The following letter was sent by all nine Democrats on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, urging President Bush to suspend Karl Rove’s security clearances pending a thorough investigation.
July 13, 2005
President George W. Bush
The White House
Washington, DC 20500Dear Mr. President:
As members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, one of our critically important responsibilities is to support the individuals who risk their lives as undercover intelligence officers for the United States.
In recent days, White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove has acknowledged, through his attorney, that he disclosed the identity of an intelligence officer to Matt Cooper, a reporter for Time Magazine. Because this officer was undercover, her identity could only be known through access to classified information.
We abhor the disclosure of the identities of undercover officers. Former President Bush has called those who expose our human sources “the most insidious of traitors.” Ten former intelligence officers signed a letter calling the disclosure of this particular officer’s identify a “shameful and unprecedented event in American history.”
There is ample precedent for suspending the security clearances of people under suspicion of leaking classified information. In addition, Special Counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald is investigating whether the leak in this case was a felony under the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. His investigation is still ongoing.
In light of the above and Mr. Rove’s status as a senior official, we urge you to suspend any and all of Mr. Rove’s security clearances at least until the Fitzgerald investigation is complete.
Sincerely,
Jane Harman
Alcee Hastings
Silvestre Reyes
Leonard Boswell
Robert E. (Bud) Cramer, Jr.
Anna G. Eshoo
Rush D. Holt
C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger
John F. Tierney
It’s really hard to argue with this modest, reasonable request… though I’m sure my righty readers will try.
It’s more then reasonable.
But it will not happen.
“It’s really hard to argue with this modest, reasonable request… though I’m sure my righty readers will try.”
What else would you expect from these America-hating apologists for treason, Goldy?
I have seen NOTHING on Sound Politics about L’Affair Rove. Looks like Stefan doesn’t want to touch this with a lineman’s pole. I wouldn’t either if I were him — if you’re a Republican, the less said the better. But plenty will be said despite strenuous GOP attempts at coverup, distraction, and diversion. The MSM are jumping all over it. Apparently the RNC strategy is to claim no laws were broken and rely on other technicalities to keep the dam from bursting until they can pre-empt the front pages with a Supreme Court appointment. Look for a controversial appointment; there’s nothing Bush needs so much right now as an attention grabber to get the press off Rove’s back.
When Patrick Leahy leaked classified intelligence because he was upset with committee discussions …and when Sandy Berger stuffed his undies with Top Secret documents and shredded them at home, and when Valerie Plame told Vanity Fair that she slept with Joe Wilson on their third date and told him she was a covert CIA operative…did they lose their clearances?
Baynative @ 4
“when Sandy Berger stuffed his undies with Top Secret documents and shredded them at home….did [he] lose [his] clearances?”
Yes, as a matter of fact, he did lose his security clearance over that.
“when Valerie Plame told Vanity Fair that she slept with Joe Wilson on their third date … did [she] lose [her] clearances?”
WTF????? The article said no such thing, you idiot (at least read the fucking article if you are going to spew bullshit about it). In any case, if she had said so, how would that violate national security policy?
“when Valerie Plame told Vanity Fair that she was a covert CIA operative…did [she] lose [her] clearances?”
Nope. She might have but, you see, two “senior white house officials” leaked that bit of classified information first. In fact, the Vanity Fair article was prompted by the leaks. It it looking like Rove is one of the two leakers.
So, should Rove lose his security even before he is found guilty? It would not be the first time: in 2000 Ambassador Martin S. Indyk’s lost his security clearance for suspected violations of security standards.
Given Rove’s admission, through his lawyer, it is easy to justify suspending his clearance.
And, probably a good thing for the security of our nation, too.
dj; stop the fake concern over security; its just politics, and yeah, you caught him with his hand in the cookie jar; beyond that, the concern over the intelligence stuff sound phony.
OK…so first we have the whistleblower defense, then we have the “cookie jar”/everybody does it defense…what’s next? The “My dog ate my credibilty” defense?
I guess a little pillow talk with someone she hardly knew on their third date could never have been a security breech. You’re right. What the hell?
* YAWN* More spittle producing ranting I see.
righton @ 6
“stop the fake concern over security; its just politics, and yeah, you caught him with his hand in the cookie jar; beyond that, the concern over the intelligence stuff sound phony.”
To some extent, I feel your pain, righton. When I hear Bush talk about security, it sometimes comes off to me as fake concern. But, if you don’t like what I write, don’t read it. Otherwise, I will kindly ask you to go fuck yourself*. Punk.
The two issues (political and security) are intertwined. One of the most disturbing things about this whole thing is that the White House would systematically cause damage to our WMD intelligence assets for political revenge. Five reporters getting Plame’s identity from two senior White House officials is NOT a slip-of-the-tongue type of breach. Besides damaging Plame’s career, we don’t yet know the extent of damage to other CIA assets. Given how hard it is to put those assets in place, the risk involved to the people, and the security importance of the work, I think the Administration’s actions are unconscionable.
We don’t know the extent of the damage, but let hope we don’t find out in the form of a mushroom cloud.
That last sentence is sardonic, but is it insincere? Sadly, no. A small atomic weapon or a dirty bomb going off in an American City is a real risk. In my opinion many aspects of the Bush Administration’s policies and actions have greatly increased our risk of such an attack. And now, this.
*Special thanks to the President of the Senate, Dick Cheney, for the inspiration.
Baynative @ 8
“I guess a little pillow talk with someone she hardly knew on their third date could never have been a security breech.”
It is certainly possible that pillow talk can result in a security breach. But, there is no indication that the CIA, FBI, or any other law enforcement body thinks she did. Nobody except a few wingnut idiots has accused Plame of violating CIA policies or breaching national security.
However, we do have an investigation into the leak of classified information from Rove and another senior White House official.
“I guess a little pillow talk with someone”
Gosh,
speaking of pillow talk,
I wonder what Gannon/Guckert knows….
Baynative is SO typical of right wing liars/haters. When they have NOTHING they pony up false sex charges against the people they want to smear. You are lower than pond scum, Baynative. You’re a fucking liar.
Of course Rove’s security clearance should be pulled pending the investigation. No one is entitled to a security clearance, and it’s not a property right or personal right subject to due process of law. A security clearance can be suspended on mere suspicion or, for that matter, for no reason at all. Security clearances are granted at the convenience and for the benefit of the government, not for the benefit of the person holding the security clearance, and if there’s any question about a possible breach of security, the government’s interests in security are first and foremost. Rove has no reasonable expectation of keeping his clearance while he is under suspicion and investigation.
wow, “She’s a slut!” is that the best you righties can do?
oh yeah, roves clearance should be pulled of course, and he should be fired.
Its funny, Bush could gain a LOT by making Rove take a bullet on this one, lets see if he has the foresight/guts to do it.
OHHHHHHHH NOOOOOOO…..not those nine democrats!!! gosh…and they are all KNOWN to be so reasonable with no axes to grind, right?
god….will you guys ever grow up? rumor has it that there are a bunch of TERRORISTS out there who are REALLY bombing people.
Its funny, Bush could gain a LOT by making Rove take a bullet on this one, lets see if he has the foresight/guts to do it.
Would he get your vote then Roger? I am sure he sits around thinking how he can get your vote!
Roger Rabbit
I read an excerpt from Joe Wilson’s self promotion. He’s the one that said he was in bed with her on their third or fourth date when she mentioned having a covert assignment.
Why is that a problem? And why would you be so uspet about mentioning sexual activity? I just read an article about the liberals and their SCREW ABSTINENCE festival. Isn’t that part of the agenda?
I think it’s like cool, DUDE.
Sifting through the rightwing rot concerning the Rove affair reveals the simplicity of the Republican worldview: government is nothing but a partisan struggle, not an exercise in upholding human rights while improving the lives of the citizenry. So, Republican actors are excused for any improprieties because they are on the right team–Republicans are all good, Democrats are anti-American evildoers. Instead of focusing on the case at hand, Republicans just squeal about Democrats in wholly unconnected cases who have done wrong.Truth and the rule of law matter not a whit. Seeing the world in black and white terms, with neither nuance nor uncertainty ever clouding the picture, must be most comforting.
I predict here and now, with great certainty that there will be no conviction of Karl Rove of these baseless politicall motivated charges against him. This is just a left wingnut driven media spittle session designed to get them some free press and a ’cause’ to rally around.
Froth on Roger, froth on DJ. No evidence, no proof no conviction – no crime.
reply@20
Oh what a touching little speech. Too bad you leftist actions do not match your words:
Truth and the rule of law matter not a whit.
Yes, those very things DO matter. Has Karl rove been formally charged with ANYTHING? Has he been convicted of anything? You are the typical liberal hypocrit to talk about the rule of law when all your comrade are screaming “Hang em” at the first media reports.
Rove has not been convicted of anything, unlike the crooked Democrat party in St Louis who WERE convicted. And unlike lying liberals, I WILL provide the link:
Democrats CONVICTED of vote fraud (RUle of law lefty – remember?):
http://www.stltoday.com/stltod.....enDocument
Hell hath no fury than a true believer scorned.
Are you proud of your crooked St Louis Democrat party now? Huh? Proud leftist, where are you?
The right has really become the party of failed ideas and their anger is boiling to the surface now.
Look at Bush’s recent dis-approval ratings:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8561443/
Here’s quote from the article:
“It’s a bad period for the president,” said Democratic pollster Peter D. Hart, who conducted the survey with Republican Bill McInturff. Hart attributes Bush’s problems to “one part the economy, two parts Iraq, and one part everything else.” In fact, he is somewhat surprised that Bush’s ratings didn’t increase slightly after the London attacks. “I am sort of surprised we don’t see more a skew toward rallying around anti-terrorism.”
The right is out of bad ideas, like Bush spending his political capital on his 60 cities in 60 days tour to promote SS reform. It went from “Privatization” to “Personal Savings Accounts” to Bush finally admitting that his plan won’t resolve the solvency issues of SS, to finally shelving the the idea.
That is how he spent his political capital. Now with his approval ratings falling off the cliff, Iraq is a mess and plans to “cut and run” before next years mid-term elections, the economy has been flat since the day he’s come in office, and now Rove.
Bush just has a track record of failed leadership no matter what he has attempted. This presidency is NO exception.
Grow up you sheeple.
PBJ @ 22
More words from Bush’s mouth to hang himself, Rove, and your stupid posts.
Here’s a qoute from the misleader of the United States:
When Rove Was Sworn In Bush Stressed That His Administration Must Avoid Even The Appearance Of Ethical Problems. Bush at Senior Staff Swearing in Ceremony: “[W]e must remember the high standards that come with high office. This begins with careful adherence to the rules. I expect every member of this administration to stay well within the boundaries that define legal and ethical conduct. This means avoiding even the appearance of problems. This means checking and, if need be, double-checking that the rules have been obeyed. This means never compromising those rules. No one in the White House should be afraid to confront the people they work for, for ethical concerns. And no one should hesitate to confront me, as well.” [Public Papers of the Presidents, 1/29/01]
Do you think Rove “checked and double checked those rules?” No.
Do you think Rove “compromised” rules when he blabbed about a CIA operative? Yes.
Should the president follow his promise to “fire” anyone who “leaked” a CIA officers name? Noticed he didn’t say broke any laws, just LEAKING their name would be sufficient grounds for termination.
Promises made. Promises Broken.
pbj @ 22 and 24
I actually agree with you that Rove shouldn’t be hung unless and until he’s indicted and convicted. Let due process run its course. Calling for his head right now may be a bit premature. Naturally, I don’t mind seeing him twist in the wind in the meantime. With regard to Democrats who have violated laws of some sort of another, the authorities need to go after them. All I’m saying is that neither partisan affiliation nor acting in the name of the cause should excuse illegal or otherwise wrongful act. The sense I get from your posts is that Republicans can do no wrong so long as they act to promote their party or their leader.
HOORAY! It’s PEANUTBUTTERJELLYTIME
peanutbutterjellytime…!Hey, pbj, go make me a sandwich. I mean, since we all know the only other thing you’re good for is spouting shit…
All these ‘outrage’ Democrat ought to be mad about Sandy Burgler who never even got punished for stealing classified documents!
reply@25,
More hot air. How does this even relat to the thread topic?
reply@27,
All I’m saying is that neither partisan affiliation nor acting in the name of the cause should excuse illegal or otherwise wrongful act.
You obviously haven’t been reading my posts for very long. I was one of the first to advocate that Spokane Mayor Jim West get what is coming to him.
The sense I get from your posts is that Republicans can do no wrong so long as they act to promote their party or their leader.
Funny, I get that sense about you. You first of all claim to be for the “rule of Law” yet join the bandwagon advocating a lynching because it is someone in the opposite party. If you truly beleived in the rule of law, you’d be advising caution until the investigation is completed.
reply@26,
More words from Bush’s mouth to hang himself, Rove, and your stupid posts.
Here’s a qoute from the misleader of the United States:
When Rove Was Sworn In Bush Stressed That His Administration Must Avoid Even The Appearance Of Ethical Problems. Bush at Senior Staff Swearing in Ceremony: “[W]e must remember the high standards that come with high office. This begins with careful adherence to the rules. I expect every member of this administration to stay well within the boundaries that define legal and ethical conduct. This means avoiding even the appearance of problems. This means checking and, if need be, double-checking that the rules have been obeyed. This means never compromising those rules. No one in the White House should be afraid to confront the people they work for, for ethical concerns. And no one should hesitate to confront me, as well.” [Public Papers of the Presidents, 1/29/01]
And Clinton promised he would have the most ethical administration ever. He turned out to have the many crooks and he himself was impeached for lying under oath. Please do not lecture me because you want Bush to jump on your bandwagon – he won’t. It is because until PROVEN guilty, a man is innocent. I know in Socialist Russia that isn’t how it works and I know how you socialists enjoy your publig hangings without any fair hearings, but this is America. When you have PROOF to meet the standard of LAW – come talk to me.
@31
Man, do you read? I said, “Rove shouldn’t be hung unless and until he is indicted and convicted. Let due process run its course.” That seems to be “advising caution until the investigation is completed.” The problem here seems to be one of communication . . .
PBJ @ 30
OK, I see I have to s-p-e-l-l it out for you.
Your comment at 22:
“Has Karl rove been formally charged with ANYTHING? Has he been convicted of anything? You are the typical liberal hypocrit to talk about the rule of law when all your comrade are screaming “Hang em” at the first media reports.”
OK, those were your words, get ready to take responsiblity for them.
Here is my reply to your wonderment about being ‘formaly charged’ or ‘convicted.’ OK, are you r-e-a-d-y?
My response using Bush’s own words, OK? Got that?
“I expect every member of this administration to stay well within the boundaries that define legal and ethical conduct. This means avoiding even the appearance of problems.”
Now where you get confused, el rotto, is the “ethical” part. I know this word is probably not in your lexicon, or mental dictionary, but it means doing the right thing. I see I’m losing you; think of it this way, doing the opposite of what you would normally do. That’s doing the right thing even if there is no specific LAW saying that’s what you have to do.
At the very least this is what Karl did. OK? With me so far? So if Karl “leaked” the name, and Bush said he’d FIRE anyone for “leaking” the CIA agenst name, shouldn’t the Bush keep his promise. Thus, suspending Rove’s security clearance. See how this ties in with the thread topic?
OK, it’s arts and crafts time, they’re going to make macaroni art. Go on now.
pbj @ 31
“If you truly beleived in the rule of law, you’d be advising caution until the investigation is completed.”
What the fuck??????? Since when does the rule of law prevent us from discussing the investigation. Is it illegal to discuss potential crimes and punishment?
Nobody here has called for an extra-judicial lynching of Rove or his co-conspirator. We all want due process, a fair trial, and a just verdict.
Get off your high horse and get out of the way, please, you are blocking the path to the gallows. . . . :-)
General BSer@33,
Now where you get confused, el rotto, is the “ethical” part. I know this word is probably not in your lexicon, or mental dictionary, but it means doing the right thing. I see I’m losing you; think of it this way, doing the opposite of what you would normally do. That’s doing the right thing even if there is no specific LAW saying that’s what you have to do.
You mean like telling the truth when under oath – even if it is about sex? Or like when Clinton stated his administration was going to be the most ethical of all yet he had about 14 of his cronies involved in scandals…and counting (e.g. Sandy Burglar).
At the very least this is what Karl did. OK? With me so far? So if Karl “leaked” the name, and Bush said he’d FIRE anyone for “leaking” the CIA agenst name, shouldn’t the Bush keep his promise. Thus, suspending Rove’s security clearance. See how this ties in with the thread topic?
Karl Rove did not “leak ” her name. He discussed her as “Wilson’s Wife”. And he never stated she was a covert agent – which she wasn’t. Rove didn’t know what the hell she did there other than it had something to with CPD of WMD.
OK, it’s arts and crafts time, they’re going to make macaroni art.
Will they change your diapers during the macaroni art period too? It is getting full again.
reply@35,
What the fuck??????? Since when does the rule of law prevent us from discussing the investigation. Is it illegal to discuss potential crimes and punishment?
Nobody here has called for an extra-judicial lynching of Rove or his co-conspirator.
Do you really want me to go back and quote the posts that say such things as “Hang him” etc? Your lies are so transparent.
pbj @ 37
Sure, show me where people have called for an extra-judicial lynching. Simple calls for Rove to be hanged are not extra-judicial as we don’t hang people for treason unless they are convicted. In the same way, when someone calls out to “throw his ass in the slammer,” is not a call for extra-judicial incarceration. (There are a small group of NeoCons who believe in extra-judicial incarceration, however).
How ’bout this:
HEY YOU LIBERALS, PROGRESSIVES, DEMOCRATS, GREENS, LEFTISTS, AND OTHER VERMON, DO ANY OF YOU SERIOUSLY THINK THAT ROVE SHOULD BE LYNCHED WITHOUT DUE PROCESS????
Have a field day with those who respond in the affirmative. And, shut the fuck up about the rest of us, eh?
pbj @ 36
Karl Rove did not “leak ” her name. He discussed her as “Wilson’s Wife”. And he never stated she was a covert agent – which she wasn’t. Rove didn’t know what the hell she did there other than it had something to with CPD of WMD.
The law (Intelligence Identities Protection Act) states:
“Whoever, having or having had authorized access to classified information that identifies a covert agent, intentionally discloses any information identifying such covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such covert agent and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent’s intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.”
Where, oh where, does it say “identify by name”? You’re spouting half-baked GOP talking points. How does “Joe Wilson’s wife”, who, by the way, was known by his last name in any event, not identify her?
And how do you know she wasn’t a covert agent? You don’t get to make that decision, nor does Bill O’Reilly, Michelle Malkin, Sean Hannity, et al. The CIA gets to make that decision—and it’s their prerogative to make that decision above and beyond and “must serve overseas in the past five years, etc.” one keeps hearing the right-wing pundits bandying about. Furthermore, their decision as to her status would be (are you ready for this?) CLASSIFIED, as are pretty much all matters pertaining to CIA employees—even the secretaries answering the phones.
So, there is no way that you, or any right-wing pundit, could possibly know without a doubt that she was not covert, unless they had access to CLASSIFIED information.
Which begs the question: how did they (or by extension you) get that information.
And further: if you are certain as to the veracity of your claims, under what authority would you have the right to divulge such classified information (i.e. your statement of “fact” that she was not covert)?
PGJ @ 36
OK, it’s official your mentally deranged. If you think that lying about an extra marital affair, and lying about going to war or selling arms to Iran are on the same level, then there is no way to have honest dialogue with you.
Bottom line: President Clinton did something you never did — got his apple polished at work. BFD. I purposely didn’t say Clinton lied about getting a hummer because I was using you as in comparison, since you’ve never had a BJ, but by your posting I know you’re pathological liar. So, what’s it like to be a virgin at your advanced age?
Dr. E @ 39,
Nice post!
To add a bit: what we know about Plame’s (or should I say Ms. Wilson’s, or is that Joe’s Wife’s?) identity was given by a CIA official and reported by a Knight Ridder News release:
Dr. E @ 39
While you’ve undoubtedly made the best post of the day, there is the one weasel word that Rove’s lawyer has already tossed out and that is “knowing.” I think the right is going to jump on “knowing” the same way Clinton parsed “is.”
But, in the end, it only takes one presidential pardon and Rove is forever off the hook.
More importantly, Progressives have to remain focused on the real issue related to the outing by Bush’s top aide. And that is the false premise Bush used to go to war in Iraq. Joe Wilson said there were no yellow cake sales and the White House, through an orchestrated effort, punished Joe Wilson for not going with the Bush plan.
Correction @ 42
At the end I meant to say “Bush lie.” Not Bush plan. Although they tend to be one in the same.
APB on PBJ!!
If anyone sees PBJ will you please pass along this message. Thanks.
PBJ
Are you going to answer my challenge on the “Dems to introduce Resolution of Inquiry into Plame’s outing” thread? Posts 60-64
Thanks,
GBS
1.) Wilson Insisted That The Vice President’s Office Sent Him To Niger:
Wilson Said He Traveled To Niger At CIA Request To Help Provide Response To Vice President’s Office. “In February 2002, I was informed by officials at the Central Intelligence Agency that Vice President Dick Cheney’s office had questions about a particular intelligence report. … The agency officials asked if I would travel to Niger to check out the story so they could provide a response to the vice president’s office.” (Joseph C. Wilson, Op-Ed, “What I Didn’t Find In Africa,” The New York Times, 7/6/03)
Joe Wilson: “[W]hat They Did, What The Office Of The Vice President Did, And, In Fact, I Believe Now From Mr. Libby’s Statement, It Was Probably The Vice President Himself …” (CNN’s “Late Edition,” 8/3/03)
Vice President Cheney: “I Don’t Know Joe Wilson. I’ve Never Met Joe Wilson. … And Joe Wilson – I Don’t [Know] Who Sent Joe Wilson. He Never Submitted A Report That I Ever Saw When He Came Back.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 9/14/03)
CIA Director George Tenet: “In An Effort To Inquire About Certain Reports Involving Niger, CIA’s Counter-Proliferation Experts, On Their Own Initiative, Asked An Individual With Ties To The Region To Make A Visit To See What He Could Learn.” (Central Intelligence Agency, “Statement By George J. Tenet, Director Of Central Intelligence,” Press Release, 7/11/03)
2.) Wilson Claimed The Vice President And Other Senior White House Officials Were Briefed On His Niger Report:
“[Wilson] Believed That [His Report] Would Have Been Distributed To The White House And That The Vice President Received A Direct Response To His Question About The Possible Uranium Deal.” (Senate Select Committee On Intelligence, “Report On The U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Assessments On Iraq,” 7/7/04)
The Senate Select Committee On Intelligence Reported That The Vice President Was Not Briefed On Wilson’s Report. “Conclusion 14. The Central Intelligence Agency should have told the Vice President and other senior policymakers that it had sent someone to Niger to look into the alleged Iraq-Niger uranium deal and it should have briefed the Vice President on the former ambassador’s findings.” (Senate Select Committee On Intelligence, “Report On The U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Assessments On Iraq,” 7/7/04)
CIA Director George Tenet: “Because This Report, In Our View, Did Not Resolve Whether Iraq Was Or Was Not Seeking Uranium From Abroad, It Was Given A Normal And Wide Distribution, But We Did Not Brief It To The President, Vice-President Or Other Senior Administration Officials.” (Central Intelligence Agency, “Statement By George J. Tenet, Director Of Central Intelligence,” Press Release, 7/11/03)
pbj @ 45
Who give a fuck who Wilson was hired by, who he though recommended him, and what Wilson though about who saw his report?
All that is completely irrelevant. The fact is, the Administration DID notice Wilson’s NYT column, and Rove punished him for it by outing his wife. Rove is a criminal!
It is not even important that his NYT column was correct. What if it had been incorrect? Is that justification for destroying the carreer of a CIA asset, endangering the lives of other agents, and divulging classified information?
Who do you think the other high-level administration criminal is?
BREAKING NEWS – REHNQUIST TO STAY ON COURT
KOMO 4 TV news just announced that Chief Justice Rehnquist issued a statement saying he will NOT retire from the Supreme Court.
CNN 7/14/05
BLITZER: But the other argument that’s been made against you is that you’ve sought to capitalize on this extravaganza, having that photo shoot with your wife, who was a clandestine officer of the CIA, and that you’ve tried to enrich yourself writing this book and all of that.
What do you make of those accusations, which are serious accusations, as you know, that have been leveled against you.
WILSON: My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity.
BLITZER: But she hadn’t been a clandestine officer for some time before that?
WILSON: That’s not anything that I can talk about. And, indeed, I’ll go back to what I said earlier, the CIA believed that a possible crime had been committed, and that’s why they referred it to the Justice Department.
She was not a clandestine officer at the time that that article in Vanity Fair appeared. And I have every right to have the American public know who I am and not to have myself defined by those who would write the sorts of things that are coming out, being spewed out of the mouths of the RNC…
BLITZER: Who did you vote for in 2000?
WILSON: In 2000? I voted for Al Gore.
Baynative @ 48
Who gives a fuck who Wilson voted for? Is that a valid reason for Rove and another White House senior official to out a CIA agent, potentially endanger other CIA operatives, and hurt the efforts of the U.S. in the war on terrorism?
What lame-ass scruples you have.
Today in the Associated Press: Presidential confidant Karl Rove testified to a grand jury that he learned the identity of a CIA operative originally from journalists, then informally discussed the information with a Time magazine reporter days before the story broke, according to a person briefed on the testimony.
But at the same time, Wilson acknowledged his wife was no longer in an undercover job at the time Novak’s column first identified her. “My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity,” he said.
But then the truth doesn’t affect lefties. They want Rove’s head no matter that he didn’t reveal it first. So if it wasn’t Rove who leaked it, what do you all have to say? Just checking.
Maybe it was Judith Miller?
So if Rove says something to a grand jury that makes it true, Puddy? Or is it conceivable Rove might lie … yes, I understand the latest RNC spin is that journalists leaked Plame’s identity to … journalists. These same folks also told us Iraq had WMDs and links to Al Qaeda … that middle class folks would get most of Bush’s tax cuts … now why don’t I believe them, hmmmm??? Puddy, you’re nothing but an apologist for treason.
Puddy @ 51
“Presidential confidant Karl Rove testified to a grand jury that he learned the identity of a CIA operative originally from journalists
There were 5 journalists and two senior WH officials involved. Supposedly Novak first told Rove that Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA (we’ll see!). And, Rove passed the information on to other reporters. I wonder who the unnamed WH official is and what his/her role is?
As far as Plame’s status. What you or I think is irrelevant. It is what the CIA thinks that is important. See my comment here
RR: Are you referring to Democratic testimony? If so I’ll agree with you. Regarding the tax cut, did you see the projected deficit will drop by ~$100MM this year.
DJ said “(we’ll see!)” That’s what I have been saying all along, we’ll see. Your side wants to convict him (Goldy posts) before the SP finishes his work!
PudDarrell @ 50:
“But at the same time, Wilson acknowledged his wife was no longer in an undercover job at the time Novak’s column first identified her. ‘My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity,’ he said.”
Yikes, that’s awful reading comprehension. Go back to 48 and read the whole exchange between Wilson and Wolf Blitzer. Wilson wasn’t saying that his wife wasn’t undercover when Novak identified her, he was pointing out that once Novak identified her publicly, her identity was blown and her clandestine work was at an end. You support that?
Uhhh David, I am so impressed and glad you can read. I used the AP on purpose, since RR and others can’t trust CNN. Regarding clandestine work, I thought she was outed by Alrich Ames in 1994 to the Russians per the New York Times. You lefties have to do your homework!!!
In 1997, Plame moved back to the Washington area, partly because (as was recently reported in The New York Times) the C.I.A. suspected that her name may have been on a list given to the Russians by the double agent Aldrich Ames in 1994.
See
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10.....1KRIS.html – You may have to pay to view it, but that’s your loss.
ABSTRACT – Nicholas D Kristof Op-Ed column on impact of revealing identity of CIA agent Valerie Plame; asserts that Democrats are exaggerating impact while Republicans are downplaying it; claims that Plame’s intelligence connections were ‘known a bit’ in Washington and she no longer performed dangerous, covert operations; scores journalist Robert Novak for revealing Plame’s identity
As Mrs. Wilson rose in the agency, she was already in transition away from undercover work to management, and to liaison roles with other intelligence agencies. So this year, even before she was outed, she was moving away from “noc” — which means non-official cover, like pretending to be a business executive. After passing as an energy analyst for Brewster-Jennings & Associates, a C.I.A. front company, she was switching to a new cover as a State Department official, affording her diplomatic protection without having “C.I.A.” stamped on her forehead.
But just for you David here it is from Missouri: foi.missouri.edu/iipa/secrets.html
While you are at it David check these stories about how Ames outed Valerie Plame Wilson!
New York Times, 22 Feb 1994, “Ex-Branch Leader of C.I.A. is Charged as a Russian Agent”
Washington Post, 23 Feb 1994, “CIA Officer Charged With Selling Secrets”
Washington Post, 25 Feb 1994, “Accused Couple Came from Different Worlds”
Washington Post, 27 Dec 1994, “Ames Says CIA Does Not Believe He Has Told All”
Los Angeles Times, 22 Oct 1994, “Wife of CIA double agent sentenced to 5 years in prison”
Security Awareness Bulletin, 4-94, “An Assessment of the Aldrich Ames Espionage Case”
Last but not least I suggest you search these David:
&
nsi.org/Library/Espionage/Hitzreport.html &
rf-web.tamu.edu/security/secguide/Spystory/Ames.htm &
http://www.agtimes.com/boards/.....ce71651260
Good Night David!
dj @ 49-
dj, dj, dj lighten up your hateful attitude for just long enough to read the point of the exchange. I’m sorry I didn’t cut off the voting part that upset you so…
Here, I’ll help you understand the Q&A I was referring to:
BLITZER: But the other argument that’s been made against you is that you’ve sought to capitalize on this extravaganza, having that photo shoot with your wife, who was a clandestine officer of the CIA, and that you’ve tried to enrich yourself writing this book and all of that.
What do you make of those accusations, which are serious accusations, as you know, that have been leveled against you.
WILSON: My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity.
BLITZER: But she hadn’t been a clandestine officer for some time before that?
WILSON: That’s not anything that I can talk about. And, indeed, I’ll go back to what I said earlier, the CIA believed that a possible crime had been committed, and that’s why they referred it to the Justice Department. She was not a clandestine officer at the time that that article in Vanity Fair appeared.
Good Morning David, RR, windie, GBS, and others. I suppose you are still researching those links. Sure is amazing when the Democrats and their right hand pivot people the MSM claim faulty memories over their own articles!!!
Jane Harman: Standard tax and spend liberal. Here record is here: http://www.vote-smart.org/issu.....d=H0525103
She votes with the American Civil Liberties Union 73 percent of the time. She opposes military patrols on our borders to battle drugs and terrorism. Even Hilary suggested that one. She votes 100 percent with the National Education Association. And how are minorities performing in the inner city schools? She supports the United Nations and opposed withholding back payments. She wants the US to abandon the US Constitution in favor of the UN Charter just like Hilary Clinton. She supported the campaign finance “reform” measures that represent wholesale attacks on the First Amendment. She opposed legislation prohibiting gun manufacturers and sellers from being sued over misuse of firearms. She opposes reporting of illegal aliens who received hospital treatment in the United States. She approved extending immigrant residency rules. She votes with the Federation for American Immigration Reform 0 percent of the time. She opposed banning human cloning. She opposed making it a crime to harm a fetus in the commission of other crimes. She opposed funding for health providers who refuse to perform abortions. She opposed banning partial-birth abortions.
PacMan, I will apologize just in case there is some emesis over Alcee Hastings. Judge Hastings was impeached and removed from his position as a United States District Court Judge in 1989. Later, ACLU of Florida honors Alcee Hastings. Now that’s amazing.
Silvestre Reyes:Standard tax and spend liberal. Here record is here: http://www.vote-smart.org/bio.php?can_id=BC031887.
He opposes military patrols on our borders to battle drugs and terrorism. 79 percent of Americans want this in a poll. Even Hilary suggested that one.
You all can do the same thing visiting http://www.vote-smart.org, and searching the Internet on these great nine singatories! I just did three in 15 minutes and found a treasure trove of information.
Goldy, I don’t mind performing the Seattle Slimes, the Puke-Indigestioner, Aroma Tribune, and other WA MSM press research. Maybe they need lessons in Internet searches.
BTW I am glad they captured the suspected chemist in the London bombings in Egypt.
I see Goldy has started another Rove flame post.
Puddy, PacMan has no problems with the Alcee Hastings post. I knew about his impeachment proceedings.
GBS @ 42
You are absolutely right, and it’s both the fact that legalistic parsing will almost certainly be a factor and that the presidential pardon is a possibility that makes this whole situation so pathetic. To really make sure that justice is served (that is, should it be proven that Rove has broken the law), several people will have to be removed from office, including the POTUS and VPOTUS.
All of which, of course has gotten me thinking about the timing of impeachment proceedings, were they to happen—and it’s probably a bit premature to be talking about such things, but I wouldn’t doubt that Democratic strategists have been mulling this over. They’ve got to be thinking about the importance of making gains in the 2006 midterm elections to regain control over both houses of Congress — or at least just the Senate. Were they able to remove both the POTUS and VPOTUS through impeachment, the succession, as it currently stands, would still remain in Repub. hands, thus making partisan pardons available.
Now that I’ve brought up the topic of pardons, one of our GOP friends will probably bring up Clinton and Marc Rich, which, to nip that one in the bud, I don’t think is even remotely germane to the matter at hand, i.e. Iraq.
Impeachment hearings? Ha ha ha ha ha. Over what? Please tell me so I can decide my support these “hearings”?
APB on Roger Rabbit,
Has anyone seen Roger Rabbit? I have a question for him.
Roger –
Please provide proof that anyone here ever accused Wilson of being a pedophile or child molester (the accusation you made in the “Rove Confirmed Plame Was CIA” thread @22). It should be quit easy to go back and copy the posts.
I am STILL waiting…