03-11-2008, 11:46 PM
|
#1 (permalink)
|
|
Banned
|
DOJ "Sat" On PA of Spitzer Story for Weeks. Was Story Timed to Distract From This?
CentCom Commander Admiral Fallon <a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-boot12mar12,0,3473735.story">resigned and retired</a> on tuesday,
(I chose CFR member Max Boot's "take", on Adm. Fallon, at the link above, because Bush himself could have written it, IMO.)
.....while everyone was distracted by DOJ leaks to the media detailing NY Gov. Spitzer's trysts with expensive prostitutes.
<h3>Please consider that, as of 4:00 Am on March 12, 2008, no official from the DOJ has officially commented on the arrests related to Gov. Spitzer's involvement</h3>, those info releases have all been "handled" as <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/11/nyregion/11inquire.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin">"said the officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
"</a>....
These same "officials" were reported by the NY Times as saying:
Quote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/11/ny...hp&oref=slogin
....The inquiry, like many such investigations, was a delicate one. Because the focus was a high-ranking government official, prosecutors were required to seek the approval of the United States attorney general to proceed. Once they secured that permission, the investigation moved forward. ....
|
...but more recently, another "unidentified official" told Reuters the exact opposite:
Quote:
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNe...60908320080311
<h3>Probe that snared Spitzer did not need OK from top</h3>
Tue Mar 11, 2008 6:38pm
.....A federal official said Justice Department headquarters in Washington had been aware of the prostitution probe, but the U.S. attorney's office in the Southern District of New York, which led the investigation, had not requested approval to go forward.
"The United States attorney was not required to seek, and did not seek, approval of the attorney general or the deputy attorney general with respect to any investigative steps taken in this matter," the official said........
|
Every "official" spewing into this distraction "Op' (if that is what it is....) can later deny that they gave any of these details to the press....the advantage of being "the officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity."
Could this be a carefully timed and coordinated set of events?
Are Adm. Fallon and Gov. Spitzer just a couple of "kewpie dolls", thrown in our faces to offset and distract from what is the real agenda, here. Is this "Op" akin to Libby prosecuter Patrick Fitzgerald's description in his Oct., 2005 news conference announcing Scooter Libby's indictment?
This is important because IMO, Adm. Fallon stood in the way of ramping up US military provocation against Iran:
Does it seem like just a coincidence that this happened tuesday, just before Cheney's scheduled March 16 <a href="http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5h9hSBz4YhqlOS94panYkpKVosrwA">trip to Saudi Arabia</a>....in March, 2003, when Bush approved the Iraq invasion, Cheney gave detailed war plan briefing to Saudi Prince Bandar, BEFORE Sect'y of State Colin Powell was advised that invasion plans were proceeding:
Quote:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...030503059.html
Commander Rejects Article of Praise
By Thomas E. Ricks
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, March 6, 2008; A03
The top U.S. commander in the Middle East is the subject of a glowing magazine article <h3>describing him as the only person who might stop the Bush administration from going to war against Iran.</h3>
Esquire magazine's forthcoming profile of Adm. William "Fox" Fallon portrays the chief of the U.S. Central Command as "brazenly challenging" President Bush on Iran, pushing back "against what he saw as an ill-advised action."
Written by Thomas P.M. Barnett, a former professor at the Naval War College, the article in the magazine's April issue predicts that if Fallon leaves his position at Central Command, "<h3>it may well mean that the president and vice president intend to take military action against Iran before the end of this year and don't want a commander standing in their way."</h3>
The article is written in an admiring fashion, praising Fallon as "a man of strategic brilliance" whose understanding of the tumultuous situation in Pakistan "is far more complex than anyone else's."
Asked about the article yesterday, Fallon called it "poison pen stuff" that is "really disrespectful and ugly." He did not cite specific objections.
Barnett said he has not heard from Fallon about the article.
The White House declined to comment, but administration insiders said the article was being discussed there yesterday. Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said, "Secretary [of Defense Robert M.] Gates has read the profile on Admiral Fallon but chooses not to comment on it or other press accounts."
Fallon clearly cooperated with Barnett for the article, with the author accompanying the Centcom chief on trips to Egypt and Afghanistan over the past year. The article quotes Fallon as saying one day in Cairo that "I'm in hot water again" with the White House, apparently for telling Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak that the United States would not attack Iran.
Fallon has previously made it clear he has differences with the Bush administration's foreign policy. Some White House aides were said to be unhappy with his decision to dump "the long war" as a phrase to describe U.S. efforts against terrorism. In addition, some White House officials were irked by the persistent friction between him and Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq. Fallon and Petraeus are known to have disagreed about plans and troop levels in Iraq, but Petraeus, even though technically subordinate to Fallon, appears to have more influence with Bush.........
|
Quote:
March 5, 2008
<div class="centerContainer" style="clear:both">
<div class="post" align="left">
<div class="storytitle" id="post-27031"><a href="http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/03/06/the-danger-of-ethics-and-competency-bush-considering-firing-centcom-chief-adm-fallon/" rel="bookmark">The Danger of Ethics and Competency: Bush Considering Firing CentCom Chief Adm. Fallon</a></div>
<div class="postSubline" style="padding-top:5px">
By:
Nicole Belle on Thursday, March 6th, 2008 at 9:00 AM - PST
<script type="text/javascript"> digg_url = 'http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/03/06/the-danger-of-ethics-and-competency-bush-considering-firing-centcom-chief-adm-fallon/'; </script>
<script type="text/javascript"> digg_title = 'The Danger of Ethics and Competency: Bush Considering Firing CentCom Chief Adm. Fallon'; </script>
<script type="text/javascript"> digg_skin = "compact"; </script><span class="diggthisplugin" style="width: 140px; padding-top: 10px; margin-left: 20px;">
<script type="text/javascript">
(
function() {
var ds=typeof
digg_skin=='string'?digg_skin:'';
var h=80;
var w=52;
if(ds=='compact') {
h=18;
w=120;
}
var u=typeof
digg_url=='string'?digg_url typeof DIGG_URL=='string'?DIGG_URL:window.location.href);
document.write("<iframe src='http://digg.com/tools/diggthis.php?u="+escape(u)+(typeof digg_title=='string'?('&t='+escape(digg_title)):'')+(typeof digg_bodytext=='string'?('&b='+escape(digg_bodytext)):'')+(typeof digg_topic=='string'?('&c='+escape(digg_topic)):'')+(typeof digg_bgcolor=='string'?('&k='+escape(digg_bgcolor)):'')+(ds?('&s='+ds):'')+"' height='"+h+"' width='"+w+"' frameborder='0' scrolling='no'></iframe>");
}
)()
</script>
</span>
</div>
<div class="storycontent">
<p><a href="http://static.crooksandliars.com/2008/03/08fallon600.jpg"><img src="http://static.crooksandliars.com/2008/03/08fallon600.thumbnail.jpg" /></a></p>
<p><a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2008/03/05/fallon-bush-fire/">Think Progress</a>: </p>
<blockquote><p>Defense Secretary Robert Gates has called CENTCOM commander Adm. William Fallon “<a href="http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/01/05/us.iraq/index.html">one of the best strategic thinkers in uniform today</a>.” Fallon <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/31/fallon-escalation/">opposed the “surge” in Iraq</a> and has consistently battled the Bush administration to avoid a confrontation with Iran, calling officials’ war-mongering “<a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2007/09/23/fallon-constant-drumbeat-of-iran-war-talk-not-helpful/">not helpful</a>.” Privately, he has vowed that an attack on Iran “<a href="http://www.ipsnews.net/print.asp?idnews=37738">will not happen on my watch</a>.”</p>
<p>Unfortunately, this level-headed thinking and willingness to stand up to President Bush may cost him his job. According to a new article by Thomas P.M. Barnett in the April issue of <a href="http://www.esquire.com/">Esquire</a> magazine (on newsstands March 12), Fallon may be prematurely “relieved of his command” as soon as this summer:</p>
<blockquote><p>[W]ell-placed observers now say that it will come as no surprise if Fallon is relieved of his command before his time is up next spring, maybe as early as this summer, in favor of a commander the White House considers to be more pliable. If that were to happen, <strong>it may well mean that the president and vice-president intend to take military action against Iran before the end of this year and don’t want a commander standing in their way</strong>.</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<p>Just another day in BushWorld. There’s a sneaky (and admittedly tin-foil hatted) suspicion on my part that there is a calculus going on here to make sure that we’re either in or on the threshold of aggression with Iran–<h3>something that Fallon has dug his heels in and fought vehemently against–as we near the November election, to help give the edge to John McCain.</h3> </p>
|
Quote:
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/09/12/webb-fallon/
CentCom Chief Fallon: Petraeus Is ‘An Ass-Kissing, Little Chickensh*t,’ ‘I Hate People Like That’
September 12, 2007
....In January, President Bush replaced Abizaid and Casey, who were “surge” skeptics, with Adm. William Fallon and Gen. David Petraeus. This week, Petraeus — in the first public hearings since taking on his new role — delivered his Iraq assessment to great media fanfare. But where was his boss, Admiral Fallon? Inter-Press Service suggests animosity between the two might be one reason for Fallon’s absence:
Fallon told Petraeus [in March] that he considered him to be “an ass-kissing little chickensh*t” and added, “I hate people like that”, the sources say. That remark reportedly came after Petraeus began the meeting by making remarks that Fallon interpreted as trying to ingratiate himself with a superior.
The Washington Post reported this weekend that there is an internal military debate, described as “Armageddon,” brewing between Petraeus and Fallon because the two men have “profoundly different views of the U.S. role in Iraq.”
Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA) announced today that he will be asking Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI) to call Fallon to testify on “his views on the region.” Webb decried the lack of independence in Petraeus’s reporting, observing that there are “a lot of control factors going on that haven’t been visible” from the one-sided testimony of Petraeus:
WEBB: [T]here’s something of a kabuki going on right now. You know, the Petraeus report was brought in. On the one hand they’re calling it independent; on the other, General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker, from my understanding, gave a one-hour exclusive interview to Fox News after their first day of testimony. […]
So it was a very narrow and focused two days of hearings…we need to hear from people like Admiral Fallon and others to get a sense of how the region is in play. … He was, by many accounts, questioning keeping these troop levels this high. […]
So I’m going to be recommending to Senator Levin that we get Admiral Fallon in and get his views on the region....
|
Last edited by host; 03-12-2008 at 12:54 AM..
|
|
|
