Home > Programs
> Democracy
Now! > Thur., Aug. 18, 2005
Democracy Now!
ATTN: ALL STATIONS
From: Democracy Now!
Re: Rundown 8-18-05
PRSS Channel: A67.7
Conyers Calls For Investigation Into Ascroft's Role In CIA
Leak Case
Media Culpa: Should The New York Times and Time Magazine
Have Exposed Karl Rove's Role in the Outing of Valerie Plame?
Conflict of Interest? Roberts' Interviews with White House
Officials Prior to Gitmo Ruling Raise Questions About Impartiality
Conyers Calls For Investigation Into Ascroft's Role
In CIA Leak Case
Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) is calling for an investigation
into the role of former Attorney General John Ashcroft in
the outing of undercover CIA operative Valerie Plame. Conyers'
call comes after a new report by investigative journalist
Murray Waas that a special prosecutor was appointed in the
case in large part because FBI investigators had begun to
specifically question the veracity of accounts provided to
them by Karl Rove. We speak with Conyers and Waas.
We begin today looking at the latest in the investigation
into who within the Bush administration outed CIA operative
Valerie Plame, the wife of Ambassador Joseph Wilson. Congressman
John Conyers, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary
Committee, is calling for an investigation into former Attorney
General John Ashcroft's role in the case.
Ashcroft initially refused to recuse himself from the investigation
despite his longtime association with Karl Rove who was being
questioned over the leak by the FBI. At the time, Ashcroft
was being personally briefed about the investigation. Conyers
described this as a "stunning ethical breach that cries
out for an immediate investigation."
Conyers' call comes after a new report by investigative journalist
Murray Waas that Justice Department officials decided to appoint
a special prosecutor in large part because investigators had
begun to specifically question the veracity of accounts provided
to them by Karl Rove.
When first questioned by the FBI, Rove failed to tell investigators
that he had talked to Time reporter Matthew Cooper about Wilson's
wife. In addition, Rove claims that he learned of Valerie
Plame's identity during a conversation with a journalist.
But according to Waas, Rove was unable to recall virtually
anything to investigators about the circumstances about that
conversation including who the journalist was or whether it
took part in person or on the phone.
- Rep. John Conyers, a longtime Congressmember from Detroit.
He is the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee.
- Murray Waas, veteran investigative journalist who writes
for a number of publications. Among them, American Prospect
magazine and Salon.com. He has broken a number of stories
on the saga of the outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame.
He maintains a blog at WhateverAlready.blogspot.com.
Media Culpa: Should The New York Times and Time Magazine
Have Exposed Karl Rove's Role in the Outing of Valerie Plame?
In an article in Vanity Fair, columnist Michael Wolff criticizes
those in the mainstream media - particularly Time Magazine
and The New York Times - who knew of Karl Rove's role in the
outing of Valerie Plame, but refused to expose him. We host
a debate with Wolff and investigative journalist Murray Waas.
In an article in the latest issue of Vanity Fair, columnist
Michael Wolff criticizes those in the mainstream media - particularly
Time Magazine and The New York Times - who knew of Karl Rove's
role in the outing of Valerie Plame, but refused to expose
him.
In the article titled, "All Roads Lead to Rove,"
Wolff writes that if the news media had revealed Rove was
their source, "it might, reasonably, have presaged the
defeat of the president, might have even - to be slightly
melodramatic - altered the course of the war in Iraq."
- Michael Wolff, columnist for Vanity Fair. His most recent
article is titled "All Roads Lead to Rove."
- Murray Waas, veteran investigative journalist who writes
for a number of publications. Among them, American Prospect
magazine and Salon.com. He has broken a number of stories
on the saga of the outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame.
He maintains a blog at WhateverAlready.blogspot.com.
Conflict of Interest? Roberts' Interviews with White
House Officials Prior to Gitmo Ruling Raise Questions About
Impartiality
New details have emerged concerning the timing of John Roberts'
interviews for his Supreme Court post with senior Bush administration
officials which call into question his impartiality in a crucial
case concerning military tribunal at Guantanamo Bay. We speak
with Georgetown University law professor David Luban and Michael
Ratner, president of the Center for Constitutional Rights.
We turn now to the latest on Supreme Court nominee Judge
John Roberts. Roberts received a "well qualified"
rating from the American Bar Association on Wednesday, clearing
another hurdle in his path to the nation's highest court.
Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont, the senior Democrat on
the Senate Judiciary Committee, said it was "regrettable"
the ABA did not review Roberts' documents that have been provided
to the Senate.
Leahy on Tuesday said the documents "paint a picture
of John Roberts as an eager and aggressive advocate of policies
that are deeply tinged with the ideology of the far right
wing of his party then and now." A huge volume of papers
relating to Roberts' work as a lawyer in the Reagan administration
in the 1980s is scheduled to be released today.
In another Roberts development, new details are emerging
over a potentially serious conflict of interest. Since 2003,
Roberts served on the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit.
As we reported previously, Roberts was part of a three-judge
panel that handed President Bush an important victory the
week before he announced Roberts' nomination to the bench.
The appeals court ruled in the Hamdan V. Rumsfeld case that
the military tribunals of detainees held at Guantanamo Bay,
Cuba, could proceed. The decision also found that Bush could
deny terrorism captives prisoner-of-war status as outlined
by the Geneva Conventions.
Well, new details have emerged concerning the timing of Roberts'
interviews for the Supreme Court post with senior Bush administration
officials which call into question his impartiality in the
Hamdan case. Roberts" answers to a Senate questionnaire
reveal that he met with Attorney General Alberto Gonzales
six days before hearing oral arguments. The Hamdan case was
argued on behalf of the administration by a top Gonzales deputy,
Assistant Attorney General Peter Kiesler.
In addition to Gonzales, he met with Vice President Dick
Cheney, the vice president's chief of staff Lewis "Scooter"
Libby, White House chief of staff, Andrew Card, Bush's top
political strategist, Karl Rove and White House legal council
Harriet Miers. And, on the day the ruling was issued in favor
of the administration, Bush himself conducted the final job
interview with Roberts.
Salon.com describes it like this: "Imagine that you're
a party to a lawsuit. Now imagine that, once the case is over
and you've lost, you find out that the judge who ruled against
you was interviewing for a job with your opponent at the same
time he was presiding over your case. Would you feel, just
maybe, that the judge had a conflict of interest? And how
would you feel knowing that the judge got the job he was seeking
-- and that the job was a lifetime appointment as an associate
justice on the U.S. Supreme Court?"
For a copy of today’s program, call 1 (800) 881 2359.
Our website is www.democracynow.org.
Our email address is mail@democracynow.org.
Democracy Now! is produced by Mike Burke, Sharif Abdel Kouddous,
Ana Nogueira, Elizabeth Press, Jeremy Scahill and Parvez Sharma.
Mike Di Filippo is our engineer.
Thanks also to Uri Galed, Angela Alston, Orlando Richards,
Simba Russeau, Johnny Sender, Rich Kim, Joe Murgio, John Randolph,
Chris Zucker, Karen Ranucci, Denis Moynihan, Eric Rweyemamu,
Jenny Filipazzo and Isis Phillips.
|
Listen
to the show
Help
whole
show
