Fact Check Complete

[DaNinjew]

Gentlemen (Cliff and Dictator in Chief),

My appologies if I was off topic on the other thread, I was only responding to what two other Moderators had raised in their postings. I thought I would include the facts that you requested on my reply.

Fact: The Plame investigation is still ongoing, Dick Chenney is named in the Grand Jury Indictment and further charges may be brought against Rove. Libby's lie was just the easiest to prove. The Grand Jury, a Federal Prosecutor, and apparently one of the Juror's (who heard all the facts firsthand) buy into my 'BS conspiracy theory' that Libby is just a patsy. I've encluded the following links:

Juror
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/06/AR2007030602365.html

Q & A Report
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/28/AR
2005102801847.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/06/AR2007030600648.html

Fact: Valerie Plame was a covert CIA agent until Spring of 2003 and had only moved to a noncover status a few months before her identity was leaked. While still under cover, she suggested that her husband, who had been US Ambassador to Iraq under Bush I and US Ambassodor in West Africa, might be able to follow up on the reports and investigate the Iraq-Niger Nuke story. He found the alledged link 'dubious':

Wilson Report
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/31/AR2005103100949.html

He was sent by the CIA after Dick Cheney requested more information. All of this is beautifully detailed in this link:

FactCheckorg
http://www.factcheck.org/article337.html

Foot Note that article also lists claims that Plames life was in danger as without merit. Point for you.

Cliff, Valerie Plame is not a traitor, nor will she ever be brought up on Treason Charges. It is a very common theme with this administration that anyone who challenges them or their desires is either a committing treason or supporting the terrorists. Thats not true and thats not how a democracy works. I would still like to see you give Anne Coultier a hug though...I think she needs one. :D:

Fact: George Soros is a multibillionaire, he is not running for office, he did not send Wilson to do his bidding, and I'm not sure why you think he needs Wilson's and Plame's money. As for George Soros, I didn't find his name listed anywhere in this investigation.

George Soros
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_billionaires_%282006%29

Fact: The Republican Administration/Congress has actually Raised VA spending each year. They have had to cut some middle income veterans out of coverage due to large increases in need/demand.

I stand corrected. Bravo Congress.

Veterans Benefits
http://www.factcheck.org/article144.html
http://capwiz.com/dav/issues/alert/?alertid=9396071&type=CU

With all that, I just want you to know that I really enjoy being a member of this forum, this is the first online forum I have participated in. There are some fantastic memembers, very knowledgable martial artists, I enjoy the humor and sharing passions for MMA/UFC etc. You may not like my political opinions but I only seek to engage in open discussion and debate. I certainly haven't agreed with everyone's viewpoints (obviously) on here but am willing to accept them and have definitely garnered respect for the individuals sharing them. Its your forum and I thank you for letting me in.

[TonyU]

Ooh, reopening a thread that has been closed by the Webmaster. Not good.

[wab25]

Fact: Valerie Plame was a covert CIA agent until Spring of 2003 and had only moved to a noncover status a few months before her identity was leaked. Sounds like she was not a covert op at the time her identity was "leaked." Should every one who "leaks" the name of a non-covert op to be charged? If you want to play that way, lets go after Bush for "leaking" the name of the general he put in charge of Iraq, after all, he is also not a covert op. (not wanting to be charged, I'll let you look up his name on publicly available sources, the same way you could have looked up Plame's name, had anyone cared to do so, at the time her name was "leaked.")

[Webmaster]

Ooh, reopening a thread that has been closed by the Webmaster. Not good.
And it usually results in getting yourself banned or suspended. Since Cliff actually closed the thread, I will let him take whatever action he would care to. I have to go to class!

[AllanJGAnderson]

Apology Accepted!

[Cliff Hargrave]

Give me time to read it, check it, and respond to it, then I will decide :)

In hindsight I probably should have just split the last thread rather than close it.

First thing though, as far as the investigation, I saw Fitzgerald (the prosecutor) on TV the day of the conviction and he said the investigation is now closed and there will be no further indictments. The rest I will have to get to later.

[aikibu]

Thanks for the post DaNinJew. :)

William Hazen

[Tony Dismukes]

Here is Valerie Plame's testimony under oath to Congress earlier today:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/03/16/plame.statement/index.html

She states quite unambigiously that she was a covert agent for the CIA.

DaNinjew - I followed your link, and I'm not seeing the source for a claim that Plame was moved to non-cover status before her identity was leaked. Rather the link states "Spring 2003 –Valerie Wilson is in the process of moving from non-official to official, State Department cover, according to a later Vanity Fair article based on interviews with the Wilsons." That sounds to me like a) she was still covert, but under a different type of cover and b) the transition was ongoing, not complete.

[Webmaster]

Sure she was and that has been well established.

The problem is that at the time of her "outting" she had not been "covert" for FIVE years. The law which prohibits disclosure of a "covert" operative specifies that they cannot be covert at the time or within the previous five years. It also specifies that the disclosure must be intentional and for the purpose of damaging national security. If Ms. Plame had actually been protected under the law, then Fitzgerald would have prosecuted Libby under that law, and not for simply having a bad memory. Fitzgerald also knew that Richard Armitage was the leaker (established during the investigation) and if Plame had been protected under that law, Armitage would have persecuted for the leak.

So yes, she was covert, but was not at the time she was outted. So there was really no crime until Fitzgerald decided to prosecute Libby for his piss-poor memory.

Here is some interesting stuff on the whole legal affair. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plame_affair_legal_questions

[Tony Dismukes]

The problem is that at the time of her "outting" she had not been "covert" for FIVE years.

Ms. Plame specifically contradicts that in her testimony. She says: "In the run-up to the war with Iraq I worked in the counter proliferation division of the CIA -- still as a covert officer whose affiliation with the CIA was classified."

[Cliff Hargrave]

The interesting thing about this whole mess is:

1. She was not covert as Robert posted. As a matter of fact she had spoke at her kid's school about her CIA job prior to all of this. Thus there are no indictments for "outing" her.

2. She had a political agenda that was contrary to the administration.

3. She used her position in the CIA to get her husband (who also had the same political agenda) assigned to the investigation.

4. Wilson went on the trip and didn't do one thing even remotely close to being an investigation, and returned declaring the issue was false. Thus supporting his and his wife's political agenda.

5. They played the poor victims in this affair and continue to do so. In reality they used their positions and connections in the government specifically to counter and embarrass the administration. Thus their actions contribute to the emboldening of our enemies.

Funny how every single thing the administration does gets looked at through a microscope by the media, but any action counter to them gets a pass.

[Webmaster]

Ms. Plame specifically contradicts that in her testimony. She says: "In the run-up to the war with Iraq I worked in the counter proliferation division of the CIA -- still as a covert officer whose affiliation with the CIA was classified."
Then she has lied under oath.

The Intelligence Identities Protection Act specifically states:


A covert agent is one who is "serving outside the United States or has within the last five years served outside the United States" (§ 426[4][a][ii]).

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Intelligence_Identities_Protection_Act


Also, if that was the case, then why didn't Fitzgerald indict Richard Armitage for disclosing Plame's identity to Robert Novak? Clearly, if she was indeed covered by the Act, then an indictment of Armitage would have been a bigger coup than going after Libby for his bad memory. So the conclusion must be that there was no crime committed under the Intelligence Identities Protection Act and thus Ms. Plame was not in fact covered by this law. If you have a better explanation, I would love to hear it, but I would think that a professional prosecutor who is "pure as the wind-driven snow" and more familiar with the case than the rest of us would have sought an indictment under the Intelligence Identities Protection Act if a violation had actually happened.

[Cliff Hargrave]

If she was covert she would not have been going around using her real name and giving lectures about her job with the CIA.

[Tony Dismukes]

Here: http://oversight.house.gov/Documents/20070316104030-43341.pdf is the opening statement from Rep. Waxman at the hearings today.


This hearing is being conducted in open session. This is appropriate, but it is also challenging.
Ms. Wilson was a covert employee of the CIA. We cannot discuss all of the details of her CIA employment in open session.
I have met with General Hayden, the head of the CIA, to discuss what I can and cannot say about Ms. Wilson's service.
My staff has also worked with the agency to ensure these remarks do not contain classified information.
I have been advised by the CIA that even now, after all that has happened, I cannot disclose the full nature, scope, and character of Ms. Wilson's service to our nation without causing serious damage to our national security interests.
But General Hayden and the CIA have cleared these following comments for today's hearing.
During her employment at the CIA, Ms. Wilson was under cover.
Her employment status with the CIA was classified information prohibited from disclosure under Executive Order 12958.
At the time of the publication of Robert Novak's column on July 14,2003, Ms. Wilson's CIA employment status was covert.
This was classified information.

Cliff, Robert - if you have better information on Valerie Plame Wilson's covert status than the she herself has or than the head of the CIA has, then perhaps you should share your sources.

[Webmaster]

Funny how every single thing the administration does gets looked at through a microscope by the media, but any action counter to them gets a pass.
It is amazing isn't it? Liberals can lie under oath and nothing happens. Conservatives have a lapse of memory and the wall falls on him. President Clinton fires every US Attorney (including the one in Little Rock that was investigating a "former" Arkansas governor and his wife) and no one bats an eye. President Bush dismissed a couple of US Attorney's for not towing the Administration line (like investigating voter fraud) and it's suddenly Bush's Watergate. Please...

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110009784

[aikibu]

Now we have folks using Plame's testimony to justify the straw man defense for the "reasons" we got into this war?

Interesting and to be expected I guess...LOL

She also said somethings that directly contradict the Administrations excuse's for a host of actions it took. More will be revealed and I can't wait to see NeoWacks dance thier way our of this one.

The investigation into Douglas Feith's role should put this kind of obfuscation by the Cheny Lackeys to rest.

William Hazen

[aikibu]

It is amazing isn't it? Liberals can lie under oath and nothing happens. Conservatives have a lapse of memory and the wall falls on him. President Clinton fires every US Attorney (including the one in Little Rock that was investigating a "former" Arkansas governor and his wife) and no one bats an eye. President Bush dismissed a couple of US Attorney's for not towing the Administration line (like investigating voter fraud) and it's suddenly Bush's Watergate. Please...

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110009784

Check your facts...You couldn't be more wrong...Start by asking the US Attorney's who were fired by AL what the differance is...

William Hazen

[Cliff Hargrave]

Here: http://oversight.house.gov/Documents/20070316104030-43341.pdf is the opening statement from Rep. Waxman at the hearings today.



Cliff, Robert - if you have better information on Valerie Plame Wilson's covert status than the she herself has or than the head of the CIA has, then perhaps you should share your sources.

Let me look for it, all of this stuff was on all the major news channels when the story broke.

[Cliff Hargrave]

Check your facts...You couldn't be more wrong...Start by asking the US Attorney's who were fired by AL what the differance is...

William Hazen

translation please.....

[aikibu]

Sure. I'll let a highly respected Lawyer Ex-Us Attorney and Ex-Republican Senator "translate it for you." :)


"I and a number of others were critical of president Clinton when he first came into office and almost immediately removed all U.S. Attorneys. But that's not the same thing as what's happening now.

We're seeing a president in his second term go after U.S. attorneys of his own party for reasons that are clearly political: not moving fast enough against targets on the other side of the aisle, succumbing to pressure from Senators for example. That is very, very corrosive, both to morale for U.S. Attorneys as well as in terms of reducing the confidence that the public has that the system is fair and impartial and non-partisan," - former U.S. attorney, Bob Barr, a Reagan appointee who was a Republican congressman from 1995 to 2003.

William Hazen

[aikibu]

Translation Part 2 ELECTRIC BUGALOO! :)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036697/

See "Fired US Attorneys Talk"

William Hazen

[Cliff Hargrave]

Clinton got rid of all of them because he and his friends were being investigated by two. He did it as a cover. Bush got rid of 8 because they were not doing what the administration wanted. May not be moral on either case, but it's legal. That is the way the system is set up. The problem is that the media didn't care when Clinton did it, but now they are running with the Bush story.

Now back to Plame.....

here are some pieces from an article in 2003.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=10694

Moreover, as Novak himself notes, Plame’s “covert” status “was not much of a secret.” The incidentals were not secret: Her name appears in Joseph Wilson’s “Who’s Who in America” entry. Moreover, when she donation $1,000 to Al Gore, she did so under her married name, also listing a private CIA front group as her “employer.”

More importantly, though, her CIA employment itself was no secret. Wilson himself disclosed that his wife let her cover slip around him early in their dating life. Presumably Ms. Plame has dated others, whom she also informed of her dreadfully well-guarded, super-duper-secret status in exchange for, say, an evening at the Ice Capades. Although she has a desk job investigating those who sell WMDs to terrorists (and is not a field “operative” as some misunderstood Novak to imply), she had knowledge of genuine field agents in hostile lands. Thus, her loose-lipped dating-and-mating habits could have endangered those within her orbit. Her blatant disregard of CIA secrecy undermined her own job. It seems she, not Bob Novak, was the graver danger to national security.

and on Wilson:

Wilson was an odd choice, indeed. He has keynoted before the Education for Peace in Iraq Center (EPIC), which opposed the Iraqi liberation, the sanctions against Saddam and even the no-fly zones protecting Saddam’s former victims. Wilson is also an “adjunct fellow” at the Saudi-funded Middle East Institute. His flaming leftist shilling has graced the pages of Nation, where he wrote, “The new imperialists will not rest until governments that ape our worldview are implanted throughout the region.” Finally, he gave the maximum campaign contribution allowed by law to Al Gore’s 2000 Presidential campaign. (Plame gave $1,000 herself.) Indeed, Wilson worked for Gore in the 1980s. In recent years, he has supported (and formally endorsed) Sen. John Kerry.

[Tony Dismukes]

1. She was not covert as Robert posted. As a matter of fact she had spoke at her kid's school about her CIA job prior to all of this. Thus there are no indictments for "outing" her.

2. She had a political agenda that was contrary to the administration.

3. She used her position in the CIA to get her husband (who also had the same political agenda) assigned to the investigation.

4. Wilson went on the trip and didn't do one thing even remotely close to being an investigation, and returned declaring the issue was false. Thus supporting his and his wife's political agenda.

5. They played the poor victims in this affair and continue to do so. In reality they used their positions and connections in the government specifically to counter and embarrass the administration. Thus their actions contribute to the emboldening of our enemies.




Cliff,

With regards to #1, do you have a source showing that she spoke at her kids school about her CIA job prior to these events? It seems unlikely, given that the head of the CIA says that she was covert at the time.

With regards to #2, what are your sources regarding Valerie Plame's political agenda prior to her outing?

With regards to #3, what is your evidence that Plame got her husband assigned to the Niger trip? After all, Wilson was eminently qualified for the job based on his own past experience.

With regards to #4, what is your basis for saying that Wilson "didn't do one thing even remotely close to being an investigation"?





Then she has lied under oath.

The Intelligence Identities Protection Act specifically states:


A covert agent is one who is "serving outside the United States or has within the last five years served outside the United States" (§ 426[4][a][ii]).


Robert,

In Plame's testimony she says: "While I helped to manage and run secret worldwide operations against this WMD target from CIA headquarters in Washington, I also traveled to foreign countries on secret missions to find vital intelligence."

[Cliff Hargrave]

I have to go to work, I'll come back to this :)

I guess attending Democratic strategy meetings, contributing money to Al Gore, John Kerry, Americans Coming Together (George Soros front group). all prior to the "leak" would count as having an agenda.

another interesting article:

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=18847

The biggest thing this "scandal" has exposed is the stupidity in the Bush administration. I don't know how they would let Plame or Wilson anywhere near an official investigation.

[Tony Dismukes]

With regards to the U.S. Attorney oustings:

Clinton did replace the existing U.S. Attorneys when he came to office in 1993. Likewise, Bush replaced the existing U.S. Attorneys when he came to office in 2001. It's pretty much standard practice for a president to fill those slots with his own appointees when he comes to power.

The contention in this case is that the eight recently fired attorneys were let go for political reasons. A growing body of evidence (emails, etc) seem to back that idea up. That's probably not against any law, as far as I can tell. What might be against the law are a) staffers from the Justice Department lying to Congress about the reasons for the firings and b) possible obstruction of justice if the firings were part of a pattern of pressure on the attorneys to prosecute certain targets (Democrats) and not others (Republicans). I would say that there is pretty clear-cut evidence for a), but only preliminary, suggestive evidence (so far) for b).

[DaNinjew]

Here is Valerie Plame's testimony under oath to Congress earlier today:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/03/16/plame.statement/index.html

She states quite unambigiously that she was a covert agent for the CIA.

DaNinjew - I followed your link, and I'm not seeing the source for a claim that Plame was moved to non-cover status before her identity was leaked. Rather the link states "Spring 2003 –Valerie Wilson is in the process of moving from non-official to official, State Department cover, according to a later Vanity Fair article based on interviews with the Wilsons." That sounds to me like a) she was still covert, but under a different type of cover and b) the transition was ongoing, not complete.

You may be right Tony, but thats what I thought it was implying.

As far as introducing her husband to the CIA thats pretty much the conclustion I came to based on what I read, even though he was very qualified to be contracted for that role. Whether you think his conlusions were politically motivated or not, its kind of immaterial at this point, he found the story (Iraq/Niger nuclear link) to be false, like most of the major justifications for going to war in Iraq. I would love to hear Collin Powell's take on all this.

[Webmaster]

Likewise, Bush replaced the existing U.S. Attorneys when he came to office in 2001.
Really? He may have replaced a few, but Clinton got rid of them ALL. That is the first and only time in history that this has been done. With regard to President Bush firing a few... so what? It's political? Sure it is. They were failing to investigate things that were of interest to the administration... like voter fraud. Also, these recent US Attorney's were some that had been around since the Clinton administration, and some were one's appointed by President Bush since he took office. The bottom line is that they serve at the pleasure of the President, and he can fire them for any reason he wants, including the color of their tie.

Folks, you, the press and the democrats are trying to dream up another supposed scandal where there is none. I wish someone would catalog all of these scandals they have tried to pin on President Bush's administration and then look were they have all gone... no where.

Next thing you know, you'll be saying the President Bush blew up the World Trade Center himself! :tinfoil2: :laugh:

[Webmaster]

Sure. I'll let a highly respected Lawyer Ex-Us Attorney and Ex-Republican Senator "translate it for you." :)
Surely you know the difference between a Senator and a Congressman don't you? That would be Congressman Bob Barr.

Amazing that when Congressman Bob Barr was prosecuting President Clinton (and ultimately led to his impeachment) he was a total baffoon. Now that he says something that you support, he's a good old guy!

BTW William, tell your buddy Sean P. to kiss my butt and that he is a total scumbag. :D

[DaNinjew]

With regard to President Bush firing a few... so what? It's political? Sure it is. They were failing to investigate things that were of interest to the administration... like voter fraud. Also, these recent US Attorney's were some that had been around since the Clinton administration, and some were one's appointed by President Bush since he took office. The bottom line is that they serve at the pleasure of the President, and he can fire them for any reason he wants, including the color of their tie.

I don't really see much of a scandal here either, they are acting within their rights. Its an unusual event to do it mid term, I think its more of congress (Dems and Republicans) having regrets over giving the Presidency so much authority after 911 and wanting to reign that in. There's just too much blood in the water at this point for Bush to get anything significant accomplished swimming with these sharks.

[Brian Dugger]

Originally Posted by Webmaster
With regard to President Bush firing a few... so what? It's political? Sure it is. They were failing to investigate things that were of interest to the administration... like voter fraud. Also, these recent US Attorney's were some that had been around since the Clinton administration, and some were one's appointed by President Bush since he took office. The bottom line is that they serve at the pleasure of the President, and he can fire them for any reason he wants, including the color of their tie.
Check your facts...You couldn't be more wrong...Start by asking the US Attorney's who were fired by AL what the differance is...

William Hazen
Someone needs to check with Vince Foster. Ooopps! He suddenly died of "apparent suicide" while working for Clinton. Anyone hear any follow-ups to that lately. Not to mention a coupla former security/bodyguards (former state troopers which went on to become federal agents)to Clinton as governor, they wound up dead at Waco. Gimme a break!

[starkjudo]

The absolute reason the Plame investigation is all bullcrap:

The person who wrote the regulations covering covert officers says she wasn't covert.

The person who had a hand in writing the act in 1982, Victoria Toesnsing, sparring with DEMOCRAT Henry Waxman:


stolen from rushlimbaugh.com:

WAXMAN: I am stunned, Ms. Toensing, that you would come here with absolute conclusions that she was not a covert agent; the White House did not leak it; no one seemed to know in advance that she was a CIA agent. Do you know those facts for your own firsthand knowledge?

TOENSING: Well, lets just take those one by one. As I said, I was there. I was the chief drafter for chairman --

WAXMAN: I'm not asking for your credentials. I'm asking how you reached those conclusions. Do you --

TOENSING: That's part of my credentials is because I know what the intent of the act was.

WAXMAN: I'm not asking what the intent of the act was.

TOENSING: Well that’s the question.

WAXMAN: Do you know that she was not a covert agent?

TOENSING: She is not a covert agent under the act.

WAXMAN: Okay, so --

TOENSING: You can call anybody anything you want to in the halls of the CIA.

WAXMAN: General Hayden! General Hayden, head of the CIA, told me personally that she was. If I said that she was a covert agent, it wouldn't be an incorrect statement?

TOENSING: Does he want to swear that she was a covert agent under the act?

WAXMAN: I'm trying to say as carefully as I can. He reviewed my statement, and my statement was that she was a covert agent.

TOENSING: Well, he didn't say it was under the act.

WAXMAN: Okay, so you're trying to define it exactly under the act.

TOENSING: That's important.

WAXMAN: No, no, no, no, no, no. I'm not giving you -- I'm not yielding my time to you.


More from Ms. Toensing here. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/16/AR2007021601705_pf.html)

Plame is lying. Wilson is lying, along with lying about the allegation that Iraq never went to Niger for yellowcake uranium. They acquired it from there before and were seeking to acquire it again, at least as recently as 1999 or 2001, take your pick.

http://www.slate.com/id/2139609/

Both of them have lied under oath and blantantly to the media, who have eaten it up. Charge them with treason, charge them with war crimes, charge them with disrupting the affairs of state with false and damaging charges, get them the hell out of the way and concentrate on more pressing matters.

[Cliff Hargrave]

I am noticing a little friction between the CIA and administration in all of this too. I think some people may be hedging their bets right now, with the Dems in control of the Congress and the possibility of a Repub president slim.