I'm all for restoring honesty. But the prestigiously named RestoreHonesty.com, originally set up by Joe Wilson (and which Glenn Reynolds noted was paid for by Kerry campaign) doesn't look very honest these days.

I mean phentermine Buy Online Pharmacy? No, really. (Check it out.)

If my impatience is showing, the reason isn't so much that I'm getting sick of the damned now-you-see-it-now-you-don't Plame scandal. That's something I was sick to death of long ago (and which would make me what Mickey Kaus calls a "scandal pooper"). Nor is it that I'm sick of contemplating the endless shenanigans of which the CIA seems capable. Rather it just floors me that so many thinking people can't understand a very simple mechanism.

At the risk of being simplistic, I'd like to point out a few things about the CIA.

By its nature, the CIA is not a group of nice guys, but a naughty agency. Maybe even a naughty naughty agency! They do things that are often secret, sometimes illegal, and they build a thing called "plausible deniability" into almost everything they do. They're so secret that even talking about who they are and what they do can be a criminal offense if you're knowledgeable about what you're talking about.

The CIA knows how to run individual agents, blackmail people, persuade them in all sorts of ways (again, legal and illegal), foment coups d'etat, and topple governments. It is an agency capable of great mischief at the very least.

With all that in mind, isn't it obvious that if such an agency (or a large enough "flock of pouting spooks" within it) had a problem with its purported commander in chief, that a great deal of trouble might be created for him? And with minimal effort? Considering the delicate nature of the CIA's work, anything even approaching a little too much zeal would do fine. Or anything approaching a little too little zeal! (Plus, there's a labrythine bureaucratic maze in which to hide while playing "CYA" games.)

Not that I'm attacking the CIA, mind you. To anyone wanting to be considered patriotic, any registered Republican, or for that matter anyone even slightly sympathetic to conservatism or libertarianism, such things are not allowed, because there's a war on and we need the CIA and its resources badly. Yet because the pouting flock (and those in sympathy with them) is on the left, as a practical matter this means that the CIA is largely immune from criticism, right or left.

I mean, what critic would want to get hit by the pouting flock's scandal poop?

Ah, but there are too many pooper scoopers in the blogosphere!

UPDATE: An intriguing tidbit from a staunchly antiwar and anti-Bush source:

For liberals and leftists accustomed to viewing the CIA as a rogue agency prone to unaccountable covert actions abroad, it is ironic that since 9-11, the CIA has emerged as a bastion of opposition to George W. Bush’s imperial foreign policy.

MORE: Speaking of too much or too little zeal, PunditGuy discusses the cavalier attitude some CIA officials exhibit over the naughty naughtiness which is supposed to be kept secret:

....CIA officials with an ax to grind are whispering into cell phones and conducting meetings over coffee at an undisclosed Starbucks.

So, what’s the problem? After all, it’s only the secrets of the CIA, and ultimately the national security of the United States that is in serious jeopardy. For some, the risks are worth the temporary gain.

Heads they win. Tails they win.

Sigh.

UPDATE (12/07/05): Here's Michael Ledeen, debating the war with Marc Cooper at Pajamas Media:

CIA should be shut down, as Pat Moynihan rightly said. Tenet should have been fired on Sept. 12th. Why hasn't Bush seen that? Beats me. It's a colossal blunder. It almost brought him down, and it's cost us enormously.