Go Back   I-Mockery Forum > I-Mockery Discussion Forums > Philosophy, Politics, and News
FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
mburbank has disabled reputation
Old Sep 29th, 2003, 09:49 AM        Who's going to take the fall? A story I told you to watch.
A while back, I said I thought blowing the cover of a CIA weapons expert as retaliation against her husband was going to be an issue. It's a federal crime, and more than that, it shows that someone at the whitehouse thinks payback is more important than the security and effectiveness of our own CIA. Well, she was only a WMD spy. Maybe the Whiotehouse figured she wasn't going to turn up anything anyway.




Alleged White House leak of CIA operative's name probed


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Justice Department is investigating the report that a Bush administration official identified the wife of former U.S. Ambassador Joseph Wilson as an undercover CIA officer to a newspaper columnist, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice said Sunday.

The CIA asked the department for a legal opinion on whether there should be an investigation of the allegation, administration officials told CNN last week.

The leak could constitute a federal crime, the Washington Post reported. Intelligence officials told the newspaper that the leak might have endangered confidential sources who had aided Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame.

The Justice Department "gets these things as a matter of routine," Rice said on "Fox News Sunday."

Plame was described as a CIA employee in a July column by Robert Novak in the Chicago Sun-Times. CNN has been unable to reach Plame.

Wilson visited Niger in early 2002 on behalf of the CIA to investigate a British intelligence report alleging Iraq had tried to buy significant quantities of "yellowcake" uranium ore there and in other African countries for possible use in nuclear weapons.

Wilson, a former U.S. diplomat with expertise in African affairs, reported finding no evidence to support the claim.

Earlier this year, Wilson criticized Bush for including in his 2003 State of the Union speech the notorious "16 words" citing the British report.

"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa," Bush said in the address.

It was later revealed the British report was based in part on forged documents, and Bush backed away from the statement.

Although CIA Director George Tenet took responsibility for the error, he said the agency warned the White House not to include the information in the speech.

"Two senior administration officials told me Wilson's wife suggested sending him to Niger to investigate," wrote Novak, who is also a host of CNN's "Crossfire."

"The CIA says its counter-proliferation officials selected Wilson and asked his wife to contact him."

Novak's column said Plame "is an agency operative on weapons of mass destruction."

Though Novak has declined to reveal his sources, Wilson and others have suggested the information was fed to Novak by the White House.

Wilson said at one point that he believes the person who broke his wife's cover was Karl Rove, Bush's senior adviser and political strategist.

White House press secretary Scott McClellan called the suggestion "ridiculous" and "simply not true" at a briefing two weeks ago. A senior administration official defended Rove again Sunday.

"This is not the way the White House operates, and no one would be authorized to do such a thing," the official said.

According to the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982, a federal employee with access to classified information who is convicted of making an unauthorized disclosure about a covert agent faces up to 10 years in prison and as much as $50,000 in fines.

Wilson told CNN last month the leak about his wife was directly connected to his public criticism of the administration for including the uranium report in the speech after he had already discredited it.

"The idea, it seemed to me, in going after me and then later making these allegations about my wife, was clearly designed to keep others from stepping forward," said Wilson, who was acting ambassador to Iraq in the months before the 1991 Persian Gulf War.

"I don't know if that's true or not, but you can be sure that a GS-14 or 15 with a couple of kids in college, when he sees the allegations that came from senior administration officials about my family ... in the public domain, you can be sure that he's going to be worried about what might happen if he were to come forward," Wilson said.

GS-14 or GS-15 refers to the federal General Schedule pay scale. GS-15 is the highest level, with annual salaries generally ranging from $95,000 to $125,000.

Asked whether the president will try to determine whether the White House leaked the information about Plame, Rice told NBC's "Meet the Press," "I think it's best, since it's in the hands of the Justice Department, to let it remain there."

Rice, speaking on "Fox News Sunday," said she "knew nothing of any such White House effort to reveal any of this."

"Certainly it would not be the way the president expected his White House to operate," she said.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
mburbank has disabled reputation
Old Sep 29th, 2003, 02:49 PM       
White House Denies Leaking CIA Identity


DEB RIECHMANN, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - The White House on Monday denied that President Bush (news - web sites)'s chief political strategist was involved in revealing the identity of a CIA (news - web sites) operative, in possible violation of the law. A Democratic senator has asked Justice Department (news - web sites) to appoint a special counsel to probe the matter.


The naming of the intelligence officer's identity by syndicated columnist Robert Novak came shortly after her husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson, undermined Bush's claim that Iraq (news - web sites) had tried to buy uranium in Africa.

Wilson has publicly blamed Karl Rove, Bush's top political adviser, for the leak, although Wilson did say Monday he did not know whether Rove personally was the source of Novak's information, only that he thought Rove had "condoned it."

"He wasn't involved," White House press secretary Scott McClellan said of Rove. "The president knows he wasn't involved. ... It's simply not true."

McClellan urged anyone with information about the alleged leak to contact with Justice Department. "The president expects everyone in his administration to adhere to the highest standards of conduct," McClellan said. "No one would be authorized to do such a thing."

The letter was sent from the CIA's Office of General Counsel to the Department of Justice (news - web sites) in late July. It noted a violation of the law had apparently occurred when someone provided Novak with the name of the CIA officer. The letter was not signed by CIA Director George Tenet and did not call for a specific investigation of the White House.

A senior administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said FBI (news - web sites) officials are trying to determine whether there was a violation of the law and, if so, then whether a full-blown criminal investigation is warranted, the official said.

"It's a serious matter and it should be looked into," McClellan said.

Asked whether Bush should fire any official found to have leaked the information, McClellan said: "They should be pursued to the fullest extent by the Department of Justice. The president expects everyone in his administration to adhere to the highest standards of conduct — and that would not be."

Sen. Charles Schumer (news, bio, voting record), D-N.Y., said the matter should be investigated from someone outside the Bush administration.

"If there was ever a case that demanded a special counsel, this is it," he said.

The Justice Department had no immediate comment on Schumer's request.

The rules for appointment of a special counsel give Attorney General John Ashcroft (news - web sites) wide latitude to either appoint one outright, conduct a preliminary investigation to determine if such a counsel is needed or to conclude that it would be better for the Justice Department to handle the probe itself.

From the presidential campaign trail, other Democrats called for independent probes.

Former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean (news - web sites) said Ashcroft should recuse himself from an investigation, which Dean believes should be handled by an "independent Justice Department inspector general."

Rep. Dick Gephardt (news - web sites), D-Mo., called for a congressional investigation into whether the administration leaked the identity of an undercover CIA officer. "There's nothing that says Congress cannot carry out this investigation," he said. "I don't think we can leave this to the administration's own Justice Department."

Sen. Joseph Lieberman (news, bio, voting record), D-Conn., said an independent, non-partisan counsel should investigate. "It is a moral outrage that multiple White House officials are alleged to have done so for political revenge. It would be scandalous if such acts were a reaction to the public's conclusion that the president has used 16 misleading words in his State of the Union address last January."



Sen. John Kerry (news - web sites), D-Mass., also called for a special counsel. "Too many questions exist to risk allowing any potential for political intervention," he said.

On Sunday, Bush national security adviser Condoleezza Rice (news - web sites) and Secretary of State Colin Powell (news - web sites) both said they were unaware of any White House involvement in the matter. McClellan reiterated the White House position, and pledged cooperation.

"There has been nothing that has been brought to our attention beyond what we've seen in the media reports that suggests that there was White House involvement," McClellan said. "No one was authorized to do this. That is simply not the way this White House operates, and if someone leaked classified information it is a very serious matter and it should be pursued."

The flap began in January when Bush said in his State of the Union address that British intelligence officials had learned that Iraq had tried to purchase yellowcake uranium in Africa.

In an opinion piece published in July by The New York Times, Wilson said he told the CIA long before Bush's address that the British reports were suspect and the administration has since said the assertion should not have been in Bush's speech.

A week after Wilson went public with his criticism Novak, quoting anonymous government sources, said Wilson's wife was a CIA operative working on the issue of weapons of mass destruction.

The Washington Post on Sunday quoted an unidentified senior administration official as saying two top White House officials called at least a half-dozen journalists and revealed the identity and occupation of Wilson's wife. Wilson had said in a late August speech in Seattle that he suspected Rove, but on Monday he backtracked somewhat from that assertion.

"I did not mean at that time to imply that I thought that Karl Rove was the source or the authorizer, just that I thought that it came from the White House, and Karl Rove was the personification of the White House political operation," Wilson said in a telephone interview.

But then he added: "I have people, who I have confidence in, who have indicated to me that he (Rove), at a minimum, condoned it and certainly did nothing to put a stop to it for a week after it was out there.

"Among the phone calls I received were those that said `White House sources are saying that it's not about the 16 words, it's about Wilson and his wife.' And two people called me up and specifically mentioned Rove's name," he said.

Wilson said that neither he or his wife had been contacted by the Justice Department, or the White House.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
VinceZeb VinceZeb is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
VinceZeb is probably a spambot
Old Sep 30th, 2003, 08:43 AM       
This story has been around since July. Why is it so important now?

Who said this woman was an undercover CIA agent? Where is the proof?

Why is it now just coming out that Wilson made a large donation to John Kerry's run for the presidency?

I smell liberal desperation.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/dai...r_2.guest.html - not necessarly a part of this story, but it shows a nice chunk of liberal bias when it comes to this situation.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
sspadowsky sspadowsky is offline
Will chop you good.
sspadowsky's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Thrill World
sspadowsky is probably a spambot
Old Sep 30th, 2003, 09:25 AM       
Because Limbaugh is as fair and balanced as it gets.
__________________
"If honesty is the best policy, then, by elimination, dishonesty is the second-best policy. Second is not all that bad."
-George Carlin
Reply With Quote
  #5  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
mburbank has disabled reputation
Old Sep 30th, 2003, 09:35 AM       
It takes time because at first only the left wing media is wiling to touch a story like this. You only know about it (and don't lie) because I posted it here. Mainstream media and most democrats have less balls than a castrated gerbil. They don't have te guts to blurt out any old thing, verified or not, like the Republicans. They wait until they're sure. Know wht it says to me that NOW the stpory i big hen two months ago it wasn't? They're sure now. It's not desperation, it's caution.

How long before yellowcake burst on the scene did it take for the media and politicains have the collective balls to pursue it? Because the story was out there, and I posted it, prettty much right after the Presidents state of the union adress. No shit about how the 16 words are technically correct. I thought you guys hated Clinton for that 'it depeneds on what is means' shit. I know I did. I was ashamed of him. You ought to be ashamed of Bush for saying "The British Learned" something they knew wasn't true.

Halliburtons ongoing financing of Dick Chenney? How long ago was that reported and it's just picking up steam now?

So Wilson is a democrat and contributed to Kerry. Wanna bet Novak who recieved the leaks contributes to Bush? Smell desperation there, or are just deomcrats corrupt? Plus, since every single democratic candidate has finally gotten the spine to call for a special investigator, it hardly matters that Wilson weants Kerry for President. Who's he GOING to contribute to, Bush? I''ll look for a source for your Kerry contribution fact since you're far too lazy, and haven't developed the habbit of backing up your claims.

If she is an undercover agent it is a federal offense to reveal her identity. If she is not, it is a deliberate attempt to ruin the legitimatge energy career of a woman as payback for her husband and a warning to other whistle blowers. Who's going to hire her as an energy consultant now that everyone thinks she's spy?

Here's todays story update:

" White House spokesman Scott McClellan said that "there has been absolutely nothing brought to our attention to suggest any White House involvement."

"The president believes leaking classified information is a very serious matter, and it should be pursued to the fullest extent by the appropriate agency, and the appropriate agency is the Department of Justice," McClellan said.


Wait and watch. Novak and several other conservative pundits know who's lying and who isn't. It's big story, and sooner or later, conservative or no, one of them is going to be just too tempted. The democratic candidates are pouncing. My guess is becuause they know something they didn't two months ago.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
mburbank has disabled reputation
Old Sep 30th, 2003, 09:47 AM       
Here's what Novak is saying:

"Nobody in the Bush administration called me to leak this," Novak said on CNN's "Crossfire," of which he is a co-host. "There is no great crime here."

"They asked me not to use her name, but never indicated it would endanger her or anybody else. According to a confidential source at the CIA, Mrs. Wilson was an analyst, not a spy, not a covert operative and not in charge of undercover operators," Novak said.

If this is %100 percent true (and that remains to be seen) Novak is confirming his sources are in the CIA. I'm not sure what he means by not a spy, but it wasn't public knowledge, she did have an 'official' job and it wasn't for the CIA. If true, all this satement says is that her life, and no other lives were endagered by ratting her out. It's still an act of revenge, it's still a warning to whistle blowers.

And that's the BEST spin you can put on it. Meanwhile,

" The Washington Post quoted a "senior administration official" in a story Sunday as saying that two top White House officials disclosed the identity of Wilson's wife in calls to at least six Washington journalists. Novak was the only recipient of the information who published it, the Post reported."

Six other journalists? And only Novak was unprincipled enough to run the story? Six? That's not a leak, that's a campaign. And that's story. There may not be a traceable white house source that committed a federal offense. But something very nasty happened here.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
VinceZeb VinceZeb is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
VinceZeb is probably a spambot
Old Sep 30th, 2003, 10:01 AM       
Did you even read Novak's piece in July? I did. Do you honestly believe that the CIA would give Novak information on a undercover CIA agent? If she was a regular run of the mill CIA agent, then no crime was committed.

I also like how you sum it up as "If she was undercover, then it is illegal. If she wasnt undercover, then they are trying to destroy her." Your true colors are shinin' through. How is giving the name of a normal CIA agent trying to destroy her career? Novak wanted information and the CIA gave it to him. Back in JULY. Don't even try to act like the Democrats have been sitting around researching this story. You also don't find it strange that Wilson brings it up now, instead of July? Wilson is also a huge lover of Clinton and hater of Bush. Did that ever cross your mind?

I'm going to wait and watch it turn out to die away just like Bush/Enron and Cheney/energy task force. Democrats are licking their lips like a shark in a pool full of body parts. Except the body parts are nothing but smoke and mirrors. Stupid people will buy into the story, the smart will research it and see it as bunk.

See, I research stories, Max. You pound your liberal drum. When this story is retracted, it will be in page D18 of the classified ads. Fox News will be the only one that follows it through. Everyone else will ignore it.

For being someone so revered for "researching" before you post, you sure as hell didn't do that here. If I am wrong, then so be it.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
VinceZeb VinceZeb is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
VinceZeb is probably a spambot
Old Sep 30th, 2003, 10:30 AM       
you can find this at www.nationalreview.com

September 29, 2003, 10:22 a.m.
Spy Games
Was it really a secret that Joe Wilson's wife worked for the CIA?

It's the top story in the Washington Post this morning as well as in many other media outlets. Who leaked the fact that the wife of Joseph C. Wilson IV worked for the CIA?

What also might be worth asking: "Who didn't know?"

I believe I was the first to publicly question the credibility of Mr. Wilson, a retired diplomat sent to Niger to look into reports that Saddam Hussein had attempted to purchase yellowcake uranium for his nuclear-weapons program.

On July 6, Mr. Wilson wrote an op-ed for the New York Times in which he said: "I have little choice but to conclude that some of the intelligence related to Iraq's nuclear weapons program was twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat."

On July 11, I wrote a piece for NRO arguing that Mr. Wilson had no basis for that conclusion — and that his political leanings and associations (not disclosed by the Times and others journalists interviewing him) cast serious doubt on his objectivity.

On July 14, Robert Novak wrote a column in the Post and other newspapers naming Mr. Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, as a CIA operative.

That wasn't news to me. I had been told that — but not by anyone working in the White House. Rather, I learned it from someone who formerly worked in the government and he mentioned it in an offhand manner, leading me to infer it was something that insiders were well aware of.

I chose not to include it (I wrote a second NRO piece on this issue on July 18) because it didn't seem particularly relevant to the question of whether or not Mr. Wilson should be regarded as a disinterested professional who had done a thorough investigation into Saddam's alleged attempts to purchase uranium in Africa.

What did appear relevant could easily be found in what the CIA would call "open sources." For example, Mr. Wilson had long been a bitter critic of the current administration, writing in such left-wing publications as The Nation that under President Bush, "America has entered one of it periods of historical madness" and had "imperial ambitions."

What's more, he was affiliated with the pro-Saudi Middle East Institute and he had recently been the keynote speaker for the Education for Peace in Iraq Center, a far-Left group that opposed not only the U.S. military intervention in Iraq but also the sanctions and the no-fly zones that protected Iraqi Kurds and Shias from being slaughtered by Saddam.

Mr. Wilson is now saying (on C-SPAN this morning, for example) that he opposed military action in Iraq because he didn't believe Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and he foresaw the possibility of a difficult occupation. In fact, prior to the U.S. invasion, Mr. Wilson told ABC's Dave Marash that if American troops were sent into Iraq, Saddam might "use a biological weapon in a battle that we might have. For example, if we're taking Baghdad or we're trying to take, in ground-to-ground, hand-to-hand combat."

Equally, important and also overlooked: Mr. Wilson had no apparent background or skill as an investigator. As Mr. Wilson himself acknowledged, his so-called investigation was nothing more than "eight days drinking sweet mint tea and meeting with dozens of people" at the U.S. embassy in Niger. Based on those conversations, he concluded that "it was highly doubtful that any [sale of uranium from Niger to Iraq] had ever taken place."

That's hardly the same as disproving what British intelligence believed — and continues to believe: that Saddam Hussein was actively attempting to purchase uranium from somewhere in Africa. (Whether Saddam succeeded or not isn't the point; were Saddam attempting to make such purchases it would suggest that his nuclear-weapons-development program was active and ongoing.)

For some reason, this background and these questions have been consistently omitted in the Establishment media's reporting on Mr. Wilson and his charges.

There also remains this intriguing question: Was it primarily due to the fact that Mr. Wilson's wife worked for the CIA that he received the Niger assignment?

Mr. Wilson has said that his mission came about following a request from Vice President Cheney. But it appears that if Mr. Cheney made the request at all, he made it of the CIA and did not know Mr. Wilson and certainly did not specify that he wanted Mr. Wilson put on the case.

It has to be seen as puzzling that the agency would deal with an inquiry from the White House on a sensitive national-security matter by sending a retired, Bush-bashing diplomat with no investigative experience. Or didn't the CIA bother to look into Mr. Wilson's background?

If that's what passes for tradecraft in Langley, we're in more trouble than any of us have realized.

— Clifford D. May, a former New York Times foreign correspondent, is president of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, a policy institute focusing on terrorism.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
mburbank has disabled reputation
Old Sep 30th, 2003, 11:04 AM       
Tell you what. You wait for this story to die out and I'll wait to see if and WMD are ever found in Iraq.


You read what you post, right? A typical right wing pundit technique is to title a piece with the nugget you want your reader to take away.

There is very little in that article that bears on the title of the piece. Here's the sum total.

"On July 14, Robert Novak wrote a column in the Post and other newspapers naming Mr. Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, as a CIA operative.

That wasn't news to me. I had been told that — but not by anyone working in the White House. Rather, I learned it from someone who formerly worked in the government and he mentioned it in an offhand manner, leading me to infer it was something that insiders were well aware of. "


Clifford May, the author of your article says he got the information from someone who was not, as Novak stated in his original article, a "Senior Administration Official". Clifford May 'infers' that the mnner this informtion was passed on was 'offhand' and thius not a leak, but "something that insiders were well aware of. " Mmmm. That's some mighty fine investigative journalism.

The rest of the article, several hundred more words is ll about discreditting Wilson and his opinions on Uranium. A far better headline would have been "Why I don't trust Wilsons opinions on Nigerian Uranium".

I think you found the lead through a search and did a cut n' paste without reading the article. Prove me wrong.


I didn't read Novak the day it was published, but I've read the article several times since. He sites "Two Senior Administration Figures". Was he lying? You may not know that there’s differnence between the administration and the CIA, which is forgiveable. With the acception only a few of appointees at the very top of the CIA are administration. Every one else there is hired and works for the agency, no matter which party holds the whitehouse. Novak knows the distinction. Does he mean Geogre tennet is the source of the leak? If not, then he was either lying in the original article, or now. My first post on this dates back to July 14’th, the day David Corn reported the story and I believe he was the first journalist to point out Novaks article might be evince of a federal crime.

Novak described Wilson's wife as "an agency operative on weapons of mass destruction." The degree of secrecy surrounding Pjalmes role in the CIA has, as far as know, not yet been reported, nor has her current status with the CIA or with her other, private sector employees, who have not been named in any story I can find. If you have sources on these, first, well done, and second, post them. Otherwise wait.

On Monday , the CIA told CNN Wilson’s wife "was an operative who ran agents in the field." Who’s telling the truth? Novak or the CIA? Ask yourself this. What motive does the CIA currently have to lie about Pjalmes job now?

"When this story is retracted, it will be in page D18 of the classified ads."
-Vinth

That's exactly where I found retraction after retraction about WMDs being found. Oh, excpet for the NYT. They haven't retracted some of their stories yet. I guess they'll get around to it when they stop having such a liberal bias.

" You also don't find it strange that Wilson brings it up now, instead of July?"
-Vinth

"Naming her this way would have compromised every operation, every relationship, every network with which she had been associated in her entire career. This is the stuff of Kim Philby and Aldrich Ames."
-Wilson 7/14/03.

I'm sorry, who pounds a drum without doing research, dumbass?

"Don't even try to act like the Democrats have been sitting around researching this story."
-Vinth

Here are the words I used to describe the democrats not going with the story in July.

"less balls than a castrated gerbil." Let me make myself clear. The reason the democrats waited so long on this story is not research, it is cowardice. The fact the have decided to go with it means that these cowardly people think they currently have nothing to be afraid of.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
VinceZeb VinceZeb is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
VinceZeb is probably a spambot
Old Sep 30th, 2003, 11:16 AM       
No, Max, they didn't go with it because THERE IS NO STORY! That is the exact reason they didn't run with this story like a retard in the Special Olympics. There is nothing here that is important!

Wow, senior administration officials told her identity. In other news, senior administration officials told me that Rohan Davey was the 3rd-string quarterback for the New England Patriots. They also told me the name of Bush’s barber and shoe-shine boy. Big fucking whoop.

What the hell does “an operative that ran agents in the field” mean? She can tell agents in the field that they need to protect certain guy at certain time. Big fucking deal. Who cares who does that? Telling her name isn’t going to release some big secret. And if she was a spy, she was a sucky one at that because you can do searches on the net and find out a plethora of info on her.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
mburbank has disabled reputation
Old Sep 30th, 2003, 11:23 AM       
"No, Max, they didn't go with it because THERE IS NO STORY! "
Vinth

So, everyone is all over it now... randomly? Just because? You do know what changed about the story that suddenly took it from the left wing to the main stream, don't you? You don't? Seriously? Huh. 'Cause I actually do, and so does anyone else who has the reading comprehension of a third grader. See if you can figure out why this story wasn't getting much covergae and now it is.

"And if she was a spy, she was a sucky one at that because you can do searches on the net and find out a plethora of info on her."
-Vinth

Seriously. A 'plethora'. Huh. Any of that plethora predate Novaks article? You know why that would matter, right?
Reply With Quote
  #12  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
mburbank has disabled reputation
Old Sep 30th, 2003, 12:28 PM       
And in todays news:

Justice Probes Leak of CIA Operative's ID
40 minutes ago


By CURT ANDERSON, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - The Justice Department launched a full-blown criminal investigation into who leaked the name of a CIA officer, and President Bush directed his White House staff on Tuesday to cooperate fully.

The White House staff was notified of the investigation by e-mail after the Justice Department decided late Monday to move from a preliminary investigation into a full probe. It is rare that the department decides to conduct a full investigation of the alleged leak of classified information.



So, The Justice department, this Justice department, the Ashcroft one? Thinks this is worth a full-blown criminal investigation.

Can we start a betting pool as to which low level sub secretary gets thrown to the wolves on this one? If that's what happens it will be a mistake, because the buck won't stop there. Nixon found that out the hard way.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
sspadowsky sspadowsky is offline
Will chop you good.
sspadowsky's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Thrill World
sspadowsky is probably a spambot
Old Sep 30th, 2003, 12:37 PM       
The language of the PARIOT Act allows for any offense that endangers human life to be classified as an act of terrorism. Maybe they should arrest the offending members of the administration and hold them without charge or access to a lawyer.
__________________
"If honesty is the best policy, then, by elimination, dishonesty is the second-best policy. Second is not all that bad."
-George Carlin
Reply With Quote
  #14  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
mburbank has disabled reputation
Old Sep 30th, 2003, 12:37 PM       
"And if she was a spy, she was a sucky one at that because you can do searches on the net and find out a plethora of info on her."
-Vinth research

"I find no mention of her on Nexis prior to the current scandal, and the only pre-scandal mention I found on the Web was Wilson's bio sheet on the Middle East Institute's Web site in which she is described as his wife, "Valerie Plame."
-Jack Schaffer, for Slate, reaserched and fact checked.

Wow Vinth. I'm dressing you in a sailor moon costume and parading you in public. You're so damn dumb.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
sspadowsky sspadowsky is offline
Will chop you good.
sspadowsky's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Thrill World
sspadowsky is probably a spambot
Old Sep 30th, 2003, 12:39 PM       
Oh, by the way, from what I have read and heard about Karl Rove, I daresay this has his fingerprints all over it.
__________________
"If honesty is the best policy, then, by elimination, dishonesty is the second-best policy. Second is not all that bad."
-George Carlin
Reply With Quote
  #16  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
mburbank has disabled reputation
Old Sep 30th, 2003, 05:24 PM       
Here's a tid bit from The Hill, a newspaper written for an widely read by congress.

"CIA agents work under different sorts of “cover.” There’s “official cover” — like when an agent is assigned to a U.S. embassy under the guise that he or she is a foreign service officer. Then there’s “nonofficial” cover — like when your business cards say you’re a manager at Acme Overseas Energy Corporation, but you really work for the CIA.

Plame is in that latter category."
Reply With Quote
  #17  
sspadowsky sspadowsky is offline
Will chop you good.
sspadowsky's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Thrill World
sspadowsky is probably a spambot
Old Sep 30th, 2003, 05:28 PM       
Max, what do you think about the Rove angle? Do you tend to think he was behind it? As I said, from what I've read about the man so far, this seems like something he or one of his minions would do.
__________________
"If honesty is the best policy, then, by elimination, dishonesty is the second-best policy. Second is not all that bad."
-George Carlin
Reply With Quote
  #18  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
mburbank has disabled reputation
Old Sep 30th, 2003, 05:37 PM       
It is absolutely a Rove-esque dirty trick, and certainly Wilson thinks it's got Roves prints on it.

He'd never get caught, though, and while a lot of circumstantial evidence has piled up against Rove for various politically oriented crimes over the years, he's never been caught. He's very slippery.

I'm sure if he's the actual mastermind here, he told somebody to tell somebody to tell someboy to do it and then covered all his snail trails.

From here on in, like every other good scandal, it's all about the cover-up. That's why the Whitehouse Legal Council has issued a do not destroy order. It's an attempt (and a wise one) to limmit damage. If this IS Roves work, anything that needed to be destroyed was destroyed back in July.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
AChimp AChimp is offline
Resident Chimp
AChimp's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: The Jungles of Borneo
AChimp is probably a real personAChimp is probably a real person
Old Sep 30th, 2003, 07:41 PM       
Quote:
She can tell agents in the field that they need to protect certain guy at certain time. Big fucking deal. Who cares who does that? Telling her name isn’t going to release some big secret.
AHAHAHAHA!!!

Vinth, even if you did get a submarine letter, you would have been a sucky captain if you can't understand the simple concept of a chain of command.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
VinceZeb VinceZeb is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
VinceZeb is probably a spambot
Old Sep 30th, 2003, 11:57 PM       
Karl Rove is behind it all. Wilson never went on Good Morning America and said that he wasn't sure if Rove even had anything to do with it or anything like that....

Dumbasses.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
VinceZeb VinceZeb is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
VinceZeb is probably a spambot
Old Oct 1st, 2003, 12:01 AM       
...But on Monday’s Good Morning America, Wilson had backed away from the very hostile statement which Miklaszewski highlighted, telling Charles Gibson: “In one speech I gave out in Seattle not too long ago I mentioned the name Karl Rove. I think I was probably carried away by the spirit of the moment. I don't have any knowledge that Karl Rove himself was either the leaker or the authorizer of the leak, but I have great confidence that at a minimum he condoned it and certainly did nothing to shut it down.”...

http://www.mrc.org/cyberalerts/2003/cyb20030930.asp#1

National Review also has a lot of information on this supposed leak.

Why can't you all just admit this is a big inside Washington story that got blown out of proportion?
Reply With Quote
  #22  
sspadowsky sspadowsky is offline
Will chop you good.
sspadowsky's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Thrill World
sspadowsky is probably a spambot
Old Oct 1st, 2003, 09:15 AM       
Hey, stupid: I'm willing to bet that you don't know jack shit about Karl Rove, or his past, so why don't you shut the hell up? The reason his name keeps coming up is because he's pulled similar shit all through his career. And if he's made it this far, odds are there's never going to be a way to prove he was behind it.
__________________
"If honesty is the best policy, then, by elimination, dishonesty is the second-best policy. Second is not all that bad."
-George Carlin
Reply With Quote
  #23  
VinceZeb VinceZeb is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
VinceZeb is probably a spambot
Old Oct 1st, 2003, 09:43 AM       
I know about Rove being fired for supposedly leaking information in 92 or 94. Please don't insult my intelligence.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
sspadowsky sspadowsky is offline
Will chop you good.
sspadowsky's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Thrill World
sspadowsky is probably a spambot
Old Oct 1st, 2003, 10:05 AM       
OK, so you know that Rove has a history of pulling this sort of stunt, and then you jump our cases for thinking he was behind it. Whose intelligence is being insulted here?

EDIT: By the way, that's just ONE story out of a great many.
__________________
"If honesty is the best policy, then, by elimination, dishonesty is the second-best policy. Second is not all that bad."
-George Carlin
Reply With Quote
  #25  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
mburbank has disabled reputation
Old Oct 1st, 2003, 10:23 AM       
Here's what I missed.

Where I said Karl Rove did it.

I said it was the sort of thing he's done. I said if he did it he was almost certainly professional enough to cover his tracks.

Which is pretty much what Wilson has said.

Jeeze Vinth, you/Boortz think that Bush should be allowed his 16 words becuase they're 'technically true'. What did I say that wasn't 'technically true'?

And before you recapittulate Boortz's argument today, that no one has said Plame was undercover and she couldn't have been because the CIA would never confirm the employment of an undercover agent, let me say:

1.) CIA agents are as capable of breaking the law as 'administration sources'. Th Boortz argument is totally specious.

2.) Absolutely the ONLY source I have been able to find that comments on the type of agent Plame was is the one that I already posted from The Hill Newspaper. I'll put it up again.

"CIA agents work under different sorts of “cover.” There’s “official cover” — like when an agent is assigned to a U.S. embassy under the guise that he or she is a foreign service officer. Then there’s “nonofficial” cover — like when your business cards say you’re a manager at Acme Overseas Energy Corporation, but you really work for the CIA.

Plame is in that latter category."

Blowing a NOC's cover is federal offense.

The CIA as of this morning has not officially commented on the nature of Palme's employment, and they are unlikely to do so unless required to by a federal prosecutor. Why? Because they are not supposed to.

There's a reason Boortz doesn't source his material. In this case, I'm fairly sure it's becuase he can't. Do you suppose if it comes out in the wash that Palme was absolutely an undercover agent, Boortz will print a retraction? I myself am not certain if Palme was undercover or routinely employed. But if the latter, I don't think the CIA and the FBI would currently be investigating. That's the way I'm leaning on this one.

IF she turns out to be a routine employee who had no cover at all, you can be certain I'll apologize, say this was a mere dirty trick and not a significant crime, and didn't need to be investigated. If she is, what will you do, Vinth? W. himself says he wants to get to the bottom of this and that it's a very serious mtter. Do you disagree?
Reply With Quote
Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

   


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:47 PM.


© 2008 I-Mockery.com
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.