so when do those impeachment hearings begin?

[natty dread]

Not with this congress of course...

In Court Filings, Cheney Aide Says Bush Approved Leak

By DAVID JOHNSTON and DAVID E. SANGER

WASHINGTON, April 6 — President Bush authorized Vice President Dick Cheney in July 2003 to permit Mr. Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis Libby Jr., to leak key portions of a classified prewar intelligence estimate on Iraq, according to Mr. Libby's grand jury testimony.

The testimony, cited in a court filing by the government late Wednesday, provides the first indication that Mr. Bush, who has long assailed leaks of classified information as a national security threat, played a direct role in the disclosure of the intelligence report on Iraq at a moment that the White House was trying to defend itself against charges that it had inflated the case against Saddam Hussein.

If Mr. Libby's account is accurate, it also involves Mr. Bush directly in the swirl of events surrounding the disclosure of the identity of an undercover C.I.A. officer.

The president has the legal power to declassify information, and Mr. Libby indicated in his testimony that the president's decision — which he said was conveyed through Mr. Cheney — gave him legal cover to pass on information contained in a National Intelligence Estimate.

A little more than a week later, under continuing pressure, the White House published a declassified version of the executive summary of the estimate, in an effort to make the case that Mr. Bush was justified in arguing, in his 2003 State of the Union address, that Iraq had sought to purchase uranium in Africa.

But the political impact of the disclosure could be significant. It suggests that Mr. Libby, who has been charged with perjury and obstruction in the C.I.A. leak case, may argue as part of his defense that any information he leaked was on the instructions of his two superiors, Mr. Cheney and Mr. Bush. However, the sections of the N.I.E. that Mr. Libby said he was freed to discuss make no mention of Valerie Plame, the C.I.A. officer who was exposed in the course of the arguments over the intelligence, prompting the leak investigation.

The disclosure prompted Democrats to demand that the White House be forthcoming about Mr. Bush's role. Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic leader, released a statement saying: "In light of today's shocking revelation, President Bush must fully disclose his participation in the selective leaking of classified information. The American people must know the truth."

The court filing, which was first reported this morning on the New York Sun Web site, said that Mr. Libby testified that the "Vice President advised defendant that the President had authorized defendant to disclose certain information in the NIE."

The prosecutors said that Mr. Libby testified that he recalled the circumstances "getting approval from the President through the Vice President to discuss material that would be classified but for that approval — were unique in his recollection."

The leak was intended, the court papers suggested, as a rebuttal to the Op-Ed article published in the New York Times on July 6, by Joseph C. Wilson, IV, a former ambassador and the husband of Ms. Plame. Mr. Wilson wrote that he had traveled to Africa in 2002 after Mr. Cheney had raised questions about possible nuclear purchases. Mr. Wilson wrote that he concluded it was "highly doubtful" Iraq had sought to nuclear fuel from Niger.

At Mr. Cheney's office, the Op-Ed article was viewed "as a direct attack on credibility of the Vice President (and the President) on a matter of signal importance: the rationale for the war in Iraq," according to the court papers.

The presidential authorization was provided, the court papers said, in advance of a meeting on July 8, 2003 between Mr. Libby and Judith Miller, then a reporter for the New York Times. Mr. Libby brought a brief abstract of the N.I.E.'s key judgments to the meeting with Ms. Miller in the lobby of the St. Regis Hotel about two blocks from the White House.

Mr. Libby testified, the prosecutors said, that he was "specifically authorized in advance of the meeting to disclose the key judgments of the classified N.I.E. to Miller on that occasion because it was thought that the N.I.E. was "pretty definitive" against what Ambassador Wilson had said and that the Vice President thought that it was "very important" for the key judgments of the N.I.E. to come out."

The court filing said that Mr. Libby said "he understood that he was to tell Miller, among other things, that a key judgment of the N.I.E. held that Iraq was 'vigorously trying to procure' uranium." Mr. Libby, the prosecutors, said, testified that the meeting with Ms. Miller was the "only time he recalled in his government experience when he disclosed a document to a reporter that was effectively declassified by virtue of the president's authorization that it be disclosed."

Ms. Miller never published anything about the contents of the intelligence estimate.

Mr. Libby testified that he first told Mr. Cheney that he could not conduct such a conversation with Ms. Miller because the intelligence estimate on Iraq was classified. Mr. Libby testified that Mr. Cheney later told him that Mr. Bush had authorized the release of "relevant portions."

In addition, Mr. Libby told the grand jury that he also spoke with David Addington, then a lawyer for Mr. Cheney, whom Mr. Libby regarded as an expert on national security law. "Mr. Addington opined that Presidential authorization to publicly disclose a document amounted to declassification of the document," the court filing said.

Mr. Libby testified that at the meeting, he did not discuss Mr. Wilson's wife, because "he had forgotten by that time that he learned about Ms. Wilson's C.I.A. employment a month earlier from the Vice President."

Ms. Miller, in her Oct. 16, 2005, account of the meeting, said that her notes showed that the two had discussed Mr. Wilson's wife, who, according to her notes, worked in a unit of the C.I.A. that is engaged in the intelligence assessments of unconventional weapons.

Ms. Miller said that Mr. Libby discussed a chronology of what she said he described as "credible evidence" of Iraq's efforts to acquire uranium. She made no reference to whether Mr. Libby referred to any material as derived from the intelligence estimate, but said that he alluded to two reports, one in 1999 and another in 2002, that seemed to support the contention that Iraq was interested in obtaining uranium.

[Monique]

I am reading a novel called Snow, which is set in Turkey, and the plot centers on corruption and cronyism at all levels of government and quasi-government...and on the tension between a secular state structure and religious extremists who are jockeying for positions of power. Pretty brutal stuff, and oh so brutally familiar. The details are different but the themes are exactly the same as the reality in the U.S. under George W. Bush. Democracy is a fucking farce as long as his administration is in power.

[Benny Profane]

Lame Duck? sheeeit.....that duck is in a fucking coma.
Let's not back the dumb fuck too far into a corner. God knows what he and Cheney will do to stay out of serious trouble.

[mday]

I hear that no meaningful business will be conducted by Congress until they finish debating the Mormon religion, how to baptize children, and whether atheists are superior beings. Oh wait, that's us.

Personally, I'm shocked, shocked, that our vice president or president had any complicity in this.

[nutcase]

Alright- my skiing season is pretty much over so might as well jump in a political thread. I find it interesting because so far there is no proof that Bush actually authorized leaking Plame's name- but I suppose that's probably what was insinuated when he authorized the leak. However- what I find really interesting is that it is arguable that as President of the USA he potentially was in effect declassifiying the documents by allowing them to be leaked.

It will be interesting to see how it plays out. On a common sense level it's pretty messed up given that he has all along said he was opposed to the fact that the info was leaked and that anyone who leaked the info should be kicked out of the White House. Ultimately I think history will judge him as one of the worst- if not the worst- presidents we have ever had. yet at the same time he has been on of the most significant presidents in terms of how he has impacted history.

[Greydon Clark]

I’m shocked this took so long to get posted here. I’m not shocked that the President and the VP were balls deep in this mess.

It is hilarious, the President leaked classified (or selectively declassified) documents in rebuttal to what the Executive branch perceived as “a direct attack on credibility of the Vice President (and the President) on a matter of signal importance: the rationale for the war in Iraq". Yet, Wilson could have written an op-ed piece everyday for a year and garnered less attention than the Bush/Cheney attempt to discredit him.

Hopefully America is paying attention, this is an election year.

[seatosky]

I am reading a novel called Snow, which is set in Turkey, and the plot centers on corruption and cronyism at all levels of government and quasi-government...and on the tension between a secular state structure and religious extremists who are jockeying for positions of power. Pretty brutal stuff, and oh so brutally familiar. The details are different but the themes are exactly the same as the reality in the U.S. under George W. Bush. Democracy is a fucking farce as long as his administration is in power.

Totally OT, but I'm currently about 3/4 of the way through the same book. Really enjoying it.

[ak_powder_monkey]

Nah everybody knows that checks and balences in government and holding the executive branch accountable makes the terrorists jump for joy.

[KillingCokes]

Hopefully America is paying attention, this is an election year.

Real Americans don't pay attention to politics, they pay attention to Wal Mart price specials. Besides who has time to vote when you have to work 2 jobs so you can survive after paying your taxes.

Nah everybody knows that checks and balences in government and holding the executive branch accountable makes the terrorists jump for joy.

But the sad thing is that every breakdown of our constitution is a victory for the terrorists. Bush gives them victory with the NSA Spying on Americans and almost every part of the Patriot Act.

[flatlander420]

Not soon enough!

[Jumper Bones]

Not with this congress of course...

what about the next one? the one we'll be getting after this november...my money for the impeachment is after the mid-terms. and it's 100% deserved (well, no shit...).

however...since Libby's already charged with perjury and obstruction of justice, how credible is anything he says from here on? how much weight can be placed on things he says, such as this? hasn't he lied under oath already at least once?

[Telekóptero]

yup, yet another cork in the P/VP ship has been pulled. i've always said i'd be very interested to see what is published about Bush and his admin. once the presidency is over but much to my joy, the shrub is bringing his show to town much earlier than expected. let the feeding frenzy begin.

[whatcomridaz]

Somebody needs to tell the little wanker selling out your nation is not the "Christian" thing to do. But do you really think Congress is going to impeach when 3/4 of them are guilty of leaking classified info as well? Its a business guys and it doesn't matter who is in power any more. Same shit different spoon. Stopping the career politician through term and service limits are the only thing that might save the beast

[Benny Profane]

yup, when there's actually a Dem majority after the November elections. It's not going to be pretty for the next two years. Don't turn on your AM radio, and stay away from gun owners.

[Cono Este]

I'm shocked that in less than a week they can have a Grand Jury investigate a Congresswoman who cut in line at the Capitol. Nice priorities our Bullshit Govt has.

I think I saw Gonzalez ticketing a skateboarder at 7-11 last night.

[MassLiberal]

I think I saw Gonzalez ticketing a skateboarder at 7-11 last night.

No, but he did say the president has the authority to tap calls between American citizens inside th country without a warrant.

[L7]

It continues to amaze me that Nixon was impeached for some dirty tricks probably orchestrated by an overzealous campaign manager that occurred before he took office. (or was it going into his second term?). Granted he lied and tried to cover it up while in office but it was a break and enter of a campaign office for god sakes.

Bush's admin has been linked to suicide (murder coverup?), false intelligence leading to a war, profiteering by corporations held at arm's length by his cronies, insider trading during one of the largest bankruptcies ever, tons of dirty tricks leading up to his first election and he hasn't even faced a serious inquiry about his actions yet. Maybe this will lead to one but I expect it to be swept away like all the others.

I just don't get it really. If he's clean he should stand up and face the fire and prove it. If not.... burn the fucker down.

[Woodsy]

If the president does it its not illegal'
-Nixon


"if the president leaks it, its declassified"

-Bush

2 points
1) the democrats cant even support a motion for Censure, and they are going to impeach? Kelly Clarkson has more balls than they do

2)withthe threat of easily justifiable impeachment (implied threat of, see point 1) the republican party is going to go BALLS OUT LIKE XOVER UP LCC ON A 3 FOOT BLUEBIRD DAY in this election.
Rallying their Base (check how many proposals there are to prohibit gays from adopting on the ballot already in key states) and pouring their money into key races.

If you care, vote. Get others tovote.

This really matters.
Now more than ever.

[Grange]

I bet if Democrats take over the Congress they will hold hearings on Bush's wiretapping and then claim they discovered enough information to try and impeach him.

[mr_gyptian]

Here I thought it was just the NYT editorial staff and Andrew Sullivan that couldn't read. However, the only thing this admission by Libby tells us is that Bush and Cheney authorized the partial leak of the NIE to discredit a dishonest critic, Joe Wilson.

that's it, nothing about Plame. Nothing about classified information.

again, nice try guys.

I swear, half the time I think the NYT editorial board is on Rove's payroll.

[MassLiberal]

I bet if Democrats take over the Congress they will hold hearings on Bush's wiretapping and then claim they discovered enough information to try and impeach him.

Why in god's name would the democrats want to impeach? So that the republicans can try to clean up their mess?

No, the democrats didn't want to rally behind censure, even though it was the correct thing to do, because they didn't want the Republican base whipped up to a frenzy. As it stands right now, a lot of republicans will probably stay home on election day, giving the advantage to the dems. If they were to take over the house, they would pass resolution after resolution taking power away from THIS president, and form committees up to wazoo to investigate wrongdoing whom would issue their reports in summer 2008. Securing the white house for the dem candidate,

Trust me, impeachment is NOT on the agenda.

[MassLiberal]

Here I thought it was just the NYT editorial staff and Andrew Sullivan that couldn't read. However, the only thing this admission by Libby tells us is that Bush and Cheney authorized the partial leak of the NIE to discredit a dishonest critic, Joe Wilson.

that's it, nothing about Plame. Nothing about classified information.

again, nice try guys.

I swear, half the time I think the NYT editorial board is on Rove's payroll.

Mr. Gyption, you are flat wrong. What this proves is that Bush is a liar who repeatedly stated that he know nothing about the leak, and that whomever was part of it should be removed from the white house.

What Bush did was not illegal, just incredibly dishonest and disheartening to his base.

[Grange]

Why in god's name would the democrats want to impeach? So that the republicans can try to clean up their mess?

No, the democrats didn't want to rally behind censure, even though it was the correct thing to do, because they didn't want the Republican base whipped up to a frenzy. As it stands right now, a lot of republicans will probably stay home on election day, giving the advantage to the dems. If they were to take over the house, they would pass resolution after resolution taking power away from THIS president, and form committees up to wazoo to investigate wrongdoing whom would issue their reports in summer 2008. Securing the white house for the dem candidate,

Trust me, impeachment is NOT on the agenda.

My opinion is the Democrats would want to impeach Bush for two reasons. First to show their strength and unity against the opposition. This would solidify their base and considering Bush's approval ratings would probably go over fairly well with the majority of Americans. Second it would be a payback to the Republicans for embarrassing the Democrats when they informed the country that the top Democrat got a blowjob from a fat chick.

[Cono Este]

My opinion is the Democrats would want to impeach Bush for two reasons. First to show their strength and unity against the opposition. This would solidify their base and considering Bush's approval ratings would probably go over fairly well with the majority of Americans. Second it would be a payback to the Republicans for embarrassing the Democrats when they informed the country that the top Democrat got a blowjob from a fat chick.

And it would be totally worth it, to trash whats left of our country and its reputation in name of Vengence!!

Yes Payback!!!!!! You said it.

[MassLiberal]

My opinion is the Democrats would want to impeach Bush for two reasons. First to show their strength and unity against the opposition. This would solidify their base and considering Bush's approval ratings would probably go over fairly well with the majority of Americans. Second it would be a payback to the Republicans for embarrassing the Democrats when they informed the country that the top Democrat got a blowjob from a fat chick.

There are a few problems there.

Firstly, the overwhelming majority of americans viewed the republican impeachment negatively, and it wound up hurting the republicans in 1998. So why shoot a dead horse when it will only seem petty and political. Once the house is won, censure the president, and leave it at that. Bush isn't goin to get any better at presidenting in the next two years.

Secondly, The country isn't quite sure it wants the president impeached. If the Democrats ran on an "impeach Bush" platform, they would almost certainly have a tougher time gaining control of congress, since that would motivate the evangelicals to vote (right now, they are starting to make some noise that the administration hasn't done enough for the community, and are threatening to stay home unless a more actively pro-life, pro-christian agenda is taken up. However, given the recent overstep in South Dakota, the GOP no longer has the leeway to do this and still keep moderates in their camp).

Thirdly, Would you want Cheney as president? (he almost certainly would be if Dems took over the house)

Fourthly, If bush is impeached, it gives the republicans a chance to clean up their mess and regain power. This happened in CT, the governor was impeached for some sketchy shit he did, and the new Governor has unprecedented approval ratings and will easily win reelection in a dem state because he changed the "culture of corruption"