Today's Culture of Treason: Scooter's Back! & Dana's Pinko Hubby
After the CIA frogmarched (I like definition #2) the $9,500 Democratic donor from the General's Office on Thursday, the Associated Press felt it appropriate to publish...

...a picture of Cheney aide Scooter Libby in its coverage of the Democratic CIA leaker.
Obviously, the Culture of Treason Party is not going down easy like a $5,000 cash donation to the Ohio Democratic Party in the '04 elections.
Mark Levin is monitoring the spin at National Review Online:
They're fixated with the weather and gas prices — and anything else that will divert the public's attention from the stunning revelation that a Sandy Berger crony has apparently been leaking top-secret information from her high post at the CIA. The media will continue to downplay this story as they cover-up their own role in exposing our nation's secrets, including the supposed existence of CIA prisons in Europe.Now, reports come out that not only was the Pulitzer Prize winner a huge Democratic supporter, but her husband, William Goodfellow, is executive director of the Center for International Policy who's mission includes reform of the nation's intelligence agencies!
She'll be called a "whistleblower" and praised as some kind of patriot (a patriot, in the eyes of the media, is anybody who undermines this administration and the war effort by leaking national security secrets to them). They will downplay that McCarthy was a Clintonoid who somehow managed to land a top post at the CIA, ultimately winding up in the CIA's Inspector General's Office, from where she could monitor CIA internal investigations of, well, leaks, among other things.
The news spin, to the extent attention is being paid to this by the big media outlets, is that McCarthy's firing is unprecedented! Or it's Bush's fault! In one of the most absurd comments by any newsman anywhere, Newsbusters.org notes that Bob Schieffer of CBS Evening News asserted that "it is no secret that the current administration does not like its people hanging out with news reporters without permission" and he described the firing as "a first — a dubious first, to be sure." Here. Is this guy for real?
So Dana Priest reports on the CIA through leaks by the Democratic donor Mary O. McCarthy, while her husband heads a left-wing organization that wants to "reform the CIA"... Sweet!

Dana Priest interviewing a farmer(?) in Afghanistan.
(To the Leftists, they're all farmers!)
Penraker adds this from a November post:
What else does the Center do? Well it complains bitterly that we did not accept the doctors that Castro offered in the wake of Katrina. Referring to him as "President Castro" (a formulation that appears to give far too much respect to a brutal dictator) the Center issued this statement.While Dana was publishing leaks from a high level CIA operative, her husband's organization, CIP, was releasing articles, quotes and interviews like this one in the Baltimore Sun:
They call Bush "delusional" since he seems to believe that Castro's government will fall relatively soon, and he has taken the prudent step of appointing a "transition coordinator". This seems to have inordinately outraged them.
Now, it is not certain that Dana Priest shares any of her husband's views. She may be a hard-bitten conservative, and her marriage may be of the Carville-Matalin variety.
Yeah, And monkeys might fly out of my....
Over the years, there have been many attempts to politicize intelligence. But no government has been so blatant as the Bush administration, which used phony intelligence to justify the war against Iraq and has introduced a new director of central intelligence, Porter J. Goss, to conduct a political housecleaning at the highest levels of the agency.While Dana Priest was doing interviews about Gitmo torture practices, her husband's organization releases this piece on Gitmo abuse:
The CIA director, Mr. Goss, has warned all hands that they must "support the administration and its policies," and appears to have begun a bureaucratic housecleaning to ensure such support...
...Instead of negotiating the intelligence reform proposals of the Senate and House, it is time for the intelligence committees of the legislature to monitor the political behavior of the CIA director and to ensure that the agency provides objective and balanced intelligence assessments to policy-makers.
Their argument is that given the many reports of detainees being abused there, Guantanamo has come to be seen internationally as a symbol of U.S. disregard for human rights and for the Geneva Conventions. And so, to get rid of the harmful symbol, we should close it.While Dana Priest was writing about clandestine "rendition" operations that actually started under Bill Clinton, her husband's group, The Center for International Policy, was/is actively promoting an anti-Bush, anti-American foreign policy message:
They are right. The administration's denials that any abuses have occurred have lost all credibility.
Before 9/11, The Center for International Policy, CIP, a Fenton Communications client, mainly acted as Fidel Castro's greatest "think tank" ally. Much of its million-dollar budget was spent lobbying to end economic sanctions and travel restrictions against Cuba.Hat Tip Larwyn
Now, it has another mission. Fenton has established a "war room" with CIP called The Iraq Policy Information Program (IPIP). Its main job is getting the anti-Bush foreign policy message out to the media and providing guests for talk shows. A featured speaker of the IPIP is former ambassador Joe Wilson, one of the Bush administration’s most vocal enemies. Like Moveon.org and Win Without War, the contact for the Iraq Policy Information Program is Fenton Communications. Win Without War also collects tax-deductible donations through CIP.
Can we now call this a Culture of Treason? ...Or must there be more proof?
Funny, Ace and Wizbang were right. The mainstream news is circling their wounded like a herd of musk ox. Here is the latest from the New York Times:
Colleagues Say C.I.A. Analyst Played by the RulesGoodness!... Does that mean they're all playing by these rules?
Sweetness and Light has a great scoop on Dana Priest and Joe Wilson.
AJ Strata has much more on the circling musk oxen.
Woah! Babalu is not pleased to hear about the Castro apologists...
From sticking up for Castro, to HELPING Castro by penetrating and discrediting the CIA, this really sounds like a lovely crowd over at the Washington Post.




































16 Comments:
Isn't Fenton Communications the shop that represents Cindy Sheehan?
Gateway,
Great reporting, as usual. Showing the linkages between Dana Priest and her husband's organization is something you will find scarcely a sentence about in the mainstream media.
I suppose it's impossible that a woman could conduct impartial reporting if her husband has an opinion on the subject. Is that the new position of the right?
Where were these complaints when Rush Limbaugh was sleeping with CNN anchor Daryn Kagan?
Dave in NYC,
You've GOT TO BE KIDDING!
Check out the pics on the web of Dana Priest participating in CIP's "Cowboy Diplomacy" conference, along with Joe Wilson in October 2003.
There is nothing impartial about that broad--Ms. Goodfellow-Priest. The WaPo, knowing her family ties, should have NEVER let her write that story--esp, condsiering the partisan Bush hating hacks at the CIA she used as sources.
Dave, were Rush Limbaugh and Daryn Kagan married? You see Dave, gererally speaking, a married man can exert much more influence over a wife than a girlfriend.
Great job, GP. Nobody connects the dots better than you do.
What I don't understand is, what exactly is the criticism of Dana Priest? She is being criticized not because her reporting was biased, but simply because she reported on things that Republicans would rather not talk about.
The fact that her husband runs the CIP may be a good sound-byte with which to bash her, but what exactly is it that she did wrong?
Looks like Dave in NYC drinks too much of the local Kool-Aid to be able to connect any dots at all.
Sandy Burglar was McCarthy's mentor and the new McCarthyism is treason on the left.
"HOBBYIST PLANE SPOTTERS" AND DANA PRIEST'S "OPEN SECRET" ABOUT CIA JETS !
From Dana Priest, Washington Post, December 27, 2004
Jet Is an Open Secret in Terror War
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A27826-2004Dec26?language=printer
"Since Sept. 11, 2001, secret renditions have become a principal weapon in the CIA's arsenal against suspected al Qaeda terrorists, according to congressional testimony by CIA officials. But as the practice has grown, the agency has had significantly more difficulty keeping it secret.
According to airport officials, public documents and hobbyist plane spotters, the Gulfstream V, with tail number N379P, has been used to whisk detainees into or out of Jakarta, Indonesia; Pakistan; Egypt; and Sweden, usually at night, and has landed at well-known U.S. government refueling stops."
Got that? "HOBBYIST PLANE SPOTTERS." YEA, RIGHT !
Dave, were Rush Limbaugh and Daryn Kagan married? You see Dave, gererally speaking, a married man can exert much more influence over a wife than a girlfriend.
So you'd have no problem with Priest's articles if she was just sleeping with Goodfellow, and they weren't actually married?
No, I'd have a problem with Priest's articles period, whether she was married, not married, divorced, single, etc. She has an agenda, which doesn't set well with the profession she is in, excluding the editorial pages.
Dave, do you think a married woman is more likely to be influenced by her husband, or is a single woman more likely to be influenced by a guy she is dating?
I knew I'd heard the name 'Fenton Communications' before so I went looking into last falls released and I found a connection between Joan Blades of MoveOn.org, Cindy Sheehan and Fenton Communications which was promoting Cindy on behalf of MoveOn and Soros, no doubt. Read the article for yourself down to where Fenton Communications is listed as the power behind Cindy:
http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=politics&id=3382521
No, I'd have a problem with Priest's articles period, whether she was married, not married, divorced, single, etc.
Can you explain what exactly was wrong with the articles? "She has an agenda" is not really an explanation.
Dave, do you think a married woman is more likely to be influenced by her husband, or is a single woman more likely to be influenced by a guy she is dating?
I think influence in a relationship, especially when both partners are well-educated professionals, usually goes both ways. I also think it depends on the particular man and the particular woman.
Just to use an example - one woman is sleeping with one of the most persuasive radio hosts in the country. Another woman is married to a guy who runs a think tank advocating "cooperation, demilitarization and respect for human rights." Who is more influenced by her partner? If I had to guess, I'd say the first one.
But I also don't think it matters. A person's work should be judged on its merits, regardless of who their spouse is. If Priest's work was flawed, then it shouldn't matter whether her husband was George Soros or Newt Gingrich.
Hey, Dave in NYC,
I suppose one could argue that Goodfellows' connections to the leftwing treason crowd are merely coincidental to Priest's work to undermine the Bush White House and the war on terror, as long as one was prepared to dismiss Priest's publication of classified material as just "something the Republicans don't like." But I can't imagine anyone honestly being that unclear on the concept.
"A person's work should be judged on its merits, regardless of who her spouse is. If Priest's work was flawed, then it shouldn't matter whether her husband was George Soros or Newt Gingrich."
I don't know how much experience you have with relationships, Dave, but you seem rather inexperienced if you truly believe what you posted. How long have you been married?
As for Priests work, it is flawed, perhaps not even true. One would think she would like to have another source to fact check her story.
But even if the facts are correct, she had to know that she was revealing information that was classified. That goes without saying, and I think she has admitted that. Is that against the law? Should the law only apply to some, and not all?
"She has an agenda" is an explanation to all but the Left, Dave. And as a former managing editor of a newspaper myself, I would not have allowed this story to go to press. It was not sourced to a high level of certainty, and it is politically motivated. This kind of reporting is killing the newspaper business.
I don't know how much experience you have with relationships, Dave, but you seem rather inexperienced if you truly believe what you posted. How long have you been married?
What aspect of it do you take issue with? Do you think a woman is incapable of writing an objective article on a subject if her husband has a strong opinion about that subject? Do you think the same thing about men with opinionated wives?
Again, I just don't see why it's relevant. Reporters are not supposed to express their opinions in their reporting, but that does not mean they are not allowed to have opinions. Why does the source of those opinions matter?
But even if the facts are correct, she had to know that she was revealing information that was classified.
In my opinion, publishing classified information that exposes illegal or immoral actions by the government is not a bad thing--especially when it does no damage to national security (and I think the claims that national security has been damaged by these stories is, at best, unsupported).
I also think that whether the story should be held back for national security reasons is something that gets decided by the editor/publisher, not by the writer alone.
"She has an agenda" is an explanation to all but the Left, Dave.
I know what "she has an agenda" means, but I have yet to see anyone explain how her reporting showed an agenda other than an attempt to report the truth.
While I appreciate your calling attention to one of the many issues the MSM won't touch with a 10-foot pole, it's ludicrous that you want to pretend that conservatives are the only ones who lose in this game. It happens every day in a thousand ways, due to a thousand different types of ideology and collusion, the results of which are all over the political map. When are you guys going to drop the whole "the liberal media's scaring me" sham? Probably when it doesn't enrage talk radio listeners anymore, something that's not likely to happen in our lifetimes. And your linking to that NYT story on the Herald Tribune site is really a shot into your own foot. If you're blinkered enough to believe that anything the administration does (apart from profiteering and graft)is halfway competent, including rounding up the real 9/11 perps, then you deserve to go away for a long time on nothing stronger than a powerful person's suspicion that your ideological purity is not up to snuff. If you'd like a nice example of conservatives working themselves into a lather over nothing, google the phrase "2. 95% of warrants for murder in Los Angeles are for illegal aliens" (without quotes), count the number of blogs that reference this "fact," then try to find the supposed source in the LA Times. So who are the real dittoheads? Treason this.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home