End of an Affair - Valerie Plame

KarlMarx

Senior Member
Joined
May 9, 2004
Messages
3,231
Reaction score
492
Points
48
Location
...
To all the liberals on the board, do yourselves a favor and please don't bring up the subject of Valerie Plame any longer. That will prevent you from appearing like an unhinged lunatic.

It's now official. Even the Washington Post, often considered a liberal newspaper, admits it.

As many of us on the board have been saying all along, the whole Valerie Plame affair was much ado about nothing....


WE'RE RELUCTANT to return to the subject of former CIA employee Valerie Plame because of our oft-stated belief that far too much attention and debate in Washington has been devoted to her story and that of her husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, over the past three years. But all those who have opined on this affair ought to take note of the not-so-surprising disclosure that the primary source of the newspaper column in which Ms. Plame's cover as an agent was purportedly blown in 2003 was former deputy secretary of state Richard L. Armitage.

....

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

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/31/AR2006083101460_pf.html
 

CockySOB

VIP Member
Joined
May 20, 2006
Messages
709
Reaction score
108
Points
78
Location
Midwest USA
This gentle readers, is the stuff of "I told you so"s to last for years. Unfortunately the loonbats on the left are going to keep on waiting for their so-called Fitzmas no matter what the facts say.
 
OP
KarlMarx

KarlMarx

Senior Member
Joined
May 9, 2004
Messages
3,231
Reaction score
492
Points
48
Location
...
This gentle readers, is the stuff of "I told you so"s to last for years. Unfortunately the loonbats on the left are going to keep on waiting for their so-called Fitzmas no matter what the facts say.
I can't resist.....

They'll be like that little guy on "Fantasy Island"...

"The Plame!!!!! The Plame!!!!!!"
 

Avatar4321

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2004
Messages
82,283
Reaction score
10,122
Points
2,070
Location
Minnesota
It didnt stop them from still blaming Vice President Cheney
 

Annie

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
50,848
Reaction score
4,826
Points
1,790
Have at it:

http://www.rogerlsimon.com/mt-archives/2006/09/why_it_all_happ.php

September 01, 2006: Why it all happened

This is a momentous morning. The Washington Post has written a remarkably honest editorial about the Valerie Plame Affair:

It follows that one of the most sensational charges leveled against the Bush White House -- that it orchestrated the leak of Ms. Plame's identity to ruin her career and thus punish Mr. Wilson -- is untrue. The partisan clamor that followed the raising of that allegation by Mr. Wilson in the summer of 2003 led to the appointment of a special prosecutor, a costly and prolonged investigation, and the indictment of Vice President Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, on charges of perjury. All of that might have been avoided had Mr. Armitage's identity been known three years ago.

No kidding. After giving 'Scooter" et al a perfunctory slap on the wrist, the editorial goes on to say what was obvious to many of us from the get-go:

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

Of course Mr. Wilson's narcissistic drivel was bought hook, line and sinker by that bastion of reactionary liberalism the New York Times and parroted by its myriad followers. Wouldn't it be interesting to be a fly on the wall of their editorial offices at this moment? In a loose-lipped moment, Bill Keller once called blogs a 'circle jerk,' one of the most classic uses of projection since Freud. What will they do now? Their onetime employee Judith Miller went to jail over this farce (and speaking of hooks and lines - we at the burgeoning PJ Media bought into the whole charade, inviting Ms. Miller to our debut).

But what interests me is how the Plame Affair fits into the whole framework. It may be opera bouffe, but it is far from unrelated to the way the press has conducted itself in recent years. Is it so different from Pallywood and the Mohammed Al Doura case, the Reuters photographs, the Jenin "massacre" and so forth - all lies swallowed whole by a gullible Western media? At first glance they would seem far apart, but in this small world one concept draws them all together - narrative. The truth is less important than the weltanschauung of the publication. But we knew that, didn't we?

So next step - why this phenomenon? Why the acceptance of this narrative whose result is so negative to world history and seems in continuous aid of the destruction of the Enlightenment itself? Is it just Bush Derangement Syndrome? Well, I think that's a large part of it. But the term (BDS) is too narrow to encompass the phenomenon. A variety of psychological forces are in the mix, but most notable to me is a sense of deprivation. 9/11 stripped the left of its self-perceived idealism that was the mainstay of its "personality." Forces (like Bush) that lefties once dismissed as reactionary were taking the lead in the preservation of the West instead of supporting dictators as they once did. Furthermore, in the old days the left could take concilation that the enemy (communism) had at least a theoretical rationale - economic fairness to all. The new enemy was more troublesome - on the one hand poor (only seemingly, of course, considering the oil rich) and on the other hand medieval, anti-woman, anti-gay and anti-modern... essentially anti-liberal. What to do.... what to do?

In the beginning the left went along with Bush, but the minute things began to lag in Iraq, they deserted him in a flash. At first glance the reason was political but on a deeper (and I believe more important) level the reason was psychological. The left was in a rush to reclaim its lost idealism (the "it's about oil" nonsense was but an obvious example of this), to preserve its disintegrating sense of self. Of course the big loser in all this is the truth. Sure Bush made a bunch of mistakes (who wouldn't?) but it should be obvious to anyone that we are at the earliest stages of a very long war. Nevertheless, a culture of media corruption set in almost instantly that ended up creating absurdities like the Plame Affair. We are lucky this one got unmasked. We will also be lucky if the conclusions drawn in the WaPo editorial stick for that publication at least. We shall see.
 

GeeWhiz

Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2006
Messages
166
Reaction score
25
Points
16
You guys are really on this, "say it ain't so Dick" bandwagon. All of you should Dick Cheney before he Dick's you.

Grand Jury investigation uncovered the fact that 6 other journalists were contacted by members of the White House. What the White House wanted those 6 journalists to do was to out Plame. This is called attempt to leak for purpose of revenge.

Libby purposefully lead the Grand Jury on a wild goose chase in order to stall facts from coming out until after the 2004 election. The facts of course was the White House contact with the 6 journalists and leaking Plames name to those journalists.

Armitage doesn't change the fact that the White House did make every attempt to out an agent and outing agents is a no, no, especially for nothing more than revenge.
 

Gunny

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2004
Messages
44,689
Reaction score
6,852
Points
198
Location
The Republic of Texas
You guys are really on this, "say it ain't so Dick" bandwagon. All of you should Dick Cheney before he Dick's you.

Grand Jury investigation uncovered the fact that 6 other journalists were contacted by members of the White House. What the White House wanted those 6 journalists to do was to out Plame. This is called attempt to leak for purpose of revenge.

Libby purposefully lead the Grand Jury on a wild goose chase in order to stall facts from coming out until after the 2004 election. The facts of course was the White House contact with the 6 journalists and leaking Plames name to those journalists.

Armitage doesn't change the fact that the White House did make every attempt to out an agent and outing agents is a no, no, especially for nothing more than revenge.
Dude, get a grip adn chew your sour grapes. You are perfect example of what was previously stated .... damn the truth, you're going to keep on perpetuating the lies. Not because they're fact, but because it's what you want.

There is nothing in your post that is corroborated by fact. End of story.
 

GeeWhiz

Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2006
Messages
166
Reaction score
25
Points
16
Dude, get a grip adn chew your sour grapes. You are perfect example of what was previously stated .... damn the truth, you're going to keep on perpetuating the lies. Not because they're fact, but because it's what you want.

There is nothing in your post that is corroborated by fact. End of story.
You still haven't contributed anything. Try learning about Judith Miller's role in the Grand Jury investigation, or Tim Russert's. Try learning about the relationship between Libby and Judith Miller and how that relationship relates to Plame. Try learning about how the log of the meeting between Cheney and Libby shows that Cheney told Libby about Plame. Try learning about how Libby is crying he didn't remember that meeting, even though he told the Grand Jury it was several journalists that told him the identity of Plame. Try learning about how the journalists told the Grand Jury that they were not the one's that told Libby, on the contrare it was Libby that told the Journalists.

Try contributing instead of just posting cheap shots at my posts.
 

Gunny

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2004
Messages
44,689
Reaction score
6,852
Points
198
Location
The Republic of Texas
You still haven't contributed anything. Try learning about Judith Miller's role in the Grand Jury investigation, or Tim Russert's. Try learning about the relationship between Libby and Judith Miller and how that relationship relates to Plame. Try learning about how the log of the meeting between Cheney and Libby shows that Cheney told Libby about Plame. Try learning about how Libby is crying he didn't remember that meeting, even though he told the Grand Jury it was several journalists that told him the identity of Plame. Try learning about how the journalists told the Grand Jury that they were not the one's that told Libby, on the contrare it was Libby that told the Journalists.

Try contributing instead of just posting cheap shots at my posts.
Well thank you, cheesewhiz for your opinion of my contribution.:finger3:

Unfortunately for YOU, I made MY point. You have no fact to base your accusations on and have once again resorted to personal attack as a lame attempt at deflection.
 

theHawk

Registered Conservative
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Messages
32,242
Reaction score
17,045
Points
1,905
Location
Arizona
You guys are really on this, "say it ain't so Dick" bandwagon. All of you should Dick Cheney before he Dick's you.

Grand Jury investigation uncovered the fact that 6 other journalists were contacted by members of the White House. What the White House wanted those 6 journalists to do was to out Plame. This is called attempt to leak for purpose of revenge.

Libby purposefully lead the Grand Jury on a wild goose chase in order to stall facts from coming out until after the 2004 election. The facts of course was the White House contact with the 6 journalists and leaking Plames name to those journalists.

Armitage doesn't change the fact that the White House did make every attempt to out an agent and outing agents is a no, no, especially for nothing more than revenge.

You are a complete moron. When the reporters were chasing this story, they quickly found out that Cheney did not send him to Niger to do his "investigation". So they next natural question ANY reporter would ask is "who did?" That puts the white house on the spot, if they say nothing it makes it look like they are hiding something, and if they point towards 'the wife' (which was the truth by the way) then they face allegations that they outted her name just for 'revenge'. How is it revenge when its the TRUTH??? It was a trap set up by Wilson, nothing more. If he and his wife didn't want her identity go become public then he shouldn't had made wild accusations about the President, especially when it was his wife that was respnosible for sending him to his Niger fantasy Austin Powers vacation.

As I pointed out a long time ago this was all bullshit caused by Joe Wilson when he first wrote his piece in the New York Times....just a few months after he started working for the Kerry campaign.


1) Wilson was never "ordered" by the government, much less the White House, to "investigate" anything in Niger. He was on an unpaid trip set up by his wife.
2) He never filed an official report when he came back from his fantasy James Bond vaction....oops I mean his "investigation".
3) Joe Wilson started working for the Kerry campaign May of 2003. A month later he published his New York Times story "What I Didn't Find in Africa". Claiming that Bush had his report (the one he never filed) and ignored it. He never said Cheney sent him, but said that the CIA told him that the VP had questions about a report he filed. Then the lapdog media took this to mean Cheney had ordered this report, and thats where it spirals out of reality because he never corrected the media.
4) The Bush administration received its intel reports about Niger Uranium sales from the British and French. Not some non-existant report by 'Secret Agent Wilson.'
5) Wilson lied and said that his wife did not send him to Niger. However the Senate Intelligence Committe obatained the memo from Valeria Plame saying Wilson "has good relations with both the PM and the former Minister of Mines" who could possibly "shed light on this sort of activity". Joe's response to the committe was "I don't see it as a recommendation to send me". Riiiight.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/forums/showthread.php?t=33683&highlight=Wilson+Plame


So as it stands now there is ZERO evidence to back any of Wilson's claims. The only evidence there is in the case is the internal memo writte by Plame to her boss suggesting her husband to go there.

Joe Wilson and his wife are liars. And you're an idiot if you ever believed them.
 
OP
KarlMarx

KarlMarx

Senior Member
Joined
May 9, 2004
Messages
3,231
Reaction score
492
Points
48
Location
...
You guys are really on this, "say it ain't so Dick" bandwagon. All of you should Dick Cheney before he Dick's you.

Grand Jury investigation uncovered the fact that 6 other journalists were contacted by members of the White House. What the White House wanted those 6 journalists to do was to out Plame. This is called attempt to leak for purpose of revenge.

Libby purposefully lead the Grand Jury on a wild goose chase in order to stall facts from coming out until after the 2004 election. The facts of course was the White House contact with the 6 journalists and leaking Plames name to those journalists.

Armitage doesn't change the fact that the White House did make every attempt to out an agent and outing agents is a no, no, especially for nothing more than revenge.
As I said "...prevent you from appearing like an unhinged lunatic".

It is amazing how the White House has a Svengali like influence over the press when it tries to "cover up" the alleged "outing" of a desk bound civil servant that supposedly undermines the entire infrastructure of our national defense as we know it. And yet at the same time, it is completely powerless to stop the press from leaking the details about highly classified NSA surveillance programs.

I think that you lefties ought to start thinking about how Valerie Plame was contacted by extra-terrestrials perhaps, maybe even Elvis, and how she was involved in the 1947 cover up at Roswell and Area 51. I don't think you've investigated that part of this vast right wing conspiracy. And while you're at it, you should try to connect the dots between Valerie Plame and the epidemic of obesity among young people, the heart break of psoriasis, bad breath, athlete's foot, the steroid scandal in major league baseball, hemorrhoids, why Tom Cruise was suddenly dropped by a major Hollywood studio and the breakup of Jessica Simpson's marriage... I'm sure that George W Bush, Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, Haliburton, Rush Limbaugh, the Republican Party, Jerry Falwell and the Moral Majority, Fox News, Rupert Murdoch, fundamentalist Christians, Senator Rick Santorum, Justices Alito, Roberts and Thomas and Israel are all involved in this (not to mention Dr. Evil!)...

:tinfoil: :tinfoil: :tinfoil:
 

Avatar4321

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2004
Messages
82,283
Reaction score
10,122
Points
2,070
Location
Minnesota
You guys are really on this, "say it ain't so Dick" bandwagon. All of you should Dick Cheney before he Dick's you.

Grand Jury investigation uncovered the fact that 6 other journalists were contacted by members of the White House. What the White House wanted those 6 journalists to do was to out Plame. This is called attempt to leak for purpose of revenge.

Libby purposefully lead the Grand Jury on a wild goose chase in order to stall facts from coming out until after the 2004 election. The facts of course was the White House contact with the 6 journalists and leaking Plames name to those journalists.

Armitage doesn't change the fact that the White House did make every attempt to out an agent and outing agents is a no, no, especially for nothing more than revenge.
Actually the fact that it was Armitage, and that Fitzgerald knew this from the beginning as well as the fact that anyone who looked at the law would have known that Valery did not qualify as an undercover agent shows evidence that Fitzgerald wasted tax payer money in an effort to undermine the Administration and calls into question anything his investigation turned up.

There was no wild goose chase by Libby because Fitzgerald knew from almost the beginning who the leaker was. There was no need to even talk to Libby.

If I were Libby, once this case is dismissed, and it will be I would sue Fitzgerald for malpractice.
 

Yurt

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2004
Messages
25,603
Reaction score
3,600
Points
270
Location
Hot air ballon
You guys are really on this, "say it ain't so Dick" bandwagon. All of you should Dick Cheney before he Dick's you.

Grand Jury investigation uncovered the fact that 6 other journalists were contacted by members of the White House. What the White House wanted those 6 journalists to do was to out Plame. This is called attempt to leak for purpose of revenge.

Libby purposefully lead the Grand Jury on a wild goose chase in order to stall facts from coming out until after the 2004 election. The facts of course was the White House contact with the 6 journalists and leaking Plames name to those journalists.

Armitage doesn't change the fact that the White House did make every attempt to out an agent and outing agents is a no, no, especially for nothing more than revenge.

You sure love to type Dick. Do you like typing Dick? What is it about Dick that you like? I am just curious.

Btw, total logical fallacy, ad hominem, attack, to make yourself look better.

Good job.
 

sitarro

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2003
Messages
5,186
Reaction score
1,028
Points
153
Location
USA
It would be a surprise that Bill Clinton wasn't involved with her except for the fact that she is gorgeous and older that 19. Now as for Britney Spears, DNA tests would reveal if that hick's kid is actually Bill's, then again, the same above mentioned rule would come into play, even though she has the mentallity of a fruit fly she was older than 19 when she became pregnant so I guess that disqualifies the ex-President again. He is still on the loose so anyone with a kid under 20, overweight and an idiot beware.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top