Gee, that quickie of a Supreme Court appointment really did a great job knocking “Rove-gate” out of the headlines, huh? Washington Post, page one, top of the fold:
A classified State Department memorandum central to a federal leak investigation contained information about CIA officer Valerie Plame in a paragraph marked “(S)” for secret, a clear indication that any Bush administration official who read it should have been aware the information was classified, according to current and former government officials.
…
The paragraph identifying her as the wife of former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV was clearly marked to show that it contained classified material at the “secret” level, two sources said. The CIA classifies as “secret” the names of officers whose identities are covert, according to former senior agency officials.
Hmm. I wonder who leaked this memo to the WaPo? Kos has a suggestion:
It’s the CIA. Funny how those guys don’t like their covers blown.
Heh. Bush’s attempt to kick Rove off the headlines is failing.
According to one of the flag bearers of the “Progressives”, EJ Dionne,
http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....02091.html
“Roberts was, in short, the shrewdest choice President Bush could have made”. So tell us more about why this supposed rushing of the nomination has got you so worked up. You guys can’t have it both ways: either he rushed it (implying he did a half assed job) or he made the shrewdest choice possible. Pick one and run with it.
zip @2,
And the topic is… Plame’s identity was a secret!
So you’re sticking with “he rushed it”? Just checking.
Ignorant Jackass @2, 4
It’s a false dichotomy.
And the topic is “Plame’s identity was a secret!”
Plame’s ID was as secret as Goldy’s. “Rove-Gate”…NOT. “FABRI-GATE”…far more likely.
@6
You mean Goldy’s name was marked “Secret” by the CIA? I didn’t know that — now you just may have a federal investigator crawling up your ass…
Bush rushed in with the shrewdest choice possible. Happy now?
The Rove scandal is too big to be dropped by MSM. But who is Judith Miller protecting? I am anxious to see who and how many get indicted.
2, 4
Bush is a lame brain. Rove will be back in the headlines by next week. What Bush should have done was appointed Judge Judy to the SCOTUS to gin up a controversy that would have buried the Rove story for months. And, of course, there was no danger of Judy actually getting on the Court because she’d have zilch chance of being confirmed. Then, after everyone was exhausted by the Judy fight, he could have slipped in a real jackass.
6
So which right-wing blog does this vacuous troll’s thinking for him? Just curious. He sounds like a cuckoo clock.
How does a covert CIA agent keep her emploment a secret by taking friends to lunch at the commisary at Langley?
Baynative @ 11
“How does a covert CIA agent keep her emploment a secret by taking friends to lunch at the commisary at Langley? “
More of your wingnut talking points, Baynative?
By the way, do you get paid to post by the word, by the comment, or by the hour?
I get it…if you support a party with no ideas and no direction, you can always feel good by insulting others.
Baynative @ 13
“I get it…if you support a party with no ideas and no direction, you can always feel good by insulting others. “
No, I usually insult people when they say stoopid things. In fact, my comment was expressing skepticism about the “lunch at the commissary” suggestion.
By the way, did you read the memo from the eleven former intelligence officers, sent to the leaders in Congress? It is here.
As far as my second point @ 12, I really am curious about the going rate for paid trolling.
I’m glad you all think this is a good continuing story. I’ll be curious what you say once it disappears, and Rove is still advising in the WH.
The memo was marked secret, and her name is mentioned in it. That doesn’t mean she was a covert agent – she hadn’t been in the field for 5 years. (That’s what the law says, in case you feel like pointing out the irrelevancy of it.)
The CIA has a large constuiency that is threated big time by the Bush administration. They have no problem working actively to undermine them. Keep this in mind when reading stories about leaked memos. Follow the money – who gains by this story coming out? Is it really what it says it is?
Of course, for those like Charmin, it is just much easier to call everyone stupid than to actually argue a point.
Baynative @ 6
“FABRI-GATE” That’s pretty funny. Try this one on for size; it’s far more accurate.
“Traitor-Gate” How President Bush lied our way to war.
DJ didn’t someone accuse PacMAn of the smae thing? Is this SOP for people who are from the Bay area?
kudos to Janet S for her “CIA-Conspiracy theory”
Its insane of course, but its nice to see people really grasping.
I want an investigation into the Deocrat liberal traitor that is leaking secret classified memos to the press!
GBS: Again you say Bush lied. If he lied then many other countries lied about the same thing. Bill Clinton in 2003 on Larry King lied about it too, right?
GBS please navigate to http://www.abc.net.au/news/new.....418907.htm – navigate to the related audio section on the right and click on the audio links under John Howard. He tells the stoopid reporter how it really is!
Excerpt: “He says the motivation is the same as that which prompted the October 2002 bombing of a nightclub in Bali, where 202 people died, including 88 Australians, which was before the March 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq.
“I remind you that terrorist attacks occurred before Iraq was on the radar screen, and those people who argue that this is really because of Iraq simply ignore those facts,” Mr Howard told reporters.
I know you dislike GWB. But the Bush lied people died is a MOveOn.Org playbook line
As I remember the libs had no problem with Loral selling classified missle guidance technology to China. They had no problem with computer hard drives disapperaing from Los Alamos Nuclear Labs or Bruce Babbit burning the place down.
They had no problem with Clinton’s head of the CIA, John Deutsch taking his laptop home loaded with Top Secret Docs and then losing a box of floppy discs with file copies.
They had no problem with Patrick Leahy leaking intelligence committee secret records to press when he got his panties in a bunch over losing power in mid term elections.
And they weren’t even bothered by Sandy Berger stealing and shredding Top Secret documents to protect Clinotn and the prevaricating Richard Clarke.
But, now they have a problem with this non-story which itself proves it is a non story. Libs are mildly (at best) concerned with security and fervently supported John Kerry’s statement that talk of terrorism was exaggerated.
So, let’s move on, get back on point and talk about what’s really important; abortion.
Janet S @ 15
“That doesn’t mean she was a covert agent – she hadn’t been in the field for 5 years. (That’s what the law says, in case you feel like pointing out the irrelevancy of it.)”
Oh? And how do you know that she hasn’t been to the field for 5 years. The CIA, apparently, disagrees with you–hence the grand jury investigation into a White House leak.
But, even if Plame had not been a covert field agent (thus precluding prosecution under the Intelligence Identities Protection Act), outing a CIA agent whose employment status is classified likely violates other laws (Espionage Act, conspiracy, fraud, and theft of public property). It is almost certainly the case, by Rove’s statements, that Rove violated the Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement he signed. Finally, it may well be that Rove is charged with perjury for lying to the FBI. Obviously, if there is “nothing to it,” the grand jury (two years old and going strong) would not supoena Air Force one phone and paper records and throws a journalist in jail.
“The CIA has a large constuiency that is threated big time by the Bush administration.”
Ooooooohhhh. . . now we have a CIA conspiracy! Who are these constituents? (Communists???? :-) )
“They have no problem working actively to undermine them.”
Really? And what is your evidence for this?
“Keep this in mind when reading stories about leaked memos.”
You are confused. It is the contents of the memo that is the issue. It was not leaked to the grand jury; they acquired it via a subpoena.
“Follow the money – who gains by this story coming out? Is it really what it says it is?”
Certainly, this news will sell some papers. But, we can only hope that the big winners will be the American people.
“Of course, for those like Charmin, it is just much easier to call everyone stupid than to actually argue a point. “
I don’t call everyone stupid. And, I’ll not call you stupid here—in this post you sound more paranoid delusional.
Puddybud @ 17
“DJ didn’t someone accuse PacMAn of the smae thing? Is this SOP for people who are from the Bay area? ”
I don’t remember who suggested Pacman was a paid troll (I am quite sure it was not me), or whether they had any idea that Pacman lives in the Bay area.
In fact, is it even established that Baynative now lives in the Bay area?
Hey, Baynative, come-on man, what do professional trolls get paid these days?
pbj @ 19
“I want an investigation into the Deocrat liberal traitor that is leaking secret classified memos to the press! “
Me too! Perhaps we can get Fitzgerald working on it right after Rove is swinging by his neck. . . .
So then your argument is that Clinton did it? Beautiful.
Further proof Goldy’s/Dem’s/liberal’s empty heads make good ECHO CHAMBERS…
“ ROLL CALL reports: “In a set of talking points issued Wednesday morning, the Senate Democratic leadership urged rank-and-file Senators to continue spotlighting Rove’s involvement in the leaking of CIA operative Valerie Plame’s identity. ‘A Supreme Court nominee will not distract the country from the growing credibility problem at the White House,’ Democrats were told to echo.” “
Echo, echo, echo, echo, echo…
You dimwits, numnuts and Kool-Aid drinkers take orders really well…HEIL Howard!!
“
I am loving this whole scandal. It is so fun to watch the left-wing praise and defend the CIA. It comes across just like the “support the troops, hate the war”. Unless the troops under Rumsfield’s command splish-splash on the Quran at Gitmo. See a pattern here? Keep it up…..PLEASE!!
Goldy: Why not put a blog article on Bernard Goldberg’s new book: “100 People Are Screwing Up America”? Are you afraid of the truth coming out, where Michael Moore is #1, Al Franken is #37?
Remember he described himself as a “old fashioned John Kennedy liberal” in his first Book “BIAS”. Doubt most lefties read this book. He reiterates this on the CBN web site. This is what I told Priscilla about me. The Democratic party left us.
http://www.nationalreview.com/.....180814.asp
http://www.harperacademic.com/.....0060761288
Excerpt: “This is serious stuff for sure. But Goldberg will also make you laugh as he harpoons scoundrels like the congresswoman who thinks there aren’t enough hurricanes named after black people, and the environmentalist to the stars who yells at total strangers driving SUVs — even though she tools around the country in a gas-guzzling private jet.” – Typical screams of the lefty environmentalists. Hey PacMan what hurricane (himmicane) names would you suggest!
Please Goldy, take a gamble and open an entry!!!!
Baynative @ 21,
“But, now they have a problem with this non-story which itself proves it is a non story.”
Oh right. QED
“Libs are mildly (at best) concerned with security and fervently supported John Kerry’s statement that talk of terrorism was exaggerated.”
Are you fucking nuts? Bush’s actions have increased the number of terrorists and the risk of such attacks. It is only a matter of time before they attack here. Then, the White House leaked information that outs a CIA agent and shuts down a counter-WMD intelligence operation (probably dealing with radioactive materials). It will take the CIA years to recover from this blow and rebuild an infrastructure in this area.
Given that terrorist attacks are inevitable here, I strongly support the use of covert operations to keep radioactive materials out of the hand of terrorists.
Why would the White House pull the carpet out from under the CIAs efforts in this arena?
Janet S @ 15 wants a different set of facts:
“The memo was marked secret, and her name is mentioned in it.”
Actually, the specific paragraph with her name in it was marked “secret.”
“That doesn’t mean she was a covert agent”
As far as we know, Plame was a non-official cover (NOC) officer working on WMD. Published reports indicate that along with the Brewster-Jennings cover, “she used other false identities and affiliations when working overseas.”
Pretending that she had no cover (and asserting it as fact) is pure partisanship, which of course is more important to some of you than supporting our intelligence community. Note that it’s unlikely the CIA, FBI and Justice Department (Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald) would be investigating this matter if she wasn’t under cover to begin with!
“she hadn’t been in the field for 5 years.”
Oh, come on. This is unsupported wishful thinking by Repubican apologists who think political retaliation is more important than national security. If you can cite her private CIA records to prove she hadn’t traveled overseas since 1998, get back to us.
Puddybud @ 27
Goldy has asked us to remain reasonabally on topic (while recognizing that the comments will naturally wander around the main topic). You are raising an unrelated topic anew.
Take it to the open thread. Your post @ 27 does not belong here!
This is Goldy’s blog, and we are guests here, so please have a bit of respect for one of the few guidelines Goldy asks us to follow.
@30
its not retaliation thats important to them, its unthinking zombielike loyalty to their masters.
To them, retaliation isn’t even an issue. The outing was right because Rove did it.
ProudAss @26,
Actually, they’re echoing me. (What… you think I’m not smart enough to come up with the same strategy independently?)
Pudding @28
Because Goldberg is a fucking whack-job. You want to talk about his so-called “book”, then take it to the open thread. There’s a fresh one coming tomorrow night.
Baynative @ 21:
“As I remember the libs had no problem with [various security breaches]”
You remember wrong.
“Libs are mildly (at best) concerned with security”
Right-wing trolls are mildly (at best) concerned with accuracy and honesty.
“So, let’s move on, get back on point and talk about what’s really important; abortion.”
LOL! :)
NoWonder @ 27
“I am loving this whole scandal. It is so fun to watch the left-wing praise and defend the CIA.”
I am finding leakergate very interesting, too. It is amusing to see wingnuts place loyalty to Rove above a serious national security issue. I mean, what the hell, the wingnuts suddenly don’t feel it is important to protect our CIA assets who are working on WMD issues? What a bunch of hypocritical fucks.
windie @ 32:
“To them, retaliation isn’t even an issue. The outing was right because Rove did it.”
You’re right! That’s a much better explanation for the way Republicans have closed ranks around Rove: they think political loyalty is more important than national security. I’m not sure whether they acknowledge the retaliation (and accept it as standard operating procedure) or just ignore it entirely because it doesn’t fit their frame of the facts.
@35 remember tho! The CIA are evil anti-Bush conspirators!
Janet S and others have said so!
@36 well if you read the quotes, I think they don’t. Or they minimize it.
Thats why they keep blabbing about her not being undercover, or the CIA complaining because they hate Bush, or bringing up distractions…
Puddy @ b20 “I know you dislike GWB. But the Bush lied people died is a MOveOn.Org playbook line.”
Is there a trademark on the truth?
Bush Lied People Died
Rove is a traitor
Iraq is another Civil War with American soldiers caught in the crossfire
Support the troops, Impeach Bush for starting an illegal war
These are not playbook lines. These are simple truths.
reply@39,
Puddy @ b20 “I know you dislike GWB. But the Bush lied people died is a MOveOn.Org playbook line.”
Is there a trademark on the truth?
Bush Lied People Died
Rove is a traitor
Iraq is another Civil War with American soldiers caught in the crossfire
Support the troops, Impeach Bush for starting an illegal war
These are not playbook lines. These are simple truths.
No, there are slogans that stupid people use in place of critical thinking skills.
Hey, Baynative, come-on man, what do professional trolls get paid these days?
Are you planning on asking the DNC for payment Charmin/DJ? Either way you, just like the used Charmin, you are full of crap.
pbj @ 41 “Either way you, just like the used Charmin, you are full of crap”
And you were lecturing me on critical thinking?
We covered the “Bush lied” topic previously.
Bush was telling the truth when he stated that Iraq had had (and had used) WMDs in the past;
he was most likely bullshitting when he said how certain we were about the exact location of Iraq’s WMDs;
and he was lying when he cast them as a looming, huge, imminent threat to the United States (especially after UN inspectors were finally back in Iraq, where they could ensure such weapons were not a threat to any country)—when he pushed the idea that Iraq had something to do with 9/11—and when he said we had no choice but to invade.
pbj @ 41
“Are you planning on asking the DNC for payment Charmin/DJ?”
I doubt they would pay me—I am not a Democrat.
“Either way you, just like the used Charmin, you are full of crap.”
Hey, it is a dirty job, but someone has to clean up the wingnut shit around here!
BTW pbj, are you paid for you blogging efforts?
Puddster @ 20 & conservatives in general.
I’m not inclined to agree with you that President Clinton lied to Larry King in 2003. While it is the privilege of past presidents to continue their briefings on national security issues, only President G WH Bush has exercised that option. With that detail of fact in mind, it would seem to me that President Clinton was only speaking to the information that was publicly known. At that point in time, Bush had already addressed the nation in the State of the Union address and stated as fact that Iraq was pursing yellow cake uranium for the purposes of making nuclear weapons.
Joe Wilson had thrown cold water on that assertion previous to Bush making his speech to the nation. In addition, before Joe Wilson went to Niger, the State Department had already decided that the allegations of Iraq seeking yellow cake was false. However, Bush chose to include that misstatement in his State of the Union address anyways. Making that claim was shaky at best, and when the Commander in Chief is deciding whether or not to take our country to war, validating those claims in the State of the Union address is a at least a serious lapse in judgment, if not moral, ethical and perhaps even legal lapses of judgment.
More importantly, though, all the conservatives who are able to point out security breaches by Democrats in the past are stridently making our point for us today. In that, they are capable of recognizing when something that is being said or done is wrong. And yet, when you examine the facts of what is going on today they defend it by pointing out what Sandy Berger did, or Pat Leahy or any other host of excuses. We cannot go back in time and correct the mistakes of the past, but, what we can do, is recognize that something is terribly wrong in the White House today and demand that the problems of today are corrected now. And, Bush should remain faithful to his promise to dismiss anyone in his administration who was connected to the leak of a CIA knock. At the very least, Rove’s security clearances should be suspended pending the outcome of this very serious, ongoing criminal investigation that, for the time being is focused on Rove.
Karl Rove was entrusted by the American public with seeing very sensitive information relating to our national security. The fact that he communicated to at least one reporter, and possibly several others, that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA was a serious breach of the trust and confidence placed in him by the American public. Whether or not he outed her first, he should have not been speaking so casually about an undercover CIA operative, past or present, especially through an email communication. We all know that once you hit the send button, you have no idea whose eyes could eventually read it. Either by design or by lack consciences, Rove has demonstrated through his own actions that he cannot be trusted not to disseminate classified information through the Internet.
If you cannot wrap your mind around that fact, and that Rove should at the very least have his security clearances temporarily suspended, then you are just being a partisan hack.
The heart of the matter, however, is not about Rove. But about the “facts” that were presented to the American public and the US Congress as the reasons we should go to war in Iraq. At no point in time did you hear George Bush say, “We believe Iraq has attempted to purchase yellow cake from Africa, although Joe Wilson and our own State Department have debunked it as falsified documents.”
Baynative’s assertion that just because Valerie Plame had not worked undercover for more than 5 years that somehow means Rove didn’t either break the law or expose undercover CIA operations is absurd. That’s not my opinion, that’s the CIA’s opinion and the reason behind the investigation. They are none too pleased with having a CIA operative exposed. If you partisan hacks think for a moment that just because 60+ months had past that other counter intelligence agencies around the world didn’t start backtracking the who, what, where, and when of Valerie Plame you’re only fooling yourselves. Once she can be / has been traced to particular places of government, business, travel, contacts etc. that will begin to unravel an untold number of CURRENT undercover operatives, CIA business fronts and other CIA operations around the world.
Shame on you for being so blindly loyal that you become unpatriotic.
Charmin @ 35
“What a bunch of hypocritical f***s.” I was thinking the very same thing about the left-wing – thanks for coming up with a better set of words.
NPR’s “Day to Day” just ran an interesting story called “What Defines an Undercover Agent?” As part of the story, they interview former CIA agents. Conclusion: Plame was undercover and, therefore, most likely covered by the Intelligence Identities Protection Act.
You can listen to the story here.
reply@45,
I’m not inclined to agree with you that President Clinton lied to Larry King in 2003. While it is the privilege of past presidents to continue their briefings on national security issues, only President G WH Bush has exercised that option. With that detail of fact in mind, it would seem to me that President Clinton was only speaking to the information that was publicly known. At that point in time, Bush had already addressed the nation in the State of the Union address and stated as fact that Iraq was pursing yellow cake uranium for the purposes of making nuclear weapons.
From factcheck.org:
The famous “16 words” in President Bush’s Jan. 28, 2003 State of the Union address turn out to have a basis in fact after all, according to two recently released investigations in the US and Britain.
Bush said then, “The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa .” Some of his critics called that a lie, but the new evidence shows Bush had reason to say what he did.
* A British intelligence review released July 14 calls Bush’s 16 words “well founded.”
* A separate report by the US Senate Intelligence Committee said July 7 that the US also had similar information from “a number of intelligence reports,” a fact that was classified at the time Bush spoke.
* Ironically, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, who later called Bush’s 16 words a “lie”, supplied information that the Central Intelligence Agency took as confirmation that Iraq may indeed have been seeking uranium from Niger .
* Both the US and British investigations make clear that some forged Italian documents, exposed as fakes soon after Bush spoke, were not the basis for the British intelligence Bush cited, or the CIA’s conclusion that Iraq was trying to get uranium.
None of the new information suggests Iraq ever nailed down a deal to buy uranium, and the Senate report makes clear that US intelligence analysts have come to doubt whether Iraq was even trying to buy the stuff. In fact, both the White House and the CIA long ago conceded that the 16 words shouldn’t have been part of Bush’s speech.
But what he said – that Iraq sought uranium – is just what both British and US intelligence were telling him at the time. So Bush may indeed have been misinformed, but that’s not the same as lying.
Joe Wilson had thrown cold water on that assertion previous to Bush making his speech to the nation.
Wrong. Joe Wilsons report actually bolstered the case that Iraq had sought Yellow Cake. Again – reade the factcheck.org link further and you will find:
But that’s not the way the CIA saw it at the time. In the CIA’s view, Wilson’s report bolstered suspicions that Iraq was indeed seeking uranium in Africa. The Senate report cited an intelligence officer who reviewed Wilson’s report upon his return from Niger:
“Committee Report: He (the intelligence officer) said he judged that the most important fact in the report was that the Nigerian officials admitted that the Iraqi delegation had traveled there in 1999, and that the Nigerian Prime Minister believed the Iraqis were interested in purchasing uranium, because this provided some confirmation of foreign government service reporting.”
In addition, before Joe Wilson went to Niger, the State Department had already decided that the allegations of Iraq seeking yellow cake was false.
What evidence of this do you have?
However, Bush chose to include that misstatement in his State of the Union address anyways. Making that claim was shaky at best, and when the Commander in Chief is deciding whether or not to take our country to war, validating those claims in the State of the Union address is a at least a serious lapse in judgment, if not moral, ethical and perhaps even legal lapses of judgment.
More importantly, though, all the conservatives who are able to point out security breaches by Democrats in the past are stridently making our point for us today. In that, they are capable of recognizing when something that is being said or done is wrong. And yet, when you examine the facts of what is going on today they defend it by pointing out what Sandy Berger did, or Pat Leahy or any other host of excuses. We cannot go back in time and correct the mistakes of the past, but, what we can do, is recognize that something is terribly wrong in the White House today and demand that the problems of today are corrected now.
Then it is curious as to why you are not immediately demanding the resignation of John Kerry for outing Otto Reich in the senate hearings of John Bolton:
At a hearing to discuss the nomination of John Bolton as US ambassador to the United Nations, politicians discussed a dispute over Bolton’s treatment of an intelligence analyst.
The analyst was referred to as “Mr Smith” but when Kerry read from a transcript of closed door interviews he mentioned a name that had not previously come up.
“Did Otto Reich share his belief that Fulton Armstrong should be removed from his position? The answer is yes,” Kerry said.
“Did John Bolton share that view? Yes.”
And, Bush should remain faithful to his promise to dismiss anyone in his administration who was connected to the leak of a CIA knock. At the very least, Rove’s security clearances should be suspended pending the outcome of this very serious, ongoing criminal investigation that, for the time being is focused on Rove.
When the Democrats suspend John Kerry’s security clearance, then we can talk Mr Pot.
Karl Rove was entrusted by the American public with seeing very sensitive information relating to our national security. The fact that he communicated to at least one reporter, and possibly several others, that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA was a serious breach of the trust and confidence placed in him by the American public. Whether or not he outed her first, he should have not been speaking so casually about an undercover CIA operative, past or present, especially through an email communication. We all know that once you hit the send button, you have no idea whose eyes could eventually read it. Either by design or by lack consciences, Rove has demonstrated through his own actions that he cannot be trusted not to disseminate classified information through the Internet.
Of course none of that is actually true. Rove never outed anyone and drawing attention to Rove to get the heat off John Kerry won’t help you either. The special prosecutor already stated that Rove is not a target of the investigation.
If you cannot wrap your mind around that fact, and that Rove should at the very least have his security clearances temporarily suspended, then you are just being a partisan hack.
If you do not agree John Kerry, who betrayed his country by trying to undermine it while at war, should not have his security clearance immediately revoked, then you are a partisan hack.
he heart of the matter, however, is not about Rove. But about the “facts” that were presented to the American public and the US Congress as the reasons we should go to war in Iraq. At no point in time did you hear George Bush say, “We believe Iraq has attempted to purchase yellow cake from Africa, although Joe Wilson and our own State Department have debunked it as falsified documents.”
Baynative’s assertion that just because Valerie Plame had not worked undercover for more than 5 years that somehow means Rove didn’t either break the law or expose undercover CIA operations is absurd. That’s not my opinion, that’s the CIA’s opinion and the reason behind the investigation. They are none too pleased with having a CIA operative exposed. If you partisan hacks think for a moment that just because 60+ months had past that other counter intelligence agencies around the world didn’t start backtracking the who, what, where, and when of Valerie Plame you’re only fooling yourselves. Once she can be / has been traced to particular places of government, business, travel, contacts etc. that will begin to unravel an untold number of CURRENT undercover operatives, CIA business fronts and other CIA operations around the world.
How nice you and other Democrats are so worried about our CIA and its ability to collect information. Too bad you didn’t have as much concern prior to 911 when it was hamstrun by rules to only deal with ‘ehtical spies’. And how hypocritical of the left to now pretend they have any respect at all for the CIA when they spent the last 50 years spinning tale of how evil the CIA was and myths about the CIA installing dictators and causing trouble all over the world.
Please pardon me if, after 50 years of painting the CIA as the bad guys you now all of a sudden show some concern for their ability to gather intelligence and I am skeptical of your partisan motives.
Shame on you for being so blindly loyal that you become unpatriotic.
Leftiss lecturing people on being patriotic Americans is a bit like Karl Marx lecturing us on being good capitalists.
I should think that if the leftist here really were concerened with safety from terrorists, they would ask their friend James Ujamma to stop it. Apparently Ujamma was a buddy of one of the terrorist who bombed London. Can’t say I am surprised – after all, Democrat Susan Lindauer and John Walker Lindh worked for the enemy too.
How the Bush administration reads an intelligence report:
“Iraq is … attempting to obtain yellowcake uranium.”
What the report actually said:
“Iraq is in no way whatsoever attempting to obtain yellowcake uranium.”
It’s time to ask again – why is Judith Miller sitting in jail? Rove already gave permission to disclose his involvement, so he isn’t the one she’s protecting. So who is so deep into this that she is willing to sit in a cell in order to cover up potentially criminal involvement?
And if it was so obvious that Plame was undercover, and that blowing her cover was a crime, why is this investigation still going on 2 years later? Why is Rove not considered a target?
By the way, Bush called for the investigation by special prosecutor, not the CIA. THe CIA is the group that didn’t dissuade Novak from publishing Plame’s name.
janet S –> alot of nonsequiters in there.
Miller is still in jail because *her* source hasn’t given the OK. I bet alot of people would love to know who it is… Non republizombies anyways.
pbj @ 48
Wow. A 1,545 word post. That ought to bring in a big check. Be fair to your employer, though. Only 342 of the words are your own.
@ 51 that is a cookbook for nonsequiters and good old fashioned missinformation.
Janet, get in touch with reality and report back to us.
48
“Leftiss lecturing people on being patriotic Americans is a bit like Karl Marx lecturing us on being good capitalists.”
I think Karl Marx had a better understanding of capitalism than most right-wingers have of patriotism. And I’m talking about intellectual substance, not blind allegiance.
49
“after all, Democrat Susan Lindauer and John Walker Lindh worked for the enemy too.”
Since you see determined to go off-topic and try to assert that only “Democrats” (I’m assuming you’re referring to voter registration) “worked for the enemy”… How about the illustrious careers of Otto Reich, John Negroponte, and Elliott Abrams?
Janet S @ 51
“And if it was so obvious that Plame was undercover, and that blowing her cover was a crime, why is this investigation still going on 2 years later?”
Ummm. . . what kind of stupid question is this?
The generous answer: They are still investigating because there are still witnesses to subpoena and question. (Did you really think they were sitting around discussing Mrs. Wilson’s status???)
The ungenerous answer: because the White House is stonewalling (and some reporters are stonewalling, too).
“Why is Rove not considered a target?”
He is, in the sense that it is an investigation of leaks by one or more White House senior officials. No individual has yet been labeled a “target” that I have heard of.
Rove’s lawyer has pointed out that Rove is not a target, but he fails to mention that no individual has been named as such.
“By the way, Bush called for the investigation by special prosecutor, not the CIA.”
Bush didn’t call for either. The special prosecutor law expired. The CIA does not investigate U.S. crimes.
A Justice Department grand jury is investigating the leak, using FBI resources for some of the investigation.
THe CIA is the group that didn’t dissuade Novak from publishing Plame’s name.
This has been widely stated, but it is not, in fact, true. Here is a link to a story discussing this further.
From the Senate Report: “The intelligence report said the uranium sales agreement had been in negotiation between the two countries since at least early 1999, and was approved by the State Court of Niger in late 2000. According to the cable, Nigerien President Mamadou Tandja gave his stamp of approval for the agreement and communicated his decision to Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.”
Next read page numbers 39 & 40 on the pages of the report. The pdf will say 49 & 50 in the page box. Then read page numbers 45 & 46 (55 & 56) and see how the committee report discredits Joe Wilson. In the report he admits that he didn’t meet with anybody in the government.
From the report:” It is reasonable for analysts to assess that Iraq may have been seeking uranium from africa based on CIA reporting and other available intelligence.
From the Report:” The report on the former ambassador’s trip to Niger, disseminated in March 2002, did not change any analysts’ assessments of the Iraq-Niger uranium deal. For most analysts, the information in the report lent more credibility to the original CIA reports on the uranium deal…” it continues. You all can read it.
I could not find the line don*****don refered to. And don*****don the Iraq report is 24003KB in size and it was saved on my PC on 5-4-2005 when DJ asked me to read it and save it.
puddy and pbj–what a joke. The Iraq Survey Group (Charles Duelfer’s group, certainly no administration opponent) conclusively reported no attempts were made, no successes in acquriing yellowcake. For one thing, we knew Iraq already HAD yellowcake.
The Fulton Armstrong thing is another Newsmax whoopsie–not only was Armstrong already publicly acknowledged multiple times two years previous to Kerry mentioning him, Sen Lugar mentioned his name BEFORE Kerry did, in the VERY SAME HEARING.
Man, you guys are pathetic.
oh, and the Senate Report was a partisan document; the Democrats tried to point out that whole section was bogus. In addition, it fails to mention that State threw cold water onto the story in the same NIE from October in which the yellowcake allegations were based. And it also ignores the simple fact that the Bush administration was forced to RETRACT their allegations, after having once taken them out of a speech already.
Torridjoe: I love how you don’t proceed to keep timelines and dates straight. Which came first Torridjoe: The retraction or the Senate Report. The White House retracted it because your side relied on Joe Wilson almost correct analysis. After the Brits did their own independent query, they said Bush was right to say what he did. I remember Ari Fleischer being gleefully grilled by your friends in the MSM. Then the 2004 Senate Report came out. But again you ascribe to the Charmin’s small intellectual prison, and if you left the prison (you do have the keys), some of your argument would be out-of-whack!
Joe, I see that you haven’t read the document because they do talk about the State Department having issues in the Senate Report. You need to read it or I will classify you with don*****don as a cliff notes reader only.
Of course the Democrats would cry foul when information was placed in the report to prove Plame did recommend her husband more than once for the job and the report by Joe Wilson proved he didn’t meet with anyone in the Niger government. Keep trying Torridjoe. The truth will set you free.
Puddybud @ 57
Wilson did not report that Iraq was trying to purchase Uranium from Niger. Factcheck.org distills it down pretty well:
Wilson made no such claim—a CIA analyst made the leap from ‘expanding commercial relations’ to ‘may be trying to purchase uranium’.
The vexing thing about this is that it is completely absurd to think that Iraq would have any interest whatsoever in purchasing yellowcake from any country. Iraq had their own source of yellowcake—there are uranium mines in Iraq. And, anybody who knows even a little bit about atomic weapons knows that possession of yellowcake is nothing. There is a huge gap between yellowcake and weapons grade uranium (like having a pile of coal when you need diamonds).
Thus, the “evidence” was extremely flimsily (hearsay and presumption) and the implied motivation on the part of Iraq is completely irrational.
In any case, the debate over Bush’s exact words and intelligence analysis’ interpretation of Wilson’s statements is not really the point. The point is, Bush was lying in trying to make the case that Iraq had an active atomic weapons program. It was known with complete certainty that Iraq had no atomic weapons production capability. Nor did they have a delivery mechanism. Bush was peddling fear and spinning a lie as justification for war.
puddy–the best way to find out whether Wilson was right or not is to ask: is the Bush administration claiming Iraq attempted to buy yellowcake? The answer is definitively NO. Amazingly, that’s exactly what Wilson told them, and Duelfer corroborated as the final word on the subject of WMD in Iraq.
These discussions are a joy to read. I know that if Clinton, Gore or Kerry had done what Bush did all of the players would take the opposite side. The common folk, (at least most of the 2004 voters), think that Bush erred on the side of common sense and/or with a post-9/11 pre-emptive stance. The left is preaching to their own choir and revving up. I actually like the results, as I think the country is better having two opposing (principled) battle groups with little or no mushy middle. The less legislation that gets passed the better.
actually nowonder, a majority now believe Bush misled the country into war, and that it wasn’t worth it. Sorry.
actually nowonder, a majority now believe Bush misled the country into war, and that it wasn’t worth it. Sorry.
Yet antoher unsubstantiated allegation.
Rove is an embarassment to the administration, the country and to all Americans.
If Bush had 1% of the “character” he supposedly ran on, Rove would be on the street.
Of course, the real character belongs to O’Neill, etc. who had the guts to speak the truth about the Bush White House.
Heaven help us all!
PBJ @ 48
“When the Democrats suspend John Kerry’s security clearance, then we can talk Mr Pot.”
When Senator Kerry is under investigation by the DOJ for such traitorous acts, then we’ll talk Mr. Reefer Madness Kettle
torridjoe @ 64
I think the “polls” have showed that you are correct since BEFORE the election. My point is that despite believing that there was deception and/or the war is not worth it, more voters wanted a cowboy rather than a windsurfer to run the country for the near-term. I think the mid-term elections will be a better barometer than any justification seen on this board.
PBJ @ 48 (more)
“Please pardon me if, after 50 years of painting the CIA as the bad guys you now all of a sudden show some concern for their ability to gather intelligence and I am skeptical of your partisan motives.”
As I pointed out in my post @ 45, you are quite capable of pointing out the foibles of others, but accept no accountability when one of your own is perpetrating crimes against CIA operatives.
Stop looking in the rearview mirror for excuses and try to resolve the national security issues we face today.
“Leftiss lecturing people on being patriotic Americans is a bit like Karl Marx lecturing us on being good capitalists.”
Righties lecturing people on being patriotic Americans is a bit like Mayor Jim West lecturing us on the immorality of homosexuality.
No Wonder @ 68
You know what? I agree with you. I too think the mid-term elections will say a lot about how the American public views this situation. We can make our predictions, but on Nov. 2nd we’ll have our answers.
Have a fine evening.
Exactly!
As I pointed out in my post @ 45, you are quite capable of pointing out the foibles of others, but accept no accountability when one of your own is perpetrating crimes against CIA operatives.
When a donk accuses a republican of something it is most likely a lie. You donks have proven that you can not be trusted over and over again. All you have to do is look at how some of your ilk reports the news on 60 minutes or Newsweek.
RUFUS @ 72
Have you considered anger management?
Man, I love Goldy’s Trolls. Just think of it! RUFUS, pbj, pudster, righton, PacMan, Mr. Cyn-Irr… *
It is hard to imagine a better representation of the Kool Aid drinking, Right wing radio listening, FOX news watching, Ditto Head, ill informed pea brains.
Hat’s off for the Trolls. For those about to be made completely irrelevant.. I salute you!
* for the Trolls I forgot to mention.. don’t feel sad, every time you post you gain attention for the insane irrationality that is wing nuttery.
Salute!
Why would I be angry. We republicans have been living with the lying MSM for years. It is funny to hear the vitriol coming from the left though. It is freakin hillarous. Fox news is by far way more balanced and truthful than any MSM news program. There is no comparison. Memogate and Newsweek are just the most recent examples of the lying left. Can you name me some scandals involving the “so called right wing” media lying.
Maybe the work ilk makes a person sound angry… oh well
Don*****don: We on the right are not known in the public as the Kool-Aid drinkers. That’s been tagged on the Moby Trolls (you guys) for years. Also, we don’t wait for cash infusions from George Soros so we can meet for three hours (check the Internet for details) to determine the latest party platform and policy, waiting for the latest poll numbers to come in.
We may be nutty to you guys but we are right! Just look at how political correctness has London paralyzed. They can’t even kick out a vitriolic cleric when the people want him deported.
I meant word ilk
75
“We republicans have been living with the lying MSM for years.”
Yeah, and “liberal media bias,” and blah blah blah. What a load of bollocks. Let’s take a recent example: Zogby published a poll on June 30, the results of which stated:
“And, in a sign of continuing polarization, more than two-in-five voters (42%) say they would favor impeachment proceedings if it is found the President misled the nation about his reasons for going to war with Iraq.”
Where was the “liberal” media on that? Front page news screaming at you? Nope. The WaPo eventually got around to it a week later. (I’m sure someone with Lexis-Nexis access could correct me on this.)
That said, it’ll be interesting to see the fallout from the Wall Street Journal article on this memo tomorrow morning (you know, the one that Mehlman and others are trying to claim is not secret). Smells like bad news for the Bush League Bears.
Isn’t that 42% about the number of people who voted for CLinton in 1992? If so then those are your standard lefties!
puddy@80
Yay, clinton’s 1992 election!
Once again you prove how utterly irrelevant you actually are.
Oh and how devoid of actual germaine argument.
WIndie, you have to stop standing ine front of the fan when you piss. I am devoid of an argument. I have many postings that I still wait for answers. Gore trying to steal the 2000 election. Ohio democratically controlled cities where all the real voting problems occurred. Convicting someone of a crime before the GJ decides evidence. There are theree for instance.
PuddyBud @ 82
“I have many postings that I still wait for answers.
Generally, you will not get answers to bullshit questions like that here (this is, after all, a liberal blog). Try freerepublic or uSP if you need bullshit answers. I’m in a pretty good mode today, so I’ll give your questions a shot anyway. . . .
“Gore trying to steal the 2000 election.”
No he didn’t.
“Ohio democratically controlled cities where all the real voting problems occurred.”
No shit. That is because urban areas tend to be more Democratic. But, the parties don’t run the elections. This is the type of question that seriously makes me question your ability to think rationally, Pudster.
Your thinking here is as inane as those who blame King County election errors on Democrats because KC is more Democratic. In fact, almost all counties had errors this election (some of them had a much higher rate of errors than KC), and most counties in Washington are Republican. But, does that mean that we can blame the Republicans for the errors? No. We cannot blame either party because parties don’t run the elections!
“Convicting someone of a crime before the GJ decides evidence.”
I’ve previously addressed this question, and address it again for ConservativeFirst here as well.
“Gore trying to steal the 2000 election.”
No he didn’t.
Because Gore was stopped.
Ohio democratically controlled cities where all the real voting problems occurred.”
Sour grapes. Come up with some evidence that would pass a court of law and you might have something. As far as I am concern Bush won by at least 120,000. My gut tells me that he probably won by 125,000 but I will go with the official count. Just like I do with the governors race in Washington.
“Gore trying to steal the 2000 election.”
No he didn’t.
That is because Gore was stopped before he pulled off what happened in this state.
“Ohio democratically controlled cities where all the real voting problems occurred.”
No shit. That is because urban areas tend to be more Democratic. But, the parties don’t run the elections.
PROVE IT!!
“Gore trying to steal the 2000 election.”
No he didn’t.
That is because Gore was stopped before he pulled off what happened in this state.
“Ohio democratically controlled cities where all the real voting problems occurred.”
No shit. That is because urban areas tend to be more Democratic. But, the parties don’t run the elections.
PROVE IT!!
Charmin, you seem to forget who mans the polling stations and how those stations get manned. In Ohio cities, the Democratic manchine did that. If you don’t have friends who live in Ohio (my best man in our wedding does) you don’t know how it’s done!If I walked up to man a polling station, I would need to be on some list knowing someone who knows someone.
I already placed a link where Seminole and Martin counties in Florida were sued by Gore to stop their absentee ballots from being counted legally (arrived legally and were mailed legally in the time frame). They were leaning to Bush. He even pissed of Democrats who would have lost their votes if the Gore lawsuit was accepted. So Charmin, you better perform a better job in your academic Internet searches!!!!