things: the Berkeley DB config is setup, i.e.,
DataSource ./db
is in your mt.cfg file. This doesn’t make sense if you’re using MySQL. Dunno if this would affect performance or what, but might want to consider removing it.
Second — Charles, this is for you — how is NAT being done? I noticed the real IP is 10.220.10.99, but this isn’t the .84 public address. Any chance this could be put on the outside?
August 14th, 2005 at 12:24:13 am
FYI, search engines are already finding this place. Might want to set up a robots.txt file.
August 14th, 2005 at 9:25:16 pm
Testing. First test since removing the .db reference.
August 14th, 2005 at 9:25:55 pm
No change… 22 seconds.
August 15th, 2005 at 12:40:05 am
Damn you beotches, you’re filling up my mail with all your test comments!!!
“Testes, testes. One. Two. … Three?”
August 15th, 2005 at 12:40:52 am
Okay let’s see if I remember math….
August 15th, 2005 at 12:41:24 am
Yep, 22 seconds.
August 15th, 2005 at 9:49:40 am
want an strace again, so testing…again.
August 15th, 2005 at 9:55:45 am
eh?
August 15th, 2005 at 9:58:01 am
dagnabbit.
August 15th, 2005 at 9:01:12 pm
We could switch to a different post, but now we have to stay on this one, just to annoy Andrew. :)
I set up an identical installation of the blog in the cgi-bin, pointing to the same database… just wondering if having it in the cgi-bin will affect performance… let’s see…
August 15th, 2005 at 9:02:09 pm
It did affect speed… it made it slower!
25 seconds.
Next idea: remove plugins, install default templates. We shall see…
August 15th, 2005 at 9:03:42 pm
Hmm… or maybe it made the speed less predictable. That one took 20 seconds. WTF?
August 15th, 2005 at 9:06:04 pm
Okay, I’m calling the 25 and 20 flukes, and going back to the “no effect” theory, as that one was 22 seconds.
BTW, Charles and Brian, the CGI version publishes to:
http://66.237.232.84/cgiver/
I am going to install the default templates in the CGI version now, and see what happens.
August 15th, 2005 at 9:54:57 pm
Testing with standard templates…
August 15th, 2005 at 9:59:03 pm
Goodness. Is this the default layout? Weird.
August 15th, 2005 at 10:10:25 pm
Argh
August 15th, 2005 at 10:21:42 pm
ARRRGH
August 15th, 2005 at 11:33:07 pm
Hmm… what happened to the comment template??
Anyway… testing with plugins removed…
August 15th, 2005 at 11:33:43 pm
Aha! Only 8 seconds that time!
August 15th, 2005 at 11:34:48 pm
9 seconds that time. That’s still not good enough, though, and I can’t live without my plugins. Argh. Stupid MT! Why is the comment script so damn inefficient? I tried it on a brand new blog and it worked fine, thus proving that the size of the database is indeed the problem. Time to investigate WordPress?
August 16th, 2005 at 12:16:15 am
and yet another test
August 16th, 2005 at 12:25:23 am
again with the testing, oy!