Why the Bushiviks Caved: Phase 2

[elucidator]

As most of you are aware, the Senate Dems ambushed the Pubbies with some parliamentary judo the other day. Demanding that further effort be expended regarding “Phase 2”, the mythical second stage of the Senate investigation on intelligence and its usage. An investigation that seemed destine to die a slow and lingering death by neglect.

So “Give 'em Hell” Harry pipes up, demands action, shuts down the Senate. Presumably, behind the closed doors were performed world class exhibitions of pissing and moaning and the very highest dudgeon. After only 2 hours (and I am surprised that any of our Senators can take a whiz in two hours, much less a hundred of them…) the Dems get what they want.

You gotta wonder why. It certainly not like the Republicans are eager to discuss the matter, they’d rather have their prostate massaged with a socket wrench. In their minds, nothing is so radioactive. Last thing in the world they want to do.

But they caved. They still have the votes, the Dems can’t actually force them to do anything. Damned sure haven’t up till now. So howcum they caved?

I think I know.

Tomorrow’s New York Times is coming out with an article about how bad the sources were for the intelligence about Iraq and Al Q, as well as how widely dessiminated this information was. A few choice morsels, if you will. If you won’t, I guess you can just stop reading…

Report Warned Bush Team About Intelligence Doubts (Published 2005)

A top member of Al Qaeda in American custody was identified as a likely fabricator months before the Bush administration began to use his statements as the foundation for its claims that Iraq trained Al Qaeda members to use biological and chemical weapons, according to newly declassified portions of a Defense Intelligence Agency document…

Oh, my.

…The document, an intelligence report from February 2002, said it was probable that the prisoner, Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, “was intentionally misleading the debriefers’’ in making claims about Iraqi support for Al Qaeda’s work with illicit weapons…

Gracious!

And furthermore…

…“Saddam’s regime is intensely secular and is wary of Islamic revolutionary movements,’’ the D.I.A. report said in one of two declassified paragraphs. “Moreover, Baghdad is unlikely to provide assistance to a group it cannot control.’’…

No shit, Sherlock?

Da punch line:

…The newly declassified portions of the document were made available by Senator Carl Levin of Michigan, the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee…

The theory: the Republicans knew this was coming: the Dems told them flat out, it was leaked, whatever…

So the Dems said “If you don’t crank up that committee, this hits the papers and you are seen voting against an investigation when it looks really, really bad. The WH doesn’t have the clout to save your political bacon. I’ve seen pictures of your family, you don’t really want to spend more time with them. The chickens are coming home to roost, do you really want to sit underneath them?”

So they caved. And the trajectory of the shit is about to intersect the locus of the fan.

(Note: posted to Pit by default: not a Debate, not really a rant, sure as hell not Mundane Pointless… If the luminous intelligence of our Mods so deem, it might be moved, I suppose. If so, this unworthy one humbly submits in advance.)

[Marley23]

There’s only one thing in this story that really shocks me: this guy’s last name is Libi??

[elucidator]

Addenduh

This could also lend a lot of political cover to Senators looking to bail on their previous war votes. As this stuff appears to be recently de-classified, they can legitimately claim they would not have voted as they did if they had seen these documents. Wonder who the first Republican to duck under its cover will be?

[DMark]

Come on now, don’t be a cock-tease…you’re telling me the press is actually going to print the truth?

My guess is the next terrorist attack will shockingly be a bomb in the offices of the New York Times.

[FinnAgain]

That bit about the NY Times is whoosh, right DMark?

Luc: we will see what happens… the info about the OSP or Downing Street Memo didn’t accomplish anything much. Unless there’s something truly major to come out, it seems like everything in the linked article is old hat. Nothing there seemed all that new to me, at least.

[DMark]

@FinnAgain

That bit about the NY Times is whoosh, right DMark?

Of course it was…I mean, who would possibly want the NY Times to shut the fuck up?

[FinnAgain]

Okay, so now you’re being sarcastic in your denial and thus suggesting that someone would “want the NY Times to shut the fuck up” badly enough to stage a fake terrorist bombing in their offices?

Seriously, please state your position clearly, as I can’t judge body language or tone of voice via the 'net.

[DMark]

@FinnAgain

Okay, so now you’re being sarcastic in your denial and thus suggesting that someone would “want the NY Times to shut the fuck up” badly enough to stage a fake terrorist bombing in their offices?

Seriously, please state your position clearly, as I can’t judge body language or tone of voice via the 'net.

Sarcasm…but considering the White House has been directly involved with outing a CIA agent because they didn’t like her husband’s comments, and torture seems to be OK nowadays, well…I wouldn’t put it past them to find a way to discredit, or disable their perceived attacker of their credibility. Would they bomb the NY Times? Absolutely, but they probably couldn’t get away with it so I doubt it would be that blatant.

[lissener]

Isn’t this al-Libi guy the one mentioned in the recent Frontline about torture? I mean, aren’t we to blame for his bad intelligence, since it’s pretty widely accepted that torture gets you bad intel?

[Johanna]

The name al-Libi wouldn’t be his real name but a pseudonym. It just means ‘the Libyan’. The Islamist militant boys tend to rename themselves with adjectives formed from country of origin.

[hawthorne]

I don’t think Republican caving cries out for explanation. I mean, the administration’s unpopular, its head cannot be re-elected, its enforcers under siege - it’s quite understandable that there is a scramble for the exit.

But if this is true - and sadly, it doesn’t seem implausible - it would be pretty fucking bad. People have said that the invasion of Iraq was playing into the hands of al Qaeda, but if it turns out that it was literally and knowingly there should be serious trouble.

[BobLibDem]

It wouild be bad news indeed if the average American had the brains of an earthworm. Unfortunately, the scene will play with these lines:

Source 1: Bush knew there was no Niger uranium connection to Iraq

Source 2: Bush knew that an informant was giving false information that he used to justify the Iraqi war.

Bush: 9/11 !

Stupid Masses: USA! USA!

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@Marley23

There’s only one thing in this story that really shocks me: this guy’s last name is Libi??

Squtar Libi, no less.

[Wolfian]

@DMark

My guess is the next terrorist attack will shockingly be a bomb in the offices of the New York Times.

Come on. We all know the next attack will be on the Reichstag, er, Senate.

[mhendo]

@Left Hand of Dorkness

Squtar Libi, no less.

Now that’s funny.

Nice one.

[John_Mace]

@elucidator

So “Give 'em Hell” Harry pipes up, demands action, shuts down the Senate. Presumably, behind the closed doors were performed world class exhibitions of pissing and moaning and the very highest dudgeon. After only 2 hours (and I am surprised that any of our Senators can take a whiz in two hours, much less a hundred of them…) the Dems get what they want.

They got what they want? Are you sure? All I heard was they appointed a committed to investigate the committee that was investigating the intel. Said committee to issue a report in 2 weeks. Man, them Dems sure got the GOP over a barrel!

[ElvisL1ves]

If it keeps the issue in the news, under public scrutiny, then yes, they do.

[elucidator]

As ever, John, a ray of sunshine.

…But neither that report nor another issued by the Sept. 11 commission made any reference to the existence of the earlier and more skeptical 2002 report by the D.I.A… the document would have circulated widely within the government, and it would have been available to the C.I.A., the White House, the Pentagon and other agencies. It remains unclear whether the D.I.A. document was provided to the Senate panel…

Which is to say that the document was widely available to the Executive but not widely available to the Legislative.

Now, as I’m sure you know, the Dems who voted for the authorization have been uncomfortably pinned by that vote, a point the WH and Senate Republicans are not reluctant to belabor. But if it turns out that there was good reason for skepticism, and that good reason was withheld from the Senate…casts rather a baleful light, don’t you think?

Interesting side note:

…The request to declassify the two paragraphs was made on Oct. 18 by Mr. Levin and Senator John D. Rockefeller IV of West Virginia, the top Democrat on the Senate intelligence committee. In an Oct. 26 response, Kathleen P. Turner, chief of the D.I.A.’s office for Congressional affairs, said the agency* “can find no reason for it to remain classified.*’…’

(emphasis gleefully added)

Had it been a WH decision, can there be any doubt that some “reason for it to remain classified” would have been found? I think that likely. Which hints to me that the “intelligence community” has come round to the opinion that falling upon their collective swords is more loyalty than they care to offer, seeing as how the WH has decided to try to pin it all on them. Can’t say as I blame them.

But in any case: when Bush, Cheney, et. al. publicly offered al-Libi as “credible”, they simply had to have had good reason to believe otherwise, and chose to ignore it. Chose to represent al-Libi’s story as not only “credible” but demanding of action. Chose war.

If you have an alternative explanation, I am eager to hear it. Have you?

[NurseCarmen]

@elucidator

They still have the votes, the Dems can’t actually force them to do anything.

Well, actually the Dems invoked a procedural rule, The Pubs couldn’t vote it down because 2 Senators invoked it. They actually can force them to do some things, but decorum has always prevented it. But the Democrats had a double edged sword with the manuever. One, they forced the Republicans to face something they had no interest in facing, and made them look bad to the press at the same time. Two, they let the Republicans know that if they pull a nuclear option, the Democrats can use procedure to grind the business of the Senate to a halt. And while they grind it to a halt, they get to dictate the topics. Since the Republicans have quite a few topics floating out there that they would prefer not be brought up, it was a good holloween fright. Win win. Ya gotta love Harry.

[elucidator]

@NurseCarmen

…Ya gotta love Harry.

I’m just wild about Harreeeeeeee…

But the “cave” part. Note how quickly Sen Rocky was to claim that, in fact, the investigation was ongoing, proceeding briskly, not neglected at all, no sir, not a bit of it. So who asked for an “oversight” committee? Certainly not the Pubbies, who’s line is “everything is going along very well, nothing to see here, you looky loos, move along, move along…”)