Wilson outted wife (1 Viewer)

[Stinger]

In news being reported today Libby's lawyer claims to have 5 witnesses who under oath have stated Joe Wilson told them his wife worked for the CIA before Novack ever stated it in his editorial. Wilson refused to comment.

Another case of Wilson lying.

"According to the NationalReviewOnline's Byron York, Libby's lawyer Ted Wells told the court that his witnesses "will say under oath that Mr. Wilson told them his wife worked for the CIA." Wells said that he expects Leakgate Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald to call Wilson to testify in a bid to salvage his case."


http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/5/8/125510.shtml?s=ic

 

[PeteEU]

yea right.. from newsmax?

Also its not a new alligation, and its been pretty much debunked by logic.. if its the same alligations from the Fox News greenroom. But hey, show proof and find non biased witnesses then sure anything is possible.

 

[Captain America]

Hold on a sec.....

When Cheney/Libby outed Plume, she wasn't classified, it wasn't illegal, she was basically a non-sensitive CIA employee and everything is on the up and up. No harm no foul. Right?

But when/if Wilson outs his wife it is suddenly different.

Let's get our stories straight.

First, let us establish if she was "outing" material to begin with and then let's proceed from there.

If we conclude that she was, in fact, an agent of the CIA in a sensitive position that required her anonynimity...anonomous.... anonemity.... covertness (dammit!)........ then we can agree that whoever revealed her for that is guilty no matter if it is Bush, Cheney, Libby or Wilson. Fair enough?

No fair changing sides if the arrow points towards your team! Yeah, right.:roll:

Newsmax indeed.

 

[Davo The Mavo]

Wilson outted wife

Valerie Brown is Gay?

BTW, how many people are being prosecuted for outting a CIA agent?


That's what I thought. Zero.

 

[Captain America]

Valerie Brown is Gay?

BTW, how many people are being prosecuted for outting a CIA agent?


That's what I thought. Zero.

C'mon D. You sound like one of those anti-Clinton cultists that love to remind us, it's not the blow-job, it's the lie.:mrgreen:

I love it when the crows come home to roost. Don't you?

 

[Stinger]

yea right.. from newsmax?

Read the story they are not the originator and if the height of your intellectual response is "Oh NewsMax" don't bother. If you want to discuss the news, the issue, then have had, baseless invectives are boring. But think of this, if you did bother to read NewsMax and avail yourself to a source that does report both sides you would have already known this new piece of news, but you don't so you didn't.

 

[Stinger]

Hold on a sec.....

When Cheney/Libby outed Plume, she wasn't classified, it wasn't illegal, she was basically a non-sensitive CIA employee and everything is on the up and up. No harm no foul. Right?

Absolutely, I will gladly agree that we stipulate that her indentity wasn't COVERT and blown already, no harm no foul.

But when/if Wilson outs his wife it is suddenly different.

How? I want him treated no different for it, but then let's stipulate that neither Rove nor Libby committed a foul, that lots of people knew where she worked and not remembering who you spoke with about it nor in what order is not material to any crime, was not an obstruction of justice and there was no crime committed.

Let's get our stories straight.

I'm right with you Bud.

First, let us establish if she was "outing" material to begin with and then let's proceed from there.

I used the word "outted" with some tongue in cheek.

If we conclude that she was, in fact, an agent of the CIA in a sensitive position that required her anonynimity...

We don't have to but she was "outted" anyway so it doesn't matter.

No fair changing sides if the arrow points towards your team! Yeah, right.:roll:

No fair making specious conclusions about my position.

Let's agree no one broke the law, it's a dead end. Time to move on.

Newsmax indeed.

Indeed, is NBC covering this? MSNBC? ABC? Did the NYT cover it today.

Or would you prefer to just not know about it, makes life easier?

 

[Stinger]

C'mon D. You sound like one of those anti-Clinton cultists that love to remind us, it's not the blow-job, it's the lie.:mrgreen:

You're still confused about that?

BTW did you hear John Fund on Hardball tonight? John Fund the not so friendly to Bush reporter? Saying that it is Wilson who will be discredited in the end of this and in fact already was by the Senate Committe. Rove and Libby may have been stupid in how they handled this but the did nothing illegal.

 

[Stinger]

yea right.. from newsmax?

Also its not a new alligation,

Really, post me cite for a previous allegation of this backed by 5 sworn statements.

But hey, show proof and find non biased witnesses then sure anything is possible.

Sworn testimony. Your turn, top it.

And let's not forget it was Wilson decrying the Administration for "outting" his wife and putting them in danger when he fact he had already done that, repeatedly.s

One more of the Wilson lies.

 

[Alex]

In news being reported today Libby's lawyer claims to have 5 witnesses who under oath have stated Joe Wilson told them his wife worked for the CIA before Novack ever stated it in his editorial. Wilson refused to comment.

Another case of Wilson lying.

"According to the NationalReviewOnline's Byron York, Libby's lawyer Ted Wells told the court that his witnesses "will say under oath that Mr. Wilson told them his wife worked for the CIA." Wells said that he expects Leakgate Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald to call Wilson to testify in a bid to salvage his case."


http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/5/8/125510.shtml?s=ic

You'll believe anything printed or shown by Conservative media.

 

[jamesrage]

I think the libs knew the whole thing was declassified and wanted to give Karl Rove **** for saying "Conservatives saw the savagery of 9/11 in the attacks and prepared for war; liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers."
Because right after Rove said those things,bam!the liberals accused Rove of releasing classified information after refusing to appologize for such comments.

 

[Stinger]

You'll believe anything printed or shown by Conservative media.

That's the sum total of your attempt to rebut the story?

 

[jamesrage]

That's the sum total of your attempt to rebut the story?

Didn't you know that only the liberal media outlets tell the truth(sarcasm)?

 

[aps]

Stinger, your obession with saying that Wilson outted his wife and that he is a liar is over the top. It says to me that you're worried that people in the Bush adminsitration are going to be held accountable for what they did. I really hope that Rove gets indicted, as I will be laughing, laughing, and laughing for the next year or so. :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[Captain America]

I think the Achille's Heel here will not be the outing but the cover-up and purgery that followed. So, Clintonesque.

Time will tell. The jury is still out. I wouldn't get my hopes up for either side.

What Rove and Libby did initially, may just be signs of bad character and cowardice as they tried to get to a man through his woman. (very Un-Texan-like ) But that's typical Rove. No holds barred. Truth be damned and all's fair in love and politics. Just because he has proven himself, yet again, a scumbag doesn't necessarily mean they technically broke the law. Especially since they have the guy in their corner who can "de-classify" the sensitive intel and make things all nice and legal like for them to be pond-scum.

Regardless, I see them for what they are. That bothers some folks and some folks are just fine with that. That in itself speaks volumes about a person.

 

[Deegan]

What has always bothered me about Joe Wilson is this, how in the hell did he go to n.ger, and prove no deals were made for yellow cake, I mean, how did he do this? He goes there for a couple of days, stays in a fine hotel on the tax payers dime, and comes home thinking he has all the answers? he even has the nerve to write an op-ed piece in the NYTimes, it all just seems very arrogant, and very much like he had an agenda from the start. This is my problem with Joe, and why I don't believe him, or lend much to his opinion at all.

 

[jamesrage]

I think the Achille's Heel here will not be the outing but the cover-up and purgery that followed. So, Clintonesque.

Time will tell. The jury is still out. I wouldn't get my hopes up for either side.

What Rove and Libby did initially, may just be signs of bad character and cowardice as they tried to get to a man through his woman. (very Un-Texan-like ) But that's typical Rove. No holds barred. Truth be damned and all's fair in love and politics. Just because he has proven himself, yet again, a scumbag doesn't necessarily mean they technically broke the law. Especially since they have the guy in their corner who can "de-classify" the sensitive intel and make things all nice and legal like for them to be pond-scum.

Regardless, I see them for what they are. That bothers some folks and some folks are just fine with that. That in itself speaks volumes about a person.

Don't you find it odd that immediatly after Karl Rove said the following statement the accusations of outing classified information surfaced?

"Conservatives saw the savagery of 9/11 in the attacks and prepared for war; liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers."

 

[Captain America]

Don't you find it odd that immediatly after Karl Rove said the following statement the accusations of outing classified information surfaced?

"Conservatives saw the savagery of 9/11 in the attacks and prepared for war; liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers."

Honestly, I do not find it odd at all. This is typical Rove. The nature of the beast. The guy is a pig in my opinion and is single-handedly responsible for instigating the greatest divide amongst the American people I have ever witnessed in my lifetime. There is an old saying. "United we stand, divided we fall." if that is to be believed, folks like Rove and those that got sucked into his propaganda, bears much responsibility for the current divisions amongst the populus and the resulting downfall. But it's not too late. People are starting to open their eyes and take off their blinders. FOXNews reported yesterday that the support for the president and his administration is now down to 31%.

There's a great day of reckoning coming. Maybe when we get past that, we will realize accomplishments never before imagined in this great nation of ours. Let freedom ring. But first, we have to put aside those that are opposing it.

 

[BWG]

I think the Achille's Heel here will not be the outing but the cover-up and purgery that followed. So, Clintonesque.

Time will tell. The jury is still out. I wouldn't get my hopes up for either side.

What Rove and Libby did initially, may just be signs of bad character and cowardice as they tried to get to a man through his woman. (very Un-Texan-like ) But that's typical Rove. No holds barred. Truth be damned and all's fair in love and politics. Just because he has proven himself, yet again, a scumbag doesn't necessarily mean they technically broke the law. Especially since they have the guy in their corner who can "de-classify" the sensitive intel and make things all nice and legal like for them to be pond-scum.

Regardless, I see them for what they are. That bothers some folks and some folks are just fine with that. That in itself speaks volumes about a person.

Conservatives like to use every excuse and technicality they can conjure up to exonerate one of their own, but when it comes to the masses (i.e. you and I), they become like howler monkeys, in crying out that liberals are soft on crime and it's all liberal activists judges fault that so many criminals are out on the street.

 

[Captain America]

Conservatives like to use every excuse and technicality they can conjure up to exonerate one of their own, but when it comes to the masses (i.e. you and I), they become like howler monkeys, in crying out that liberals are soft on crime and it's all liberal activists judges fault that so many criminals are out on the street.

Yeah, but according to the word on the streets, for every 3 of them howling like monkeys, seven more people are shouting, "Shut up fool!"

It's a lonely time for them.

Nobody wants to be alone.

 

[BWG]

Don't you find it odd that immediatly after Karl Rove said the following statement the accusations of outing classified information surfaced?

"Conservatives saw the savagery of 9/11 in the attacks and prepared for war; liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers."

No, what I find coincidental, is that when Wilson came back with information that contradicted the Administration's assertions, Valerie Plame was outed. You need to stop regurgitating that 'freeper' stuff. :doh

 

[jamesrage]

No, what I find coincidental, is that when Wilson came back with information that contradicted the Administration's assertions, Valerie Plame was outed. You need to stop regurgitating that 'freeper' stuff. :doh

If you think it is nonsense then why did it the accusations of Karl Rove revealing classified information happened right after he refused to apologize for calling liberals a bunch of ******s onj the Iraq war?

 

[aps]

If you think it is nonsense then why did it the accusations of Karl Rove revealing classified information happened right after he refused to apologize for calling liberals a bunch of ******s onj the Iraq war?

james, tell me the specific accusations you are talking about. Karl Rove made the statement that you quoted above in June 2005. What are you saying happened afterwards?

 

[Alex]

What has always bothered me about Joe Wilson is this, how in the hell did he go to n.ger, and prove no deals were made for yellow cake, I mean, how did he do this? He goes there for a couple of days, stays in a fine hotel on the tax payers dime, and comes home thinking he has all the answers? he even has the nerve to write an op-ed piece in the NYTimes, it all just seems very arrogant, and very much like he had an agenda from the start. This is my problem with Joe, and why I don't believe him, or lend much to his opinion at all.

He was chosen to go to n*ger because he had previously known heads of state there.

 

[aps]

He was chosen to go to n*ger because he had previously known heads of state there.

On top of that, he went to n*ger before Bush's January 2003 State of the Union. Don't forget that George H. W. Bush appointed him as Ambassador. Wilson could have written that op ed in January 2003, but he waited until July 2003. To me, that doesn't indicate he had an agenda. I am rather disappointed that he waited so damn long to publish that article. WTF?