Valerie Plame hadn’t said much since Bush administration officials blew her cover as a CIA agent to discredit her husband, Joseph Wilson, a critic of the Iraq war. But in testimony to Congress today, she didn’t hold back, saying officials "carelessly and recklessly abused" her name and identity, and prevented her from doing the work for which she’d been trained. She rightly warned: "If our government cannot even protect my identity, future foreign agents who might consider working with the Central Intelligence Agency and providing needed intelligence would think twice."
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- DorisKing on Open thread 11/22
- Chas on Open thread 11/22
- george on Health care reform would save state money
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- Politico on So they said
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- JWink on Health care reform would save state money
- Politico on Health care reform would save state money
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
133 Comments
…yawn…
Let’s hope these hearings get to the bottom of the treason of this administration.
Rhonda, might change the title of this thread..
Libby did not out Valerie Plame.. he just lied to a Grand Jury..
Yes, SHE said that. But the CIA has never said she was a COVERT operator, and that is different from an UNDERCOVER operator. Her driving and walking in and out of the building everyday would seem to preclude her being COVERT due to anyone seeing her would come to the conclusion she was working for the CIA. Spies seem to catch on so such things.
And this supposed OUTING only applies to COVERT. Not Undercover.
different things.
Valerie Plame hadn’t said much since Bush administration (Armitage) officials blew her cover as a CIA agent to discredit her husband,
Rhonda, Please tell me you did not write that..Valerie and her husband have been out on the Lacture tour..
I’m curiuos to see how much money they have made over the last year from being so quite over what has happened to her because of Armitage..
One of the things that amaze me about this whole affair is that as I listened to her statement today not once did she mention Armitage. He has admitted that he was the first to throw her name out there. Even her lawsuit doesn’t mention him eventhough she has brought in Rove, Cheney, Bush, etc.. This would give the lie to the fact that she thinks she has been wronged and lead one to believe that it is –gasp– potical.
Wait a minute. IS preserving the identity of Mrs. Plame-Wilson (a resident of Washington DC) more important than the identities of hundreds of thousands of U.S. military personnel who wear their names on their fatigue jackets and military uniforms as they go nose to nose with the enemy?
Obviously not.
This whole expensive controversy is an attempt to remove the public’s attention from the failures of the U.S. foreign policy and/or embarass the administraton.
Plus it might offer a plot line for a future movie starring a revived religned reshined Britney Spears.
Get serious inside the Washington DC beltway.
mrbill,
Please provide proof that “driving and walking in and out of the building everyday would seem to preclude her being COVERT”.
According to this open statement to Congress by 11 former U.S. intelligence officers,http://www.fas.org/irp/news/2005/07/intlet.pdf“The fact is that there are thousands of U.S. intelligence officers who “work at a desk” in the Washington, D.C. area every day who are undercover. Some have official cover, and some have non-official cover. Both classes of cover must and should be protected.”
…Zzzzzzz…
The hearings were nothing more than propaganda BS show trial.
Victoria Tensing the attorney that wrote the law covering the leaks of CIA covert agents claimed at thhearing today that Valerie Plame’s name wasn’t ‘leaked’ under the law.
I wonder how much coverage that will get in the MSM! The dems would hardly let her talk!
Hank
It’s okay Hank, the whole world was watching the Congressman making a fool of himself by interrupting Tensing several times when she was trying to explain the law.
Guess what? We all heard loud and clear what Tensing was saying about the Act that covers Covert agent.
That is, Plame’s position was not covered under the act.
This was also, IN FACT, what the Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald discovered and knew there was no reason to pursue it legally.
What we are seeing here is indeed a Show Trial and Democratic Congressional Representatives making a total fool of themselves.
Common Sense people know a “dog and pony” show when they see it.
yep, Im sure there has to be a pony in here somewhere….
..keep mucking…
that is crap. the idea that people won’t go to the cia b/c they fear their identity would be exposed.
please.
she is hot though.
So, who was charged with outing Plame? No one. It wasn’t chargable or you know somebody would have been charged with it.
She is quite MILFY. Is she a cougar or a puma?
Did you see that punk sitting in the background at the hearing with the sign “GOT IMPEACHMENT’?
the tranny?
yeah, I saw him/her
he/she IS NOT hot.
btw, didn’t the senate select intelligence committee find that Wilson was known to the CIA because Plame had recommended him for an earlier mission?
was my understanding
If it was captain poindexter, the Democratic Senators will no doubt say it was a “mis-speak” and give Wilson a bye.
Joe Wilson is a confirmed LIAR, and now, so is Valerie Plame!
Plame was NOT covered by the law that protected UNDERCOVER “covert” agents.Plame parked her car in the CIA parking lot everyday, she was not on ANY secret assignment!Plame DID recommend her Democrat activist husband for a job — for the purpose of undermining the administration.Plame and Wilson are Co-conspirators in many lies.For starters, Wilsons oral (not written) report to the CIA clearly shows that Saddam WAS attempting to buy Yellow Cake, or Uranium.For another, Democrat Activist Plame signed a letter recommending her husband for the un-paid trip to Niger.For another, Wilon’s bogus article in the New York Times mentions forged documents that he later admitted, in Senate hearings, that he had never seen. Wilson admitted that he had “mispoken” about those documents, which had only become public After his Niger trip!It is not a crime for Wilson to lie to the New York Times.It is not a crime to lie to to the Senate if not under oath.Even so, this whole thing started because Wilson and Plame LIED.
It is a matter of public record.Wilson already admitted that Plame recommended Wilson for this job.NOW, Plame denies a fact that her husband already conceded.—-Plame was not out of the country in the previous 5 years before Novak mentioned her name.Richard Armitage admits HE told the press about Plame.Plame, in testimony today stated her CIA status “was not widely known” in the Washington cocktail circuit. — Strange choice of words, huh? I guess it was “known” just not “widely known” ??If it was known at all, her “cover” was blown long ago.—-The Wichita Eagle can’t be prosecuted for “outing” Plame.Neither can anyone else.She was not covert.She was not out of the country in the 5 years previous.Nobody who mentioned her name was attempting to harm the United States or help an enemy.Her CIA employment was KNOWN!All of these things prevent prosecution under the law.
The lazy reporters in this country dont want to read the law.They just repeat the lies of Wilson and Plame!
“Something for Libby to think about in jail (or post-pardon)”
Why doesn’t this headline add the most likely scenario,Conviction Overturned?
You all are traders. To you lies do not mean a thing unless its a dem doing it. you people have no repect for law, if she is lieing charge her, like libby. It would be so easily prove, she has a boss, but you people have all the inside scoop huh!
I’ll trade you one lie for a half-truth.
Traders of what repuke? Traders of stock? Traders of Baseball Cards?
Exactly what is it, that we are trading?
By the way, she Plame has already lied once in front of a National Audience, I just saw it.
Paraphrased:
Congress, I did not in any way recommend, suggest my husband for this trip.
Later on:
Congressman, what happened is a co-worker came to me upset about a phone call she received from the office of the Vice President from some unknown person. (yeah right, the CIA doesn’t know who calls them and then acts on an unknown phone call.)
And Congressman, my Co-Worker said, “What about Joe?” Plame, Yes yes..” So Congressman I went to my supervisor and discussed with him about the Yellow Cake and my husband, would be perfect for the job as he was blah blah and blah blah.”
If that is not recommending or suggesting, I’ll eat your grandma’s shoes.
I be wait for the charges
There is not a chance in hell that the Dems would make Plame testify under oath.
Furthermore, there is not a chance in hell that Plame would have testfied to the smae BS she did today if she was under oath.
Everytheing the democrats in congress will do the next two years is merely focused on the White house. the only thing that matters to a democratic congressman or senator is to keep their sorry butts in office and to win the White house in 08.
Truth and country be damned.
Hank
“Joe Wilson is a confirmed LIAR, and now, so is Valerie Plame!”
Then prosecute them. Otherwise, STFU!
Who are those bobble headed people behind her? (affirmative answer- bobble bobble) (negative answer head shake head shake)
It’s a perfect future Saturday Night Live comedy routine waiting to happen. rofl!
Hank Price,
“There is not a chance in hell that the Dems would make Plame testify under oath.
Furthermore, there is not a chance in hell that Plame would have testfied to the smae BS she did today if she was under oath.”
Hank, do you have proof she was not under oath?
‘Valerie Plame Wilson: I worked on secret missions’http://edition.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/03/16/plame.statement/ “My name is Valerie Plame Wilson and I am honored to have been invited to testify under OATH before the committee…”
“There is not a chance in hell that the Dems would make Plame testify under oath.”
Hank – it is my understanding that her testimony today was under oath. I am listening now.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8k3GuVTfWLw
hank does not what he is talking about. who would of thunk it!
HardLying is not always a crime.
Democrat activists Plame and Wilson know this and take adantage of it by lying constantly!
Plame and Wilson said different, contradictory things in Congressional hearings.
Which one should we prosecute?
Hank Price,
‘Ex-Spy Plame Wilson: Leak Was ‘Purely Political’http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=8959467 “”I want to ask you now under OATH,” [Rep. Stephen Lynch] said. “Did you make the decision to send Ambassador Wilson to Niger?”
“No,” Plame Wilson replied. “I did not recommend him, I did not suggest him, there was no nepotism involved; I didn’t have the authority.”
Econ – Plame testified UNDER OATH. So, prosecute her! IF YOU CAN! Tell Gonzales to get right on it; if he can find the time while spinning his other ‘issues’!
Cosmos,
I already posted about Plame’s claim of not suggesting Wilson for the job. Within ten minutes after that statement she turns around and makes a recommendation to her supervisor that her husband be selected for the job.
Does Plame have a different dictionary meaning of suggesting or recommending than I do?
spinning his lies not issues
“I want to ask you now under oath,” Lynch said. “Did you make the decision to send Ambassador Wilson to Niger?”
So? Was she under oath?
If so, she lied. But it’s OK, she’s a democrat operative and they aren’t looking for the truth, just sound bites for the evening news.
Hank
“So? Was she under oath?
If so, she lied.”
THEN PROSECUTE HER! IF YOU DARE! CALL GONZALES!
There is not a chance in hell that the Dems would make Plame testify under oath.
Furthermore, there is not a chance in hell that Plame would have testfied to the smae BS she did today if she was under oath.
Hank I watched it from beginning to end. She was under oath. As was everyone that testified today.
so
Ain’t my job man.
I don’t care if she’s prosecuted or not.
Besides, politics and policy are only criminal if you are a republican and conservative.
Hank
LoL but yes she is cute!But it must be a circus.. It was hard to miss the clown standing in the back, that pink outfit was bright!
Hey writerdog,
Tough for me to believe!
Hank
Hard and Kramer (Cosmo)The Democrats control Congress.The Democrats would have to ask for any prosecution of Plame.Seperation of powers issues involved.The Dems will allow Plame to lie with impunity.Plame did Lie today, grow up and face the facts!
“Plame did Lie today, grow up and face the facts!”
PROVE IT! Your AG will have ample opportunity – IF HE DARES TO TRY!
“The Democrats would have to ask for any prosecution of Plame.” NOT TRUE. The AG can do it on his own.
Keep on spinning; you’re fun to watch!
Hey HardTruth,
Aren’t you one of the “in crowd”? You’re not on the secret email list?
Don’t you know the secret liberal handshake?
Just wondering, there’s a boycott going on you know, email the farmgrrl and get the details.
Hank
Wilson is a LiarPlame is a Liar
http://newsbusters.org/node/7356
“Scarborough: “Christopher, we have a question up right now. You’re going to say this is obvious, too, because it’s in the record, but we need an answer. Is Joe Wilson a liar?”
Hitchens: “Well, Joe Wilson’s been caught lying a lot already. I mean, he, for example, said that his wife had never had anything to do with sending him to Niger. Now, we have her letter of recommendation. It’s in the Senate investigation into the matter. It’s very warm, and it actually recommends him on the bizarre grounds that he’s close friends with the people he’s supposed to be investigating. That’s how he missed the fact that both Saddam’s chief nuclear envoy and A.Q. Khan were in Niger at the same time, as he was, or had been not long before. Quite remarkable.”
Hitchens: “He lied when he said he’d exposed a later forgery based on those facts. We don’t know where that forgery came from. It doesn’t alter the authenticity of the original documents. The forgery came out a long time after his visit had taken place, so he had no role at all in exposing it. I don’t know if he’s a liar or not, but he has no concept of what the truth is.”
Ok, attack Hitchens, attack my link — I expect that.
However, Democrat Activist Plame did write and SIGN a letter recommending her Democrat Activist husband Wilson for the Niger job!Wilson at first lied about this, then admitted it.Plame is STILL lying about it.
And Democrats are allowed to lie.
With all this evidence I’m sure AG Gonzales can mount a successful prosecution.
hey econIs that what repubs have been doing all this time. do you think that is right or could you care less about right and wrong just repubs and dems
notes this thread has turned into familiar contemptuous blithering associated with the Fisters.
They never left, they just changed their nics…
Oh, that can’t be, that would make them hypocrites! :)
repuke, I have Defended Democrats on this Blog.Have YOU ever defended a Conservative or a Republican on this Blog or at any time in your life?
I will take your word for that.this is the first day I have ever posted. I have been reading these posts for a little while now. but I do not see thing as repub or dem just what I feel is right.
“contemptuous blithering”
Gee, the only contempt I see are the constant accusations that Plame and Wilson are liars. Well, if they are, given the fact that she testified UNDER OATH, I would expect prosecution to follow.
Kook former Congresswoman Cynthia Mckinney thinks Bush planned the 9-11 attacks.Democrats got rid of her themselves!One of Mckinney’s allies is former CIA employee Mel Goodman, who signed the original letter to Congress concerning the “outing” of Plame!
http://www.redstate.com/story/2005/7/23/131127/416
Government agencies employ humans with agendas and political motives.A professional would still try to do an honest job, but it appears that the Plames and Wilsons and Goodmans of the world will support or say anything that hurts Bush!
Sing Scooter sing!
You shouldn’t be the only one of these crooks to go to jail.
bush and Cheney should be frog marched from the White house and tried for treason, among other things.
Then give the bastards to the world court.
Well, if they are, given the fact that she testified UNDER OATH, I would expect prosecution to follow. Posted by: HardTruth | March 16, 2007 at 06:22 PMWon’t happen HardTruth.
This was the Congressional equivalent of Ringling Brothers, Barnum and Bailey Circus. It even had trained bobble headed poodles and a pink t-shirted she-man in the background.
This was a show of:”I got your back, you got my back, I got his back, you got her back, have we got each others back, you got that back, let’s all get each others back now.”
Circus is over, pick up your popcorn and peanut bags on the way out please.
Republican,
Why do you believe that Plame repeating to her supervisor what a colleague suggested means she personally recommended her husband?
Their meeting with her supervisor involved her husband. Why should Plame have told her colleague to take his suggestion to her supervisor by himself?
And consider her comment about their 2-year-old twins.
You mean the comment from the unnamed colleague that got a phone call from an unknown person on the colleagues desk?
I don’t know, too many unknowns there.
Anyone cooking fudge? I can smell it!
Plame and Wilson are political operatives to the bone:
http://www.liddyletter.com/valeriePlame.htm
CosmosDo I correctly recall that YOU once posted that “Plame did not have the authority to send Wilson to Africa”??If not you, it was one of your buddies on this Blog!Now, Plame says her SUBORDINATE did have the authority to send her HUSBAND to Africa?Get real.And get a good Chiropractor, liberals, you are going to hurt yourselves with all of these back-flips!
PAUL F. ROSELL,
“Now, we have her letter of recommendation.”
So Plame was supposed to REFUSE her supervisor’s request to list her husband’s qualifications? Why?
Cosmos,
Plame testified before Congress that she is the one that brought up her name to her supervisor. I just watched it on CSPAN.
Or are you trying to make that channel into CSPIN?
PAUL F. ROSELL,
Are you really that “slow”?
Plame’s colleague suggested Wilson. She told her supervisor. Her supervisor passed it on. The higher-ups at CIA had the “authority”.
Plame was a political mole operating within the CIA to take down Bush:
“Proper application of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure would impose Rule 11 sanctions against Joseph Wilson, IV and Valerie Plame (hereafter, “Wilson/Plame”) for their spurious law suit alleging Dick Cheney, Karl Rove and others “exposed” and/or “conspired to expose” what Wilson/Plame falsely allege was an “undercover” status of Plame’s employment at the CIA at the time of Robert Novak’s July 14, 2003, column identifying her by name, “Valerie Plame,” as Wilson’s wife and reciting that it was upon her recommendation as a CIA employee that the CIA had dispatched Wilson to Niger to “investigate” intelligence reports that Saddam Hussein had sought to make arrangements to acquire uranium from Niger. Why does their filing such suit warrant Rule 11 sanctions against them? It’s because they know the foundational premise for their suit to be false.
Wilson/Plame know that years before Novak’s July 14, 2003, column actions of others in our intelligence community had compromised her then-covert status as “Valerie Plame.” Long before Novak’s column, Wilson had either defied CIA restrictions against, or obtained CIA permission for, his touting her extremely uncommon maiden name, “Valerie Plame” (also her “covert” name) as the maiden name of his wife on his website touting himself internationally as a former “Ambassador” for the United States as part of his curriculum vitae for consulting work in international relations. Wilson/Plame knew that absent the true status of “Valerie Plame” having already become compromised, Wilson’s identifying her (extremely uncommon) name as his wife’s maiden name on his website touting his expertise in international affairs as a former ambassador for the U.S. would have enabled non-stupid adversaries with rudimentary internet skills to “connect the dots” to discern that person known to them as “Valerie Plame” was married to someone touting himself as a loyal agent of the U.S.– i.e., that her true status was something other than what she had purported it to be.
Thus, if Wilson/Plame were to have genuinely believed she was still serving in a covert capacity and were to have genuinely believed that for her “true” identity to be discerned by adversaries would pose a danger to her safety and/or the safety of her children, then Wilson would not have identified his wife on his website other than as “Mrs. Joseph Wilson, IV.” Therefore, his having identified her (extremely uncommon) maiden name (which he knew she had used as her “covert” name) as the maiden name of his wife makes it self-evident that Wilson/Plame either: (a) knew that her true status had already been exposed and that she was no longer a “covert” operative or (b) were carelessly, recklessly, stupidly and/or criminally indifferent to common-sense precautions that they would have been legally obliged to take if they were to have still believed that her status remained “covert.”
Shortly after the Novak column, Wilson removed from his website his prior identification of his wife as “the former Valerie Plame.” However, he apparently did not know that an internationally recognized, independent “archive” of the internet had already permanently preserved the version of that website page as it existed before he altered it. The name for that internet archive is the “WayBack Machine,” named after the fictional device used by the Bullwinkle cartoon’s dog “scientist” named “Peabody” as a time-travel machine to allow “Peabody” and “Sherman” to travel back into the archives of history. The url address for the WayBack Machine is: http://www.waybackmachine.org/. The WayBack Machine url’s for displaying the the February 8, 2003, version of Wilson’s website preserved for posterity in the archives of the internet are here·º¹· and here·º²·. No matter how much Wilson/Plame may try to claim to the contrary, the WayBack Machine is not a tool of Dick Cheney, Karl Rove or Scooter Libby, nor is any of them an “agent” of the WayBack Machine. Nor is there any “conspiracy” among Peabody, Sherman, Bullwinkle or Rocky to expose Wilson’s and Plame’s mendacity.
This is not the sole example of Wilson’s and Plame’s mendacity in claiming that Novak’s July 14, 2003, column had “outed” her as an “undercover” agent for the CIA. There are many more. For examples, see an October 5, 2005, Weekly Standard article,·º³· one of many articles from a variety of sources exposing the facts.
The true nature of her “status” that was really “blown” by, or in the wake of, Novak’s July 14, 2003, column was her status as a political mole operating inside the Bush administration on behalf of Wilson as a staunch supporter of John Kerry in a bitter campaign against Bush. The real story is about how a CIA employee used her status at the Agency to confer superficial credibility upon actions by her husband to propagate falsehoods and disinformation in an attempt to discredit Bush in order to help Bush’s opponent, John Kerry. It’s the real story to which the dominant media (a.k.a. “MSM”) prefer not to draw attention.
–Jim Wrenn, Editor at PoliSat.Com.
And again, Eagle and other journalists, why dont you ever report the fact that the CIA was trying to undermine Bush?These CIA operatives are completely out of line to get so political:http://www.insightmag.com/Media/MediaManager/CIA2.htm
Republican,
“You mean the comment from the unnamed colleague that got a phone call from an unknown person on the colleagues desk?”
You didn’t pay attention? The officer who suggested Wilson overheard the conversation about the phone call.
And WHY do you avoid answering my question?Why should Plame have told her colleague to take his suggestion to her supervisor by himself?
Cosmos,
Plame just testified before Congress that she did not suggest her husband.
Less than ten minutes later she testified before Congress that she did in fact suggest her husband to go to Niger.
She was against suggesting her husband before suggesting her husband.
There seems to be a lot of that going on by Democrats in D.C. these days.
That is, they are against something before they are for it.
Or
They are for something before they are against.
:)
like every repub running for prez.
Is that convicted felon G Gordon? Boy is THAT ever a reliable source!
“For his role in Watergate, which he coordinated with Hunt, Liddy was convicted of conspiracy, burglary and illegal wiretapping, and received a 20-year sentence. He served four and a half years in prison before his sentence was commuted by President Jimmy Carter.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._Gordon_Liddy
Plame lied.Plame recommended Wilson for the Niger Job:”1999 – Joseph Wilson takes a trip to Niger at the behest of the CIA to investigate “uranium-related matters” separate from Iraq . (Wilson, Politics lv-lvi). According to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence report on pre-war intelligence, Wilson “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.” (Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Report on Prewar Assessment of Iraq Intelligence, 39, July 2004).”
Plames cover was BLOWN in 1997:
June 1997 – Joseph Wilson returns to Washington DC as Senior Director for African Affairs at the National Security Council. At about the same time, Plame also moves back to the United States (Wilson, Politics 240), in part because the CIA suspects her name was leaked to the Russians in 1994. ( Vanity Fair, Jan. ‘04) .
Wilson identifies Plane as his wife and employed by a CIA frond company when he contributes to Gore:
“April 22, 1999 – Valerie Wilson lists “Brewster-Jennings & Assoc.”—later revealed to be a CIA front company—as her employer when making a donation to the Gore campaign. ( Gore FEC filing).”
Wilson lied when he said that Iraq did NOT try to obtain uranium:
“June 1999 – Niger ’s former prime minister Ibrahim Mayaki meets with an Iraqi delegation wanting to discuss “expanding commercial relations.” Mayaki interprets this as an interest in uranium, Niger ’s main export, and later tells Wilson that he did not discuss it because Iraq remained under UN trade sanctions. (Senate Intelligence Cmte., Iraq 43-44, July 2004).”
Read it yourself folks:http://www.factcheck.org/article337.html
High comedy from Econ:
“The CIA has been taken over by a dissident faction that seeks to undermine President Bush.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Peter Hoekstra has identified the anti-Bush faction in a letter to the president. Mr. Hoekstra said the faction appears to be led by Mr. Bush’s recent appointments to the agency.”
So Bush appoints them and they stab him in the back! More conspiricy theories from InsightMag.com!
HardProve something Liddy said in that post is false, would you?
And, while you are at it, how about attacking factcheck.org??
Hard, history will record Plame and Wilson as political operatives and liars.When they are no longer useful to the left, they will get what they deserve.
Republican,
Plame testified that she told her supervisor that her COLLEAGUE suggested Wilson.If you are UNABLE to understand that simple fact… heh, whatever.
Plame recommended Wilson:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A39834-2004Jul9.html
Factcheck – the only thing I found there was that she gave her superiors information about her husband for an EARLIER trip (1999) to Niger. Not that SHE sent him on the later trip. THERE IS A DIFFERENCE!
Econ – Prove that she lied under oath today. Then give your proof to Gonzales. YOU ARE THE ONE ACCUSING. THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS UPON YOU!
You say history will record … we shall see. I believe that history will record them as patriots and the Bushies as traitors. We shall see.
I’m sure if I went to the Dem Underground I would fine “proof” of Bush’s guilt just you find your on the “Rep Underground” (Convicted Felon Liddy, etc) sites.
“Plame recommended Wilson:” ACCORDING TO A REPORT. OK – as I have said; if she lied under oath Gonzales will prosecute and convict.
Hard, the Senate found that Plame sent Wilson to Niger TWICE:
Again, Plame recommended Wilson, that is what the Senate Report says:The report states that a CIA official told the Senate committee that Plame “offered up” Wilson’s name for the Niger trip, then on Feb. 12, 2002, sent a memo to a deputy chief in the CIA’s Directorate of Operations saying her 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.” The next day, the operations official cabled an overseas officer seeking concurrence with the idea of sending Wilson, the report said.
Wilson has asserted that his wife was not involved in the decision to send him to Niger.
“Valerie had nothing to do with the matter,” Wilson wrote in a memoir published this year. “She definitely had not proposed that I make the trip.”
Wilson stood by his assertion in an interview yesterday, saying Plame was not the person who made the decision to send him. Of her memo, he said: “I don’t see it as a recommendation to send me.”
The report said Plame told committee staffers that she relayed the CIA’s request to her husband, saying, “there’s this crazy report” about a purported deal for Niger to sell uranium to Iraq. The committee found Wilson had made an earlier trip to Niger in 1999 for the CIA, also at his wife’s suggestion
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A39834-2004Jul9.html
Econ – if she lied under oath as you claim I am sure Mr. Gonzales will take note.
histroy will record gw as worst prez ever.
A Civil case is far different from a criminal case. As far as I know, and someone can correct me here if I’m wrong, but Plame was not covert at the time of the outing.
At one time she WAS considered covert, but there is a time limit an agent is allowed when working stateside and she was beyond that. Therefore Fitzgerald had no real crime, and no charges were ever filed against anyone in that capacity.
But – as my attorney is fond of saying, “G…you can sue the Pope for rape…..but you might not win…” lol
Civil suits are about deep pockets for the most part. No one wins but the attorneys…but in this case, it seems to be about politics.
I don’t know how much money Plame and Wilson have, but I would be willing to bet someone is footing the bill for their attorney. If you followed that money trail, it would likely lead to some leftist group or individual. In a civil suit – BOTH sides have to pay for their attorney, and then, perhaps later, one will have to reimburse the other…if they lose. Or maybe not, they can settle out of court at any time and for any kind of terms.
The point was broached earlier in this thread that the man who actually ‘leaked’ the name isn’t even mentioned in the lawsuit. So, OF COURSE, it’s political. Armitage is buds with the libs. But he did it. He leaked Plame.
This is only a Civil suit – not a criminal one. The outcome means nothing. Even if a judge or jury awards damages to Plame, she has to figure out a way to get them, if the defendants don’t pay up. That can be pretty tough.
Yuppers, I would lay money that this is ALL about politics.
But it’s probably a good move for the Left at this time. Striking while the iron is hot.
It’s just iffy when considering what will happen to the public opinion should the war in Iraq continue to make big gains….and the Dems are held accountable for non-support of our troops.
Sentiment could change pretty quickly.
The non-recommendation by Valerie Plame?
12 February 2002: Valerie E. Wilson (aka Valerie Plame), a C.I.A. analyst working in its Counterproliferation Division, sends a memo to the deputy chief of the C.I.A.’s Directorate of Operations stating that her husband has good contact with the former Prime Minister and Director of Mines in Niger as well as other contacts who might prove useful in shedding light on the supposed Niger-Iraq uranium contract.
repuke – he doesn’t even come close to being as bad as Carter was.
PAUL F. ROSELL,
“Plame lied.Plame recommended Wilson for the Niger Job:”1999 – ”
Ooooops, that was Wilson’s EARLIER trip.
PAUL F. ROSELL: “Plames cover was BLOWN in 1997:”
Then WHY did she continue doing covert, classified, “Secret” work for the CIA?
PAUL F. ROSELL: “Wilson identifies Plane as his wife and employed by a CIA frond company when he contributes to Gore:”
Brewster “was” her employer. Listing the “frond”(sic) company is logical.
Wilson on CNN:
3 August 2003: Wilson appears on CNN Late Night with Wolf Blitzer offering his opinion on the existence of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction programs:
BLITZER: I think he’s being very cautious now, given some of the missteps in the past. But do you have confidence in (weapons inspector) David Kay, that they know what they’re doing?
JOSEPH WILSON, FORMER U.S. ACTING AMBASSADOR TO IRAQ: Oh, absolutely, and I’ve had confidence in — that we would find weapons of mass destruction, weapons of mass destruction programs from the very beginning of the run-up to the war in Iraq.
687, the initial U.N. resolution dealing with weapons of mass destruction, demanded compliance, and it had as its objective disarmament. We had not yet achieved disarmament, so it was perfectly appropriate to continue to try and gather together the international consensus to disarm Saddam and his programs.
I think we’ll find chemical weapons. I think we’ll find biological precursors that may or may not have been weaponized. And I think we will find a continuing interest of — on nuclear weapons. The question really is whether it met the threshold test of imminent threat to our own national security or even the test of grave and gathering danger
“someone can correct me here if I’m wrong, but Plame was not covert at the time of the outing”
Well, she just testified UNDER OATH that she was. So, that can be another count for which Gonzales can prosecute and convict.
cosmosyou have your own share of typos.When you resort to secretarial corrections, I know I am winning!
Republican,
“The non-recommendation by Valerie Plame?”
And duuuuhh… she wrote that document because her SUPERVISOR REQUESTED her to.But don’t let inconvenient facts get in the way of your attack.
CosmosEVEN if Plame did not write a memo recommending Wilson for the second trip (SHE DID) — Wilson stated, emphatically, at first, that Plame had NOTHING to do with his second trip to Niger.One of the reasons to send Wilson to Niger AGAIN was that he had been there before, right? And THAT TRIP was because of Plame, right?Now, it is clear that Plame also recommended Wilson for his SECOND Niger trip.By the way, Wilson’s NYT piece clearly stated (falsely) that Iraq was NOT trying to obtain Uranium in Niger.That was a complete LIE!Wilsons own oral report to the CIA contradicts Wilsons NYT piece.
Wilson and Plame are proven liars.
They won’t get prosecuted for it, because only Congress can assert that Congress was lied to.
The Washington Post already admits that Wilson lied to them!
Cosmos,
Again, repeat, and again.
Today on CSPAN: Valerie Plame testified before Congress on National Television that she went to her Supervisor and recommend her husband to go on the trip to Niger.
What part of the testimony did you not understand about that?
Did you watch that testimony? I certainly did and so did millions of people.
PAUL F. ROSELL,
How does my pointing out your typo change the fact that you are WRONG? Listing the front company as employer is how covers are built.
Just because Plame SAID she was covert – doesn’t make it so. In fact I believe there is a foremost authority that takes precedence over her statements, right?
But, let’s look at credibility.
Wasn’t Plame forced to admit that she already LIED about her political affiliation? She wasn’t a Republican, as she said – but a Democrat.
If she can’t tell the truth about that- why does anyone suddenly think her definition of ‘covert’ is the correct one?
Gonzales will prosecute and convict her. Then we will know she lied under oath.
That is why they swear them in – so they can prosecute if they lie.
Republican,
I understand that Plame testified that she, and her colleague, went to her Supervisor, and Plame said that her COLLEAGUE recommended that Plame’s husband go on the trip to Niger.
Why are you UNABLE to understand that is what she said in her testimony? Dense?
cosmosfirst of all, there is a point to be made: How many people give maximum contributions to political campaigns?And Wilson CLAIMED he was on a mission for Cheney when they were giving money to Democrat opponents of Bush?Furthermore, this CIA front company was pretty much known in Washington as a front company.
Further, the CIA DOES employ people who are NOT covered by the law protecting UNDERCOVER Covert agents.That Plame worked for the CIA does NOT prove she was covered.
Also, in a previous post, it is clear that Wilson deleated some information about Plame from Wilsons own website, after they manufactured this false issue.
HardYou are wrong.If Congress does not ask for a prosecution for “lying to Congress” then no prosecution will take place.Seperation of powers issue.Wont happen.
Again, Econ, Gonzales will prosecute and convict her for lying under oath. She testified that she was covert.
It’s not like we have a Democratic AG to protect her.
I think you are wrong on that one Econ. They would have to do the ‘contempt of Congress’ deal but I think the AG can do perjury.
Or, he can always convene a grand jury.
PROVE SHE IS LYING. Don’t just come up with a convicted felon CLAIMING she is.
Factoid:
12 February 2002Email sent by Valerie Plame to her supervisor states that the VP office contacted her department and wanted someone to go to Niger. She recommends her husband Mr. Wilson.
Everything okay so far Cosmos?
Okay, watch this.
The decision meeting by VP Cheney to request that the CIA send someone to Niger was on what date?
11 Feb 2002?12 Feb 2002?
Buzzzz….
13 Feb 2002 :)
The VP’s office hadn’t even contacted the office of Valerie Plame to request anything.
Does this look like there might be some one fudging the date and perhaps facts of an email because the email didn’t really exist?
BTW, emails are easily forged with dates and manipulating dates is not a problem on a computer. :)
Ooops Valerie! Have you pulled a Britney Spears when you stepped out of that CIA Limo?
HardTruth – Victoria Toensing is HARDLY a convicted felon!
She claims Plame was NOT covert – and that she knows – because she helped write the law! Is Valerie the real liar? I don’t know, but something is pretty fishy here.
Here is her Feb testimony:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/16/AR2007021601705_pf.html
I assume the committee will give Cheney and anyone else interested an opportunity to testify. Let them contradict her UNDER OATH.
Wilson used Plames COVERT name on his website, identified her as his Wife with the “covert” name of Plame.Either CIA gave him permission to use Plame’s name, because the cover was blown, or Wilson broke the law when he used Plames covert name and identified her as his wife.In any event, Wilson knew he better cover his tracks, because he corrected his website after the Novak column!
Repeat post:”Shortly after the Novak column, Wilson removed from his website his prior identification of his wife as “the former Valerie Plame.” However, he apparently did not know that an internationally recognized, independent “archive” of the internet had already permanently preserved the version of that website page as it existed before he altered it. The name for that internet archive is the “WayBack Machine,” named after the fictional device used by the Bullwinkle cartoon’s dog “scientist” named “Peabody” as a time-travel machine to allow “Peabody” and “Sherman” to travel back into the archives of history. The url address for the WayBack Machine is: http://www.waybackmachine.org/. The WayBack Machine url’s for displaying the the February 8, 2003, version of Wilson’s website preserved for posterity in the archives of the internet are here·º¹· and here·º²·. No matter how much Wilson/Plame may try to claim to the contrary, the WayBack Machine is not a tool of Dick Cheney, Karl Rove or Scooter Libby, nor is any of them an “agent” of the WayBack Machine. Nor is there any “conspiracy” among Peabody, Sherman, Bullwinkle or Rocky to expose Wilson’s and Plame’s mendacity.
This is not the sole example of Wilson’s and Plame’s mendacity in claiming that Novak’s July 14, 2003, column had “outed” her as an “undercover” agent for the CIA. There are many more. For examples, see an October 5, 2005, Weekly Standard article,·º³· one of many articles from a variety of sources exposing the facts.
The true nature of her “status” that was really “blown” by, or in the wake of, Novak’s July 14, 2003, column was her status as a political mole operating inside the Bush administration on behalf of Wilson as a staunch supporter of John Kerry in a bitter campaign against Bush. The real story is about how a CIA employee used her status at the Agency to confer superficial credibility upon actions by her husband to propagate falsehoods and disinformation in an attempt to discredit Bush in order to help Bush’s opponent, John Kerry. It’s the real story to which the dominant media (a.k.a. “MSM”) prefer not to draw attention.
–Jim Wrenn, Editor at PoliSat.Com.
http://www.archive.org/web/web.php
OK – so now we have another ACCUSATION – this time from a Reagan political operative. Proves nothing. Accusations are a dime a dozen – just like all her other ones in her column going after Fitzgerald etc. Let her file charges and secure a conviction. (By the way – I didn’t see any ‘testimony’ on your link, just an opinion piece)
HardTruth,
Victoria Toensing testified today before Congress. She was trying to explain to Congressman Waxman that Valerie Plame was not Covert under the Law. The Law that she authored by the way.
Congressman Waxman shouted her down to keep people (us) from hearing the answer. Guess what?
Congressman Waxman did not succeed, the answer about Valerie Plame being Covert under the Law was heard loud and clear.
Result?
Non-issue about Plame being outted.
So now we have another OPINION – that of Jim Wrenn, whoever he is. Other than having been a Clinton-basher I don’t know a whole lot about his reliability:
http://polisat.com/jimwrenn.htm
He seems quite proud of his visceral hatred on Clinton. “At every opportunity, he shamelessly promotes his book for orders or by fax at http://www.ClintonLiebraryBook.com (spelling LIE deliberate)
Well, we shall see who gets prosecuted. And convicted. Toensing was not at the CIA – all she could be giving is opinion.
News item – KU just won big – 107-67.
And I’m outta here! Good night folks, it’s been fun.
Yay KU!
HardTruth do you have a brother named WSClark? You and he share the same type of logic analysis. I thought it might be a familial trait. Just wondering
HardThe opinion of the woman who WROTE the law in question is important, dont you think?
All you libs
My major point is that the law on “outing” wasnt broken because NO ONE was convicted or even charged with “outing” Plame!You have turned that arguement on its head, claiming that Plame and Wilson arent lying unless THEY are convicted of lying — yet Plame and Wilson’s entire public life has been consumed with saying OTHER people lied, without any proof for the claims of EITHER Plame or Wilson.Wilsons entire case against Bush is a FRAUD.Now, Plame and Wilson have given contraditory testimony.
And I am right on the law on this one: The AG CANT prosecute for “lying to Congress” without the consent and cooperation of Congress!
Paul – then why lie about it. Why not just come out in the first place and proudly proclaim “I exposed the traitorous mole”? And Paul, even if you are correct on he law, I would suspect the Republicans in the Senate would push for it – IF JUSTIFIED!
Remember Paul – as you love to remind everyone – Clinton was impeached for lying about a legal act.
I dont know if Libby really lied.I dont understand what Libby did.However, Plame was not covered by the law in question.
I dont know if Libby really lied.I dont understand what Libby did.However, Plame was not covered by the law in question.
Republican,
Re: http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/03/something_for_l.html#comment-63491104
Your proof, credible link(s), on those dates.
Your proof, that the VP’s office did not PHONE her office, as she testified under oath today?
ONCE AGAIN… Plame’s supervisor REQUESTED that she document her husband’s qualifications.
Republican: “BTW, emails are easily forged with dates and manipulating dates is not a problem on a computer. :) ”
Emails show the date/time they’re received at the email server(s). Those are NOT easy to “manipulate”.
It’s all political grandstanding from both sides.
Hardly anybody (outside the hard core politicos) will even remember the Libby or Plame scandle when it comes time for 2008.
Big yawn fest.
HardIf Libby lied he should be punished, but I dont think he did.I will wait for the appeal.However, Fits never should have interviewed Libby in the first place, since there was no crime.
You all were no doubt saying that the Plame scandal was the flavor of the month back when GWB first denied ANYONE in his administration was involved in outing Plame, and if anyone was involved he’d fire them! That was a few years ago!
It’s only up because you know about it as a political hack.
Democrats will try to rake it through the mud for as long as possible.
I can’t speak for Bush or his Administration nor can I defend their actions.
I think this is the best thing that could have happened to the Wilsons. They will get filthy rich and tons of fame from this from Democrats for quite a few years. I say! More power to them. Hope they become rich multi-millionaires.
They will be multi-millionairs after the civil suit.
Joe,Deep breaths… alternating with calming self-statements – “it will be okay – nothing to get upset about..”
I’m clearly not upset about the matter. Did you see me do a big yawn?
;)
Removing all questions of Illegality from the equation, what the administration did to the wife of someone that opposed them is reprehensible.An analogy would be you work with the wife of someone whose spouse sometimes works or has worked as an undercover cop. She opposes on of your “Big Ideas”, you leak to a scumbag reporter the info. about her spouse, he prints it and your ruin the cops career. What is ethical about that?
Valerie Plame Wilson yesterday testified that the senate select committee’s report published false information.
The new Congress will re-examine that report, and subpoena witnesses who, according to Plame, have told her that their testimony wasn’t what the report summarized.
She testified, under oath, that she had been both covert (= undercover, according to Republican lawyer Victoria Toensing who co-drafted the Intelligence Identities Protection Act 1982) and did work overseas as a covert agent less than 5 years before she was outed by Bush administration officials.
How likely is is that Plame-Wilson committed perjury on this claim? She has zero to gain, except a prison sentence. Toensing claimed that Plame-Wilson was NOT covert, nor did Plame-Wilson work covertly overseas, within 5 years of her outing, and thus IIPA. But at the time Toensing was a private-practice attorney and we recall, a frequent paid-commentator on Fox news during the Clinton scandal. Toensing had ZERO access to CIA files on Ms. Plame. Did Toensing commit perjury? Probably not. It is much more likely that somebody fed her false information, using her as a tool.
Furthermore, even if IIPA did not apply, as Toensing claimed, she admitted that administrative action, under Bush’s own executive order, would be another matter.
But Bush, who has the Article II power to issue executive orders, does not have the power to exercise them or ignore them, according to caprice. An executive order applies to the president’s friends every bit as much as it applies to people he doesn’t like.
The committee yesterday had Republican members. They could have skewered Plame, if she were lying. They didn’t.
That was as telling as anything. If they were baiting her, acting nice, to later entrap her for perjury, well we’ll just see if that happens in the future. But as things stood yesterday, this administration is looking more and more like it has entrapped itself in Nixonian behavior. No small surprise because Cheney (and ousted Rumsfeld) cut their eye teeth as Nixon’s assistants.
So Heartlander, now the Senate Select Committee can be charged with lying?
The list is getting much bigger now.
Maybe we can accuse custodial workers at Oakwood Elementary as complicit in the “outting crime” as well. :)
Outing is not unethical unless it involves outing the lesbian daughter of a VP, who works as a paid promoter for a corporation at gay bars! I thought everyone knew that.
Ah, the thought processes of the “fair-minded” Democrat eh Steve?
So much love and equality of treatment towards all – NOT.
heartlanderYou are becomming riduculous!If the Senate report of of the last hearings is wrong, why in the hell havent any Democrats on that commmittee come forward to point out the errors?None, absolutely none, have done so!You think that, since Toensing has been on Fox News, she cant be trusted?But the fact that Wilson and Plame supported Kerry and Gore does not cloud their credibility one bit, in your mind?—–Come on LIBERALS!Is their such a thing as a liberal who is so biased it affects job performance?Plame and Wilson lied because they thought their “cause” — huring Bush, justified dishonesty!
Wilson lied about Iraq, when he said Iraq was not trying to get “yellow cake” from Niger. He lied in his letter in the NYT. He actually told the truth, to the CIA, in an oral, not written, report. (Another lie!)Wilson lied when he claimed to uncover “forged documents.” Wilson admitted in a Senate hearing that he “misspoke” on that one, since he never once saw the documents in question, and since those fake documents surfaced after he came back from Africa, and since the Administration, from the start, dismissed those fake documents.Wilson and Plame BOTH lied on the subject of Plame recommending Wilson for the 2nd Niger trip!
Now, I will admit, Plame’s lie on this one is not as obvious as Wilsons, but they both lied.Wilson stated emphatically that Plame had “Nothing to do” with the 2nd Niger trip.That is false!
Maybe Bush and Alberto can appoint a cronie and pressure the USA general into prosecuting, under threat of dismissal if he doesn’t get Plame.
Econ 101,
“Wilson stated emphatically that Plame had ‘nothing to do” with the 2nd Niger trip.”
Do you want to give an authoritative, non-Fox News “fair and balanced” PARAPHRASE of what he said?
Like a viewable video quote, or a direct quote, written verbatim by a credible news outlet’s reporter who has an aural tape of the statement?
Plame, in testimony televised three times on C-SPAN, stated under oath that she was asked to ask her hubsband if he would be willing to go to Niger. She claims she was merely a messenger, under credible circumstances.
As she testified, she had no power to SEND her husband to Niger. That is completely credible, given that she was not a deputy/assistant secretary in the State Department.
Please recall, that the White House leaks portrayed her as “sending” her husband to Niger, i.e. giving him the assignment. You probably read this account and said to yourself, “Oh, that explains things,” without doing critical thinking: how could a sub-executive CIA covert operator ASSIGN an ambassador to go to Niger?
Plame’s testimony shows the absurdity of this false-planted story, concocted at the White House.
Some bubble-brain who thought he was a genius decided that Wilson’s Times opinion piece could be discredited by concocting a phony story that Plame committed nepotism, in giving her husband an assignment.
Of course, at the time of this chicanery, Preznit Bush’s January 2003 State of the Union claim that Saddam was trying to build nuclear weapons–and remember Connie Rice’s “mushroom cloud” propaganda?–was totally false. Now we know that Wilson’s claim that the White House corrupted CIA analysis, and that Saddam was NOT trying to build nuclear weapons was and is true.
We now know that the White House’s leaked rumor that Plame-Wilson “sent” her husband to Niger is totally false. Because she has claimed, under penalty of perjury, that it was totally false. She’s suing three White House officials in civil court, and will prevail, and the GNP will pay the damages.
Plame and Wilson haven’t been convicted for perjury. Only Dick Cheney’s Chief of Staff Scooter Libby has been convicted of three felonies for lying to federal investigators and obstructing justice. The jury felt that he was the “fall guy”, but get real, he’s got a golden parachute of some kind, and he’ll be pardoned before Bush leaves office. But a presidential pardon doesn’t erase a felony conviction, only its punishment. Libby will always be a convicted felon. But the trial testimony and material evidence indicated he was only a lackey for Cheney, which is why the jury felt sympathy for him.
If anything, you need to ask yourself, WHY DID LIBBY LIE TO FEDERAL INVESTIGATORS?
Yesterday’s hearings included one Republican congressman’s opinion, and that of Vicky Toensing, that the CIA was to blame for the outing, due to an information officer’s not doing his homework to determine that Valerie Plame was covert/undercover, and his revealing that Plame was married to Ambassador Wilson. (Also, note, Wilson worked in Baghdad after Gulf War I, so, get real: he was an expert in Iraq who had the credentials to investigate its potential purchase of uranium.)
It’s a safe bet that the so-called careless CIA information officer will be testifying under subpoena to explain what REALLY happened.
For example, if he revealed that Plame was married to Wilson to a White House officer who had top-level security clearance, but not to the press, then someone in the White House besides Libby is going to be subjected to some real difficulties, such as impeachment by the House, and a trial by the Senate to remove him from office. It’s going to make Clinton’s lying about sex look trivial in comparison.
Cheney has openly said that he felt the Nixon debacle stripped too much power from the presidency and gave it to the congress, and that he felt a duty to restore presidential power.
Maybe Cheney is on a misguided track. Have you considered this possibility, such as that maybe to accomplish this requires too much deception of the American people, as well as abusing them too much by running up ruinous deficits to capture a major Middle Eastern oil dominion, to be feasible, in the long run?
heartlanderThe United States Senate found that Wilson recommended Plame for the Niger trip in question.Not a single Democrat or Republican Senator is on record disputing that Senate finding.
Also, it is not always a crime to lie.I am not sure that Libby did lie, and if he did, I don’t understand why.However:
PLAME AND WILSON HAVE MADE A CAREER OUT OF CALLING BUSH A LIAR, AND THEY HAVE NOT PROVED A SINGLE CHARGE AGAINST BUSH! WHY SHOULDNT WILSON AND PLAME BE HELD TO THE SAME HIGH STANDARDS OF HONESTY THEY EXPECT FROM EVERYONE ELSE?
Plame and Wilson have lied.You know full well that they have lied.Wilsons NYT article is public record, it is full of lies.Plames testimony conflicts with Wilsons testimony.Both Conflict with several other people’s testimony.Come on, these folks are toast where credibility is concerned!
Read the FEB 12 FACT CHECK:
“February 12, 2002 – The Defense Intelligence Agency writes a report concluding “Iraq is probably searching abroad for natural uranium to assist in its nuclear weapons program.” Vice President Cheney reads this report and asks for the CIA’s analysis. (Senate Intelligence Cmte., Iraq 38-39, July 2004).
Responding to inquiries from Cheney’s office, the State Department, and the Defense Department, the CIA’s Directorate of Operations’ Counterproliferation Division (CPD) look for more information. They consider having Wilson return to Niger to investigate. In the process, Valerie Wilson writes a memo to a superior saying, “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.” One of Valerie Wilson’s colleagues later tells Senate investigators she “offered up his name” for the trip. Wilson says that her agency made the decision and she only later approached her husband on the CIA’s behalf. (Senate Intelligence Cmte., Iraq 39, July 2004).
February 19, 2002 – Joseph Wilson meets with officials from CIA and the State Department. According to a State Department intelligence analyst’s notes, the meeting was convened by Valerie Wilson. She later testifies that she left the meeting after introducing her husband. (Senate Intelligence Cmte., Iraq 40, July 2004). ”
http://www.factcheck.org/article337.html
By the way,Wilsons ORAL report (HE LIED WHEN HE SAID HE GAVE A WRITTEN REPORT) — Wilson’s oral report supported President Bush’s position that Iraq WAS trying to get Uranium from Niger.Wilson lied in the NYT and said, in effect, that Wilsons own oral report was not true.In that case, Wilson either lied in the NYT or Wilson lied to the CIA!
First of all, the current head of the CIA testified under oath that Valarie Plame was a COVERT agent. I guess he would know, right?
Second, the law states that the White House will conduct an Administrative investigation any such activity (leaking classified info), yet according to the testimony, there was NO Administrative investigation.
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/16/white-house-plame-leak/trackback/WAXMAN: Will the gentleman yield to me…
CUMMINGS: Of course.
WAXMAN: … because I just want to pin this point down? Do you know whether there was an investigation at the White House after the leaks came out?
KNODELL: I don’t have any knowledge of an investigation within my office.
WAXMAN: Ever?
KNODELL: I do not.
WAXMAN: Because the president said he was investigating this matter and was going to get the bottom of it. You’re not aware that any investigation took place?
KNODELL: Not within my office, sir.
First of all, the current head of the CIA testified under oath that Valarie Plame was a COVERT agent. I guess he would know, right?
Second, the law states that the White House will conduct an Administrative investigation any such activity (leaking classified info), yet according to the testimony, there was NO Administrative investigation.
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/16/white-house-plame-leak/trackback/WAXMAN: Will the gentleman yield to me…
CUMMINGS: Of course.
WAXMAN: … because I just want to pin this point down? Do you know whether there was an investigation at the White House after the leaks came out?
KNODELL: I don’t have any knowledge of an investigation within my office.
WAXMAN: Ever?
KNODELL: I do not.
WAXMAN: Because the president said he was investigating this matter and was going to get the bottom of it. You’re not aware that any investigation took place?
KNODELL: Not within my office, sir.