Comments on: The Turning of the Tide: Let’s Take the Offensive Now http://informedspeculation.com/2005/10/30/the-turning-of-the-tide-lets-take-the-offensive-now/ Refunds Cheerfully Given To All Who Disagree Fri, 10 Feb 2012 06:53:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: peter http://informedspeculation.com/2005/10/30/the-turning-of-the-tide-lets-take-the-offensive-now/comment-page-1/#comment-7414 peter Mon, 31 Oct 2005 18:20:02 +0000 http://decision08.net/2005/10/30/the-turning-of-the-tide-lets-take-the-offensive-now/#comment-7414 Well, there was Teapot Dome -- I'm not a good enough student of American history to know which other scandals occured in the past -- but I think that the answer to your question is that in times past there was a higher caliber of public servant than we have today. This is obviously quite a generality, but I think it is by and large true. Not surprising -- to be in public life these days you have to accept getting the crap beat out of you every day, and who needs that? Well, there was Teapot Dome — I’m not a good enough student of American history to know which other scandals occured in the past — but I think that the answer to your question is that in times past there was a higher caliber of public servant than we have today. This is obviously quite a generality, but I think it is by and large true. Not surprising — to be in public life these days you have to accept getting the crap beat out of you every day, and who needs that?

]]> By: Mark http://informedspeculation.com/2005/10/30/the-turning-of-the-tide-lets-take-the-offensive-now/comment-page-1/#comment-7380 Mark Mon, 31 Oct 2005 04:08:40 +0000 http://decision08.net/2005/10/30/the-turning-of-the-tide-lets-take-the-offensive-now/#comment-7380 I think a more interesting question was how little scandal there was (of a legal jeopardy nature) prior to Nixon...was it just that Watergate made the press more aggressive, after Vietnam made the Presidency a subject of ridicule (hey, hey, LBJ, how many kids did you kill today?)?... I think a more interesting question was how little scandal there was (of a legal jeopardy nature) prior to Nixon…was it just that Watergate made the press more aggressive, after Vietnam made the Presidency a subject of ridicule (hey, hey, LBJ, how many kids did you kill today?)?…

]]> By: peter http://informedspeculation.com/2005/10/30/the-turning-of-the-tide-lets-take-the-offensive-now/comment-page-1/#comment-7379 peter Mon, 31 Oct 2005 03:57:47 +0000 http://decision08.net/2005/10/30/the-turning-of-the-tide-lets-take-the-offensive-now/#comment-7379 I stand corrected, although in my hazy memory I thought Bert Lance just quit with no legal problems, and honestly I don't know who Hazel O'Leary is. Also, I was counting the five years of LBJ (1963-1968), so it would be 17 years vs. 25 years. But your point is well taken, it's not a fair comparison. I stand corrected, although in my hazy memory I thought Bert Lance just quit with no legal problems, and honestly I don’t know who Hazel O’Leary is.

Also, I was counting the five years of LBJ (1963-1968), so it would be 17 years vs. 25 years. But your point is well taken, it’s not a fair comparison.

]]> By: Mark http://informedspeculation.com/2005/10/30/the-turning-of-the-tide-lets-take-the-offensive-now/comment-page-1/#comment-7377 Mark Mon, 31 Oct 2005 03:48:14 +0000 http://decision08.net/2005/10/30/the-turning-of-the-tide-lets-take-the-offensive-now/#comment-7377 peter, Henry Cisneros...Clinton. Bert Lance...Carter. Mike Espy...Clinton Administration. Ron Brown...Clinton Administration. Hazel O'Leary...Clinton Administration. You missed Casper Weinberger on the Republican side...but more to the point, since LBJ, Democrats in office: Carter, Clinton, 12 years. Republicans: Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush I, Bush II...25 years. Not a fair comparison... peter, Henry Cisneros…Clinton.

Bert Lance…Carter.

Mike Espy…Clinton Administration.

Ron Brown…Clinton Administration.

Hazel O’Leary…Clinton Administration.

You missed Casper Weinberger on the Republican side…but more to the point, since LBJ, Democrats in office: Carter, Clinton, 12 years. Republicans: Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush I, Bush II…25 years. Not a fair comparison…

]]> By: peter http://informedspeculation.com/2005/10/30/the-turning-of-the-tide-lets-take-the-offensive-now/comment-page-1/#comment-7376 peter Mon, 31 Oct 2005 03:32:12 +0000 http://decision08.net/2005/10/30/the-turning-of-the-tide-lets-take-the-offensive-now/#comment-7376 Sorry if I was unclear: the analogy was not between Liddy and Libby. Rather, the point I was trying to make was that when G Gordon Liddy was indicted, one might have thought then that the Watergate affair was over, when in fact it went on for another two years or so. Similarly, one might think that because Scooter Libby was indicted, that the Plame affair is over. Perhaps it is and perhaps it isn't. So the analogy was not between the two men, it was between the two indictments and whether they both are false signs that their respective scandals have reached their peaks. Today I made a mental list of all of the high officials in Republican administrations who went to jail or were indicted. Haldeman, Erlichman, and Colson served time. Agnew plea-bargained and resigned to avoid indictment. Nixon resigned. Poindexter was pardoned. Libby now indicted. I then tried to think of high ranking officials in Democratic administrations since LBJ which were indicted or jailed. Outside of the Clinton impeachment, I couldn't think of any instances where senior administration figures in Democratic administrations were in serious legal trouble. Am I missing anyone? I am not making the argument that Democrats are cleaner than Republicans -- we are all fallible and the temptations of power are great - but it is an interesting line of reasoning which I haven't seen discussed anywyere. Sorry if I was unclear: the analogy was not between Liddy and Libby. Rather, the point I was trying to make was that when G Gordon Liddy was indicted, one might have thought then that the Watergate affair was over, when in fact it went on for another two years or so. Similarly, one might think that because Scooter Libby was indicted, that the Plame affair is over. Perhaps it is and perhaps it isn’t. So the analogy was not between the two men, it was between the two indictments and whether they both are false signs that their respective scandals have reached their peaks.

Today I made a mental list of all of the high officials in Republican administrations who went to jail or were indicted. Haldeman, Erlichman, and Colson served time. Agnew plea-bargained and resigned to avoid indictment. Nixon resigned. Poindexter was pardoned. Libby now indicted. I then tried to think of high ranking officials in Democratic administrations since LBJ which were indicted or jailed. Outside of the Clinton impeachment, I couldn’t think of any instances where senior administration figures in Democratic administrations were in serious legal trouble. Am I missing anyone? I am not making the argument that Democrats are cleaner than Republicans — we are all fallible and the temptations of power are great – but it is an interesting line of reasoning which I haven’t seen discussed anywyere.

]]> By: louielouie http://informedspeculation.com/2005/10/30/the-turning-of-the-tide-lets-take-the-offensive-now/comment-page-1/#comment-7375 louielouie Mon, 31 Oct 2005 02:29:48 +0000 http://decision08.net/2005/10/30/the-turning-of-the-tide-lets-take-the-offensive-now/#comment-7375 i can't agree with peter on his liddy analogy. liddy didn't work at the white house during W/G. he was outside contract help. you know........a plumber. i think a better analogy would be poindexter during the reagan admin. taking the rap for the arms trafikking between our good friends the mullahs of iran our other good friends in central america. i can’t agree with peter on his liddy analogy.
liddy didn’t work at the white house during W/G.
he was outside contract help.
you know……..a plumber.
i think a better analogy would be poindexter during the reagan admin. taking the rap for the arms trafikking between our good friends the mullahs of iran our other good friends in central america.

]]> By: Mark http://informedspeculation.com/2005/10/30/the-turning-of-the-tide-lets-take-the-offensive-now/comment-page-1/#comment-7372 Mark Sun, 30 Oct 2005 19:49:41 +0000 http://decision08.net/2005/10/30/the-turning-of-the-tide-lets-take-the-offensive-now/#comment-7372 Hey, Liddy's a sneaky guy, maybe you were right the first time... Hey, Liddy’s a sneaky guy, maybe you were right the first time…

]]> By: peter http://informedspeculation.com/2005/10/30/the-turning-of-the-tide-lets-take-the-offensive-now/comment-page-1/#comment-7371 peter Sun, 30 Oct 2005 18:51:02 +0000 http://decision08.net/2005/10/30/the-turning-of-the-tide-lets-take-the-offensive-now/#comment-7371 Sorry, meant to say "the trail stops at Libby," not Liddy. Can't these guys get names which don't sound alike? Sorry, meant to say “the trail stops at Libby,” not Liddy. Can’t these guys get names which don’t sound alike?

]]> By: Colin http://informedspeculation.com/2005/10/30/the-turning-of-the-tide-lets-take-the-offensive-now/comment-page-1/#comment-7370 Colin Sun, 30 Oct 2005 18:49:54 +0000 http://decision08.net/2005/10/30/the-turning-of-the-tide-lets-take-the-offensive-now/#comment-7370 Barnes is right. Kristol is right (boy, after the whole Miers fiasco, its sure nice to say that again). And, of course Mark, you're right. Its time to take on the opponents and detractors of the Administration, no more bunker mentality. No matter what happens, it can't be worse than what we've just been through. Stephen Hayes said that in regards to Iraq, the White House has the arguments but is just unwilling to articulate them for fear of retaliatory leaks from the CIA. Well, make the case anyway, prepare for the leaking onslaught and have a response ready. Last week was the low point of the Administration. If they start once again aggressively making the case for their agenda, in a few months the current troubles will be nothing but a distant memory and an interesting but ultimately superfluous historical footnote. Barnes is right. Kristol is right (boy, after the whole Miers fiasco, its sure nice to say that again). And, of course Mark, you’re right. Its time to take on the opponents and detractors of the Administration, no more bunker mentality. No matter what happens, it can’t be worse than what we’ve just been through. Stephen Hayes said that in regards to Iraq, the White House has the arguments but is just unwilling to articulate them for fear of retaliatory leaks from the CIA. Well, make the case anyway, prepare for the leaking onslaught and have a response ready. Last week was the low point of the Administration. If they start once again aggressively making the case for their agenda, in a few months the current troubles will be nothing but a distant memory and an interesting but ultimately superfluous historical footnote.

]]> By: peter http://informedspeculation.com/2005/10/30/the-turning-of-the-tide-lets-take-the-offensive-now/comment-page-1/#comment-7369 peter Sun, 30 Oct 2005 18:48:27 +0000 http://decision08.net/2005/10/30/the-turning-of-the-tide-lets-take-the-offensive-now/#comment-7369 I believe that Barnes is wrong by stating that "short of a Rove indictment, Bush won’t be overshadowed by trials and hearings the way Reagan was." First, Fitzgerald was quite clear that there are things which he still does not know. It is possible that the five indictments against Libby will put enough pressure on him that he will reveal incriminating information against Bush and/or Cheney. We may be in the stage which is equivalent to when Gordon Liddy was indicted -- as we know, Watergate went on for about two years after that. Or maybe the trail stops at Liddy -- we don't know yet. However, if there is a trial, it will be very difficult for the Bush administration, as it seems inevitable that Cheney will have to testify, and perhaps Bush as well. If this is concurrent with a DeLay trial, it will be devastating. However, I would be very surprised if Libby comes to trial. My guess is that the Bush administration will do anything to prevent this, so he will plea bargain, serve a minimal amount of jail time, and be pardoned by Bush in January 2009. I believe that Barnes is wrong by stating that “short of a Rove indictment, Bush won’t be overshadowed by trials and hearings the way Reagan was.”

First, Fitzgerald was quite clear that there are things which he still does not know. It is possible that the five indictments against Libby will put enough pressure on him that he will reveal incriminating information against Bush and/or Cheney. We may be in the stage which is equivalent to when Gordon Liddy was indicted — as we know, Watergate went on for about two years after that. Or maybe the trail stops at Liddy — we don’t know yet.

However, if there is a trial, it will be very difficult for the Bush administration, as it seems inevitable that Cheney will have to testify, and perhaps Bush as well. If this is concurrent with a DeLay trial, it will be devastating.

However, I would be very surprised if Libby comes to trial. My guess is that the Bush administration will do anything to prevent this, so he will plea bargain, serve a minimal amount of jail time, and be pardoned by Bush in January 2009.

]]>