red states rule
Senior Member
- May 30, 2006
- 16,011
- 573
- 48
Libs never give up - even after their lies and distorations are dismissed in a court of law
Judge Dismisses former CIA Operative Valerie Plame's Lawsuit Against
- Thread starter Angel Heart
- Start date
Libs never give up - even after their lies and distorations are dismissed in a court of law
red states rule
Senior Member
- May 30, 2006
- 16,011
- 573
- 48
I wished I owned a liquor store near a liberal stronghold, I'd be making alot of money right now
From what I have read. I don't need to be there to know this anymore then I need to work for the CIA to know what their procedures are. We know that covert operatives are in fact based out of CIA Headquarters and are given temporary assignments there on a routine basis while maintaining their cover. I'm as capable as anyone of reading the reports, and studies and I have already looked into this issue and concluded the CIA has used this method as a means to protect the identity of its agents. So let's begin with some background.
Valarie Plame explained it this way, "Congressman, thank you for the opportunity. I know Im here under oath, and I am here to say I was a covert officer of the Central Intelligence Agency. Just like a general is a general whether he is in the field in Iraq or Afghanistan, when he comes back to the Pentagon, he is still a general. In the same way, covert operations officers who are serving in the field, when they rotate back to a temporary assignment in Washington, they, too, are still covert." She isn't referring to a mall population of the CIA's covert agent but every one of them. The most interesting comment supporting this is a comment that appeared in the news back in 2004.
Here is the comment: "The associate deputy director of counterintelligence, a highly respected case officer whose name is being withheld because she is undercover, told Michael Sulick, the associate deputy director of operations, about the threat. Sulick told his superior, Kappes, and both sought a meeting with Goss to complain." The reason this comment is so interesting is it demonstrates what I have said. It demonstrates that even high ranking officials at the CIA can be considered covert agents including those who work in administrative roles such as an Associate Deputy Director. The role of the person determines whether they are covert and not whether they work at the CIA. It's the role or function they perform that is covert while their identities may be generally known. I don't doubt that many of the people who knew this Associate Deputy Director of Counter-Intelligence knew she worked for the CIA but I doubt that any of them knew what she really did for the CIA and that her employmen with the CIA was part of her cover or in the words of the news reports she was "undercover" as just another CIA employee.
To demonstrate my point: For all we know this associate deputy director could have been Valarie Plame or any number of covert agents since we know she worked in the Directorate of Operations and specifically in the areas dealing with counter-intelligence and counter-proliferation. This could explain the reason that the CIA had such a negative response to the Bush administration leaking the identity of Valarie Plame. If Plame was an Associate Deputy Director then it may have caused the CIA to take more notice than if she was just any other covert operative. But I doubt that she was the woman in question but it only goes to show that a covert agent doesn't lose that status simply because they are assigned to work at CIA Headquarters. I am also fairly positive that the family and friends of this Associate Deputy Director thought she was merely a low-level CIA employee and that when asked by someone if she worked there they would have said she did without revealing her covert status.
How much responsibility Plame had while at the CIA may never be known nor do we know many of these agents who work undercover who are based out of CIA Headquaters but we do know based on this comment that an Associate Deputy Director can be considered undercover. When you have the identity of such a high ranking member of the CIA administration kept secret because she is undercover it should tell you something about the status of Plame and the nature of the work she performed in the counter-proliferation division.
Here you have the Director of the CIA, the Director of Operations, the Associate Deputy Director of Operations and the Associate Deputy Director of Counter-Intelligence and one of their identities can't be released. She was only a few steps removed from the Director of the CIA and yet her identity was kept secret because she was a covert agent.
red states rule
Senior Member
- May 30, 2006
- 16,011
- 573
- 48
From then on Mr. Wilson promoted a two-fold story to reporters in which he claimed:
1) That he had personally debunked the claims of Iraqs nuclear deals with Niger with an "unequivocal" report that circulated at the highest levels of the government.
2) That he had personally debunked the so-called Niger forgeries by pointing out to the CIA and State Department that the documents contained errors in names and dates.
We now know thanks to the report on this matter from the bi-partisan US Senate Select Committee On Intelligence that both of these claims were utterly false. (And indeed, the "sixteen words" themselves have turned out to be quite grounded in fact.)
So how is it that some of the most prominent reporters from the New York Times, the Washington Post and elsewhere reported Mr. Wilsons outlandish charges on faith? He does not generally give the impression of being any too trustworthy.
Was it because he had someone who could corroborate his incendiary story? A "second source"? An expert in this very field?
A month before Bob Novak published Valerie Plames name and disclosed that she worked at the CIA in a department that monitored weapons of mass destruction, the gossipy Richard Armitage at the State Department already knew all about her.
When asked how he knew about Plame, Armitage said he knew because Joe Wilson was "calling everybody" and telling them. And by "everybody" Mr. Armitage certainly meant reporters.
With that in mind it is an easy step to suppose that it was Mr. Joseph C. Wilson IV himself who first "outed" his wife as a CIA officer.
And, as Mr. Armitage also suggested, Wilson did so because he didnt want to be dismissed as some "low-level guy." He wanted to buttress his wildly outrageous (and we now know fallacious) claims against a then popular President at the height of a then popular war.
And what better way to do so than to produce the person who sent him on his mission, and who witnessed the events unfold his own wife, who just happened to be an expert on weapons of mass destruction.
http://sweetness-light.com/archive/when-and-why-joseph-c-wilson-iv-outed-valerie-plame
1) That he had personally debunked the claims of Iraqs nuclear deals with Niger with an "unequivocal" report that circulated at the highest levels of the government.
2) That he had personally debunked the so-called Niger forgeries by pointing out to the CIA and State Department that the documents contained errors in names and dates.
We now know thanks to the report on this matter from the bi-partisan US Senate Select Committee On Intelligence that both of these claims were utterly false. (And indeed, the "sixteen words" themselves have turned out to be quite grounded in fact.)
So how is it that some of the most prominent reporters from the New York Times, the Washington Post and elsewhere reported Mr. Wilsons outlandish charges on faith? He does not generally give the impression of being any too trustworthy.
Was it because he had someone who could corroborate his incendiary story? A "second source"? An expert in this very field?
A month before Bob Novak published Valerie Plames name and disclosed that she worked at the CIA in a department that monitored weapons of mass destruction, the gossipy Richard Armitage at the State Department already knew all about her.
When asked how he knew about Plame, Armitage said he knew because Joe Wilson was "calling everybody" and telling them. And by "everybody" Mr. Armitage certainly meant reporters.
With that in mind it is an easy step to suppose that it was Mr. Joseph C. Wilson IV himself who first "outed" his wife as a CIA officer.
And, as Mr. Armitage also suggested, Wilson did so because he didnt want to be dismissed as some "low-level guy." He wanted to buttress his wildly outrageous (and we now know fallacious) claims against a then popular President at the height of a then popular war.
And what better way to do so than to produce the person who sent him on his mission, and who witnessed the events unfold his own wife, who just happened to be an expert on weapons of mass destruction.
http://sweetness-light.com/archive/when-and-why-joseph-c-wilson-iv-outed-valerie-plame
You are an idiot since she wasn't a paper pusher. She was heavily involved in the work on counter-proliferation and was even placed in charge of the the operations section of the counter-proliferation division (CPD). It is an insult to the hundreds of men and women who work at the CIA as covert agents to label them paper-pushers when their work is as vital if not more vital than that the man or woman on the ground. These people spend a portion of their time at CIA Headquarters performing essential jobs before being re-tasked and sent to other assignments in the United States and abroad.
red states rule
Senior Member
- May 30, 2006
- 16,011
- 573
- 48
If she was this female James Bond as libs claim, why was nobody charged with the leak?
Hint - she was not covert - just another faceless paper pusher
ReillyT
Senior Member
Possible reasons that no one was charged with a leak were discussed about two pages back. There are several possible reasons. I won't repeat the discussion here. I leave it to you to review it if you like.
red states rule
Senior Member
- May 30, 2006
- 16,011
- 573
- 48
The only reason is - she was NOT covert
ReillyT
Senior Member
For someone who considers yourself such a patriot, you are pretty dismissive of anyone who sits behind a desk at Langley.
ReillyT
Senior Member
You were too lazy to even go back and read the prior discussion.
Tsk... Tsk... RSR
Liberals have never claimed she was a female James Bond. She isn't running around in the back streets of a city looking under the bushes for WMD. She isn't crawling in gutters trying to find that bomb that is hidden in a crevice. That isn't the role of 90% of covert agents. The term covert is intended to describe the function or role an agent. Let me quote the following again to demonstrate my point: "The associate deputy director of counterintelligence, a highly respected case officer whose name is being withheld because she is undercover, told Michael Sulick, the associate deputy director of operations, about the threat. Sulick told his superior, Kappes, and both sought a meeting with Goss to complain." Understanding the prominent role of an Associate Deputy Director tells us that these "face-less paper pushers" are considered vital to the interests of the country. They aren't just picking up papers and pushing them around. These people could be kidnapped, raped, tortured and killed by our enemies if they were to find out their identities. Associate Deputy Directors in the National Clandestine Service are high ranking officials within the CIA just like they are in other government agencies and yet their covert status requires that their information not be released to the public in order to protect them and our interests. The days of James Bond are long gone except in your sick mind and the spies of today are far more effective. They wear numerous hats but the fact remains that Valarie Plame was a covert agent before, and during her work at CIA Headquarters and would still have been a covert agent after she returned to the field in a different task.
red states rule
Senior Member
- May 30, 2006
- 16,011
- 573
- 48
I read them
But here is what tells me she was not covert - and her own words when could not get her story straight
Plame's contradictory testimony
CIA LEAK CASE | Republican rep wants to recall ex-agent to find out which of her stories is the truth LABEL 14.5PT | Deck head is 21 pt Utopia Semibold sdfhsdjfjsdfj sdfh sjfhdshdfjhsjdfhsdf
July 15, 2007
ROBERT NOVAK novakevans@suntimes.com
Rep. Tom Davis, ranking Republican on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, is puzzled by the House Intelligence Committee's claim that Valerie Plame Wilson has been consistent in her sworn testimony. He is asking the Intelligence Committee for documents to back up its contention.
Davis last month noted that Valerie Wilson had testified to his committee that she, as a CIA employee, had not suggested the fact-finding mission to Niger by her husband, former ambassador Joseph Wilson. She earlier had told the Senate Intelligence Committee staff that she did not recall whether she made such a proposal. Davis also cited an internal CIA e-mail by her saying her husband ''may be in a position to assist.''
Davis asked that Valerie Wilson be recalled for testimony by his committee. Democratic Chairman Henry Waxman bucked the issue over to the House Intelligence Committee. When it responded that she had been consistent in denying that she suggested her husband's mission, Davis was baffled in view of contradictory evidence.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/novak/468224,CST-EDT-NOVAK15.article
red states rule
Senior Member
- May 30, 2006
- 16,011
- 573
- 48
It is fun to watch libs shooting themselves in the foot
ReillyT
Senior Member
I don't really have an opinion on Ms. Plame herself. However, yesterday a decent amount of time was spent discussing whether Plame was a covert operative (as the Director of CIA believed - see link in prior discussion), and if so, why was no one charged?
Was she covert? Who the hell knows? It is a legal classification that would have to be tested in court. Is there reason to believe she was covert? Sure there is. (See prior discussion in this same thread).
Are there reasons that no one may have been charged that are not directly related to whether she was covert? Sure. Read prior discussion.
Come on man. Show some initiative. It is only about 2 or 3 pages back in the thread.
P.S. I wouldn't rely to much on Novak to support claims about Plame. He is what you might call an interested party.
red states rule
Senior Member
- May 30, 2006
- 16,011
- 573
- 48
She did not fit the law that would have made her covert
Libs were blaming Novack for leaking her ID - turns out he did not
He is more loyal to the Republican Party than he is to this country. The fact is that the CIA does a lot of good work and most of it is done right from the offices of Langley where people go and perform various tasks from overt to covert in an effort to advance our interests as a nation. Those who worked in the counter-proliferation division of the CIA were a part of the clandestine service and would have continued to serve in that function long afterwards. It seems to me that RSR is quick to jump on Valarie Plame being a paper-pusher because if he admitted that she was a vital asset to our country which was destroyed for the political vendetta that the Bush administration had against her husband then he would have to finally admit their wrong-doing. To see Plame as a covert operative, it is interesting to note that those who had a higer position at the CIA then she did would have been considered covert as well, would require him to admit that this administration broke the law, violated her rights and ultimately put a lot of people in danger. We are forunate that there has been no major fall-out over this but there could just as easily been a major fallout and people could have died but the Bush administration doesn't seem to care about that anymore than they care that our soldiers could die in Iraq fighting a war that is entirely based on their opinion and ideology.
red states rule
Senior Member
- May 30, 2006
- 16,011
- 573
- 48
I love watching nutty libs go off the deep end when the facts go against them (which is often)
Because the evidence necessary to convict them would result in a security breach to our country and harm our interests. The CIA isn't going to release information about her travels abroad, or document when and where she was out of the country on assignment in a court of law. That's simply isn't going to happen. This means that we will probably have to wait 10 to 20 years before everyone finally knows just how harmful the actions of the Bush administration was to our country.
There is more then enough reason to believe she was covert starting with the fact that she worked for the clandestine branch of the CIA but since this isn't enough for people and the word of the Director of the CIA isn't enough when it comes to identifying her as a covert agent then the classification will not be tested in court because the CIA will not place its foreign operations under that amount of scrutiny. To prove that she was a covert operative and that she served outside of the country as she testified under oath would require a jury to know when and where she served within the five years leading up to the release of her covert status and the CIA isn't going to do that.
The number one reason and which I believe is the primary motivation for not charging anyone is that the information that would be required to prove that she fits the definition of the law would require more proof then the CIA is willing to give. If the courts would simply accept the testimony of the Director of the CIA, her testimony and a handful of people who served in the CIA administration then they would be willing to proceed but they won't even allow the court to speak to her direct reports since all of them below the Deputy Director of Operations for the CIA would be a covert agent under the specifications of the law.
I don't doubt for a minute that he has read these posts and that he chooses to ignore them just like he conveniently ignores anything that doesn't agree with his twisted world-view.
The facts speak for themselves. When the Associate Deputy Director of the directorate of the CIA that Plame was a part of is considered "undercover" and her identity kept secret it is obvious to everyone that her subordinates are also covert agents. That you do not want to admit that Plame worked in what we now refer to as the National Clandestine Service is a problem that you have which is that you don't want to admit the truth or accept the facts and the facts are ample to demonstrate that she was a covert agent which include the statement of the Director of the CIA that she was a covert agent. Of course, you know full well that the CIA will not provide a jury with a detailed account of her work at the CIA in order to gain a conviction. The CIA would whether see the guilty go free before they cause further harm to our country as a result of the harm the administration did to our country when they revealed Plame's covert status. I suspect that we may find out in 10 to 20 years that Plame was an Associate Deputy Director of Counter-proliferation. But, that will be for history to tell since the CIA wouldn't want to release that information now. I have asked myself why the CIA reacted so quickly and harshly in the case of Valarie Plame. It's not like the covert status of CIA agents hadn't been revealed in the past. How was this action different from the others? It leads me to believe that we have watched the fall of one of the highest ranking members of the CIA community.
ReillyT
Senior Member
I think the reason no one was charged might be much simpler than that. Fitzgerald was a dedicated prosecutor, and I don't believe that there is no means to effectuate the statute because of security issues. Maybe I am wrong, but the following seesm more likely to me.
Prosecutorial Discretion. To convict, you would have to demonstrate specific intent, and prove beyound a reasonsable doubt that she was covert (not based upon the opinion of Dir. of CIA, but based upon language of statute). This is a pretty steep standard of proof, and my guess is that Fitzgerald believed it would be too difficult to prove.
New Topics
-
-
-
S.C. should keep its nose out of the birthright citizenship case, which is a political matter
- Started by johnwk
- Replies: 3
-
Trump's answer upon hearing the totalitarian Mullahcracy steps up executions of young women- Started by Pastelli
- Replies: 7
-
