by Goldy, 07/18/2005, 10:26 PM

Big tip of the hat to Carl at Washington State Political Report for pointing us towards Randy Cohen’s The Ethicist column in this week’s NY Times Magazine:

I have always believed that an elected official’s private life is not a part of the public record. Before and after the Mayor Jim West episode, I have heard colleagues discuss outing legislators who oppose gay rights but are rumored to be gay. What are the ethics in this case? State Senator Ken Jacobsen, Seattle

Your colleagues may ethically out an official only if that official’s being gay is germane to his policy-making. A person who seeks elected office, voluntarily entering the public arena, does surrender some claims to privacy. (Financial disclosure comes to mind.) Some, but not all. An official’s private life should remain private unless he or she makes it relevant to a public position freely taken. A cross-dressing secretary of agriculture who voiced no opinion on the sexual high jinks of soybeans — do legumes engage in high jinks? — would not meet this standard; a gay state senator who opposed gay civil rights would.

I agree with Carl, both that Randy gives a good answer, and that in the current political and media climate, “any expectation of staying in the closet is a joke.”

I too have had sources feed me unsolicited allegations of closeted gay legislators voting against gay rights legislation, and for a variety of reasons, have chosen not run with them. Even politicians deserve a little privacy, and I do not relish the thought of inflicting pain on anyone’s family. Besides, sexual preference is a private matter, and I think it is counterproductive to treat being gay as a scandal.

But I will not promise that my very real misgivings cannot be overcome, and I do not believe that I am alone amongst bloggers in admitting that, given reasonably reliable information — and political relevance — I would reluctantly consider outing a closeted politician. For example, the anti-discrimination bill, HB 1515, failed in the state senate by a single vote; it will surely come to floor again next session, and I’m told there is at least one senator who should think twice before casting another hypocritical vote in opposition.

That Sen. Jacobsen should ask his question in such a blunt and public manner should be viewed as a clear, if subtle, warning shot across the bow of those of his colleagues who know who they are. There are closeted politicians who have strongly opposed HB 1515 and other legislation that would have extended civil rights to the gay community, and if they continue to pander to the religious zealots on the far right, they risk being revealed for what these zealots hate the most: a homosexual.

Personally, I hope it doesn’t come to that. The state GOP leadership could protect its caucus from the personal and political consequences of a high-profile outing by simply arranging for HB 1515 to pass. Indeed, I would hope that Senate Minority Leader Bill Finkbeiner would show some true leadership, and cast the deciding vote himself… a vote, by the way, that would be consistent with the sentiments of his own district. I understand that such a move might cost him his leadership position, but his fellow Republicans should be made to understand that failure to pass HB 1515 could cost some in their caucus even more.

While such threats might represent a coarsening of the public debate, it would be cynical to argue that the decision to out a closeted gay legislator comes anywhere near the moral and ethical dilemma posed by the outing of an undercover CIA operative. It is safe to say that when it comes to the politics of personal destruction, nobody leads the way more boldly than President Bush… and thus Republicans nationwide should be prepared to reap what they have sown.

72 Responses to “The ethics of outing”

1. headless lucy spews:

McCain’s not going to let his disgraceful treatment by Bush and his Brain go unanswered forever. That’s my prediction.

2. Roger Rabbit spews:

One trick deserves another, I always say.

3. zip spews:

Darn tootin’ your threats represent “a coarsening of the public debate”. Way to go!

What if a legislator AND HIS CONSTITUENTS don’t like the bill? What if they’re libertarian whem it comes to laws like HB 1515? What if small business is their constituency? Are they allowed to vote against it, or do they have to fear the wrath of you and your ethicist?

Only those who march in lockstep with every single element of your “progressive” agenda deserve your support and deserve not to be threatened, is that it? That seems real progressive, not.

It’s pathetic that you keep whining (and now threatening) Republicans over this bill. What’s wrong with your party? They control the legislature and they couldn’t pass it. Taking thta “failure” of your party and twisting it around to a supposedly valid excuse for threatening some un named Republican legislator (using the Ethicist as cover) is about the lowest you’ve sunk yet, Goldy. Get some Democrats elected that will pass your bills and whine at them when they don’t but leave the straw men home on this one.

4. NoWonder spews:

It is OK if the lefties out the gays who do not tow the line, yet if someone else does it – scream “intolerance” or “bigot”. Your want to say what happens in the privacy of your home is private, unless we need to speed our pet legislation along. I always wonder how people can rationalize acting on both sides of an issue. Reminds me of Billary Clinton using the abortion should be safe, legal and rare. If it is OK why not encourage abortion as a means of birth control. If the unborn child is not a person then anyone can kill her. Although the partial-birth version does illustrate that anything goes, why pander with abortion frequency using the term “rare”?

5. drool spews:

Those that think Clinton’s mummer fun with Monica is his own business should take not of the article. I always maintinaed that if Clinton used his family/ bible in hand/going to church as a photo op then his infidelity ceases to become a personal matter and is one for all to comment on.

6. windie spews:

@5 clintons inability to keep his pants on would be covered by this if he were to push anti adultery laws, or anti-oral sex laws.

Not just claiming religion… see the diff?

7. ConservativeFirst spews:

Goldy:

“The state GOP leadership could protect its caucus from the personal and political consequences of a high-profile outing by simply arranging for HB 1515 to pass.”

Sounds like blackmail to me.

8. Puddybud spews:

Zip, No Wonder, CF: You all have identified lefty liberals for what they are. “Pass our Litmus Test Progressives” who say we’ll call you a racist or bigot or intolerant. But, but, but I heard from the MSM that it was only Republicans who frog-march or goosestep to Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Neil Boortz, etc. Nope!!! George Soros, Howard Deaniac and Michael Moore set the lefty liberal aganda now and all the lefties frog march/goose step to them!!!

9. windie spews:

unfortunately for you, puddy, having been seriously discredited, people don’t actually hear your raving anymore.

not that you’re remotely relevant anwyays.

@7;

sounds like blackmail to me, I admit. It also sounds like just deserts for any ‘Jim West Republicans’. Saying ‘vote right, or we out you’ is a scary precedent, even if it IS terribly relevant.

On the other hand, why are they in the closet and voting against what they practice?

10. Goldy spews:

zip, con1st, puddy et al…

Oh… so now you have a problem with outing somebody for political purposes? (NUANCE ALERT: Re-read the final paragraph.)

11. windie spews:

goldy@10

oh god, I’m an idiot…

*slaps self upside the head*

12. righton spews:

goldy, depends on the meaning of the word outing (like is)

Is outing only for gays, now its also for CIA agents, ok, what about revealing folks w/ criminal records, drug dealer sons, sex crimes, adultery, etc

Sounds like its all fair game, that is, whatever is legal to reveal. Just politics.

13. Charmin (formerly known as dj) spews:

drool @ 5

“I always maintinaed that if Clinton used his family/ bible in hand/going to church as a photo op then his infidelity ceases to become a personal matter and is one for all to comment on.”

You seem to be arguing that Clinton is a hypocrite because he sins and then carries a Bible to Church. But, the Bible says For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God(Rom 3:23). That makes the sins of everyone carrying a Bible to church a public matter.

More generally, as just another sinner, who the fuck are you to judge the sins of Clinton or anyone else? Has Republican Jesus outsourced that job to you or something?

14. Puddybud spews:

Goldy: No I don’t. You side attacked Rove for clearing up a misstatements made by Wilson to Matt Cooper.

Windie: Some lefty discredited me? GBS? He tried. The DoD. Who counts? The DoD!! That’s funny. Again, your side can’t handle the truth. I see Charmin has tried to discredit my information (he can’t otherwise he would be replying quickly) to persuade Terry J. So again windie, you need to stop pissing in front of the fan!!!

15. ConservativeFirst spews:

Goldy @ 10

“Oh… so now you have a problem with outing somebody for political purposes? (NUANCE ALERT: Re-read the final paragraph.) ”

Goldy (from blog):

“It is safe to say that when it comes to the politics of personal destruction, nobody leads the way more boldly than President Bush… and thus Republicans nationwide should be prepared to reap what they have sown.”

I’m not for “outing” people for political purposes, but clearly you advocate that here. A difference between us I guess.

I did read your statement before I posted. If you replace “Bush” with “Clinton” and “Republicans” with “Democrats”, and you sound just like a Republican in 1995. A distinction I’m sure you’d be proud of.

If you go further back in time, I’ll bet you can find others with similar resumes on both sides of the aisle. No party has a monopoly on dirty politics. So I chose to ignore your statement as the hyperbole that it is.

If the Bush administration is so horrible, my advice is you should take the high road. Otherwise you are debasing yourself by stooping the level of the Bush “dirty tricks machine” you despise so much.

BTW, don’t you mean President Bush’s advisors instead of Bush himself? According to some of the lefties here, Bush is too stupid to answer even simple questions. How then is he smart enough to destroy other people’s personal lives?

16. Janet S spews:

Once again – Valerie Plame did not qualify for protection, as she had been in the country for at least five years. The CIA did not discourage the publishing of her name. She was not undercover – she openly drove to the CIA every day, in full sight of whoever wanted to monitor activities in and out.

And finally – she engaged in POLITICS! She recommended her husband for a POLITICAL job, knowing he was a political activist for the other side. That alone would nullify any protection that might have been accorded to her (but legally doesn’t).

Nothing unethical here – just truth telling.

17. Charmin (formerly known as dj) spews:

Janet S @ 16.

“Once again – Valerie Plame did not qualify for protection, as she had been in the country for at least five years”

And once again, the CIA makes that determination. Not you.

“And finally – she engaged in POLITICS!”

What the fuck? She cannot vote or make political donations?

“She recommended her husband for a POLITICAL job”

Sorry, but recommending someone to serve as a CIA consultant is not politics.

“knowing he was a political activist for the other side.”

Oh??? He was working for terrorists?

“That alone would nullify any protection that might have been accorded to her (but legally doesn’t). “

Take your meds. . . you seem to have gone off the deep end.

Charmin — “it’s a dirty job, but someone has to do it”

18. Mr. X spews:

I have no more problem with outing gay politicians who actively oppose gay rights than I would outing a stauch drug warrior who was a pothead or cokehead (W – I’m talkin to YOU). To hear Rethugs scream about the “politics of personal destruction” just points up what a bunch of glass-jawed pussies they really are.

19. ConservativeFirst spews:

windie @ 9

“On the other hand, why are they in the closet and voting against what they practice? ”

Kind of hard to ask someone when you don’t know who they are.

Maybe they believe more strongly in individual rights than group rights. Or maybe they feel there is adequate legal protection for gays already on the books and the bill is unnecessary. Maybe they feel the bill doesn’t go far enough. Maybe they had overwhelming response from their constituents and are voting to represent the people that elected them regardless of personal philosophy. Those all seem like reasonable positions for a person who is gay, regardless of whether they are in or out of the closet.

20. Puddybud spews:

Speaking of Joe Wilson: L.A. Times, Feb. 6, 2003 – “There is now no incentive for Hussein to comply with the inspectors or to refrain from using weapons of mass destruction to defend himself…” And, “…he will use them; we should be under no illusion about that”. – Find it. It was on John Kerry’s web site http://www.johnkerry.com/honesty/la_times.html, but they took it down because it makes Joe look bad:

http://www.cpsag.com/our_team/wilson.html – Joe Wilson names his wife in a resume.

So HA lefties I have a question for you?

Robert Novak claims he told the Grand Jury that he contacted the CIA to validate Plame’s employment. Should Novak have held it back (July 16, 2003) writing of Plame’s employment history if the CIA did indeed confirm to him a MSM person, that Plame worked for the CIA?

I propose that one of two things is true: Either the CIA is guilty of leaking Plame’s cover; because whichever official talked to Novak breached their own security protocols, or nobody is guilty of any breach whatsoever. The 36 MSM newspapers submitted a brief saying no crime was committed by anyone. Why would they do that? Maybe this is true about Novak and the CIA? Maybe Judith Miller has a hand in this? You can’t call Karl Rove a traitor while exonerating the CIA for the leak to Novak.

21. PacMan - The Best Game Ever spews:

Windie: If I remember Roger Rabbit, the furry one also had problems entering the military. There is a song that popped in my head when I read your attacks windie.

“Everybody Plays the Fool” by the Main Ingredient There is a verse:
“Hey, everybody plays the fool, sometime
Use your heart just like a tool, listen baby
They never tell you so in school, I wanna say it again,
Everybody plays the fool” – This is what the windie and his lefties do to the public. They assume you are a fool, play your heart like a hammer with partial truths (most lefties; e.g. IT & Charmin) and they make up things while you’re in school (Loocy)!

What about this column: On the same day in 1999 that retired diplomat Joseph Wilson was returned $1,000 of $2,000 he contributed to Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore a month earlier because it exceeded the federal limit, his CIA-employee wife gave $1,000 to Gore using a fictitious identification for herself.

In making her April 22, 1999, contribution, Valerie E. Wilson identified herself as an “analyst” with “Brewster-Jennings & Associates.” No such firm is listed anywhere, but the late Brewster Jennings was president of Socony-Vacuum oil company a half-century ago. Any CIA employee working under “non-official cover” always is listed with a real firm, but never an imaginary one.

22. Donnageddon spews:

Speaking of Dich Cheney: LA Times Sept.8, 1999 “Dick Cheney is a lying theiving water rat cyborg, who would kill his children and rape his parents for the gold fillings in their teeth” – George W. Bush. It was on the G.W.Bush 2000 website but they took it down because Cheney stole one of G.W. Bush’s kidneys and served it to him with a chilled chiante.

Oh, and it is now known that G.W. Bush used his wife’s name and image in his resume and campaign ads.

23. Donnageddon spews:

@ 21 “In making her April 22, 1999, contribution, Valerie E. Wilson identified herself as an “analyst” with “Brewster-Jennings & Associates.” No such firm is listed anywhere, but the late Brewster Jennings was president of Socony-Vacuum oil company a half-century ago. Any CIA employee working under “non-official cover” always is listed with a real firm, but never an imaginary one.”

Brewster-Jennings & Associates was a front company created by the CIA and used for placing cover for NOC operatives. It of course now is of no use to the intelligence community becasue of Karl And Libby’s treason.

24. Charmin (formerly known as dj) spews:

Puddybutt @ 20,

’L.A. Times, Feb. 6, 2003 – “There is now no incentive for Hussein to comply with the inspectors or to refrain from using weapons of mass destruction to defend himself…” And, “…he will use them; we should be under no illusion about that”.’

I am not following you. What is the point you were trying to make here?

”www.cpsag.com/our_team/wilson.html – Joe Wilson names his wife in a resume.”

So? There is a public marriage record, too. Plame was not in the witness protection program, you idiot!

”Should Novak have held it back (July 16, 2003) writing of Plame’s employment history if the CIA did indeed confirm to him a MSM person, that Plame worked for the CIA?”

Your point being, what? Novak did publish the information, but he is not under investigation. White House senior officials are.

”I propose that one of two things is true: Either the CIA is guilty of leaking Plame’s cover; because whichever official talked to Novak breached their own security protocols”

Could be. But, it appears that Rove and Libby were either the original source, or a confirming source, and furthermore, they also spread the information to four other reporters.

”or nobody is guilty of any breach whatsoever.”

The CIA doesn’t see it that way. They think the WH outed Plame. The charges are serious enough, and evidence compelling enough, to keep a grand jury going for two years.

The 36 MSM newspapers submitted a brief saying no crime was committed by anyone. Why would they do that?

No they didn’t. They submitted this brief to a Federal Appeals Court stating that the press should not be forced to reveal their sources until after it has been determined a crime has been committed. They suggest there is evidence that no crime was committed. The brief cited public information sources and rumors about Plame being previously outed. The lawyers preparing the brief were not privy to the CIA classified information about Plame and her status within the CIA.

In any case, the court disagreed and the SCOTUS declined to hear the case.

”Maybe this is true about Novak and the CIA?”

Maybe. . . but, it doesn’t seem relevant to the investigation of the WH leakers.

”Maybe Judith Miller has a hand in this?”

Maybe. . . we all would like to know.

”You can’t call Karl Rove a traitor while exonerating the CIA for the leak to Novak.”

Yes, I can! Karl Rove is a traitor and I exonerate the CIA. So there.

Charmin — “Useful for cleaning up after leakers, too!”

25. Charmin (formerly known as dj) spews:

Pacman @ 21

”What about this column: On the same day in 1999 that retired diplomat Joseph Wilson was returned $1,000 of $2,000 he contributed to Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore a month earlier because it exceeded the federal limit, his CIA-employee wife gave $1,000 to Gore using a fictitious identification for herself.

In 2000, Wilson donated $1000 to Gore and $1000 to Bush. But, what is your point?
Isn’t Wilson allowed to participate in politics? Can’t he provide support to candidate? Isn’t he allowed to vote?

”In making her April 22, 1999, contribution, Valerie E. Wilson identified herself as an “analyst” with “Brewster-Jennings & Associates.” No such firm is listed anywhere, but the late Brewster Jennings was president of Socony-Vacuum oil company a half-century ago. Any CIA employee working under “non-official cover” always is listed with a real firm, but never an imaginary one.

Ummm. . . Pacman, that was a claim that Novak made in a CNN interview. It turns out that Novak was wrong. BJA was the energy company (actually, listed as a legal firm), set up by the CIA, that Plame used for cover. It was in the Boston phone book and had a phone number (now disconnected).

Charmin — “Useful for packing material, too!”

26. righton spews:

Headache from watch you lefties go ape**** over chance to bag Rove. You were never pro CIA, till this guy misspoke and gave you the best/only shot you’ll ever get.

I’ll bet you never got fired up about Philip Agee…

27. Mr. X spews:

Hmm, as long as our Rethugs insist on going off-topic, I guess I’ll wade in.

Rove and Bushco wouldn’t have spent the last two years lying about the Plame/Wilson leak if they didn’t know they had done something wrong. Rationalize, spin and obfuscate all you want, this stinks to high heaven, and Bush defining deviancy down (the threshhold seems to have gone from being involved in the leak getting you fired to having to be convicted of a crime – so much for “restoring honor to the WH”) just proves how full of shit they have been throughout.

Keep on parsing, my little right-wing bitches – as long as you’re in that hole, far be it from from me to tell you to stop digging.

28. Richard Pope spews:

Pacman @ 21, Charmin @ 24

Here is the link to the Valerie Wilson $1,000.00 contribution to Al Gore on 04/22/1999 using the name of the fake company Brewster-Jennings & Assoc:

http://herndon1.sdrdc.com/cgi-bin/fecimg/?99990049155

This means there may be no criminal law violation whatsoever by the “outing” of Ms. Plame-Wilson. Anybody with half a brain could have looked up on any of several websites that have the FEC postings for political contributions of Joseph Wilson and Valerie Wilson (or Valerie Plame), when the provocative editorial against the Iraq War by Mr. Wilson appeared in the New York Times.

It would have been very easy to find out that the company listed by Ms. Wilson “Brewster-Jennings & Assoc” wasn’t a bona fide company. Since Joseph Wilson claimed to be sent by the CIA, suspicion would naturally turn towards whether or not this company was a CIA front.

Unless it is proven otherwise, all publicly available evidence shows that Valerie Plame-Wilson carelessly outed herself on April 22, 1999 by listing the fake CIA front company as her employer, and her husband’s political commentary on the Iraq war situation led to investigative journalists putting two and two together.

29. dan spews:

Obviously, the NYT piece was a shot across the bow at Luke Esser.

30. Richard Pope spews:

Also, Joseph Wilson might actually be responsible for this outing, and not Valerie Plame. Joseph Wilson started out by giving Al Gore an illegal contribution of $2,000.00, when the limit was $1,000.00. To remedy this, the Gore campaign was given information that (1) $1,000.00 of this was actually donated by Joseph’s wife and (2) the name of Valerie’s alleged employer and her alleged position of “Analyst”.

I think it would be highly unusual for a CIA agent to make a political contribution. And especially an undercover agent working for a fake “employer” — especially to identify the fake “employer” in such a fashion. If we give Valerie the benefit of the doubt, then it was Joseph’s decision to: (1) make an illegal excess contribution to Gore, (2) give false information that half of it came from his wife, and (3) blow his wife’s cover working for a CIA undercover front company.

31. Richard Pope spews:

By the way, have they released the name of the fellow who got screwed to death by the horse in Enumclaw? Would that be the proper subject of an “outing” in the media?

32. Donnageddon spews:

righton @ 25 “Headache from watch you lefties go ape**** over chance to bag Rove. You were never pro CIA,”

Uh… did Hannity-Limbaugh-Savage tell you that? Are do you have some evidence that “we lefties” have never been pro CIA.

hint: You have no evidence because your statement is a damned lie.

33. Donnageddon spews:

RP @ 29 “Also, Joseph Wilson might actually be responsible for this outing, and not Valerie Plame.”

Uh.. you flunked logic class I assume. That is called a “false choice”. The correct answer is: Rove and Libby, and… fill in Bush, Cheney or both.

34. marks spews:

Charmin @25

“Useful for packing {…} too!”

So Mr. Whipple (the weird old man who thought Charmin was “sqeezably soft” and kept everyone else from sqeezing the Charmin) WAS your lover!

Oops, didn’t mean to out you…you’re not in the CIA are ya?

35. Charmin (formerly known as dj) spews:

Richard Pope @ 28

“This means there may be no criminal law violation whatsoever by the “outing” of Ms. Plame-Wilson. Anybody with half a brain could have looked up on any of several websites that have the FEC postings for political contributions of Joseph Wilson and Valerie Wilson (or Valerie Plame), when the provocative editorial against the Iraq War by Mr. Wilson appeared in the New York Times.”

I fail to comprehend the logic here. Plame’s cover was as an enery analyst for BJA. That company was created by the CIA as a front for Plame and at least one other agent. How on earth does making a political contribution, putting down the company one publically claims to work for in any way shape or form “out” oneself? It seems to me she would have “outed” herself only if she put down the CIA as her employer!

“It would have been very easy to find out that the company listed by Ms. Wilson “Brewster-Jennings & Assoc” wasn’t a bona fide company.”

Huh??? How’s that?

“Since Joseph Wilson claimed to be sent by the CIA, suspicion would naturally turn towards whether or not this company was a CIA front.”

Sure. . . if a senior WH official told you that Plame worked for the CIA. Otherwise, most people would think that Plame was an energy analyst working for some Boston Company.

“Unless it is proven otherwise, all publicly available evidence shows that Valerie Plame-Wilson carelessly outed herself on April 22, 1999 by listing the fake CIA front company as her employer”

No. That doing so makes it look like she is an energy analyst working for a company called Brewster-Jennings & Assoc.

“and her husband’s political commentary on the Iraq war situation led to investigative journalists putting two and two together.”

Wow. . . you mean every time somebody speaks out against the war, we should suspect that their spouse works for the CIA???????

I don’t think so.

36. Charmin (formerly known as dj) spews:

Marks @ 34

“So Mr. Whipple … WAS your lover!”

Ummmm. . . I was just a child. . . .

“Oops, didn’t mean to out you…you’re not in the CIA are ya?”

No. But my wife is!

Oops!

37. Charmin (formerly known as dj) spews:

Richard Pope @ 30

‘Also, Joseph Wilson might actually be responsible for this outing, and not Valerie Plame. Joseph Wilson started out by giving Al Gore an illegal contribution of $2,000.00, when the limit was $1,000.00. To remedy this, the Gore campaign was given information that (1) $1,000.00 of this was actually donated by Joseph’s wife and (2) the name of Valerie’s alleged employer and her alleged position of “Analyst”.’

It seems to me Richard that you are assuming that Plame was suppose to be a non-person or something. My understanding is that her cover was “Valerie Wilson, mother of twins, wife of Wilson, energy analyst for BJA.” Obviously, with a cover like that, BJA is who she lists as here employer.

“I think it would be highly unusual for a CIA agent to make a political contribution.”

Really? I would think the CIA would tell agents to do what they were inclined to do anyway in their personal life. I mean, if there were a bunch of rules—dos and don’ts for such agents—couldn’t the absence of such activities be used as confirming information?

“And especially an undercover agent working for a fake “employer” – especially to identify the fake “employer” in such a fashion.”

The employer was not fake, it was a company set up to provide cover for CIA agents. It had an address, phone number, was in the telephone book, etc. In fact, a company like this is precisely what agents would need for doing paperwork requiring an employer (i.e. for filling out credit card applications, political contributions, hotel bills, etc.).

“If we give Valerie the benefit of the doubt, then it was Joseph’s decision to: (1) make an illegal excess contribution to Gore, (2) give false information that half of it came from his wife, and (3) blow his wife’s cover working for a CIA undercover front company.”

Again, there is no logical path that takes you from Wilson political donations or Plame political donations to outing Plame.

38. David spews:

Richard Pope @ 28, 30: You’re kidding, right? By listing Brewster-Jennings as her employer (on records open to the public), Valerie Plame was maintaining her cover! You do understand what “cover” means, don’t you? Her cover was broken when Rove told journalists she (and presumably anyone else at Brewster-Jennings) was really working for the CIA.

39. Puddybud spews:

Charmin, sometimes you are really dense. I love the dissembling courses you provide to your lefty friends. I guess I have to spell it out to you again.

Feb 6, 2003 Joe Wilson is all gung ho about getting Saddam in Iraq. But, but, but he just came back and said the Niger Uranium thing was bogus in late 2002. Uhhh, no little lefties, the Senate Report said he fabricated information. He didn’t write a report, he spoke in conversational tones to his handlers, whom BTW were not from Cheney’s office as we know now!

Charmin, the resume entry was before July 16, 2003 “outing”. If I have a covert operative wife am I going to name her anywhere? Duh Charmin! Hannity or Limbaugh didn’t tell me where to look either! Found it with a little Google digging.

Charmin, thanks for providing the brief. On Page two: “In this case there exists ample evidence on the public record to cast serious doubt as to whether a crime has even been committed unter the IIPA in the investigation underlying the attempts to secure testimony from miller and Cooper”. – Okay I said “no crime”. Sorry everyone I should have said “whether a crime has even been committed”. Evidence in the public record. Isn’t that what us dextro side thinkers are providing to you sinistero side thinkers? So what does that prove Charmin, other that you provided your own namesake to wipe your own ass!!!

Who is under investigation? The SP already said Rove is not primarily under investigation, he is looking for perjury. The WA Post said the investigation has moved from one involving the identity of the White House official to one involving perjury or a cover-up. They are looking to determine if the source may have been questioned in front of the grand jury and lied. Get a life lefties!!!

Regarding the Gore contribution by Plame, RPope already proved your wiping technique needs remedial training by providing the live link. BJA was a fake company, even if it was created by the CIA. Did it create a annual report? Doubt it. Did it pay taxes? Doubt it?

Lefties: I have to congratulate Charmin because he provides the most links (just a few over 0)to “try” and refute our arguments. Most of you just provide standard 2004 John Kerry playbook materials from MoveOn.Org.

Regarding IT’s rant @32: You need remedial education. Start here:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=14324 & http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/9/17/162056.shtml &
http://www.consortiumnews.com/archive/story27.html provide some background material.

IT do I need to provide you the Robert “Torch” Torricelli documents on how he eviscerated the CIA with his “no bad guys on the payroll” letter to President Clinton? No better yet, you need to perform some Googleing on the Internet. Don’t you remember (no, probably not as you possess long term memory loss) during the 9/11 hearings and the Senate Hearings how former Deputy Attorney General Jamie S. Gorelick drafted the separations law (the wall) between the FBI & CIA and how Torricelli wrote the 1995 letter where the CIA was barred from using spies who were bad individuals? Bottom line IT, your side does not like the CIA!!!!

40. PacMan - The Best Game Ever spews:

Charmin, I am glad you like my new name for you. Unfortunately Richard Pope used yourself to wipe up your post gainst him. I love how you implement your small intellectual prison logic arguments.

Marks – That was funny!!! I wondered if anyone would remember Mr. Whipple.

Identified character cast so far :P
Gilbert Gottfried – David Goldstein
Charmin – DJ,
Mr Whipple – Charmin’s main squeeze(r)
IT – Donnageddon, unsure for a while what gender IT was
Loocy – Headless Lucy, unsure what it’s college credentials are to work in the Seattle School District as a teacher, and loose with many facts
In need of a divorce – Roger Rabbit – Maybe married to Loocy, concalescing in the San Juans Islands?
Hot Air Provider – Windie – Unsure of wind direction before urinating on HA
Chief Military Proponent – GBS – He’s my friend. It’s tough to diss him here

41. Donnageddon spews:

PuddyBuddy… NewsMax?

NewsMax!!??

I am supposed to get some “background material” from NewsMax!!???

…..

42. PacMan - The Best Game Ever spews:

Don, When you ask a legit question, I’ll call you by your first name. I referred to NewsMax because the facts are there. I refer to the NY Slimes, eventhough it leaves a nasty taste in my mouth. You may have the same bile reaction when you see NewsMax but take some time and read the article. Then refute away if you can Don!

43. Puddybud spews:

Don I like newsmax. What’s your problem?

44. PacMan - The Best Game Ever spews:

Remember I have used NewsMax too, Don and I refered to the Free Republic once. Someone identified the Free Republic people as ones against Andy Stephenson. Notice I haven’t used them since?

45. Charmin (formerly known as dj) spews:

Pudster @ 39

“…the Senate Report said [Wilson] fabricated information.”

No, it did not say that Wilson faked information.

”He didn’t write a report, he spoke in conversational tones to his handlers”

“spoke in conversational tones” :-) Is that conspiracy talk, pud? Wilson did say in his Op-Ed piece he provided several oral debriefings.

”whom BTW were not from Cheney’s office as we know now!”

Correct, just as Wilson suggested in his Op-Ed piece.

”Charmin, the resume entry was before July 16, 2003 “outing”. If I have a covert operative wife am I going to name her anywhere?

Pudster, this statement demonstrates your colossal ignorance of CIA operatives. The identity of Valerie Wilson was not concealed—she and Wilson had an ordinary public life, they had friends, they socialized, they went to dinner and movies together. There was nothing hidden about their marriage or their life together. The only thing that was hidden was Valerie’s real occupation. She wasn’t really an energy analyst. She was a CIA agent using her occupation as an energy analyst as a conduit into groups trying to purchase WMD-related material (probably uranium, although I don’t think this is public).

“In this case there exists ample evidence on the public record to cast serious doubt as to whether a crime has even been committed unter the IIPA in the investigation underlying the attempts to secure testimony from miller and Cooper”. – Okay I said “no crime”. Sorry everyone I should have said “whether a crime has even been committed”.

No. . . you should have said that the Media brief cast doubt about the existence of a crime. You could have also pointed out that the Courts rejected the argument being made in the brief.

”Evidence in the public record. Isn’t that what us dextro side thinkers are providing to you sinistero side thinkers? So what does that prove Charmin, other that you provided your own namesake to wipe your own ass!!!”

Sorry. . . I didn’t follow that paragraph. . . .

”Who is under investigation? The SP already said Rove is not primarily under investigation, he is looking for perjury. The WA Post said the investigation has moved from one involving the identity of the White House official to one involving perjury or a cover-up. They are looking to determine if the source may have been questioned in front of the grand jury and lied. Get a life lefties!!!”

No doubt the investigation has expanded to perjury against some individuals. But the SP is still primarily investigating leaks from senior WH officials.

”Regarding the Gore contribution by Plame, RPope already proved your wiping technique needs remedial training by providing the live link. BJA was a fake company, even if it was created by the CIA. Did it create a annual report?“

You idiot. Do you think the CIA sets up a front company and then doesn’t take the relatively minor steps to make it look legit? My understanding is that it had a real address, phone number, phone book entry, and was listed with Dun & Bradstreet’s database of company names (complete with financial information). BTW: How do you think Valerie Wilson listed her occupation and employer on her income tax form?

In fact, I think we can say, with the information at hand that the CIA was taking positive steps to provide an occupational cover for Plame. Who knows what the fallout has been for other CIA field personnel who were working in the field using BJA as well.

46. Puddybud spews:

Charmin, did you read the section on Niger on the report? It wasn’t covered in the cliff notes version IT uses. Someone posted the live testimony between Wilson and Senate Committee where he was chided about his Niger comments and his lie about his wife not getting him the Niger gig. Did you miss that Charmin?

My use of the brief, if you reread my original post, was comparing how the MSM lawyers were arguing in court one position while printing another position. I guess you missed that.

Dextro – Latin for Right
Sinistero – Latin for Left – Language lesson for the day

Conspiracy talk. Wilson changed his tune when he joined the Gore campaign. I showed you all that the Wilson 2/6/03 editorial was removed from John Kerry’s web site. I wonder why.

I guess you discount her old boss at the CIA Fred Rustmann’s take on Valerie Plame and many people knew what she did in WA, DC.

Someone already provided the informational link that she was transitioning from the CIA to the State Department. Did you read that Charmin?

47. Donnageddon spews:

Puddle and PM, I will not refute, nor will I read NewsMax. It is not even a biased news source.

It is not a news source at all.

48. Donnageddon spews:

Oh, and PM, Don is not my first name. I assume Pac is not your first name either.

49. Donnageddon spews:

Puddy @ 46 “showed you all that the Wilson 2/6/03 editorial was removed from John Kerry’s web site.”

Uh.. No, actually you didn’t.

50. Charmin (formerly known as dj) spews:

Pudster,

”Evidence in the public record. Isn’t that what us dextro side thinkers are providing to you sinistero side thinkers? So what does that prove Charmin, other that you provided your own namesake to wipe your own ass!!!”

I forgot to mention. I am still trying to figure out what you are getting at in this paragraph.

51. Donnageddon spews:

Charmin @ 51 Don’t worry, hardly anyone but PacMan can make heads or tails what Puddy is blathering about.

52. Donnageddon spews:

I think Puddy is “special”.

53. PacMan - The Best Game Ever spews:

Ok your name is not Don, so IT it is. You’re right, mine is not Pac. Sorry you will not read NewsMax. The news is fresh and crisp. Many times they fill in the blanks that the NY Slimes chose not to. They have a funny monthly magazine I sometimes get. Your loss IT.

54. Puddybud spews:

IT, maybe us Ivy Leaguers are educated to a higher mindset? Too bad you didn’t attend one. You could learn to think above the gutter.

Charmin, Are you making a claim of many operatives being outed from Plame’s old paymaster? Don’t you think the CIA would have escalated the issue even more to the Schumers and Leahys, you know the lefty loudmouths?

55. PacMan - The Best Game Ever spews:

IT, other righty posters are making similar references to Puddy’s informational sources. Apparently you can’t think too well.

56. Donnageddon spews:

PM @ 56 “other righty posters are making similar references to Puddy’s informational sources.”

Is that surprising? MaxNews is a Neo-Con spin machine. It is not a legitamate news source, and I will not debate a spin machine slander sheet.

I am sure you are very proud of your Ivy League education, I went to a humble State University. It is odd that given this difference that you choose to be so poorly informed.

And if you wish to call me IT or whatever pleases your limited vocabulary is fine by me.

57. Donnageddon spews:

PM @ 54 “orry you will not read NewsMax. The news is fresh and crisp. Many times they fill in the blanks”

Filling in the blanks is no real trick, as long as you have no respect for the truth. You can just make shit up, like MaxNews, Hannity-Limbaugh-Savage-O’Reilly do.

It is nothing to be proud of.

58. RUFUS spews:

Filling in the blanks is no real trick, as long as you have no respect for the truth. You can just make shit up, like MaxNews, Hannity-Limbaugh-Savage-O’Reilly do.

Oh yeah…. well can they make shit up and have the memo to back it up.. Fox-Limbaugh-Savage ect are just lightweights. They are not proffesional shit talkers like the MSM… hell they are not even in the same league

59. RUFUS spews:

60 minutes… now that is 100% pure USDA prime bullshit there.

60. Donnageddon spews:

RUFUS, I am serius here. Huffing paint fumes and gasoline is not good for you. Just say no.

61. RUFUS spews:

Newsweek is a grade lower… only 99% pure USDA choice bullshit.

62. Donnageddon spews:

RUFUS, back away from the keyboard and sleep it off.

63. PacMan - The Best Game Ever spews:

Wow IT. I am not the one who uses a feminine moniker. Donna Geddon, Donna Ged don, Don Naged don, what is it “whatever”? Were you trying to create a palindrome? A funny take on Armageddon?

Now regarding what RUFUS said about the MSM, did it hit a nerve “whatever”? Accusing RUFUS of performing your personal entertainment acts? Shame on you Whatever. You inferred only Puddy and I understood each other? Now RUFUS enters the fray and you get all uppity, “Whatever”!

RUFUS: You go man! Whatever get it’s news from Dan Rather CBS News reruns. I bet Bill Burkett’s direct personal cell phone # is on Whatever’s phone. Mary Mapes is a personal friend correct Whatever? I can’t tell you what to read, but if your news sources just lean to the left, then you are only half a loaf! Most of us righties do read lefty materials. Your loss!

64. Puddybud spews:

PacMan, stop being mean to don*****don. Congrats on going to Don*****don can’t learn to read that fast. If it isn’t mean spirited, shrill, bloviated, humorless, poorly researched materials trying to make the administration look bad then it doesn’t appeal with don*****don!

Besides don*****don may be upset that a WA legislator, Pam Roach, is creating a law making it a felony to have sex with animals. I just watched a news video and my skin crawled when they described what happened! YUCK!

65. PacMan - The Best Game Ever spews:

I like it. Don*****don. Okay I’ll use that instead. I’m sorry don*****don. Please forgive me don*****don. So you went to a state university. Kool. Which one? I am still asking leadless hoocy where did the “wrestling coach” go to school to spit such wonderful venom like #1 from leadless hoocy.

Newer FA-18Gs are being placed at Whidbey NAS as EA13G to replace the old E-6B Prowlers or something like that on the news for you guys. See we hear about you guys too.

66. Donnageddon spews:

64-66

Testaments to the right wing intellect.

67. Charmin (formerly known as dj) spews:

Puddybud @ 55

“Charmin, Are you making a claim of many operatives being outed from Plame’s old paymaster?”

I am repeating claims that there is a domino effect from outing Plame. Any of her overseas associates, contacts, and people refering “business” through BJA are potentially at risk, or are worthless as intelligent assets now.

“Don’t you think the CIA would have escalated the issue even more to the Schumers and Leahys, you know the lefty loudmouths?”

No. In fact, I would expect the CIA to undertake a pretty extensive damage assessment, but not declassify the report (that would be too revealing about the CIA and its operations). The “big picture” damage (aside from people getting killed and whatnot) is the intelligence and intelligence capacity that will be lost by this operation being shutdown. It may take years to rebuild the capacity. Unfortunately, dirty bombs, and even small-scale atomic weapons are currently considered a real threat by the U.S. intelligence community.

68. dan spews:

It sure is funny how Republicans don’t want to talk about LUKE ESSER

69. Richard Pope spews:

So who is Ken Jacobsen contemplating outing? The Seattle Times has a piece on this matter in today’s paper:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002391109_danny20.html

70. dan spews:

Esser.

71. Richard Pope spews:

Welcome to Esser Networks

Our organization provides development, consulting, and training in the fields of data and telecommunication networks, with WANs and internet applications in focus. Our headquarters are based in Berlin, Germany, however, we gladly serve customers all over Europe — directly or in co-operation with our partner organizations, depending on the project. This site is regularly updated — please return here now and then.

If you want to get more information about our organization, or if you want to make an inquiry, feel free to contact us via e-mail. You can also subscribe to our e-mail service and will be regularly provided with any news about our company.

http://www.esser.com/int/international.htm

72. Charmin (formerly known as dj) spews:

Puddybud @ 55

An interesting letter was just sent to leaders in Congress by 11 former intelligence employees.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/docs/intel.officers.letter.pdf