SINCE 1759

Free alert to Candide's Notebooks
Your email:


Candide’s Latest: Tuesday, October 3, 2006
Condi's Lies
She plays foreign policy like it's a Brahms lullaby

Condoleezza Rice has always thought that her charm, her talent for Brahms and her academic intelligence—not to mention Bush referring to her as his “mother hen”—could pass her off as one of those credible voices inside the Bush White House, one of those voices James Q. Wilson can point to and proudly say: Integrity. Rice of course blew that cover in her famous 9/11 Commission testimony in May 2004 (remember that exchange? “BEN-VENISTE: Isn't it a fact, Dr. Rice, that the August 6 [Presidential Daily Briefing] warned against possible attacks in this country? And I ask you whether you recall the title of that PDB? RICE: I believe the title was, "Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States." Now, the... BEN-VENISTE: Thank you.” The full transcript here). But Rice has been on a mild romp lately, trying to refute charges that she was indifferent to warnings by the administration’s own counterterrorism brains that an attack was (as her memo indicated) imminent. “Simply ludicrous,” is how she described the claim, in the Woodward book, that she’d given CIA chief George Tenet and his counterterrorism guru Cofer Black the “brush off.” Rice, the Times reports, “said she had no specific recollection of meeting with Mr. Tenet and Mr. Black on July 10, 2001.” She was wrong: “A review of White House records has determined that George J. Tenet, then the director of central intelligence, did indeed brief Condoleezza Rice and other top officials on July 10, 2001 about looming threat from Al Qaeda, a State Department spokesman said on Monday evening,” the Times says. More to the point: “Members of the commission that investigated the attacks of Sept. 11 and the events leading up to them have said they were never told of a special White House meeting held on that date, and have questioned in recent days whether information about such a meeting may have been intentionally withheld from the panel.” And the scandals pile on.


Hastert's Lies

Lying must be a Republican thing. As the Mark Foley scandal unfolds around not only how he spoke to underage pages in Congress, but how his Republican superiors knew about it and covered it all up, Dennis Hastert, the Speaker of the House, is claiming never to have been told about Foley’s IM lust: Hastert said, though, “that someone obviously did know of the Internet instant-messages before that time and should have alerted authorities immediately. "Anyone who can should help us find out who," Hastert said in a prepared statement.” Yet: “Hastert did not mention e-mails from Foley to another 16-year-old page, from Louisiana, in 2005 that triggered the initial focus on the Florida congressman. That exchange, which is not as sexually explicit as the 2003 communications, was made public on Thursday by ABC News. Hastert's office has acknowledged knowing about the 2005 incident.” So Hastert figures that by not having been privy to every Foley message ever written to a page, he can always finger one of them and say: “I didn’t know,” and use that to build the a shield to protect him from what he did know. Talk about depravity. An equally suspicious circumstance: The Miami herald had the Foley emails. Why didn’t it write about them until now?

  • Latest: Washington Times calls for Hastert's resignation: "Either he was grossly negligent for not taking the red flags fully into account and ordering a swift investigation, for not even remembering the order of events leading up to last week's revelations -- or he deliberately looked the other way in hopes that a brewing scandal would simply blow away. He gave phony answers Friday to the old and ever-relevant questions of what did he know and when did he know it? Mr. Hastert has forfeited the confidence of the public and his party, and he cannot preside over the necessary coming investigation, an investigation that must examine his own inept performance."
  • Remember Ronald Reagan's 11th Commandment? "Thou Shalt Not Speak Ill of Another Republican." Ohdave remembers it. And nails the consequence: "... What is shows is that to the Republicans, personal behavior and private morality don't matter; what matters is only the public narrative and adherence to a far right agenda. And so, if Mark Foley publicly sponsors a bill to protect minors from on-line predators, it doesn't matter if privately he is preying on minors. The Reagan Rule prevails. Don't make it public. Keep it behind closed doors. Don't say anything. Protect the criminal. Protect the decadent. Put on a happy face. Keep the agenda going." See the full post at Into My Own...

In Other Worlds

Can blogs reshape American Democracy? Netroots bloggers don’t share a common ideology. If they are united by anything, it is their harsh criticism of the Republican Party, their shared anger at the Democratic Party’s failures, and their rough analysis of how it could do better.” Henry Farrell goes on…

Bookmark and Share


Read Pierre’s Latest

The Latest Comments

Add to Google Reader or Homepage Subscribe in NewsGator Online Subscribe in Rojo   Add to My AOL Subscribe in FeedLounge Add to netvibes Subscribe in Bloglines Add to The Free Dictionary