Judith Miller cannot remember ??

[cnredd]

Why do you guys have this hatred for Judy Miller? She's a conservative Republican who took a principled stand and went to jail to protect her (most likely) conservative Republican source. If you can't respect her principled stand, I would think you'd at least be able to respect the fact that she's shielding one of YOUR guys by keeping them out of jail.

And there's the problem in a nutshell...

You think that all Conservatives believe that if it's a Liberal, sink the ship...but if it's another Conservative, than we believe it's A-OK...the fact that this is not the case here confuses you because it goes against your mindset...

Generalizations are just that...

Sorry to burst your bubble....You can take the horseblinders off now...

We're not all Navy Prides...:roll:

 

[Kandahar]

And there's the problem in a nutshell...

You think that all Conservatives believe that if it's a Liberal, sink the ship...but if it's another Conservative, than we believe it's A-OK...the fact that this is not the case here confuses you because it goes against your mindset...

But see, the thing is that it's hard to take a nonpartisan stand against the antics of Judy Miller when no one here has articulated any reason why they dislike her or what she did wrong.

And from the posts of the two people in this thread who have been trashing her, it's clear that it has EVERYTHING to do with partisanship. My interpretation is that they assumed she was a liberal and therefore worthy of character assassination, then when they found out they were wrong it was too late to stop without looking like hypocrites.

 

[cnredd]

But see, the thing is that it's hard to take a nonpartisan stand against the antics of Judy Miller when no one here has articulated any reason why they dislike her or what she did wrong.

So you decide to take a partisan one?...:roll:

As for what the whole story is...go here and get an update....

And from the posts of the two people in this thread who have been trashing her, it's clear that it has EVERYTHING to do with partisanship. My interpretation is that they assumed she was a liberal and therefore worthy of character assassination, then when they found out they were wrong it was too late to stop without looking like hypocrites.

Then you need to consider the source from those two people...

If I read something from certain people in here, it automatically gets discounted due to past history...some, yes, even on the other side of the aisle, get more respect than others...There are Conservatives that I think are ignorant and "hurt the team"...You are speaking about one of them...

There are some on "your team", too...It would be nice if some more on the left would keep them in check...It seems galenrox is the only one with a bronze pair to actually do that...

This is purely from a "forum member" standpoint and not a Moderator standpoint...which is another BS argument in and of itself...

 

[Kandahar]

So you decide to take a partisan one?...:roll:

Umm no. I was referring to the people who were trashing her. They seem to have no real reason for doing so other than the (false) assumption that she's a liberal Democrat.

Judy Miller is OK by me, and I don't agree with her on much politically.

If I read something from certain people in here, it automatically gets discounted due to past history...some, yes, even on the other side of the aisle, get more respect than others...There are Conservatives that I think are ignorant and "hurt the team"...You are speaking about one of them...

There are some on "your team", too...It would be nice if some more on the left would keep them in check...It seems galenrox is the only one with a bronze pair to actually do that...

I'll usually voice any disagreement with anyone, liberal or conservative, who posts something I disagree with.

Don't be so sure that "my team" is always the liberals. I lean libertarian more than anything else.

 

[cnredd]

Umm no. I was referring to the people who were trashing her. They seem to have no real reason for doing so other than the (false) assumption that she's a liberal Democrat.

Judy Miller is OK by me, and I don't agree with her on much politically.

I have no clue as to what her actual party affiliation is...nor do I care...My only two questions are...

1) If your source is really Scooter Libby, then why did you go to prison when his lawyer already gave you a waiver saying you are free to discuss?...It's pretty dumb to hide your source when your source says it's OK...

2) Why go to prison for 80+ days, only to come out and then say you don't remember who your source is??????

She's playing mind games with somebody...And its tough to figure anything out...she's no help...

I'll usually voice any disagreement with anyone, liberal or conservative, who posts something I disagree with.

Don't be so sure that "my team" is always the liberals. I lean libertarian more than anything else.

There's one problem I have with Libertarians...The "kevlar defense"...

It's pretty easy to go after anyone you feel like on any given day due to the fact that no one can identify with anyone from your affiliation and thus slam you for it...

You folks are a bunch of chameleons!...:doh

 

[oldreliable67]

If your source is really Scooter Libby, then why did you go to prison when his lawyer already gave you a waiver saying you are free to discuss?...It's pretty dumb to hide your source when your source says it's OK...

And when your new lawyer asks for and receives a reiteration of the 'its ok' waiver, you stay in jail another ten days longer than necessary???? Whats up with that?

Additional conferences with the prosecutor following the reiteration of the waiver suggest but certainly don't prove that more folks are on the prosecutor's mind than Libby.

 

[Stinger]

Why do you guys have this hatred for Judy Miller?

:rofl why do you paint it as "hatred" Oooooooooooooooooo yes we HATE HER!

She's a conservative Republican

Well unlike Democrats I don't slant my opinions based on what party they are suppose to be of. Do you?

who took a principled stand

If her stand was based on principle then why did she give it up with less than 30 days left?

and went to jail to protect her (most likely) conservative Republican source.

Well the people whom we thought were her sources had released her to testify a year ago and now she says she can't remember who her source was. But she does have her book deal doesn't she.

If you can't respect her principled stand,

Just because someone thinks the stand they are taking is principled doesn't mean I have to respect it does it. The Neo-nazi's in Toledo thought thier stand was principled too.

I would think you'd at least be able to respect the fact that she's shielding one of YOUR guys by keeping them out of jail.

He's not my guy even if he is a he, she can't remember. But you do prove that people on your side are expected to support those on YOUR side even if they break the law I guess.

 

[Stinger]

And there's the problem in a nutshell...

You think that all Conservatives believe that if it's a Liberal, sink the ship...but if it's another Conservative, than we believe it's A-OK...the fact that this is not the case here confuses you because it goes against your mindset...

Generalizations are just that...

Sorry to burst your bubble....You can take the horseblinders off now...

We're not all Navy Prides...:roll:

That's because Kandahar is showing his own thinking process and projecting it on us. He believes that if it's a conservative, sink the ship..but it it's another Liberal, the he believe's it's A-OK


Like the old adage about most suspicious spouses are suspicious because they are sneaking around themselves.

 

[Stinger]

But see, the thing is that it's hard to take a nonpartisan stand against the antics of Judy Miller when no one here has articulated any reason why they dislike her

Why do you think the opinons of her ACTIONS are based on PERSONAL things? Why do you frame it as "hate"? We don't know the woman so how could we "hate"her?

 

[Kandahar]

That's because Kandahar is showing his own thinking process and projecting it on us. He believes that if it's a conservative, sink the ship..but it it's another Liberal, the he believe's it's A-OK


Like the old adage about most suspicious spouses are suspicious because they are sneaking around themselves.

If that was true, then I'd be jumping on board the "**** Judy Miller" bandwagon since she's a conservative.

But I'm not doing that. I have little respect for any public figure - reporter, politician, religious leader, etc - of any political affiliation involved in corruption or dishonesty (depending on what exactly they did of course). I have a great deal of respect for public figures who stand up for their principles (if those principles are correct) even in the face of jail time.

However, you have failed to corroborate any accusations against Judy Miller as to why she deserves this trashing you're giving her. In fact, you haven't even MADE any accusations. This leads me to believe that your position has nothing to do with seeking justice in a nonpartisan way or any other such BS, but has more to do with the fact that you simply don't like her.

 

[Kandahar]

Why do you think the opinons of her ACTIONS are based on PERSONAL things?

Perhaps if you outlined exactly which of her actions you dislike, I might give you a little more credibility. And having a few questions about why she did certain things (that you honestly don't know the answers to) isn't the same as evidence of wrongdoing.

Why do you frame it as "hate"? We don't know the woman so how could we "hate"her?

I don't know. That's what I'm asking you.

 

[Stinger]

v
Originally Posted by Stinger
Why do you think the opinons of her ACTIONS are based on PERSONAL things?

Perhaps if you outlined exactly which of her actions you dislike,

You didn't say actions you said "when no one here has articulated any reason why they dislike her"

I might give you a little more credibility.

I really don't need it from you but so far your post is sorely lacking of it.

She has admitted now that she doesn't remember who told he about Plame while keeping the idea that it was Rove alive and well in the public discourse and going to jail over it. She said it was a matter of principle then suddenly a month before she gets out all principle goes out the window.



Originally Posted by Stinger
Why do you frame it as "hate"? We don't know the woman so how could we "hate"her?

I don't know. That's what I'm asking you.

You weren't asking you framed it as such, and as we now see without any basis. Actually it's a sophmoric debating tactic, when you are losing just say the other side "hates" the subject of the debate (person or idea0 and try to diminish the impact.

That dog don't hunt.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

This whole thing is a total mess and if indeed Ms. Plame was covert in her actions for the CIA the person or people who outted her need to be held accountable, however, I do have to add that you have respect Ms. Miller's journalistic integrity in not revealing her sources. It is true though that she should have never printed the Agent's identity in the first place and that's why I think she deserves her jail time.

 

[scottyz]

It is true though that she should have never printed the Agent's identity in the first place and that's why I think she deserves her jail time.

Are you saying she deserved the jail time she got or deserves more? I think she deserves more and might get it...

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Are you saying she deserved the jail time she got or deserves more? I think she deserves more and might get it...

both -----

 

[Stinger]

This whole thing is a total mess and if indeed Ms. Plame was covert in her actions for the CIA the person or people who outted her need to be held accountable,

Yes if she were currently working undercoveror within the last 5 years and was making active attempts to hide the fact she worked for the CIA and the CIA was doing the same. But that was not the case, she worked there under her own name and her last covert, which is stretching it, was over 5 years ago.

So that being the case then it was she and her husband who launched the attack on the White House, did so but lying to the press and covering up the genesis of the whole deal. The White House had a perfect right to hit back with the truth and make sure the facts were gotten out.

however, I do have to add that you have respect Ms. Miller's journalistic integrity in not revealing her sources.

Not at all, she had been released from any need to keep from disclosing and she doesn't even know who it is that was her source. She said she was doing it on principle and then worked hard to get out of it.

It is true though that she should have never printed the Agent's identity in the first place and that's why I think she deserves her jail time.

She DIDN'T! She never wrote anything, she never used or cited a source for what she never reported.

 

[Stinger]

Are you saying she deserved the jail time she got or deserves more? I think she deserves more and might get it...

For what? I think she has lost credibility as a reporter and what she did was very strange unless her ultimate goal was to make herself a martyr and then get a book deal (which she did and she did).

 

[Simon W. Moon]

This whole thing is a total mess and if indeed Ms. Plame was covert in her actions for the CIA the person or people who outted her need to be held accountable ...

If her identity as an operative was not classified, then the CIA should be held accountable for requesting an investigation into the disclosure of non-classified information.

I can't help but think that if her identity as an operative was not classified, that someone would have noticed before it got to the grand jury stage. It's unfathomable to me why the CIA would have gone through the troule of requesting an investigation if her identity as an operative was not classified.

Anyone have any theories as to why the CIA woudl request an investigation into the disclosure of her identity as a CIA employee if her identity as an operative was not classified?
What do the "she wasn't covert" conspiracists believe on this count?

It is true though that she should have never printed the Agent's identity in the first place and that's why I think she deserves her jail time.

AFAICT, she never did print anything re V. Wilson.

 

[cnredd]

Yes if she were currently working undercoveror within the last 5 years and was making active attempts to hide the fact she worked for the CIA and the CIA was doing the same. But that was not the case, she worked there under her own name and her last covert, which is stretching it, was over 5 years ago.

The law requires that the CIA be attempting to keep the identity of the agent secret. But in interviews with The Washington Times, most of Mrs. Plame's neighbors in Northwest Washington said they knew she worked for the CIA. A former supervisor, Fred Rustmann, who spent 24 years in the CIA, noted that the agency was doing little to protect her cover, and she is listed in her husband's Who's Who in America entry.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20050718-092253-3802r.htm

Assuming that any laws made were not just for "outing" to the press, but "outing" to ANYONE, could someone please explain why Wilson & Plame wouldn't be indicted for letting out such "privileged infornation" to their local community?

My guess would be that the information doesn't seem as "privileged" as some want to believe...

But if someone disagrees, I'm still looking for an answer...

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

If her identity as an operative was not classified, then the CIA should be held accountable for requesting an investigation into the disclosure of non-classified information.

I can't help but think that if her identity as an operative was not classified, that someone would have noticed before it got to the grand jury stage. It's unfathomable to me why the CIA would have gone through the troule of requesting an investigation if her identity as an operative was not classified.

Anyone have any theories as to why the CIA woudl request an investigation into the disclosure of her identity as a CIA employee if her identity as an operative was not classified?
What do the "she wasn't covert" conspiracists believe on this count?

AFAICT, she never did print anything re V. Wilson.

This is the second time I've heard this, then who did? Was it Novak? And if so then what did Miller do and why do they keep saying that it was her source which she won't submit? Who printed Plames/Ms. Wilsons identity?

 

[oldreliable67]

From Robert Novak's column -- this is what started it all:

"Wilson never worked for the CIA, but his wife, Valerie Plame, is an Agency operative on weapons of mass destruction. Two senior administration officials told me Wilson's wife suggested sending him to Niger to investigate the Italian report. The CIA says its counter-proliferation officials selected Wilson and asked his wife to contact him. "I will not answer any question about my wife," Wilson told me."

http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/robertnovak/2003/07/14/160881.html

 

[Simon W. Moon]

The law requires that the CIA be attempting to keep the identity of the agent secret. But in interviews with The Washington Times, most of Mrs. Plame's neighbors in Northwest Washington said they knew she worked for the CIA. A former supervisor, Fred Rustmann, who spent 24 years in the CIA, noted that the agency was doing little to protect her cover, and she is listed in her husband's Who's Who in America entry.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20050718-092253-3802r.htm

Assuming that any laws made were not just for "outing" to the press, but "outing" to ANYONE, could someone please explain why Wilson & Plame wouldn't be indicted for letting out such "privileged infornation" to their local community?

My guess would be that the information doesn't seem as "privileged" as some want to believe...

But if someone disagrees, I'm still looking for an answer...

All that matters is how privileged the CIA "wants to believe" it is.

"Before this whole affair, no one would ever have thought of her as an undercover agent," said David Tillotson, a next-door neighbor for seven years who got to know the Wilsons well over back-fence chats, shared dinners and play dates for their grandchildren with the Wilsons' children, Trevor and Samantha.

"She wasn't mysterious," Mr. Tillotson said. "She was sort of a working soccer mom."

He recalled his incredulity on July 14, 2003, when his wife, Victoria, spotted in The Washington Post, in a syndicated column by Robert Novak, a line identifying their neighbor by her maiden name and calling her an "agency operative." Ms. Tillotson kept calling out: "This can't be! This can't be!"
​

And as to the Who's Who entry, I've seen it. It fails to mention that she works for the CIA, so I'm not at all clear what the heck it has to do w/ anything. It was no secret that Valerie Plame married Joe Wilson. The secret was that Mrs. Wilson was a CIA operative. Who's Who glaringly failed to mention the CIA operative part.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

A senior intelligence official confirmed that Plame was a Directorate of Operations undercover officer who worked "alongside" the operations officers who asked her husband to travel to Niger.

But he said she did not recommend her husband to undertake the Niger assignment. "They [the officers who did ask Wilson to check the uranium story] were aware of who she was married to, which is not surprising," he said. "There are people elsewhere in government who are trying to make her look like she was the one who was cooking this up, for some reason," he said. "I can't figure out what it could be."



When Novak told a CIA spokesman he was going to write a column about Wilson's wife, the spokesman urged him not to print her name "for security reasons," according to one CIA official. Intelligence officials said they believed Novak understood there were reasons other than Plame's personal security not to use her name, even though the CIA has declined to confirm whether she was undercover.

Novak said in an interview last night that the request came at the end of a conversation about Wilson's trip to Niger and his wife's role in it. "They said it's doubtful she'll ever again have a foreign assignment," he said. "They said if her name was printed, it might be difficult if she was traveling abroad, and they said they would prefer I didn't use her name. It was a very weak request. If it was put on a stronger basis, I would have considered it."

[If only the CIA had used a stronger basis than "security reasons," then Mr. Novak would have "considered it.".]





CIA Director George Tenet has requested a Justice Department investigation into charges that the White House leaked the name of the wife of former U.S. Ambassador Joseph Wilson, who traveled to Niger last year to investigate claims that Iraq had attempted to purchase uranium there, according to reports.





Sources said the CIA is angry about the circulation of a still-classified document to conservative news outlets suggesting Plame had a role in arranging her husband's trip to Africa for the CIA. The document, written by a State Department official who works for its Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR), describes a meeting at the CIA where the Niger trip by Wilson was discussed, said a senior administration official who has seen it.

CIA officials have challenged the accuracy of the INR document, the official said, because the agency officer identified as talking about Plame's alleged role in arranging Wilson's trip could not have attended the meeting.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Prosecutor In CIA Leak Case Casting A Wide Net Prosecutor In CIA Leak Case Casting A Wide Net
By Walter Pincus and Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, July 27, 2005; A01

[Bush officials] said that his 2002 trip to Niger was a boondoggle arranged by his wife, but CIA officials say that is incorrect. One reason for the confusion about Plame's role is that she had arranged a trip for him to Niger three years earlier on an unrelated matter, CIA officials told The Washington Post.

[Bill Harlow, former CIA spokesman,]... said he warned Novak, in the strongest terms he was permitted to use without revealing classified information, that Wilson's wife had not authorized the mission and that if he did write about it, her name should not be revealed.

Harlow ... checked Plame's status and confirmed that she was an undercover operative. He said he called Novak back to repeat that the story Novak had related to him was wrong and that Plame's name should not be used. But he did not tell Novak directly that she was undercover because that was classified.​

 

[oldreliable67]

From Simon's post...

Novak's remarks:

Novak said in an interview last night that the request came at the end of a conversation about Wilson's trip to Niger and his wife's role in it. "They said it's doubtful she'll ever again have a foreign assignment," he said. "They said if her name was printed, it might be difficult if she was traveling abroad, and they said they would prefer I didn't use her name. It was a very weak request. If it was put on a stronger basis, I would have considered it." [emphasis added]

Harlow (CIA) remarks:

[Bill Harlow, former CIA spokesman,]... said he warned Novak, in the strongest terms he was permitted to use without revealing classified information, that Wilson's wife had not authorized the mission and that if he did write about it, her name should not be revealed.

Harlow ... checked Plame's status and confirmed that she was an undercover operative. He said he called Novak back to repeat that the story Novak had related to him was wrong and that Plame's name should not be used. But he did not tell Novak directly that she was undercover because that was classified. [emphasis added]

So who is at fault here?

Actually, this part of the so-called 'outing' may be irrelevant (except in principal) given the apparent attention now being given to questions of perjury and obstruction.