Author Topic: Cheney sued in CIA identity case (Read 2530 times)

Captain Virgil Hilts · « **Reply #30 on:** July 13, 2006, 08:40:47 PM »

Once more, in plain English. So you can understand it.

NO ONE HAS BEEN CHARGED WITH "OUTING" VALERIE PLAME.

Scooter Libby has been charged with lying to the special prosecutor. The "court accepted" that charge.

The CIA may have complained, but they would still have to prove Plame was covert.

The fact remains that by their own admission, the CIA recalled Plame from over seas covert duty around 1997 because they believed she had been compromised. Since Plame was already compromised in 1995, she couldn't be compromised again in 2003.

john9001 · « **Reply #31 on:** July 13, 2006, 08:45:09 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Nash
IThe CIA says she was covert. It was they who filed the complaint.

link please.

Captain Virgil Hilts · « **Reply #32 on:** July 13, 2006, 08:47:36 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Nash
I think there can be a serious psychological study of this board - both fascinating and informative - of the hows and whys of some people's absolute detachment from and refusal to face reality... no matter how it's presented to them.

Again, Capt.

The CIA says she was covert. It was they who filed the complaint. It wasn't disputed by the courts. The defence itself isn't disputing it. Nobody is.

Except you.

What's going on in your head?

The only thing going on in my head is a clear vision of the truth.

The defense isn't concerned with Plame's status, because the case does not concern her status. It is concerned with whether or not libby lied to the prosecutor.

And no, Nash, it isn't me alone. Look up in the thread. You can ignore all of the rest of them if you wish, but that does not mean they do not exist any more than calling Plame covert makes her covert.

Go ahead and make any sort of remark you wish about my mental state. I'll forego stooping to your level at this point. Remember that.

Nash · « **Reply #33 on:** July 13, 2006, 08:50:44 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by john9001
link please.

I'll link you and Capt. Virgil up when you two tell me what you guys think legally constitutes a covert agent.

Kinda tired of the convertible/parking spaces rebuttle.

No.....

Link to me what actually constitutes a covert agent, and then I'll hook you guys up.

Captain Virgil Hilts · « **Reply #34 on:** July 13, 2006, 08:58:39 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Nash
I'll link you and Capt. Virgil up when you two tell me what you guys think legally constitutes a covert agent.

Kinda tired of the convertible/parking spaces rebuttle.

No.....

Link to me what actually constitutes a covert agent, and then I'll hook you guys up.

YOU are making the assertion that she was. Prove it if you can. I believe john9001 has already posted a link that states CLEARLY that Plame was recalled in 1997, because the CIA believed she was compromised by Aldrich Ames, and assigned to a desk. Look it up, Ames compromised dozens of agents, maybe more, some of whom were killed, and Plame was likely compromised or they would not have brought her home.

Ripsnort · « **Reply #35 on:** July 13, 2006, 09:15:54 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Nash
I think it could, but it will depend on what the courts do - not on whether Wilson/Plame settle. They're not in it for the money, and any monetary settlement would have to come with the unchallenged claim of "no wrongdoing" which would clearly be unacceptable to Wilson/Plame.

Nash finally got something right, but failed to finish the reason for the suit....I'll give you a hint, Nash. Its an election year for congress....

Nash · « **Reply #36 on:** July 13, 2006, 09:28:30 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
YOU are making the assertion that she was. Prove it if you can. I believe john9001 has already posted a link that states CLEARLY that Plame was recalled in 1997, because the CIA believed she was compromised by Aldrich Ames, and assigned to a desk. Look it up, Ames compromised dozens of agents, maybe more, some of whom were killed, and Plame was likely compromised or they would not have brought her home.

I gave you the exact definition of a covert agent.

I explained to you that neither the CIA itself who made this assertion, the prosecution, the courts, nor the defence now dispute this.

But you do.

I can't help ya, at this point.

Captain Virgil Hilts · « **Reply #37 on:** July 13, 2006, 09:30:24 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Nash
I think it could, but it will depend on what the courts do - not on whether Wilson/Plame settle. They're not in it for the money, and any monetary settlement would have to come with the unchallenged claim of "no wrongdoing" which would clearly be unacceptable to Wilson/Plame.

You think this isn't about MONEY? Or POLITICS?

Nash · « **Reply #38 on:** July 13, 2006, 09:33:37 PM »

No I don't.

Captain Virgil Hilts · « **Reply #39 on:** July 13, 2006, 09:38:26 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Nash
I gave you the exact definition of a covert agent.

I explained to you that neither the CIA itself who made this assertion, the prosecution, the courts, nor the defence now dispute this.

But you do.

I can't help ya, at this point.

Gee whiz, you posted a definition from Find Law. That does not make Plame a covert agent. Again, and this matters, because the civil suit accuses the defendants of compromising Plame's covert status, Plame's covert status was evidently compromised as early as 1995, and the CIA ITSELF ACKNOWLEDGED THIS by recalling her and assigning her a desk job in 1997, so she was ALREADY COMPROMISED. It's sort of like not being able to deflower a former virgin who was already deflowered. You can only compromise an agent once.

And once again, Libby's defence is NOT CONCERNED with whether Plame could claim covert status, as Libby is NOT CHARGED with compromising her covert status, but rather is charged with OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. Whether Libby's defence acknowledges her status is no more relevant to this than whether they acknowledge Jesus Christ could walk on water.

Horn · « **Reply #40 on:** July 13, 2006, 09:38:35 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
I believe john9001 has already posted a link that states CLEARLY that Plame was recalled in 1997, because the CIA believed she was compromised by Aldrich Ames, and assigned to a desk. Look it up, Ames compromised dozens of agents, maybe more, some of whom were killed, and Plame was likely compromised or they would not have brought her home.

Yes, this is true; however just because an agent's cover is "blown" does not change the agent's undercover status.

Captain Virgil Hilts · « **Reply #41 on:** July 13, 2006, 09:39:21 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Nash
No I don't.

Figures.

Captain Virgil Hilts · « **Reply #42 on:** July 13, 2006, 09:43:10 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Horn
Yes, this is true; however just because an agent's cover is "blown" does not change the agent's undercover status.

I suppose one could assign whatever status one desired on someone. However, once the KGB, the Eastern Bloc, and the Chinese know the identity of an agent, that agent is hardly covert anymore.

Nash · « **Reply #43 on:** July 13, 2006, 10:09:25 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts

Figures.

There's gonna come a day - trust me Virgil - when these one word ("see? I told ya so!") responses are going to backfire on you....

..... when they aren't going to cut it anymore..... and folks are going to scratch their heads and wonder just what the **** you're talking about.

Captain Virgil Hilts · « **Reply #44 on:** July 13, 2006, 10:31:10 PM »

Hell, there may come a day when I care. But I doubt it.

This is all academic. Verbal jousting. After it is all over nothing will have changed.

I don't place much importance on what most people think, certainly few here or on any board of this nature.

This is, after all, the O'Club. Which, however you look at it, ain't much.

So don't think yourself so important as to have what you think matter to me . I say whatever I think, and whether you agree or disagree just doesn't matter. I'll engage in said verbal joust until I decide I'm through. Whether you or anyone else is convinced, impressed, or otherwise moved makes no difference.