« The Next Open Thread | Main | Clinton, Health Care, and Democratic Values »

June 09, 2006

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b97969e200d8349331fa53ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Greetings from Yearly Kos:

Comments

other coverage from Tom Curry.

First read.

Last night, the activists gave Markos Moulitsas Zuniga, the proprietor of Daily Kos web site, a hero’s welcome. The bloggers had proven “there was a desperate need for strong progressive voices in this country,” he said. “I think we have arrived.”

Actually, Gina, who organized this thing, got a bigger ovation than Kos. As is appropriate.

Hey EW--

I'd love to hear LJ's and Wilson's (and Waas's for that matter) take on some random theories. If you're at liberty to discuss some of them, I know I would sure appreciate the discussion!

Have fun in Vegas! I'm already going there twice this summer (went over Memorial day weekend for a bachelor party and in July for a wedding), so I couldn't swing a third trip.

Cheers to Gina and all the organizers of Yearly Kos. Lots of people have ideas but not so many make those ideas reality. It takes a lot of hard work and perserverance and the organizers should all be applauded. Instead of a bunch of pols heading off to the Aspen Institute to watch leaves turn with other big shots they are meeting with citizens and hashing out what's best for our democracy. That's pretty cool.

Anyway, we've had Eschacon and Yearly Kos. When is The Next Hurrah Fleadh?

Good luck! Looking forward to following the panel online, and to hearing the stories afterwardm, especially any scoops, confirmed-disconfirmed theories you've got.

emptywheel, thanks so much for this post. I am thrilled you are getting the recognition you deserve. I'm also happy Joe Wilson is there. He and Valerie did everything they could to keep us out of Iraq, and they paid a terrible price. At an event like this, they can see how much support they have.

Just a heads up to all fellow Plameaholics here. C-SPAN has decided to headline the Plame panel on C-SPAN2, not C-SPAN3 at 12:30 EDT. So, you can watch online, or on your TV at home or work too!

Can't wait for the fun to begin!

Now you tell me--after I paid the $10!

Good luck EW, I'm looking forward to the panel and am very glad that you will be there!

viget, thanks I turned it on just as they were saying something about that. (My coworkers are using an LCD projector hooked up to an internet station to broadcast the world cup on a wall here... not sure I can talk them into changing the channel.) did they say 12:45 on cspan-2?

Since I don't have TV, I would have paid the $10 anyway. Let the games begin!

fyi, cspan-2 online here for those poor souls without TVs or $10

Here's what makes it worth the ten bucks: hot mikes before the event begins, and during breaks.

It's nice to hear everyone on the Plame panel. Joe Wilson was very charming. Dan Froomkin speaking now.

Hey emptywheel!

Sorry I didn't see your thread until now. It looks like you posted it a few hours ago.

You'll kick ass on the panel, don't worry! Or wait, did you already kick ass? I just looked at the schedule, and it looks like you already did your thing.

I'm too many time zones ahead, and math is hard work, you know ;-)

nope, it's this very hour. First, jane then Wilson then Froomkin, now Murray W.

Thanks DemFromCT, I'm watching the stream now.

I'm waiting to see if emptywheel shouts, "Baba-Booey! Howard Stern!" like she said she was going to.

Nevermind that! She just said the one thing I needed to hear: "I didn't want to happen to this story what happened to Iran-Contra."

That's why I get up in the morning. Thank you!

She makes me feel like a total retard. In a good way.

emptywheel, you're kicking ass, great job.

" tell the story and hold these guys accountable."

-EW

Yes.

Great job, wheel!

Panelists and/or schmoozers. Somebody tell Mr. Waas not to refer to yellowcake as "weapons-grade uranium" as he did in his latest (June 8) National Journal article:

"In March 2002, the CIA had sent Wilson to Niger to look into allegations that Saddam Hussein had tried to procure weapons-grade uranium from the African nation."

Unless I missed something huge (and scary), Niger does not have the technology to refine their uranium ore into "the good stuff." Waas should have written, "had tried to procure a precursor to weapons-grade uranium from...."

A minor point, I know. But reality is an ensemble of minor points.

great job emptywheel!

I just wish you'd told us before launching your own site (emptywheel.com) -- I feel so used, having to find out through C-SPAN.

although frankly, no c-span flub comes close to hearing Larry Johnson try to pronounce "chutzpah"... (although he was a really excellent speaker once he got past the yiddish)

Interesting to hear/see them all in person. Poor Byron York! Larry really let him have it right between the eyes. Very diverse group and very interesting.

emptywheel

Great job, great job. Excellent job answering the Jason Leopold question. I hate to break the mood, but I have to ask about your earlier comment about Armitage. Surely you heard something interesting in that regard (that goes beyond the Daily News story) to support the idea that, just as your Judith Miller speculation was subsequently largely confirmed, so your Armitage stuff is holding up to what we're learning. So spill. Again, I'm assuming this goes beyond simply the question of whether he's going to be indicted or what have you, and has to do with what his actual role and motivation was, right?

Just watched CSpan. I am in awe. What a superb panel. Speechless. Felt like I was watching history in the making. Beyond great.

Hey the panel was great, and EW you did a fantastic job, particularly on the critical sourcing question with respect to Leopold's piece. I also liked Christy's indirect approach to where the story is headed -- Professional Prosecutors don't waste the time of an underpaid citizen's grand jury.

EW, it was great to see you at the big table. I took a long New Jersey lunch and watched in glee. It DID feel like history. What a panel!

And your work was SO important--in the past year I've felt that if I missed even one post, I'd lose my place in the story. As you said, it's been your job to dive deep into the facts and come up with the story. And you've succeeded on the grandest scale. Thanks for all.

Great job on the panel, would have loved to be there. It is a little weird to have the t.v. on C-Span watching, the computer streaming AAR and reading your website. Just wanted to congratulate your appearance.

Thanks for the kind words, everyone. It was a lot of fun.

And Jeff, sorry, no real scoops. It seems everyone agrees, once and for all, that Armitage is Mr. X. There's probably a little more, but I need to sort it out.

emptywheel dot cot ???

you been seeing another blog behind our backs EW ???

just for the smart people apparently, cuz they won't let me in ...

thanks for everything you do, and we forgive you for the Plame fetish

if you ever find a cure, don't take it

and hurry up and dish on the "random theories" discussions

I'll take your wild assed guesses over most of the so called journalists anonomously sourced spin

2 interesting panel moments... the audience reaction to calling out Steno Sue - shocked silence for a moment - by Jane Hamsher with Froomkin on the panel (discussed later), and the (mostly) good-natured teasing of Byron York by everyone (he is in attendance).

emptywheel

There's probably a little more, but I need to sort it out.

I am hoping that is the sort of understatement worthy of a Patrick Fitzgerald press conference.

When you say there is agreement that Armitage is Mr. X, does that mean agreement that he is Novak's first source, not just Woodward's?

Waas' gradual, respectful and substantive calling out of Byron York was a thing of beauty. Truly, so much was played out there, it's one for the history books.

I do feel a bit sorry for York. I imagine he's writing a scathing report right now, though.

I swear, everybody at this convention is brilliant and charming. I want to marry them all (sigh).

I do feel a bit sorry for York.

But here's the thing. Much of what Waas said was not even particularly aimed at York, and it was of much wider significance. I missed Larry Johnson going after York, and I am much more willing to believe that it was less appropriate. Johnson is, after all, a much less able contender than Waas.

Sorry to be repetitive on this, but I'd really like to know: when you say there was agreement that Armitage was Mr. X, does that refer to him being Novak's first source, as well as Woodward's?

Larry Johnson went after conservatives in general, IIRC, not York personally, as Waas did. But he hit them right between the eyes. I connected it to York because he was obviously there listening.

EW - you were brilliant, and seemed completely in your element. My only complaint is that the damned thing ended when it should have just been getting started - I really wanted to hear more detailed analysis and prognostication.

Jeff,
Yes, I think the understanding was he leaked to both. Though it's kind of vague. I was pretty tired by that point of the story.

EW,

Congratulations! I am so excited for you and all of the other bloggers who were able to participate in the panel. What is exciting about YKos is the press coverage that it is getting (it has made it on to the top of the Times webpage). Maybe those who have been doing the best work on the Plame issue, i.e. the bloggers, will finally be able to get their voices heard in a broader way. With net neutrality failing today in the House, Joe Wilson's words about how bloggers have been furthering the ideals of democracy speak very loudly. Thanks for all your time and amazing work on the Plame matter.

Kate Phillips was hanging with Ad Nags during my media training session. I can't get the story opened, she doesn't say anything about a drooling blogger getting media training, does she?

Thanks, emptywheel.

I want to hear the panel again - it went quickly and the online stream was a little dodgy - but one interesting detail I caught was Waas' allusion to, and evident lack of confidence in, the Post's poorly sourced report that Hannah was supposedly worried about getting indicted.

I also thought your evocation of Iran-contra and Waas' of Whitewater and impeachment really nicely set the current story, and our travails with coverage of it, in a little recent historical relief.

she doesn't say anything about a drooling blogger getting media training, does she?

How'd you know? It's the lede.

Kidding. No such mention.

Alright, this is for Jeff. The two briefers or one briefer you never got to ask? I asked. It was two briefers.

There is that whole business of the disclaimers from the former chief of staff, and that is still in litigation until its belated trial date in early next year; but, understanding how the post junket reports were made, once again, might help understand other things coming out of the Jeffress trial balloon machine which awakens from time to time in the media, eliciting Walton's scoldings and threats of more severe sanctions; I hear Olsen's lament not to be tossed into the briar patch on that; but, hearing some of the people involved retrace that again might be of passing interest to help understand during the next seven months of interim whether we, or even the special prosecutor, know that alibi for a patent fabrication.

Then there is the whole matter of the Maguirite nonTroll's questioning about the Libya trade mission, plus your totally different topic discussion about the newly chastened regime's nonproliferation hopes, at least as enunciated by that leader's offspring who attended the London School of Economics. Though all these supraSarahan topics are much more volatile and likely less discussible because they relate to current and future events in the region.

Departing even more widely from the narrow theme of the panel, perhaps, as many principals are in attendance, likely, would be the lecture Sen. Leahy gave Mr. Friedrich at the Judiciary Committee hearing on the attorney general's desire to redact the 188 cartons of Jack Anderson's papers, Gonzales fairly disregarding the fact JA's heirs has loaned those materials to a professor who is publishing a civics study book sourcing them, date unspecified set in 2007, and, as the WaPo link describes, G's rep Friedrich basically taking the 5th, thereby evoking the committee's ire.

That's the news from the area forty miles north of Gina's place.
JL

Great panel and great job, ew! Watching it now after recording it. Not surprised at all how great it was but just put me down as a little star struck right now.

Also wanted you to know you looked like I expected. That was kind of an extra fun treat.

Hoping littlesky and I can make the 2nd annual.

fyi the panel now re-airing on c-span 2 (10 pm Eastern time). It's about 1/2-way through already.

You were brilliant!

I passed Byron York in the hallway afterwards and thanked him for being such a good sport (yeah, right!) He laughed.

EW - you were great.
No worry - the closest that NYT's Kate Phillips comes to bloggers' TV appearances is this:

Some even fit the advice column mode. At several sessions on Thursday, one offered political pundit training, (for the mainstream television appearance — smile no-matter-what; wear boring clothes and always a jacket; women, don't tilt your heads; men, keep a hand in one pocket).

Very positive piece indeed. Hang out with her and make friends.
She will be useful later on. She is postively disposed toward
ykos convention crowd.

ew - just caught the end of the panel rebroadcast and my mate dowloaded your opening comments. You are such a good person. I fully understood your perspective of adding depth to a story and to remind people to keep it real and not fall for the same MO time and again and not let them get away with it again. These people are sociopaths and will not stop until they are, indeed, held accountable.

Damn, emptwheel! Good memory (though it was your question, after all). For my part, at the moment I can't remember what motivated the question. It appears that the SSCI is correct on this count. Does the motivation have to do with whether one of the DO debriefers might have discussed something related to the Niger documents?

So are we going to get a series of rolling disclosures, of questions asked and answered, theories and hypotheses denied or confirmed? Can you tell how badly I wish I were there?

EW,

Just wanted to say I was proud of you. You continue to impress us all.

Folks if you don't know this woman walks the walk. I met her the first time when we car pooled to the Iowa Caucus for the Doctor.

Never Surrender!

You were great on the Plame panel. That forum alone was worth the price of my ticket.

I missed all of this and I am PISSED about it! C'SPAN is not shy about replaying extremely boring events ad nauseum. Let's hope they re-run THIS several times. It's either that or buy the (pixelissimo) internet feed...rats!

frank

I'm listening to the good Doctor as we speak. He still has it.

And I won't surrender. Don't you surrender either.

ew -

Looking for the full video of the panel, but the little bit I saw with you in it was great. It was great to put a face to the "name" and (though I'm going to have to review the video) it was wonderful to see you drilling down on the knowns, the known knowns and the known unknowns. :-)

nothing to do with the island of Kos then? Oh well, never mind, should have used Google lol!

The comments to this entry are closed.

Where We Met

Blog powered by Typepad