Links
Archives
- 01/01/2004 - 02/01/2004
- 11/01/2004 - 12/01/2004
- 12/01/2004 - 01/01/2005
- 01/01/2005 - 02/01/2005
- 02/01/2005 - 03/01/2005
- 03/01/2005 - 04/01/2005
- 04/01/2005 - 05/01/2005
- 05/01/2005 - 06/01/2005
- 06/01/2005 - 07/01/2005
- 07/01/2005 - 08/01/2005
- 08/01/2005 - 09/01/2005
- 09/01/2005 - 10/01/2005
- 10/01/2005 - 11/01/2005
- 11/01/2005 - 12/01/2005
- 12/01/2005 - 01/01/2006
- 01/01/2006 - 02/01/2006
- 02/01/2006 - 03/01/2006
- 03/01/2006 - 04/01/2006
- 04/01/2006 - 05/01/2006
- 05/01/2006 - 06/01/2006
- 06/01/2006 - 07/01/2006
- 07/01/2006 - 08/01/2006
- 08/01/2006 - 09/01/2006
- 09/01/2006 - 10/01/2006
- 10/01/2006 - 11/01/2006
- 11/01/2006 - 12/01/2006
- 12/01/2006 - 01/01/2007
- 01/01/2007 - 02/01/2007
- 02/01/2007 - 03/01/2007
- 03/01/2007 - 04/01/2007
- 04/01/2007 - 05/01/2007
- 07/01/2007 - 08/01/2007
- 08/01/2007 - 09/01/2007
- 09/01/2007 - 10/01/2007
- 10/01/2007 - 11/01/2007
- 07/01/2008 - 08/01/2008
A tribute to Condoleeza Rice and George W. Bush who, despite voluminious evidence to the contrary, said, "I don't think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center, take another one and slam it into the Pentagon, that they would try to use an airplane as a missile," adding that "even in retrospect" there was "nothing" to suggest that" and "I don't think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees," respectively.
Friday, December 30, 2005
And you thought FEMA was slow to respond:
The Justice Department is opening an investigation into the person or persons who leaked the story about Bush's use of the NSA to bypass the FISA Court to conduct warrantless searches of American citizens. According to Mr. Bush, this leak jeopardized our efforts in the never-ending fight against terror.
Part of this story is how the administration convinced the New York Times to delay publication due to national security concerns. The Times, apparently, sat on the story for over a year and presumably had the story prior to the 2004 elections.
So here's the rub. The administration has known for well over a year that someone had leaked what they called classified information. This information purportedly was vital to the national security interests yet they did not begin an investigation until now. So why is that? Is it because they knew what they were doing was illegal and could impact the 2004 elections? Or, do they only care when the information causes them some embarassment.
If the leak was a detrimental as they claim, what's the excuse for not investigating until now? Something is wrong with this picture.
|
Part of this story is how the administration convinced the New York Times to delay publication due to national security concerns. The Times, apparently, sat on the story for over a year and presumably had the story prior to the 2004 elections.
So here's the rub. The administration has known for well over a year that someone had leaked what they called classified information. This information purportedly was vital to the national security interests yet they did not begin an investigation until now. So why is that? Is it because they knew what they were doing was illegal and could impact the 2004 elections? Or, do they only care when the information causes them some embarassment.
If the leak was a detrimental as they claim, what's the excuse for not investigating until now? Something is wrong with this picture.
