But I have not written a single word on that story that seized the entire press for the last two weeks only to fizzle into nothingness.
You know what? Pat. Pat.
Breaking News
Oprah Quitting TV Show In 2011
Not To Pat Myself On The Back Or Anything
August 30th, 2006
28 Comments
You earned those pats. Keep up the good work.
What I love is how the media is attempting to justify their fixation. John Gibson had an essay on foxnews.com where he said it was of dire national importance to find out who killed this girl. Bull and shit. It was a pretty, dead, white girl. End of story.
But the same John Gibson and his Fox News cohorts think it’s no big deal that we don’t catch the person who masterminded the deaths of 3,000 Americans on 9/11. Whatever!
Only Partial Credit. You did spill millions of electrons on the story that seized the entire press for the last three years only to fizzle into nothingness.
Unfortunately, you fell for the “the White House purposely leaked the identity of a covert CIA operative for political payback” story and have been pimping that endlessly.
Ahh, c’mon: You’ve posted about George Allen, Valerie Plame, Ray Nagin, and similar non-events.
Or were you talking about something else?
Bush humper reflexes, you gotta love ‘em.
“What, a post alluding to Jon Benet fetishists in the media? Not a slam at Bush…hmmm…best not to take chances. Better try to change the subject!”
Love this picture.
“Call me!”
Yeah, unless you spell “nothing” like “perjury”.
Oliver, stop it. You’ve been beating the drum that Dick Cheney, Karl Rove and others deliberately outed Plame in an effort top ’smear’ Joe Wilson.
We now that was all a bunch of CRAP. Joe Wilson lied his rear end off. It was Richard Armitage who leaked Plame’s name, and now all your left with is a ridiculous perjury charge against Scooter Libby?
Puh-lease.
I think there’s more to it that “just” a perjury charge since it’s well known that Rove went on about “Wilson’s wife” etc. I’m looking forward to what internal memos will be turned out if the civil suit isn’t quashed.
But I really find it amazing that perjury has gone from a deep threat to the very foundation of our judiciary meriting impeachment (when Clinton lied about a private consensual sexual affair), to a “ridiculous” nothing that ought to be dismissed out of hand when used to mislead the investigation of the leaking of a covert CIA operative.
What exactly did Wilson lie about? He had perfectly good reason to suspect Rove of being behind it, but never said he saw him do it or anything, and Armitage is certainly a high ranking administration official, is he not? And of course youre not dense enough to think the perjury charge is going to be the only one, the case being, as I still understand it, still ongoing given this new information, and Plame herself considering filing a civil suit against Armitage. I mean what exactly makes this a non-issue? Administration official commits blows the cover of an active CIA agent, damaging her effectiveness in her operations. You dont seriously expect me to believe that if the exact same shit happened under Clinton that you wouldnt be frothing at the mouth, do you? Puh-lease yourself, dickweed.
“Joe Wilson lied his rear end off.”
Well, see, Webster’s has a problem with that. Do you know he was lying? Or was he just mistaken? How can you possibly know if he was lying until you see into his head at the time? Are you a mind reader?
Not to be a stickler or anything, but isn’t revealing the identity of a CIA agent still illegal in this country?
There’s that pre-9/11 thinking again Duros. How can you expect the president to defend us against terrorists when he doesn’t have the tools to retailiate against someone questioning the rush to war?
Duros,
depends on the agent. Is it a crime to reveal that Michael Hayden works at the CIA?
Well, about what he found in Africa, for one…
christlikepullingteethwiththisnimrod… And what, oh wise and venerable Farris, did he lie about finding? As I understand it the Senate Prewar Intel Report found that Wilson found nothing to bolster the claim that the CIA found shaky at the time, namely that Saddam was seeking Uranium from Niger, which even if true they werent in much of a position to provide, he may as well have sought it from a box of Fruit Loops. Anyway, CIA thought the yellow cake claim was shaky, wilson went, CIA says he provided no new information to change their opinion on the matter. Where exactly is the lie? And if this was “For one…” please let us know what “For two” might be. Thank you.
Duros,
depends on the agent. Is it a crime to reveal that Michael Hayden works at the CIA?
Depends on the agent. Ok, so Valerie Plame/Wilson was working in an undercover operation in the Middle East. That’s what I’m talking about and you know it.
What exactly did Wilson lie about?
Well, about what he found in Africa, for one.
Wait, was he lying about what he found? I.e., no truth to the rumors of Saddam buying Yellowcake? Or was he telling the truth aobut what he didn’t find? I.e., evidence to support US claims that Saddam was buying Yellowcake?
I’m confused now.
But I really find it amazing that perjury has gone from a deep threat to the very foundation of our judiciary meriting impeachment (when Clinton lied about a private consensual sexual affair), to a “ridiculous” nothing that ought to be dismissed out of hand when used to mislead the investigation of the leaking of a covert CIA operative.
Who dismissed it out of hand? The fact is, there was accusation after accusation after accusation that Dick Cheney, Karl Rove and others purposely blew the cover of a covert CIA operative in order to settle a political score. The words ‘treason’ and ‘traitor’ were being tossed around. And what comes of it? A perjury charge against Libby about what he told the media?
What exactly did Wilson lie about?
Oh please. Wilson lied to the Washington Post and he flat out lied about what he wrote in his report regarding Iraq attempting to purchase uranium in Africa. And he lied about his wife having nothing to do with sending him when she repeatedly lobbied for him to go. Try and do a little reading. It was in all the papers.
Not to be a stickler or anything, but isn’t revealing the identity of a CIA agent still illegal in this country?
In order for somebody to have violated the law, they had to know that Plame’s status was covert. All evidence suggests that Armitage didn’t know. He didn’t have any political bones to pick. The fact that Plame worked at a desk for the previous 5 years negated her status as a “covert” operative.
Why can’t all of you just admit that this was much ado about nothing and that all of the frothing and drum beating about treason and such was overblow.
And yet, Scooter Libby still chose to lie under oath.
If Plame was on an “undercover operation”, then she had the worst possible cover story: desk jockey at the CIA!
As for Mr. Wilson’s truthiness, the SCSI report pretty much put an end to that.
He didn’t have any political bones to pick.
Then why leak it? Unless maybe he was asked to?
The fact that Plame worked at a desk for the previous 5 years negated her status as a “covert” operative.
How does that work, exactly? If I don’t drive my car for 5 years, does that negate my license (obviously, yes if it expires. Let’s assume for the moment it doesn’t expire)?
…yeah, dickweed, she was working undercover to investigate the CIA office pool, certainly not as a private energy expert working on nuclear proliferation, and certainly not for years before, and the revealation of her true position doesnt compromise current, future, and past work of hers. Jesus Halibut Christ do you have to go to a special school to get that ignorant? Is it like a special skill youve honed after ages of practice passed down from master to teacher since time immemorial?
But yeah though, Plame was just some office schmuck, a little receptionist who has no importance except playint the pivotal role of malicious co-conspirator in suggesting the true fact that Saddam wasnt really getting any Uranium from Niger, and so was practically asking to be exposed and have her covert career ended, meaning that nothing important happened which absolutely warranted the secrecy about it, and sure Libby perjured himself over a non issue, ending his career too. And the fact that all this happened is proof that nothing happened at all. Holy living fsck its brilliant!
…and speaking of words that are also acronyms for computer terms, what exactly is the SCSI report? Ive been looking through google trying to find it but no real luck finding someone linking to it. whats it stand for?
Select Committe on Senate Intelligence
Sorry. Hang around Tom Maguire’s place too much and you assume that people are up-to-date on the Plame story. Given that most folks get their info from the MSM, that’s a perrilous assumption, I know.
what exactly is the SCSI report? Ive been looking through google trying to find it but no real luck finding someone linking to it. whats it stand for?
That’s Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. Condescension loses a little of its bite when you mangle your facts.
Ah, SSCI then…hm, I might be reading this wrong but I’m still not seeing where Wilson lied. The Wiki link offers differences of opinion from both sides on what happened, but quotes Newsday saying Plame may have been involved in nominating her husband for the investigation that Cheney requested by pointing to his connections and experience, but wasnt involved in actually sending him to Niger. The only thing of any marginal substance he found was a former prime minister saying Iraq wanted to “expand commercial relations” which the PM interpreted as meaning Yellowcake… so we have the personal opinion of a former government official of an otherwise innocuous statement (If Walmart wanted to “expand commercial relations” thered be no damn problem) and apparently the CIA didnt think that enough to change the opinion put forth in their assesment “Niger: Sale of Uranium to Iraq is Unlikely” a week previous… And what else is there seems to be differences between personal accounts, not so much actual lies… um… is that it? That all the proof that he lied? Honestly here, what am I missing?
Oh, you mean the truth. Not surprised you have an aversion to that.
I guess a clarification is in order.
The explanation was for you, Rex.
The condescension thing was for Farris.