Author Topic: Political explosion in t-5,4,3,2.... (Read 9023 times)

Nash · « **Reply #225 on:** July 15, 2005, 12:59:04 AM »

Well okay.... honest enough answer. I just happen to think this is a completely different beast than Michael Jackson. But forget about the prosecutor's wishes for a sec....

The decision by a judge to jail a NYT reporter is extremely serious. It doesn't really happen unless the judge also thinks there's something here...

The SC even denied that appeal.

And this happened in spite of nobody understanding if Plume was covert or not? That there's even a case here? That the CIA itself - who requested this investigation - didn't know if she was covert? Sorry - it's unimaginable.

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #226 on:** July 15, 2005, 01:06:39 AM »

Usually, when reporter's source cases are brought up, when reporters are jailed, (not that it's common, it isn't) it is for refusing a court order. They are jailed for contempt of court.

If the court orders you to testify in front of a grand jury and you do not, you would be held in contempt. The function of a grand jury is to decide if there is enough evidence of a crime to proceed with a trial.

So you could be jailed for witholding your testimony before it is legally known that a crime was committed.

Nash · « **Reply #227 on:** July 15, 2005, 01:13:05 AM »

Well you're exactly right and it's good to see you emphasize the fact...... it is rare for a reporter to be sent to jail for not revealing his/her sources.

The reason it happened here should tell us something.

Again, I simply can't believe that the fundamental determination of if a crime had even taken place has been overlooked by everyone. I can't believe it's even a question. What the grand jury is determining is who by, and if the evidence can support that. Not if there was a crime in the first place.

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #228 on:** July 15, 2005, 01:20:20 AM »

I thought "who by" was a given, since Rove was convicted even before there was any publically known evidence.

(Interesting that columnists from the NYT et al were condemning Rove while lawyers representing the very same news groups were argueing that he did nothing wrong)

So "if" is the important piece of the pie.

Grand juries frequently decide "if".

Nash · « **Reply #229 on:** July 15, 2005, 01:35:29 AM »

Well lets back up a second.

We're all speculating that this whole thing revolves around the IIPA. It may not. There are plenty of other things that may be happening instead. In point of fact, Rove may not even be at the center here. We just don't know.

This idea, however, that the CIA who asked for the investigation, and the prosecutor who has been investigating it for two years, and the judges who are sending people to jail over it, have no idea what Plame's job description was defies logic.

Fact is - it might not even matter. Our even talking about this could just be the result of RNC talking points completely missing the mark.

Like I said, there's the espionage act, purgery and obstruction of justice among other things that they may be looking at. In that case, her job description doesn't even matter.

What we do know is that Rove (and others?) outted a CIA agent's identity in retribution for truth being told about lies. I regret seeing you avoid quite the same (or any) examination of that.

And with that, I'm off to bed.

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #230 on:** July 15, 2005, 02:04:19 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Nash
Well lets back up a second.

.... clip...

In point of fact, Rove may not even be at the center here. We just don't know.

.... clip...

What we do know is that Rove (and others?) outted a CIA agent's identity in retribution for truth being told about lies. I regret seeing you avoid quite the same (or any) examination of that.

And with that, I'm off to bed.

We do not know that "Rove (and others?) outted a CIA agent's identity in retribution for truth being told about lies." A story is out there with as much credibility as any other that Rove may have passed on information that was already out in the public domain.

We do not truely know what his motives were: if it was an offand response to someone or if it was a cold calculated maneuver.

To illustarate, if you were to unthinkingly respond to a your wife's question "Does this make me look fat?" Would it be a calculated response to say "yes" or was it an unthinking reflexive response? Once you said it did you wish you could have retracted it? But perhaps you planned to say yes to get your wife to think about losing weight and two weeks on the couch would be worth it?

The only thing that we do know is that we don't know.

DrDea · « **Reply #231 on:** July 15, 2005, 05:47:36 AM »

I found this intresting.The Hubby is saying his wife wasnt responsible for his being sent,even after she claimed she was.

Quote

Administration officials told columnist Robert D. Novak then that Wilson, a partisan critic of Bush's foreign policy, was sent to Niger at the suggestion of Plame, who worked in the nonproliferation unit at CIA. The disclosure of Plame's identity, which was classified, led to an investigation into who leaked her name. The report may bolster the rationale that administration officials provided the information not to intentionally expose an undercover CIA employee, but to call into question Wilson's bona fides as an investigator into trafficking of weapons of mass destruction. To charge anyone with a crime, prosecutors need evidence that exposure of a covert officer was intentional.

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."

Quote

The committee found Wilson had made an earlier trip to Niger in 1999 for the CIA, also at his wife's suggestion.
The report also said Wilson provided misleading information to The Washington Post last June. He said then that he concluded the Niger intelligence was based on documents that had clearly been forged because "the dates were wrong and the names were wrong."

Hmmmm..No agenda here.

DrDea · « **Reply #232 on:** July 15, 2005, 06:32:57 AM »

Also on Yahoo today.Guess she wasnt covert and heres the proof.

Quote

In an interview on CNN earlier Thursday before the latest revelation, Wilson kept up his criticism of the White House, saying Rove's conduct was an "outrageous abuse of power ... certainly worthy of frog-marching out of the White House."But at the same time, Wilson acknowledged his wife was no longer in an undercover job at the time Novak's column first identified her. "My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity," he said.

Heres the link for those that need it.http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050715/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/cia_leak_rove

DrDea · « **Reply #233 on:** July 15, 2005, 06:52:12 AM »

More info came out today.Newsweek reported that Rove tried to dissuade Cooper from letting out the name and CIA info.Today the NY times stated that Novac called Rove and discussed another matter but also sidelined that he was working a story about Wilson and had heard his wife worked for the CIA.Rove stated that he had "heard something like that." The 2 things dems are useing to burn Rove exonerate him.A leftist web site is calling for people to go to his house and mess up his yard.WTF????

I bet even Dan Rather is saying "Boy,Im glad Im not on this story.Wouldnt want to look like an idiot again."

Gunslinger · « **Reply #234 on:** July 15, 2005, 08:08:39 AM »

I don't want to "jump the gun" or act like I need a political legg to hump or anything but:

Source: Rove says reporters told him of Plame

Krusher · « **Reply #235 on:** July 15, 2005, 10:29:51 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Gunslinger
I don't want to "jump the gun" or act like I need a political legg to hump or anything but:

Source: Rove says reporters told him of Plame

Its getting better every day.

A former CIA covert agent who supervised Mrs. Plame early in her career yesterday took issue with her identification as an "undercover agent," saying that she worked for more than five years at the agency's headquarters in Langley and that most of her neighbors and friends knew that she was a CIA employee.
"She made no bones about the fact that she was an agency employee and her husband was a diplomat," Fred Rustmann, a covert agent from 1966 to 1990, told The Washington Times. "Her neighbors knew this, her friends knew this, his friends knew this.

A lot of blame could be put on to central cover staff and the agency because they weren't minding the store here. ... The agency never changed her cover status."
Mr. Rustmann, who spent 20 of his 24 years in the agency under "nonofficial cover" -- also known as a NOC, the same status as the wife of Mr. Wilson -- also said that she worked under extremely light cover.

In addition, Mrs. Plame hadn't been out as an NOC since 1997, when she returned from her last assignment, married Mr. Wilson and had twins, USA Today reported yesterday.
The distinction matters because a law that forbids disclosing the name of undercover CIA operatives applies to agents that had been on overseas assignment "within the last five years."
"She was home for such a long time, she went to work every day at Langley, she was in an analytical type job, she was married to a high-profile diplomat with two kids," Mr. Rustmann said. "Most people who knew Valerie and her husband, I think, would have thought that she was an overt CIA employee."

Raider179 · « **Reply #236 on:** July 15, 2005, 01:01:06 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Donzo
Fitzgerald has been working on this for 18 months, right? He must know by now if she was undercover. With this being known and what Rove said being known, what is the hold-up?
Answer:
There is no hold-up. Of the two statements above, one must be false. We know what Rove said (they have the notes from the Cooper). What we don't offically know is was she undercover. If she was, don't you think Rove would be indicted?
Grasping at straws...that's all it is.

If she wasnt undercover this would not even be an issue.

Raider179 · « **Reply #237 on:** July 15, 2005, 01:06:43 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by DrDea
Also on Yahoo today.Guess she wasnt covert and heres the proof.

Heres the link for those that need it.http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050715/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/cia_leak_rove

Man you are so off the point it's getting rediculous.

Doesnt matter if she wasnt "covert" on the day her name got blown. She can "NO LONGER" be an agent. Also, Anyone she worked with, "IS PROBABLY IN DANGER".

Matters none if she is no longer an agent. They compromised her and people she dealt with in the past.

Raider179 · « **Reply #238 on:** July 15, 2005, 01:09:27 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by DrDea
Also on Yahoo today.Guess she wasnt covert and heres the proof.

Heres the link for those that need it.http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050715/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/cia_leak_rove

Here is also from your link

Rove told the grand jury that by the time Novak had called him, he believes he had similar information about Wilson's wife from another member of the news media but he could not recall which reporter had told him about it first, the person said.

When Novak inquired about Wilson's wife working for the CIA, Rove indicated he had heard something like that, according to the source's recounting of the grand jury testimony.

See the part about Noavak "inquired about Wilson's wife"

Now are you gonna tell me that Inquired does not mean asked?

Rove then "indicated he had heard something like that"

Sounds to me like he was confirming her being an agent.

Raider179 · « **Reply #239 on:** July 15, 2005, 01:13:08 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Krusher
Its getting better every day.

A former CIA covert agent who supervised Mrs. Plame early in her career yesterday took issue with her identification as an "undercover agent," saying that she worked for more than five years at the agency's headquarters in Langley and that most of her neighbors and friends knew that she was a CIA employee.
"She made no bones about the fact that she was an agency employee and her husband was a diplomat," Fred Rustmann, a covert agent from 1966 to 1990, told The Washington Times. "Her neighbors knew this, her friends knew this, his friends knew this.

A lot of blame could be put on to central cover staff and the agency because they weren't minding the store here. ... The agency never changed her cover status."
Mr. Rustmann, who spent 20 of his 24 years in the agency under "nonofficial cover" -- also known as a NOC, the same status as the wife of Mr. Wilson -- also said that she worked under extremely light cover.

In addition, Mrs. Plame hadn't been out as an NOC since 1997, when she returned from her last assignment, married Mr. Wilson and had twins, USA Today reported yesterday.
The distinction matters because a law that forbids disclosing the name of undercover CIA operatives applies to agents that had been on overseas assignment "within the last five years."
"She was home for such a long time, she went to work every day at Langley, she was in an analytical type job, she was married to a high-profile diplomat with two kids," Mr. Rustmann said. "Most people who knew Valerie and her husband, I think, would have thought that she was an overt CIA employee."

You do of course understand the difference between neighbors and Friends knowing you work for the CIA and someone telling the press your an Agent and it getting printed in a world wide newspaper? or maybe you dont.

Also, you should think about anyone she might have worked with during her time as an "agent" Wonder if anyone has gotten killed?