Interesting stuff from M Crispin MIller, John Dean on Kathleen Dunn show.

[Jackpine Radical]

I won't recite chapter & verse, esp. since most DUers are pretty familiar with both.

Miller was Miller. Recounted the Kerry brouhaha.

Interesting points from Dean--

He doesn't believe in significant levels of election fraud in either 2000 or 2004. Somebody ought to get to him with some facts.

He talked a lot about Woodward, seeming to say that he thought Woodward was both unethical in his denigrating a big story that he himself is part of, and is helping along with a new layer of obfuscation of the Plame story.

He cited the Hadley theory, attributing it to Raw Story, which he described as "a reliable source."

He thinks Libby is playing for a pardon, with his lawyers dropping hints about how much damage he can do with his defense if it all goes to trial.

He says that the current WH "Push Back" strategy is evidence that Rove is fully back on the job.

[Jackpine Radical]

1. Shameless Self-Serving

:kick:

[H2O Man]

2. I agree with Dean.

Raw Story appears to have a very reliable source to information on Mr. Hadley. I'm sure that in the next few days, they will be in a position to expand on the reasons why Hadley's attorney decided to approach Fitzgerald on this.

The part on Libby looking for a pardon, and his attorneys are indeed signaling that a trial would knee-cap the administration. I'd be curious what you think about any attempt to pressure a person of George W. Bush's make-up? I do not view any public pressure as working in the manner they are hoping for.

Last night, I found myself thinking that Rove's hand is behind a lot of the White House offensive. Yet, again, I think it is fun to consider some of the dynamics: does Rove want to take attention off of Cheney? Or is he putting the old man in the cross-hairs of the prosecutor?

[Jackpine Radical]

4. Insightful questions as always.

I think I just saw a report of a Hadley denial, which is very interesting under the circumstances. Not because it necessarily exculpates him from anything, but because it indicates that Lala touched a nerve, no mean feat for a small liberal website.

Re: Bush's possible reaction. I think you're right about how Bush would react to simple pressure from Libby or his ilk--he would likely just dig in his heels & consult Jack, Jim & Johnny (Daniels, Beam & Walker, respectively), but that may not be the question here. It may be more a question of how Rove, Hughes, or even Condi decide to pull the strings.

I get an increasing feeling that Rove is maneuvering himself into a posistion to feed Cheney to the lions if necessary. Sort of Agnewize him. (All these little stories & memoes going all the way back to the energy policy meetings are suddenly surfacing.) Drag something as foul as Cheney across your trail & you'd think it would throw the hounds off the track.

[gumby]

3. Link to the archives

http://www.wpr.org/ideas/programnotes.cfm

Both programs were good. I just went to the program notes, but these programs aren't archived yet -- will be shortly.

I wanted to listen again to the Dean program to write down the "official" definition of "strict constructionist." It 'isn't very pretty.'

Now, if Ben Merens would follow Dunn's lead and host some relevant programs, WPR would improve.

[Jackpine Radical]

5. The "official" def, that Dean credited to Rehnquist, was a judge who:

Sides with the prosecution in criminal cases & sides with the defense in civil rights cases.

This was the definition he used when vetting SC nominees for Tricky Dick.