TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Plame leak fingers Rove
Pages (4): « 1 [2] 3 4 »
again, this is an ongoing investigation. i will not get sucked in to Opus's speculation because that is just what it is so far. Opus went so far as to say that the WaPost was biased in quoting the '03 intel committee report that clearly states their findings. i mean, WTF? it's futile. i'm not gonna spoonfeed shit to him or anyone here for that matter.
the facts that are out there are out there for anyone to interpret. why would i bang my head against a Opus's brickwall of partisaned speculation? i said my peace. and nooooo, Opus hasn't used party rhetoric has he, occ?
give ME a f^%$#in break!
BTW if anyone has lied so far, it's already been proven that Wilson has.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Q5echo BTW if anyone has lied so far, it's already been proven that Wilson has. |
Just to be consistent Bush should promote Rove. Anything less would be a sign of weakness:
For those who make mistakes but do Bush's bidding:
Tenet (slam dunk) -> Metal of Freedom
Condi (ignoring PDB) -> promoted to Secretary of State
Rumsfeld (abu ghraib + not enuff troops) -> Kept his Job
For those who dissent:
Powell (quietly voice his opposition to Iraq war) -> let go
Richard Clarke (raised 9/11 warnings) -> demoted and let go
General Chenseki (critical of number of troops) -> let go
Sen Wilson (no wmd africa connection) -> cia info leak on wife
An interesting "talking point"...
| quote: |
| Don't forget, sitting in prison right now, protecting her source, is Judith Miller of the New York Times. She, along with Matthew Cooper and Robert Novak, also wrote about Valerie Plame. Novak has apparently cut some sort of sweetheart deal with the special prosecutor. Miller is refusing to name her source to the special prosecutor. So she's sitting in the hoosegow. But why is she in jail? It's been disclosed that Rove signed a statement giving anyone permission to speak about any contact he had over the Plame affair. Matthew Cooper of Time cited that assurance when he finally rolled over and agreed to testify, avoiding jail. It was also made easier when his employer released his e-mail contacts with Rove. So there was no more source to protect. But neither Judith Miller nor the New York Times is rolling over. Couldn't the Times release Miller's notes just as easily as Time did Cooper's? Of course. But they won't. And Judith Miller is sitting in prison. Why? Who are they protecting? It couldn't possibly be Rove. Because if it were, the Times would roll on him in a second. How could they resist the chance to pile on against their nemesis, George W. Bush? That's the real story here...and the mainstream media is missing it. It's not Rove, it's who Judith Miller is protecting. Could it be somebody else in the Bush White House? Cheney's chief of staff, Scooter Libby, has come up. Could it be Joseph Wilson? Valerie Plame herself? We'll probably know soon enough. And don't forget a likely possibility: that the prosecutor will wrap things up and nobody will be indicted. Can you imagine the rage of the left then? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Q5echo OH MY FUCKING GOD! you are out there dude. no one can rationalize with you foaming at the mouth and a rock hard dick for any little thing that can embarass the administration. wow! admit it, your weak ass party has never and will never be able to outmanuever or out-stratigize Karl Rove, so what do guys do? try to cut him off at the knees at the first hint of blood. hint, mind you, because no one yet has testified that he outed anyone. if he did. he'll pay one way or another. but keep on speculating. you're good at it. just remember thats all you've done in this thread so far. |
| quote: |
| Opus went so far as to say that the WaPost was biased in quoting the '03 intel committee report that clearly states their findings. i mean, WTF? it's futile. i'm not gonna spoonfeed shit to him or anyone here for that matter. |
| quote: |
| the facts that are out there are out there for anyone to interpret. |
| quote: |
| why would i bang my head against a Opus's brickwall of partisaned speculation? i said my peace. and nooooo, Opus hasn't used party rhetoric has he, occ? give ME a f^%$#in break! |
| quote: |
| BTW if anyone has lied so far, it's already been proven that Wilson has. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Shakka An interesting "talking point"... Miller is obviously not protecting Rove as the source, so forgive me for saying that something appears a bit fishy. |
Ive been listening to this news since last week on NPR about the rumours. It's been heating up for a while now.. but oh WoW to the the 1st president to ever have the lowest approval rating after been re-elected. At least this is IMPORTANT news, not a waste of time like it did for a stained dress.
G'head, Opus, tear it apart.
Link
| quote: |
| Karl Rove, Whistleblower July 13, 2005; Page A14 Democrats and most of the Beltway press corps are baying for Karl Rove's head over his role in exposing a case of CIA nepotism involving Joe Wilson and his wife, Valerie Plame. On the contrary, we'd say the White House political guru deserves a prize -- perhaps the next iteration of the "Truth-Telling" award that The Nation magazine bestowed upon Mr. Wilson before the Senate Intelligence Committee exposed him as a fraud. For Mr. Rove is turning out to be the real "whistleblower" in this whole sorry pseudo-scandal. He's the one who warned Time's Matthew Cooper and other reporters to be wary of Mr. Wilson's credibility. He's the one who told the press the truth that Mr. Wilson had been recommended for the CIA consulting gig by his wife, not by Vice President Dick Cheney as Mr. Wilson was asserting on the airwaves. In short, Mr. Rove provided important background so Americans could understand that Mr. Wilson wasn't a whistleblower but was a partisan trying to discredit the Iraq War in an election campaign. Thank you, Mr. Rove. Media chants aside, there's no evidence that Mr. Rove broke any laws in telling reporters that Ms. Plame may have played a role in her husband's selection for a 2002 mission to investigate reports that Iraq was seeking uranium ore in Niger. To be prosecuted under the 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act, Mr. Rove would had to have deliberately and maliciously exposed Ms. Plame knowing that she was an undercover agent and using information he'd obtained in an official capacity. But it appears Mr. Rove didn't even know Ms. Plame's name and had only heard about her work at Langley from other journalists. [Karl Rove] On the "no underlying crime" point, moreover, no less than the New York Times and Washington Post now agree. So do the 36 major news organizations that filed a legal brief in March aimed at keeping Mr. Cooper and the New York Times's Judith Miller out of jail. "While an investigation of the leak was justified, it is far from clear -- at least on the public record -- that a crime took place," the Post noted the other day. Granted the media have come a bit late to this understanding, and then only to protect their own, but the logic of their argument is that Mr. Rove did nothing wrong either. The same can't be said for Mr. Wilson, who first "outed" himself as a CIA consultant in a melodramatic New York Times op-ed in July 2003. At the time he claimed to have thoroughly debunked the Iraq-Niger yellowcake uranium connection that President Bush had mentioned in his now famous "16 words" on the subject in that year's State of the Union address. Mr. Wilson also vehemently denied it when columnist Robert Novak first reported that his wife had played a role in selecting him for the Niger mission. He promptly signed up as adviser to the Kerry campaign and was feted almost everywhere in the media, including repeat appearances on NBC's "Meet the Press" and a photo spread (with Valerie) in Vanity Fair. But his day in the political sun was short-lived. The bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report last July cited the note that Ms. Plame had sent recommending her husband for the Niger mission. "Interviews and documents provided to the Committee indicate that his wife, a CPD [Counterproliferation Division] employee, suggested his name for the trip," said the report. The same bipartisan report also pointed out that the forged documents Mr. Wilson claimed to have discredited hadn't even entered intelligence channels until eight months after his trip. And it said the CIA interpreted the information he provided in his debrief as mildly supportive of the suspicion that Iraq had been seeking uranium in Niger. About the same time, another inquiry headed by Britain's Lord Butler delivered its own verdict on the 16 words: "We conclude also that the statement in President Bush's State of the Union Address of 28 January 2003 that 'The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa' was well-founded." In short, Joe Wilson hadn't told the truth about what he'd discovered in Africa, how he'd discovered it, what he'd told the CIA about it, or even why he was sent on the mission. The media and the Kerry campaign promptly abandoned him, though the former never did give as much prominence to his debunking as they did to his original accusations. But if anyone can remember another public figure so entirely and thoroughly discredited, let us know. If there's any scandal at all here, it is that this entire episode has been allowed to waste so much government time and media attention, not to mention inspire a "special counsel" probe. The Bush administration is also guilty on this count, since it went along with the appointment of prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald in an election year in order to punt the issue down the road. But now Mr. Fitzgerald has become an unguided missile, holding reporters in contempt for not disclosing their sources even as it becomes clearer all the time that no underlying crime was at issue. As for the press corps, rather than calling for Mr. Rove to be fired, they ought to be grateful to him for telling the truth. |
it's editorial from the Wall Street Journal. way too easy. all he has to do is ignore the facts and speculate that they are an arm of the GOP.
he's not stupid. he knows what's really goin on, but just won't admit it. it's entirely too much fun for him having Rove in the sights of the moonbat left's BB gun.
i think Hugh Hewitt has summarized this debacle best.
Cooper calls Rove: "Hey, so whats going on with this Wilson rumor going to Niger?"
Rove: "Oh man, don't go down that road. It's a weak lead. Contrary to his claim, Cheney didn't send him, his wife offered him up. She works at the CIA."
i can't remember the rest but it was funny.
and then Cooper does this.
| quote: |
| Lawyer: Cooper �Burned� Karl Rove Rove�s attorney talks to NRO. The lawyer for top White House adviser Karl Rove says that Time reporter Matthew Cooper "burned" Rove after a conversation between the two men concerning former ambassador Joseph Wilson's fact-finding mission to Niger and the role Wilson's wife, CIA employee Valerie Plame, played in arranging that trip. Nevertheless, attorney Robert Luskin says Rove long ago gave his permission for all reporters, including Cooper, to tell prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald about their conversations with Rove. In an interview with National Review Online, Luskin compared the contents of a July 11, 2003, internal Time e-mail written by Cooper with the wording of a story Cooper co-wrote a few days later. "By any definition, he burned Karl Rove," Luskin said of Cooper. "If you read what Karl said to him and read how Cooper characterizes it in the article, he really spins it in a pretty ugly fashion to make it seem like people in the White House were affirmatively reaching out to reporters to try to get them to them to report negative information about Plame." First the e-mail. According to a report in Newsweek, Cooper's e-mail to Time Washington bureau chief Michael Duffy said, "Spoke to Rove on double super secret background for about two mins before he went on vacation..." Cooper said that Rove had warned him away from getting "too far out on Wilson," and then passed on Rove's statement that neither Vice President Dick Cheney nor CIA Director George Tenet had picked Wilson for the trip; "it was, KR said, wilson's wife, who apparently works at the agency on wmd issues who authorized the trip." Finally � all of this is according to the Newsweek report � Cooper's e-mail said that "not only the genesis of the trip is flawed an[d] suspect but so is the report. he [Rove] implied strongly that there's still plenty to implicate iraqi interest in acquiring uranium fro[m] Niger..." A few days after sending the e-mail, Cooper co-wrote an article headlined "A War on Wilson?" that appeared on Time's website. The story began, "Has the Bush administration declared war on a former ambassador who conducted a fact-finding mission to probe possible Iraqi interest in African uranium? Perhaps." The story continued: Some government officials have noted to Time in interviews (as well as to syndicated columnist Robert Novak) that Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, is a CIA official who monitors the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. These officials have suggested that she was involved in her husband's being dispatched to Niger to investigate reports that Saddam Hussein's government had sought to purchase large quantities of uranium ore, sometimes referred to as yellow cake, which is used to build nuclear devices. Plame's role in Wilson's assignment was later confirmed by a Senate Intelligence Committee investigation. Luskin told NRO that the circumstances of Rove's conversation with Cooper undercut Time's suggestion of a White House "war on Wilson." According to Luskin, Cooper originally called Rove � not the other way around � and said he was working on a story on welfare reform. After some conversation about that issue, Luskin said, Cooper changed the subject to the weapons of mass destruction issue, and that was when the two had the brief talk that became the subject of so much legal wrangling. According to Luskin, the fact that Rove did not call Cooper; that the original purpose of the call, as Cooper told Rove, was welfare reform; that only after Cooper brought the WMD issue up did Rove discuss Wilson � all are "indications that this was not a calculated effort by the White House to get this story out." "Look at the Cooper e-mail," Luskin continues. "Karl speaks to him on double super secret background...I don't think that you can read that e-mail and conclude that what Karl was trying to do was to get Cooper to publish the name of Wilson's wife." Nor, says Luskin, was Rove trying to "out" a covert CIA agent or "smear" her husband. "What Karl was trying to do, in a very short conversation initiated by Cooper on another subject, was to warn Time away from publishing things that were going to be established as false." Luskin points out that on the evening of July 11, 2003, just hours after the Rove-Cooper conversation, then-CIA Director George Tenet released a statement that undermined some of Wilson's public assertions about his report. "Karl knew that that [Tenet] statement was in gestation," says Luskin. "I think a fair reading of the e-mail was that he was trying to warn Cooper off from going out on a limb on [Wilson's] allegations." Luskin also shed light on the waiver that Rove signed releasing Cooper from any confidentiality agreement about the conversation. Luskin says Rove originally signed a waiver in December 2003 or in January 2004 (Luskin did not remember the exact date). The waiver, Luskin continues, was written by the office of special prosecutor Fitzgerald, and Rove signed it without making any changes � with the understanding that it applied to anyone with whom he had discussed the Wilson/Plame matter. "It was everyone's expectation that the waiver would be as broad as it could be," Luskin says. Cooper and New York Times reporter Judith Miller have expressed concerns that such waivers (top Cheney aide Lewis Libby also signed one) might have been coerced and thus might not have represented Rove's true feelings. Yet from the end of 2003 or beginning of 2004, until last Wednesday, Luskin says, Rove had no idea that there might be any problem with the waiver. It was not until that Wednesday, the day Cooper was to appear in court, that that changed. "Cooper's lawyer called us and said, "Can you confirm that the waiver encompasses Cooper?" Luskin recalls. "I was amazed. He's a lawyer. It's not rocket science. [The waiver] says 'any person.' It's that broad. So I said, 'Look, I understand that you want reassurances. If Fitzgerald would like Karl to provide you with some other assurances, we will.'" Luskin says he got in touch with the prosecutor � "Rule number one is cooperate with Fitzgerald, and there is no rule number two," Luskin says � and asked what to do. According to Luskin, Fitzgerald said to go ahead, and Luskin called Cooper's lawyer back. "I said that I can reaffirm that the waiver that Karl signed applied to any conversations that Karl and Cooper had," Luskin says. After that � which represented no change from the situation that had existed for 18 months � Cooper made a dramatic public announcement and agreed to testify. A few other notes: Luskin declined to say how Rove knew that Plame "apparently" (to use Cooper's word) worked at the CIA. But Luskin told NRO that Rove is not hiding behind the defense that he did not identify Wilson's wife because he did not specifically use her name. Asked if that argument was too legalistic, Luskin said, "I agree with you. I think it's a detail." Luskin also addressed the question of whether Rove is a "subject" of the investigation. Luskin says Fitzgerald has told Rove he is not a "target" of the investigation, but, according to Luskin, Fitzgerald has also made it clear that virtually anyone whose conduct falls within the scope of the investigation, including Rove, is considered a "subject" of the probe. "'Target' is something we all understand, a very alarming term," Luskin says. On the other hand, Fitzgerald "has indicated to us that he takes a very broad view of what a subject is." Finally, Luskin conceded that Rove is legally free to publicly discuss his actions, including his grand-jury testimony. Rove has not spoken publicly, Luskin says, because Fitzgerald specifically asked him not to. � Byron York, NR's White House correspondent, is the author of the book The Vast Left Wing Conspiracy: The Untold Story of How Democratic Operatives, Eccentric Billionaires, Liberal Activists, and Assorted Celebrities Tried to Bring Down a President � and Why They'll Try Even Harder Next Time. |
faux news video clip
http://oliverwillis.com/vid/gibson-plame.mov
Oh Jon Stewart, will you marry me? 
mms://a386.v99506.c9950.g.vm.akamaistream.net/7/386/9950/v001/comedystor.download.akamai.com/9951/dailyshow/headlines/10085_headline.wmv
mms://a386.v99506.c9950.g.vm.akamaistream.net/7/386/9950/v001/comedystor.download.akamai.com/9951/dailyshow/stewart/jon_10085.wmv
(Should be playable through winamp or anything else that supports mms.)
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Trancer-X http://oliverwillis.com/vid/gibson-plame.mov |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Q5echo it's editorial from the Wall Street Journal. way too easy. all he has to do is ignore the facts and speculate that they are an arm of the GOP. |
| quote: |
| "Democrats and most of the Beltway press corps are baying for Karl Rove's head over his role in exposing a case of CIA nepotism involving Joe Wilson and his wife, Valerie Plame." |
| quote: |
| "For Mr. Rove is turning out to be the real "whistleblower" in this whole sorry pseudo-scandal. He's the one who warned Time's Matthew Cooper and other reporters to be wary of Mr. Wilson's credibility." |
| quote: |
| "He [Rove] is the one who told the press the truth that Mr. Wilson had been recommended for the CIA consulting gig by his wife, not by Vice President Dick Cheney as Mr. Wilson was asserting on the airwaves." |
| quote: |
| he's not stupid. |
| quote: |
| he knows what's really goin on, but just won't admit it. |
| quote: |
| it's entirely too much fun for him having Rove in the sights of the moonbat left's BB gun. |
| quote: |
| i think Hugh Hewitt has summarized this debacle best. Cooper calls Rove: "Hey, so whats going on with this Wilson rumor going to Niger?" Rove: "Oh man, don't go down that road. It's a weak lead. Contrary to his claim, Cheney didn't send him, his wife offered him up. She works at the CIA." i can't remember the rest but it was funny. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Q5echo and then Cooper does this. * * * |
| quote: |
| TALKING POINT: Matt Cooper of Time magazine "burned" Rove. FACT: Rove's lawyer, who made the above fake claim, himself has been expounding again and again about how Rove gave complete waivers to all his journalist contacts to testify. http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/7/12/173649/452 |
| quote: |
| TALKING POINT: Valerie Plame (Joseph Wilson's wife) was not covert. FACT: She was. TALKING POINT: Karl Rove did not leak Valerie Plame's name. FACT: Please. Her name was not the secret, her identity was (which is the issue here) and he leaked that. (also see here and here). TALKING POINT: Karl Rove was "not the leaker". FACT: Rove's attorney's statement and Cooper's email shows this claim is false. Rove did leak Plame's identity. (Whether or not this is found to be prosecutable is another matter). P.S. It's not like this is the first time Rove has been in the spotlight for leaking secrets. TALKING POINT: Karl Rove has never lied about his role in this matter. FACT: Yes, he has. TALKING POINT: The White House has never lied or misled people about its role in this matter. FACT: False. TALKING POINT: Karl Rove never knew that Valerie Plame was covert. FACT: Really? Then why not state this on the record, something Rove's attorney refuses to do. TALKING POINT: Matt Cooper of Time magazine "burned" Rove. FACT: Rove's lawyer, who made the above fake claim, himself has been expounding again and again about how Rove gave complete waivers to all his journalist contacts to testify. TALKING POINT: Bob Novak used the word "operative" by accident and his sources did not say she was one. FACT: This is false, after-the-fact spin from Novak. TALKING POINT: Rove "was discouraging a reporter from writing a false story" based on Joe Wilson's "false premise" (that DCI Tenet or VP Cheney authorized his trip) FACT: False. Moreover, Joe Wilson did not make such a claim before Rove exposed Valerie Plame's identity. TALKING POINT: The Senate Intelligence Committee said that Valerie Plame was the one who set up Joe Wilson's trip. FACT: False and false. (Also see here). (In fact, there is no consensus view that Valerie Plame even suggested that Wilson be sent on the trip.) TALKING POINT: The White House/GOP cannot comment on questions regarding Rove or his role because of the ongoing investigation. FACT: False. A completely bogus claim considering that they are talking behind the scenes or issuing false/misleading press releases (also see here and here) spreading fakery about Wilson. (Not to mntion, they felt free to comment self-servingly about the whole matter until the Rove story broke.) TALKING POINT: Karl Rove is not a target of Fitzgerald's investigation. FACT: He is a subject of the investigation. TALKING POINT: The Butler Report etc. vindicated Bush's "uranium in Africa" State of the Union claim FACT: False. The Butler Report was intended to exonerate Tony Blair and George Bush to prevent them from facing criminal charges. For obvious reasons, it excluded reams of information about Bush's claim that showed that the White House lied through it's teeth in defending Bush's claim. (Indeed, as the link shows, people from the NSA, CIA etc. themselves stated that the SOTU claim did not have a sound backing.) TALKING POINT: This is all just a partisan attack by Democrats (or Joseph Wilson) FACT: False. The GOP leadership has a habit of minimizing numerous acts of treason from individuals inside the Bush administration over the last several years, by smearing truth-tellers. This is just the latest episode among many. In private, even Republicans admit that this kind of nonsense would have resulted in Congressional hearings "in a second", if the President had been a Democrat. Not to mention the hypocrisy of Rove himself. TALKING POINT: Even if Karl Rove leaked Valerie Plame's identity, it's no big deal and deserves a medal. FACT: The GOP's Ed Gillespie and George Bush disagreed (with an emphasis on 'd'). In fact, if it's so not a big deal, why all this intrigue about what the White House can or cannot comment on? Just tell the truth then rather than hiding behind reporters and smears of people who had nothing to do with the expose. (As for medals, it probably deserves a medal in prison, to define the "role model" for fellow prisoners at Gitmo - while eating rice pilaf in the process). TALKING POINT: There was no legal crime committed with the Plame expose. FACT: False and false. So much for offering "a stiff dose of truth" instead of "more lectures, and legalisms, and carefully worded denials". TALKING POINT: Joseph Wilson supported John Kerry. FACT: So? He also supported Republicans in the past (before they turned on him and his wife, treasonously) and was recognized by George Bush Sr. for his bravery against Saddam Hussein in Iraq - where he was ambassador before Gulf War I. TALKING POINT: President Bush is committed to upholding the honor and dignity of his office. FACT: For the umpteenth time, false, false and false. http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/004870.php |
you can see a more definitive analysis here
http://www.comedycentral.com/shows/...playVideo=16223
| quote: |
| Despite hearing the same thing from Scott McClellan several days running, the press descended their hordes on the Cabinet Room yesterday to ask President Bush about the Karl Rove saga. With Rove sitting behind him, Bush said: "This is a serious investigation. I will be more than happy to comment on this matter once this investigation is complete. I also will not prejudge the investigation based on media reports." So, once again, the media has gotten nowhere. There was, of course, more Karl Rove coverage on the tube this morning. One CNN reporter referred to Rove and "his role in outing a covert CIA agent." Hold on a moment. Either I've missed something here, or someone is assuming facts not in evidence. So ... just to straighten me out, would someone somewhere please tell me who has said that Valerie Plame was a undercover CIA agent ... other, that is, than the media and her husband Joe Wilson? Look ... I know that the media says that Plame was an undercover CIA agent .. but this is the same media that wants Rove's head on a stake. The official line seems to be she had a desk job at the CIA at the time all of this happened. There were many people in Washington, including reporters, who knew that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA. One key provision of the law Rove is alleged to have broken states that to be a covert agent, a person must have been doing work in the field sometime in the last 5 years. It turns out Valerie Plame may have already been outed over a decade ago....by Aldrich Ames, the turncoat spying for the Soviets back in 1994. She was brought back to the states and given a desk job at the CIA. Apparently she also came and went in public. So even if Rove had named her, he wouldn't have broken the law. But the special prosecutor says Rove isn't the target. Dead end for the Democrats on that one. And by the way, there's still nobody that knows who the New York Times' Judith Miller is protecting by sitting in prison. Wouldn't it be nice if the Democrats and the media would worry as much about government over-spending and winning in Iraq as they do about trying to claim a trophy kill in the White House? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Shakka Hold on a moment. Either I've missed something here, or someone is assuming facts not in evidence. So ... just to straighten me out, would someone somewhere please tell me who has said that Valerie Plame was a undercover CIA agent ... other, that is, than the media and her husband Joe Wilson? Look ... I know that the media says that Plame was an undercover CIA agent .. but this is the same media that wants Rove's head on a stake. The official line seems to be she had a desk job at the CIA at the time all of this happened. There were many people in Washington, including reporters, who knew that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA. One key provision of the law Rove is alleged to have broken states that to be a covert agent, a person must have been doing work in the field sometime in the last 5 years. It turns out Valerie Plame may have already been outed over a decade ago....by Aldrich Ames, the turncoat spying for the Soviets back in 1994. She was brought back to the states and given a desk job at the CIA. Apparently she also came and went in public. So even if Rove had named her, he wouldn't have broken the law. But the special prosecutor says Rove isn't the target. Dead end for the Democrats on that one. |
| quote: |
| TALKING POINT: Valerie Plame (Joseph Wilson's wife) was not covert. FACT: She was. (More here). Links: http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/7/13/04720/9340 http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/004866.php http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/ar...3_10/002318.php http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/7/12/235811/128 |
| quote: | ||
Common sense tells me that 2 years into the investigation, the Plame prosecutor would have gathered enough facts to make such a determination. Seems a simple enough question. Heck, to me 2 hours seems sufficient. Served overseas? Check. In the last five years? Well, the CIA would know that one hopes. And the CIA referred the case to Justice. My application of common sense tells me that the answer is probably yes. Not enough? How about this:
Don't know about Bob, but the CIA official makes sense to me |
| quote: |
| Valerie Plame was a classmate of mine from the day she started with the CIA. I entered on duty at the CIA in September 1985. All of my classmates were undercover--in other words, we told our family and friends that we were working for other overt U.S. Government agencies. We had official cover. That means we had a black passport--i.e., a diplomatic passport. If we were caught overseas engaged in espionage activity the black passport was a get out of jail free card. A few of my classmates, and Valerie was one of these, became a non-official cover officer. That meant she agreed to operate overseas without the protection of a diplomatic passport. If caught in that status she would have been executed. The lies by people like Victoria Toensing, Representative Peter King, and P. J. O'Rourke insist that Valerie was nothing, just a desk jockey. Yet, until Robert Novak betrayed her she was still undercover and the company that was her front was still a secret to the world. When Novak outed Valerie he also compromised her company and every individual overseas who had been in contact with that company and with her. Larry Johnson http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/7/13/04720/9340 |
| quote: |
| TALKING POINT: Karl Rove did not leak Valerie Plame's name. FACT: Please. Her name was not the secret, her identity was (which is the issue here) and he leaked that. (also see here and here). http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/004870.php |
| quote: | ||
Originally posted by Shakka
|
| quote: |
"If she were only an analyst, not an operative, we would not have filed a crimes report" with the Justice Department, a senior intelligence official said. http://edition.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLI.../30/wilson.cia/ |
| quote: |
The case is, however, not yet closed, at least not the criminal case. To have violated the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, the exposer must be authorised to see classified information, must know the officer is undercover, and must know that the CIA is taking �affirmative measures� to conceal the operative�s identity. Mr Cooper�s e-mail does not make clear Mr Rove knew Ms Plame was undercover. However, the CIA did seem to be taking �affirmative measures� to protect her identity. The agency has since kept her from publishing an article clarifying what happened, saying it could damage their work. http://www.economist.com/agenda/dis...tory_id=4173001 |
| quote: |
Legal experts said the evidence that has emerged in recent days -- including confirmation that Rove and Cooper spoke about Plame's role at the CIA as a way of knocking down a damaging story about the administration's Iraq policy -- does not by itself necessarily indicate a crime was committed. Even so, White House officials acknowledged privately that they are concerned that the investigation will lead to an indictment of someone in the administration later this year. . . . Several people familiar with the investigation said they expect Fitzgerald to indict, or at least force a plea agreement with, at least one individual for leaking Plame's name to conservative columnist Robert D. Novak in July 2003. Randall D. Eliason, former public corruption chief at the U.S. Attorney's Office here, said Fitzgerald likely has evidence of serious wrongdoing, or he would not have gone this far. "Right now, it's more political damage than legal damage" for the White House, Eliason said. "But it's reasonable to speculate he wouldn't go to the Supreme Court on reporters' privilege unless he had something pretty serious. You don't subpoena reporters and throw them in jail lightly. Fitzgerald is not some type of bomb-thrower." An official could face perjury charges for misleading the special counsel while testifying under oath. If so, this would become a familiar case of Washington officials getting in trouble for a coverup rather than the original misdeed. "If you look at past scandals, people are most often indicted for making false statements to federal investigators or false statements to the grand jury," said Jonathan Turley, a George Washington University law professor and criminal lawyer. "Even a brief conversation can become an obstruction charge." Fitzgerald could have evidence, for instance, that Rove or other officials encouraged someone to tell a coverup story to explain their conversations about Plame, which could lead to a charge of conspiracy to obstruct justice. But legal experts noted these cases are often difficult to prove. Finally, there could be evidence of the crime that Fitzgerald first set out to investigate, a violation of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. Under a very detailed list of conditions, if Rove or other government officials revealed the identity of Plame to the media while knowing she was a covert agent, they could face felony charges and up to 10 years in prison if convicted. Victoria Toensing, who helped write the act, has said there is likely no such evidence in this case, because the statute was designed to have a high standard and requires proof of intent to harm national security. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...5071302343.html |
Forgive me, Opus, but if you're going to cite your left-wing blogs, then anything from the right-wingers is fair game as well. And that includes your girlfriend, Coulter and WND. Of course, I'm sure you've already read them.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/...c20050713.shtml
| quote: |
| Mission Implausible Ann Coulter (back to web version) | email to a friend Recommend to a friend July 13, 2005 Karl Rove was right. The real story about Joseph C. Wilson IV was not that Bush lied about Saddam seeking uranium in Africa; the story was Clown Wilson and his paper-pusher wife, Valerie Plame. By foisting their fantasies of themselves on the country, these two have instigated a massive criminal investigation, the result of which is: The only person who has demonstrably lied and possibly broken the law is Joseph Wilson. So the obvious solution is to fire Karl Rove. Clown Wilson thrust himself on the nation in July 2003 when he wrote an op-ed for the New York Times claiming Bush had lied in his State of the Union address. He said Bush was referring to Wilson's own "report" when Bush said: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." $30,821 11:14AM Thursday But that is not what Wilson says he found! Thus, his column had the laughably hubristic title, "What I Didn't Find in Africa." (Once I couldn't find my car for hours after a Dead show. I call the experience: "What I Didn't Find in San Francisco.") Driven by that weird obsession liberals have of pretending they are Republicans in order to attack Republicans, Wilson implied he had been sent to Niger by Vice President Dick Cheney. Among copious other references to Cheney in the op-ed, Wilson said that CIA "officials asked if I would travel to Niger to check out the story" that Saddam Hussein had attempted to buy uranium from Niger, "so they could provide a response to the vice president's office." Soon Clown Wilson was going around claiming: "The office of the vice president, I am absolutely convinced, received a very specific response to the question it asked, and that response was based upon my trip out there." Dick Cheney responded by saying: "I don't know Joe Wilson. I've never met Joe Wilson. I don't know who sent Joe Wilson. He never submitted a report that I ever saw when he came back." Clown Wilson's allegation that Cheney had received his (unwritten) "report" was widely repeated as fact by, among others, the New York Times. In a huffy editorial, the Times suggested there had been a "willful effort" by the Bush administration to slander the great and honorable statesman Saddam Hussein. As evidence, the Times cited Bush's claims about Saddam seeking uranium from Niger, which, the Times said, had been "pretty well discredited" � which, according to my copy of "The New York Times Stylebook" means "unequivocally corroborated" � "by Joseph Wilson 4th, a former American diplomat, after he was dispatched to Niger by the CIA to look into the issue." So liberals were allowed to puff up Wilson's "report" by claiming Wilson was sent "by the CIA." But � in the traditional liberal definition of "criminal" � Republicans were not allowed to respond by pointing out Wilson was sent to Niger by his wife, not by the CIA and certainly not by Dick Cheney. So important was Wilson's fact-finding mission to Niger that he wasn't paid and he produced no written report. It actually buttressed the case that Saddam had tried to buy uranium from Niger, though Wilson was too stupid to realize it. His conclusion is contradicted by the extensive findings of the British government. (I'm not sure, but I think that's what Bush may have been referring to when he said, "the British government.") One could write a book about what Joe Wilson doesn't know about Africa. In fact, I'm pretty sure someone did: Joe Wilson. About a year later, a bipartisan Senate committee heard testimony from a CIA official that it was Wilson's wife who had "offered up" Wilson for the Niger trip. The committee also discovered a Feb. 12, 2002, memo from Wilson's wife gushing that her husband "has good relations with both the PM [prime minister] and the former Minister of Mines [not to mention lots of French contacts], both of whom could possibly shed light on this sort of activity." Wilson's response to the production of his wife's memo was: "I don't see it as a recommendation to send me." Wilson's report was a hoax. His government bureaucrat wife wanted to get him out of the house, so she sent him on a taxpayer-funded government boondoggle. That was the information Karl Rove was trying to convey to the media by telling them, as described in the notes of Time reporter Matt Cooper: "big warning"! Don't "get too far out on Wilson." Democrats believe that because Wilson's wife worked at the CIA, the White House should not have been allowed to mention that it was she who sent him to Niger. But meanwhile, Clown Wilson was free to puff up his apocryphal credentials by implying he had been sent to Niger on an important mission for the vice president by the CIA. Despite the colloquialism being used on TV to describe the relevant criminal offense, the law does not criminalize "revealing the name" of a covert operative. If it did, every introduction of an operative at a cocktail party or a neighborhood picnic would constitute a felony. "Revealing the name of" is shorthand to describe what the law does criminalize: Intentionally revealing a covert operative as a covert operative, knowing it will blow the operative's cover. Rove had simply said Wilson went to Niger because of his wife, not his skill, expertise or common sense. It was the clown himself who outed his wife as an alleged "covert" agent by saying he was not recommended by his wife, and thus the White House must have been retaliating against him by mentioning his wife. Wilson intentionally blew his wife's "cover" in order to lie about how he ended up going to Niger. Far from a serious fact-finding mission, it was a "Take Your Daughters to Work Day" gone bad. Maybe liberals shouldn't have been so insistent about that special prosecutor. |
| quote: |
| Drafter of intel statute: Rove accusers ignorant Lawyer who wrote law to protect agents says Plame charge doesn't meet standard Valerie Plame appeared in Vanity Fair magazine with her husband Joseph Wilson in January 2004 Democrat leaders and editorialists accusing Karl Rove of treason for referring to CIA agent Valerie Plame in an off-the-record interview are ignorant of the law, according to the Washington attorney who spearheaded the legislation at the center of the controversy. Plame's circumstances don't meet several of the criteria spelled out in a 1982 statute designed not only to protect the identity of intelligence agents but to maintain the media's ability to hold government accountable, Victoria Toensing told WorldNetDaily. Toensing � who drafted the legislation in her role as chief counsel for the chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence � says the Beltway frenzy surrounding Plame's alleged "outing" as a covert agent is a story arising out of the capital's "silly season." "The hurricane season started early and so did the August silly stories," Toensing said. "What is it that qualifies as a story here?" Democrat leaders are accusing Rove of exposing Plame's identity as an act of retribution against her husband Joe Wilson, who returned from a CIA assignment to Niger with a report disputing the administration's suspicion that Iraq wanted to acquire uranium from the African nation. Toensing, now a private attorney in Washington, says Plame most likely was not a covert agent when Rove referred to her in a 2003 interview with Time magazine's Matt Cooper. The federal code says the agent must have operated outside the United States within the previous five years. But Plame gave up her role as a covert agent nine years before the Rove interview, according to New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof. Kristof said the CIA brought Plame back to Washington in 1994 because the agency suspected her undercover security had been compromised by turncoat spy Aldrich Ames. Moreover, asserts Toensing, for the law to be violated, Rove would have had to intentionally reveal Plame's identity with the knowledge that he was disclosing a covert agent. Toensing believes Rove's waiver allowing reporters testifying before the grand jury to reveal him as a source � signed more than 18 months ago � shows the Bush strategist did not believe he was violating the law. Rove, according to Cooper's notes, apparently was trying to warn the reporter not to give credence to Wilson's investigation, because he had no expertise in nuclear weapons and was sent to Africa on the recommendation of his wife. Wilson had claimed he was sent by Vice President Cheney. Another element necessary for applying the law is that the government had to be taking affirmative measures to conceal the agent's identity. Toensing says that on the contrary, the CIA gave Plame a desk job in which she publicly went to and from work, allowed her spouse to do a mission in Africa without signing a confidentiality agreement and didn't object to his writing an op-ed piece in the New York Times about his trip. Columnist Robert Novak, who first published Plame's name, also apparently didn't think it was a big deal, Toensing said, or he would have put it in the first paragraph. Novak's aim was to expose the incompetence of the CIA, she argued. "These are the kinds of stories we wanted to still be put out there when we passed the law," she said. "We only wanted to stop the methodical exposing of CIA personnel for the purpose of assassination." |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Q5echo ...not the left wing press. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Shakka Forgive me, Opus, but if you're going to cite your left-wing blogs, then anything from the right-wingers is fair game as well. And that includes your girlfriend, Coulter and WND. Of course, I'm sure you've already read them. http://www.townhall.com/columnists/...c20050713.shtml ..Democrat leaders and editorialists accusing Karl Rove of treason for referring to CIA agent Valerie Plame in an off-the-record interview are ignorant of the law, according to the Washington attorney who spearheaded the legislation at the center of the controversy. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/a...RTICLE_ID=45266 |
| quote: |
| But that is not what Wilson says he found! Thus, his column had the laughably hubristic title, "What I Didn't Find in Africa." (Once I couldn't find my car for hours after a Dead show. I call the experience: "What I Didn't Find in San Francisco.") |
| quote: |
| So liberals were allowed to puff up Wilson's "report" by claiming Wilson was sent "by the CIA." But � in the traditional liberal definition of "criminal" � Republicans were not allowed to respond by pointing out Wilson was sent to Niger by his wife, not by the CIA and certainly not by Dick Cheney. |
| quote: |
| Wilson Falsely Claimed That It Was Vice President Cheney Who Sent Him To Niger, But The Vice President Has Said He Never Met Him And Didn�t Know Who Sent Him: Wilson Says He Traveled To Niger At CIA Request To Help Provide Response To Vice President�s Office. �In February 2002, I was informed by officials at the Central Intelligence Agency that Vice President Dick Cheney�s office had questions about a particular intelligence report. � The agency officials asked if I would travel to Niger to check out the story so they could provide a response to the vice president�s office.� (Joseph C. Wilson, Op-Ed, �What I Didn�t Find In Africa,� The New York Times, 7/6/03) Joe Wilson: �What They Did, What The Office Of The Vice President Did, And, In Fact, I Believe Now From Mr. Libby�s Statement, It Was Probably The Vice President Himself ...� (CNN�s �Late Edition,� 8/3/03) Vice President Cheney: �I Don�t Know Joe Wilson. I�ve Never Met Joe Wilson. � And Joe Wilson - I Don�t [Know] Who Sent Joe Wilson. He Never Submitted A Report That I Ever Saw When He Came Back.� (NBC�s �Meet The Press,� 9/14/03) CIA Director George Tenet: �In An Effort To Inquire About Certain Reports Involving Niger, CIA�s Counter-Proliferation Experts, On Their Own Initiative, Asked An Individual With Ties To The Region To Make A Visit To See What He Could Learn.� (Central Intelligence Agency, �Statement By George J. Tenet, Director Of Central Intelligence,� Press Release, 7/11/03) Tenet: �Because This Report, In Our View, Did Not Resolve Whether Iraq Was Or Was Not Seeking Uranium From Abroad, It Was Given A Normal And Wide Distribution, But We Did Not Brief It To The President, Vice-President Or Other Senior Administration Officials.� (Central Intelligence Agency, �Statement By George J. Tenet, Director Of Central Intelligence,� Press Release, 7/11/03) http://www.gop.com/News/Read.aspx?ID=5620 |
| quote: |
| BLITZER: Is that true? WILSON: Well, look, it's absolutely true that neither the vice president nor Dr. Rice nor even George Tenet knew that I was traveling to Niger. What they did, what the office of the vice president did, and, in fact, I believe now from Mr. Libby's statement, it was probably the vice president himself... BLITZER: Scooter Libby is the chief of staff for the vice president. WILSON: Scooter Libby. They asked essentially that we follow up on this report -- that the agency follow up on the report. So it was a question that went to the CIA briefer from the Office of the Vice President. The CIA, at the operational level, made a determination that the best way to answer this serious question was to send somebody out there who knew something about both the uranium business and those Niger officials that were in office at the time these reported documents were executed. BLITZER: Is that true? WILSON: Well, look, it's absolutely true that neither the vice president nor Dr. Rice nor even George Tenet knew that I was traveling to Niger. What they did, what the office of the vice president did, and, in fact, I believe now from Mr. Libby's statement, it was probably the vice president himself... BLITZER: Scooter Libby is the chief of staff for the vice president. WILSON: Scooter Libby. They asked essentially that we follow up on this report -- that the agency follow up on the report. So it was a question that went to the CIA briefer from the Office of the Vice President. The CIA, at the operational level, made a determination that the best way to answer this serious question was to send somebody out there who knew something about both the uranium business and those Niger officials that were in office at the time these reported documents were executed. BLITZER: Is that true? WILSON: Well, look, it's absolutely true that neither the vice president nor Dr. Rice nor even George Tenet knew that I was traveling to Niger. What they did, what the office of the vice president did, and, in fact, I believe now from Mr. Libby's statement, it was probably the vice president himself... BLITZER: Scooter Libby is the chief of staff for the vice president. WILSON: Scooter Libby. They asked essentially that we follow up on this report -- that the agency follow up on the report. So it was a question that went to the CIA briefer from the Office of the Vice President. The CIA, at the operational level, made a determination that the best way to answer this serious question was to send somebody out there who knew something about both the uranium business and those Niger officials that were in office at the time these reported documents were executed. http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRI...8/03/le.00.html |
| quote: |
| though Wilson was too stupid to realize it. His conclusion is contradicted by the extensive findings of the British government. (I'm not sure, but I think that's what Bush may have been referring to when he said, "the British government.") One could write a book about what Joe Wilson doesn't know about Africa. In fact, I'm pretty sure someone did: Joe Wilson. |
| quote: |
| About a year later, a bipartisan Senate committee heard testimony from a CIA official that it was Wilson's wife who had "offered up" Wilson for the Niger trip. The committee also discovered a Feb. 12, 2002, memo from Wilson's wife gushing that her husband "has good relations with both the PM [prime minister] and the former Minister of Mines [not to mention lots of French contacts], both of whom could possibly shed light on this sort of activity." Wilson's response to the production of his wife's memo was: "I don't see it as a recommendation to send me." Wilson's report was a hoax. His government bureaucrat wife wanted to get him out of the house, so she sent him on a taxpayer-funded government boondoggle. |
| quote: |
| TALKING POINT: The Senate Intelligence Committee said that Valerie Plame was the one who set up Joe Wilson's trip. FACT: False and false. (Also see here). (In fact, there is no consensus view that Valerie Plame even suggested that Wilson be sent on the trip.) |
| quote: |
| Wilson's report was a hoax. His government bureaucrat wife wanted to get him out of the house, so she sent him on a taxpayer-funded government boondoggle. |
| quote: |
| That was the information Karl Rove was trying to convey to the media by telling them, as described in the notes of Time reporter Matt Cooper: "big warning"! Don't "get too far out on Wilson." Democrats believe that because Wilson's wife worked at the CIA, the White House should not have been allowed to mention that it was she who sent him to Niger. But meanwhile, Clown Wilson was free to puff up his apocryphal credentials by implying he had been sent to Niger on an important mission for the vice president by the CIA. Despite the colloquialism being used on TV to describe the relevant criminal offense, the law does not criminalize "revealing the name" of a covert operative. If it did, every introduction of an operative at a cocktail party or a neighborhood picnic would constitute a felony. "Revealing the name of" is shorthand to describe what the law does criminalize: Intentionally revealing a covert operative as a covert operative, knowing it will blow the operative's cover. Rove had simply said Wilson went to Niger because of his wife, not his skill, expertise or common sense. It was the clown himself who outed his wife as an alleged "covert" agent by saying he was not recommended by his wife, and thus the White House must have been retaliating against him by mentioning his wife. Wilson intentionally blew his wife's "cover" in order to lie about how he ended up going to Niger. Far from a serious fact-finding mission, it was a "Take Your Daughters to Work Day" gone bad. Maybe liberals shouldn't have been so insistent about that special prosecutor. |
| quote: |
| Drafter of intel statute: Rove accusers ignorant Lawyer who wrote law to protect agents says Plame charge doesn't meet standard |
| quote: |
| The CIA declined to discuss Plame's intelligence work, but an agency official disputed suggestions that she was a mere analyst whose public exposure would have little consequence. "If she was not undercover, we would have no reason to file a criminal referral," the CIA official said, insisting on anonymity because of the sensitivity of the investigation. |
| quote: |
| TALKING POINT: Matt Cooper of Time magazine "burned" Rove. FACT: Rove's lawyer, who made the above fake claim, himself has been expounding again and again about how Rove gave complete waivers to all his journalist contacts to testify. http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/7/12/173649/452 |
| quote: |
| �A senior administration official said that before Novak�s column ran, two top White House officials called at least six Washington journalists and disclosed the identity and occupation of Wilson�s wife� �Clearly, it was meant purely and simply for revenge,� the senior official said of the alleged leak.� http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/w...anguage=printer |
Don't stop studying on my account.
Out of curiousity, maybe you could tell me more about the Daily Kos site that you've become so fond of sourcing. I admittedly am not a reader of the site and don't really know what their agenda is. I scanned around briefly and didn't really see much citing of facts. Not that I want to debunk it as a decent source, I just don't know enough about it to call it an authoritative source. Could just be another Drudge Report for all I know.
Now go study your nuts off.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by leavingharvard Oh yea, the left wing press. Let me refer to Maddox. Liberal media: Whiny, bitching, cry-baby conservatives love to prattle on and on about the "liberal media." To be fair, except for FOX News (Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, John Gibson, Neil Cavuto, Steve Doocy, E.D. Hill, Brian Kilmeade, Brit Hume), Clear Channel, Laura Ingraham, Dr. Laura, Rush Limbaugh, Hugh Hewitt, Ann Coulter, Newsmax, G. Gordon Liddy, Michael Reagan, Michael Savage, The New York Post, Sinclair Broadcast Group (WLOS13, Fox 45, WTTO21, WB49, KGAN, WICD, WICS, WCHS, WVAH, WTAT, WSTR, WSYX, WTTE, WKEF, WRGT, KDSM, WSMH, WXLV, WURN, KVWB, KFBT, WDKY, WMSN, WVTV, WEAR, WZTV, KOTH, WYZZ, WPGH, WGME, WLFL, WRLH, WUHF, KABB, WGGB, WSYT, WTTA), David Horowitz, Rupert Murdoch, PAX, and MSNBC's Joe Scarborough, they're right. |
who thinks Joe Wilson is the target of the investigation right now?
just a hunch.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Q5echo who thinks Joe Wilson is the target of the investigation right now? just a hunch. |
| quote: |
| In February 2002, I was informed by officials at the Central Intelligence Agency that Vice President Dick Cheney's office had questions about a particular intelligence report. While I never saw the report, I was told that it referred to a memorandum of agreement that documented the sale of uranium yellowcake � a form of lightly processed ore � by Niger to Iraq in the late 1990's. The agency officials asked if I would travel to Niger to check out the story so they could provide a response to the vice president's office. After consulting with the State Department's African Affairs Bureau (and through it with Barbro Owens-Kirkpatrick, the United States ambassador to Niger), I agreed to make the trip. The mission I undertook was discreet but by no means secret. While the C.I.A. paid my expenses (my time was offered pro bono), I made it abundantly clear to everyone I met that I was acting on behalf of the United States government. http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0706-02.htm |
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.