Valerie Plame leaker identified
Former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage has admitted he was the one who leaked the identity of CIA operative Valerie Plame (Wilson).
Armitage said he inadvertently revealed Plame’s job to syndicated columnist Robert Novak in July 2003. Quote:
It was not Rove, Libby, Cheney or the President. Fitgerald's knowledge and silence regarding the truth IMO gives considerable proof that the "investigation" was just political manuvering and not the investigation that it was supposed to be. You can call it "Patrick Fitgerald's publicly funded Witchunt". [Yawn] Another liberal conspiracy theory appropriately flushed away as deserved. Years of "investigation" efforts when Fitzgerald knew the truth. I wonder how many tax dollars went down the flusher on this.. Consequently, Joseph C. Wilson 4th and Valerie Plame Wilson's lawsuit against Rove, Libbby and Cheney will probably go the way of the flusher as well. [Insert Laugh track here] Conspiracy is still a probable issue, but it's now a question of whether or not Fitzgerald and others consipred to falsely implicate Rove, Libby, Cheney, or the President. LOL, let's see what happens now. The sideshow just got somewhat more entertaining. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14723718/ LOL, give a flame for Plame, I don't care. |
Nobody is pitching a bitch about the media read on the thing?
hahahahahahaa buried on the 3rd page. |
Poor knifey...:dis:
|
leaving a couple of things out here, aren't we?
Quote:
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060918/corn |
Hmmm, a war critic in charge of an operation supporting war. How strange that the operation did poorly. :dunno:
|
Quote:
The original leak was made by Richard Armitage to syndicated columnist Robert Novak. Novak’s column, published in a number of places 07/14/2003 is what publicly disclosed Valerie Plame Wilson’s identity as a CIA operative. It was this public disclosure that prompted Joseph C. Wilson IV to make allegations that the White House had purposefully leaked his wife’s CIA employment for punitive measures against his criticism of the invasion of Iraq. The Wilson’s primarily blamed Rove, Libby, and Cheney - naming them in a lawsuit. Joseph and Valerie Wilson were wrong. From Joseph and Valerie Wilson’s preliminary statement in their lawsuit against Libby, Rove and Cheney: Quote:
It's 23 pages, slightly larger than 4 MB. What is even far worse is that Armitage told Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald he was Robert Novak’s source early in the “investigation”. Yet, this revelation was never disclosed and the “investigation” continued as if this information was unknown. It seems clear that the “investigation” into the leak has been clearly demonstrated to be something other than the thorough and impartial investigation it was supposed to be. I’m speculating of course, but it seems clear that the “investigation” was simply the continuation of an effort to fabricate wrongdoing by Rove, Libby, Cheney, and the President. The smear campaign didn’t work, Fitzgerald and the Wilson's have been caught in a gigantic lie. Too bad we can’t send Fitzgerald and the Wilson's to Singapore for an ass caning. |
NOVAK: ARMITAGE DID NOT TELL ALL
Wed Sep 13 2006 08:37:07 ET "When Richard Armitage finally acknowledged last week he was my source three years ago in revealing Valerie Plame Wilson as a CIA employee, the former deputy secretary of state's interviews obscured what he really did," Bob Novak claims in a column set for Thursday release. Novak, attempting to set the record straight, writes: "First, Armitage did not, as he now indicates, merely pass on something he had heard and that he 'thought' might be so. Rather, he identified to me the CIA division where Mrs. Wilson worked, and said flatly that she recommended the mission to Niger by her husband, former Amb. Joseph Wilson. Second, Armitage did not slip me this information as idle chitchat, as he now suggests. He made clear he considered it especially suited for my column." Novak slams Armitage for holding back all this time. Armitage's silence for "two and one-half years caused intense pain for his colleagues in government and enabled partisan Democrats in Congress to falsely accuse Rove of being my primary source," Novak explains. "When Armitage now says he was mute because of special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's request, that does not explain his silent three months between his claimed first realization that he was the source and Fitzgerald's appointment on Dec. 30. Armitage's tardy self-disclosure is tainted because it is deceptive." Developing... http://www.drudgereport.com/flash9.htm http://www.suntimes.com/output/novak...t-novak14.html |
Quote:
This thing has the potential of rapidly expanding into a massive and revealing scandal of unprecedented proportions. It appears the Plame matter can now be legally proven to be a purposeful attempt by the left to undermine the U. S. Government for political and personal gain. The government should sock it to them big time. |
Quote:
|
why bother anymore Drak.....sad, but it seems reading between the lines and connecting the dots can only implicate, not exonerate the Bush inner circle. never mind keeping an eye on the ball, some refuse to even admit the ball exists.
|
Quote:
GO Twins!! |
Ain't politics grand!!??
Stop, Thief! No Right To Privacy From Snooping Democrats By Dan McLaughlin So, it turns out that a liberal blogger hacked into a password-protected section of Minnesota GOP Senate candidate Mark Kennedy's website to get an unauthorized peek at Kennedy's campaign ads before they ran. The blogger - a Democratic consultant - apparently did this illegally, and Democratic candidate Amy Klobuchar has now fired her chief spokeswoman, who viewed the purloined ads. This follows on the heels of California Democrat Phil Angelides' campaign admission that it accessed a taped conversation that was password protected on a Web site operated by Governor Schwarzenegger's campaign. Technology has sure come a long way since the days when John Kerry's brother broke into the basement of an opponent's headquarters. Now, the Minnesota Democrat's defense is to claim that Kennedy's website was too vulnerable to snoopers like him. You may remember a case a few years back when the shoe was on the other foot, and Democrats embarrassed by highly damaging internal Judiciary Committee memos (showing them taking direction on judicial nominees from far-left interest groups, targeting one nominee because he was Latino and stalling another at the request of participants in a pending case) demanded an investigation of a GOP staffer who snooped on their files. So, for all those who were outraged by that story or thought it worthy of media attention, here's your chance to denounce Klobuchar and Angelides: Paging Walter Pincus and the Washington Post. Paging Michael Crowley and the New Republic. Paging Josh Marshall. Paging Media Matters. Paging Kevin Drum. Paging Dahlia Lithwick and Slate. Paging Armando. (And this Kos diarist and this one too). Paging The Carpetbagger Report. Paging Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. Well, you get the idea. |
Fair And Ballanced Propaganda
1 Attachment(s)
.
|
Not according to MSNBC ;)
Quote:
|
They say he 'could' get 25 years.
I bet the lying govm'nt worker gets less than 3 years and that will be with a bracelet on his ankle, living at his home with secret service guards kissing his stanky arse. |
She used to be (Valerie) CIA's Iran eyes and ears about their nuke/WMD's program.
Quite ironic she was "leaked" in favor of other middle east informants. Anyone, take a wild guess on whom we now rely on Iran inside intel? |
Did anyone else notice those huge ass knives sticking out of his back as he was leaving the courtroom?
Next big news story: Cheney resigns. It just a question of when now. |
Quote:
|
Libby doesn't have enough money to pull off faking his own death to avoid prison.
|
He will receive a presidential pardon and not spend a second in prison.
|
Quote:
- js. |
I don't know why Cheney would need one, but if all Sandy Berger got was probation for destroying original classified documents from the National Archives that were critical into the inquiry about 9/11, how could Libby get any thing more? Even if he does he will appeal until 08 and then will receive a pardon.
And Jack isn't it ironic how liberals are pretending that perjury and obstruction of justice suddenly matter? |
Quote:
|
the money quote, from one of the 12 people who had the whole thing layed out for them in minute detail:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
gee, left out a few things, no?
Quote:
so it actually isn't even about Joseph Wilson at this point. Libby got convicted by 12 people - not bloggers, politicos, op-ed writers, talking heads, or commentators -12 people who now know more about this matter than anybody....had the entire scenario laid out in excruciating detail, then took ten days to analyze and rehash every bit of it...and these people not only decided that Libby committed four felonies, but wondered why the other culpable people got to walk away. |
Quote:
But fuck it; you're once again showing your warped liberal bias by even thinking that without sworn testimony from Plame and Wilson, jurors can have a complete picture of the matter. |
Quote:
it may be ironic that many of the strident "law & order" types who wanted clinton destroyed for obscuring an affair between consenting adults want freedom "now" for a man who is guilty of lying to the fbi about a "smear campaign that was orchestrated by his boss against the first person to unmask one of the many untruths that president bush used to justify invading iraq" and that has killed so many. well, that's really not irony. unfortunately it's business as usual. and pay no attention to our fouled trolls; we will see how far this goes, and where it leads, and who and how many in the end will seek the pardons so similar to those bush senior handed out like bon-bons to iran-contra felons... in the meantime, "it was still a breath of fresh air to see someone in this administration, which specializes in secrecy, prevarication and evading blame, finally called to account." yes it was. the best is yet to come. - js. |
Quote:
No bias in their drug shriveled, propaganda saturated minds. |
trolling again albed...perjury in this case is a legal term as you well know. something mr. libby is familiar with now that he's been convicted on four of five counts, including perjury and obstruction of justice. after a forty million dollar plus witch hunt, clinton wasn't convicted of anything, so no, he wasn't guilty of perjuring himself in the legal sense. as for the moral sense, when the majority of those practicing fellatio didn't consider the activity "sex" and the question was specifically about sex, the argument that clinton lied ends there as well.
i wondered why the prosecutors simply didn't ask him if he had "physical contact" with the woman, and if so, what variety...they could have done so and had clinton denied it he clearly would have set himself for perjury, although i have my doubts as to whether he would have "obscured" an answer to such a direct question. but it didn't happen and we'll never know. for whatever reason they demurred. in any event we all knew the genesis of this. it was the continuing attempt by the right and the supreme court to subvert democracy and was itself far more harmful to the republic than any awkward verbal gymnastics clinton may have employed to defend himself and the office of a duly elected president. in spite of trolls trying continuously to confuse this (and so many other current republican political disasters) with deliberately misleading history lessons on clinton, it is about valerie plame's leakers, where the subversion continues unabated, and with bush and cheney at its head. of course thanks to bush 1, jr. has better advisors. this man is a sociopath who doesn't understand truth beyond the fact he senses it's dangerous. when the 9/11 commission requested he swear in and testify under oath this president flatly refused. so i won't call him a perjurer. he isn't one - yet. for now he's just a liar. the highest in the land. - js. |
Bill Clinton lied in a civil suit. His purpose was deny justice to Paula Jones. There was about 1500 people then held in federal prisons by the executive branch which he headed for the exact crimes that he committed. A federal judge then ordered President Bill Clinton to pay $90,686 for giving false testimony in the civil sexual harassment lawsuit filed against him by Paula Jones. Clinton did not fight the ruling and agreed to pay the court $1,202 for expenses associated with a deposition and for "reasonable costs incurred by plaintiffs" as a result of his actions. Now The payments were in addition to the $850,000 Clinton paid to Jones to settle her lawsuit.
Again funny how being a liar all of a sudden matters to liberals. Libby is guilty because he lied in an investigation which the prosecutor already knew was bogus. Why do you think he was not put of trail for outing her? Answer me that. I also may go back on saying he will receive a pardon because I believe you have to admit guilt to get one. He will be better off getting cleared in an appeal. Why didn’t the judge allow the impeachment of Russert with tape, or allow the defense to call Mitchell to the stand??? But if the appeals fail I guess a pardon is just as good... |
1 Attachment(s)
.
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
http://www.answers.com/sociopath&r=67 Quote:
|
Quote:
You know why? Of course you do. Because you are INNOCENT till proven guilty.:tu: |
The term is "presumed innocent" in this country beerboy.
It means you have to be treated as if innocent, not that you are. |
Quote:
|
|
So pretty much nobody is gonna get into trouble for the leak. Typical D.C.
|
Plame Suit Dismissed by Controversial GOP Loyalist
Quote:
|
Plus there's a good chance that Libby will have his conviction overturned on appeal now that his sentence has been commuted.
You know, the last time somebody started a witch hunt in Washington D.C. the president of the United States ended up getting impeached. Is this the best the left wing can muster? I fear for the future of the Democrat party (not that the Republicans are doing any better). |
Quote:
|
Yep, you got me. ;)
|
So it was a bent judge then?
|
Ignore the spin or you'll get dizzy trying to follow it. Take this line from multi's article:
Quote:
The reporting on this whole affair has been very one-sided. If anyone involved appears 'bent' then it's because you're looking at them through the eyes of the media. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:12 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© www.p2p-zone.com - Napsterites - 2000 - 2024 (Contact grm1@iinet.net.au for all admin enquiries)