AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Novak/Plame
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Novak/Plame - Page 3

post #81 of 346
7/12/05 at 12:50pm
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
trumpt:

Who leaked her name?

I believe there is an investigation looking into that right now.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #82 of 346
7/12/05 at 1:41pm
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
There is a big difference between saying that leaking the name was wrong, and saying that Rove committed and is guilty of a crime.

What really is sad is to see the left so wrapped up in guilt by association that every little bit of news becomes part of a grand conspiracy theory.

/conspiracy on

Bush lied in his State of the Union speech.

He did? How do you know that?

This one guy Wilson was sent to Niger by Tenet at the request of Dick Cheney himself. He came back and said there were no weapons and since he reported directly to Tenet to answer Cheney's questions, that means that Bush and the administration knew and lied.

But he wasn't sent by Tenet, he was sent by his wife.

OMG, now that is even worse, you told me his wife sent him!

Why is telling the truth wrong?

Because his wife is classified as a secret agent and you just blew her cover.

/conspiracy off

Nick

It's not a conspiracy.

Here's my summary of the story, taken from a variety of sources. Tell me what you disagree with.

We know that the CIA discredited the Africa-Iraq-nuclear story. The documents alleging a link were known to be a forgery. For that reason, George Tenet nixed a line about it in a Bush speech in October 2002. But it appeared anyway in Bush's SOTU speech a few months later. There's debate about whether the CIA nixed that too, but Rice has said they had other information of their own, or something.

When, a year or so later, the press starts reporting the fact that the intelligence people never believed the Iraq-Africa-nuclear connection, the administration defends it, which pisses off Wilson, who played a role in the investigation of the issue.

Wilson was originally appointed an ambassador to Africa by George HW Bush, he was called a hero by Bush for helping Americans in Iraq when he was there at the start of the (1990) Gulf War, and then he was the National Security Council's Africa director under Clinton. He was an expert on both Iraq and Africa, and a strong critic of Saddam Hussein.

So a pissed-off Wilson writes an op-ed calling the administration liars for claiming they didn't know the Africa-Iraq-nuclear story was bogus.

The White House defends themselves, and part of that defense involves criticizing Wilson. One of their criticisms is that his wife recommended him - it was just a kind of family-sponsored vacation to Niger rather than a real intelligence trip. As part of Rove (and perhaps others) revealing that his wife recommended him, they also reveal that she works for the CIA. Novak has admitted that CIA people he talked to before he wrote the story asked him not to reveal her, but he did anyway.

After that, the White House defends it for a while, but Tenet again said that "the 16 words" should never have been included in the SOTU. But he takes the blame himself for not being forceful enough with the WH, or something. George Tenet is given the Presidential Medal of Freedom, and lives happily ever after.
Reply
Reply
post #83 of 346
7/12/05 at 2:30pm
That overview seems accurate to me-IMHO. Hate the ending, take a rubber bullet get a silver star. Where is the outrage, indeed?
Reply
Reply
post #84 of 346
7/12/05 at 2:44pm
Quote:
Originally posted by SDW2001
"pissed off the press"? How, by existing?



This is the Democratic party and their TOOL the NYT looking to take down Rove and by extension...Bush. They don't give two shits about "national security" and that's evidenced by how they've all jumped all over the story. Rove said he didn't leak the name and as of now, I've seen nothing contradicting that.

Huh. So then my theory is true:

Eventually, the cognitive dissonance between defending every aspect of the Bush administration against the slanderous lies of traitorous liberals, and the sorry, debased spectacle of how the Bush administration actually conducts itself, leads to utter, irrevocable insanity.
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 #85 of 346
7/12/05 at 3:42pm
Anyone working in the White House who violates national security for political revenge purposes is much, MUCH worse than anyone who lies about getting a blowjob, and he ought to be locked up, or at least taken out of a position where he can further damage national security ASAP . Hey, maybe we can send him to Gitmo as an enemy combatant!!!

12 volt wires to his nipples and balls... America - Fuck YEAH!

"But, I didn't technically give out her name, I only said she was Joe Wilson's wife".
Riiiiight, and it depends on what the definition of "IS", is . . . doesn't it, you scumbag?

"But I (claim, can't be proven that I) didn't know she was actually an UNDERCOVER agent!!"
Well then maybe you shouldn't be so fucking cavalier with publicly naming CIA employees, and especially if you don't know whether or not s/he's an undercover agent, you treasonous lump of lard!

This isn't just something that harmed her personally... it harmed the CIA, it harmed anyone (who might or might not be undercover) that was ever associated with Plame or Brewster Jennings, it harmed our national security!
Quote:
John Dean, Richard Nixon's White House General Counsel, has denounced the Wilson-Plame affair as "worse than Watergate." He is right. Not only did the Novak column, orchestrated from the White House, end Valerie Plame's 20-year career as a CIA "non-official cover" officer. The leak also exposed a longstanding CIA proprietary company, Brewster Jennings & Associates, where Plame worked. The Boston- and Washington-based front company had, since 1994, been tracking weapons of mass destruction, through a network of agents and correspondents in a such dangerous places as Iran, North Korea, Belarus, Israel, Pakistan, Libya, Serbia and Taiwan.

It is not known whether the CIA or one of the Congressional intelligence oversight panels has done a full damage assessment of the consequences of the Plame leak. But they are no doubt extensive. It is one thing for a spy, like Aldrich Ames, Robert Hanssen, or Jonathan Jay Pollard, to steal secrets jeopardizing the national security of the United States on behalf of a foreign power. It is another thing altogether, for top officials of the White House to willfully leak the identity of an undercover CIA officer, as an act of revenge or damage control, against a U.S. official who came forward to reveal government chicanery in a matter as serious as the Iraq War.

For some real entertainment, I like to re-read the transcript from Scott "I have no comment on my previous comments regarding an ongoing investigation that I'm not supposed to comment on" McClellen's press conference yesterday.... to paraphrase:
"um, I have no, um, comment on an ongoing investigation ..... even though I already said (while the investigation was already ongoing) that Rove is innocent, any suggestions that he was involved in any way are ridiculous, and the President is going to fire anyone who was involved".

ROTFLMAO (except when I remember how SAD this truly is...)
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
post #86 of 346
7/12/05 at 3:57pm
Quote:
Originally posted by SDW2001
. . . Rove and by extension...Bush. They don't give two shits about "national security" . . .

Amazingly enough, if you parse it just right, there is truth in that post!
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
post #87 of 346
7/12/05 at 5:25pm
Rove should get a medal, according to Fox News.
Reply
Reply
post #88 of 346
7/12/05 at 5:57pm
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
There is a big difference between saying that leaking the name was wrong, and saying that Rove committed and is guilty of a crime.

What really is sad is to see the left so wrapped up in guilt by association that every little bit of news becomes part of a grand conspiracy theory.

/conspiracy on

Bush lied in his State of the Union speech.

He did? How do you know that?

This one guy Wilson was sent to Niger by Tenet at the request of Dick Cheney himself. He came back and said there were no weapons and since he reported directly to Tenet to answer Cheney's questions, that means that Bush and the administration knew and lied.

But he wasn't sent by Tenet, he was sent by his wife.

OMG, now that is even worse, you told me his wife sent him!

Why is telling the truth wrong?

Because his wife is classified as a secret agent and you just blew her cover.

/conspiracy off

Nick

Thank you Nick.

Don't forget that this "Secret Agent" was commuting to Langley every day.

Cooper Burned Rove

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #89 of 346
7/12/05 at 6:28pm
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
Don't forget that this "Secret Agent" was commuting to Langley every day.

Because real CIA agents teleport in using stolen alien technology?

Keep it up, though. At this point, the cognitive dissonance is well past the critical point where it could still be safely vented. I'd rather see posts like this than see someone's head explode.
Reply
Reply
post #90 of 346
7/12/05 at 7:00pm
K. Rove is a moron, he should have kept his mouth shut, and his motives behind releasing this information is irrelevant as it should not have happened at all but it did...
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #91 of 346
7/12/05 at 7:25pm
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
Thank you Nick.

Don't forget that this "Secret Agent" was commuting to Langley every day.

Cooper Burned Rove

There's something so fantastically creepy about the things you actually say and apparently believe in compared to the kind of passages you quote for your sig.

Apparently there is no place in the fabulous "Triune" construct for honesty, integrity, the rule of law, or simple decency. Secular phantoms all, no doubt.
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 #92 of 346
7/12/05 at 8:01pm
And now a quote from an actual grown up:

A point that hasn't been made yet.

Everyone I hear from today says that the White House is going after Joe Wilson hard in their background conversations with reporters. Apprently Karl Rove himself.

Their main hit apparently is that it was Valerie Plame who authorized Wilson's trip to Niger or was the one who sent him -- which is as false today as it was two years ago.

Now, that's as much an attack on Plame as it is on Wilson. Actually, even more of one on her since the subtext is that she was either engaging in nepotism or advancing some private political agenda.

So now we know that Karl Rove started attacking Valerie Plame to get his boss out of the soup. And now two years later he continues to attack her.

True to form to the last. And every reporter in town knows it.

Josh Marshall
"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 #93 of 346
7/12/05 at 8:05pm
This is why I've completely abandoned the media in totale (with the exception of The Daily Show! )

No, apparently the comedy will never end.

CNN's Kyra Phillips says there's "definitely a major smear campaign going on" against Karl Rove.

If only Karl would come forward and knock down all the slanders, she says.

Will the world ever stop victimizing this man?

Oh, the never ending decline of CNN.

Talking Points Memo
"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 #94 of 346
7/12/05 at 8:05pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Towel
Because real CIA agents teleport in using stolen alien technology?

nooooooo, because the story was spun that a 'field agent under deep cover' was outed.

Didn't match up, and this point is not being given fair treatment.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #95 of 346
7/12/05 at 8:34pm
Quote:
This one guy Wilson was sent to Niger by Tenet at the request of Dick Cheney himself. He came back and said there were no weapons and since he reported directly to Tenet to answer Cheney's questions, that means that Bush and the administration knew and lied.

But he wasn't sent by Tenet, he was sent by his wife.

I just saw this passage again by Nick. It slipped by the first time, but now I've seen these talking points on conservative blogs and other places, and I realize what's going on.

The argument here is that Wilson lied in his op-ed when he claimed that Cheney and/or Tenet sent him, and that's the reason Rove et al. had to set the record straight: His wife sent him, not Cheney or Tenet.

I did some searching of my own and found this transcript of what Cheney said about that:
Quote:
VICE PRES. CHENEY: No. I dont know Joe Wilson. Ive never met Joe Wilson. A question had arisen. Id heard a report that the Iraqis had been trying to acquire uranium in Africa, Niger in particular. I get a daily brief on my own each day before I meet with the president to go through the intel. And I ask lots of question. One of the questions I asked at that particular time about this, I said, What do we know about this? They take the question. He came back within a day or two and said, This is all we know. Theres a lot we dont know, end of statement. And Joe WilsonI dont who sent Joe Wilson. He never submitted a report that I ever saw when he came back.

OK, so Cheney asked about it, but didn't personally send Joe Wilson or know him. That proves Wilson lied, right?

Well, here's where Wilson mentioned Cheney in his op-ed:
Quote:
In February 2002, I was informed by officials at the Central Intelligence Agency that Vice President Dick Cheney's office had questions about a particular intelligence report. While I never saw the report, I was told that it referred to a memorandum of agreement that documented the sale of uranium yellowcake a form of lightly processed ore by Niger to Iraq in the late 1990's. The agency officials asked if I would travel to Niger to check out the story so they could provide a response to the vice president's office.

Wilson never, ever claimed that Cheney or Tenet personally sent him. He said Cheney asked the question, and then the CIA sent him. This idea that Wilson made a false claim about who sent him, and that's why the administration had to "correct the record" is simply untrue.
Reply
Reply
post #96 of 346
7/12/05 at 8:49pm
Quote:
Originally posted by addabox
There's something so fantastically creepy....

Yes, creepy indeed.

Creepy that the reporter at the center of this is the source of ambiguous information. Creepy that the nature of Rove's information was twisted in its reporting -- by even the reporter's own admission. Creepy that 'double secret background' means that Rove personally wrote and exported the X1-A file out of InDesign to the pressroom -- overriding all editorial decisions in-between personally. Somehow those editorial decisions are overlooked.

"Hmmmm, boss should we publish information outing a CIA agent with only deep background sourcing??"

"Oh, what the heck, it just a CIA agent, 'letter rip."

Creepy is a press corps visibly agitated over a possible 'in' to the man responsible for GW's reelection -- they can barely restrain themselves. I haven't seen anything like this since Dan Rather messed himself during the '92 election returns.

It's not even originally political drama, let alone believable.

And creepiest of all, are people who don't know so much as a city council-person by name who insist they are comfortable making definitive statements of the 'going's on' respective of the President's inner circle.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #97 of 346
7/12/05 at 9:13pm
dmz, it sounds like we both agree that Novak is a scumbag for publishing the info.

However, I don't see how you can follow this line of reasoning...

- high gov't official leaks sensitive intelligence info to reporter
- reporter does what reporters DO, which is to publish the info
- therefore reporter is bigger scumbag than gov't official

eye
bee
BEE
Reply
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
post #98 of 346
7/12/05 at 9:47pm
Quote:
Originally posted by FormerLurker
dmz, it sounds like we both agree that Novak is a scumbag for publishing the info.

However, I don't see how you can follow this line of reasoning...

- high gov't official leaks sensitive intelligence info to reporter
- reporter does what reporters DO, which is to publish the info
- therefore reporter is bigger scumbag than gov't official


Well, for one, there is just a fundamental tar baby aspect to this that you can't escape --- you've got Novak who 'seems' --- and I stress seems --- to be the bad guy here, but can't get dirty with the Grand Jury. And you've got Cooper, and other reporters in on this as well --- and let's face it, they all have their own audiances and motives.

The problem with the Rove thing is that it's being spun at the expense of the really practical things, the devil and the details.

In my experience, politics is a hurricane of personalities.

Novak, if he's a big enough pull could tell his publisher to 'stick it' and they might roll over --- BUT if Rove knew that ding-dong's wife was playing favorites/getting out of line/[insert inbred political reason here] then you can bet everybody knew.

So basically my contention is what you are reading in the papers is a badly filtered allegory of what is really happening.

We are talking about some of the strongest, most pervasive personalities you will ever encounter. And they are all competeing for a place at the public trough.

In the end no one can really report on these personalities; it's just a collection of egos sounding off for effect.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #99 of 346
7/12/05 at 9:55pm
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
Yes, creepy indeed.

Creepy that the reporter at the center of this is the source of ambiguous information. Creepy that the nature of Rove's information was twisted in its reporting -- by even the reporter's own admission. Creepy that 'double secret background' means that Rove personally wrote and exported the X1-A file out of InDesign to the pressroom -- overriding all editorial decisions in-between personally. Somehow those editorial decisions are overlooked.

"Hmmmm, boss should we publish information outing a CIA agent with only deep background sourcing??"

"Oh, what the heck, it just a CIA agent, 'letter rip."

Creepy is a press corps visibly agitated over a possible 'in' to the man responsible for GW's reelection -- they can barely restrain themselves. I haven't seen anything like this since Dan Rather messed himself during the '92 election returns.

It's not even originally political drama, let alone believable.

And creepiest of all, are people who don't know so much as a city council-person by name who insist they are comfortable making definitive statements of the 'going's on' respective of the President's inner circle.

Not so much all that as creepy that you would openly align yourself with the devil because the devil is under fire by people you disagree with politically.

What's so hard about cutting Rove loose? Because he's "responsible for GW's election"? So he's a horrible, horrible man, but he's your horrible man, so you look to smear his tormentors?

This one is pretty clear, pretty easy to grasp, so a lot of hand waving and name calling isn't really going to get the job done.


Rove revealed that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA in order to discredit a political enemy of the White House. History has shown that the political enemy's crime was to tell the truth.

The White House has lied, repeatedly, about Rove's role in this. The president's spokesman has been reduced to stonewalling in the face of reality superseding the operative lie. The White house press core has become "visibly agitated" for the simple reason that the president's spokesman and reality have so far diverged that even that normally somnolent group can't help but notice they are being treated like fools.

Doesn't, like, the spirit of Jesus enter your heart at times like this, and advise you that defending a scum bucket like Rove makes shake his head sadly?
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 #100 of 346
7/12/05 at 9:57pm
Quote:
Originally posted by addabox
Not so much all that as creepy that you would openly align yourself with the devil because the devil is under fire by people you disagree with politically.

What's so hard about cutting Rove loose? Because he's "responsible for GW's election"? So he's a horrible, horrible man, but he's your horrible man, so you look to smear his tormentors?

This one is pretty clear, pretty easy to grasp, so a lot of hand waving and name calling isn't really going to get the job done.


Rove revealed that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA in order to discredit a political enemy of the White House. History has shown that the political enemy's crime was to tell the truth.

The White House has lied, repeatedly, about Rove's role in this. The president's spokesman has been reduced to stonewalling in the face of reality superseding the operative lie. The White house press core has become "visibly agitated" for the simple reason that the president's spokesman and reality have so far diverged that even that normally somnolent group can't help but notice they are being treated like fools.

Doesn't, like, the spirit of Jesus enter your heart at times like this, and advise you that defending a scum bucket like Rove makes shake his head sadly?

....see the above post, you're carving absolutes where they can't be had.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #101 of 346
7/12/05 at 9:58pm
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
Well, for one, there is just a fundamental tar baby aspect to this that you can't escape --- you've got Novak who 'seems' --- and I stress seems --- to be the bad guy here, but can't get dirty with the Grand Jury. And you've got Cooper, and other reporters in on this as well --- and let's face it, they have their own audiances and motives.

The problem with the Rove thing is that it's being spun at the expense of the really practical things, the devil and the details.

In my experience, politics is a hurricane of personalities.

Novak, if he's a big enough pull could tell his publisher to 'stick it' and they might roll over --- BUT if Rove knew that ding-dong's wife was playing favorites/getting out of line/[insert inbred political reason here] then you can bet everybody knew.

So basically my contention is what you are reading in the papers is a badly filtered allegory of what is really happening.

We are talking about some of the strongest, most pervasive personalities you will ever encounter. And they are all competeing for a place at the public trough.

In the end no one can really report on these personalities; it's just a collection of egos sounding off for effect.

Oh for fucks sake, so now it's "everybody's an asshole"?

What a lovely resolution for you: Karl Rove has dirtied everything he's touched, but because admitting that forthrightly is politically inexpedient for you, you just go ahead and declare the whole world made of mud.
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 #102 of 346
7/12/05 at 9:59pm
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
....see the above post, you're carving absolutes where they can't be had.

What, in that list of facts, can't be had?
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 #103 of 346
7/12/05 at 10:09pm
Quote:
Originally posted by addabox
What, in that list of facts, can't be had?

My god addabox, how simple do you think this is? By all rights Novak should have his noogies in a federal vise -- but doesn't'. Cooper's email about Rove beating about the bush., etc. One reporter is in Jail. another is not. What are you to make of this??

I'd let the Grandy Jury finish whatever it's doing.

And in any case, if this woman was commuting everyday to Langley at a desk job, I'd have to serously consider whether the entire thing weren't nonsense in the first place.

Ed: there's a guy in the administration in my state, he is known as the "energizer bunny " because he's just that good -- the guy is an enigma. When you get done sounding to the depths of Washington's infighting, PM me, so you can figure out my state's situation.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #104 of 346
7/12/05 at 10:48pm
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
And in any case, if this woman was commuting everyday to Langley at a desk job, I'd have to serously consider whether the entire thing weren't nonsense in the first place.

"Nonsense?"
Endangering the effectiveness and even the LIVES of not just Plame, but countless agents and sources she worked with while she was in deep cover is "nonsense?"

It's treasonous bullshit, that's what it is.
Quote:
The leak of a CIA operative's name has also exposed the identity of a CIA front company, potentially expanding the damage caused by the original disclosure, Bush administration officials said yesterday.

The company's identity, Brewster-Jennings & Associates, became public because it appeared in Federal Election Commission records on a form filled out in 1999 by Valerie Plame, the case officer at the center of the controversy, when she contributed $1,000 to Al Gore's presidential primary campaign.

After the name of the company was broadcast yesterday, administration officials confirmed that it was a CIA front. They said the obscure and possibly defunct firm was listed as Plame's employer on her W-2 tax forms in 1999 when she was working undercover for the CIA. Plame's name was first published July 14 in a newspaper column by Robert D. Novak that quoted two senior administration officials. They were critical of her husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, for his handling of a CIA mission that undercut President Bush's claim that Iraq had sought uranium from the African nation of Niger for possible use in developing nuclear weapons.

The Justice Department began a formal criminal investigation of the leak Sept. 26.

The inadvertent disclosure of the name of a business affiliated with the CIA underscores the potential damage to the agency and its operatives caused by the leak of Plame's identity. Intelligence officials have said that once Plame's job as an undercover operative was revealed, other agency secrets could be unraveled and her sources might be compromised or endangered.

A former diplomat who spoke on condition of anonymity said yesterday that every foreign intelligence service would run Plame's name through its databases within hours of its publication to determine if she had visited their country and to reconstruct her activities.

"That's why the agency is so sensitive about just publishing her name," the former diplomat said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...nguage=printer
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
post #105 of 346
7/12/05 at 11:44pm
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
Thank you Nick.
Don't forget that this "Secret Agent" was commuting to Langley every day.

Well shit. I'm glad those CIA agents know where to commute to.

Don't those secret agents know they should never go there? Damn it.

Is that the latest pseudo justification on the winger blogs?
Like they said on Fox News....what took Rove so long? Give him a medal!

And these are the guys claiming we're safer with them in power? Republican 2004 logic. Brilliant!

P.S By the way, thanks for the link to that article with info. provided by Rove's lawyer.

As soon as that guy gets Rove's mom's side of the story let us know! We all need all the unbiased info. we can get.
Reply
Reply
post #106 of 346
7/13/05 at 12:20am
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
My god addabox, how simple do you think this is? By all rights Novak should have his noogies in a federal vise -- but doesn't'. Cooper's email about Rove beating about the bush., etc. One reporter is in Jail. another is not. What are you to make of this??

I'd let the Grandy Jury finish whatever it's doing.

And in any case, if this woman was commuting everyday to Langley at a desk job, I'd have to serously consider whether the entire thing weren't nonsense in the first place.

Ed: there's a guy in the administration in my state, he is known as the "energizer bunny " because he's just that good -- the guy is an enigma. When you get done sounding to the depths of Washington's infighting, PM me, so you can figure out my state's situation.

Yes, there are many players. Yes, we don't know yet exactly how everything will shake out as far as Novak et al are concerned.

That doesn't really change "the facts on the ground" in Rove's case. It's pretty clear what his role was, the only question being if he can make his "Gosh, I didn't know she was all secret and all" defense stick.

The president said he would fire anyone who was found to have done something as outrageous as to have outed Valerie Plame. Rove has admitted as much. Hmmmmmmm..............

Quick! Let's start babbling about if she was "really" covert or just pretend covert! Ah, fuck what the CIA says, how the hell would they know? And the press is bad! Except when they're not! And Joe Wislon is an embittered hack! And liberals will stop at nothing etc.! And nothing is really knowable, on account of the complexity!

It's amazing how the "good guys/bad guys, my President is a simple talkin' straight shooter" crowd become nuance parsing relativists of the first water, given a self serving opportunity.....
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 #107 of 346
7/13/05 at 1:00am
  • Anders
  • Feared and Biased Moderator
Quote:
Originally posted by Gilsch
Well shit. I'm glad those CIA agents know where to commute to.

Don't those secret agents know they should never go there? Damn it.

Is that the latest pseudo justification on the winger blogs?
Like they said on Fox News....what took Rove so long? Give him a medal!

And these are the guys claiming we're safer with them in power? Republican 2004 logic. Brilliant!

Well can´t say they didn´t warn the rest of us. "Either you are with us or against us". Its just a matter of defining "us"
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
post #108 of 346
7/13/05 at 5:13am
Thread Starter 
  • e1618978
  • will burn in the Fiery Pit of Hell.
Quote:
And in any case, if this woman was commuting everyday to Langley at a desk job, I'd have to serously consider whether the entire thing weren't nonsense in the first place.

1. I am sure that they worked at langley in between overseas missions.

2. He outed everyone in her fake company, and all their overseas contacts. Hundreds of people were affected, most probably, along with millions (or possibly billions) of dollars and many years of investments.

I think that you have gone insane, dmz. Evil is evil - if Satan ran on the republican ticket, it seems like you would go around chanting "Lucifer is best, vote for Lucifer!".
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #109 of 346
7/13/05 at 6:33am
Quote:
Originally posted by FormerLurker
"Nonsense?"
Endangering the effectiveness and even the LIVES of not just Plame, but countless agents and sources she worked with while she was in deep cover is "nonsense?"

It's treasonous bullshit, that's what it is.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...nguage=printer

You're protesting too much. If there was this much 'damage' where are the prosecutions? They can't even nail Novak on this.

Wait and see.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #110 of 346
7/13/05 at 6:35am
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
I think that you have gone insane, dmz.

see the above post, you're freaking out the national security has been breached and it is getting no traction?? Really.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #111 of 346
7/13/05 at 7:02am
Quote:
Originally posted by addabox
Yes, there are many players. Yes, we don't know yet exactly how everything will shake out as far as Novak et al are concerned.

That doesn't really change "the facts on the ground" in Rove's case. It's pretty clear what his role was, the only question being if he can make his "Gosh, I didn't know she was all secret and all" defense stick.

The president said he would fire anyone who was found to have done something as outrageous as to have outed Valerie Plame. Rove has admitted as much. Hmmmmmmm..............

Quick! Let's start babbling about if she was "really" covert or just pretend covert! Ah, fuck what the CIA says, how the hell would they know? And the press is bad! Except when they're not! And Joe Wislon is an embittered hack! And liberals will stop at nothing etc.! And nothing is really knowable, on account of the complexity!

It's amazing how the "good guys/bad guys, my President is a simple talkin' straight shooter" crowd become nuance parsing relativists of the first water, given a self serving opportunity.....

noooo, GW is taken to be a bit simpler than he is, and I would imagine Rove might actually be the energizer bunny. And, yes there is some explaining to do, but to fixate on a secondary source when the two guys who basically started this whole thing are sitting in the catbird's seat? No. Also, why would a guy write a falacious column [wilson] outing himself as an CIA consultant? How smart was that? I see Novak rightly getting great deal of scrutiny, but not Wilson.

Also, I'm reading in the WSJ today that:

Quote:
To be prosecuted under the 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act, Mr. Rove would had to have deliberately and maliciously exposed Ms. Plame knowing that she was an undercover agent and using information he'd obtained in an official capacity.
...
Mr. Wilson had been recommended for the CIA consulting gig by his wife, not by Vice President Dick Cheney
....
Mr. Wilson, who first "outed" himself as a CIA consultant in a melodramatic New York Times op-ed in July 2003. At the time he claimed to have thoroughly debunked the Iraq-Niger yellowcake uranium connection that President Bush had mentioned in his now famous "16 words" on the subject in that year's State of the Union address.
...
But his day in the political sun was short-lived. The bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report last July cited the note that Ms. Plame had sent recommending her husband for the Niger mission. "Interviews and documents provided to the Committee indicate that his wife, a CPD [Counterproliferation Division] employee, suggested his name for the trip," said the report.

The same bipartisan report also pointed out that the forged documents Mr. Wilson claimed to have discredited hadn't even entered intelligence channels until eight months after his trip. And it said the CIA interpreted the information he provided in his debrief as mildly supportive of the suspicion that Iraq had been seeking uranium in Niger.

About the same time, another inquiry headed by Britain's Lord Butler delivered its own verdict on the 16 words: "We conclude also that the statement in President Bush's State of the Union Address of 28 January 2003 that 'The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa' was well-founded."

In short, Joe Wilson hadn't told the truth about what he'd discovered in Africa, how he'd discovered it, what he'd told the CIA about it, or even why he was sent on the mission. The media and the Kerry campaign promptly abandoned him, though the former never did give as much prominence to his debunking as they did to his original accusations. But if anyone can remember another public figure so entirely and thoroughly discredited, let us know.

I'm not going to sort this out --- let the Grand Jury find the fire.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #112 of 346
7/13/05 at 7:32am
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
I'm not going to sort this out --- let the Grand Jury find the fire.

Bullshit. You already did. That's what you've been arguing ever since you began posting in this thread.

Since the winger bloggers and Fox are encouraging their little zombies/soldiers to go out and attack Wilson, here's a little reminder that it wasn't just Wilson who was sent to Niger. Of course, let's not let the facts get in the way of the lying....... Joe Wilson sucks!!
Quote:
Four-Star Marine General Carlton W. Fulford Jr., deputy commander of the US European Command, travels to Niger to investigate the security of that country's uranium and to remind Niger's president of the need to keep a close eye on its ore deposits. The trip is separate from, and independent of, retired diplomat Joseph Wilson's mission, which occurs at about the same time. On February 24, Fulford joins US ambassador to Niger, Barbro Owens-Kirkpatrick, at a meeting with Niger's President Mamadou Tandja. He explains the importance of keeping Niger's ore deposits secure. Fulford's investigation concludes that Niger's uranium is safely in the hands of a French consortium and that there is little risk that the material will end up in the wrong hands. These findings are passed on to General Joseph Ralston who provides them to General Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. [The Washington Post, 7/15/03; Voce of America, 7/15/03; Vanity Fair, 5/2004, pg 282 Sources: Carlton W. Fulford] The Pentagon will later say that Donald Rumsfeld was not informed about the trip or its conclusions. [Voice of America, 7/15/03]

In other words, Mr. Fulford's investigation and the US Ambassador to Niger reached the same "falacious" conclusion that Joe Wilson did.
[ignorant winger mode] Hey guys! Let's go after Four-Star Marine General Carlton W. Fulford Jr., deputy commander of the US European Command!! Traitorrrrrrrr!! [/ignorant winger mode]
Reply
Reply
post #113 of 346
7/13/05 at 7:51am
Quote:
To be prosecuted under the 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act, Mr. Rove would had to have deliberately and maliciously exposed Ms. Plame knowing that she was an undercover agent and using information he'd obtained in an official capacity.
...
Mr. Wilson had been recommended for the CIA consulting gig by his wife, not by Vice President Dick Cheney
....
Mr. Wilson, who first "outed" himself as a CIA consultant in a melodramatic New York Times op-ed in July 2003. At the time he claimed to have thoroughly debunked the Iraq-Niger yellowcake uranium connection that President Bush had mentioned in his now famous "16 words" on the subject in that year's State of the Union address.
...
But his day in the political sun was short-lived. The bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report last July cited the note that Ms. Plame had sent recommending her husband for the Niger mission. "Interviews and documents provided to the Committee indicate that his wife, a CPD [Counterproliferation Division] employee, suggested his name for the trip," said the report.

The same bipartisan report also pointed out that the forged documents Mr. Wilson claimed to have discredited hadn't even entered intelligence channels until eight months after his trip. And it said the CIA interpreted the information he provided in his debrief as mildly supportive of the suspicion that Iraq had been seeking uranium in Niger.

About the same time, another inquiry headed by Britain's Lord Butler delivered its own verdict on the 16 words: "We conclude also that the statement in President Bush's State of the Union Address of 28 January 2003 that 'The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa' was well-founded."

In short, Joe Wilson hadn't told the truth about what he'd discovered in Africa, how he'd discovered it, what he'd told the CIA about it, or even why he was sent on the mission. The media and the Kerry campaign promptly abandoned him, though the former never did give as much prominence to his debunking as they did to his original accusations. But if anyone can remember another public figure so entirely and thoroughly discredited, let us know.

Almost every single statement in here is false. I have class in 5 minutes, but if no one else cares to, I'll debunk every one later this afternoon. I'm sure you're looking forward to it, dmz.
Reply
Reply
post #114 of 346
7/13/05 at 8:26am
Forgive me if this has a little bit more credibility than what the Bush apologists are posting. After all, this guy used to be CIA, Deputy Director in the U.S. State Departments Office of Counter Terrorism and a Fox News contributor. Traitor!
Quote:
For starters, Valerie Plame was an undercover operations officer until outed in the press by Robert Novak._ Novak's column was not an isolated attack._ It was in fact part of a coordinated, orchestrated smear that we now know includes at least Karl Rove.

Valerie Plame was a classmate of mine from the day she started with the CIA._ I entered on duty at the CIA in September 1985._ All of my classmates were undercover--in other words, we told our family and friends that we were working for other overt U.S. Government agencies._ We had official cover._ That means we had a black passport--i.e., a diplomatic passport._ If we were caught overseas engaged in espionage activity the black passport was a get out of jail free card.

Quote:
A few of my classmates, and Valerie was one of these, became a non-official cover officer._ That meant she agreed to operate overseas without the protection of a diplomatic passport._ If caught in that status she would have been executed.

Quote:
et, until Robert Novak betrayed her she was still undercover and the company that was her front was still a secret to the world._ When Novak outed Valerie he also compromised her company and every individual overseas who had been in contact with that company and with her.

Quote:
The Republicans now want to hide behind the legalism that "no laws were broken"._ I don't know if a man made law was broken but an ethical and moral code was breached._ For the first time a group of partisan political operatives publically identified a CIA NOC._ They have set a precendent that the next group of political hacks may feel free to violate.

Quote:
But don't take my word for it, read the biased Senate intelligence committee report._ Even though it was slanted to try to portray Joe in the worst possible light this fact emerges on page 52 of the report:_ According to the US Ambassador to Niger (who was commenting on Joe's visit in February 2002), "Ambassador Wilson reached the same conclusion that the Embassy has reached that it was highly unlikely that anything between Iraq and Niger was going on."_ Joe's findings were consistent with those of the Deputy Commander of the European Command, Major General Fulford.

Quote:
The Republicans insist on the lie that Val got her husband the job._ She did not._ She was not a division director, instead she was the equivalent of an Army major._ Yes it is true she recommended her husband to do the job that needed to be done but the decision to send Joe Wilson on this mission was made by her bosses.

Emphasis mine. Two years into an investigation, I would think that's ample time to determine whether Valerie Plame was covert or not.
Reply
Reply
post #115 of 346
7/13/05 at 9:03am
Quote:
Originally posted by BRussell
Almost every single statement in here is false.

That's from today's Op-Eds in The Wall Street Journal -- I doubt it.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #116 of 346
7/13/05 at 9:07am
Quote:
Originally posted by Gilsch
Bullshit.

noooo, you're straining out what pleases you from very complicated political catfight.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #117 of 346
7/13/05 at 11:05am
Quote:
Originally posted by addabox
It's amazing how the "good guys/bad guys, my President is a simple talkin' straight shooter" crowd become nuance parsing relativists of the first water, given a self serving opportunity.....

Bingo! My sentiments exactly.

Dean: His statements are outrageous! How dare he speak the truth!

Rove: Eh, big deal.
"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 #118 of 346
7/13/05 at 11:09am
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
That's from today's Op-Eds in The Wall Street Journal -- I doubt it.

An op-ed? An "opinion editorial"?

"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 #119 of 346
7/13/05 at 11:13am
Since we're quoting OP-ED pieces regarding this issue, here's my contribution. And since the Wapo article carries the same water as Mehlman's talking points, just replace Mehlman for Wapo below:

Republican Leaders: We Support Plame's Outing
by Hunter

Tue Jul 12th, 2005 at 12:09:55 PDT

Armando has already noted Ken Mehlman and other Republican reactions, but I want to re-emphasize it, because the "spin" really is contemptible, and demonstrates just how ethically corrupt the central "core" of the Republican machine has become.

All yesterday, every Republican in Washington simply clammed up -- the AP and other news reports couldn't get anyone to go on the record condemning Karl Rove. Or defending him, for that matter. Republicans wouldn't touch the issue with a ten-foot pole. But after an intense day of Spin Camp, they're set to go, and the spin they've chosen is founded on an attempt to misdirect people from all of the basic facts of the case.

The RNC and other parties are now reading from the approved, faxed talking points. The central argument is this, according to the two-sentence statement by RNC Chairman Ken Mehlman:

Quote:
It's disappointing that once again, so many Democrat leaders are taking their political cues from the far-left, Moveon wing of the party. The bottom line is Karl Rove was discouraging a reporter from writing a false story based on a false premise and the Democrats are engaging in blatant partisan political attacks.

Sounds like he supports Karl Rove's actions to me. However, while that spin is so furious that it could dry a pair of jeans in ten minutes, it's still nothing more than spin. Which is a polite way of saying lie.

Mehlman admits, at least, the central premise which the White House is still denying -- that Rove talked to Cooper, at minimum, about CIA NOC agent Plame's identity. That much has been acknowledged by Rove's own lawyer. But let's examine the obvious conclusions of Mehlman's statement.

Mehlman freely admits that Rove was talking to the reporter to "discourage" him from writing his story, a story which was very damaging to Bush, and which was admitted to be true by the White House on the 7th of July -- four days before Rove's conversation with Cooper. And to do that, Rove gave Cooper the information about Plame's CIA status.

Is the outing of an undercover agent during a time of war acceptable to "discourage" a negative story acceptable, now? Is that the Republican position? Not that Rove didn't do it, but that it was OK to do it in the course of shaping news reports?

If Rove was for a minute concerned with "discouraging" damaging stories in the press, you know what he could have done? Discouraged reporters from outing an undercover agent. Or at the very least, refused to talk about the status of undercover agents. He didn't. He made it a point -- he and apparently at least six other Bush administration officials -- to broadcast Plame's CIA status to reporters. That doesn't sound to me like someone working in the interests of American national security.

There was once a time when President Bush -- and Scott McClellan, for that matter -- had plausible deniability on Rove's actions. The White House stated repeatedly that Rove was not involved with the Plame outing; that he was explicitly asked about involvement with the Plame outing, and denied it; and that anyone who was determined to have had a part in the outing would be fired.

The President no longer has that plausible deniability. Both Cooper and Rove's own lawyer have confirmed Rove's conversation with Cooper, the Friday before Novak's column would appear in papers. Now the President has to decide whether Rove's known actions are ones he will endorse. And so does the RNC, and so does every Republican senator and congressman. It's time to chose between party and ethics; between talking points and country.

Time to choose. Now.

As for the boilerplate of Mehlman's statement itself, which states "It's disappointing that once again, so many Democrat leaders are taking their political cues from the far-left, Moveon wing of the party" -- You know what, Ken? Fuck you. Personally. I can say that now, because your Vice President said so.

Being anti-corruption is not "far-left". Or is it, now? Being anti-treason isn't "far-left". Or is it, now?

Despite the RNC insistence that every exposure of Republican crime and corruption -- whether it be Rove, DeLay, Cunningham, or other Republican figures under active criminal investigation -- is a trick by the evil far-left MoveOn or other groups that have the audacity to support Democrats instead of Republicans, that simply isn't the case. It is a tired joke, at this point. It stopped even being insulting a few years ago, and now is simply recognized as the last refuge of a pack of scoundrels -- the talking point that acts as a few sentences of placeholder, in all Republican generated documents, until it can be edited out for some more credible defense against Republican amorality or corruption.

You don't want corrupt Republicans to be exposed? Then condemn them. Expose them. Expell them. At some point, your party is going to have to treat government with the same seriousness that you treat campaigning, and not simply as a perpetual money trough for rewarding anyone who has given the correct amount of money to the party through Jack Abramoff, through Texans for a Republican Majority, or other spigots.

And that, then, is the central lesson of the Republican reaction. Republicans -- whether partisan bloggers, conservative interest groups, or Republican Party leaders -- choose entirely to define the issue as parsing whether or not what Karl Rove did was strictly illegal. There should be a roughly higher standard, for Republicans, then the line between felony and not felony. At one point in time, the Republicans held the standard that there were moral, ethical, and patriotic lines that should not be crossed. Those notions have been completely discarded. According to the Republican leadership of Rove, DeLay, Reed, Abramoff, Santorum, Frist, Hastert, Mehlman, and President Bush himself, the only defining line in acceptable behavior is whether or not the government can put you in prison for doing it.

And even then, we find numerous Republican officials treading the wrong side of that line.

So Ken Mehlman, you've got a decision to make. The top advisor to the White House has been exposed as having direct connections to the "outing" of a CIA NOC agent. Documents confirm it. Both Cooper and Rove's own lawyer admit it. You need to decide how long you're going to defend it, or if maybe -- maybe -- damaging this country's intelligence capabilities during a time of war is a line that you, Ken Mehlman, don't want to cross.
"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 #120 of 346
7/13/05 at 12:04pm
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
noooo, you're straining out what pleases you from very complicated political catfight.

The Bush Fanatics meeting is that way. ----->

You quoted an op-ed, I quoted an article from an ex-CIA guy who would know more than the shills you are quoting.

No covert CIA agent= no crime.

Again, this investigation is two years old. How long does it take them to figure out if she was covert or not?

No covert CIA agent= no crime.

Just admit you will not stop at anything to defend your Republican party and Bush.

With Us or Against US.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Novak/Plame