or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › This is REAL treason Ann Coulter: Someone is going to Jail or worse!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

This is REAL treason Ann Coulter: Someone is going to Jail or worse! - Page 12

post #441 of 498
Thread Starter 
that's what i'm talking about...bush JUNIOR wants people to forget about the traitor in is house, but american patriots like these do not...



http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/....ap/index.html

Quote:


Ex-CIA officers seek Senate leak probe

WASHINGTON (AP) --Two former CIA officers are asking the Senate Intelligence Committee to open its own investigation into who leaked the identity of an undercover officer.

Jim Marcinkowski, a case officer from 1986 to 1989, said a congressional investigation will be needed to demonstrate the credibility of an investigation now under way by the Justice Department.

"I have every confidence they (Justice officials) will come up with the right conclusion," he said in an interview Wednesday. "But obviously there are going to be people that are going to question that conclusion, so you might as well put it all on the table right now."

Marcinkowski, now deputy city attorney in Royal Oak, Michigan, appeared before the Senate panel Thursday. He and another former CIA officer, Larry Johnson, had requested the meeting. Johnson also served as the State Department's deputy chief of counterterrorism in the first Bush administration.

A call to the office of Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kansas, chairman of the Intelligence Committee, was not immediately returned Wednesday. Roberts and the panel's top Democrat, Sen. Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, have been reluctant to start their own investigation, saying they don't want to interfere with the Justice Department inquiry.

Johnson rejected that position. "I think there's a lot they can do without undermining the criminal investigation," he said in an interview.

Investigators are trying to determine who leaked to columnist Robert Novak and two Newsday journalists the identity of an undercover CIA operations officer. The officer is married to former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, who has accused the Bush administration of manipulating intelligence to exaggerate the threat from Iraq before the war.

Novak wrote in his column that the information came from two senior administration officials.

Marcinkowski said he wants to stress to the committee that the leak was an "unprecedented and extremely egregious act." He said he wanted to urge the committee "to say, 'We're going to look at this because it's important."'

Johnson said: "When you start outing clandestine officers for political reasons, that has to be stopped."

He stressed that he is a Republican who voted for Bush and contributed to his presidential campaign.

Johnson said he and Marcinkowski had trained with the exposed officer at the CIA in 1985.


The washington post (seems like the only newspaper that cares) chimes in:

Quote:
More on the disclosure of Valerie Plame's employment at the CIA.


The Post today runs a story, basically similar to the one which ran

_ yesterday afternoon in the Associated Press. There's not too much there beyond word that a dozen-member FBI team has now interviewed more than three dozen administration officials.

They're also poring over phone logs and memos and the like. And the investigation remains centered on the White House.

The sizzle to the story is that Karl Rove and Scott McClellan, the president's press secretary, have both been interviewed.

Here's what catches my eye though. These are, as the Post notes, voluntary interviews. And I doubt that either of these men is the actual culprit (I suspect Rove pushed the story after the fact, but was likely not the original leaker, though he may have known about it.)

I'd be much more interested to learn whether the investigators have interviewed anybody in the Office of the Vice President, or the NSC, for that matter. These are voluntary interviews. So have the investigators asked but been rebuffed? Just not gotten to it yet?

That's the story I'd read with great interest.

One other point: The Post piece says "McClellan has specifically denied that any of three prominent White House officials -- Rove, Vice President Cheney's Chief of Staff I. Lewis Libby and National Security Council official Elliott Abrams -- had leaked the information or authorized leaks."

As we've noted here before, that's not precisely what he's said. He's hung his statements on a very precise -- and to my mind -- highly technical and obfuscatory statement that none of them has "leaked classified information."

He's never made any blanket statements about things they may have
-- Josh Marshall
post #442 of 498
Thread Starter 
A Stinging description of the problem can be found here:

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/...eak/index.html

Quote:

HEMMER: Tell me why you think it is such a big deal.

JOHNSON: Was 9/11 a big deal? It's a big deal in part because we saw the planes crash into the buildings and we saw the images and horrible vision of people jumping from those towers. We saw it. If we didn't see it and didn't read about it, we wouldn't know it happened.


The problem with this is a lot of the damage that has occurred is not going to be seen. It can't be photographed. We can't bring the bodies out because in some cases it's going to involve protecting sources and methods. And it's important to keep this before the American people. This was a betrayal of national security.

HEMMER: Larry, tell me, what's the damage, though. Be specific, as best you can right now. Have lives been lost? Have people been sacrificed?


JOHNSON: I don't know if lives have been lost yet, but we have to start with the damage to Mrs. Wilson. Her life has been put at risk. The people that she was working with overseas who were spies, they are potentially at risk. You could potentially have people dead because of this. But the odds of finding that out as far as the CIA coming forth and detailing it, we are not likely to hear that because they have to protect the sources and methods.


HEMMER: Jim, you appeared before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Can you tell us what happened.

MARCHINKOWSKI: First off, the hearing was held by Senator Rockefeller and Senator Roberts on 72-hour notice. They were receptive to our request to have a closed session of the Intelligence Committee. Obviously it was a closed session, but I can say this. I believe all the members were very concerned. They were very sincere in their concern and I have confidence that they are going to do the right thing.


HEMMER: After listening to Larry, it sounds like, essentially the sky is falling in terms of the CIA around the world. Do you see it that way and did you get that sense in the hearing?

MARCHINKOWSKI: Yes, I did. I think the message is out there. This is an unprecedented act. This has never been done by the United States government before. The exposure of an undercover intelligence officer by the U.S. government is unprecedented. It's not the usual leak from Washington. The leak a week scenario is not at play here. This is a very, very serious event.

HEMMER: You are both registered Republicans, right? How concerned are you about the political gain that one side or the other may seek in this?

JOHNSON: That's what we have to get out of this. I don't know, Bill if you have any kids, they've gone to school on "opposite day" where they wear their clothes inside out and wear their shoes on the wrong feet. I feel like we're seeing opposite day. If a Democrat had done this, we would see the Republicans up in arms.
As a Republican, I think we need to be consistent on this. It doesn't matter who did it, it didn't matter which party was involved. This isn't about partisan politics. This is about protecting national security and national security assets and in this case there has been a betrayal, not only of the CIA officers there, but really a betrayal of those of us who have kept the secrets over the years on this point.

This white house is going to try and bury this. They are going to call it no big deal. They are going to say this is partisan politcs.


The leakers must be brought forward and punished!
post #443 of 498
Thread Starter 
Just watching cspan.

They are showing (from friday) one of the former cia agents testify before the senate intelligence committee:

vince cannistrano (27 year cia employee):

i talked to some of my colleages who lived thru this period of intimidation and pressure. (iraq) and yes they say its intimidation, they say its pressure. the fact that its manifested by very senior officials. the vice president of the united states for the first time in my life of 27 years in intelligence, this is the first time i have ever heard of the VP going out to CIA and sitting down with desk level analysts.

The pres. the VP coming out and making a speech, cutting a ribbbon absolutely.

But sitting down and debating with junior level analysts and pushing him for support that he (the vp) personally beleives, that saddam was trying to aquire uranium, that to me is pressure, that to me is intimidation.

analysts are generally a fiesty lot. they don't often just rollover and play dead.but they are also political animals and alos career minded. and they are not going to say mr. vice president you're full of it. they'll say well we haven't found anything.

vp: you're not looking hard enough...

Well, we will go out and try again.

But that pressure is unrelenting and even when you don't find something and you report back and the vice pres. says its true, saddam is renewing his program, and says it on the eve of his invasion of the war.

or when other people, officials of the government demand that those 16 words are in the state of the union address about the nuclear program.

....

that means they (the WH) is not going to take no for an answer...it means we know what we (the WH) believe and if you don't find it then you are just doing an imcompentant job...

----

its goes on... sickening


cheney has no soul. bush does not have a brain. this is cheney's war.
post #444 of 498
These are cases that Ann Coulter conservatives consider a matter of treason:

1948 William Weisband, of the U.S. Armed Forces Security Agency (the predecessor of the NSA) provided U.S. codes to the Soviet Union. The Soviets change their codes and cripple U.S. military intelligence in the early days of the Korean War. Weisband a Russian spy since 1934 was fired from the NSA and served a year for contempt of a grand jury.

1949 Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs, Harry Gold, David Greenglass, Julius and Ethel Rosenburg, Max Elitcher, and Morton Sobel are arrested as members of a spy network that provided the Soviet Union with atomic espionage. David Greenglass pleaded guilty and testified against his colleagues. Gold also testified in the case.

On March 29, 1951, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, and Morton Sobell were found guilty. The Rosenbergs were sentenced to death and Sobell to 30 years. The Rosenbergs were executed at Sing Sing Prison, New York on June 19, 1953. David Greenglass received a 15-year sentence.

1980 Former CIA agent David H. Barnett pleads guilty to spying for the Soviet Union between 1976 and 1979 while based in Indonesia. Barnett was the first current or former CIA agent convicted of espionage. He exposed the identities of 30 U.S. agents.

1985 Former CIA officer Edward Lee Howard flees from the U.S while the FBI is investigating him for spying. Howard was suspected of disclosing the identities of CIA agents in Moscow. He turned up in the Soviet Union in 1986.

1985 Walker Family spy ring is exposed. Retired U.S. Navy Warrant Officer, John A. Walker Jr. pleaded guilty along with his son, Navy Seaman Michael L. Walker, 22, to charges of spying for the Soviet Union. John Walker passed secrets to the Soviets while he was a shipboard communications officer. In addition, Arthur Walker (his brother) and friend Jerry Whitworth were also convicted of stealing documents and passing Navy codes. Soviets discover American anti-submarine detection abilities and react by redesigning propulsion systems, crippling U.S. ASW ability.

1986 Ronald W. Pelton, a former employee of the U. S. National Security Agency, is convicted of selling top-secret signals intelligence information to the Soviet Union. Pelton revealed to his handlers that U.S. intelligence had tapped Soviet undersea cables and was listening to all navy communications.

February 1994 Aldrich Ames, 52, an alcoholic who had been a CIA employee for more than 31 years is charged, along with his wife, with spying for the Soviet Union and then later for Russia. Ames passed information to the KGB from 1985 to 1994 including the identities of U.S. agents and U.S. counterintelligence techniques. It was called the most damaging espionage case in American history. Later CIA chief John Deutch told Congress Ames compromised more than 100 U.S. spies. Ten were executed and others turned by the KGB to then feed selective information to the CIA. Ames and his wife received over $2.7 million, the most money paid by the Soviet Union/Russia to an American spy. Ames pleaded guilty in 1994 and was sentenced to life.

December 1996 FBI arrests one of its own, agent Earl Pitts. Pitts, who was stationed at the FBI Academy in Quantico, Va., had been selling secrets to Russia for nine years. He was paid more than $224,000. Pitts was caught in a sting, giving FBI cipher codes and his own security badge to FBI undercover agents he thought were his new Russian handlers. He was sentenced to 27 years.

November 1996 The FBI arrests veteran CIA officer Harold Nicholson on charges of spying for Russia. Nicholson was at a Washington airport on his way to Europe to meet with his Russian intelligence handlers. At the time of his arrest, he was carrying rolls of exposed film that contained secret information. In March 1997, Nicholson pleaded guilty to the charges and was sentenced to 23 years.

October 1998 A retired U.S. army intelligence analyst named David Sheldon Boone is charged with selling secrets to Moscow after FBI sting.

Nov. 29, 1999 U.S. military officials charge Navy code breaker Daniel King with selling data to Moscow.

June 14, 2000 U.S. Army Colonel George Trofimoff of Florida becomes the highest ranking U.S. military officer charged with spying. The FBI says Trofimoff was a spy for 25 years, photographing U.S. documents and passing the film to KGB agents.

This is what liberal democrat operatives think is treason:

July 2003 - One or two unknown party(s), presumably an employee(s) in the executive branch, tell one or more Washington journalists of the insider dispute over who/what/and how Wilson got assigned to a sensitive political task and mentioned that his wife is a local CIA employee apparently an open secret on the Washington cocktail circuit (as are the insider disputes). Said individual(s) violated employment secrecy law, not for a foreign power, but to aide his executive employer in the political infighting.

Wilson, a far-left, Nation magazine contributor becomes left celebrity, makes rash overstatements, and this thread joins in calling for jail or worse (meaning capital punishment?)

How pathetic!
post #445 of 498
Thread Starter 
Oh Boy,

If you think the bush appointed wilson who has contributed to both demos and repubs is "far left" then you have been listening to too much hate radio.and It really shows a lack of research. But that's beside the fact, wilson could have been a card carry NRA loving, didn't think ann coulter is a liar, bill oreilly t-shirt buying, rush limbaugh listening "good ole" american and it would not have made a difference to this white house.

Wilson came forth with information that showed the white house was not being forthright with the american people. Because of that, senior administration officials outed his wife and put the national security of this country in jepordy. PURELY FOR POLITICAL REVENGE.

Read the whole thread maybe you missed something. There is, in the words of bush JUNIOR's daddy, an "insidious traitor" in his son's white house....

Of course there have been other traitors in our country's history. Do me a little favor, look thru the list:

Did any of those people work in the white house or vice president's office?

Any of those people take their actions because wilson's comments showed their 16 words to be a lie?

Any one of those people go after the person's wife who exposed them?

Any one of those people people say how saddam would be found or ossama would be found (which they still have not by the way) and yet when it comes to a traitor in the next office say "the leaker may never be found"?

Any of those people have an AG that had one of the potencial leakers work on one of their election campaigns? and still not recuse himself?

That's exactly what is happening here and liberals, moderates, non rabid republicans, and even stevie wonder can see this...

Want to know what pathetic is?

Pathetic is the mindset of this white house to even think LET ALONE ACT on an action such as this...


Yes... this is all a big liberal consipiracy sureeeeeee....
post #446 of 498
That's your best shot ?

Har Har
post #447 of 498
Quote:
Originally posted by MaxParrish
That's your best shot ?

Har Har

Well you don't have a single answer to any of his questions, Mr. 4-Post.
meh
Reply
meh
Reply
post #448 of 498
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by MaxParrish
That's your best shot ?

Har Har

That's all your worth...

Have a nice day. Watch out for the liberal media. They are ALL out to get TRUE Americans such as you...

Say hello to Ann Coulter for me the next time you are at one of her book signings...
post #449 of 498
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Harald
Well you don't have a single answer to any of his questions, Mr. 4-Post.

It was'nt worth it, I'll demonstrate:

Q:"Of course there have been other traitors in our country's history. Do me a little favor, look thru the list:

Did any of those people work in the white house or vice president's office?"

A: On the list I offered, those guilty of treason were in the CIA, FBI, and US Military meaning they were less damaging than what recently occured ? Moreover, on a compressive list I could have also included Alger Hiss, Harry Dexter White, and many others who have worked in both the white house and congress read the history of the cold war my friend and youll see how dumb that question is.

Q: Any of those people take their actions because Wilsons comments showed their 16 words to be a lie?

A: No, the people took their actions because of loyalty to the Soviet Union,international communism, and to enrich themselves on substantial money from their Soviet paymasters. They took that action in order to assist the second most powerful state, in a cold war with the west, sustain a state that killed 10s of millions of its own citizens in reigns of terror, crushed eastern Europe under imperialism, and sought the destruction of world democratic systems. A little more treasonous than mentioning Wilsons wife is a CIA employee Dont you think ?

Q: Any one of those people go after the person's wife who exposed them?

A: No, none of the Soviet agents have ever gone after someone's wife, they executed their exposer when possible. Of course, they also killed hundreds (maybe thousands) in exposing western agents and crippling US military efforts, cost the west 10s of billions, perhaps more, in reconstructing its defenses, and prolonged the cold war for a decade or more.

Q: Any one of those people say how saddam would be found or ossama would be found (which they still have not by the way) and yet when it comes to a traitor in the next office say "the leaker may never be found"?

A: Nope, the Soviet agents had no comment on Saddam or Osama, or are familiar with current political leakers (although they knew about and shielded their white house comrades in the 30s and 40s).

Q: Any of those people have an AG that had one of the potential leakers work on one of their election campaigns? and still not recuse himself?

A: Nope, none of these Soviet agents directed the US Attorney General to use a potential leaker on an election campaign. Now, Soviet agents did manage to appoint their comrades to various executive agencies, with the compliance of New Deal liberals. The more well know being Alger Hiss, a deputy Secretary of State, and Harry Dexter White in Treasury.

Want to know what pathetic is?

Pathetic is the mindset of this white house to even think LET ALONE ACT on an action such as this...


Now that I have answered Mr. 4s questions it should be obvious that it was hardly worth doing. Consumed by his hysteria, his fevered ramblings are, at times, incoherent. Getting excited that the AG appointed a potential leaker (notice he said potential) is indictment by wishful thinking; going ballistic over an executive leaker and comparing them to the hunt for Bin Ladan or Saddam is someone who has lost touch with reality; someone who thinks this individual is guilty of treason has no familiarity with the law (which requires acting on behalf of an enemy of the United States) or a sense of proportion.

But come to think of it, he probably thinks that Bush is an enemy of the US governmentno?
post #450 of 498
If Wilson is far-left in your eyes, something's seriously wrong with you dude. SERIOUSLY wrong. I guess some people just like to remain ignorant and in denial.

So what is the latest on the investigation? Did it get magically swept under the rug?
post #451 of 498
Thread Starter 
Read the "just watching cspan" post i made a few up..

The senate had 3 form cia agents paint a picutre of the bush admin's actions re: the iraq info...

It does not paint a pretty picture of them to say the least.

I still say we are in the "blue gap dress" of the investiagtion. Things probably won't heat up till Jan.

But from my other readings the CIA is NOT going to let it go. There seems to be a war going on between them and the white house.

I expect it will be current and former CIA agents that do the bulk of the heavy work until next year...
post #452 of 498
Quote:
Originally posted by Gilsch
If Wilson is far-left in your eyes, something's seriously wrong with you dude. SERIOUSLY wrong. I guess some people just like to remain ignorant and in denial.

So what is the latest on the investigation? Did it get magically swept under the rug?

Well, dude, lets look at Joseph C. Wilson the 4th (no kidding). Wilson has endorsed Sen. John Kerry, the New England liberal standard bearer, and has expressed a deeply ideological hatred of Bush. Wilson, a former Clinton appointee, chose to write his first blast of the Bush administration's Iraq policy in the far-left magazine The Nation in March. He wrote, "The underlying objective of this war is the imposition of a Pax Americana on the region and installation of vassal regimes that will control restive populations." He went on to predict: "Nations in the regionwill now listen when Washington tells them to tailor policies and curb anti-Western dissent. Hegemony in the Arab nations of the Gulf has been achieved, a laughable assertion, if it weren't so viscerally anti-American.

But Mr. Wilson and his wife are not new to politics. Both Wilson and his wife have been active Democrats for some time, they worked for both Bill Clinton and Al Gore, and donated the maximum allowed by law to Gore's 2000 presidential campaign, as did his wife Plame remarkable in that they also listed his wifes name and the name of her CIA front company on the donation papers. In doing so, he obviously didnt worry much about exposing covert companies or endangering his wife did he?

And there is more the Mr. Wilson than his show of being an aggrieved husband or a democratic operative. He really reveling in the fame, spending a lot of time ruminating over who might play his now famous wife Valerie Plame, when Hollywood calls. "She is really quite amazing," Wilson recently told The Washington Post, which described Plame as a slim, 40-year-old blonde, possessing "the looks of a film star" herself. Wilson apparently believes he will bring down this president and he mused to the Post that his future obituary might read, "Joseph C. Wilson IV, the Bush I administration political appointee who did the most damage to the Bush II administration ... "

Most recently, Mr. Wilson happily attended and spoke Washington's National Press Club meeting, with his WIFE no less, to accept an award from Nation magazine. Daniel Ellsberg, who leaked the Pentagon Papers more than 30 years ago, was introduced at the National Press Club yesterday as 'the ultimate whistle-blower" (gee I thought that 'leaking' classified documents might be treason). But, grinning from the dais, Ellsberg said he'd finally achieved another great ambition: to meet Joe Wilson's wife."

Ive only touched on some of his many theatrics (we once wore a lynch noose in front of reporters in the early 90's), and not addressed his smearing of Karl Rove (which Mr. Wilson had to retract).

There is a story here, but not the one democratic operatives wish to spin. Until then, you can be assured that if this story has legs, its in a wheelchair.
post #453 of 498
Quote:
Originally posted by MaxParrish
Well, dude, lets look at Joseph C. Wilson the 4th (no kidding). Wilson has endorsed Sen. John Kerry, the New England liberal standard bearer, and has expressed a deeply ideological hatred of Bush. Wilson, a former Clinton appointee, chose to write his first blast of the Bush administration's Iraq policy in the far-left magazine The Nation in March. He wrote, "The underlying objective of this war is the imposition of a Pax Americana on the region and installation of vassal regimes that will control restive populations." He went on to predict: "Nations in the regionwill now listen when Washington tells them to tailor policies and curb anti-Western dissent. Hegemony in the Arab nations of the Gulf has been achieved, a laughable assertion, if it weren't so viscerally anti-American.

But Mr. Wilson and his wife are not new to politics. Both Wilson and his wife have been active Democrats for some time, they worked for both Bill Clinton and Al Gore, and donated the maximum allowed by law to Gore's 2000 presidential campaign, as did his wife Plame remarkable in that they also listed his wifes name and the name of her CIA front company on the donation papers. In doing so, he obviously didnt worry much about exposing covert companies or endangering his wife did he?

And there is more the Mr. Wilson than his show of being an aggrieved husband or a democratic operative. He really reveling in the fame, spending a lot of time ruminating over who might play his now famous wife Valerie Plame, when Hollywood calls. "She is really quite amazing," Wilson recently told The Washington Post, which described Plame as a slim, 40-year-old blonde, possessing "the looks of a film star" herself. Wilson apparently believes he will bring down this president and he mused to the Post that his future obituary might read, "Joseph C. Wilson IV, the Bush I administration political appointee who did the most damage to the Bush II administration ... "

Most recently, Mr. Wilson happily attended and spoke Washington's National Press Club meeting, with his WIFE no less, to accept an award from Nation magazine. Daniel Ellsberg, who leaked the Pentagon Papers more than 30 years ago, was introduced at the National Press Club yesterday as 'the ultimate whistle-blower" (gee I thought that 'leaking' classified documents might be treason). But, grinning from the dais, Ellsberg said he'd finally achieved another great ambition: to meet Joe Wilson's wife."

Ive only touched on some of his many theatrics (we once wore a lynch noose in front of reporters in the early 90's), and not addressed his smearing of Karl Rove (which Mr. Wilson had to retract).

There is a story here, but not the one democratic operatives wish to spin. Until then, you can be assured that if this story has legs, its in a wheelchair.

Yawn.

1). First, Wilson's politics don't even matter. It has nothing to do with the fact that senior administration officials unlawfully leaked the name of a CIA Operative-- Valerie Plame. That much is known and that much has been agreed upon even by President Bush himself.

2). Second, Wilson is probably a moderate Democrat-- not as far left as his critics would be happy to paint him. He has donated money to George W. Bush's presidential campaign (before the nasty South Carolina primary) and has worked for the first Bush administration. And if you think supporting John Kerry epitomizes far-left liberalism, you are mistaken (ridiculously so).
post #454 of 498
MaxParrish, rather than wasting my screen space, why not just post 18 USC 2381 and be done with it?

And Wilson's politics are irrelevant.
post #455 of 498
Quote:
Originally posted by ShawnJ
Yawn.

1). First, Wilson's politics don't even matter. It has nothing to do with the fact that senior administration officials unlawfully leaked the name of a CIA Operative-- Valerie Plame. That much is known and that much has been agreed upon even by President Bush himself.

2). Second, Wilson is probably a moderate Democrat-- not as far left as his critics would be happy to paint him. He has donated money to George W. Bush's presidential campaign (before the nasty South Carolina primary) and has worked for the first Bush administration. And if you think supporting John Kerry epitomizes far-left liberalism, you are mistaken (ridiculously so).

First, if the "leak" controversy on this board was confined to a question of a violation of US statutes( and I did not take a position on that aspect), I might agree. However, the threads author, along with twelve pages of board discussion, have centered on far more expansive and serious allegations; e.g. a cover-up by Bush (or even worse), the political motivations of Karl Rove, treason, etc. In addition, many posters have done a lot of hair pulling on behalf of Mr. Wilson and his wife, which hardly makes the Wilsons immune to examination. As long as the motivations, personalities, politics, and veracities are board questions for the Administration, the CIA, and journalists, then all should be examined in the same light, especially the instigating accuser, Joe Wilson.

Second, if the term far left is the only substantive disagreement with my prior post (as it was for several posters), just replace the term far left with solid left or left, it doesnt change the points of the original post.

But, in the meantime, do you really think that Mr. Wilsons ranting about "the imposition of a Pax Americana on the region and installation of vassal regimes that will control restive populations" and that Hegemony in the Arab nations of the Gulf has been achieved is the rhetoric of a moderate liberal? Do you think The Nation is a moderate liberal or moderate Democratic Party journal of opinion (the only thing to its left would have to be socialist)?

Its no accident that Wilson has thrown his support to Kerry, after all, his ADA ratings live up to Wilson political expectations. In case you didnt know, the lifetime ADA ratings for Democratic candidates are:

Sen. John Kerry 92
Former Sen. Moseley Braun 88
Rep. Dennis Kucinich 86
Sen. John Edwards 85
Sen. Joseph Lieberman 78
Rep. Richard Gephardt 74

A moderate democrat? Hardly.

Last, Wilson did serve under Bush Sr. (12 years ago), but the claim of contemporary non-partisanship is ludicrous. Here is the breakdown of his contributions in 2002: Hillary Clinton' PAC ($1000),Al Gore ($1000), John Kerry ($1000), Ted Kennedy ($1000) and Charlie Rangle ($500); gave $500 to a Democratic Senatorial Candidate in Idaho in 2002 (former Ambassador to Belgium under Clinton from 1993-1998),gave $250 to Nick Rahall (D-West Virginia).

His basis for non-partisan claims is that he Gave $1000 to President Bush in May of 1999 and a small sum to a minor, local, candidate. Interestingly, this was 2 months after he tried to give $2000 to Al Gore but apparently had to take back $1000 in April of 1999 as it would have been illegal to give $2000 at that time.

This "non-partisan" gave heavily to the anti-Bush crowd (his Kerry contribution was reported on May 23, 2003--only a month before his New York Times Op-ed and subsequent Sunday morning talk show tour) and his last minute Bush contribution looks to be little more than second thought strategic hedging ( job hunting ?).

My main points remain: going ballistic over an executive leaker and comparing him/her to the hunt for Bin Ladan or Saddam is someone who has lost touch with reality; someone who thinks this leaker is guilty of treason has no familiarity with the law (which requires acting on behalf of an enemy of the United States) or a sense of proportion.
post #456 of 498
Wow, I'm sold now. Wilson is a red commie bastahd. You're right. We should blow the cover off any CIA operatives who are democrats. Hang them all I say!!!

By the way, the "Pax Americana" you like to mention is a favorite term of PNAC. Hardly liberals (red commies to you). Maybe you're just such a radical that everyone to your left is "far-left"?

You should check out the PNAC website. Specifically : "Rebuilding America's Defenses". Then come talk about the Pax Americana.
post #457 of 498
Quote:
Originally posted by Gilsch
Wow, I'm sold now. Wilson is a red commie bastahd. You're right. We should blow the cover off any CIA operatives who are democrats. Hang them all I say!!!

By the way, the "Pax Americana" you like to mention is a favorite term of PNAC. Hardly liberals (red commies to you). Maybe you're just such a radical that everyone to your left is "far-left"?

You should check out the PNAC website. Specifically : "Rebuilding America's Defenses". Then come talk about the Pax Americana.

My challenge:..."the imposition of a Pax Americana on the region and installation of vassal regimes that will control restive populations" and that Hegemony in the Arab nations of the Gulf has been achieved is the rhetoric of a moderate liberal?"

What a pinhead ! Reread the quote sport, understand the meaning, and don't embarrass yourself with the arguement that the PNAC says the same thing (by the way the PNAC also use the word "the").

Geeeshhh!
post #458 of 498
Is it just me, or did this guy make no arguments at all concerning the actual topic here.

And did Democrats ever go back and defend all of those double-agents? He makes it sound as if only the Ann Coulter Left thinks their actions were treasonous.

Here's a much more fair assessment:

Quote:
These are cases that Ann Coulter conservatives consider a matter of treason:

1948 William Weisband, of the U.S. Armed Forces Security Agency (the predecessor of the NSA) provided U.S. codes to the Soviet Union. The Soviets change their codes and cripple U.S. military intelligence in the early days of the Korean War. Weisband a Russian spy since 1934 was fired from the NSA and served a year for contempt of a grand jury.

1949 Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs, Harry Gold, David Greenglass, Julius and Ethel Rosenburg, Max Elitcher, and Morton Sobel are arrested as members of a spy network that provided the Soviet Union with atomic espionage. David Greenglass pleaded guilty and testified against his colleagues. Gold also testified in the case.

On March 29, 1951, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, and Morton Sobell were found guilty. The Rosenbergs were sentenced to death and Sobell to 30 years. The Rosenbergs were executed at Sing Sing Prison, New York on June 19, 1953. David Greenglass received a 15-year sentence.

1980 Former CIA agent David H. Barnett pleads guilty to spying for the Soviet Union between 1976 and 1979 while based in Indonesia. Barnett was the first current or former CIA agent convicted of espionage. He exposed the identities of 30 U.S. agents.

1985 Former CIA officer Edward Lee Howard flees from the U.S while the FBI is investigating him for spying. Howard was suspected of disclosing the identities of CIA agents in Moscow. He turned up in the Soviet Union in 1986.

1985 Walker Family spy ring is exposed. Retired U.S. Navy Warrant Officer, John A. Walker Jr. pleaded guilty along with his son, Navy Seaman Michael L. Walker, 22, to charges of spying for the Soviet Union. John Walker passed secrets to the Soviets while he was a shipboard communications officer. In addition, Arthur Walker (his brother) and friend Jerry Whitworth were also convicted of stealing documents and passing Navy codes. Soviets discover American anti-submarine detection abilities and react by redesigning propulsion systems, crippling U.S. ASW ability.

1986 Ronald W. Pelton, a former employee of the U. S. National Security Agency, is convicted of selling top-secret signals intelligence information to the Soviet Union. Pelton revealed to his handlers that U.S. intelligence had tapped Soviet undersea cables and was listening to all navy communications.

February 1994 Aldrich Ames, 52, an alcoholic who had been a CIA employee for more than 31 years is charged, along with his wife, with spying for the Soviet Union and then later for Russia. Ames passed information to the KGB from 1985 to 1994 including the identities of U.S. agents and U.S. counterintelligence techniques. It was called the most damaging espionage case in American history. Later CIA chief John Deutch told Congress Ames compromised more than 100 U.S. spies. Ten were executed and others turned by the KGB to then feed selective information to the CIA. Ames and his wife received over $2.7 million, the most money paid by the Soviet Union/Russia to an American spy. Ames pleaded guilty in 1994 and was sentenced to life.

December 1996 FBI arrests one of its own, agent Earl Pitts. Pitts, who was stationed at the FBI Academy in Quantico, Va., had been selling secrets to Russia for nine years. He was paid more than $224,000. Pitts was caught in a sting, giving FBI cipher codes and his own security badge to FBI undercover agents he thought were his new Russian handlers. He was sentenced to 27 years.

November 1996 The FBI arrests veteran CIA officer Harold Nicholson on charges of spying for Russia. Nicholson was at a Washington airport on his way to Europe to meet with his Russian intelligence handlers. At the time of his arrest, he was carrying rolls of exposed film that contained secret information. In March 1997, Nicholson pleaded guilty to the charges and was sentenced to 23 years.

October 1998 A retired U.S. army intelligence analyst named David Sheldon Boone is charged with selling secrets to Moscow after FBI sting.

Nov. 29, 1999 U.S. military officials charge Navy code breaker Daniel King with selling data to Moscow.

June 14, 2000 U.S. Army Colonel George Trofimoff of Florida becomes the highest ranking U.S. military officer charged with spying. The FBI says Trofimoff was a spy for 25 years, photographing U.S. documents and passing the film to KGB agents.

This is what liberal democrat operatives think is treason:

1948 William Weisband, of the U.S. Armed Forces Security Agency (the predecessor of the NSA) provided U.S. codes to the Soviet Union. The Soviets change their codes and cripple U.S. military intelligence in the early days of the Korean War. Weisband a Russian spy since 1934 was fired from the NSA and served a year for contempt of a grand jury.

1949 Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs, Harry Gold, David Greenglass, Julius and Ethel Rosenburg, Max Elitcher, and Morton Sobel are arrested as members of a spy network that provided the Soviet Union with atomic espionage. David Greenglass pleaded guilty and testified against his colleagues. Gold also testified in the case.

On March 29, 1951, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, and Morton Sobell were found guilty. The Rosenbergs were sentenced to death and Sobell to 30 years. The Rosenbergs were executed at Sing Sing Prison, New York on June 19, 1953. David Greenglass received a 15-year sentence.

1980 Former CIA agent David H. Barnett pleads guilty to spying for the Soviet Union between 1976 and 1979 while based in Indonesia. Barnett was the first current or former CIA agent convicted of espionage. He exposed the identities of 30 U.S. agents.

1985 Former CIA officer Edward Lee Howard flees from the U.S while the FBI is investigating him for spying. Howard was suspected of disclosing the identities of CIA agents in Moscow. He turned up in the Soviet Union in 1986.

1985 Walker Family spy ring is exposed. Retired U.S. Navy Warrant Officer, John A. Walker Jr. pleaded guilty along with his son, Navy Seaman Michael L. Walker, 22, to charges of spying for the Soviet Union. John Walker passed secrets to the Soviets while he was a shipboard communications officer. In addition, Arthur Walker (his brother) and friend Jerry Whitworth were also convicted of stealing documents and passing Navy codes. Soviets discover American anti-submarine detection abilities and react by redesigning propulsion systems, crippling U.S. ASW ability.

1986 Ronald W. Pelton, a former employee of the U. S. National Security Agency, is convicted of selling top-secret signals intelligence information to the Soviet Union. Pelton revealed to his handlers that U.S. intelligence had tapped Soviet undersea cables and was listening to all navy communications.

February 1994 Aldrich Ames, 52, an alcoholic who had been a CIA employee for more than 31 years is charged, along with his wife, with spying for the Soviet Union and then later for Russia. Ames passed information to the KGB from 1985 to 1994 including the identities of U.S. agents and U.S. counterintelligence techniques. It was called the most damaging espionage case in American history. Later CIA chief John Deutch told Congress Ames compromised more than 100 U.S. spies. Ten were executed and others turned by the KGB to then feed selective information to the CIA. Ames and his wife received over $2.7 million, the most money paid by the Soviet Union/Russia to an American spy. Ames pleaded guilty in 1994 and was sentenced to life.

December 1996 FBI arrests one of its own, agent Earl Pitts. Pitts, who was stationed at the FBI Academy in Quantico, Va., had been selling secrets to Russia for nine years. He was paid more than $224,000. Pitts was caught in a sting, giving FBI cipher codes and his own security badge to FBI undercover agents he thought were his new Russian handlers. He was sentenced to 27 years.

November 1996 The FBI arrests veteran CIA officer Harold Nicholson on charges of spying for Russia. Nicholson was at a Washington airport on his way to Europe to meet with his Russian intelligence handlers. At the time of his arrest, he was carrying rolls of exposed film that contained secret information. In March 1997, Nicholson pleaded guilty to the charges and was sentenced to 23 years.

October 1998 A retired U.S. army intelligence analyst named David Sheldon Boone is charged with selling secrets to Moscow after FBI sting.

Nov. 29, 1999 U.S. military officials charge Navy code breaker Daniel King with selling data to Moscow.

June 14, 2000 U.S. Army Colonel George Trofimoff of Florida becomes the highest ranking U.S. military officer charged with spying. The FBI says Trofimoff was a spy for 25 years, photographing U.S. documents and passing the film to KGB agents.

July 2003 - One or two unknown party(s), presumably senior official(s) in the executive branch, tell one or more Washington journalists (for whatever reason) that his wife is a covert CIA operative and that that information is "fair game" to be published. Said individual(s) violated national law to aide their executive employer in the political infighting, with either his knowledge or his eyes averted.

Yes. We see all that as treason.
post #459 of 498
Quote:
Originally posted by tonton
Is it just me, or did this guy make no arguments at all concerning the actual topic here.

It's not just you.
post #460 of 498
Quote:
Originally posted by MaxParrish
My challenge:..."the imposition of a Pax Americana on the region and installation of vassal regimes that will control restive populations" and that Hegemony in the Arab nations of the Gulf has been achieved is the rhetoric of a moderate liberal?"

What a pinhead ! Reread the quote sport, understand the meaning, and don't embarrass yourself with the arguement that the PNAC says the same thing (by the way the PNAC also use the word "the").

Geeeshhh!

Wow, another "convincing" post by Max. And I'm the pinhead. lol
post #461 of 498
Is there a terrorist in the whitehouse?

According to the partiot act there is...

http://www.newsday.com/news/opinion/...ints-headlines
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
post #462 of 498
Thread Starter 
Oh the frelling irony!!!!!
post #463 of 498
http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i...103&s=alterman

Can you believe Elliott Abrams works at the NSC???? Hired by THIS administration. He was part of the Contra Scandal! He's used to lying and getting away with it. He was pardoned by BUSH 1.
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
post #464 of 498
Thread Starter 
Plame Update:

http://calpundit.com

Quote:
VALERIE PLAME UPDATE....Via Arthur Silber and Mark Kleiman, there have been a couple of small developments in the Valerie Plame investigation recently. First, in what the New York Times describes as an "unusual step," the director of the FBI's Washington office has been removed from the list of officials with access to the case:

The official, Michael A. Mason, one of the Federal Bureau of Investigation's most senior managers, was taken off the list in an effort to restrict information about the case, the officials said.


Customarily, a senior official like Mr. Mason would have full access to details of the case, which is being investigated mainly by agents from his office, although it is being supervised by F.B.I. headquarters.


....The decision to drop Mr. Mason and other officials from the list was made after Mr. Ashcroft emphasized to subordinates the importance of avoiding leaks in the case, one of the most politically delicate investigations of his tenure.


I've been agnostic on the idea of whether a special prosecutor should be appointed in this case, but this nudges me in the direction of thinking it would be a good idea. Ashcroft simply shouldn't be a part of this case in any way, and he certainly shouldn't be providing direction that affects who's involved in the case and who isn't.


Second, the Village Voice reports that the investigation is widening to include activity after the original leak:

Of particular interest, the two sources said, were contacts between White House officials and the Republican National Committee during the burgeoning scandal. Probers are interested in how the Bush administration and party officials strategized to stymie negative press and to counter public criticism by former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV of the leak of his wife's status as a CIA officer.


The administration sources said, however, that they don't think the investigators are probing the efforts to discredit Wilson and Plame as potential criminal conduct but rather as a way of determining who leaked her identity to conservative columnist Robert Novak.


"I guess their thinking is that if you were involved in efforts to damage their reputations or discredit them since the leak, you might have been the one to have leaked the name," said one of the administration officials. "And if you are someone managing the press response . . . you might have also been in contact with the leakeror know who it is."

As always, stay tuned.


Ashcroft.Ashcroft.Ashcroft. tisk tisk...
post #465 of 498
Quote:
Originally posted by MaxParrish
Last, Wilson did serve under Bush Sr. (12 years ago), but the claim of contemporary non-partisanship is ludicrous. Here is the breakdown of his contributions in 2002: Hillary Clinton' PAC ($1000),Al Gore ($1000), John Kerry ($1000), Ted Kennedy ($1000) and Charlie Rangle ($500); gave $500 to a Democratic Senatorial Candidate in Idaho in 2002 (former Ambassador to Belgium under Clinton from 1993-1998),gave $250 to Nick Rahall (D-West Virginia).

His basis for non-partisan claims is that he Gave $1000 to President Bush in May of 1999 and a small sum to a minor, local, candidate. Interestingly, this was 2 months after he tried to give $2000 to Al Gore but apparently had to take back $1000 in April of 1999 as it would have been illegal to give $2000 at that time.

This "non-partisan" gave heavily to the anti-Bush crowd (his Kerry contribution was reported on May 23, 2003--only a month before his New York Times Op-ed and subsequent Sunday morning talk show tour) and his last minute Bush contribution looks to be little more than second thought strategic hedging ( job hunting ?).

You know, this seems to be an awfully detailed investigation of Wilson's activities. Gee, I don't suppose it might derive from a coordinated effort to paint the man as a crazed left-wing Bush hater that would do or say anything to "get" the president? And that wouldn't be part of a pattern of neutralizing opponents by providing the spade-work to various right-wing megaphones, so that the mantra can be memorized as quickly as possible by ditto-head nation? "That Wilson guy, you know he's not the saint the liberal media would have you believe, just listen to this...Liberal.... not that good at his job...his Africa visit was half-assed.... Oh yeah, and his wife wan't really even a real CIA agent, she was some kind of glorified secretary I heard, and anyway, everybody already knew..."

BUT YOU HAVE TO TELL US, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, WHAT DOES ANY OF IT HAVE TO DO WITH THE MATTER AT HAND?

What do Wilson's political affiliations have to do with a White House leak of a CIA agent's identity? Are you saying he made it up? Put his wife up to it? Does the fact that he is pissed, loves his wife, possible even enjoys the spotlight somehow mean nothing happened? Or something happened but it's OK by you? Wilson isn't heading up the investigation, doesn't have any real power at all, so WHY DO HIS POLITICS MATTER?
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #466 of 498
Thread Starter 
http://www.workingforchange.com/arti...m?itemid=15896

More from Joe Conason

Quote:
The Beltway warfare escalated dramatically when former Ambassador Joseph Wilson exposed the hollowness of the administration's claims about Iraqi attempts to buy uranium "yellowcake" from Niger -- and persons unknown responded last July by outing his wife, Valerie Plame, as a C.I.A. officer.

Still angry, Mr. Cannistraro told the Senators that the unknown administration officials who committed that "dirty trick" did so not only to "undermine and trash Ambassador Wilson, but to demonstrate their contempt for C.I.A. by bringing Valerie's name into it."

Mr. Johnson expressed the bitterness felt by many in the intelligence community toward this President, whose father's name adorns their Langley headquarters. "We're all Republicans. We all voted for Bush. And we all contributed funds to him," he said. But after the assault on the Wilsons and the C.I.A., he believes "there are some bullies in this administration, and the essence of being a bully is being a coward. And I expect President Bush -- having voted for him, I expected something different from him."

All those disappointed patriots know much more than they have yet disclosed. But then, the election year has yet to begin.


You know things are bad when guys that are on the same team as you aren't going to vote for you...let alone moderates or independents.

reason #49492234 why bush JUNIOR is going to lose...
post #467 of 498
Quote:
Originally posted by addabox
You know, this seems to be an awfully detailed investigation of Wilson's activities. Gee, I don't suppose it might derive from a coordinated effort to paint the man as a crazed left-wing Bush hater that would do or say anything to "get" the president? And that wouldn't be part of a pattern of neutralizing opponents by providing the spade-work to various right-wing megaphones, so that the mantra can be memorized as quickly as possible by ditto-head nation? "That Wilson guy, you know he's not the saint the liberal media would have you believe, just listen to this...Liberal.... not that good at his job...his Africa visit was half-assed.... Oh yeah, and his wife wan't really even a real CIA agent, she was some kind of glorified secretary I heard, and anyway, everybody already knew..."

BUT YOU HAVE TO TELL US, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, WHAT DOES ANY OF IT HAVE TO DO WITH THE MATTER AT HAND?

What do Wilson's political affiliations have to do with a White House leak of a CIA agent's identity? Are you saying he made it up? Put his wife up to it? Does the fact that he is pissed, loves his wife, possible even enjoys the spotlight somehow mean nothing happened? Or something happened but it's OK by you? Wilson isn't heading up the investigation, doesn't have any real power at all, so WHY DO HIS POLITICS MATTER?

I think I answered your "query" previously. For you edification, I'll repeat it:

"First, if the "leak" controversy on this board was confined only to a question of a violation of US statutes( and I did not take a position on that aspect), I might agree. However, this threads author, along with twelve pages of board discussion, have centered on far more expansive and serious allegations; e.g. a cover-up by Bush (or even worse), the political motivations of Karl Rove, treason, etc. In addition, many posters have done a lot of hair pulling on behalf of Mr. Wilson and his wife, which hardly makes the Wilsons immune to examination. As long as the motivations, personalities, politics, and veracities are board questions for the Administration, the CIA, and journalists, then all should be examined in the same light, especially the instigating accuser, Joe Wilson...

My main points remain: going ballistic over an executive leaker and comparing him/her to the hunt for Bin Ladan or Saddam is someone who has lost touch with reality; someone who thinks this leaker is guilty of treason has no familiarity with the law (which requires acting on behalf of an enemy of the United States) or a sense of proportion.

Of course, limiting the subject is an excellent way of avoiding uncomfortable issues. There is a lot to think about in this story: the political infighting of the CIA vs. the Administration; the spin the various parties are using to their advantage; what the investigation will do to staffers and morale; the grandstanding, phony outrage, and overblown characterizations by administration critics; the self-serving manipulations of press and the public; the degree of actual harm to the U.S.; the motivations of the staffers involved; the ethics and integrity issues. Etc.

But then again, you only want to discuss the matter at hand, right ? So, I suppose guess that the only aspects on this subject you wish to discuss are: firstly, who in white house leaked the name of a C.I.A. agent to the press; and second, is it against the law and how can they pay for it ?

Ill provide a short answer to that: someone in the Whitehouse, at some level, at least mentioned to one or more reporters that Wilsons wife was a CIA employee. That alone is an offense of a minor aspect of the law, but the major outstanding legal aspects (and penalties) require answering some other questions: was she a covert employee at the time of the leak, was the revelation done with foreknowledge of the law and the intent to harm her official function in the CIA, and what are the legal penalties, if true ?

Bush will fire the violator(s), and depending on the answer to the above questions, they will be prosecuted.

Now is that all you want to discuss????
post #468 of 498
Well, since you're interested in dealing with"uncomfortable truths", lets do this: lets take a long hard look at John Ahscroft's history of campaign contributions, public remarks, voting record, political affiliations, et al.
I think we can quickly discern the man's "irrational hatred" for the Democratic Party and their agenda. And I'm sure we can drag up some instances of unseemliness, grandstanding, poor judgement, etc. In fact, let's make that the main topic of conversation, so we can endlessly parse his degree objectivity and worthiness, or lack thereof.

It all leads to only one possible conclusion: we must appoint an independent prosecuter immediately, because the entire matter of "finding out what happened" is clearly and hopelessly compromised by Ashcroft's sordid history.

This is a legitimate rhetorical cul-de-sac because of all the conservative breast beating about patriotism and treason.

Yes?
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #469 of 498
Max is comfortable with a white house the doles out retribution on people who work for fthe section of the CIA that tries to find WMD.

As long as the law wasn't technically broken... no foul?
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
post #470 of 498
Quote:
Originally posted by addabox
It all leads to only one possible conclusion: we must appoint an independent prosecuter immediately, because the entire matter of "finding out what happened" is clearly and hopelessly compromised by Ashcroft's sordid history.

This is a legitimate rhetorical cul-de-sac because of all the conservative breast beating about patriotism and treason.

Yes?

Addabox:

What cul-de-sac ? Perhaps in your mind, but its pretty clear: either you wish to discuss the story and its related issues, or you wish to narrow it to the matter at hand I dont care which, its up to you. It would seem, however, your frustration over the dialog is due more to your raw contempt for the Bush administration and Ashcroft, than any thoughtful points you wish to make.

As you know, the special prosecutor's law was terminated with the invaluable assistance of the Democratic Party, in part because it became an endless nightmare of prosecutorial investigation over several administrations. Frankly, it was a wise choice by both parties.

To date, the FBI and the Attorney Generals office have devoted substantial resources to the investigation (I think 11 in the AGs office alone), and I have faith that both offices to carry out their constitutional duties.

Why dont you wait until the results are in before calling for a peoples court and lynch mob? Otherwise, it simply confirms there is more to this story than real outrage
post #471 of 498
I mean the cul-de-sac where we basically change the topic from "what the hell was the white house thinking" to " Wilson is a bad man". I have no visceral hatred of the Bush administration, I just think we should apply your same metric to all the involved parties. After all, if it makes sense to offer up an extensive list of Wilson's campaign contributions in order to shed light on what happened, surely it follows that we should know about the predilictions of the man charged with gathering the facts.

I'm glad you have complete faith in the Justice Department, but if Wilson's democratic affinities make him somehow less worthy of defending, then Ashcorft's demonstrable hard right ideology certainly makes him less than a disinterested observer and certainly less than a reliable source of justice. By your metric.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #472 of 498
A full two months later, we finally get an update on this. Guess what? Ashcroft Recuses Himself From Leak Investigation (WaPo). It strikes me as a little too late.
post #473 of 498
Quote:
Originally posted by ShawnJ
A full two months later, we finally get an update on this. Guess what? Ashcroft Recuses Himself From Leak Investigation (WaPo). It strikes me as a little too late.

Finally. Maybe the investigation will come to a head at a most unopportune time for BushCorp and Rove, Inc.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #474 of 498
Hmm. Maybe you're right. Josh Marshall just wrote something encouraging:
Quote:
I've only had a chance to do a cursory look at Fitzgerald. So these judgments are tentative. But, from what I've seen, he appears to be someone without any strong partisan profile and a career prosecutor with experience both in public corruption cases and intelligence and counter-terrorism.
post #475 of 498
I think Ashcroft had to recuse himself because the investiagation HAS gotten somewhere... and Ashcroft probably knows him well enough to have to step aside.
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
post #476 of 498
Looks like they've actually gotten somewhere... it's alive!

And surpise surprise surprise...

they worked for Cheney.


http://www.insightmag.com/news/2004/...e-598606.shtml

Cheney's Staff Focus of Probe

Posted Feb. 5, 2004
By Richard Sale
Published: Tuesday, February 17, 2004

Federal law-enforcement officials said that they have developed hard evidence of possible criminal misconduct by two employees of Vice President Dick Cheney's office related to the unlawful exposure of a CIA officer's identity last year. The investigation, which is continuing, could lead to indictments, a Justice Department official said.

According to these sources, John Hannah and Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, were the two Cheney employees. "We believe that Hannah was the major player in this," one federal law-enforcement officer said. Calls to the vice president's office were not returned, nor did Hannah and Libby return calls.

The strategy of the FBI is to make clear to Hannah "that he faces a real possibility of doing jail time" as a way to pressure him to name superiors, one federal law-enforcement official said.
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
post #477 of 498
This is big.
post #478 of 498
Powell as VP. Yummy.
post #479 of 498
I don't know how that would happen... he's not very popular with Rummy and the others.
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
post #480 of 498
"libby"? !\
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › This is REAL treason Ann Coulter: Someone is going to Jail or worse!