<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Plame-gate Escape Hatch</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thetalentshow.org/2005/10/08/the-plame-gate-escape-hatch/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thetalentshow.org/2005/10/08/the-plame-gate-escape-hatch/</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Jul 2011 01:04:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: NHL</title>
		<link>http://www.thetalentshow.org/2005/10/08/the-plame-gate-escape-hatch/comment-page-1/#comment-8092</link>
		<dc:creator>NHL</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Oct 2005 17:27:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thetalentshow.org/wp/?p=2066#comment-8092</guid>
		<description>I thought it was interesting that Atrios decided to post the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&amp;contentId=A11208-2003Sep27&amp;notFound=true&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;original Sept 2003 Washington Post article&lt;/a&gt; this morning, which fingers the two staffers but insulates Bush and doesn&#039;t even mention Cheney.  It&#039;s sad to see the &quot;liberal&quot; blogs buying into this...and maybe &quot;buying in&quot; is a more apt phrase than we know, since so much of the debate on the highly publicized blogs seems staged these days.

Anyhow, the whole WaPo article reads like a cover story, playing up the &quot;revenge&quot; story angle and downplaying Cheney&#039;s link to the Niger memos as being hearsay from Wilson.  The fix has been in from the start, as you say.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I thought it was interesting that Atrios decided to post the <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&#038;contentId=A11208-2003Sep27&#038;notFound=true" rel="nofollow">original Sept 2003 Washington Post article</a> this morning, which fingers the two staffers but insulates Bush and doesn&#8217;t even mention Cheney.  It&#8217;s sad to see the &#8220;liberal&#8221; blogs buying into this&#8230;and maybe &#8220;buying in&#8221; is a more apt phrase than we know, since so much of the debate on the highly publicized blogs seems staged these days.</p>
<p>Anyhow, the whole WaPo article reads like a cover story, playing up the &#8220;revenge&#8221; story angle and downplaying Cheney&#8217;s link to the Niger memos as being hearsay from Wilson.  The fix has been in from the start, as you say.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aaron Swartz</title>
		<link>http://www.thetalentshow.org/2005/10/08/the-plame-gate-escape-hatch/comment-page-1/#comment-8091</link>
		<dc:creator>Aaron Swartz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Oct 2005 05:19:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thetalentshow.org/wp/?p=2066#comment-8091</guid>
		<description>What possible reason could Rove have for telling Bush the truth on this subject? It&#039;s just the kind of thing that would get Bush upset and not in a good way. Considering the way Rove stage manages Bush&#039;s intake (as described in The Price of Loyalty) I can&#039;t fathom he&#039;d actually incriminate himself in front of Bush.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What possible reason could Rove have for telling Bush the truth on this subject? It&#8217;s just the kind of thing that would get Bush upset and not in a good way. Considering the way Rove stage manages Bush&#8217;s intake (as described in The Price of Loyalty) I can&#8217;t fathom he&#8217;d actually incriminate himself in front of Bush.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AvengingAngel</title>
		<link>http://www.thetalentshow.org/2005/10/08/the-plame-gate-escape-hatch/comment-page-1/#comment-8090</link>
		<dc:creator>AvengingAngel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Oct 2005 04:50:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thetalentshow.org/wp/?p=2066#comment-8090</guid>
		<description>Get the latest PlameGate articles, briefings, timelines, statutes and other essential documents in the &lt;b&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.perrspectives.com/resources/documents.htm#plame&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Rove/PlameGate Scandal Center.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/b&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Get the latest PlameGate articles, briefings, timelines, statutes and other essential documents in the <b><a href="http://www.perrspectives.com/resources/documents.htm#plame" rel="nofollow">Rove/PlameGate Scandal Center.</a></b></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Geoduck</title>
		<link>http://www.thetalentshow.org/2005/10/08/the-plame-gate-escape-hatch/comment-page-1/#comment-8089</link>
		<dc:creator>Geoduck</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Oct 2005 22:53:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thetalentshow.org/wp/?p=2066#comment-8089</guid>
		<description>I agree that the pardons will start flying out of the Oval Office, but I wonder if BushCo truly expected things to go &lt;i&gt;this&lt;/i&gt; far. Did they really anticipate that someone might seriously investigate all of this, instead of Ashcroft just sweeping it under the rug along with all the other scandals?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree that the pardons will start flying out of the Oval Office, but I wonder if BushCo truly expected things to go <i>this</i> far. Did they really anticipate that someone might seriously investigate all of this, instead of Ashcroft just sweeping it under the rug along with all the other scandals?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: almostinfamous</title>
		<link>http://www.thetalentshow.org/2005/10/08/the-plame-gate-escape-hatch/comment-page-1/#comment-8088</link>
		<dc:creator>almostinfamous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Oct 2005 22:15:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thetalentshow.org/wp/?p=2066#comment-8088</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;Trust me, this article is just evidence that the fix has been in since Day One.&lt;/i&gt;

amen. seems like karl rove is the new oliver north. 

and kamachanda, when it comes to protecting their own asses, the asshole brigade is fully competent</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>Trust me, this article is just evidence that the fix has been in since Day One.</i></p>
<p>amen. seems like karl rove is the new oliver north. </p>
<p>and kamachanda, when it comes to protecting their own asses, the asshole brigade is fully competent</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kamachanda</title>
		<link>http://www.thetalentshow.org/2005/10/08/the-plame-gate-escape-hatch/comment-page-1/#comment-8087</link>
		<dc:creator>kamachanda</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Oct 2005 21:20:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thetalentshow.org/wp/?p=2066#comment-8087</guid>
		<description>&quot;Bush, Rice, and Cheney, fully cognizant&quot;?  This blog must origionate in a parallel universe.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Bush, Rice, and Cheney, fully cognizant&#8221;?  This blog must origionate in a parallel universe.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: NHL</title>
		<link>http://www.thetalentshow.org/2005/10/08/the-plame-gate-escape-hatch/comment-page-1/#comment-8086</link>
		<dc:creator>NHL</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Oct 2005 20:35:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thetalentshow.org/wp/?p=2066#comment-8086</guid>
		<description>Exactly.  I am glad someone else is getting out in front of the breathless orthodoxy that has been shifting the focus to the &quot;little picture&quot; of Rove, Libby, Miller, and Novak.  This orthodoxy seems to be peddling various strands of minutiae while ignoring the big picture.

In these theories, Rove and Libby oil themselves in the State Department report, completely destroying their status as conduits with deniability that would allow a Miller story to proceed with an &quot;unnamed source&quot; as the name-giver. No way. Who creates a paper sh!t trail and then rolls in it?

And everyone&#039;s backup theory is, &quot;Well, Cheney/Bolton/Hadley/State Dept just told Rove and Libby straight up.&quot; Riiight. Based on their knowledge obtained how? From the INR report? Why not just call the CIA director? Unless of course, you did, and he said he couldn&#039;t/wouldn&#039;t tell you right away, and so you started digging, and started getting fed info from the outside such that you and everyone around you became radioactive. Why not just put some more heat on your CIA director to get moving, or just wait until he tells you the answer?

I just can&#039;t see why Bush, Rice, and Cheney, fully cognizant of the lessons of Watergate and Iran Contra, would follow or become caught up in such a ridiculous plan as is being spun on some blogs with &quot;sources&quot;. In my estimation, Cheney in particular (since he was the one who went to the CIA to clear his name, in response to the original NYT article tagging him as giving the order for Wilson&#039;s trip) would do something far simpler at the outset. The fact that it later came back to bite the entire staff in the ass might be interesting, but it&#039;s not where the big fish swims. Then again, Nixon only would have gone down for obstruction in Watergate, and maybe that&#039;s what will happen to Cheney here and everyone will pat themselves on the back thinking &quot;Oh, that&#039;s all that really happened,&quot; ignoring the logical consequence: It takes the main actor out of their primary role as director/approver/establisher of deniability. It&#039;s like saying Nixon didn&#039;t know about Watergate but tried to cover it up.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Exactly.  I am glad someone else is getting out in front of the breathless orthodoxy that has been shifting the focus to the &#8220;little picture&#8221; of Rove, Libby, Miller, and Novak.  This orthodoxy seems to be peddling various strands of minutiae while ignoring the big picture.</p>
<p>In these theories, Rove and Libby oil themselves in the State Department report, completely destroying their status as conduits with deniability that would allow a Miller story to proceed with an &#8220;unnamed source&#8221; as the name-giver. No way. Who creates a paper sh!t trail and then rolls in it?</p>
<p>And everyone&#8217;s backup theory is, &#8220;Well, Cheney/Bolton/Hadley/State Dept just told Rove and Libby straight up.&#8221; Riiight. Based on their knowledge obtained how? From the INR report? Why not just call the CIA director? Unless of course, you did, and he said he couldn&#8217;t/wouldn&#8217;t tell you right away, and so you started digging, and started getting fed info from the outside such that you and everyone around you became radioactive. Why not just put some more heat on your CIA director to get moving, or just wait until he tells you the answer?</p>
<p>I just can&#8217;t see why Bush, Rice, and Cheney, fully cognizant of the lessons of Watergate and Iran Contra, would follow or become caught up in such a ridiculous plan as is being spun on some blogs with &#8220;sources&#8221;. In my estimation, Cheney in particular (since he was the one who went to the CIA to clear his name, in response to the original NYT article tagging him as giving the order for Wilson&#8217;s trip) would do something far simpler at the outset. The fact that it later came back to bite the entire staff in the ass might be interesting, but it&#8217;s not where the big fish swims. Then again, Nixon only would have gone down for obstruction in Watergate, and maybe that&#8217;s what will happen to Cheney here and everyone will pat themselves on the back thinking &#8220;Oh, that&#8217;s all that really happened,&#8221; ignoring the logical consequence: It takes the main actor out of their primary role as director/approver/establisher of deniability. It&#8217;s like saying Nixon didn&#8217;t know about Watergate but tried to cover it up.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

