Valerie Plame for Congress

[Faun]

Wrong as always, ******* moron. The information about Valerie Plame's employment history came from the CIA, not from Fitzgerald, entered into the Provacy Act systems of records.

The information you posted in this forum came from Fitzgerald. You haven't posted any information from the CIA, you ******* moron.

You keep trying to weasel around that request.

Who do you think you're fooling?

Nope, not all of it, ya ******* moron. I quoted a member from the CIA who said she was worked undercover and I posted her unclassified employment history with the CIA.

Your retorted, "nuh-uh!"

In other words, you failed to post any verifiable evidence.

You're the one who needs to prove that she was "serving undercover" when she was sitting at a desk in Langley VA.

And I proved it.

Exhibit A. Plame's unclassified CIA employment history from the Privacy Act systems of records.

"Nuh-uh" doesn't wash that away.

What do you imagine that proves?

It proves Plame's work history with the CIA.

 

[bripat9643]

The information you posted in this forum came from Fitzgerald. You haven't posted any information from the CIA, you ******* moron.

You keep trying to weasel around that request.

Who do you think you're fooling?

Nope, not all of it, ya ******* moron. I quoted a member from the CIA who said she was worked undercover and I posted her unclassified employment history with the CIA.

Your retorted, "nuh-uh!"

In other words, you failed to post any verifiable evidence.

You're the one who needs to prove that she was "serving undercover" when she was sitting at a desk in Langley VA.

******* moron, testimony is evidence.

It's nothing more than Fitzgerald's opinion. Comey and McCabe gave testimony, and they lied.

If Harlow lied about his conversation, Novak certainly would have contested Harlow's claims since Novak was in the middle of this. So g'head, show the forum where Novak accused Harlow of lying about Plame being an undercover CIA operative during their conversation -- which Novak confirmed he spoke with Harlow.

How would Novak know whether Harlow was lying? Novak didn't have a security clearance. He couldn't verify what Harlow said.

 

[bripat9643]

The information you posted in this forum came from Fitzgerald. You haven't posted any information from the CIA, you ******* moron.

You keep trying to weasel around that request.

Who do you think you're fooling?

Nope, not all of it, ya ******* moron. I quoted a member from the CIA who said she was worked undercover and I posted her unclassified employment history with the CIA.

Your retorted, "nuh-uh!"

In other words, you failed to post any verifiable evidence.

You're the one who needs to prove that she was "serving undercover" when she was sitting at a desk in Langley VA.

And I proved it.

Exhibit A. Plame's unclassified CIA employment history from the Privacy Act systems of records.

"Nuh-uh" doesn't wash that away.

What do you imagine that proves?

It proves Plame's work history with the CIA.

Where does it say she was "undercover?"

 

[Faun]

******* moron, you're not debating. You're saying, "nuh-uh." You've literally offered nothing other than "nuh-uh" to refute a word Fitzgerald said.

And again, I have more than Fitzgerald's opinion. I have the unclassified CIA record of her employment showing she served overseas under cover. And I have the CIA asking the Department of Justice to open an investigation into who outed one of their agents.

But even if all I had was Fitzgerald's opinion, that would still be infinitely more than what you're bringing to the debate, which is no more than "nuh-uh." Fitzgerald, like Mueller, was a Special Counsel who investigated a potential crime. If I were a ******* moron like you, my argument would be nuh-uh trump is innocent of colluding with Russia. That's only Mueller's opinion.

Do you see now why you're a ******* moron, ******* moron?

I don't need to refute a single word he said because you haven't provided a single official document to support it.

You have "unclassified CIA record of her employment showing she served overseas under cover?" Then post it.

Otherwise, shut the **** up.

Furthermore, even Mueller didn't claim that Trump colluded with Russia

I've proved everything I said with verifiable news sources, court documents and direct quotes.

All you've posted is, "nuh-uh!"



"Furthermore, even Mueller didn't claim that Trump colluded with Russia"

******* moron, Mueller said trump didn't collude with Russia. Applying your brain-dead "nuh-uh" denials to that case, that's only Mueller's "opinion" which means trump did collude with Russia. Do you see now why you're such a ******* moron?

We know he didn't collude with Russia because there isn't a shred of evidence that we did. On the other hand, we know Plame wasn't undercover because there isn't a shred of credible evidence that she was.

The only evidence we have coming from an investigation into the matter comes from Mueller's investigation. I'm merely employing your brain-dead "nuh-uh" logic here. Claiming trump did not collude with Russia means that is only Mueller's opinion.

Let's apply your moronic idiocies to other Special and Independent Counsels.....

It was only Ken Starr's "opinion" that Bill Clinton had sex with Monica Lewinsky, therefore, Clinton didn't lie under oath.

It was only Leon Jaworksi's "opinion" that Richard Nixon was covering up the Watergate break in. Nixon shouldn't have resigned.

It was only Lawrence Walsh's "opinion" that our government traded arms for hostages and then lied about it. Reagan should never have apologized.

In all the cases you listed, you're wrong. It wasn't only their opinion. Fitzgerald presented no evidence that Plame was under cover. That's because he knew he couldn't make that charge against Libby stick.

You're lying again, ******* moron. Harlow testified under oath that she was an undercover operative.

 

[Faun]

Nope, not all of it, ya ******* moron. I quoted a member from the CIA who said she was worked undercover and I posted her unclassified employment history with the CIA.

Your retorted, "nuh-uh!"

In other words, you failed to post any verifiable evidence.

You're the one who needs to prove that she was "serving undercover" when she was sitting at a desk in Langley VA.

And I proved it.

Exhibit A. Plame's unclassified CIA employment history from the Privacy Act systems of records.

"Nuh-uh" doesn't wash that away.

What do you imagine that proves?

It proves Plame's work history with the CIA.

Where does it say she was "undercover?"

******* moron, can't you read English??

"While assigned to CPD, Ms. Wilson engaged in temporary duty (TDY) travel overseas on official business. She traveled at least seven times to more than ten countries. When traveling overseas, Ms. Wilson always traveled under a cover identity — sometimes in true name and sometimes in alias — but always using cover — whether official or non-official cover (NOC) — with no ostensible relationship to the CIA."​

 

[daveman]

"Operative"?

You misspelled "analyst whom everyone in DC knew worked for CIA".

Yo're welcome.

Dumbfuck.

Transcript of Special Counsel Fitzgerald's Press Conference

"Valerie Wilson was a CIA officer. In July 2003, the fact that Valerie Wilson was a CIA officer was classified. Not only was it classified, but it was not widely known outside the intelligence community. Valerie Wilson's friends, neighbors, college classmates had no idea she had another life. The fact that she was a CIA officer was not well-known, for her protection or for the benefit of all us. It's important that a CIA officer's identity be protected, that it be protected not just for the officer, but for the nation's security. Valerie Wilson's cover was blown in July 2003. The first sign of that cover being blown was when Mr. Novak published a column on July 14th, 2003. But Mr. Novak was not the first reporter to be told that Wilson's wife, Valerie Wilson, Ambassador Wilson's wife Valerie, worked at the CIA. Several other reporters were told." ~ Patrick Fitzgerald, lead investigator​

You know how much any of this matters?

None. Zip. Zilch. Nada.

You didn't get the W perp walk you so desperately wanted and you were breathlessly promised. You got a low-level functionary who was charged with lying to prosecutors because they didn't let him use his notes.

That's it. That's all you got. And it was funny to watch you guys, so convinced W and Rove were going to be frog-marched to the Hague for war crimes.

ROFL!!

Sure Libby was used as a scapegoat, so then when he got pardoned, all the guilty escaped justice.
But why are you happy about that?
Iraq really was innocent, and Plame, about 6,000 dead US soldiers, and half a million Iraqis were harmed by those in the Bush administration who lied.
That is a terrible outcome.

Poor Saddam. Did you cry when he was executed? Such a terrible injustice, wasn't it?

So you think sending off Americans to die based on bullshit reasons is ok, do you?

Americans have been dying in the cause of freedom for over two centuries.

The left apparently thinks freedom is bullshit.

You would have left any number of brown people to die under Saddam's oppression, and done so with a clear conscience...as long as Bush didn't get his way.

You can stop pretending you have a moral position now.

 

[daveman]

MY PROOF THAT FITZGERALDS OPINION IS CORRECT IS FITZGERALDS OPINION

-- faun

Great, let's see your evidence the CIA records, which proved Plame was a covert operative, were falsified...

You've been repeatedly asked for proof that Fitzgerald's opinion is correct.

You then repost Fitzgerald's opinion.

I'm sure you believe that's a devastating point. But it's not.

Meanwhile, I have a question for you:

In the 60s, the left wouldn't trust anyone from the government as far as they could throw them. Now -- disagreeing with a government functionary to you is treason.

What the hell happened to you people?

"You've been repeatedly asked for proof that Fitzgerald's opinion is correct."

And it's been explained to you multiple times, it was not his opinion. It came from CIA records. It was from CIA records of Plame's employment with the agency that were unclassified.

Furthermore, the CIA would not have initially asked the Department of Justice to open a criminal investigation into who outed a covert agent of theirs had Plame not been covert.

I repeat: What the hell happened to you people? You can pretend the question isn't there. It would require more introspection that you're capable of to answer it.

Not being a product of the 60's, that's not a question I can answer. I don't speak for anyone but myself.

What I do see is a covert CIA operative was exposed and her job at counter nuclear proliferation was jeopardized. What I also see is traitorous ******* morons being ok with that because she's a Democrat.

Democrats have no idea what treason is.

 

[Faun]

Dumbfuck.

Transcript of Special Counsel Fitzgerald's Press Conference

"Valerie Wilson was a CIA officer. In July 2003, the fact that Valerie Wilson was a CIA officer was classified. Not only was it classified, but it was not widely known outside the intelligence community. Valerie Wilson's friends, neighbors, college classmates had no idea she had another life. The fact that she was a CIA officer was not well-known, for her protection or for the benefit of all us. It's important that a CIA officer's identity be protected, that it be protected not just for the officer, but for the nation's security. Valerie Wilson's cover was blown in July 2003. The first sign of that cover being blown was when Mr. Novak published a column on July 14th, 2003. But Mr. Novak was not the first reporter to be told that Wilson's wife, Valerie Wilson, Ambassador Wilson's wife Valerie, worked at the CIA. Several other reporters were told." ~ Patrick Fitzgerald, lead investigator​

You know how much any of this matters?

None. Zip. Zilch. Nada.

You didn't get the W perp walk you so desperately wanted and you were breathlessly promised. You got a low-level functionary who was charged with lying to prosecutors because they didn't let him use his notes.

That's it. That's all you got. And it was funny to watch you guys, so convinced W and Rove were going to be frog-marched to the Hague for war crimes.

ROFL!!

Sure Libby was used as a scapegoat, so then when he got pardoned, all the guilty escaped justice.
But why are you happy about that?
Iraq really was innocent, and Plame, about 6,000 dead US soldiers, and half a million Iraqis were harmed by those in the Bush administration who lied.
That is a terrible outcome.

Poor Saddam. Did you cry when he was executed? Such a terrible injustice, wasn't it?

So you think sending off Americans to die based on bullshit reasons is ok, do you?

Americans have been dying in the cause of freedom for over two centuries.

The left apparently thinks freedom is bullshit.

You would have left any number of brown people to die under Saddam's oppression, and done so with a clear conscience...as long as Bush didn't get his way.

You can stop pretending you have a moral position now.

The main reason Bush invaded Iraq was over WMD that turned out not to be there. Sorry, but you don't get to change the narrative for political expediency.

 

[daveman]

I wonder...is the left supporting Plame's campaign because she worked against Bush, or because she's an anti-Semite?

 

[Faun]

Great, let's see your evidence the CIA records, which proved Plame was a covert operative, were falsified...

You've been repeatedly asked for proof that Fitzgerald's opinion is correct.

You then repost Fitzgerald's opinion.

I'm sure you believe that's a devastating point. But it's not.

Meanwhile, I have a question for you:

In the 60s, the left wouldn't trust anyone from the government as far as they could throw them. Now -- disagreeing with a government functionary to you is treason.

What the hell happened to you people?

"You've been repeatedly asked for proof that Fitzgerald's opinion is correct."

And it's been explained to you multiple times, it was not his opinion. It came from CIA records. It was from CIA records of Plame's employment with the agency that were unclassified.

Furthermore, the CIA would not have initially asked the Department of Justice to open a criminal investigation into who outed a covert agent of theirs had Plame not been covert.

I repeat: What the hell happened to you people? You can pretend the question isn't there. It would require more introspection that you're capable of to answer it.

Not being a product of the 60's, that's not a question I can answer. I don't speak for anyone but myself.

What I do see is a covert CIA operative was exposed and her job at counter nuclear proliferation was jeopardized. What I also see is traitorous ******* morons being ok with that because she's a Democrat.

Democrats have no idea what treason is.

I said "traitorous," not "treasonous," and sure we do. Such as supporting and defending the outing of a covert CIA operative who was working on counter nuclear proliferation. That's traitorous.

 

[daveman]

You know how much any of this matters?

None. Zip. Zilch. Nada.

You didn't get the W perp walk you so desperately wanted and you were breathlessly promised. You got a low-level functionary who was charged with lying to prosecutors because they didn't let him use his notes.

That's it. That's all you got. And it was funny to watch you guys, so convinced W and Rove were going to be frog-marched to the Hague for war crimes.

ROFL!!

Sure Libby was used as a scapegoat, so then when he got pardoned, all the guilty escaped justice.
But why are you happy about that?
Iraq really was innocent, and Plame, about 6,000 dead US soldiers, and half a million Iraqis were harmed by those in the Bush administration who lied.
That is a terrible outcome.

Poor Saddam. Did you cry when he was executed? Such a terrible injustice, wasn't it?

So you think sending off Americans to die based on bullshit reasons is ok, do you?

Americans have been dying in the cause of freedom for over two centuries.

The left apparently thinks freedom is bullshit.

You would have left any number of brown people to die under Saddam's oppression, and done so with a clear conscience...as long as Bush didn't get his way.

You can stop pretending you have a moral position now.

The main reason Bush invaded Iraq was over WMD that turned out not to be there. Sorry, but you don't get to change the narrative for political expediency.

I don't give a shit about the narrative -- the narrative is just people talking.

I focus on results. And a tyrant was deposed and executed by his own people.

That's what pisses off the left.

 

[daveman]

You've been repeatedly asked for proof that Fitzgerald's opinion is correct.

You then repost Fitzgerald's opinion.

I'm sure you believe that's a devastating point. But it's not.

Meanwhile, I have a question for you:

In the 60s, the left wouldn't trust anyone from the government as far as they could throw them. Now -- disagreeing with a government functionary to you is treason.

What the hell happened to you people?

"You've been repeatedly asked for proof that Fitzgerald's opinion is correct."

And it's been explained to you multiple times, it was not his opinion. It came from CIA records. It was from CIA records of Plame's employment with the agency that were unclassified.

Furthermore, the CIA would not have initially asked the Department of Justice to open a criminal investigation into who outed a covert agent of theirs had Plame not been covert.

I repeat: What the hell happened to you people? You can pretend the question isn't there. It would require more introspection that you're capable of to answer it.

Not being a product of the 60's, that's not a question I can answer. I don't speak for anyone but myself.

What I do see is a covert CIA operative was exposed and her job at counter nuclear proliferation was jeopardized. What I also see is traitorous ******* morons being ok with that because she's a Democrat.

Democrats have no idea what treason is.

I said "traitorous," not "treasonous," and sure we do. Such as supporting and defending the outing of a covert CIA operative who was working on counter nuclear proliferation. That's traitorous.

Yes, that's what you were told to believe. You were also told to believe any Democrats pursuing anti-American goals is NOT traitorous.

If you have standards, great. But at least make sure you apply them evenly across the board.

 

[Faun]

Sure Libby was used as a scapegoat, so then when he got pardoned, all the guilty escaped justice.
But why are you happy about that?
Iraq really was innocent, and Plame, about 6,000 dead US soldiers, and half a million Iraqis were harmed by those in the Bush administration who lied.
That is a terrible outcome.

Poor Saddam. Did you cry when he was executed? Such a terrible injustice, wasn't it?

So you think sending off Americans to die based on bullshit reasons is ok, do you?

Americans have been dying in the cause of freedom for over two centuries.

The left apparently thinks freedom is bullshit.

You would have left any number of brown people to die under Saddam's oppression, and done so with a clear conscience...as long as Bush didn't get his way.

You can stop pretending you have a moral position now.

The main reason Bush invaded Iraq was over WMD that turned out not to be there. Sorry, but you don't get to change the narrative for political expediency.

I don't give a shit about the narrative -- the narrative is just people talking.

I focus on results. And a tyrant was deposed and executed by his own people.

That's what pisses off the left.

Ignoring reality doesn't help you.

Bush's main reason for invading Iraq was over WMD.

 

[daveman]

Poor Saddam. Did you cry when he was executed? Such a terrible injustice, wasn't it?

So you think sending off Americans to die based on bullshit reasons is ok, do you?

Americans have been dying in the cause of freedom for over two centuries.

The left apparently thinks freedom is bullshit.

You would have left any number of brown people to die under Saddam's oppression, and done so with a clear conscience...as long as Bush didn't get his way.

You can stop pretending you have a moral position now.

The main reason Bush invaded Iraq was over WMD that turned out not to be there. Sorry, but you don't get to change the narrative for political expediency.

I don't give a shit about the narrative -- the narrative is just people talking.

I focus on results. And a tyrant was deposed and executed by his own people.

That's what pisses off the left.

Ignoring reality doesn't help you.

Bush's main reason for invading Iraq was over WMD.

Here's some reality: This woman got to vote. You believe she should never have been allowed to.

 

[Faun]

So you think sending off Americans to die based on bullshit reasons is ok, do you?

Americans have been dying in the cause of freedom for over two centuries.

The left apparently thinks freedom is bullshit.

You would have left any number of brown people to die under Saddam's oppression, and done so with a clear conscience...as long as Bush didn't get his way.

You can stop pretending you have a moral position now.

The main reason Bush invaded Iraq was over WMD that turned out not to be there. Sorry, but you don't get to change the narrative for political expediency.

I don't give a shit about the narrative -- the narrative is just people talking.

I focus on results. And a tyrant was deposed and executed by his own people.

That's what pisses off the left.

Ignoring reality doesn't help you.

Bush's main reason for invading Iraq was over WMD.

View attachment 279439

Here's some reality: This woman got to vote. You believe she should never have been allowed to.

No, that's not what I believe. Of course, there's no shortage of you yahoos telling others what you think they believe.

Meanwhile, you're supporting the government lying to you for political expediency.

 

[daveman]

Americans have been dying in the cause of freedom for over two centuries.

The left apparently thinks freedom is bullshit.

You would have left any number of brown people to die under Saddam's oppression, and done so with a clear conscience...as long as Bush didn't get his way.

You can stop pretending you have a moral position now.

The main reason Bush invaded Iraq was over WMD that turned out not to be there. Sorry, but you don't get to change the narrative for political expediency.

I don't give a shit about the narrative -- the narrative is just people talking.

I focus on results. And a tyrant was deposed and executed by his own people.

That's what pisses off the left.

Ignoring reality doesn't help you.

Bush's main reason for invading Iraq was over WMD.

View attachment 279439

Here's some reality: This woman got to vote. You believe she should never have been allowed to.

No, that's not what I believe. Of course, there's no shortage of you yahoos telling others what you think they believe.

Meanwhile, you're supporting the government lying to you for political expediency.

And how is that different from the left lying about Trump's non-existent collusion with Russia?

It's always different when you do it, isn't it?

 

[Faun]

The main reason Bush invaded Iraq was over WMD that turned out not to be there. Sorry, but you don't get to change the narrative for political expediency.

I don't give a shit about the narrative -- the narrative is just people talking.

I focus on results. And a tyrant was deposed and executed by his own people.

That's what pisses off the left.

Ignoring reality doesn't help you.

Bush's main reason for invading Iraq was over WMD.

View attachment 279439

Here's some reality: This woman got to vote. You believe she should never have been allowed to.

No, that's not what I believe. Of course, there's no shortage of you yahoos telling others what you think they believe.

Meanwhile, you're supporting the government lying to you for political expediency.

And how is that different from the left lying about Trump's non-existent collusion with Russia?

It's always different when you do it, isn't it?

WTF is wrong with you?

My party wasn't even in power until this year; and even that was only one chamber of one branch. No policies were passed ... no wars started.

 

[bripat9643]

I don't need to refute a single word he said because you haven't provided a single official document to support it.

You have "unclassified CIA record of her employment showing she served overseas under cover?" Then post it.

Otherwise, shut the **** up.

Furthermore, even Mueller didn't claim that Trump colluded with Russia

I've proved everything I said with verifiable news sources, court documents and direct quotes.

All you've posted is, "nuh-uh!"



"Furthermore, even Mueller didn't claim that Trump colluded with Russia"

******* moron, Mueller said trump didn't collude with Russia. Applying your brain-dead "nuh-uh" denials to that case, that's only Mueller's "opinion" which means trump did collude with Russia. Do you see now why you're such a ******* moron?

We know he didn't collude with Russia because there isn't a shred of evidence that we did. On the other hand, we know Plame wasn't undercover because there isn't a shred of credible evidence that she was.

The only evidence we have coming from an investigation into the matter comes from Mueller's investigation. I'm merely employing your brain-dead "nuh-uh" logic here. Claiming trump did not collude with Russia means that is only Mueller's opinion.

Let's apply your moronic idiocies to other Special and Independent Counsels.....

It was only Ken Starr's "opinion" that Bill Clinton had sex with Monica Lewinsky, therefore, Clinton didn't lie under oath.

It was only Leon Jaworksi's "opinion" that Richard Nixon was covering up the Watergate break in. Nixon shouldn't have resigned.

It was only Lawrence Walsh's "opinion" that our government traded arms for hostages and then lied about it. Reagan should never have apologized.

In all the cases you listed, you're wrong. It wasn't only their opinion. Fitzgerald presented no evidence that Plame was under cover. That's because he knew he couldn't make that charge against Libby stick.

You're lying again, ******* moron. Harlow testified under oath that she was an undercover operative.

McCabe and Comey also testified under oath, and they both lied.

 

[daveman]

I don't give a shit about the narrative -- the narrative is just people talking.

I focus on results. And a tyrant was deposed and executed by his own people.

That's what pisses off the left.

Ignoring reality doesn't help you.

Bush's main reason for invading Iraq was over WMD.

View attachment 279439

Here's some reality: This woman got to vote. You believe she should never have been allowed to.

No, that's not what I believe. Of course, there's no shortage of you yahoos telling others what you think they believe.

Meanwhile, you're supporting the government lying to you for political expediency.

And how is that different from the left lying about Trump's non-existent collusion with Russia?

It's always different when you do it, isn't it?

WTF is wrong with you?

My party wasn't even in power until this year; and even that was only one chamber of one branch. No policies were passed ... no wars started.

Oh -- so the Democratic Party hasn't been whinging on for over 2 years making baseless claims that Trump colluded with Russia to "steal" the election from the rightful queen Hillary?

Hint: Yes. Yes, they have.

So...WTF is wrong with you?

 

[Faun]

I've proved everything I said with verifiable news sources, court documents and direct quotes.

All you've posted is, "nuh-uh!"



"Furthermore, even Mueller didn't claim that Trump colluded with Russia"

******* moron, Mueller said trump didn't collude with Russia. Applying your brain-dead "nuh-uh" denials to that case, that's only Mueller's "opinion" which means trump did collude with Russia. Do you see now why you're such a ******* moron?

We know he didn't collude with Russia because there isn't a shred of evidence that we did. On the other hand, we know Plame wasn't undercover because there isn't a shred of credible evidence that she was.

The only evidence we have coming from an investigation into the matter comes from Mueller's investigation. I'm merely employing your brain-dead "nuh-uh" logic here. Claiming trump did not collude with Russia means that is only Mueller's opinion.

Let's apply your moronic idiocies to other Special and Independent Counsels.....

It was only Ken Starr's "opinion" that Bill Clinton had sex with Monica Lewinsky, therefore, Clinton didn't lie under oath.

It was only Leon Jaworksi's "opinion" that Richard Nixon was covering up the Watergate break in. Nixon shouldn't have resigned.

It was only Lawrence Walsh's "opinion" that our government traded arms for hostages and then lied about it. Reagan should never have apologized.

In all the cases you listed, you're wrong. It wasn't only their opinion. Fitzgerald presented no evidence that Plame was under cover. That's because he knew he couldn't make that charge against Libby stick.

You're lying again, ******* moron. Harlow testified under oath that she was an undercover operative.

McCabe and Comey also testified under oath, and they both lied.

******* moron, Harlow testified about his conversation with Novak. He told Novak before Novak's article was released, not to identify Plame because she was an undercover operative for the CIA.

Had Harlow not told that to Novak and lied under oath saying he did, as you moronically suggest, it would have screwed Novak over and Novak wouldn't have hesitated to clear his own name by saying Harlow lied -- he never did because Harlow didn't lie.

Sadly for you, you're too big of a ******* moron to understand any of that.