And these guys have real secrets to leak

I have been anxiously waiting all week for somebody to deliver the knockout blow to Rumsfeld though some kind of leak. I figure there must be all sorts of skeletons and insinuations on Rumsfeld throughout Washington file cabinets, Abu Ghraib, torture, renditions, bad intel, bad policy, the list goes on and on.

The strategy could vary, but if you wanted to get rid of Rumsfeld, a classic military strategy would be to fire the first shots(the general's criticism,) make the Rumsfeld supporters show their defense, then attack with a second round from a second direction while they're unsettled. (An augmented version of this could be aimed at Bush as well, by getting him way out on the defending Rumsfeld limb before hacking down the tree.) So, all week this week I've been looking for leaks. Nothing yet.

But then I come across this.

But what's been little noted thus far is what looks to be a similar revolt brewing at the CIA. An ex-senior agency officer who keeps in contact with his former peers told me that there is a “a big swing” in anti-Bush sentiment at Langley. “I've been stunned by what I'm hearing,” he said. “There are people who fear that indictments and subpoenas could be coming down, and they don't want to get caught up in it.”

This former senior officer said there “seems to be a quiet conspiracy by rational people” at the agency to avoid involvement in some of the particularly nasty tactics being employed by the administration, especially “renditions.”

I don't know about the sources or connections of Ken Silverstein, but the administration is not in a position to handle any serious leaks on any of the programs the CIA has been involved in, renditions, secret prisons, torture, pre-war intel, surveillance....

This could be a second blow.

Also, interestingly, the way this piece describes the resistance is very similar to the military resistance to Rumsfeld. It seems that those who disagreed with the policies are now trying to bail off the sinking ship so that the blame, for policies they opposed, stays affixed to the Bush administration. No more "bad apples" arguments will be allowed.

I'm reading pretty deep beneath the text, but I think all of this may be telling.

Also of interest, and in the same vein, check out this little clip of Tim Russert on Imus where he says that alot in the military supported the Murtha plan, and that Bush “won’t fire Rumsfeld because it would be the equivalent of firing himself.”

In other words, again, Bush will continue to allow Rumsfeld to make policy costing lives solely out of Bush's concern for his domestic political standing. For the third time, technically not a crime, but it should be.