CBlountBlogs

Nancy Pelosi, John Murtha in Anti-war Scheme

News reports say that House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi "reversed course" yesterday by endorsing Rep. John Murtha's call for an "immediate redeployment" of U.S. forces out of Iraq.

"We should follow the lead of Congressman John Murtha, who has put forth a plan to make American safer, to make our military stronger and to make Iraq more stable," Pelosi said. "That is what the American people and our troops deserve."

However, the San Francisco Democrat's "reversal" was really nothing of the kind. In fact, Pelosi and Murtha began scheming to put President Bush on the defensive over the Iraq war at least three weeks ago.

Most of the press painted Murtha's Nov. 17 call for a pullout as a spontaneous burst of conscience, a perception that helped gin-up pressure on the White House.

But according to Newsweek's Howard Fineman, the entire episode had been cooked up by Pelosi and her longtime Pennsylvania pal.

"[Pelosi] was anxious to open a second axis of attack on Iraq - and was aware of [Murtha's] growing antagonism toward the war," he reported.

"The two met and agreed that he would make his case in private to the party conference. After that, on his own, he would introduce a resolution calling for withdrawal of troops from Iraq 'at the earliest practicable date.'"

The scheme, Fineman said, called for "Pelosi and the other liberals [to] keep their distance, while their own Marine charged up the Hill. Framed by long rows of American flags at a press conference, [Murtha] denounced the Iraq war as a 'flawed policy wrapped in an illusion.'"

After Murtha rolled out Act One of their plot, Pelosi played dumb - just as the plan called for.

Asked whether she backed his call for a withdrawal, she told reporters: "Mr. Murtha speaks for himself."

The Washington Post noted: "At her afternoon news conference, Pelosi was meticulous in avoiding any agreement with Murtha's 'very provocative' statement."

"But do you agree with the call for immediate withdrawal?" a reporter asked.
Pelosi replied: "As I said, that was Mr. Murtha's statement."

In fact, Pelosi and Murtha are close allies in the House - so much so that the Pennsylvania Democrat actually managed her campaign to become House Minority Leader.

And it looks like the two of them have been spinning their anti-war schemes for some time now.

When Murtha called the Iraq war "unwinnable" at a May 2004 press conference, Pelosi was standing by his side.

Moments before, she had introduced Murtha to reporters as "one of the most recognized experts on defense in the country."

Before he spoke, the San Francisco Democrat seemed to know exactly what Murtha was going to say, announcing that her defense expert would be delivering a "wake up call for the administration."

Rush Limbaugh Exposes Chuck ‘Schumer’s Plumbers’

Rush Limbaugh calls them "Schumer’s Plumbers” – two Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee staffers who worked for Senator Chuck Schumer and are now accused of illegally obtaining the credit report of a Republican candidate for the Senate.

The two staffers have resigned, and Sen. Schumer – chairman of the DSCC – denies any involvement.

In his latest must-read "Limbaugh Letter,” Rush writes that the media is continuing a cover-up of the scandal.

Limbaugh notes that despite Schumer’s denial of any involvement, his organization is picking up the $400-an-hour tab for the pair’s attorney.

The Senator from New York "has presided over a genuine scandal the Old Media has ignored,” Rush reports. "In a dirty tricks scheme worthy of the infamous Watergate ‘plumbers,’ two of Schumer’s DSCC staffers took their opposition research assignment to the max: preparing to smear Maryland Lieutenant Governor Michael Steel, a Republican candidate for Senate.”

DSCC research director Katie Barge – who came to Schumer directly from the liberal George Soros-funded Web site Media Matters – and staffer Lauren Weiner used Steele’s Social Security number, reportedly obtained from court records, to "fraudulently and illegally obtain his credit report,” according to Investor’s Business Daily.

As NewsMax reported earlier, the Fair Credit Reporting Act makes it a federal crime to knowingly and willfully obtain a person’s credit report without their consent or under false pretenses.

The felony is punishable with a fine and up to two years in prison.

Schumer, ironically, last April introduced a bill aimed at preventing identity theft.

But "he has not abandoned his dirt-diggers,” according to the Limbaugh Letter, and is paying "for Barge and Weiner’s attorney William Lawler III – the Democrat-infamy lawyer who represented ex-Gov. Jim McGreevey (D-N.J.) during his 2004 sex scandal.

"And the anti-Steele mud is still being slung.”

The Senatorial campaign of Steele, an African-American, blasted as "gutter racism” a blog containing a doctored photo showing Steele in minstrel makeup – part of what the Steele camp believe is a coordinated Democratic attack on the Republican.

Democrats have reportedly also called him "Uncle Tom” and "Sambo” and pelted him with Oreo cookies during a 2002 campaign debate.

Steele is seeking to fill the seat of Democratic Sen. Paul Sarbanes, who is retiring.

Democrats are hoping to increase their Senate numbers in 2006, and losing Maryland’s "safe” seat to Steele could spell disaster for that plan.

"I annoy them,” said Steele, "because I’m an independent-thinking black man who has not bought into their lies and rhetoric.”

Dennis Hastert Challenges John Kerry's 'Coward' Comments

The already ugly debate over the war in Iraq just got uglier.

In a written appeal to supporters, Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., accused House Speaker Dennis Hastert of calling Democratic Rep. John Murtha a coward.

Ever since Murtha, a decorated Marine and longtime supporter of the military, called for the immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, Republicans and Democrats have engaged in a verbal war, questioning each other's patriotism, support for the troops and right to criticize.

Writing to supporters the day after Murtha's Nov. 17 announcement, Kerry said, "You and I have to make it absolutely clear that we won't stand for Republican `Swift Boat' style attacks on Jack Murtha."

Kerry, the Democratic nominee for president in 2004 who was savaged by a conservative political group that questioned his Vietnam War service, said the Republican attack machine had set its sights on Murtha, and noted: "Dennis Hastert - the Speaker of the House who never served - accused Jack Murtha of being a coward."

However, Hastert's first response to Murtha, D-Pa., while blistering, never explicitly called Murtha a coward. Neither did a subsequent Internet blog, in which Hastert, R-Ill., softened his remarks considerably.

"I need everyone to understand that I have known Congressman (John) Murtha a long time," Hastert wrote just before Thanksgiving. "He's a good man. I have the utmost respect for him. In fact, I'm pretty sure he knows that. I disagreed with the pullout plan he announced last week."

But Hastert's initial response to Murtha's withdrawal announcement accused him and the Democratic Party of adopting a policy of "cut and run."

Furthermore, Hastert said Murtha and the Democrats "want us to retreat. They want us to wave the white flag of surrender to the terrorists of the world." And he said, "We must not cower like European nations who are now fighting terrorists on their soil."

A spokeswoman for Kerry said the senator was reacting to Hastert's use of the word "cower" and said that the speaker and other Republican Party leaders "were all calling (Murtha) a coward."

"That was the implication," said Jenny Backus, the spokeswoman for Kerry's political action committee, which sent out the letter urging people to complain about "these vicious smear tactics" to their elected representatives, local talk radio shows and local newspapers.

"John Kerry will stand up and defend the right of any American to speak out about what is happening in Iraq without having their patriotism attacked by the White House and the Republican Party, especially when those who did not serve dare to attack the patriotism of those who have," Backus said Sunday.

While Hastert never called Murtha a coward, freshman Rep. Jean Schmidt, R-Ohio, seemed to during a debate on the House floor.

"Cowards cut and run, Marines never do," said Schmidt, setting off a chorus of catcalls and hisses that forced her to withdraw her remarks. Later she said she did not know that Murtha was a decorated Marine who saw combat in Vietnam, earning two Purple Hearts and a Bronze Star.

The White House similarly launched a scorching attack against Murtha, comparing him to left-wing filmmaker Michael Moore and labeling his call for a withdrawal from Iraq "baffling."

But the high-octane grenades against Murtha seemed to backfire, and eventually President Bush called the congressman a good person with whom he simply disagreed.

A representative for Hastert was less forgiving of Kerry, however, and used the opportunity to make the case for American troops to stay the course.

"Sen. Kerry's comments used for campaign fundraising purposes are simply over-the-top, extremely inappropriate and factually incorrect," Ron Bonjean, a spokesman for Hastert, said Sunday.

"As he has said, the speaker has the utmost respect for Rep. Murtha. However, the House of Representatives has overwhelmingly voted against and most of America disagrees with Sen. Kerry and Rep. Murtha's policy of immediate withdrawal or redeployment of U.S. troops in Iraq," Bonjean said. "One does not have to serve in the military to recognize that the policy of retreat and defeat is the wrong approach."

Democrats Recruiting War Vets for 2006

Maj. Ladda (Tammy) Duckworth, an Iraqi war veteran who lost her legs when a rocket-propelled grenade struck her Black Hawk helicopter, invited Rahm Emanuel, the Democrats' master strategist in the House of Representatives, to Walter Reed Army Medical Center one day to meet some recovering vets from their home state of Illinois. "We were walking down the hall and you could see the incredible response to her and her leadership," Emanuel told Newsweek. "She goes to see other troops to keep their spirits up."

Duckworth recently returned home to Chicago's affluent suburbs to begin what looked like an unofficial campaign for the open congressional seat now held by retiring Republican Rep. Henry Hyde. Still on active duty, Duckworth cannot declare her candidacy or talk politics to the media. But according to Democratic leaders, she's their preferred candidate, according to a report in the current issue of Newsweek.

Duckworth is part of a new breed of macho Democrats, joining eight Iraq veterans who have already announced themselves as candidates in next year's congressional elections. (The party is also reaching out to veterans of wars in Afghanistan, Bosnia and Vietnam, as well as former CIA officers and FBI agents). These Democrats don't offer a unified strategy on how to leave Iraq. But they represent the most visible sign of the sea change in politics over the past year, report Senior White House Correspondent Richard Wolffe and Washington Correspondent Jonathan Darman in the Dec. 5 issue of Newsweek. Recent polls show Democrats running neck-and-neck with Republicans on terrorism and comfortably ahead on Iraq.

The vets also represent the Democrats' best hope of burying their GOP-crafted caricature as the Mommy party of John Kerry -- unable to defend the country from terrorists or themselves from political attack. "A macho Democrat is someone who isn't afraid to stand up for what they believe in, to tell their story, to fight back when they're unfairly attacked," says John Lapp, executive director of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

Another vet Emanuel found is Chris Carney, who is running for a House seat in northeastern Pennsylvania. Carney is a lieutenant commander in the U.S. Naval Reserve, but his specialty is intel and counterterrorism. That took him inside the Bush administration as a Pentagon adviser, where he argued the case that there were links between al-Qaida and Saddam Hussein. As a uniformed officer, Carney defended the road to war even as he began harboring concerns about its execution -- the lack of troops on the ground and the absence of planning for a possible insurgency. He decided to run -- as a Democrat, his lifelong affiliation -- in part to reshape policy on the war, advocating aphased withdrawal with clear targets. "For every trained up battalion of Iraqi security forces, an American battalion should get to come home," he told Newsweek.

The White House says it doesn't matter who the candidate is: the Democrats cannot argue from a position of strength on the war given the depth of antiwar sentiment inside their base. Other Republicans say the war isn't going to affect the '06 elections either way. "Local dynamics will trump everything," insists Tom Reynolds, chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee. Reynolds dismisses the Democratic veterans' strategy as "just a bunch of hoopla," saying his goal is simply to recruit the best candidates.

Late Nite Jokes

Leno

It’s TGIF. Do you know what that means? Thanksgiving is finished.

Did anyone have one of these turduckens? Do you know about these? It’s a turkey stuffed inside a duck stuffed inside a chicken. That pretty much sounds like the bird flu trifecta!

President Bush announced that the White House turkey they had this year was stuffed but not tortured.

The Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade has a new slogan, "Incoming!”

You probably heard this story, the M&M balloon in the Macy’s parade struck a light post and was punctured, injuring some spectators. That’s when you know you’re in New York, even the balloons are mugging people.

President Bush is on another six-day vacation at his Texas ranch. He wanted to come back today but he couldn’t figure out how to work that door.

Thanksgiving is Bill Clinton's favorite holiday. It's the one time of year he can undo his pants at the dinner table and not get sued.

The former head of FEMA, Michael Brown, has decided to go into business for himself as an emergency management consultant. That's like Robert Blake deciding to become a marriage counselor.

He’s even got a great slogan - when you call Michael Brown, you know it’s a disaster.

Rock star Elton John and his long time companion David Furnish will get married next month in England. Elton said it will be a small low keyed affair. You know Elton, he hates to be showy.

Last night NBC showed back-to-back episodes of Donald Trump’s "The Apprentice”. And really, what’s more fun than firing people on Thanksgiving?

Letterman

You out of dinner with relatives guys will do anything to get!

I want to get through the show real fast because afterwards I’m leaving for my ranch in Crawford.

What I like about Thanksgiving is seeing all the relatives you haven’t seen in a long time, all the family is there you haven’t seen in a while – and opening up old psychological wounds.

Every Thanksgiving this happens with every family, either before or after the dinner. At some point someone turns to mom and says, "How long has dad been drinking like this?”

Did you see the parade? How about that? Once again it was won by a guy from Kenya.

A funny thing happened at our Thanksgiving. Mom lost her cell phone and then later while at dinner the turkey started to vibrate.

Time for one of our holiday classics. Turkey has tryptophan in it which makes you tired, it makes your drowsy, so here’s a tip, this is what mom does. When she’s ready to put the turkey in the oven, she puts the stuffing in, and then adds just a tablespoon of crack.

Al-Qaida Devastated by U.S. Offensive

The U.S. military's recent offensive in western Iraq has had a devastating impact on the al-Qaida-backed insurgency, with coalition forces killing over 700 terrorists and capturing 1,500 in the last two months alone.

"It's been very successful," Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch told a briefing in Baghdad on Wednesday, referring to a series of security offensives conducted by U.S. and Iraq forces in Anbar province since September 28.

Though media reports suggest recent U.S. casualties are due to deteriorating security conditions in Iraq as a whole, most were incurred during the new offensive - dubbed "Operation Steel Curtain."

In quotes picked up by Reuters, Gen. Lynch noted that despite the heavy combat, U.S. troop casualties had fallen more than 30 percent in November compared with last month. During the November 2004 assault on Fallujah, the monthly casualty rate was nearly twice what it is now.

The Anbar operations, and others in the northern Iraq city of Mosul, have been focused on foreign fighters and militants linked to al-Qaida's chief of operations in Iraq, Abu Musab al Zarqawi, Gen. Lynch said.

Noting that Zarqawi was nearly captured last week, Gen. Lynch said the close call was a result of the terror group's deteriorating position in the country.

"We come close to Zarqawi continuously," the top military man explained, adding, "At one point in time in the not too distant future, we will capture or kill him."

Barack Obama Won't Admit Byrd Error

Sen. Barack Obama is blasting President Bush for not admitting alleged mistakes he made in waging the Iraq war.

But the up-and-coming black Democrat still has yet to acknowledge his own mistake in endorsing and raising campaign funds for notorious one-time Ku Klux Klansman, Sen. Robert Byrd.

On the Iraq war, Obama told the Washington Post on Tuesday:

"Straight answers to critical questions. That's what we don't have right now. Members of both parties and the American people have now made clear that it is simply not enough for the president to simply say 'We know best' and 'Stay the course.' "

But Obama still hasn't given a straight answer about his endorsement for the former Grand Cyclops, who, until recently, was still using the "N"-word in television interviews.

In a fundraising letter issued on Byrd's behalf earlier this year, the celebrated black Democrat declared:

"In 2006, Senator Byrd will be the target of Republicans because he stands up for what he believes. Will you join me in supporting Senator Byrd's campaign for re-election?"

And just what does Sen. Byrd believe?

After leaving the Klan in 1946 the West Virginia Democrat remained an unabashed admirer of the anti-black terror group. "The Klan is needed today as never before and I am anxious to see its rebirth," he urged in a letter to the group's Grand Imperial Wizard later that year.

Byrd led the filibuster of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and called notorious white supremacist Sen. Richard B. Russell, who was chiefly remembered for blocking anti-lynching legislation, "my mentor." In 1972 Byrd sponsored legislation to name the Senate's main office building after Russell.

Still, the West Virginia Democrat's well-documented history of racism hasn't fazed the Senate's lone black Democrat. Obama's springtime fundraising pitch saved Byrd's flagging campaign, raising a record $823,000 for the ex-Klansman in just 48 hours.

If Sen. Obama is having any second thoughts about supporting the man who once compared his people to "the darkest specimens of the wilds," he has yet to express them publicly.

CNN Explains the 'X' Hex on Cheney

A technical glitch – and not political bias – caused a large black X to appear briefly over the image of Vice President Cheney on CNN while he was giving a speech Monday morning, the network said.

The X appeared for only one-eighth of a second, but the fleeting image provided plenty of ammunition for conservative bloggers on the Internet, the New York Sun reports.

The bloggers hinted that the X could have been a deliberate subliminal message. But CNN spokeswoman Christa Robinson called it a "very, very insignificant" technical glitch.

"Upon seeing this unfortunate but very brief graphic, CNN management immediately investigated," the network said in a statement. "We obviously regret that it happened, and are working on the equipment to ensure it is not repeated."

The statement stressed that the incident was a "technical malfunction" and was not linked to a human error, where political bias could come into play.

On the air Tuesday, a CNN anchor and a technician said the X graphic was called a "switcher” and was used in the control room to cue tape. CNN could not explain exactly how the glitch occurred.

It came shortly after 11 a.m. during a live broadcast of a speech by Cheney at the American Enterprise Institute.

The vice president was promoting the Bush administration's policy in Iraq.

Democrats Speak Out on WMD

Perhaps Senator Harry Reid (D-Nev.) should have done some research before charging the Bush administration with "manufacturing” and "manipulating” pre-war intelligence relating to Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction programs.

In particular, Reid should have researched statements made by several prominent members of his own Democratic Party.

Republicans have circulated numerous pre-war Democratic statements on weapons of mass destruction since Reid blurred the line between the claims of the Democratic Party and the slanders of Michael Moore. Reid on Nov. 1 invoked Rule 21, accusing the Bush administration of purposely misleading the public in the run-up to the Iraq war.

Bottom Line: If the Bush administration was lying about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, then so too were many leading Democrats

The following is a list of statements made by prominent Democrats on Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction program:

Senator John Kerry (D-Mass.)

"According to the CIA's report, all U.S. intelligence experts agree that Iraq is seeking nuclear weapons. There is little question that Saddam Hussein wants to develop nuclear weapons."

Congressional Record, October 9, 2002

Senator Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.)

"In the four years since the inspectors, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capability to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."

Congressional Record, October 10, 2002

Senator Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.)

"[It] is Hussein's vigorous pursuit of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons, and his present and potential future support for terrorist acts and organizations, that make him a terrible danger to the people to the United States."

Congressional Record, October 10, 2002

Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.)

"We must eliminate that [potential nuclear] threat now before it is too late. But that isn't just a future threat. Saddam's existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose real threats to America today, tomorrow. ... [He] is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East. He could make these weapons available to many terrorist groups, third parties, which have contact with his government. Those groups, in turn, could bring those weapons into the United States and unleash a devastating attack against our citizens. I fear that greatly."

Congressional Record, October 10, 2002

Senator Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.)

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.”

Remarks at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, October 27, 2002

Senator Chris Dodd (D-Conn.)

"There is no question that Iraq possesses biological and chemical weapons and that he seeks to acquire additional weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons. That is not in debate. I also agree with President Bush that Saddam Hussein is a threat to peace and must be disarmed, to quote President Bush directly."

Congressional Record , October 8, 2002

President Bill Clinton

"In the next century, the community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now - a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists, drug traffickers, or organized criminals who travel the world among us unnoticed. If we fail to respond today, Saddam, and all those who would follow in his footsteps, will be emboldened tomorrow by the knowledge that they can act with impunity, even in the face of a clear message from the United Nations Security Council, and clear evidence of a weapons of mass destruction program."

Remarks at the Pentagon , February 17, 1998

"[L]et's imagine the future. What if he fails to comply and we fail to act, or we take some ambiguous third route, which gives him yet more opportunities to develop this program of weapons of mass destruction and continue to press for the release of the sanctions and continue to ignore the solemn commitments that he made? Well, he will conclude that the international community has lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating destruction. And some day, some way, I guarantee you he'll use the arsenal. And I think every one of you who has really worked on this for any length of time, believes that, too."

Remarks at the Pentagon, February 17, 1998

"Other countries possess weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles. With Saddam, there is one big difference: He has used them, not once, but repeatedly. Unleashing chemical weapons against Iranian troops during a decade-long war. Not only against soldiers, but against civilians, firing Scud missiles at the citizens of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Iran. And not only against a foreign enemy, but even against his own people, gassing Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq. The international community had little doubt then, and I have no doubt today, that left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again."

Remarks at the White House , December 16, 1998

Vice President Al Gore

"[I]f you allow someone like Saddam Hussein to get nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, chemical weapons, biological weapons, how many people is he going to kill with such weapons? He's already demonstrated a willingness to use these weapons; he poison gassed his own people. He used poison gas and other weapons of mass destruction against his neighbors. This man has no compunctions about killing lots and lots of people."

Larry King Live, December 16, 1998

"Remember, Peter, this is a man who has used poison gas on his own people and on his neighbors repeatedly. He's trying to get ballistic missiles, nuclear weapons, chemical and biological weapons. He could be a mass murderer of the first order of magnitude. We are not going to allow that to happen."

ABC News’ "Special Report,” December 16, 1998

"We know that [Saddam] has stored away secret supplies of biological weapons and chemical weapons throughout his Country."

Remarks to the Commonwealth Club of California, San Francisco, Calif., September 23, 2002

Secretary Of State Madelyn Albright

"Countering terror is one aspect of our struggle to maintain international security and peace. Limiting the dangers posed by weapons of mass destruction is a second. Saddam Hussein's Iraq encompasses both of these challenges.”

Remarks at the American Legion Convention, New Orleans, La., August 9, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [America], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risk that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face. And it is a threat against which we must and will stand firm. In discussing Iraq, we begin by knowing that Saddam Hussein, unlike any other leader, has used weapons of mass destruction even against his own people."

CNN "Showdown With Iraq: International Town Meeting," February 18, 1998

Defense Secretary William Cohen

Cohen appeared on ABC’s "This Week” in 1997 to talk about Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction. To illustrate the danger, he brought a five-pound bag of sugar.

Cohen: It’s important when we talk about weapons of mass destruction that we translate that into something that the American people, and hopefully, the world community can understand. If you take a five pound bag of sugar and accept – call this anthrax (holding up a 5-pound bag of table sugar). This amount of anthrax could be spread over a city – let’s say the size of Washington. It could destroy at least half the population of that city. If you had even more amounts ...

One of the things we found with anthrax is that one breath and you are likely to face death within five days. One small particle of anthrax could produce death within five days.

VX is a nerve agent. One drop from this particular thimble as such – one single drop will kill you within a few minutes.

Cokie Roberts: Would you put that bag down please.

Cohen: Now I want to point out – I will spill it on the table – point out that he has had enormous amounts and I’d like to go to some of the lies that have been told about this, because originally, if we could look at this particular chart, the original declaration of Iraq, he said he had small quantities of nerve agent for research. We found almost four tons of VX – that little vial I just showed you – four tons of it.

Kennedy Clan Profiting from Hugo Chavez's Oil?

A prominent member of the Kennedy family is joining forces with one of President George Bush’s most ardent foes – Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez.

A subsidiary of Venezuela’s national oil company will ship 12 million gallons of discounted home-heating oil to Massachusetts in a deal that former U.S. representative Joseph P. Kennedy II helped to arrange.

The $9 million worth of oil will go to 45,000 low-income families and institutions that serve the poor, such as homeless shelters, said officials from Citizens Energy, an organization founded by Kennedy in 1979.

When the oil arrives next month, Citizens Energy will help screen recipients, according to the Boston Globe.

Home-heating oil prices are expected to rise significantly this winter because of higher crude oil prices.

But "some foreign-policy analysts said Chavez helped broker the deal in part as a jab at President Bush,” according to the Globe.

Chavez has frequently criticized the Bush administration, saying it is not doing enough to help the poor. He has called Bush an "assassin,” "Mr. Danger," and a "crazy man.”

"It is a slap in the face,” to the Bush administration, said Larry Birns, executive director of the Council on Hemispheric Affairs.

"Chavez is involved in petro-diplomacy.”

Human rights groups have accused Chavez of curtailing press freedoms and criticized his treatment of political foes.

But Kennedy told the Globe he was not concerned about Chavez’s politics: "You start parsing which countries’ politics we’re going to feel comfortable with, and only buying oil from them, then there are going to be a lot of people not driving their cars and not staying warm this winter.”

Citizens Energy Corp. is a nonprofit organization. But the Kennedy family has extensive oil interests, author Peter Schweizer reveals in his best-selling new book "Do As I Say (Not As I Do): Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy."

According to Schweizer, "oil deposits have generated tens of millions in profits for the Kennedy clan … In total, family revenue from crude oil and natural gas is more than $1 million a year.”

Half of All Americans OK With Torture

Nearly half of all Americans think torturing terror suspects to gain information can be justified, according to a new survey, reports the Washington Times.

The survey, by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press by, of 2,006 persons found that 46 percent thought torturing terrorists to gain important information was sometimes (31 percent) or often (15 percent) justified; 17 percent thought it was rarely justified; and 32 percent were opposed. By contrast, the study found that of 520 opinion leaders questioned on the issue, no more than one in four thinks that torture of terrorist suspects can be sometimes or often justified, Agence France-Presse reports.

The survey also found that opinion leaders differ on who should be held responsible for prisoner abuse in Iraq and at the detention center at U.S. Naval Station Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The survey noted that more than 50 percent of academics, journalists, foreign affairs analysts and scientists think such abuses are the result of official policy, against 60 percent of military and religious leaders who see it as mostly misconduct by soldiers and contractors.

Nancy Pelosi: Pro-Troop Vote 'a Disgrace'

Anti-war House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi is blasting last night's 403 to 3 House vote in support of U.S. troops and their mission in Iraq, calling it "a disgrace."

Complaining that House Republicans had engaged in a "deception" by calling for a last minute vote on the Iraq war, the San Francisco Democrat said the pro-troop resolution was "a disservice to our country."

Pelosi said that the "Republican majority has stooped to a new low" by forcing Democrats to go on the record against an immediate pullout.

Her California colleague, House Armed Services Committee chairman, Rep. Duncan Hunter, wrote the resolution, which asked whether members thought "that the deployment of United States forces in Iraq be terminated immediately."

"We're going to let every member answer that, and I hope the message that goes back to our troops in Iraq is that we do not support a precipitous pullout," Hunter said.

Pelosi slammed Hunter's proposal as "a political stunt and should it be rejected by this House" - minutes before she voted with the Republican majority.

Col. James Brown Refutes Murtha on Iraq War

A U.S. field commander in Iraq countered calls by a usually pro-military congressman for withdrawal of Americans fighting there Friday, while Democrats defended Rep. John Murtha as a patriot even as they declined to back his view.

"Here on the ground, our job is not done," said Col. James Brown, commander of the 56th Brigade Combat Team, when asked about Murtha's comments during a weekly briefing that American field commanders routinely give to Pentagon reporters.

Speaking from a U.S. logistics base at Balad, north of Baghdad, two days before his scheduled return to Texas, Brown said: "We have to finish the job that we began here. It's important for the security of this nation."

The withdrawal demand by Murtha, a veteran Pennsylvania Democrat, lent more intensity to the increasingly hot Iraq debate. Some members of the House and Senate, looking ahead to off-year elections next November, are publicly worrying about a quagmire there.

Our troops have become the primary target of the insurgency," Murtha, a longtime hawk on foreign and military affairs issues, said Thursday. "They are united against U.S. forces and we have become a catalyst for violence. The war in Iraq is not going as advertised. It is a flawed policy wrapped in illusion."

Republicans pounced, chastising Murtha for advocating what they called a strategy of surrender and abandonment.

"I won't stand for the swift-boating of Jack Murtha," Sen. John Kerry, the Democratic presidential nominee in 2004, responded Friday. Also a Vietnam veteran, Kerry was dogged during the campaign by a group called the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth that challenged his war record.

"There is no sterner stuff than the backbone and courage that defines Jack Murtha's character and conscience," Kerry said.

For his part, Kerry has proposed a phased exit from Iraq, starting with the withdrawal of 20,000 troops after December elections in Iraq. A Kerry spokesman said "he has his own plan" when asked if Kerry agreed with immediate withdrawal.

As a Vietnam veteran and top Democrat on the House Appropriations defense subcommittee with close ties to many military officers, Murtha carries more credibility with his colleagues on the issue than a number of other Democrats who have opposed the war from the start.

"Our military has accomplished its mission and done its duty," the 30-year lawmaker told reporters at news conference with American flags arrayed behind him.

"It's time to bring them home," he said.

Bush administration officials have been cautious in responding to Murtha.

"We have nothing but respect for Congressman Murtha's service to his country," White House communications director Nicolle Wallace told NBC's "Today" show Friday. "And I think he spoke from the heart yesterday. We happen to have a real serious policy disagreement with him."

Rep. Sam Johnson, R-Texas, a 29-year Air Force veteran who was a prisoner of war in Vietnam for nearly seven years, called Murtha's position unconscionable and irresponsible. "We've got to support our troops to the hilt and see this mission through," he said.

Said House Speaker Dennis Hastert: "They want us to retreat. They want us to wave the white flag of surrender to the terrorists of the world."

Referring to President Bush, Murtha had said, "I resent the fact, on Veterans Day, he criticized Democrats for criticizing them."

The GOP-controlled Senate on Tuesday defeated a Democratic push for Bush to lay out a timetable for withdrawal. Spotlighting mushrooming questions from both parties about the war, though, the chamber then approved a statement that 2006 should be a significant year in which conditions are created for the phased withdrawal of U.S. forces.

Murtha estimated that all U.S. troops could be pulled out within six months. He introduced a resolution Thursday that would force the president to call back the military, but it was unclear when, or if, either GOP-run chamber of Congress would vote on it.

On the Senate floor Thursday, Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., called on Bush and the White House to stop what he called an orchestrated attack campaign.

"It's a weak, spineless display of politics at a time of war," said Reid, who spoke while Bush was in Asia.

With a Bronze Star and two Purple Hearts, Murtha retired from the Marine Corps reserves as a colonel in 1990 after 37 years as a Marine, only a few years longer than he's been in Congress. Elected in 1974, Murtha has become known as an authority on national security whose advice was sought out by Republican and Democratic administrations alike.

Murtha's shift from an early war backer to a critic advocating withdrawal reflects plummeting public support for a war that has cost more than $200 billion and led to the deaths of more than 2,000 U.S. troops.

Solar Study Cool on Global Warming Claim

Another study has cast doubt on the global warming theory.

Recognizing that the Earth’s climate has been changing since the pre-industrial era, physicist A. Kilcik and his colleagues set out to determine if there is a link between variations in solar activity and changes in the earth’s temperatures, John McCaslin reports in the Washington Times’ Inside the Beltway column.

They compared surface air temperature variations in the U.S. and Japan from 1900 to 1995.

"Our results indicate marked influence of solar-activity variations on the earth’s climate,” the researchers reported in the Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics.

Writes McCaslin: "Which might help explain other historic climate changes, from the ‘Medieval Warm Period’ from the 12th century through the 14th century, to the ‘Little Ice Age’ from the latter half of the 17th century into the early 18th century.

"President Bush may have been correct not to rush his signature onto the Kyoto Protocol treaty on climate change.”

New Documents Reveal Saddam Hid WMD, Was Tied to Al Qaida

Recently discovered Iraqi documents now being translated by U.S. intelligence analysts indicate that Saddam Hussein's government made extensive plans to hide Iraq's weapons of mass destruction before the U.S. invasion in March 2003 - and had deep ties to al Qaida before the 9/11 attacks.

The explosive evidence was discovered among "millions of pages of documents" unearthed by the Iraq Survey Group weapons search team, reports the Weekly Standard's Stephen Hayes.

In the magazine's Nov. 21 issue, Hayes reveals that the document cache now being examined contains "a thick stew of reports and findings from a variety of [Iraqi] intelligence agencies and military units."

Though the Pentagon has so far declined to make the bombshell papers public, Hayes managed to obtain a list of titles on the reports.

Topics headlined in the still embargoed Iraqi documents include:

• Chemical Agent Purchase Orders (Dec. 2001)

• Formulas and information about Iraq's Chemical Weapons Agents

• Locations of Weapons/Ammunition Storage (with map)

• Denial and Deception of WMD and Killing of POWs

• Ricin research and improvement

. Chemical Gear for Fedayeen Saddam

• Memo from the [Iraqi Intelligence Service] to Hide Information from a U.N. Inspection team (1997)

• Iraq Ministry of Defense Calls for Investigation into why documents related to WMD were found by UN inspection team

• Correspondence between various Iraq organizations giving instructions to hide chemicals and equipment

• Correspondence from [Iraqi Intelligence Service] to [the Military Industrial Commission] regarding information gathered by foreign intelligence satellites on WMD (Dec. 2002)

• Cleaning chemical suits and how to hide chemicals

• [Iraqi Intelligence Service] plan of what to do during UNSCOM inspections (1996)

Still other reports suggest that Iraq's ties to al Qaida were far deeper than previously known, featuring headlines like:

• Secret Meeting with Taliban Group Member and Iraqi Government (Nov. 2000)

• Document from Uday Hussein regarding Taliban activity

• Possible al Qaeda Terror Members in Iraq

• Iraqi Effort to Cooperate with Saudi Opposition Groups and Individuals

• Iraqi Intel report on Kurdish Activities: Mention of Kurdish Report on al Qaeda - reference to al Qaeda presence in Salman Pak

• [Iraqi Intelligence Service] report on Taliban-Iraq Connections Claims

• Money Transfers from Iraq to Afghanistan

While the document titles sound stunning enough to turn the Iraq war debate on its head, Hayes cautions that it's hard to know for certain until the full text is available.

It's possible, he writes, "that the 'Document from Uday Hussein regarding Taliban activity' was critical of one or another Taliban policies. But it's equally possible, given Uday's known role as a go-between for the Iraqi regime and al Qaeda, that something more nefarious was afoot."

"What was discussed at the 'Secret Meeting with Taliban Group Member and Iraqi Government' in November 2000? It could be something innocuous. Maybe not. But it would be nice to know more."

Hayes also notes that an additional treasure trove of evidence on Saddam Hussein's support for al Qaida may be lost forever.

"When David Kay ran the Iraq Survey Group searching for weapons of mass destruction, he instructed his team to ignore anything not directly related to the regime's WMD efforts," he reports.

"As a consequence, documents describing the regime's training and financing of terrorists were labeled 'No Intelligence Value' and often discarded, according to two sources."

Colin Powell's Tape Shows Iraqis 'Evacuating' WMDs

Bush officials have done such a poor job defending themselves against charges they lied about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction that even their supporters seem to have forgotten about some of the most compelling WMD evidence.

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell, for instance, keeps apologizing for his speech to the United Nations on the eve of the Iraq war. But at least one chilling bit of evidence he introduced there has never been refuted.

Here's how Powell introduced his case on Feb. 5, 2003:

POWELL: Let me begin by playing a tape for you. What you're about to hear is a conversation that my government monitored. It takes place on November 26 [2002], on the day before United Nations teams resumed inspections in Iraq.

The conversation involves two senior officers, a colonel and a brigadier general, from Iraq's elite military unit, the Republican Guard.

TAPE TRANSCRIPT:

IRAQI COLONEL : About this committee that is coming with [U.N. nuclear weapons inspector] Mohamed ElBaradei.

IRAQI GENERAL : Yeah, yeah.

COL: We have this modified vehicle. What do we say if one of them sees it?

GEN: You didn't get a modified... You don't have a modified...

COL: By God, I have one.

GEN: Which? From the workshop...?

COL: From the al-Kindi Company

GEN: Yeah, yeah. I'll come to you in the morning. I have some comments. I'm worried you all have something left.

COL: We evacuated everything. We don't have anything left. [END OF POWELL TAPE EXCERPT]

What type of "modified vehicle" do Iraq war critics think Saddam's general was worried about? A souped-up 1967 Mustang?

And what, pray tell, do they think Saddam's colonel was referring to when he said, "We evacuated everything. We don't have anything left"?

Bush Approval Rating on the Rebound

President Bush's approval rating is on the rebound, according to the latest Rasmussen poll - while a new survey by Newsweek shows just the opposite.

Rasmussen's latest three day rolling survey shows that 46 percent of Americans approve of the way Bush is handling his job - with 53 percent giving him a thumbs down.

The numbers are a marked improvement from just a week ago, when 56 percent of Americans disapproved of Bush's performance, while just 43 percent approved.

The latest numbers represent "the President's highest Job Approval Rating in over a month," notes Rasmussen.

Meanwhile, a new Newsweek poll shows Bush continuing to slide, with only 36 percent giving him a positive job approval. Newsweek doesn't offer a number for overall job disapproval, but notes that "almost 2 in 3 Americans (65 percent) disapprove of the president’s handling of Iraq."

Both surveys relied on samples of more than 1000 "adults" - as opposed to more accurate samplings of "registered" or "likely voters." Surveys relying on "adults" almost always favor Democrats, while "registered voters" lean more towards the GOP. "Likely voters" tend to trend even more Republican still than "registered voters."

So which survey - Rasmussen or Newsweek - more accurately reflects the mood of the public?

Here's a clue. Newsweek is currently offering an "unscientific" online survey that asks the question: "If Congressional elections were held today, would you vote for a Democratic or Republican candidate?"

The result? A landslide for Democrats, of course - 81 to 15 percent.

Internal Violence Splits Iraqi Insurgents

A civil war has broken out among rival terrorist groups fighting U.S. forces in Iraq, with Sunni insurgents turning on groups run by al Qaeda's chief of operations in Iraq, Abu Musab al Zarqawi.

Last Sunday, a gun battled erupted between al Qaida and Sunni insurgent groups at a central intersection in Ramadi, the capital of the Sunni province of Anbar.

According to the Knight Ridder newswire: "As many as two dozen men fired automatic weapons and blasted away with shoulder-mounted rockets as al-Qaida in Iraq ambushed members of three local [insurgent] groups."

The violent clash left residents speculating that the strong support al-Qaida had in Anbar province "is starting to fracture, if not completely break," Knight Ridder said.

One key bone of contention - the decision by Sunni groups to participate in the vote on Iraq's constitution three weeks ago.

Another is the growing resentment by indigenous Iraqi insurgents angry over al Qaida's continuing terror campaign against Sunni civilians. Al Qaida in Iraq is comprised mainly of Islamic radicals from other countries. Zarqawi, for instance, is Jordanian.

An insurgent split in Ramadi, said Knight Ridder correspondent Mohammed al Dulaimy, "could blunt the influence of al-Qaida in Iraq, as the city in the so-called Sunni Triangle has been at the epicenter of fighting for the past 18 months and generally is seen as the heart of the group's power in the country."

Saddam's Uranium Enough for One Nuke

Though President Bush didn't mention it in his speech yesterday rebutting critics of his administration's use of intelligence on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, experts say that Saddam Hussein had stockpiled enough partially enriched uranium to produce at least one full-fledged nuclear bomb.

Commenting on Saddam's enriched uranium stash after the U.S. Energy Department removed it to Oak Ridge, Tenn., in June 2004, top physicist Ivan Oelrich told the Associated Press:

"[Saddam's] 1.95 tons of low-enriched uranium could be used to produce enough highly enriched uranium to make a single nuclear bomb."

Oelrich, a leading member of the Federation of American Scientists, is not alone in that assessment.

Bryan Wilkes, a spokesman for the National Nuclear Security Administration, told the New York Times that Saddam's partially enriched uranium "could have been further enriched to make it useful in a weapon."

After the U.S. removed Saddam's nuke fuel stockpile, interim Prime Minister Iyad Allawi confirmed that it posed a great danger to the region's security interests.

"These materials, which are potential weapons of mass murder, are not welcome in our country and their production is unacceptable," Allawi told Agence France Press.

Even Saddam's 500-ton un-enriched uranium stockpile, which he stored at the same nuclear weapons research facility where inspectors found his partially enriched stash, posed a potential threat.

In a March 2003 op-ed piece for London's Evening Standard, Norman Dombey, professor of theoretical physics at the University of Sussex, calculated that Saddam's yellowcake could have yielded a staggering nuclear arsenal.

"You have a warehouse containing 500 tons of natural uranium," Dombey wrote. "You need 25 kilograms of U235 to build one weapon. How many nuclear weapons can you build?

"The answer is 142 [nuclear bombs]," he said.

Rove Re-emerges

WASHINGTON -- Emerging from weeks of political hibernation, President Bush's longtime advisor Karl Rove told the conservative Federalist Society that rulings by liberal judges will "provoke a strong counter-reaction” through laws or constitutional amendments to limit the judiciary.

Rove addressed the group Thursday evening at the Federalist Society's annual meeting in Washington, reported MSNBC's Tom Curry.

"The public will reclaim its rights as a sovereign people,” Rove predicted, and "at the end of the day the views of the Founders will prevail.”

Rove was greeted by a standing ovation. He has been under a shadow for more than a week as some in Washington expected — and others hoped — that he might be indicted for disclosing classified information that Valerie Plame, the wife of Iraq war critic Joseph Wilson, worked for the Central Intelligence Agency. But only I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, has so far been indicted in that case.

Rove made no reference to the Libby case in his 25-minute address Thursday.
Rove denounced recent examples of what he saw as liberal judicial activism such as the 9th Circuit court of appeals declaring that the recitation of the words "under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools was unconstitutional

He also denounced last year’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling Roper v. Simmons in which five justices ruled that convicted murderers under the age of 18 could not be put to death. Rove noted that 20 states allowed capital punishment for those under 18 and argued that the high court was depriving those states of the right to self-government.

Rove confidently predicted that soon Chief Justice John Roberts will be joined by "a proud member of the Federalist Society,” Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito.

Kurds Campaign Thanks U.S. for Liberation

A group representing Kurdistan thanks America for liberating that nation from Saddam Hussein's dictatorship of terrorism.

"The Kurds of Iraqi Kurdistan just want to say ‘thank you for helping us win our freedom. Thank you for democracy. Thank you America.”

The print and broadcast advertisements are sponsored by the Kurdistan Development Corporation, an organization created by the government of Kurdistan to encourage international investment.

The ad campaign began Monday in the United States with ads in The Wall Street Journal and on Fox News Channel. Ads begin airing Nov. 14 airing in Europe.

The group describes Kurdistan as a place "where peace and prosperity have reigned since liberation from Saddam Hussein.”

Bayan Sami Abdul Rahman, Chairman of the Kurdistan Development Corporation and Kurdistan’s High Representative to the UK, says the commercials are necessary to counter the American media’s largely negative coverage of Iraq.

"We feel the mainstream media,” she tells Newsmax, "is focusing on the negative stories coming out of Iraq and very rarely highlighting the good news.”

"We’re not saying that the media doesn’t tell the truth. They do tell the truth. There is violence. There is an insurgency. But it’s not the whole truth, or the whole picture.”

"The truth is that while there is violence,” she continues, "there are big strides being taken towards democracy in Iraq, particularly in Kurdistan. There are vast sections of Iraq, and again particularly Kurdistan, where the region is safe, stable, and people are getting on with their lives, doing business, trying to build a future.”

Indeed, not a single coalition soldier has died in Kurdistan since March 2003.

Rahman worries, however, about suggestions that the United States should pull out of Iraq.

"If people are saying that America should withdraw their troops now, that would be a catastrophe, not only for the people of Iraq but also for the Middle East and the wider intentional community and the United States,” she says.

The current peace and prosperity is a welcome change from conditions under Saddam Hussein, who targeted the Kurds throughout his rule.

Among other atrocities, Hussein ordered the use of chemical weapons against the Kurdish village of Halabja in 1988, killing an estimated 5,000 Kurds, a majority of which were women and children.

Following the Gulf War in 1991, the United States and the United Kingdom established "no-fly zones” in northern Iraq to prevent continued bombing of Kurdistan by Saddam. Kurds ran a semi-autonomous government under the protection of the "no-fly zones.”

Kurdistan President H.E. Masoud Barzani thanked President Bush for his dedication to Iraqi freedom in an Oct. 25 visit to the White House.

"It was a brave decision that you have made,” Barzani told the president, "you have liberated a people from a dictatorial regime that has hurt a lot of people.”

Rahman goes further, calling President Bush a "hero.”

"The people of Kurdistan and the government of Kurdistan,” she gushes, "admire President Bush’s courage in fighting Saddam Hussein despite some of the doubts of America’s international partners.”

Rahman says there is no question that the decision to liberate Iraq was just.

"Saddam Hussein was a tyrant,” she notes, "a dictator who committed genocide against the people of Kurdistan ... To get rid of someone like that, there should be no question.”

In addition to the advertisments, the group maintains a Web site, www.theotheriraq.com, expressing its gratitude to the U.S. and the value of Kurdistan to the world community.

Patrick Fitzgerald Ignored Witnesses who Contradicted Wilson

Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald's Leakgate investigation is coming unraveled, as witness after witness steps forward to challenge a key premise of his controversial probe.

Was the identity of Joseph Wilson's wife Valerie Plame really a deep dark secret before she was "outed" by columnist Robert Novak in July 2003?

The number of witnesses now saying "No" has climbed to four - and none of them have apparently been interviewed by Fitzgerald's investigators.

On Wednesday, Wayne Simmons, a 27-year veteran at the CIA, told Fox News Radio: "As most people now know, [Plame] was traipsed all over Washington many years ago by Joe Wilson and introduced at embassies and other parties as 'my CIA wife.'"

Last week, Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely told WABC Radio's John Batchelor that during a 2002 conversation with Wilson while the two waited to appear on a TV show, Wilson casually mentioned that his wife worked at "the Agency."

In Oct. 2003, NBC's diplomatic correspondent, Andrea Mitchell, told CNBC that Plame's occupation "was widely known among those of us who cover the intelligence community and who were actively engaged in trying to track down who among the foreign service community was the envoy to Niger."

Mitchell added: "So a number of us began to pick up on that."

And in Sept. 2003, NationalReviewOnline's Cliff May wrote that when Plame's CIA connection was mentioned in Novak's column - "That wasn't news to me."

"I had been told that [Plame was CIA] - but not by anyone working in the White House. Rather, I learned it from someone who formerly worked in the government and he mentioned it in an offhand manner, leading me to infer it was something that insiders were well aware of."

The day his report appeared, May told the Fox News Channel's John Gibson: "I knew this, and a lot of other people knew it."

In fact, rumors now swirl around Washington that Plame used to take her friends to lunch at the CIA's cafeteria.

So what has Mr.Fitzgerald - who was hailed as a "prosecutor's prosecutor" only weeks ago - done with the avalanche of testimony that contradicts his stated claim that Plame's job "was not widely known"?

Apparently nothing.

In the six days since he's gone public, Gen. Vallely says prosecutors have yet to contact him.

Ms. Mitchell has been mum since her "widely known" comment resurfaced last week, offering no indication whether Fitzgerald has bothered to check her story out.

If Mr. May has been interrogated, he's also keeping it to himself.

And Mr. Simmons has made no mention of any contact with Fitzgerald's team.

On the other hand, the prosecutor's prosecutor made a big show of interviewing two of the Wilsons neighbors just four days before he announced his indictment of Lewis Libby - in a bid to establish whether Ms. Plame's occupation was indeed secret.

It was, as far as her neighbors were concerned. But the revelation that Fitzgerald had waited till the last minute to confirm such a key aspect of his case raised more than a few eyebrows.

Now, with four witnesses on the record saying they knew what the Wilsons' neighbors didn't - and two of those witnesses coming forward even before the Leakgate investigation began - it's beginning to look like Mr. Fitzgerald deliberately ignored critical testimony that would have compelled him to close up shop well before he ever got to Mr. Libby.

Rush Limbaugh: Saddam Needs Dems' Help

Top conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh had some advice on Monday for Saddam Hussein's lawyers: Pay attention to Democrats in Congress, who have already formulated a defense strategy for the Iraqi dictator that would make the late Johnnie Cochran blush.

First, said Limbaugh, Saddam's lawyers should demand a postponement until Senate Democrats finish the discovery phase of the trial [i.e., yet another weapons of mass destruction investigation].

Saddam should tell the judge, "The honorable Senate Democrats in the United States are doing an honorable investigation to find out exactly what happened to cause me to lose my country."

"And until these honorable Senate Democrats in the United States get every one of their questions answered about the manipulation and the distortion of the intelligence . . . I can't get a fair trial, until all these questions are answered by the Senate Democrats."

Saddam's witness list, said the conservative talker, should include prominent war critics like Sens. Dick Durbin, Ted Kennedy, Chuck Schumer and Jay Rockefeller.

Or, as Saddam himself might tell the court:

"If I get my trial in the United States of America as I so rightly deserve, I, Saddam Hussein, would like to call Dick Durbin as a witness because he would be able to testify that US troops are like Nazi storm troopers.

"He would be able to testify that US troops are no different than the murdering thugs of Pol Pot and the gulags of Stalin.

"I would next call Senator Kennedy who would be able to testify that US troops are no better than Hussein's thugs -- my thugs.

"I would call Michael Isikoff of Newsweek magazine. He would be able to testify how US troops mistreat prisoners by flushing their Korans down the toilet at G'itmo."

And Saddam should demand, said Limbaugh, that the U.S. return his country - based on Democrat complaints.

"Bush is a liar!" he should tell the court. "He lied about the reasons for and the need to invade my country, and I want it back."

In another page borrowed from the Democrats' playbook, Saddam should urge Bush's impeachment.

"It is George Bush who should be impeached and convicted in his own country and then tried at The Hague in my place. Not me. I had nothing to do with 9/11. Yet I'm the one paying the price."

Ted Kennedy couldn't have said it better himself.

Leakgate, the CIA, Iraq and 9/11

The Leakgate imbroglio has put the spotlight on the CIA's opposition to the Bush administration's Iraq war policy - with questions swirling about who at the agency thought it was a good idea to send Bush-bashing war critic Joe Wilson to verify key administration claims about Iraq's nuclear ambitions.

But the Agency's double-dealing on evidence of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction begs another question: Was the CIA an honest broker of information that seemed, early on, to link Iraq to the 9/11 attacks?

Longtime Washington lawyer Victoria Toensing - who drafted the 1982 law that was supposed to be at the center of the Leakgate scandal - has been arguing for weeks now that the CIA's permanent bureaucracy had a hidden agenda against the Iraq war.

Writing on OpinionJournal.com on Sunday, Toensing went so far as to suggest that the CIA's decision to enlist Wilson is beginning to look like "a brilliant covert action against the White House."

Was a similar strategy employed whenever inconvenient evidence materialized linking Iraq to 9/11?

Since two Iraqi defectors first reported in Nov. 2001 that radical Islamists had been trained at Saddam's Salman Pak terrorist camp to hijack airplanes using techniques similar to those employed on 9/11, the CIA has been working overtime trying to knock the story down.

The defectors weren't credible, Agency sources repeatedly told reporters.

"The probability that the training provided at such centers, e.g. Salman Pak, was similar to what al Qaida could offer at its own camps in Afghanistan, combined with the sourcing difficulties, leads us to conclude that we need additional corroboration before we can validate that this low level basic terrorist training for al Qaida occurred in Iraq," one CIA analyst told Knight Ridder news in January 2003.

Four months later, U.S. Marines overran the super secret facility that the Agency had dismissed as innocuous.

On April 6, 2003, CENTCOM spokesman, Brig. Gen. Vincent Brooks, told reporters that the Iraqis defending the camp were not run of the mill soldiers.

"The nature of the work being done by some of those people we captured, their inferences about the type of training they received, all these things give us the impression that there is terrorist training that was conducted at Salman Pak," Brooks said.

"Some of them come from Sudan, some from Egypt, some from other places . . . It reinforces the likelihood of links between this regime and external terrorist organizations," the CENTCOM spokesman added.

The CIA's response? Certainly not the kind of intelligence review that would have gotten to the bottom of just what was going on at Salman Pak. In fact, at last report, the Agency accepted the alibi offered by Iraqi officials: that hijack classes staged aboard a parked airliner were actually hijack prevention exercises.

The Agency reacted the same way when Czech intelligence reported that lead 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta met with Iraqi intelligence in Prague just months before the 9/11 attacks, dismissing the claim despite repeated Czech assertions that it was true.

And when the London Telegraph reported in Dec. 2003 that the interim Iraqi government had uncovered a document that put Mr. Atta in Baghdad in July 2001, anonymous U.S. intelligence sources told Newsweek the document was a probable forgery, citing an Iraqi document expert who hadn't laid eyes on the paper in question.

Interim Prime Minister Iyad Allawi, however, sounded thoroughly impressed by the discovery, telling the Telegraph:

"This is the most compelling piece of evidence that we have found so far. It shows that not only did Saddam have contacts with Al Qaeda, he had contact with those responsible for the September 11 attacks.'"

Perhaps the CIA has conducted thorough behind-the-scenes investigations of each one of these episodes - and has simply decided not to go public with its smoking gun evidence debunking the claims. But there's nothing to that effect on the public record.

The 9/11 Commission claims to have conclusively determined that Saddam played no role whatsoever in 9/11. But like the CIA, the Commission has earned a reputation for ignoring important and compelling evidence - by burying key testimony that Mohamed Atta had been tracked down by the Able Danger intelligence group before the 9/11 attacks.

Meanwhile, in the only legal test of Saddam's involvement in 9/11 - a May 8, 2003 ruling by U.S. District Judge Harold Baer awarded two 9/11 families $104 million based on what Baer said was Iraq's "material" role in the attacks.

What's more, Oil for Food sleuth Claudia Rosett has offered a compelling, albeit circumstantial, case that Osama bin Laden didn't have the financial wherewithal to bankroll the 9/11 operation while simultaneously underwriting al Qaeda's worldwide network - until Saddam began pouring some of his Oil for Food profits into terrorist coffers.

Though even the Bush administration now treats the theory as hearsay, there remains a substantial body of evidence that suggests Iraq played a role in the 9/11 attacks.

And almost none of it has been credibly debunked by the CIA or other U.S. intelligence gathers, who offer only unsupported claims that the evidence in question is unreliable.

Clueless on Saddam's Uranium Stash

Ever since the indictment of Lewis "Scooter" Libby, New York Times scribe Frank Rich has gone into overdrive with complaints that the Bush administration lied about Saddam Hussein's nuclear capability.

But on Saturday Rich sounded clueless when confronted with reports that Saddam had stockpiled some 500-tons of uranium - news reported just last year on the front page of his own paper.

The usually informed-sounding Timesman fumbled for answers during the following exchange with WABC Radio's Mark Simone:

SIMONE: Speaking of uranium, your own paper, on May 22, 2004, reported on 500-tons of uranium we found in Iraq.

RICH: I don't remember that. I don't know if that was uranium that could be made into nuclear weapons. That's something that I don't know.

SIMONE: Well, it hadn't been enriched yet, but as your own paper pointed out, it sure could make good dirty bombs.

RICH: Well [sighing], ah . . .

SIMONE: I never heard you pause.

RICH: [laughs nervously] I have no - I don't - I didn't see this - no - even the administration hasn't made hay of it so I wonder if it was written by Jayson Blair. I don't know.

SIMONE: You know what your paper did back then. The reason they were going after it - apparently the Bush administration had decided to take it out of Iraq and environmentalists were screaming that it was too dangerous to move. So that's why the Times and the Washington Post were covering it.

RICH: I see.

SIMONE: But isn't that fascinating that the administration never brings that out.

RICH: Yeah - because maybe they don't trust it. Or maybe they don't read the New York Times. [END EXCERPT]

Apparently, neither does Mr. Rich - since the Times also reported in the same story that part of Saddam's uranium stockpile had been partially enriched, and then explained - "the low-enriched version could be useful to a nation with nuclear ambitions."

Moments before Rich's "homina-homina" moment, he had been railing how the Libby indictment showed that the Bush administration had lied about Iraq's WMDs.

"The administration, particularly Dick Cheney but not exclusive Dick Cheney, made claims for which they didn't have a basis to sell the war," he insisted to Simone, "No one but this administration, particularly, heightened the nuclear part of [the WMD threat] as much as they did."

Times Cuts Patriotism from Marine's Letter

The New York Times cut patriotic comments from a letter written by a U.S. Marine before he was killed in Iraq.

The family of Cpl. Jeffrey Starr slammed the Times for selectively excerpting the letter he wrote to his girlfriend, intending for her to read it in the event of his death.

A November 2 Times story about soldiers killed while serving multiple tours of duty mentioned 22-year-old Starr, who was serving his third tour of duty when he died, and included this excerpt from his letter:

"I kind of predicted this ... A third time just seemed like I’m pushing my chances.”

In fact, the letter read in its entirety (emphasis added):

"I kind of predicted this, that is why I’m writing this in November. A third time just seemed like I’m pushing my chances. I don’t regret going, everybody dies but few get to do it for something as important as freedom. It may seem confusing why we are in Iraq, it’s not to me. I’m here helping these people, so that they can live the way we live. Not have to worry about tyrants or vicious dictators. To do what they want with their lives. To me that is why I died. Others have died for my freedom, now this is my mark.”

Starr’s mother Shellie told the New York Post that the "part of the letter about freedom and dying for it was much more important for him than what they wrote from the letter.”

Democrat Quotes on Saddam Hussein's WMD Before the War - Part I

October 9th, 1999 Letter to President Clinton Signed by Senators Levin, Lieberman, Lautenberg, Dodd, Kerrey, Feinstein, Mikulski, Daschle, Breaux, Johnson, Inouye, Landrieu, Ford and Kerry -- all Democrats

"We urge you, after consulting with Congress and consistent with the US Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions, including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."

Joe Biden > August 4, 2002

"This is a guy who is an extreme danger to the world, and this is a guy who is in every way possible seeking weapons of mass destruction."

Al Gore > December 16, 1998

"[I]f you allow someone like Saddam Hussein to get nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, chemical weapons, biological weapons, how many people is he going to kill with such weapons? He has already demonstrated a willingness to use such weapons..."

John Kerry > January 23, 2003

"Without question we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator leading an impressive regime. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he's miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. His consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction."

Sandy Berger > February 18, 1998

"He'll use those weapons of mass destruction again as he has 10 times since 1983."

Senator Carl Levin > September 19, 2002

"We begin with a common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations, is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."

Senator Hillary Clinton > October 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock. His missile delivery capability, his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists including Al-Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."

Madeleine Albright > November 10, 1999

"Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."

Robert Byrd > October 3, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of '98. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons."

Al Gore > September 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter, and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."

Joe Biden > August 4, 2002

"I think he has anthrax. I have not seen any evidence that he has smallpox, but you hear them say, Tim (Russert), is the last smallpox outbreak in the world was in Iraq; ergo, he may have a strain."

Bill Clinton > December 17, 1998

"Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq.... Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors."

Hillary Clinton > October 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspections, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability and his nuclear program."

Dick Gephardt > September 23, 2002

"(I have seen) a large body of intelligence information over a long time that he is working on and has weapons of mass destruction. Before 1991, he was close to a nuclear device. Now, you'll get a debate about whether it's one year away or five years away."

Russell Feingold > October 9, 2002

"With regard to Iraq, I agree Iraq presents a genuine threat, especially in the form of weapons of mass destruction: chemical, biological and potentially nuclear weapons. I agree that Saddam Hussein is exceptionally dangerous and brutal, if not uniquely so, as the president argues."

Johnny Edwards > January 7, 2003

"Serving on the intelligence committee and seeing day after day, week after week, briefings on Saddam's weapons of mass destruction and his plans on using those weapons, he cannot be allowed to have nuclear weapons. It's just that simple. The whole world changes if Saddam ever has nuclear weapons."

John Kerry > January 31, 2003

"If you don't believe...Saddam Hussein is a threat with nuclear weapons, then
you shouldn't vote for me."

Bill Nelson > September 14, 2002

"I believe he has chemical and biological weapons. I think he's trying to develop nuclear weapons, and the fact that he might use those is a considerable threat to us."

Al Gore > September 23, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."

Tom Daschle > February 11, 1998

"The (Clinton) administration has said, 'Look, we have exhausted virtually our diplomatic effort to get the Iraqis to comply with their own agreements and with international law. Given that, what other option is there but to force them to do so?' That's what they're saying. This is the key question. And the answer is we don't have another option. We have got to force them to comply, and we are doing so militarily."

Bill Richardson > May 29, 1998

"The threat of nuclear proliferation is one of the big challenges that we have now, especially by states that have nuclear weapons, outlaw states like Iraq."

Hillary Clinton > October 10, 2002

"It is clear, however, that if left unchecked Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capability to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."

Democrat Quotes on Saddam Hussein's WMD Before the War - Part II

Bill Clinton > February 17, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace, and we have to use force, our purpose is clear: We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."

Madeleine Albright > February 1, 1998

"We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and the security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction."

Nancy Pelosi > December 16, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology, which is a threat to countries in the region, and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."

Al Gore > September 23, 2002

"We know that he has stored nuclear supplies, secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."

John Kerry > October 9, 2002

"I will be voting to give the president of the US the authority to use force if necessary to disarm Saddam because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."

Ted Kennedy > September 27, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."

Jay Rockefeller > October 10, 2002

"There was unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. We also should remember that we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."

Joe Biden > August 4, 2002

"[H]e does have the capacity, as all terrorist-related operations do, of smuggling stuff into the United States and doing something terrible. That is true. But there's been no connection, hard connection made yet between he and al-Qaida or his willingness or effort to do that thus far. Doesn't mean he won't. This is a bad guy."

Madeline Albright > February 18, 2002

Iraq is a long way from (here), but what happens there matters a great deal here, for the risk that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest national security threat we face -- and it is a threat against which we must and will stand firm."

Jane Harman > August 27, 2002

"I certainly think (Hussein's) developing nuclear capability which, fortunately, the Israelis set back 20 years ago with their preemptive attack which, in hindsight, looks pretty darn good."

Dick Durbin > September 30, 1999

"One of the most compelling threats we in this country face today is the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Threat assessments regularly warn us of the possibility that North Korea, Iran, Iraq, or some other nation may acquire or develop nuclear weapons."

Bill Nelson > August 25, 2002

"[M]y own personal view is, I think Saddam has chemical and biological weapons and I expect that he is trying to develop a nuclear weapon. So at some pointwe might have to act precipitously."

Nancy Pelosi > October 10, 2002

"Yes, he has chemical weapons. Yes, he has biological weapons. He is trying to get nuclear weapons."

Evan Bayh > August 4, 2002

"I'm inclined to support going in there and dealing with Saddam, but I think that case needs to be made on a separate basis: his possession of biological and chemical weapons, his desire to get nuclear weapons, his proven track record of attacking his neighbors and others."

Bill Clinton > February 17, 1998

"We have to defend our future from these predators of the 21st Century.... They will be all the more lethal if we allow them to build arsenals of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them. We simply cannot allow that to happen. There is no more clear example of this threat than Saddam Hussein."

Hillary Clinton > January 22, 2003

"I voted for the Iraqi resolution. I consider the prospect of a nuclear-armed Saddam Hussein who can threaten not only his neighbors but the stability of the region and the world, a very serious threat to the United States."

Joe Biden > August 4, 2002

"We know he continues to attempt to gain access to additional capability, including nuclear capability."

Johnny Edwards > February 6, 2003

"The question is whether we're going to allow this man who's been developing weapons of mass destruction continue to develop weapons of mass destruction, get nuclear capability and get to the place where -- if we're going to stop him if he invades a country around him -- it'll cost millions of lives as opposed to thousands of lives."

Joe Biden > August 4, 2002

"First of all, we don't know exactly what he has. It's been five years since inspectors have been in there, number one. Number two, it is clear that he has residual of chemical weapons and biological weapons, number one."

Senator Bob Graham > December 8, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has and has had for a number of years a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."

John Kerry > February 23, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has already used these weapons and has made it clear that he has the intent to continue to try, by virtue of his duplicity and secrecy, to continue to do so. That is a threat to the stability of the Middle East. It is a threat with respect to the potential of terrorist activities on a global basis. It is a threat even to regions near but not exactly in the Middle East."

Berger Case 'Fertile' for Investigation

Influential Democratic Senator Ben Nelson said Tuesday that it would be appropriate for Congress to hold hearings into the destruction of top secret terrorism documents by former National Security Advisor Sandy Berger, calling the Berger burglary "fertile ground for an investigation."

Asked about plans by Democratic Senators to launch a probe into Iraq war intelligence, Sen. Nelson told ABC Radio host Sean Hannity that Senate Republicans would be within their rights if they launched new probes into Democrat scandals.

HANNITY: What if Republicans want to launch multiple full-blown investigations, for example, into Sandy Berger? He was sent by Bill Clinton to research testimony before the 9/11 Commission. He took these documents and destroyed them.

Or where did the Rathergate forged documents come from? Was there an association with the Democratic Party? Or the Able Danger scandal? Or Bill Clinton's refusal to take Osama bin Laden when he was offered by the Sudan?

NELSON: I think they could do that.

HANNITY: But what if they do? Is this in the best interests of the country?

NELSON: Well, I don't know. It could be. I certainly think that [Senate Republicans] would do whatever they think is in the best interests of the country. And if they wanted to investigate those points, they have the power to do so.

I suppose we've got to get beyond the point of just investigating investigations but I certainly wouldn't want to block their right to do that.

HANNITY: Would it be fair, for example, to have Bill Clinton explain why he bombed Saddam [Hussein] in 1998 and said the mission was to attack nuclear, chemical and biological weapons?

NELSON: I suppose the answer to that is - then people would want to investigate why the first President Bush didn't go on through into Baghdad. I mean there probably is some point where it just doesn't make any sense to do that. But if it were about Sandy Berger - that might have been fertile ground for an investigation. [END EXCERPT]

Dead People Gave $1.3 Million to Candidates

Most people have heard tales of the dead casting ballots in Chicago or Philadelphia, but there's another form of posthumous political participation that has grown into a nationwide trend: donating money from beyond the grave.

A study by the Center for Public Integrity has found that there are at least 100 of the dearly departed still giving funds to political parties and to candidates for Congress and the presidency.

Members of this underground political movement have contributed more than $1.3 million to federal candidates and political parties in the past 14 years. Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., former President Bill Clinton and Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., have been among their beneficiaries, the study found.

As spooky - or as fishy - as that might sound, it's done through a perfectly legal practice that doesn't require seances or Ouija boards. People are setting aside money for future contribution via their wills.

The deceased, often known to vote Democratic in Chicago, have donated more overall to Democrats as well. National Democratic Party committees received almost $630,000; Republican Party committees received $588,000; and liberal National Committee for an Effective Congress received nearly $35,000.

The Center study found that in the 2000 election cycle, such contributors donated $245,000 overall. Two years later, a groundswell of activity in the deceased demographic raised that total to nearly $680,000.

Scores of these dead donors appear in public records with their employment listed as "deceased" on contribution reports; in other cases, the politicians reported receiving money from the person's estate.

FEC spokesman George Smaragdis said people can set up "testamentary bequests" to support political parties and specific candidates after they have passed away.

"If that is their wish while they are alive, money can be set aside for federal political action committees," Smaragdis said, noting that because of new laws, estates, like living individuals, recently have been limited to donations of $5,000 to a PAC per calendar year.

Federal law bans donations by non-citizens, foreign governments and corporations. But contributions are welcome from all U.S. citizens ... dead or alive.