One Scandal per Administration? No.
/in Bush Administration /by emptywheelI wrote a long comment in Kagro X’s latest impeachment post arguing that we need to demonstrate the systematic, ongoing corruption of the Republican party. Until we can show how often the Republicans have brought back discredited flunkies to pick up their corrupt plans where they left off, it will be difficult to show the importance of impeachment–the one recourse citizens have to ensure that these flunkies never return again. I’ve got a lot to say on this: we need to show how each scandal has built on the previous one, we need to move away from speaking in terms of individual administrations. But for now, I will argue that we need to move away from speaking in terms of discrete scandals.
Watergate, Iran-Contra, Abramoff (no mention of BCCI and S&L). That’s how we remember the scandals of the Nixon, Reagan-Bush, and Bush administrations. When we think of the first two, we think of them as events that reached some kind of resolution which therefore should be regarded as past, closed. And we treat them–even if we know this to be inaccurate–as one coherent scandal, one unified effort.
Where Is Abu Zubaydah?
/in Bush Administration, Terrorism, War /by emptywheelAm I the only one who is disturbed that our government has disappeared all the Al Qaeda leadership rather than dealing with them transparently?
I just finished James Risen’s new book in which Abu Zubaydah features prominently. First there’s the anecdote where, a few days after Abu Zubaydah’s capture and transfer to Thailand, Bush asked Tenet what kind of intelligence they had gotten from Zubaydah. None, Tenet explained, he’s still so doped up for his injuries he can’t talk coherently.
Bush turned to Tenet and asked: "Who authorized putting him on pain medication?" (22)
Then there’s the story near the end of the book about finding–and not pursuing–Zubaydah’s ATM cards. Don’t want to know who’s filling Zubaydah’s bank accounts, you see, for fear you’ll discover it’s your crack oil dealer.
Reading of Zubaydah’s capture made me ask, for the umpteenth time, why haven’t we hard of Zubaydah’s military tribunal and execution? Why are we still holding him in an undisclosed location, almost 4 years after we captured him, and presumably long after he’s been of any intelligence value?
Which Came First, Daou's Triangle, or the Egg?
/in Blogs Internet and New Media, Bush Administration, Press and Media /by emptywheelI’m not sure I buy it.
Lefty blogosphere is agog over Peter Daou’s latest assessment of Democratic woes. And while I absolutely agree with Daou’s description of the predominance of a Republican narrative…
Matthews, Moore, Murtha, and the Media:What’s the common thread running through the past half-decade of Bush’spresidency? What’s the nexus between the Swift-boating of Kerry, theSwift-boating of Murtha, and the guilt-by-association between Democratsand terrorists? Why has a seemingly endless string of administrationscandals faded into oblivion? Why do Democrats keep losing elections? It’s this: thetraditional media, the trusted media, the "neutral" media, have becomethe chief delivery mechanism of potent anti-Democratic and pro-Bushstorylines. And the Democratic establishment appears to be either ignorant of this political quandary or unwilling to fight it.
There’s a critical distinction to be made here: individual reporters may lean left, isolatednews stories may be slanted against the administration. What I’mdescribing is the wholesale peddling by the "neutral" press ofdeep-seated narratives, memes, and soundbites: simple, targeted talkingpoints that paint a picture of reality for the American public thatfavors the right and tarnishes the left.
…I don’t buy the picture of media responsibility Daou paints.
Reading Comprehension Can Be Fun
/in Bush Administration /by emptywheelSummary: In this post, I review Jason Leopold’s claim that Bush authorized domestic surveillance before 9/11. Leopold relies heavily on a December 2000 document to make his claim and cites it out of context. He includes three other sources to support his claim, but these sources are talking about different programs, not the domestic surveillance program James Risen first exposed. While Leopold collects several incidences of disconcerting surveillance, he doesn’t prove his central claim, purportedly disproving that Bush started the Risen program in response to 9/11.
Jason Leopold came out with what seemed to be a real scoop yesterday–the news that Bush ordered NSA surveillance of Americans before 9/11. Leopold quotes "people who worked at the NSA as encryption specialists" and James Risen’s book, but most of his scoop relies on a declassified agency report called "Transitions 2001." Now frankly, two of the quotes Leopold includes refute the claim that the NSA was illegally spying. For example, Leopold cites…
Director of the National Security Agency is obligated by law to keep Congress fully and currently formed of intelligence activities.
…and later cites NSA’s limitations under the Fourth Amendment (see below). But Leopold suggests the citations from the document support his contention that:
the document contradicts [Bush’s] assertion that the 9/11 attacks prompted him to take the unprecedented step of signing a secret executive order authorizing the NSA to monitor a select number of American citizens thought to have ties to terrorist groups.