Plame Hearing Is A Joke

[red states rule]

The liberal media is living down to all expectations. Playing the victim card for the CIA paper pusher and carrying the water for the Bush hating left


Evening Newscasts on Plame's Testimony: 'Impeach Bush' and No Mention of Armitage
Posted by Brent Baker on March 16, 2007 - 21:51.
The three broadcast network evening newscasts were similar Friday night in featuring full stories on Valerie Plame's testimony before the House Government Reform Committee, including video of Plame with a woman behind her wearing a pink “Impeach Bush” T-shirt -- ABC even caught a moment when the woman was making the “shame” sign with her fingers (see screen shot to right) -- and not mentioning Richard Armitage, the former Deputy Secretary of State who was the source for columnist Robert Novak's reporting of her name. CBS's Gloria Borger, remarkably, concluded her report by listing every big name involved but Armitage's: “When asked whether she'd gotten an apology from the President, the Vice President, Karl Rove or Scooter Libby, she said no.”

But there were differences. Only NBC Nightly News led with Plame as fill-in anchor Campbell Brown announced: “The CIA operative at the heart of a scandal tells Congress the Bush administration blew her cover and wrecked her career.” NBC's Chip Reid uniquely highlighted how Plame contributed to Al Gore's 2000 campaign and that she conceded “I am a Democrat.” While CBS's Borger concluded with a missing apology to her, ABC's David Kerley ended his piece by noting how Plame is taking advantage of her situation: “While Plame may have lost the undercover job she loved, the blown cover is allowing her to find a new career. She signed a book deal for more than $1 million. And oh, about all those ingredients for a Hollywood movie, there will be one of those, as well.”

ABC's World News opened with the impact of the storm in theNortheast followed by how more troops are being added to the “surge” in Iraq, then arrived at Plame.

Katie Couric led the March 16 CBS Evening News with how Alberto Gonzales is “on his way out. Sources tell CBS News it's just a matter of time now before the Attorney General gets fired.” She then ran an interview with ousted U.S. attorney of New Mexico, David Iglesias, before going to Borger's report on Plame. Couric teased the Plame story:


“Also tonight, former CIA operative Valerie Plame goes public. She says the Bush administration blew her cover and ruined her career.”
Couric set up Borger's subsequent report:

“Meanwhile, we've been hearing about her for years, today we heard from her. Valerie Plame, the former CIA operative, testified on Capitol Hill. She accused the Bush administration of ruining her CIA career by leaking her name for political reasons.”
Campbell Brown led the NBC Nightly News:

“Good evening. She has been the object of fascination, the woman in the middle of a Washington scandal and Valerie Plame Wilson, the outed CIA officer, has never before spoken so extensively about what has happened to her until today. She arrived on Capitol Hill surrounded by photographers to tell Members of Congress that her career as a CIA undercover officer was brought to an end when Bush administration officials revealed her true identity.”
Reporter Chip Reid uniquely highlighted this exchange:

Valerie Plame: “My exposure arose from purely political motives.”

Chip Reid: “But some Republicans today questioned her motives. Some have noted her husband campaigned for John Kerry and that she contributed to Al Gore.”

Congressman Lynn Westmoreland, R-Georgia: “Would you say you're a Democrat or a Republican?”

Plame: “Yes, Congressman, I am a Democrat.”

http://newsbusters.org/node/11476

 

[red states rule]

Plame On!
Let's get into the Plame hearing conducted by Rep. Waxman today.

Matt Apuzzo of the AP deserves the props we gave him - this story seems to hit the key controversies and presents both sides. Here we go:

(1) Was Valerie involved in sending Joe?

"I did not recommend him. I did not suggest him. There was no nepotism involved. I did not have the authority," she said.

That conflicts with senior officials at the CIA and State Department, who testified during Libby's trial that Plame recommended Wilson for the trip.

Yes, it does conflict - here is Grenier of the CIA, as liveblogged by Joyner and Wheeler.

Or here is Special Counsel Fitzgerald's indictment, point 7. And let's note that I am setting to one side the State Department people who also thought Ms. Wilson was behind the trip because they may have been misinformed.

Finally, John Podhoretz provides a funny bit of testimony telling us that, although she did not recommend her hubby for the 2002 Niger trip, Ms. Wilson went to her boss accompanied by the man who did, talked to her hubby about the assignment, and wrote the recommending email. She also (per the SSCI) had recommended her hubby for his 1999 trip to Niger. So please pardon our confusion about her obvious non-involvement here. (And how will this be treated in the movie? Will Val be dragged into her boss's office at gunpoint? Or depending on how they want to position the film, the producer could have the CIA waterboard her into giving up her husband's name - good looking woman, bondage, water everywhere... just thinking out loud and trying to help. TGIF.)

(2) Was Ms. Plame covert?

From Matt Apuzzo:

Plame also repeatedly described herself as a covert operative, a term that has multiple meanings. Plame said she worked undercover and traveled abroad on secret missions for the CIA.

But the word "covert" also has a legal definition requiring recent foreign service and active efforts to keep someone's identity secret. Critics of Fitzgerald's investigation said Plame did not meet that definition for several reasons and said that's why nobody was charged with the leak.

Also, none of the witnesses who testified at Libby's trial said it was clear that Plame's job was classified. However, Fitzgerald said flatly at the courthouse after the verdict that Plame's job was classified.

...

Plame said she wasn't a lawyer and didn't know what her legal status was but said it shouldn't have mattered to the officials who learned her identity.

"They all knew that I worked with the CIA," Plame said. "They might not have known what my status was but that alone - the fact that I worked for the CIA - should have put up a red flag."

She didn't know her legal status? She's so covert that not even she knows if she is legally covert! And we are more than three years into this. Oh, my - well, I don't know her status either. Maybe they call her the wind. (But they call the wind Mariah...)

The WaPo was OK on this issue this morning as well:

In the CIA's eyes, the revelation of Plame's name in any context, whether she was stationed here or abroad, gave away a national security secret that could have dangerous repercussions. When Novak's column unmasking her as a CIA operative was published on July 14, 2003, the CIA general counsel's office automatically sent a routine report to the Justice Department that there had been an unauthorized disclosure of classified information.

As part of normal procedures, the agency made a preliminary damage assessment and then sent a required follow-up report to Justice. Then-Attorney General John Ashcroft decided to open a criminal investigation but three months later recused himself because the probe led into the White House. Patrick J. Fitgerald, the U.S. attorney for northern Illinois, became special counsel and began to investigate "the alleged unauthorized disclosure of a CIA employee's identity."

In February 2004, after reviewing what the FBI had, Fitzgerald widened his investigation to include "any federal criminal laws related to the underlying alleged unauthorized disclosure," plus any efforts to obstruct the probe.

* * *

Some news stories created initial confusion over Plame's status by suggesting that disclosure of her name and employment may have violated the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982. That law, passed in response to disclosure of the names of CIA officers serving overseas by former CIA employee Philip Agee, made it a crime to disclose the names of "covert agents," which the act narrowly defined as those serving overseas or who had served as such in the previous five years.

"Covert agent" is not a label actually used within the agency for its employees, according to former senior CIA officials. Plame, who joined the agency right out of Pennsylvania State University, underwent rigorous spycraft training to become an officer in the Directorate of Operations. (The term "agent" in the CIA is only applied to foreign nationals recruited to spy in support of U.S. interests.)

It is funny watching CREW try to lower the bar:

Plame's testimony today "will be very forceful and clear, and there won't be any question what classified means," said Anne Weismann, chief counsel for Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington...

No, there probably won't be any questions about "classified", since the key question is whether she was "covert" under the statute.

Let give some props to Rep. Tom Davis:

Rep. Tom Davis, the ranking Republican on the committee, said, "No process can be adopted to protect classified information that no one knows is classified. This looks to me more like a CIA problem than a White House problem."

Well, if this was a good day for the Wilso-philes, what would a bad day look like? I guess we need to see how the WaPo, Times, and LA Times spin it. But keep hope alive! The press did join in the suit arguing that their was no underlying crime, so there is at least a chance that some of the editors and reporters have apprised themselves of the issues. But forget about the columnists.

We Grade The Times:

(1) Was Valerie involved in sending Joe? Their coverage:

Ms. Wilson told the committee that, despite what has been written and said repeatedly, she did not recommend her husband for the trip to Africa. In fact, she said, she had unhappy visions “of myself at bedtime with a couple of two-year-olds” to handle alone if her husband went overseas. (The Wilsons have young twins.)

“I did not recommend him, I did not suggest him, there was no nepotism involved,” she said. “I did not have the authority.”

Ms. Wilson said she did sound out her husband about the trip after she was asked to do so, but that her husband was picked for the trip because of his background in Africa.

Nothing mentioning the trial testimony or the indictment.

Grade: F

(2) Was Ms. Plame covert? The closeet they come to acknowledging a controversy is this:

Soon afterward, Ms. Wilson was unmasked by Mr. Novak. That incident led to an investigation to find who had leaked her name, possibly in violation of the law.

Grade: Are you kidding? F.

And under "Random Noise" we will note this:

Administration critics have long asserted that Ms. Wilson’s name was leaked to intimidate others who differed with the White House.

Administration critics have long asserted many things. But did the Libby trial provide evidence that intimidating critics (or punishing Wilson) was the motive?

Just for instance, Richard Armitage of State leaked the Plame info to both Bob Woodward and Bob Novak. Would a reasonable reader conclude from the transcript that he was hoping to intimidate critics?

Did Karl Rove hope to intimidate critics by saying "I heard that, too" to Bob Novak (who was confirming the story he got from Armitage)?

Here is what Walter Pincus speculated about the motive of Ari Fleischer, who Pincus has said was his source:

I wrote my October story because I did not think the person who spoke to me was committing a criminal act, but only practicing damage control by trying to get me to stop writing about Wilson.

Well. If the new Times policy is to free-associate and print random speculation, they might try telling their readers that:

(a) Joe Wilson's critics think that his wife was involved, in some fashion, in sending him to Niger. As Libby said in his grand jury testimony, the implication is that Wilson is not an impartial judge of the White House - CIA intel dispute, a point on which the press should have picked up.

(b) Valerie Wilson did not have "covert" status as defined by the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. A reasonable special counsel would have at least disclosed that to the court and clarified that he was simply looking for perjury charges before having a reporter locked up for 85 days.

Hey, it has been asserted - we meet the Times standard.

http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2007/03/plame_on.html

 

[red states rule]

Blonde Faith
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Friday, March 16, 2007 4:20 PM PST

Political Theater: The congressional testimony of Valerie Plame, the 'spy' who became a Vanity Fair cover girl, was staged to embarrass the Bush White House. It actually completed Plame's exposure as a fraud.

When all was said and done, the least preposterous sight at Friday's House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing could be found in the audience: namely, the woman dressed in hot pink who kept standing up behind Plame during her testimony to show the television viewers her 'Impeach Bush' T-shirt.

Plame: Politics and publicity.
That woman was a lot more honest about what was taking place than Mrs. Joseph Wilson, who looked like the cat who ate the canary when Georgia Republican Rep. Lynn Westmoreland asked her whether she and her husband are Democrats.

After giving her husband's Republican family background, she said: 'I would say he's a Democrat.' As for herself, she conceded: 'Yes . . . I am a Democrat.'

As if we all didn't know.

Plame's 'cover' as a CIA employee was so secret she was listed in her husband's 'Who's Who in America' entry. Her cover was 'blown' in 2003 by then-Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage. Armitage was never charged with a crime, because she was no longer a covert agent. So special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald instead went after Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, Scooter Libby, for his bad memory.

Plame's fellow Democrats, led by committee Chairman Henry Waxman of California, spent much of their time waving at the cameras a new version of the Clinton administration's 'Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy' flowchart. The chart featured a big, black box labeled 'UNKNOWN,' representing the mysterious personage who told Karl Rove and Vice President Dick Cheney about Plame.

Gee, the republic must be in mortal danger if someone is giving CIA secrets to the vice president and a senior presidential adviser.

Plame repeatedly answered questions about her official status at the CIA with an unconvincing 'I'm not a lawyer.'

Then she claimed that the smoking-gun e-mail she sent to her superiors recommending that her husband be sent to Niger — after which he wrote a New York Times op-ed questioning Iraq's pursuit of nuclear material in Africa — was taken 'out of context.'

Far from being a 'covert agent,' Plame and her husband are a politically motivated PR partnership. She's negotiating a book deal for her life story, titled 'Fair Game,' for which Simon & Schuster has reportedly paid her a $1 million advance. She appeared with Wilson on the cover of Vanity Fair just months after being 'outed.'

Just why was Plame, who listed her CIA cover company as her employer when she gave to Al Gore's campaign, riding a desk in Langley, Va.? The Washington Times' Bill Gertz has reported that U.S. officials said her identity was first disclosed to Russia by a Moscow spy in the mid-1990s. She returned to the U.S. in 1994 because the CIA suspected her cover was blown by turncoat Aldrich Ames.

By placing Plame under the hot spotlights, Democrats have unwittingly caused her story to melt before the public.

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=258936799316774

 

[Gunny]

The liberal media is living down to all expectations. Playing the victim card for the CIA paper pusher and carrying the water for the Bush hating left


Evening Newscasts on Plame's Testimony: 'Impeach Bush' and No Mention of Armitage
Posted by Brent Baker on March 16, 2007 - 21:51.
The three broadcast network evening newscasts were similar Friday night in featuring full stories on Valerie Plame's testimony before the House Government Reform Committee, including video of Plame with a woman behind her wearing a pink “Impeach Bush” T-shirt -- ABC even caught a moment when the woman was making the “shame” sign with her fingers (see screen shot to right) -- and not mentioning Richard Armitage, the former Deputy Secretary of State who was the source for columnist Robert Novak's reporting of her name. CBS's Gloria Borger, remarkably, concluded her report by listing every big name involved but Armitage's: “When asked whether she'd gotten an apology from the President, the Vice President, Karl Rove or Scooter Libby, she said no.”

But there were differences. Only NBC Nightly News led with Plame as fill-in anchor Campbell Brown announced: “The CIA operative at the heart of a scandal tells Congress the Bush administration blew her cover and wrecked her career.” NBC's Chip Reid uniquely highlighted how Plame contributed to Al Gore's 2000 campaign and that she conceded “I am a Democrat.” While CBS's Borger concluded with a missing apology to her, ABC's David Kerley ended his piece by noting how Plame is taking advantage of her situation: “While Plame may have lost the undercover job she loved, the blown cover is allowing her to find a new career. She signed a book deal for more than $1 million. And oh, about all those ingredients for a Hollywood movie, there will be one of those, as well.”

ABC's World News opened with the impact of the storm in theNortheast followed by how more troops are being added to the “surge” in Iraq, then arrived at Plame.

Katie Couric led the March 16 CBS Evening News with how Alberto Gonzales is “on his way out. Sources tell CBS News it's just a matter of time now before the Attorney General gets fired.” She then ran an interview with ousted U.S. attorney of New Mexico, David Iglesias, before going to Borger's report on Plame. Couric teased the Plame story:


“Also tonight, former CIA operative Valerie Plame goes public. She says the Bush administration blew her cover and ruined her career.”
Couric set up Borger's subsequent report:

“Meanwhile, we've been hearing about her for years, today we heard from her. Valerie Plame, the former CIA operative, testified on Capitol Hill. She accused the Bush administration of ruining her CIA career by leaking her name for political reasons.”
Campbell Brown led the NBC Nightly News:

“Good evening. She has been the object of fascination, the woman in the middle of a Washington scandal and Valerie Plame Wilson, the outed CIA officer, has never before spoken so extensively about what has happened to her until today. She arrived on Capitol Hill surrounded by photographers to tell Members of Congress that her career as a CIA undercover officer was brought to an end when Bush administration officials revealed her true identity.”
Reporter Chip Reid uniquely highlighted this exchange:

Valerie Plame: “My exposure arose from purely political motives.”

Chip Reid: “But some Republicans today questioned her motives. Some have noted her husband campaigned for John Kerry and that she contributed to Al Gore.”

Congressman Lynn Westmoreland, R-Georgia: “Would you say you're a Democrat or a Republican?”

Plame: “Yes, Congressman, I am a Democrat.”

http://newsbusters.org/node/11476

This such a joke. Lost the undercover job she loved? She'd been pulled from the field and was riding a desk at CIA Headquarters for several years. Longer as a matter of fact, than the normal amount of time for maintaining a cover after being pulled from the field.

Nice to see my tax dollars being blown over such bullshit as this.

 

[red states rule]

This such a joke. Lost the undercover job she loved? She'd been pulled from the field and was riding a desk at CIA Headquarters for several years. Longer as a matter of fact, than the normal amount of time for maintaining a cover after being pulled from the field.

Nice to see my tax dollars being blown over such bullshit as this.

She outed herself

Blonde Faith
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY

Political Theater: The congressional testimony of Valerie Plame, the 'spy' who became a Vanity Fair cover girl, was staged to embarrass the Bush White House. It actually completed Plame's exposure as a fraud.

When all was said and done, the least preposterous sight at Friday's House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing could be found in the audience: namely, the woman dressed in hot pink who kept standing up behind Plame during her testimony to show the television viewers her 'Impeach Bush' T-shirt.

Plame: Politics and publicity.
That woman was a lot more honest about what was taking place than Mrs. Joseph Wilson, who looked like the cat who ate the canary when Georgia Republican Rep. Lynn Westmoreland asked her whether she and her husband are Democrats.

After giving her husband's Republican family background, she said: 'I would say he's a Democrat.' As for herself, she conceded: 'Yes . . . I am a Democrat.'

As if we all didn't know.

Plame's 'cover' as a CIA employee was so secret she was listed in her husband's 'Who's Who in America' entry. Her cover was 'blown' in 2003 by then-Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage. Armitage was never charged with a crime, because she was no longer a covert agent. So special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald instead went after Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, Scooter Libby, for his bad memory.

Plame's fellow Democrats, led by committee Chairman Henry Waxman of California, spent much of their time waving at the cameras a new version of the Clinton administration's 'Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy' flowchart. The chart featured a big, black box labeled 'UNKNOWN,' representing the mysterious personage who told Karl Rove and Vice President Dick Cheney about Plame.

Gee, the republic must be in mortal danger if someone is giving CIA secrets to the vice president and a senior presidential adviser.

Plame repeatedly answered questions about her official status at the CIA with an unconvincing 'I'm not a lawyer.'

Then she claimed that the smoking-gun e-mail she sent to her superiors recommending that her husband be sent to Niger — after which he wrote a New York Times op-ed questioning Iraq's pursuit of nuclear material in Africa — was taken 'out of context.'

Far from being a 'covert agent,' Plame and her husband are a politically motivated PR partnership. She's negotiating a book deal for her life story, titled 'Fair Game,' for which Simon & Schuster has reportedly paid her a $1 million advance. She appeared with Wilson on the cover of Vanity Fair just months after being 'outed.'

Just why was Plame, who listed her CIA cover company as her employer when she gave to Al Gore's campaign, riding a desk in Langley, Va.? The Washington Times' Bill Gertz has reported that U.S. officials said her identity was first disclosed to Russia by a Moscow spy in the mid-1990s. She returned to the U.S. in 1994 because the CIA suspected her cover was blown by turncoat Aldrich Ames.

By placing Plame under the hot spotlights, Democrats have unwittingly caused her story to melt before the public

 

[Gunny]

She outed herself

Blonde Faith
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY

Political Theater: The congressional testimony of Valerie Plame, the 'spy' who became a Vanity Fair cover girl, was staged to embarrass the Bush White House. It actually completed Plame's exposure as a fraud.

When all was said and done, the least preposterous sight at Friday's House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing could be found in the audience: namely, the woman dressed in hot pink who kept standing up behind Plame during her testimony to show the television viewers her 'Impeach Bush' T-shirt.

Plame: Politics and publicity.
That woman was a lot more honest about what was taking place than Mrs. Joseph Wilson, who looked like the cat who ate the canary when Georgia Republican Rep. Lynn Westmoreland asked her whether she and her husband are Democrats.

After giving her husband's Republican family background, she said: 'I would say he's a Democrat.' As for herself, she conceded: 'Yes . . . I am a Democrat.'

As if we all didn't know.

Plame's 'cover' as a CIA employee was so secret she was listed in her husband's 'Who's Who in America' entry. Her cover was 'blown' in 2003 by then-Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage. Armitage was never charged with a crime, because she was no longer a covert agent. So special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald instead went after Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, Scooter Libby, for his bad memory.

Plame's fellow Democrats, led by committee Chairman Henry Waxman of California, spent much of their time waving at the cameras a new version of the Clinton administration's 'Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy' flowchart. The chart featured a big, black box labeled 'UNKNOWN,' representing the mysterious personage who told Karl Rove and Vice President Dick Cheney about Plame.

Gee, the republic must be in mortal danger if someone is giving CIA secrets to the vice president and a senior presidential adviser.

Plame repeatedly answered questions about her official status at the CIA with an unconvincing 'I'm not a lawyer.'

Then she claimed that the smoking-gun e-mail she sent to her superiors recommending that her husband be sent to Niger — after which he wrote a New York Times op-ed questioning Iraq's pursuit of nuclear material in Africa — was taken 'out of context.'

Far from being a 'covert agent,' Plame and her husband are a politically motivated PR partnership. She's negotiating a book deal for her life story, titled 'Fair Game,' for which Simon & Schuster has reportedly paid her a $1 million advance. She appeared with Wilson on the cover of Vanity Fair just months after being 'outed.'

Just why was Plame, who listed her CIA cover company as her employer when she gave to Al Gore's campaign, riding a desk in Langley, Va.? The Washington Times' Bill Gertz has reported that U.S. officials said her identity was first disclosed to Russia by a Moscow spy in the mid-1990s. She returned to the U.S. in 1994 because the CIA suspected her cover was blown by turncoat Aldrich Ames.

By placing Plame under the hot spotlights, Democrats have unwittingly caused her story to melt before the public

I'd say driving in and out of the front gate of CIA Headqarters on a daily basis pretty-much did the job if anything. Unless anyone wants to believe no intelligence agencies would think to watch the front gate to see who comes and goes.

 

[red states rule]

It seems the liberal media and the libs do not count that as a give away to her employment

 

[Gunny]

It seems the liberal media and the libs do not count that as a give away to her employment

Nor the Republicans bright enough to use such an obvious common-sense argument as one means of refuting the charges.

Make no mistake, I think the allegations are a joke, and the Dems involved exercising their witch hunting skills. At teh same time, I'm just sick of Republicans who will neither defend themselves against obvious bullshit accusation, nor other Republicans.

 

[red states rule]

Nor the Republicans bright enough to use such an obvious common-sense argument as one means of refuting the charges.

Make no mistake, I think the allegations are a joke, and the Dems involved exercising their witch hunting skills. At teh same time, I'm just sick of Republicans who will neither defend themselves against obvious bullshit accusation, nor other Republicans.

We need a Patton like figure to go to DC and kick the Republicans in the ass

While we have our disagreements - I would support you for the job

 

[red states rule]

Holt Lets Wilson Walk on Wife's Role in Sending Him to Niger
Posted by Mark Finkelstein on March 17, 2007 - 11:09.
For his level-headed professionalism, Lester Holt is on my [admittedly short] list of MSM faves. But while Holt did hit former Ambassador [to Gabon, São Tomé and Príncipe] Joseph Wilson with one tough question on this morning's "Today," he let Valerie Plame's husband hijack the beginning of the interview, lobbed him numerous softballs, and failed to challenge Wilson on his blatant misrepresentation of Plame's role in sending him to Niger.

View video here.

In the set-up piece preceding the interview, "Today" aired a clip of Rep. Lynn Westmoreland [R-Georgia] asking Plame, during yesterday's congressional hearing, whether she was a Republican or a Democrat. For the record, Plame sardonically acknowledged that she was indeed a Dem.

When the interview began at 7:15 AM EDT, and before Holt could get off a question, Wilson launched into an attack on Westmoreland for having posed that question to Plame, and extolled his own and Plame's record of bi-partisan public service. When Holt eventually gained control, he did hit Wilson with the following question, the only challenging one of the dialogue:

LESTER HOLT: "Ambassador, your wife did say, and made it clear she considers herself a victim of political assassination, or at least being used politically in this case. Would her testimony, and the fact that she has a book coming out soon, the fact that you have been so outspoken, could that also be described as a form of political retaliation?"

JOE WILSON: "You're suggesting that somehow Valerie and I are engaged in political retaliation?"

HOLT: "I'm not suggesting, I'm asking the question."

WILSON: "I would remind you, yeah, I would remind you of course that everything I said in my article has proven true. There was no substance to the assertion that Saddam had attempted to purchase uranium from Iraq [sic]. With respect to Valerie's book [NB: for which she has reportedly received a $2.5 million advance], that's still hung up in negotiations with the CIA. And with respect to her testimony, she was invited [NB: by committee chairman and friendly fellow Dem Henry Waxman, D-Calif.] to testify before Congress. It is totally appropriate to respond positively to such an invitation."

Holt didn't challenge Wilson on his assertion that there was "no substance to the assertion" that Saddam had sought yellow-cake from Niger. Others, including Christopher Hitchens, say otherwise, as in this Slate article, Sorry everyone, but Iraq did go uranium shopping in Niger.

Later, Wilson asserted that in her testimony Plame had debunked the "lie" that "she was responsible for suggesting or sending me to Niger." Holt again failed to challenge Wilson on his very dubious assertion. Consider this WaPo article, which flatly states:

"Former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, dispatched by the CIA in February 2002 to investigate reports that Iraq sought to reconstitute its nuclear weapons program with uranium from Africa, was specifically recommended for the mission by his wife, a CIA employee, contrary to what he has said publicly."

Holt then served this one up on a platter: "Ambassador Wilson, do you expect to get an apology from the White House? Would you like to get an apology from the White House?"

WILSON [managing to take a swipe at both President Bush and his parents]: "You know, I don't, frankly, and I'm disappointed in that because I thought they raised people more correctly than that down in Texas."

Finally, Holt failed to react when Wilson made a controversial claim regarding former presidential press secretary Scott McLellan.

HOLT: "Have you had a conversation with anyone from the White House subsequent to all this?"

WILSON: "No. I did run into Scott McLellan in the green room at a different station, and we commiserated on the fact that we both had been lied to by this White House."

Not Lester's finest journalistic hour. As for Wilson, a combination of anger and preening egotism does not wear well.


http://newsbusters.org/node/11479

 

[boedicca]

This wasn't a hearing. It was the first stop on the Press Tour for her upcoming book.

 

[red states rule]

This wasn't a hearing. It was the first stop on the Press Tour for her upcoming book.

I am sure the invites to the liberal cocktail party circuit are going out to them right now

 

[boedicca]

They are most certainly in Wilson and Plame's Outlook contacts. She was outed on the DC cocktail circuit long before Armitage did the deed. Wilson is an notorious status seeker / attention whore.

 

[red states rule]

They are most certainly in Wilson and Plame's Outlook contacts. She was outed on the DC cocktail circuit long before Armitage did the deed. Wilson is an notorious status seeker / attention whore.

Perverse Libby trial was revealing

March 11, 2007
BY MARK STEYN Sun-Times Columnist
A couple of days ago, Shane Gibson, the Bahamian immigration minister, resigned. The Tribune in Nassau had published front-page pictures of him in bed with Anna Nicole Smith. Could happen to anyone. Riding high in February, shot down in March. And, in fairness to the minister, both parties were fully clothed. Indeed, Anna Nicole was more fully clothed than she usually was out of bed.
My point here is that this is a classic scandal in the Westminster parliamentary tradition: On Monday, you're blandly denying vague rumors; on Tuesday, they're all over the front page; on Wednesday, you're photographed alongside your long-suffering wife vowing to fight this outrageous slur; on Thursday, you're resigning to spend more time with your family and the prime minister issues a statement saying the nation will always be grateful to you for your long years of public service culminating in the passage of the Municipal Airports (Parking Lot Signage) Bill, and on Friday your successor is seated behind your desk already working on his own career-detonating scandal.

Washington doesn't seem to do things that way. In a Beltway political scandal, you appoint a special prosecutor who investigates it for years and the scandal metastasizes and morphs in bizarre fantastic ways. I'm not being especially partisan here. I thought Bill Clinton should have resigned when the blue dress showed up. But the months pass and instead he's testifying to the grand jury about his definition of non-sexual relations -- if the party of the first part is apart from the parts of the party of the second part while the party of the second part is partaking of the parts of the party of the first part, etc. -- and once you're arguing on that basis the very process is a mockery.

What's just happened to Scooter Libby is, I think, worse. In his closing remarks, Patrick Fitzgerald invited the jury to view a narrow perjury case as something epic: ''What is this case about?'' the special counsel mused. ''Is it about something bigger?'' Fortunately, he was musing rhetorically, and he had the answer on hand: ''There is a cloud over the vice president. . . . There is a cloud over the White House.''

Indeed. And what exactly is the cloud? Is it that the name of a covert agent was intentionally leaked in breach of the relevant law on non-disclosure?

No. On the alleged violation of Valerie Plame's identity, Fitzgerald was unable to produce not only a perpetrator but any crime.

Is the cloud then a more general murk? A politically motivated attempt to damage the white knight Joe Wilson as he sallied forth against the Bush dragon?

No. The man who leaked Valerie Plame's name was Richard Armitage, Colin Powell's deputy at the State Department and a man who dislikes Rove, Cheney and all their neocon warmongering works. The journalist he leaked it to -- Bob Novak -- was also opposed to the Iraq war. Neither Armitage nor Novak had any animus against Joe Wilson. On the contrary, they broadly share Wilson's skepticism on the threat posed by Saddam. There was no conspiracy, just Armitage gossiping like the gravelly voiced schoolgirl he's been for years.

When a prosecutor speaks about ''a cloud over the vice president's office'' and ''a cloud over the White House,'' he is speaking politically. There is no law about the amount of cumulus permitted over 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. The prosecutor is speculating on political capital -- reputation, credibility, the currency of politics. Once damaged, they're hard to recover. So, even if it's not within the purview of the jury, his question is relevant to the wider world: How did this cloud get there and stay there even though it had no meaningful rainfall?

Answer: Patrick Fitzgerald.

The prosecutor knew from the beginning that (a) leaking Valerie Plame's name was not a crime and (b) the guy who did it was Richard Armitage. In other words, he was aware that the public and media perception of this ''case'' was entirely wrong: There was no conspiracy by Bush ideologues to damage a whistleblower, only an anti-war official making an offhand remark to an anti-war reporter. Even the usual appeals to prosecutorial discretion (Libby was a peripheral figure with only he said/she said evidence in an investigation with no underlying crime) don't convey the scale of Fitzgerald's perversity: He knew, in fact, that there was no cloud, that under all the dark scudding about Rove and Cheney there was only sunny Richard Armitage blabbing away accidentally. Yet he chose to let the entirely false impression of his ''case'' sit out there month in, month out, year after year, glowering over the White House, doing great damage to the presidency on the critical issue of the day.

So much of the current degraded discourse on the war -- ''Bush lied'' -- comes from the false perceptions of the Joe Wilson Niger story. Britain's MI-6, the French, the Italians and most other functioning intelligence services believe Saddam was trying to procure uranium from Africa. Lord Butler's special investigation supports it. So does the Senate Intelligence Committee. So Wilson's original charge is if not false then at the very least unproven, and the conspiracy arising therefrom entirely nonexistent. But the damage inflicted by the cloud is real and lasting.

As for Scooter Libby, he faces up to 25 years in jail for the crime of failing to remember when he first heard the name of Valerie Plame -- whether by accident or intent no one can ever say for sure. But we also know that Joe Wilson failed to remember that his original briefing to the CIA after getting back from Niger was significantly different from the way he characterized it in his op-ed in the New York Times. We do know that the contemptible Armitage failed to come forward and clear the air as his colleagues were smeared for months on end. We do know that his boss Colin Powell sat by as the very character of the administration was corroded.

And we know that Patrick Fitzgerald knew all this and more as he frittered away the years, and the ''political blood lust'' (as National Review's Rich Lowry calls it) grew ever more disconnected from humdrum reality. The cloud over the White House is Fitzgerald's, and his closing remarks to the jury were highly revealing. If he dislikes Bush and Cheney and the Iraq war, whoopee: Run against them, or donate to the Democrats, or get a talk-radio show. Instead, he chose in full knowledge of the truth to maintain artificially a three-year cloud over the White House while the anti-Bush left frantically mistook its salivating for the first drops of a downpour. The result is the disgrace of Scooter Libby. Big deal. Patrick Fitzgerald's disgrace is the greater, and a huge victory not for justice or the law but for the criminalization of politics.

© Mark Steyn 2007


http://www.suntimes.com/news/steyn/291111,CST-EDT-steyn11.article

 

[Gem]

I had stopped taking her and her husband seriously the moment I read in his book that she "outed" herself to Wilson during a make-out session while on their second or third date.

How seriously can you love being a secret agent if you tell any man who gets past first-base?

 

[red states rule]

I had stopped taking her and her husband seriously the moment I read in his book that she "outed" herself to Wilson during a make-out session while on their second or third date.

How seriously can you love being a secret agent if you tell any man who gets past first-base?

Plus Wilson admits his extensive investagation in Niger was conducted by the hotel pool

Your tax dollars at work even if he was not

 

[red states rule]

I had stopped taking her and her husband seriously the moment I read in his book that she "outed" herself to Wilson during a make-out session while on their second or third date.

How seriously can you love being a secret agent if you tell any man who gets past first-base?

Joe Wilson's Top Ten Worst Inaccuracies And Misstatements

1.) Wilson Insisted That The Vice President’s Office Sent Him To Niger:

Wilson Said He Traveled To Niger At CIA Request To Help Provide Response To Vice President’s Office. “In February 2002, I was informed by officials at the Central Intelligence Agency that Vice President Dick Cheney’s office had questions about a particular intelligence report. … The agency officials asked if I would travel to Niger to check out the story so they could provide a response to the vice president’s office.” (Joseph C. Wilson, Op-Ed, “What I Didn’t Find In Africa,” The New York Times, 7/6/03)

Joe Wilson: “[W]hat They Did, What The Office Of The Vice President Did, And, In Fact, I Believe Now From Mr. Libby’s Statement, It Was Probably The Vice President Himself ...” (CNN’s “Late Edition,” 8/3/03) Vice President Cheney: “I Don’t Know Joe Wilson. I’ve Never Met Joe Wilson. … And Joe Wilson - I Don’t [Know] Who Sent Joe Wilson. He Never Submitted A Report That I Ever Saw When He Came Back.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 9/14/03)

CIA Director George Tenet: “In An Effort To Inquire About Certain Reports Involving Niger, CIA’s Counter-Proliferation Experts, On Their Own Initiative, Asked An Individual With Ties To The Region To Make A Visit To See What He Could Learn.” (Central Intelligence Agency, “Statement By George J. Tenet, Director Of Central Intelligence,” Press Release, 7/11/03)

2.) Wilson Claimed The Vice President And Other Senior White House Officials Were Briefed On His Niger Report:

“[Wilson] Believed That [His Report] Would Have Been Distributed To The White House And That The Vice President Received A Direct Response To His Question About The Possible Uranium Deal.” (Senate Select Committee On Intelligence, “Report On The U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Assessments On Iraq,” 7/7/04)

The Senate Select Committee On Intelligence Reported That The Vice President Was Not Briefed On Wilson’s Report. “Conclusion 14. The Central Intelligence Agency should have told the Vice President and other senior policymakers that it had sent someone to Niger to look into the alleged Iraq-Niger uranium deal and it should have briefed the Vice President on the former ambassador’s findings.” (Senate Select Committee On Intelligence, “Report On The U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Assessments On Iraq,” 7/7/04)

CIA Director George Tenet: “Because This Report, In Our View, Did Not Resolve Whether Iraq Was Or Was Not Seeking Uranium From Abroad, It Was Given A Normal And Wide Distribution, But We Did Not Brief It To The President, Vice-President Or Other Senior Administration Officials.” (Central Intelligence Agency, “Statement By George J. Tenet, Director Of Central Intelligence,” Press Release, 7/11/03)

3.) Wilson Has Claimed His Niger Report Was Conclusive And Significant

Wilson Claims His Trip Proved There Was Nothing To The Uranium “Allegations.” “I knew that [Dr. Rice] had fundamentally misstated the facts. In fact, she had lied about it. I had gone out and I had undertaken this study. I had come back and said that this was not feasible. … This government knew that there was nothing to these allegations.” (NBC’s, “Meet The Press,” 5/2/04)

Officials Said Evidence In Wilson’s Niger Report Was “Thin” And His “Homework Was Shoddy.” (Michael Duffy, “Leaking With A Vengeance,” Time, 10/13/03)

Senate Select Committee On Intelligence Unanimous Report: “Conclusion 13. The Report On The Former Ambassador’s Trip To Niger, Disseminated In March 2002, Did Not Change Any Analysts’ Assessments Of The Iraq-Niger Uranium Deal.” (Senate Select Committee On Intelligence, “Report On The U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Assessments On Iraq,” 7/7/04) “For Most Analysts, The Information In The Report Lent More Credibility To The Original Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Report On The Uranium Deal, But State Department Bureau Of Intelligence And Research (INR) Analysts Believed That The Report Supported Their Assessments That Niger Was Unlikely To Be Willing Or Able To Sell Uranium.” (Senate Select Committee On Intelligence, “Report On The U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Assessments On Iraq,” 7/7/04) CIA Said Wilson’s Findings Did Not Resolve The Issue. “Because [Wilson’s] report, in our view, did not resolve whether Iraq was or was not seeking uranium from abroad, it was given a normal and wide distribution, but we did not brief it to the president, vice president or other senior administration officials. We also had to consider that the former Nigerien officials knew that what they were saying would reach the U.S. government and that this might have influenced what they said.” (Central Intelligence Agency, “Statement By George J. Tenet, Director Of Central Intelligence,” Press Release 7/11/03)

The Butler Report Claimed That The President’s State Of the Union Statement On Uranium From Africa, “Was Well-Founded.” “We conclude that, on the basis of the intelligence assessments at the time, covering both Niger and the Democratic Republic of Congo, the statements on Iraqi attempts to buy uranium from Africa in the Government’s dossier, and by the Prime Minister in the House of Commons, were well-founded. By extension, we conclude also that the statement in President Bush’s State of the Union Address of 28 January 2003 that: ‘The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.’ was well-founded.” (The Rt. Hon. The Lord Butler Of Brockwell, “Review Of Intelligence, On Weapons Of Mass Destruction,” 7/14/04)

4.) Wilson Denied His Wife Suggested He Travel To Niger In 2002:

Wilson Claimed His Wife Did Not Suggest He Travel To Niger To Investigate Reports Of Uranium Deal; Instead, Wilson Claims It Came Out Of Meeting With CIA. CNN’s Wolf Blitzer: “Among other things, you had always said, always maintained, still maintain your wife, Valerie Plame, a CIA officer, had nothing to do with the decision to send to you Niger to inspect reports that uranium might be sold from Niger to Iraq. … Did Valerie Plame, your wife, come up with the idea to send you to Niger?” Joe Wilson: “No. My wife served as a conduit, as I put in my book. When her supervisors asked her to contact me for the purposes of coming into the CIA to discuss all the issues surrounding this allegation of Niger selling uranium to Iraq.” (CNN’s “Late Edition,” 7/18/04)

But Senate Select Committee On Intelligence Received Not Only Testimony But Actual Documentation Indicating Wilson’s Wife Proposed Him For Trip. “Some CPD, [CIA Counterproliferation Division] officials could not recall how the office decided to contact the former ambassador, however, interviews and documents provided to the Committee indicate that his wife, a CPD employee, suggested his name for the trip. The CPD reports officer told Committee staff that the former ambassador’s wife ‘offered up his name’ and a memorandum to the Deputy Chief of the CPD on February 12, 2002, from the former ambassador’s wife says, ‘my husband has good relations with both the PM [prime minister] and the former Minister of Mines (not to mention lots of French contacts), both of whom could possibly shed light on this sort of activity.’” (Select Committee On Intelligence, “Report On The U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Intelligence Assessments On Iraq,” U.S. Senate, 7/7/04) 5.) Wilson Has Claimed His 1999 Trip To Niger Was Not Suggested By His Wife:

Wilson Claims CIA Thought To Ask Him To Make Trip Because He Had Previously Made Trip For Them In 1999, Not Because Of His Wife’s Suggestion. CNN’s Wolf Blitzer: “Who first raised your name, then, based on what you know? Who came up with the idea to send you there?” Joe Wilson: “The CIA knew my name from a trip, and it’s in the report, that I had taken in 1999 related to uranium activities but not related to Iraq. I had served for 23 years in government including as Bill Clinton’s Senior Director for African Affairs at the National Security Council. I had done a lot of work with the Niger government during a period punctuated by a military coup and a subsequent assassination of a president. So I knew all the people there.” (CNN’s “Late Edition,” 7/18/04)

In Fact, His Wife Suggested Him For 1999 Trip, As Well. “The former ambassador had traveled previously to Niger on the CIA’s behalf … The former ambassador was selected for the 1999 trip after his wife mentioned to her supervisors that her husband was planning a business trip to Niger in the near future and might be willing to use his contacts in the region …” (Select Committee On Intelligence, “Report On The U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Intelligence Assessments On Iraq,” U.S. Senate, 7/7/04)

6.) Wilson Claimed He Was A Victim Of A Partisan Smear Campaign

Joe Wilson: “Well, I Don’t Know. Obviously, There’s Been This Orchestrated Campaign, This Smear Campaign. I Happen To Think That It’s Because The RNC, The Republican National Committee’s Been Involved In This In A Big Way …” CNN’s Wolf Blitzer: “But They Weren’t Involved In The Senate Intelligence Committee Report.” Wilson: “No, They Weren’t.” (CNN’s “Late Edition,” 7/18/04)

Senate Intelligence Committee Unanimously Concluded That Wilson’s Report “Lent More Credibility” For Most Analysts “To The Original Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Reports.” “Conclusion 13. The report on the former ambassador’s trip to Niger, disseminated in March 2002, did not change any analysts’ assessments of the Iraq-Niger uranium deal. For most analysts, the information in the report lent more credibility to the original Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) reports on the uranium deal, but the State Department Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR) analysts believed that the report supported their assessment that Niger was unlikely to be willing or able to sell uranium to Iraq.” (Select Committee On Intelligence, “Report On The U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Intelligence Assessments On Iraq,” U.S. Senate, 7/7/04)

Members Of The Senate Select Committee On Intelligence That Wrote The Unanimous “Report On The U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Intelligence Assessments On Iraq”:

Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV)

Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI)

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR)

Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL)

Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN)

Sen. John Edwards (D-NC)

Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-MD)

Sen. Pat Roberts (R-KS)

Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT)

Sen. Mike DeWine (R-OH)

Sen. Christopher Bond (R-MO)

Sen. Trent Lott (R-MS)

Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME)

Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE)

Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA)

Sen. John Warner (R-VA)

(Select Committee On Intelligence, “Report On The U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Intelligence Assessments On Iraq,” U.S. Senate, 7/7/04)

7.) A Month Before The Bob Novak And Matthew Cooper Articles Ever Came Out, Wilson Told The Washington Post That Previous Intelligence Reports About Niger Were Based On Forged Documents:

In June Of 2003, Wilson Told The Washington Post “The Niger Intelligence Was Based On Documents That Had Clearly Been Forged Because ‘The Dates Were Wrong And The Names Were Wrong.’” (Susan Schmidt, “Plame’s Input Is Cited On Niger Mission,” The Washington Post, 7/10/04)

However, “The [Senate Select Committee On Intelligence] Report … Said Wilson Provided Misleading Information To The Washington Post Last June [12th, 2003].” (Susan Schmidt, “Plame’s Input Is Cited On Niger Mission,” The Washington Post, 7/10/04)

Senate Select Committee On Intelligence Unanimous Report: “The Former Ambassador Said That He May Have ‘Misspoken’ To The Reporter When He Said He Concluded The Documents Were ‘Forged.’” (Senate Select Committee On Intelligence, “Report On The U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Assessments On Iraq,” 7/7/04) 8.) Wilson Claimed His Book Would Enrich Debate:

NBC’s Katie Couric: “What Do You Hope The Whole Point Of This Book Will Be? Joe Wilson: “Well, I - I Hope, One, It Will Tell - It Tries To Tell An Interesting Story. Two, I Hope That It Enriches The Debate In A Year In Which We Are All Called Upon As Americans To Elect Our Leaders. And Three, … That [It] Says That This Is A Great Democracy That Is Worthy Of Our Taking Our Responsibilities As Stewards Seriously.” (NBC’s “Today Show,” 5/3/04)

Wilson Admits In His Book That He Had Been Involved In “A Little Literary Flair” When Talking To Reporters. “[Wilson] wrote in his book, he told Committee staff that his assertion may have involved ‘a little literary flair.’” (Matthew Continetti, “‘A Little Literary Flair’” The Weekly Standard, 7/26/04)

Wilson’s Book The Politics Of Truth: Inside The Lies That Put The White House On Trial And Betrayed My Wife’s CIA Identity Has Been Panned In Numerous Reviews For Its Inaccuracies:

“On Page One Of Chapter One, He Quotes NBC Talk Show Host Chris Matthews, Who Told Him That, After Mr. Wilson Chose To Go Public: ‘Wilson’s Wife Is Fair Game.’ Later, He Bases His List Of Suspect Leakers On Conversations With Members Of The News Media And A ‘Source Close To The House Judiciary Committee.’” (Eli Lake, Op-Ed, “Don’t Quit Your Day Job, Mr. Wilson,” New York Post, 5/4/04)

“For Example, When Asked How He ‘Knew’ That The Intelligence Community Had Rejected The Possibility Of A Niger-Iraq Uranium Deal, As He Wrote In His Book, He Told [Senate Intelligence] Committee Staff That His Assertion May Have Involved ‘A Little Literary Flair.’” (Matthew Continetti, “‘A Little Literary Flair,’” The Weekly Standard, 7/26/04)

The Boston Globe: “In Essence, Much Of Wilson’s Book Is An Attempt To Portray The Bush Administration As A Ministry Of Fear Whose Mission In Pursuing War In Iraq Required It To Proclaim A Lie As Truth.” (Michael D. Langan, Op-Ed, “‘Truth’ Makes Much Of Bush Controversy,” The Boston Globe, 5/4/04)

Newsweek’s Evan Thomas Wrote In The Washington Post: “[W]ilson’s Claims And Conclusions Are Either Long Hashed Over Or Based On What The Intelligence Business Describes As ‘Rumint,’ Or Rumor Intelligence.” (Evan Thomas, Op-Ed, “Indecent Exposure,” The Washington Post, 5/16/04) 9.) Wilson Claimed The CIA Provided Him With Information Related To The Iraq-Niger Uranium Transaction:

“The Former Ambassador Noted That His CIA Contacts Told Him There Were Documents Pertaining To The Alleged Iraq-Niger Uranium Transaction And That The Source Of The Information Was The [Redacted] Intelligence Service.” (Senate Select Committee On Intelligence, “Report On The U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Assessments On Iraq,” 7/7/04)

However, “The DO [Director Of Operations At The CIA] Reports Officer Told Committee Staff That He Did Not Provide The Former Ambassador With Any Information About The Source Or Details …” (Senate Select Committee On Intelligence, “Report On The U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Assessments On Iraq,” 7/7/04) 10.) Wilson Claimed He Is A Non-Partisan “Centrist”: Recently, Joe Wilson Refused To Admit He Is A Registered Democrat. NBC’s Jamie Gangel: “You are a Democrat?” Joe Wilson: “I exercise my rights as a citizen of this country to participate in the selection of my leaders and I am proud to do so. I did so in the election in 2000 by contributing not just to Al Gore's campaign, but also to the Bush-Cheney campaign.” (NBC’s “Today Show,” 7/14/05)

“[Wilson] Insist He Remained A Centrist At Heart.” (Scott Shane, “Private Spy And Public Spouse Live At Center Of Leak Case,” The New York Times, 7/5/05)

Joe Wilson Is A Registered Democrat. (District Of Columbia Voter Registrations, Accessed 7/14/05)

Joseph Wilson Has Donated Over $8,000 To Democrats Including $2,000 To John Kerry For President In 2003, $1,000 To Hillary Clinton’s (D-NY) HILLPAC In 2002 And $3,000 To Al Gore In 1999. (The Center For Responsive Politics Website, www.opensecrets.org, Accessed 7/12/05)

Wilson Endorsed John Kerry For President In October 2003 And Advised The Kerry Campaign. (David Tirrell-Wysocki, “Former Ambassador Wilson Endorses Kerry In Presidential Race,” The Associated Press, 10/23/03)

“[Wilson] Admits ‘It Will Be A Cold Day In Hell Before I Vote For A Republican, Even For Dog Catcher.’” (Scott Shane, “Private Spy And Public Spouse Live At Center Of Leak Case,” The New York Times, 7/5/05
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1458067/posts

 

[Annie]

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YmE2ODY1MTUwZTcxNzNlNDQxZDcxNzYxN2UyNTVkZWI=

Saturday, March 17, 2007

"Covert" To Whom? [Andy McCarthy]

This morning, the New York Times reports Valerie Plame Wilson's assertion yesterday, in testimony before Rep. Henry Waxman's House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, that the leaking of her name as a CIA operative (which the Times calls "the security breach") might have “jeopardized and even destroyed entire networks of foreign agents, who in turn risk their own lives and those of their families to provide the United States with needed intelligence. Lives are literally at stake.”

It made me wonder, once again, about the media hypocrisy in reporting this story. Though Times reporters Neil Lewis and Mark Leibovich make no mention of it in their dispatch (and, indeed, it has been absent from press coverage of this story), the Times, along with numerous mainstream media powerhouses, has long maintained in court that Mrs. Wilson's cover had been blown many years before Scooter Libby ever mentioned her.

Specifically, she was exposed by a Russian spy in the early 1990s. Thereafter, the CIA itself "inadvertently" compromised Plame by not taking appropriate measures to safeguard classified documents that the Agency routed to the Swiss embassy in Havana. According to Bill Gertz of the Washington Times, "the documents were supposed to be sealed from the Cuban government, but [unidentified U.S.] intelligence officials said the Cubans read the classified material and learned the secrets contained in them."

As I wrote here nearly two years ago, this is not my claim. It is the contention made in a 2005 brief to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit by the Times along with ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, AP, Newsweek, Reuters America, the Washington Post, the Tribune Company (which publishes the Los Angeles Times and the Baltimore Sun, among other papers), and the White House Correspondents (the organization which represents the White House press corps in its dealings with the executive branch). The mainstream media made the contention in an attempt to quash subpoenas issued to journalists — the argument being that if Mrs. Wilson's cover had already been blown, there could have been no crime when an administration official (who we now know to be Richard Armitage, not Scooter Libby) leaked her identity to journalist Robert Novak, and thus there was no need to compel reporters to reveal their sources.

Amazing how, when its own interests are at stake, the media manages to be very forceful in reporting relevant facts. But now, when those facts are even more relevant because Mrs. Wilson and congressional Democrats are bloviating about ruined intelligence networks and threatened lives, the media won't mention them. How can it be possible that a leak in 2002 "jeopardized and even destroyed entire networks of foreign agents" associated with Mrs. Wilson's covert assignment when, by the media's own account to a federal court, those networks had to have been blown for years?

It's very much worth reading this insightful post at Haft of the Spear from intelligence expert Michael Tanji. As he points out, the real, untold story in this farce is the shoddy spycraft of the CIA. Foreign intelligence professionals well know that, for an American, non-official cover overseas is easy to pierce, especially in places where proliferation (Mrs. Wilson's specialty) is a major issue. As Tanji observes:

When a public records search — something anyone with a credit card can do — reveals affiliation with one of those laughable "cover" organizations, all the linguistic dancing in the world isn't going to help you if confronted about your non-governmental status. Any half-curious foreign intelligence service could have figured this out and probably did, which means Ms. Plame really needs to answer only one question of merit [from Rep. Waxman's Committee], though I doubt it will be asked [Tanji's right — it wasn't]: "Given the ease with which any of your targets could have determined or at least suspected your affiliation with the US government, is it not reasonable to assume that some or all of the intelligence information you obtained while working under the Brewster-Jennings cover was false or misleading?"

​

03/17 08:44 AM

 

[Bullypulpit]

Let's look at a few facts here:

1. The CIA filed a crime report with the DoJ following the publication of Novak's column in which Ms. Plame's name and position with the CIA were released.

2. Fitzgerald repeatedly stated that her position with the CIA was classified.

3. General Hayden, Chimpy's pick for DCIA confirmed that Ms. Plame's position with the CIA was classified.

4. Ms. Plame testified, under oath, that her position with the CIA was classified.

These facts render all the right wing noise machine's spin irrelevant. But it's only a crime to blow the cover of a CIA operative if you're not a loyal supporter, or member, of the Bush Administration. So don't let a few facts stand in the way of your delusions.

 

[manu1959]

Let's look at a few facts here:

1. The CIA filed a crime report with the DoJ following the publication of Novak's column in which Ms. Plame's name and position with the CIA were released.

2. Fitzgerald repeatedly stated that her position with the CIA was classified.

3. General Hayden, Chimpy's pick for DCIA confirmed that Ms. Plame's position with the CIA was classified.

4. Ms. Plame testified, under oath, that her position with the CIA was classified.

These facts render all the right wing noise machine's spin irrelevant. But it's only a crime to blow the cover of a CIA operative if you're not a loyal supporter, or member, of the Bush Administration. So don't let a few facts stand in the way of your delusions.

why then pray tell did the grand jury and special prosecutors not bring forth charges?