Federal judge dismisses Plame suit

[joseephuss]

Just heard that headline. I am sure there will be plenty of news to follow.

[adamknite]

At the risk of sounding stupid, what is that?

[trickblue]

I didn't think she would have much of a case. Everyone seemed to know who she was anyway...

[BrAinPaiNt]

I didn't think she would have much of a case. Everyone seemed to know who she was anyway...

Like Patrick Fitzgerald who in his court documents said she WAS covert at the time?

I knew she would not win her case because of other reasons.

[joseephuss]

At the risk of sounding stupid, what is that?

Valerie Plame-Wilson was attempting to sue Cheney.

[adamknite]

Valerie Plame-Wilson was attempting to sue Cheney.

What over? I must be living under a rock.......

[BrAinPaiNt]

At the risk of sounding stupid, what is that?

Valerie Plame was a CIA agent.

Her husband was an ambassador.

The admin tried to make the connection of Iraq buying yellow cake from Nigeria I think. Bush even said so in a Press Conference or National Address.

Her Husband, Joseph Wilson, said they were making things up and that it was not the case ALONG with other things.

He was proven right about the yellow cake but proven wrong about others.

In order to get back at Wilson someone in the administration (armitage and rove) leaked the Name Valerie Plame who was married to Joseph Wilson and how that situation of the job was questionable.

It went to trial to see who leaked the name but they never brought Rove up on charges. Armitage was either fired or resigned, Ari Fleisher somehow got immunity.

Vice President aid/assistant (not sure of his exact title) Scooter Libby lied about things under oath and was brought up on charges of perjury and obstruction.

So even though he did commit those crimes (perjury and obstruction) he was basically a scape goat because he did not leak the name where Rove and Armitage did.

Bush Commutted Libby's sentence so all he has not is a fine and probation.

So basically a covert CIA agent was out and nobody paid for it.

Plame and or Wilson brought up a suit against them in order to get some justice or money out of it.

[adamknite]

ohhh, thanks BP.

I remember hearing something about that now. I just normally don't follow that kinda stuff too closely.

Thanks again.

[joseephuss]

Valerie Plame was a CIA agent.

Her husband was an ambassador.

The admin tried to make the connection of Iraq buying yellow cake from Nigeria I think. Bush even said so in a Press Conference or National Address.

Her Husband, Joseph Wilson, said they were making things up and that it was not the case ALONG with other things.

He was proven right about the yellow cake but proven wrong about others.

In order to get back at Wilson someone in the administration (armitage and rove) leaked the Name Valerie Plame who was married to Joseph Wilson and how that situation of the job was questionable.

It went to trial to see who leaked the name but they never brought Rove up on charges. Armitage was either fired or resigned, Ari Fleisher somehow got immunity.

Vice President aid/assistant (not sure of his exact title) Scooter Libby lied about things under oath and was brought up on charges of perjury and obstruction.

So even though he did commit those crimes (perjury and obstruction) he was basically a scape goat because he did not leak the name where Rove and Armitage did.

Bush Commutted Libby's sentence so all he has not is a fine and probation.

So basically a covert CIA agent was out and nobody paid for it.

Plame and or Wilson brought up a suit against them in order to get some justice or money out of it.

Bush said this last Thursday:

"I'm aware of the fact that perhaps somebody in the administration did disclose the name of that person," Bush said. "I've often thought about what would have happened if that person had come forth and said, 'I did it.' Would we have had this endless hours of investigation and a lot of money being spent on this matter? But, so, it's been a tough issue for a lot of people in the White House. It's run its course and now we're going to move on."

[trickblue]

Like Patrick Fitzgerald who in his court documents said she WAS covert at the time?

Meaning what?

[BrAinPaiNt]

Bush said this last Thursday:

"I'm aware of the fact that perhaps somebody in the administration did disclose the name of that person," Bush said. "I've often thought about what would have happened if that person had come forth and said, 'I did it.' Would we have had this endless hours of investigation and a lot of money being spent on this matter? But, so, it's been a tough issue for a lot of people in the White House. It's run its course and now we're going to move on."

Yes...didn't that make you made when he said that.

I keep thinking back to the idea of him originally saying that whoever leaked the information would be fired and he may have said something along the lines of getting in trouble with the law but I am not so sure about that last part.

However Arimtage did leave. I think he just moved on but we don't know about if he was really fired and said he could resign.

Still Rove is there.

Each seem equally guilty and each seem to be the ones that everyone says did it...I think Woodward or Novack have basically said it.

[BrAinPaiNt]

Meaning what?

That she was covert according to his investigation.

The whole thing about people saying she was not covert at the time is an inaccuracy or a lie by political mouth pieces.

This was also not a situation of Liberal bias in the investigation that the right political mouth pieces would have you believe.

It was not a liberal organization that even requested the investigation. It was the CIA itself. They felt she was covert and wanted an investigation for someone outing a CIA agent.

Originally John Ashcroft was to be the investigator but he had to recluse himself because he had business dealings with Rove in the past.

Fitzgerald was appointed to the prosecutor.

The judge was appointed, to his seat, by Ronald Reagan as well.

So there is no liberal bias like some would lead us to believe.

According to Fitzgeralds court documents he states that at the time of the investigation she indeed was a Covert Agent.

This is from his documents...

Ms. Wilson was a covert CIA employee for whom the CIA was taking affirmative measures to conceal her intelligence relationship to the United States... When traveling overseas, [Plame] always traveled under a cover identity [undercover], sometimes in true name and sometimes in alias -- but always using cover -- whether official or non-official (NOC) -- with no ostensible relationship to the CIA.

So time and time again I hear on political shows from the republican mouth piece that she was not covert or undercover at the time. When that is false according the the republican appointed prosecutor of the case.

[trickblue]

That she was covert according to his investigation.

The whole thing about people saying she was not covert at the time is an inaccuracy or a lie by political mouth pieces.

This was also not a situation of Liberal bias in the investigation that the right political mouth pieces would have you believe.

It was not a liberal organization that even requested the investigation. It was the CIA itself. They felt she was covert and wanted an investigation for someone outing a CIA agent.

Originally John Ashcroft was to be the investigator but he had to recluse himself because he had business dealings with Rove in the past.

Fitzgerald was appointed to the prosecutor.

The judge was appointed, to his seat, by Ronald Reagan as well.

So there is no liberal bias like some would lead us to believe.

According to Fitzgeralds court documents he states that at the time of the investigation she indeed was a Covert Agent.

This is from his documents...

Ms. Wilson was a covert CIA employee for whom the CIA was taking affirmative measures to conceal her intelligence relationship to the United States... When traveling overseas, [Plame] always traveled under a cover identity [undercover], sometimes in true name and sometimes in alias -- but always using cover -- whether official or non-official (NOC) -- with no ostensible relationship to the CIA.

So time and time again I hear on political shows from the republican mouth piece that she was not covert or undercover at the time. When that is false according the the republican appointed prosecutor of the case.

That's not what I am asking. She may have been OFFICIALLY covert, but many have said that it was well-known who she was already...

I'm not playing politics but rather stating that it's hard to sue for something that is common knowledge with many. Even her own attorney said it wasn't likely they could win.

Now who pays the court costs?

[bbgun]

Actually, the "fact" of her "covertness" was not established until last week--well after Libby's trial and sentencing had concluded. So unimportant was her "covertness" that it had nothing to do with Fitz's investigation. Libby was tried for perjury, not outing a so-called covert agent. Fitz should have abandoned this wild goose chase after interviewing Armitage. But even independent prosecutors are not immune to the spotlight, regardless of who appointed them. When The Wash Post calls you a liar, as they did with Joe Wilson, the game is up.

[trickblue]

When The Wash Post calls you a liar, as they did with Joe Wilson, the game is up.

That'll leave a mark...

[BrAinPaiNt]

Actually, the "fact" of her "covertness" was not established until last week--well after Libby's trial and sentencing had concluded. So unimportant was her "covertness" that it had nothing to do with Fitz's investigation. Libby was tried for perjury, not outing a so-called covert agent. Fitz should have abandoned this wild goose chase after interviewing Armitage. But even independent prosecutors are not immune to the spotlight, regardless of who appointed them. When The Wash Post calls you a liar, as they did with Joe Wilson, the game is up.

It was in his documents at the time of the investigation.
It was later released.

I have also stated that libby was found guilty of perjury and obstruction and said he was NOT guilty of leaking the name.


I ALSO stated in my original post that he, Wilson, was proven WRONG on other things.


Look I think many know that Libby, although guilty of the two charges, was also the scape goat for the whole investigation.

No way they would let "Turd Blossom" go down. They already let armitage walk away and they gave Ari immunity before testifying.

And of course bush comes out recently and all but admits it was someone in his admin.

Truly a shame IMO.

This was ALL done in order to get back at someone that questioned the Administration.

Funny thing was he, Wilson, was right about the yellow cake.

Later it was said that some in the Bush Camp told him not to say that in the address. He did so anyways.

Later that part was stricken out of the official transcripts that they put on their web pages.

[bbgun]

Valerie Plame is a lot of things, but she ain't no victim. If anything her "outing" represents a career upgrade. She and her ertwhile husband will hit the lucrative left-wing lecture circuit, while a Hollywood movie is in the works. That is, if they can find the time inbetween Vanity Fair photo shoots. Wilson fired the first salvo with his defamatory NY Times piece, and reacted with shock that the Bush Admin decided to defend itself. The specious Fitz investigation was little more than the criminalization of politics--which has always been down and dirty. The CIA has been waging a political war against the Bush Admin for the last five years, leaking state secrets like a colander. Perhaps Fitz would like to look into that.

[ConcordCowboy]

I didn't think she would have much of a case. Everyone seemed to know who she was anyway...

Not before the leak.

[ConcordCowboy]

Valerie Plame is a lot of things, but she ain't no victim. If anything her "outing" represents a career upgrade. She and her ertwhile husband will hit the lucrative left-wing lecture circuit, while a Hollywood movie is in the works. That is, if they can find the time inbetween Vanity Fair photo shoots. Wilson fired the first salvo with his defamatory NY Times piece, and reacted with shock that the Bush Admin decided to defend itself. The specious Fitz investigation was little more than the criminalization of politics--which has always been down and dirty. The CIA has been waging a political war against the Bush Admin for the last five years, leaking state secrets like a colander. Perhaps Fitz would like to look into that.

They didn't defend themselves...there wasn't anything to defend...they were wrong and Wilson exposed them.

So instead of saying hey...Wilson's wrong and here's the proof to refute his claims...they when on the attack against the only thing they could get him on....exposing his wife.

[trickblue]

Not before the leak.

Several have said they knew...

[ConcordCowboy]

Several have said they knew...

Like who? I really don't know.

[Vintage]

Like who? I really don't know.

The Russians and Cubans supposedly knew....

Ill see if I can find a link.

http://www.investors.com/editorial/editorialcontent.asp?secid=1501&status=article&id=156550&secure=1972


"She made no bones about the fact that she was an agency employee and her husband was a diplomat,"" Rustmann said. ""Her neighbors knew this; her friends knew this; his friends knew this.""
And so did the Russians and the Cubans. According to Times reporter Bill Gertz, U.S. officials said Plame's identity was first disclosed to Russia by a Moscow spy in the mid-1990s. The Cubans learned of her status when they read supposedly sealed documents sent by the CIA to the U.S. Interests Section of the Swiss Embassy in Havana.
And, as we have noted, the reason Plame was working as a desk analyst in Langley, having been brought back to the U.S. in 1994 - nine years before the Rove ""leak,"" was that the CIA suspected that her undercover security had been compromised by turncoat spy Aldrich Ames.


No clue as to how reliable this site is....I'll see if I can find something else...

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/10/28/MNGUJFFFSJ1.DTL


That said, McCarthy sided with those who argue that Plame's identity was hardly sensitive, citing her regular presence in Washington, court filings he said suggested her identity was known to the Russians and Cubans in the 1990s, and Plame's appearance with Wilson in a two-page Vanity Fair photo spread after Novak's column ran.

[ConcordCowboy]

The Russians and Cubans supposedly knew....

Ill see if I can find a link.

Well then while all the BS about the leak then....If they really knew.

If they really did know...How did they know?

[junk]

You can delve in and try to justify it all you want.

Bottom line: Someone in the Bush Administration outed a CIA agent. Even if everyone "knew" who she was, its at a minimum highly unethical. By the letter of the law, even if everyone "knew" who she was, its still illegal.

As BP more or less stated, it was an act of retribution from an administration that doesn't want to be challenged.

Frankly, I'm amazed anyone would defend the administration on this one. I was surprised there wasn't more outrage over the whole deal.

[bbgun]

They didn't defend themselves...there wasn't anything to defend...they were wrong and Wilson exposed them.

So instead of saying hey...Wilson's wrong and here's the proof to refute his claims...they when on the attack against the only thing they could get him on....exposing his wife.

Bush Admin was wrong about what? Yellowcake? Bullcrap.

http://www.slate.com/id/2146475/

Wash Post editorial (key graph):

Nevertheless, it now appears that the person most responsible for the end of Ms. Plame's CIA career is Mr. Wilson. Mr. Wilson chose to go public with an explosive charge, claiming -- falsely, as it turned out -- that he had debunked reports of Iraqi uranium-shopping in Niger and that his report had circulated to senior administration officials. He ought to have expected that both those officials and journalists such as Mr. Novak would ask why a retired ambassador would have been sent on such a mission and that the answer would point to his wife. He diverted responsibility from himself and his false charges by claiming that President Bush's closest aides had engaged in an illegal conspiracy. It's unfortunate that so many people took him seriously.

[ConcordCowboy]

The Russians and Cubans supposedly knew....

Ill see if I can find a link.

http://www.investors.com/editorial/editorialcontent.asp?secid=1501&status=article&id=156550&secure=1972



No clue as to how reliable this site is....I'll see if I can find something else...

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/10/28/MNGUJFFFSJ1.DTL

"that the CIA suspected that her undercover security had been compromised by turncoat spy Aldrich Ames."

Well that could say it all.

[Vintage]

"that the CIA suspected that her undercover security had been compromised by turncoat spy Aldrich Ames."

Well that could say it all.

I'm not disagreeing that this was a dumb thing to do, leaking her name....

I was just trying to answer your post and find you a couple of links.

FWIW.

(I know you aren't accusing me of anything either, I just wanted to say this to you and in case anyone was thinking I am ok with the leak)

[ConcordCowboy]

You can delve in and try to justify it all you want.

Bottom line: Someone in the Bush Administration outed a CIA agent. Even if everyone "knew" who she was, its at a minimum highly unethical. By the letter of the law, even if everyone "knew" who she was, its still illegal.

As BP more or less stated, it was an act of retribution from an administration that doesn't want to be challenged.

Frankly, I'm amazed anyone would defend the administration on this one. I was surprised there wasn't more outrage over the whole deal.

Well get ready to be amazed.

[bbgun]

You can delve in and try to justify it all you want.

Bottom line: Someone in the Bush Administration outed a CIA agent. Even if everyone "knew" who she was, its at a minimum highly unethical. By the letter of the law, even if everyone "knew" who she was, its still illegal.

Then why wasn't Richard Armitage prosecuted? He was the unwitting leaker, after all. Armitage is hardly a Bush crony, and he's on the record as being against the Iraq War. Doesn't make sense that he'd leak her name maliciously. The Left is furious that Cheney or Rove wasn't brought down, so they have to settle for Libby. Too bad.

[ConcordCowboy]

I'm not disagreeing that this was a dumb thing to do, leaking her name....

I was just trying to answer your post and find you a couple of links.

FWIW.

(I know you aren't accusing me of anything either, I just wanted to say this to you and in case anyone was thinking I am ok with the leak)


I know what you're saying...Thanks for the info.

[trickblue]

You can delve in and try to justify it all you want.

Bottom line: Someone in the Bush Administration outed a CIA agent. Even if everyone "knew" who she was, its at a minimum highly unethical. By the letter of the law, even if everyone "knew" who she was, its still illegal.

As BP more or less stated, it was an act of retribution from an administration that doesn't want to be challenged.

Frankly, I'm amazed anyone would defend the administration on this one. I was surprised there wasn't more outrage over the whole deal.

Oh I am certainly not defending the Bush Administration. I didn't vote for him in 2004 and I have many issues with his policy.

My point is that it took up alot of time and money to try some officials on what many already knew around Washington. Then she turns around and files a lawsuit which her own lawyer said would be tough to win.

It's throwing good money after bad...

[bbgun]

One caveat: I disagree with Bush commuting Libby's sentence. I don't care if you think you're a victim of political persecution: you cannot lie under oath without serious consequences. You cannot pick and choose when you want to tell the truth.

[joseephuss]

Oh I am certainly not defending the Bush Administration. I didn't vote for him in 2004 and I have many issues with his policy.

My point is that it took up alot of time and money to try some officials on what many already knew around Washington. Then she turns around and files a lawsuit which her own lawyer said would be tough to win.

It's throwing good money after bad...

It was a bad lawsuit. Even if no one knew around Washington.

[AtlCB]

One caveat: I disagree with Bush commuting Libby's sentence. I don't care if you think you're a victim of political persecution: you cannot lie under oath without serious consequences. You cannot pick and choose when you want to tell the truth.
I don't have a problem with it. Libby still has a large fine, probation, and a felony conviction on his record. I believe that is fair punishment for perjury.

[Sasquatch]

Frankly, I'm amazed anyone would defend the administration on this one. I was surprised there wasn't more outrage over the whole deal.

It's shocking only if you assume the public is not cynical and willing to sacrifice quaint moral principles for perceived short-term political gain. I don't find it surprising in the least.

[Dallas]

I don't have a problem with it. Libby still has a large fine, probation, and a felony conviction on his record. I believe that is fair punishment for perjury.

I agree. I was glad to see Libby get the pardon. His probation and large fine is plenty for his perjury offense.


He was sentenced to those years because he was the scape goat and someone had to go to jail. That's pretty much it. He certainly didn't go to jail because he lied on the stand.

Someone had to go so Libby was served up.

[joseephuss]

I agree. I was glad to see Libby get the pardon. His probation and large fine is plenty for his perjury offense.


He was sentenced to those years because he was the scape goat and someone had to go to jail. That's pretty much it. He certainly didn't go to jail because he lied on the stand.

Someone had to go so Libby was served up.

He was not pardoned. His sentence was commuted. From what I understand, he is not on probation because he did not serve prison time. Bush can still pardon him and may do just that at some point in the future.

I am cynical enough to know that he probably got a lot of volunteers to help him pay off his hefty fine. And just like Plame and Wilson, he can always write a book to cover his costs.

I don't think Bush should have commuted his sentence. At least not until after Libby had his appeal. His sentence could have been reduced upon appeal. I thought his sentence was a bit harsh especially since it exceed the recommendations of the prosecution, but he still should have served some jail time.

[AtlCB]

He was not pardoned. His sentence was commuted. From what I understand, he is not on probation because he did not serve prison time. Bush can still pardon him and may do just that at some point in the future.

I am cynical enough to know that he probably got a lot of volunteers to help him pay off his hefty fine. And just like Plame and Wilson, he can always write a book to cover his costs.

I don't think Bush should have commuted his sentence. At least not until after Libby had his appeal. His sentence could have been reduced upon appeal. I thought his sentence was a bit harsh especially since it exceed the recommendations of the prosecution, but he still should have served some jail time.You don't have to serve time to receive probabation.

[Rackat]

One thing to take away from this:

Be careful when you're slinging mud. Mud doesn't care who it hits or sticks to.


Plame and Wilson are as culpable as he Administration for the 'outing'. IIRC, wasn't there a magazine cover with Joe and Valerie on it with a story saying she worked for the CIA? I mean c'mon, even the Fijian Secretive Service could've figured this one out.

[joseephuss]

You don't have to serve time to receive probabation.

There may be a technicality in this case. Who knows, it is yet to be determined.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19591231/

WASHINGTON - President Bush forced the CIA leak case into uncharted legal territory when he commuted the prison sentence of former White House aide I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, a federal judge said Tuesday.

Bush eliminated Libby’s 2½-year prison term and left in place his two years of supervised release. But supervised release — a form of probation — is only available to people who have served prison time. Without prison, it’s unclear what happens next.

U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton posed the question to Libby’s attorneys and to Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald: Does this mean Libby won’t actually be required to serve supervised release? Should he just have to report to probation officials as if he spent time in prison?
Story continues below ↓advertisement

The law, Walton said in court documents, “does not appear to contemplate a situation in which a defendant may be placed under supervised release without first completing a term of incarceration.”

For now, it appears Libby is in legal limbo. Walton gave both sides until Monday to respond.

[burmafrd]

A question I have but as far as I know has never been answered: how could she be a covert agent after marrying a diplomat? Even a former one? He was well known, he was well connected, and she marries him? HOW in the WORLD does she remain a covert operative? One thing is an absolute- an ambassador cannot have a spy in the family- its against all sorts of unwritten diplomatic rules. You can have one as an aide, etc- but not a FAMILY member.
It was established that the law was not violated as regards outing a covert agent. What I would like to know is when Fitzgerald knew this- and did he decide to pursue other things in order to justify the investigation?

[joseephuss]

One thing is an absolute- an ambassador cannot have a spy in the family- its against all sorts of unwritten diplomatic rules. You can have one as an aide, etc- but not a FAMILY member.


He wasn't ambassador when they were married.

HOW in the WORLD does she remain a covert operative?

I don't know the definition of covert operative. At least as defined by the government or the CIA. I guess you can have a covert operative that is currently working and one that was formerly working. You have to protect their ties to their operations in both cases. In one because they are still in the field and in harms way if their cover is blown. In the other case because they probably still have ties to others still in the field and they could be in harms way if their cover is blow. So you can maintain that status even if you are not working directly in the field. Her marrying a big name ex-diplomat doesn't necessarily take away from her status as a covert operative although it is seems somewhat unorthodox. It may aid in her cover story. I haven't seen anything that listed exactly what her duties were as a covert operative.

[BrAinPaiNt]

A few things to consider.

If the CIA did not consider her covert they would not have contacted the DOJ to look into the matter?

If it was widely known as it was speculated by some at the time than why did it take two high ranking administration members to leak it to a media?

Think about that for a second. The media can find dirt on about anybody and anyone.

It was not a neighbor coming forward, it was not a low or middle ranking politician coming forward it was two high ranking members of this administration AFTER Wilson said what he did.

It makes no difference at all if Wilson was wrong or not. If he was wrong they could have just proved he was wrong and left it at that.

What happened was a gross misuse of power and the outing of a CIA agent to the media by two high ranking administration members.

It was a pure act of retribution against Wilson. They could not do it the right way and just prove him wrong, they had to go and be vindictive and dirty about it and attack his wife.

Similar to how the bush and rove team did with McCain in that one primary by telling people McCain had a bi-racial illegitimate child.

Vindictive and dirty. And it is pretty bad IMO that people act like it is ok to do something like this.

As someone posted earlier Bush all but admitted that someone from his administration LEAKED the name.

How can you LEAK something if it is widely known as some are willing to claim.

There is a difference between government agents knowing and what is let out to the civilian world.

I am sure many on the hill know many secrets but they don't go and leak them to a national magazine.

Sad

[bbgun]

Generally speaking, CIA employees don't want you to know they're CIA--whether they're covert or not.

[ConcordCowboy]

He was not pardoned. His sentence was commuted. From what I understand, he is not on probation because he did not serve prison time. Bush can still pardon him and may do just that at some point in the future.


That's nice too.

Commute his sentence just before jail time...knowing that if he doesn't serve jail time...his probation will not stand.

And don't tell me Bush's legal team didn't know that.

That would be BS.

[ConcordCowboy]

A few things to consider.

If the CIA did not consider her covert they would not have contacted the DOJ to look into the matter?

If it was widely known as it was speculated by some at the time than why did it take two high ranking administration members to leak it to a media?

Think about that for a second. The media can find dirt on about anybody and anyone.

It was not a neighbor coming forward, it was not a low or middle ranking politician coming forward it was two high ranking members of this administration AFTER Wilson said what he did.

It makes no difference at all if Wilson was wrong or not. If he was wrong they could have just proved he was wrong and left it at that.

What happened was a gross misuse of power and the outing of a CIA agent to the media by two high ranking administration members.

It was a pure act of retribution against Wilson. They could not do it the right way and just prove him wrong, they had to go and be vindictive and dirty about it and attack his wife.

Similar to how the bush and rove team did with McCain in that one primary by telling people McCain had a bi-racial illegitimate child.

Vindictive and dirty. And it is pretty bad IMO that people act like it is ok to do something like this.

As someone posted earlier Bush all but admitted that someone from his administration LEAKED the name.

How can you LEAK something if it is widely known as some are willing to claim.

There is a difference between government agents knowing and what is let out to the civilian world.

I am sure many on the hill know many secrets but they don't go and leak them to a national magazine.

Sad

Wow Brain...Great post.

You can write things sometimes that I wish I could.

[joseephuss]

Something else I heard about why Libby was commuted and not pardoned. If Libby was pardoned he would not be able to use his 5th amendment rights if he had to testify. He can use them now, but Congress can grant him immunity as a way around that.

[burmafrd]

Brain you keep posting things as facts like supposedly what Rove did, etc. They are not facts- they are opinions. No one really knows what went on - nor will we ever really know. How Wilson was chosen for that mission is another question that never seems to get answered.

[bbgun]

I'm kinda sad that the judge threw out today's suit. My only regret is that Joe and Val will not face cross examination from government lawyers, meaning that they can pretend from now until the end of time that they were "wronged," and that the only thing that saved Cheney, Rove, et al., is “immunity."

Recap: Joe Wilson lied about the significance, scope, and impetus of his own fact-finding mission for the express purpose of undermining the President.
His wife, a CIA agent, recommended him for the job — the conclusions from which he published in a politically-timed op-ed in a Bush-hating rag. Wilson claimed he was sent by the VP’s office — another lie — and when members of the Bush administration supplied the context for all these machinations and motivations on background, Joe Wilson, caught in the tangle of his own lies, half-truths, and shoddy fact-finding work, knew exactly what to do: claim victim status and run screaming into the arms of the anti-Bush crowd.

It has always troubled me that those who embraced Wilson and Plame — even if they actually believed there was wrongdoing on the part of the administration (and I’m convinced many of them don’t believe it for a second) — never bothered to distance themselves from what follow-up investigations kept proving was Wilson’s cynical, partisan, deceitful, and self-serving behavior. Instead, they embraced him as a hero, and he, in turn, has moved comfortably (shamelessly?) into the role of maligned patriot. Puh-leeze. He started a malicious fight with the Bushies, and his wife (a major player in this fiasco; not just an innocent bystander) got caught in the crossfire. There are no heroes in this story, only villains. Some free advice, Joe: don't throw a punch unless you're able to take one in return. Now go away.

[BrAinPaiNt]

I'm kinda sad that the judge threw out today's suit. My only regret is that Joe and Val will not face cross examination from government lawyers, meaning that they can pretend from now until the end of time that they were "wronged," and that the only thing that saved Cheney, Rove, et al., is “immunity."

Recap: Joe Wilson lied about the significance, scope, and impetus of his own fact-finding mission for the express purpose of undermining the President.
His wife, a CIA agent, recommended him for the job — the conclusions from which he published in a politically-timed op-ed in a Bush-hating rag. Wilson claimed he was sent by the VP’s office — another lie — and when members of the Bush administration supplied the context for all these machinations and motivations on background, Joe Wilson, caught in the tangle of his own lies, half-truths, and shoddy fact-finding work, knew exactly what to do: claim victim status and run screaming into the arms of the anti-Bush crowd.

It has always troubled me that those who embraced Wilson and Plame — even if they actually believed there was wrongdoing on the part of the administration (and I’m convinced many of them don’t believe it for a second) — never bothered to distance themselves from what follow-up investigations kept proving was Wilson’s cynical, partisan, deceitful, and self-serving behavior. Instead, they embraced him as a hero, and he, in turn, has moved comfortably (shamelessly?) into the role of maligned patriot. Puh-leeze. He started a malicious fight with the Bushies, and his wife (a major player in this fiasco; not just an innocent bystander) got caught in the crossfire. There are no heroes in this story, only villains. Some free advice, Joe: don't throw a punch unless you're able to take one in return. Now go away.

For the record, and I made mention of it in my post. Wilson was proven wrong in some of his points.

Never have claimed otherwise and never said I cared for Wilson or his wife to be honest.

I just don't like that she was outed or leaked to the media and even more disturbed that they did it for vindictive reasons to repute her husband.

That is shady and cowardly no matter how you look at it IMO.

[BrAinPaiNt]

Brain you keep posting things as facts like supposedly what Rove did, etc. They are not facts- they are opinions. No one really knows what went on - nor will we ever really know. How Wilson was chosen for that mission is another question that never seems to get answered.


Armitage on tape with woodward saying the leak.

link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FlFBt7ZCFB8)

Now Novak saying Rove also did...

Link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NEUMoykb-Ec)

If you are talking about me saying the McCain issue it is pretty obvious. They don't call Rove Turd Blossom for nothing. But you are right in that case I have no facts...just a logical deduction.

[sacase]

The thing about Plame is simply this. She was NOT a NOC. He husband was a Ambassador for the United States Government, there is no possible way she was a NOC. As soon as she married him her NOC status was pulled.

Now it comes to cover names. People (CIA and other government agents) travel under a cover name all the time, it is normal practice and it is not considered a big deal. So when her name was dropped as working for the CIA it was not a issue, especially since she worked at CIA headquarters. Hell, she even worked with officals from other governments under her real name for the CIA. Which means those officals from other countries knew she worked for the CIA and knew her true name.

The problem with this whole thing is people are not understanding what the difference between a NOC is and what a cover name is.

[burmafrd]

You quoting Armitage. Great source brain. Like he does not have a reason to lie and slant.
I have never thought Novak was all that great a reporter. He also has an agenda.
Frankly your sources are not much.

[BrAinPaiNt]

You quoting Armitage. Great source brain. Like he does not have a reason to lie and slant.
I have never thought Novak was all that great a reporter. He also has an agenda.
Frankly your sources are not much.

I am not quoting him...he is saying it with his own words. He is telling the reporter and is heard on tape doing so.

What is he lying and slanting about? Seriously he leaked a name of an agent to the press. An agent who happened to be the wife of the guy the bush people were trying to discredit.

Look I can understand if people want to be hardcore on one party or the other but come on guys. This was done in order to slam Wilson.

Now people want to act like Armitage is lying and slanting...lying and slanting about what in this case?

I don't know if it is humorous or sad or maybe a combo of both that people will go to this length to make it seem like what they did was ok.

If this was a president from another party I would bet money that many would be raising as much fuss over it instead of defending it. And just the reverse of those defending it.

However you have to look beyond parties and just see what is right and what is wrong and quit trying to justify what is wrong.

All you do by justifying what is wrong is make it easier for BOTH parties to get away with things. They love people that are blinded by party lines.

[joseephuss]

You quoting Armitage. Great source brain. Like he does not have a reason to lie and slant.
I have never thought Novak was all that great a reporter. He also has an agenda.
Frankly your sources are not much.

Those are the closest sources to the issue. They were involved. Who should he be referencing?

[BrAinPaiNt]

Those are the closest sources to the issue. They were involved. Who should he be referencing?

Actually I have a feeling I could reference anybody and they would get thrown to the wolves in order to justify the actions and protect the admin.

Which is a bad thing IMO.

I like where woodward basically says that he only let the Rove name out after Rove basically let it out himself.

Here is the thing IMO.

If she was as exposed as so many claim it would not take two high ranking administration members to leak the name.

Then the whole thing got out and people realized that it must have came from the white house.

You want to know the worst part of all of this mess?

Between Bush, Cheney, Ari Fleisher (sp?), Rove, Libby and Armitage the only person that spent any jail time over this whole situation was Judith Miller...a reporter.

[ConcordCowboy]

Between Bush, Cheney, Ari Fleisher (sp?), Rove, Libby and Armitage the only person that spent any jail time over this whole situation was Judith Miller...a reporter.

That's the pathetic part.

[burmafrd]

Whats pathetic is how Wilson basically gets a pass on all the crap he has done and said.

[Danny White]

Something else I heard about why Libby was commuted and not pardoned. If Libby was pardoned he would not be able to use his 5th amendment rights if he had to testify. He can use them now, but Congress can grant him immunity as a way around that.

I've heard that floated as well, but I don't really buy it.

They'd would and are claiming executive privilege in keeping him and others from testifying, so they don't really need the 5th Amendment to keep him from appearing before Congress.

I think it's mostly that Bush wanted to take the real risk to him (prison) out of the equation and then let him work his appeal through the system to let him try to clear his good name. If Libby fails on appeal, Bush can always issue a full pardon later.

[Sasquatch]

Actually I have a feeling I could reference anybody and they would get thrown to the wolves in order to justify the actions and protect the admin.

Bingo. Interesting that no one thought that Miller's punishment was too harsh for not disclosing her sources. Selective justice, another reason not to like the commutation.

If I ever run afoul of the law, I hope someone with absolute authority overturns my punishment as excessive. But who am I kidding, as a middle-class chump, I'm expected to take whatever medicine the system doles out to me whereas the Libby's of the world live by completely different rules altogether.

[BrAinPaiNt]

Whats pathetic is how Wilson basically gets a pass on all the crap he has done and said.

How does he get a pass.

He was proven wrong in many of his points and his wife was outed by two high ranking administration members for political and vindictive reasons and they just lost their law suit.

How has he gotten a free pass?

Last time I heard it was not against the law to be wrong about talking points.

To my knowledge he did not leak the name of a CIA agent for retribution. He did not lie under oath to a grand jury, he did not obstruct justice to a grand jury.

What is he getting this so called "Free pass" for exactly?

[BrAinPaiNt]

I've heard that floated as well, but I don't really buy it.

They'd would and are claiming executive privilege in keeping him and others from testifying, so they don't really need the 5th Amendment to keep him from appearing before Congress.

I think it's mostly that Bush wanted to take the real risk to him (prison) out of the equation and then let him work his appeal through the system to let him try to clear his good name. If Libby fails on appeal, Bush can always issue a full pardon later.

I think there is probably more truth to the 5th than meets the eye.

The guy, I think we all can agree, was the scape goat for this even though the leak is not what he was charged with.

IMO Bush has never been shy or cared what the people think about his actions as proof just look at his ratings and him still staying in the war. I think he does things regardless of what others think.

It shocked me he did not give a pardon at the time and I think this 5th issue is probably close to the truth of it.

Let me stipulate that I have no facts or proof of this. I am just giving an opinion.

I think he will be pardoned once bush is leaving office.

Also I have to ask, as I honestly do not know. Does Libby fall under the executive privilege stance now. He was either fired or resigned. He is no longer in office and he was found guilty of perjury and obstruction. Does he still fall under the executive position? I really don't know.

[joseephuss]

I think there is probably more truth to the 5th than meets the eye.

The guy, I think we all can agree, was the scape goat for this even though the leak is not what he was charged with.

IMO Bush has never been shy or cared what the people think about his actions as proof just look at his ratings and him still staying in the war. I think he does things regardless of what others think.

It shocked me he did not give a pardon at the time and I think this 5th issue is probably close to the truth of it.

Let me stipulate that I have no facts or proof of this. I am just giving an opinion.

I think he will be pardoned once bush is leaving office.

Also I have to ask, as I honestly do not know. Does Libby fall under the executive privilege stance now. He was either fired or resigned. He is no longer in office and he was found guilty of perjury and obstruction. Does he still fall under the executive position? I really don't know.

Well last week Bush was claiming executive privilege applied to some people last week at the congressional hearings. Harriet Meirs was one of the people and I don't think she still works for Bush. Neither did one of the other people called on by congress.

I think executive privilege really doesn't apply to the Libby case. He is not protecting information vital to national security. If executive privilege is applicable I don't think it should matter if Libby is currently working for the administration or was a past employee. It center around the time he was working there.

[Danny White]

Also I have to ask, as I honestly do not know. Does Libby fall under the executive privilege stance now. He was either fired or resigned. He is no longer in office and he was found guilty of perjury and obstruction. Does he still fall under the executive position? I really don't know.


I think executive privilege really doesn't apply to the Libby case. He is not protecting information vital to national security. If executive privilege is applicable I don't think it should matter if Libby is currently working for the administration or was a past employee. It center around the time he was working there.

It depends on who you ask.

The Bush Administration would certainly say that it most certainly DOES apply to Libby, and that he is still covered by it even though he's no longer with the Admin.

Congressional Democrats will argue otherwise.

If Congress presses the issue, then it will probably have to be decided by the Supreme Court, in which case Libby's 5th Amendment rights may then be exercised to keep him from testifying... but I don't think it's going to get to that.

But typically, Exec Priv still extends to those who are no longer with the Admin as long as the testimony covers things that happened while they were there.

[BrAinPaiNt]

It depends on who you ask.

The Bush Administration would certainly say that it most certainly DOES apply to Libby, and that he is still covered by it even though he's no longer with the Admin.

Congressional Democrats will argue otherwise.

If Congress presses the issue, then it will probably have to be decided by the Supreme Court, in which case Libby's 5th Amendment rights may then be exercised to keep him from testifying... but I don't think it's going to get to that.

But typically, Exec Priv still extends to those who are no longer with the Admin as long as the testimony covers things that happened while they were there.

Thanks for the info.

So at this moment it is an up in the air issue although typically he would still be protected.

Interesting.

[burmafrd]

Wilson never gets called out for all his lies anywhere. The way he was trotted out by NBC and others and they never challenged him. talk about bias.

[bbgun]

This thread is still going? Wake me up when there's a real scandal.

[Danny White]

This thread is still going? Wake me up when there's a real scandal.

Check out my thread on Al Gore eating an endangered fish... now there's a scandal that's rocking Washington!

[BrAinPaiNt]

Wilson never gets called out for all his lies anywhere. The way he was trotted out by NBC and others and they never challenged him. talk about bias.

He got called out on Fox news, and still does.

He gets called out in republican circles.

He gets called out on this board.

He had a PRESIDENTIAL ADMINISTRATION not only call him out but leaked a CIA agents name to the media in order to "call him out"

I think you are swimming in hate on this one if you think he was never called out.

You are more worried about this guy than the idea than the idea that a presidential administration leaked a name out for vindictive reasons.