- Joined
- Aug 17, 2005
- Messages
- 20,915
- Reaction score
- 546
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
Great article on the real agenda of the justice department and the CIA to go after the Bush administration.
Bait and switch and trap: The real story behind the Libby Trial
Clarice Feldman
[FONT=times new roman,times]Early in the Fitzgerald case I wrote an [/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times]article[/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times] on "The Wilson Gambit" in which I said,[/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]"The Wilson Gambit was a stealth operation undertaken outside normal procedures and supervision, used as a political weapon, complete with lies spread by a cooperative media establishment interested in bringing down a leader and his policies which they detest" [/FONT]American Thinker Blog: Bait and switch and trap: The real story behind the Libby Trial
blog op/eds are breaking news now?
Considering that the Libby trial is just wrapping up you bet your as$ it is.
What, you've never dead a Billo thread?blog op/eds are breaking news now?
So he argues that since the CIA requested an investigation into the "unauthorized discosure of a CIA employee" instead of the "unauthorized disclosure of a covert CIA employee", that proves Plame wasn't covert. Have I got that right?
To my knowledge there has been no difinitive answer from the CIA about whether or not she was covert. I don't know why that is, but if they still can't figure out what her status was then how could they have known 5 years ago when they requested the investigation? And if they didn't know what her status was at the time, then the kind of request they made has no bearing.
In any event, her covert status doesn't matter very much except for what kind of punishment there should be. The fact that she worked for the CIA was classified and somebody leaked it. And in doing so, they uncovered Brewer Jennings and all of its employees too. I'm so disappointed that the squealer hasn't been caught yet that I would be willing to let Libby off the hook so they can focus on catching the real scumbag.
In connection with his role as a senior government official with responsibilities for national security matters, LIBBY held security clearances entitling him to access to classified information. As a person with such clearances, LIBBY was obligated by applicable laws and regulations, including Title 18, United States Code, Section 793, and Executive Order 12958 (as modified by Executive Order 13292), not to disclose classified information to persons not authorized to receive such information, and otherwise to exercise proper care to safeguard classified information against unauthorized disclosure. On or about January 23, 2001, LIBBY executed a written "Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement," stating in part that "I understand and accept that by being granted access to classified information, special confidence and trust shall be placed in me by the United States Government," and that "I have been advised that the unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention, or negligent handling of classified information by me could cause damage or irreparable injury to the United States or could be used to advantage by a foreign nation."
Full Text: U.S. v. Libby Indictment
Very interesting observation, I think you may be right about that. It is also telling to consider the specific lies he's accused of, in the context of investigating whether or not he was the media's source.aps said:I think that Fitzgerald was interested in going after Libby under this statute but could not since he changed his story--hence, the indicment for perjury, false statements, etc.
Fitzgerald sets up the premise that Libby is to not disclose classified information, points out the law, and then points out how Libby signed a document agreeing to abide by that law.
If I had feelings, that might of hurt!Originally posted by CurrentAffairs:
What, you've never dead a Billo thread?
Kinda like trying to bounce a basketball with no air. :lol:If I had feelings, that might of hurt!
First, I should say that I think the great multitude of theories about the various vast conspiracies against the Bush Admin are fud. That said, taking this conspiracy theory at face value...
Shouldn't we be worried that our lead law enforcement agency and lead intel agency think that the WH is something they should risk their careers over?
ok, TOT, name 2 lies that the President exposed. that's what you said. evidence, please.
ps. news is stuff that happens. opinions aren't news.
the president exposed those? where is your evidence?
One thing I don't understand is if Libby can get prosecuted for Perjury why wasn't "Slick Willie."
[/SIZE][/FONT]
Great article on the real agenda of the justice department and the CIA to go after the Bush administration.
Why are you telling me this when I asked you to explain how the President exposed that the CIA was lying?TOT said:It was also exposed that Wilson was lying about the intelligence...
| Moderator's Warning: |
Clarice Feldman and you are obviously total and complete tools. You really should read something other than right-wing propaganda.
Why are you telling me this when I asked you to explain how the President exposed that the CIA was lying?
"Wilson lied" ... blah blah blah. Your topic, YOUR topic, TOT, is "the real agenda of the justice department and the CIA to go after the Bush administration."
It would be fabulous if we could have a thoughtful discussion and I didn't have to remind you of these little inconvenient details.
Name one thing in the official Niger reports that Wilson lied about. You can't. His conclusions were sound, and it wasn't until several months after his trip that he started speaking out against Bush. That hardly adds up to Bush exposing any sort of lie.Trajan Octavian Titus said:Wilson was working for the CIA that's kind of the whole point here buddy.
Name one thing in the official Niger reports that Wilson lied about.
Conclusion: [FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman PS]Rather than speaking publicly about his actual experiences during his inquiry of the Niger issue, the former ambassador seems to have included information he learned from press accounts and from his beliefs about how the Intelligence Community would have or should have handled the information he provided. [/FONT]
At the time the former ambassador traveled to Niger, the Intelligence Community did not have in its possession any actual documents on the alleged Niger-Iraq uranium deal, only second hand reporting of the deal. The former ambassador’s comments to reporters that the Niger-Iraq uranium documents "may have been forged because ‘the dates were wrong and the names were wrong," could not have been based on the former ambassador’s actual experiences because the Intelligence Community did not have the documents at the time of the ambassador’s trip. In addition, nothing in the report from the former ambassador’strip said anything about documents having been forged or the names or dates in the reports having been incorrect. The former ambassador told Committee staff that he, in fact, did not have access to any of the names and dates in the CIA’s reports and said he may have become confbsed about his own recollection after the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported in March 2003 that the names and dates on the documents were not correct. Of note, the names and dates in the documents that the IAEA found to be incorrect were not names or dates included in the CIA reports.
Following the Vice President’s review of an intelligence report regarding a possible uranium deal, he asked his briefer for the CIA’s analysis of the issue. It was this request which generated Mr. Wilson’s trip to Niger. The former ambassador’s public comments suggesting that the Vice President had been briefed on the information gathered during his trip is not correct, however. While the CIA responded to the Vice President’s request for the Agency’s analysis, they never provided the information gathered by the former Ambassador. The former ambassador, in an NBC Meet the Press interview on July 6,2003, said, "The office of the Vice President, I am absolutely convinced, received a very specific response to the question it asked and that response was based upon my trip out there." The former ambassador was speaking on the basis of what he believed should have happened based on his former government experience, but he had no knowledge that this did happen.
These and other public comments from the former ambassador, such as comments that his report "debunked" the Niger-Iraq uranium story, were incorrect and have led to a distortion in the press and in the public’s understanding of the facts surrounding the Niger-Iraq uranium story. The Committee found that, for most analysts, the former ambassador’s report lent more credibility, not less, to the reported Niger-Iraq uranium deal.
During Mr. Wilson’s media blitz, he appeared on more than thirty television shows including entertainment venues. Time and again, Joe Wilson told anyone who would listen that the President had lied to the American people, that the Vice President had lied, and that he had "debunked" the claim that Iraq was seeking uranium from Africa. As discussed in the Niger section of the report, not only did he NOT "debunk" the claim, he actually gave some intelligence analysts even more reason to believe that it may be true. I believed very strongly that it was important for the Committee to conclude publicly that many of the statements made by Ambassador Wilson were not only incorrect, but had no basis in fact.
In an interview with Committee staff, Mr. Wilson was asked how he knew some of the things he was stating publicly with such confidence. On at least two occasions he admitted that he had no direct knowledge to support some of his claims and that he was drawing on either unrelated past experiences or no information at all. For example, when asked how he "knew" that the Intelligence Community had rejected the possibility of a Niger-Iraq uranium deal, as he wrote in his book, he told Committee staff that his assertion may have involved "a little literary flair."
The former Ambassador, either by design or though ignorance, gave the American people and, for that matter, the world a version of events that was inaccurate, unsubstantiated, and misleading. Surely, the Senate Intelligence Committee, which has unique access to all of the facts, should have been able to agree on a conclusion that would correct the public record. Unfortunately, we were unable to do so.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?