Most Serious BS

Annie

Diamond Member
Nov 22, 2003
50,848
4,827
1,790
Miller on Plame and 'not remembering.' :rolleyes:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051015...u5ZJ_wA;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

Miller Can't Recall Who Gave Agent's Name

By PETE YOST, Associated Press Writer1 hour, 6 minutes ago

Notes by the New York Times' Judith Miller that were turned over in a criminal investigation contain the name of a covert CIA officer, but the reporter has told prosecutors she cannot recall who disclosed the name, the newspaper reported Saturday.

The prosecutor in the case asked Miller in recent days to explain how Valerie Plame — misspelled in those notes as "Valerie Flame" — appeared in the same notebook the reporter used in interviewing her confidential source, Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, according to the Times.

In response to questioning by Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, Miller replied that she "didn't think" she heard Plame's name from Cheney's aide, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby.

"I said I believed the information came from another source, whom I could not recall," Miller wrote, recounting her testimony for an article that the newspaper posted on its Web site Saturday afternoon.

"Valerie Flame" actually was the name in the notebook, and the Times said Miller should have written Valerie Plame.
 
Yahoo had another article about Judith Miller's testimony posted this morning, and it sure does appear to me that Scooter Libby had nothing to do with "outing" Valerie Plame. Libby should sue everyone in the press who had anything to do with slandering him based of this outrageous innuendo. There has got to be a way to put an end to these destructive lies appearing in the main stream press. I believe in freedom of the press, but freedom to report truth, not lies and fiction. The NYT, in their zeal to bring down the Bush Administration, may have taken on more than they can handle with this "story." A 1/2-inch retraction printed on page 28 is not going to do the trick for them this time.
 
Adam's Apple said:
Yahoo had another article about Judith Miller's testimony posted this morning, and it sure does appear to me that Scooter Libby had nothing to do with "outing" Valerie Plame. Libby should sue everyone in the press who had anything to do with slandering him based of this outrageous innuendo. There has got to be a way to put an end to these destructive lies appearing in the main stream press. I believe in freedom of the press, but freedom to report truth, not lies and fiction. The NYT, in their zeal to bring down the Bush Administration, may have taken on more than they can handle with this "story." A 1/2-inch retraction printed on page 28 is not going to do the trick for them this time.

And this wacko went to jail because she couldn't remember anything ??
 
dilloduck said:
And this wacko went to jail because she couldn't remember anything ??

Shades of Bill and Hillary Clinton at the time they gave testimony!!! :) Just couldn't resist myself.

Oh, yes, Judith Miller remembers who her source was, but, unfortunately for her and the diabolical NYT, it was not someone from the Bush Administration. Do you know that Judith Miller agreed to testify only if her interview with Scooter Libby was the subject of the interview. Fitzgerald could not ask her about any other source she may have had on the topic. How is that procedure for arriving at the truth?
 
William Joyce said:
Knowing this lady, she probably engineered it so as to better posture as a journalistic hero.

I've thought about that too---a Martha Stewart wannabe maybe or maybe just another one of the left-wing conspiracists.
 
GunnyL said:
Doesn't matter. The lefties will keep posting the accusations against Bush and Cheney and stick to their conspiracy script as if none of this info came out.

I read her long tirade which seems to say there is nothing there. Not on Rove and not on Libby. Unless there is someone in hiding, that didn't go to jail to protect their sources, I wonder what Fitzgerald will come up with?
 
Kathianne said:
I read her long tirade which seems to say there is nothing there. Not on Rove and not on Libby. Unless there is someone in hiding, that didn't go to jail to protect their sources, I wonder what Fitzgerald will come up with?

The fact is, if her husband had not lied trying to make himself sound more important, the info would never have come into question nor be an issue.

I have and do contend that if anyone is to blame, it is him.

Second, I STILL haven't had a satisfactory answer as to just WHAT was compromised. She was sitting behind a desk at CIA headquarters, and well past the customary 2 years agents retain their undercover status after being pulled from the field.

But hey, what do the facts have to do with it? ;)
 
GunnyL said:
The fact is, if her husband had not lied trying to make himself sound more important, the info would never have come into question nor be an issue.

I have and do contend that if anyone is to blame, it is him.

Second, I STILL haven't had a satisfactory answer as to just WHAT was compromised. She was sitting behind a desk at CIA headquarters, and well past the customary 2 years agents retain their undercover status after being pulled from the field.

But hey, what do the facts have to do with it? ;)

I am not an attorney, but if my readings are close to correct, seems that Fitzgerald has been looking at some 'conspriacy' and 'espionage' laws...
 
Kathianne said:
I am not an attorney, but if my readings are close to correct, seems that Fitzgerald has been looking at some 'conspriacy' and 'espionage' laws...

I'm not an attorney either. Based on the actual facts that have been presented, it appears a law degree isn't required. Doesn't take much G-2 to figure out this is just another sensationalized, dishonest leftist attack on the current administration.

They don't even get credit for originality because they've regurgitated this issue as they do their other favorites ...... 1) Bush lied about WMDs; 2)Cheney cuts deals for Haliburton; 3) Abu Ghraib; and lest we forget 4) "yada, yada, yada ....."
 
GunnyL said:
I'm not an attorney either. Based on the actual facts that have been presented, it appears a law degree isn't required. Doesn't take much G-2 to figure out this is just another sensationalized, dishonest leftist attack on the current administration.

They don't even get credit for originality because they've regurgitated this issue as they do their other favorites ...... 1) Bush lied about WMDs; 2)Cheney cuts deals for Haliburton; 3) Abu Ghraib; and lest we forget 4) "yada, yada, yada ....."

Oh I agree with you on that, but facts have never stood in the way of these kind of 'investigations.'
 

Forum List

Back
Top