July 13, 2006
Via Stop The ACLU
The CIA officer whose identity was leaked to reporters sued Vice President Dick Cheney, his former top aide and presidential adviser Karl Rove on Thursday, accusing them and other White House officials of conspiring to destroy her career.
In a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court, Valerie Plame and her husband, Joseph Wilson, a former U.S. ambassador, accused Cheney, Rove and I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby of revealing Plame’s CIA identity in seeking revenge against Wilson for criticizing the Bush administration’s motives in Iraq.Source
Iowa Voice linked with Wilson, Plame Sue Rove, Cheney, And Libby...
SEIXON linked with Civil Suit Leaked in October...
Amy Proctor linked with The Vampire Strikes Back...
68 Responses to “Valerie Plame Sues Cheney, Rove, Libby”
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Register to comment here.
4:56 pm [ Quote ]
Poor thing. Is her book deal a still no-starter?
5:02 pm [ Quote ]
Right or wrong, a case of Coors says it settles and she gets paid.
5:08 pm [ Quote ]
I say we hire Sam Waterson to represent them. (sort of a take on it being a trial for show)
5:08 pm [ Quote ]
Plame Vs. Cheney, Rove and Libby
Priceless…
5:08 pm [ Quote ]
This is a good thing, because now the defense team will be able bring into court/evidence that Joe Wilson is a liar and his wife was technically not under cover at the time. The mainstream media won’t be able to protect him anymore. However, I am sure we’ll hear at some point (after the case is thrown out) from the liberal whack’s that this is just another attempt by Bush and the GOP to smear Mr. Wilson and his wife.
Good luck!
5:11 pm [ Quote ]
These people really don’t want their 15 minutes to end.
Just when you thought this story might finally die a well-deserved death, they calculate a way to keep it fresh for another couple of years.
This lawsuit will eventually be tossed since there was no indictment by Fitzgerald and he has already determined that no crime was committed by Rove or Cheney, but it gives Democrats another means to try to get Rove.
Too bad it won’t happen.
5:16 pm [ Quote ]
This is a good thing, because now the defense team will be able bring into court/evidence that Joe Wilson is a liar and his wife was technically not under cover at the time. The mainstream media won’t be able to protect him anymore. However, I am sure we’ll hear at some point (after the case is thrown out) from the liberal whack’s that this is just another attempt by Bush and the GOP to smear Mr. Wilson and his wife.
Good luck!
Good points.
I think you could be right in saying that Wilson may finally be exposed for his own falsehoods.
However, that still wouldn’t matter to the MSM and Democrats because they’ll just continue to repeat his dishonest ramblings for years to come.
5:18 pm [ Quote ]
Why do cheap Ho’s always look for a quick buck.
5:34 pm [ Quote ]
They filed suit after Novak said he learned the Plame name from the Who’s Who entry written by Joe and Val and the CIA confirmed she worked there whne he asked them (because he had heard Joe’s wife had been involved in sending him) and did not ask him to hold back that information?
5:51 pm [ Quote ]
frogcatcher, anaconda, you guys continue to label Wilson a liar. Can anybody substantiate the claim that Joe Wilson made any misrepresentations when debunking the administration’s yellowcake claim? No, you can’t. Meanwhile, others have reached his same conclusion:
http://rawstory.com/showarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.vanityfair.com%2Ffeatures%2Fgeneral%2Farticles%2F060606fege02
6:07 pm [ Quote ]
Constantine: Bush said that British Intelligence reported Saddam had been seeking ‘nuclear technology in Africa;’ later it was confirmed, I believe by Colin Powell that he was seeking yellowcake.
(a) Bush never used that as the sole or even primary reason for going into Iraq.
(b) He cannot be called a liar for reporting what British Intelligence said, if they were wrong them blame them. We know that there was a general breakdown in intelligence about Iraq before the war; but Bush didn’t have the luxury of waiting years to make sure everything was perfect, he had to act on the best information available at that time. Unlike you, he was not an armchair general, benefiting from hindsight, he had to live and make decisions in the real world.
(c)I never look to Vanity Fair for anything of a political nature, though I suspect it is favorite reading for you.
6:15 pm [ Quote ]
Didn’t know the CIA hired bimbos.
I was obviously wrong.
Did know that bimbos usually marry bimboys. I was right. Her husband is an explosed liar and obviously has nothing in his own “accomplishments” to brag about.
She is a glittering jewel of collosal ignorance and if she was an example of CIA competance, it’s no wonder we’re in the state we are in today. Why doesn’t she simply go for the Playboy nude shots and fade into the sunset?
6:16 pm [ Quote ]
This is a good thing, because now the defense team will be able bring into court/evidence that Joe Wilson is a liar and his wife was technically not under cover at the time
Why would the CIA ask for an investigation as to who outed a CIA agent when she wasn’t covert?
Fitzgerald found that Plame had indeed done covert work overseas in the last five years, and the CIA was making specific efforts to conceal her identity. That seems to meet the requirement that she was indeed covert.
Source
6:22 pm [ Quote ]
Nice try, Frank. Keep fishing Don’t quit your day job. I’d really like to see the covert stuff they had that dummy (the wife – had to insert this since they’re both dummies) do. Heck, she and her dummy hubby couldn’t even keep that secret, eh? Listed in Who’s Who, eh? Guess Rove did that. Gotta love you libs.
6:30 pm [ Quote ]
Nice try, Frank. Keep fishing Don’t quit your day job. I’d really like to see the covert stuff they had that dummy (the wife – had to insert this since they’re both dummies) do. Heck, she and her dummy hubby couldn’t even keep that secret, eh? Listed in Who’s Who, eh? Guess Rove did that. Gotta love you libs.
So you are dismissing the CIA own words?
Was it a secret that Wilson was married to Valerie Plame? If Wilson was fond of bragging that his wife was a CIA agent why wasn’t it also in the Who’s Who listing?
But instead of resorting to childish name calling, why not post proof that the CIA did not consider her covert.
6:35 pm [ Quote ]
I hope they all end up in jail.
6:36 pm [ Quote ]
“Robert Novak, some other commentators and the Administration continue to try to completely distort the role that Valerie Wilson played with respect to Ambassador Wilson’s trip to Niger. The facts are beyond dispute. The Office of the Vice President requested that the CIA investigate reports of alleged uranium purchases by Iraq from Niger. The CIA setup a meeting to respond to the Vice President’s inquiry. Another CIA official, not Valerie Wilson, suggested to Valerie Wilson’s supervisor that the Ambassador attend that meeting. That other CIA official made the recommendation because that official was familiar with the Ambassador’s vast experience in Niger and knew of a previous trip to Africa concerning uranium matters that had been undertaken by the Ambassador on behalf of the CIA in 1999. Valerie Wilson’s supervisor subsequently asked her to relay a request from him to the Ambassador that he would like the Ambassador to attend the meeting at the CIA. Valerie Wilson did not participate in the meeting.
As the CIA itself has officially confirmed, Valerie Wilson did not send Ambassador Wilson to Niger and she neither suggested him nor recommended him for the trip. Furthermore, the Ambassador agreed to travel to Niger pro bono with only his travel expenses being paid.”
6:43 pm [ Quote ]
The Vampire Strikes Back…
Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson have filed a lawsuit accusing Vice-President Dick Cheney, former Presidential advisor Karl Rove, Scooter Libby and 10 “John Doe”s of “putting the Wilsons and their children’s lives at risk by exposing Plame” and trying…
6:45 pm [ Quote ]
Constantine: Bush said that British Intelligence reported Saddam had been seeking ‘nuclear technology in Africa;’ later it was confirmed, I believe by Colin Powell that he was seeking yellowcake.
(a) Bush never used that as the sole or even primary reason for going into Iraq.
(b) He cannot be called a liar for reporting what British Intelligence said, if they were wrong them blame them. We know that there was a general breakdown in intelligence about Iraq before the war; but Bush didn’t have the luxury of waiting years to make sure everything was perfect, he had to act on the best information available at that time. Unlike you, he was not an armchair general, benefiting from hindsight, he had to live and make decisions in the real world.
(c)I never look to Vanity Fair for anything of a political nature, though I suspect it is favorite reading for you.
a) True. That story and the rest of Bush’s Iraq assertions are debunked by his own intelligence people, on camera, in this documentary:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/darkside/view/
b) I think the film adequately details how Bush and Cheney put forth a perspective on Iraq that they knew to be false.
As far as Colin Powell promoting the Niger story:
“The CIA was pushing the aluminum tube argument heavily and Cheney went with that instead of what our guys wrote,” Powell said. And the Niger reference in Bush’s State of the Union speech? “That was a big mistake,” he said. “It should never have been in the speech. I didn’t need Wilson to tell me that there wasn’t a Niger connection. He didn’t tell us anything we didn’t already know. I never believed it.”
When I pressed further as to why the president played up the Iraq nuclear threat, Powell said it wasn’t the president: “That was all Cheney.” (Columnist Robert Scheer)
c) You can choose to accept or dismiss the information put forth by any source, but I think the fact that much of the information is corroborated by another source (the PBS film) gives it added credibility.
7:09 pm [ Quote ]
Constantine: Bush said that British Intelligence reported Saddam had been seeking ‘nuclear technology in Africa;’ later it was confirmed, I believe by Colin Powell that he was seeking yellowcake.
(a) Bush never used that as the sole or even primary reason for going into Iraq.
(b) He cannot be called a liar for reporting what British Intelligence said, if they were wrong them blame them. We know that there was a general breakdown in intelligence about Iraq before the war; but Bush didn’t have the luxury of waiting years to make sure everything was perfect, he had to act on the best information available at that time. Unlike you, he was not an armchair general, benefiting from hindsight, he had to live and make decisions in the real world.
(c)I never look to Vanity Fair for anything of a political nature, though I suspect it is favorite reading for you.
a) True. That story and the rest of Bush’s Iraq assertions are debunked by his own intelligence people, on camera, in this documentary:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/darkside/view/
b) I think the film adequately details how Bush and Cheney put forth a perspective on Iraq that they knew to be false.
As far as Colin Powell promoting the Niger story:
“The CIA was pushing the aluminum tube argument heavily and Cheney went with that instead of what our guys wrote,” Powell said. And the Niger reference in Bush’s State of the Union speech? “That was a big mistake,” he said. “It should never have been in the speech. I didn’t need Wilson to tell me that there wasn’t a Niger connection. He didn’t tell us anything we didn’t already know. I never believed it.”
When I pressed further as to why the president played up the Iraq nuclear threat, Powell said it wasn’t the president: “That was all Cheney.” (Columnist Robert Scheer)
c) You can choose to accept or dismiss the information put forth by any source, but I think the fact that much of the information is corroborated by another source (the PBS film) gives it added credibility.
The US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence found Joe Wilson lied.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A39834-2004Jul9.html
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/serialset/creports/iraq.html
7:14 pm [ Quote ]
frogcatcher, anaconda, you guys continue to label Wilson a liar. Can anybody substantiate the claim that Joe Wilson made any misrepresentations when debunking the administration’s yellowcake claim? No, you can’t. Meanwhile, others have reached his same conclusion:
http://rawstory.com/showarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.vanityfair.com%2Ffeatures%2Fgeneral%2Farticles%2F060606fege02
WIlson’s being debunked has been well catalogued and qualified. This is fact, not your made up fiction.
7:14 pm [ Quote ]
PBS isn’t all that high on the credibility list.
7:18 pm [ Quote ]
The US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence found Joe Wilson lied.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A39834-2004Jul9.html
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/serialset/creports/iraq.html
7:18 pm [ Quote ]
Constantine, you’ll have to do better than that. If it’s not reported on Fox, Worldnetdaily, newsmax, or the WSJ I don’t believe one liberal word.
What liberals don’t seem to understand is that all these ex-CIA and ex-military officials are political apointees under the Clinton administration. They place their liberal agenda ahead of the USA and will stop at nothing to smear Bush – even if it includes destroying the US. They fear the Bush administration (rightfully so) because Bush is exposing their party’s lies and treasonous behaviour on a daily basis. The Bush administration and the republican party are so close to making Americans realize that democrats are the real enemy, and they need to be kicked out of oofice so that America reamins the bastion of freedom and liberty that democrats despise so much.
That’s why these people are commong out against Bush, republicans are close to claiming the country as ours, and liberals don’t like that.
7:35 pm [ Quote ]
Constantine: I’m sorry, PBS and Frontline are such left wing organizations and programs, I could never take anything they produced seriously. They are clearly propaganda ministries for the DNC.
As to the rest, I respect Powell’s military service and much of his work in the Bush administration; but he was never a team player, and since he got out of government I believe he is trying to deal with his own legacy; and like almost all ex-government and ex-elected officials, he is playing revisionist recollecations of events to improve his image for the history books. I am not suggesting he is lying, in many cases it is a matter of honestly perceiving events differently, and in other cases massaging the facts for maximum effect in his favor.
If Bush was deliberately picking and choosing intelligence data he agreed with and ignored the truth as you seem to believe: 1. Tony Blair and British intelligence apparently were guilty of exactly the same offenses and should be equal objects of your wrath and disdain. 2. Virtually all of the world intelligence agencies have to also be damnable fools that, likewise ignored contrary intelligence data for evil motives. 3. Leading members of Congress, even those on the top intelligence committee’s, even Ted Kennedy, Kerry, Hillary and many other Democrats, were making strong and often even stronger comments about the intelligence data; and so they must likewise be guilty of cherry picking intelligence data, and they must share Bush’s guilt, your wrath and disdain. 4. Wilson has to be the only person in the entire world possessing the intellect, wisdom and honesty to know and tell the truth. he is a god!5. The President and Cheney are damnable traitors, they should immediately be impeached, tried and executed for deliberately, consciously lying to the American people and the world to launch a war against Saddam, and I must presume their motve was for oil money in their pockets.
Or, there is room for honest differences of opinion about the totality of the intelligence data; and that Bush along with Blair and others used the best data at the time and made decisions based on the best judgment of all of these people combined. Thus, while we might have preferred another outcome, they did not have the luxury of hindsight, or sitting in their armchairs playing President and Commanders-In-Chief, they had to act and did to the best of their ability.
7:45 pm [ Quote ]
It’s about time she sues the bastards. If you rightees weren’t such hypocrites you would be supporting her against those who ratted out an agent who was fighting for our freedom. Shame on the pig who called her a ho. What a dirty rotten SOB you are. If bush wasn’t such a bastard by changing his words he would have fired those she is suing. If you little pricks, (the right) weren’t such political assholes you would have been upset about what happened to her.
7:55 pm [ Quote ]
Civil Suit Leaked in October…
The Wilsons seem to have planned their civil suit against Bush administration officials a long time ago. Press reports from October provide an interesting look at the journey and creation of the civil suit launched today….
7:56 pm [ Quote ]
Too bad bush didn’t plan the war in Irag as long.
7:57 pm [ Quote ]
All the administration did was answer the question as to why Wilson went to Niger and then said that it was Chaney who sent him when in fact Chaney did not. The administration had the right to defend itself against a false statement.
7:58 pm [ Quote ]
Constantine wrote:
“As far as Colin Powell promoting the Niger story:
“The CIA was pushing the aluminum tube argument heavily and Cheney went with that instead of what our guys wrote,” Powell said. And the Niger reference in Bush’s State of the Union speech? “That was a big mistake,” he said. “It should never have been in the speech. I didn’t need Wilson to tell me that there wasn’t a Niger connection. He didn’t tell us anything we didn’t already know. I never believed it.”
Once again, you got it wrong. The distancing of the aluminum tube story was because there were questions as to their actual use, not why there were there. Saddam was well known for buying 7000 series aluminum tubing and plate for nuclear material/gas refinement and buying such material and bringing it into Iraq would have had to had UN and UNSCOM approval prior with documentation and supervision along with it.
For Saddam there was no other reason to buy 7000 series tubing and plate unless he was starting or restarting his nuclear refining process. Also, these tubes have dual use purposes, but even if they were used for making anti-tank weaponry or mortars, they could still be used to facilitate WMD’s. Why don’t you understand this?
http://www.isis-online.org/publications/iraq/aluminumtubes.html
Joe Wilson’s trip to Niger and his conclusions where a lie. They have been debunked ad nausem. Please read this and go to #104 for clarification on how incorrect you are.
http://www.exposetheleft.com/2006/07/06/sheehan-hardball/#commentform
7:58 pm [ Quote ]
stomptheirass: Who was charged and convicted of ‘ratting’ out Plame in the Administration? NO ONE!
Plame was sitting at a desk for over 5 years, and she is a whore because she is selling herself for money by suing this adminstration.
You are absolutely wrong about absolutely every detail because you are a kool aid drinking liberal!!
8:00 pm [ Quote ]
Does anyone besides me hear an annoying buzzing sound eminating from silly, little ignorant Moon Bat stomptheirass????
Jack.
8:03 pm [ Quote ]
All the administration did was answer the question as to why Wilson went to Niger and then said that it was Chaney who sent him when in fact Chaney did not. The administration had the right to defend itself against a false statement.
Not only did Cheney not send Joe Wilson, but it was Joe Wilson’s wife, Valerie Plame that made the recommendation and most likely requisitioned him to go to Niger. Which we all know was a farce of a trip because he lied about the Nigerians selling Saddam any uranium at all.
http://www.nationalreview.com/may/may200407121105.asp
Joe Wilson’s discreditation is complete and has been for a long time. Why are people like Constantine unable to accept reality is beyond me, other than to say that being a stone cold leftist leaves you that way. Living in a fantasy world were wishes and desires trump reality and the truth.
8:05 pm [ Quote ]
Too bad bush didn’t plan the war in Irag as long.
And your solution to fighting against terrorists/terrorism and making sure that Americans aren’t killed by them again, is?
8:09 pm [ Quote ]
Where is Irag?
Stomp is throwing quite the righteous, or should I say lefteous, little fit isnt he? Someone must be presenting a concise and cogent argument.
The best way to throw liberals into hysterics is present cold, hard facts to them…or display the American flag.
8:10 pm [ Quote ]
Civil Suit Leaked in October…
The Wilsons seem to have planned their civil suit against Bush administration officials a long time ago. Press reports from October provide an interesting look at the journey and creation of the civil suit launched today….
Nothing but an attention whoring venture. It puts the names of the lawyers, Plame, & Wilson back on the front page for the mere fact that high administration officials are being sued with little to no evidence in their corner. While a civil case has a less stringent requirement for the burden of proof, even this less strigent requirement isn’t enough to carry this out to a legitimate civil action. If this case doesn’t get thrown out, then it will be a loser in the end.
8:12 pm [ Quote ]
stomptheirass: Who was charged and convicted of ‘ratting’ out Plame in the Administration? NO ONE!
Reminds me of those who supported and defended John Gotti when he was called the Teflon Don. They swore up and down he was not a criminal because he was not convicted, where as everyone esle knew he was guilty. This is how this administration comes off.
Plame was sitting at a desk for over 5 years, and she is a whore because she is selling herself for money by suing this adminstration.
The CIA asmitted she had done covert work overseas in the five years prior to her being outed.
The reason no one will be charged on this case is because it’s legal for the Vice-President to declassify material and have one of his staff leak it to reporters.
It may have been legal, but it show the lack of moral character of the Bush administration, and the lengths it will go to silence those who disagree with them.
8:15 pm [ Quote ]
It’s about time she sues the bastards. If you rightees weren’t such hypocrites you would be supporting her against those who ratted out an agent who was fighting for our freedom. Shame on the pig who called her a ho. What a dirty rotten SOB you are. If bush wasn’t such a bastard by changing his words he would have fired those she is suing. If you little pricks, (the right) weren’t such political assholes you would have been upset about what happened to her.
You’re a moron who can’t seem to string together a logical argument other than bush = bastard. Don’t your fingers get tired of typing out tirades that equate to nothing more than an internet tantrum with a dash of internet epilepsy to boot that make you look like a foolish liar and a liar that types lies as well?
8:17 pm [ Quote ]
Frank babbled:
“It may have been legal, but it show the lack of moral character of the Bush administration, and the lengths it will go to silence those who disagree with them.”
Then it would be safe to assume from your weepy little summation that you aren’t suited for politics or the political process. This is how the big boys play. Don’t bring the ball if you can’t play the game.
8:26 pm [ Quote ]
Then it would be safe to assume from your weepy little summation that you aren’t suited for politics or the political process. This is how the big boys play. Don’t bring the ball if you can’t play the game.
I guess that’s why I’m not in politics. I wouldn’t want scumbags like Bush and Rove wrapping themselves in the American flag and holding a bible in their hands so they could smear me and my family while claiming the moral high ground – like they have in all their election campaigns.
8:34 pm [ Quote ]
“PBS isn’t all that high on the credibility list.”
“If it’s not reported on Fox, Worldnetdaily, newsmax, or the WSJ I don’t believe one liberal word.”
“all these ex-CIA and ex-military officials are political apointees under the Clinton administration. They place their liberal agenda ahead of the USA and will stop at nothing to smear Bush – even if it includes destroying the US.”
Holy crap. This degree of denial is truly astounding.
Let’s look at this another way: What do these people and organizations stand to gain or lose by their actions?
Intelligence officers risk the emnity of a vindictive administration, possibly losing their jobs by speaking out this way. What do they have to gain by lying? What in the world do any of us have to gain by destroying America? PBS is heavily funded by the government. What do they stand to gain by pissing off the administration? They’ve already suffered many successful (and attempted) budget cuts by spiteful GOP legislators.
Even with all their lies and blunders, I don’t believe that BushCo is trying to destroy America. It’s just not in their own personal interest, and they are all about their own personal fortunes. Bush has longtime ties with the petroleum industry, Cheney with Halliburton.
Beyond that, In the early-1990s, there was a group of ideologues and power-politicians on the fringe of the Republican Party’s far-right. The members of this group in 1997 would found The Project for the New American Century (PNAC); their aim was to prepare for the day when the Republicans regained control of the White House—and, it was hoped, the other two branches of government as well—so that their vision of how the U.S. should move in the world would be in place and ready to go, straight off-the-shelf into official policy.
This PNAC group was led by such heavy hitters as Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, James Woolsey, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Bill Kristol, James Bolton, Zalmay M. Khalilzad, William Bennett, Dan Quayle, Jeb Bush, most of whom were movers-and-shakers in previous Administrations, then in power-exile, as it were, while Clinton was in the White House. But even given their reputations and clout, the views of this group were regarded as too extreme to be taken seriously by the mainstream conservatives that controlled the Republican Party. (from crisispapers.org)
Now, you may take issue with that characterization of the PNAC, but there is no question whatsoever that these people were already advocating an invasion of Iraq before 9/11, as revealed by Bill Kristol on The Colbert Report.
These people may geniunely believe that invading Iraq would make America safer and the world a better place. The problem is they didn’t make that case to the American people honestly.
So again, I ask you all: Who stands to gain by lying about Iraq? Who stands to lose?
Jerry, your analysis of claim vs. fact in Wilson’s statements was lifted from The GOP web site! Talk about biased sources! But I’ll address those analyses in a later post.
8:46 pm [ Quote ]
So, was her career destroyed? Is this really her agenda?
Why didn’t she bring this lawsuit before now? (that’s a question that is fully loaded since it will lead us to her ultimate agenda and whoever her backers are?)
I think this whole thing about destroying her career is rather strange since I don’t think she really had a career.
Oh, and I guess all those photo ops didn’t do her career much good either.
It’s what is so great about our litigous society, you can bring lawsuits against anyone for anything and create news for yourself.
8:54 pm [ Quote ]
I guess that’s why I’m not in politics. I wouldn’t want scumbags like Bush and Rove wrapping themselves in the American flag and holding a bible in their hands so they could smear me and my family while claiming the moral high ground – like they have in all their election campaigns.
Im with ya dude. I sure wouldnt want scumbags like Kerry stating that he hopes to be the next black president or Gore chiding me for global warming while he rides in his private jet.
8:59 pm [ Quote ]
Constantine, It’s like Umnumzana states, the who world knew Saddam had wmd’s, The UN weapons inspectors said Saddam had wmd’s, as did the CIA. Bush just couldn’t sit around with the knowledge that Saddam had these weapons, and might use them. Bush had to move fast. When you have mad men with wmd’s and possible nuclear weapons there is no time for diplomacy. Could you imagine the amount of wmd’s Saddam might have today if Bush decided not to go to war? His arsenal might rival that of Iran’s or North Korea. Bush could not allow that.
9:12 pm [ Quote ]
Constantine, It’s like Umnumzana states, the who world knew Saddam had wmd’s, The UN weapons inspectors said Saddam had wmd’s, as did the CIA. Bush just couldn’t sit around with the knowledge that Saddam had these weapons, and might use them. Bush had to move fast. When you have mad men with wmd’s and possible nuclear weapons there is no time for diplomacy. Could you imagine the amount of wmd’s Saddam might have today if Bush decided not to go to war? His arsenal might rival that of Iran’s or North Korea. Bush could not allow that.
HEADDESK
9:52 pm [ Quote ]
I do wonder what clothing company will be outfitting Ms. Plame for the trial?
10:01 pm [ Quote ]
Scooternyc: Very good analysis! Thanks you!
10:02 pm [ Quote ]
Adding to #24
Why did John Kerry, in voting to give the president the authority to use force, say, “I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a threat, and a grave threat, to our security.” Why did Ted Kennedy say this, “We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.” Why did Hillary Clinton say this, “In the four years since the inspectors, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability and his nuclear program.” These are but a few of the statements prior to the war in Iraq made by those on the left.
No serious person would justify a war based on information he knows to be false and which would be shown to be false. Not even GWB. The world community thought he had WMD. The people I mentioned above thought he had WMD. Our own intelligence did or in the words of George Tenet “it a slam dunk.” Let me say this, most of the world was operating from essentially the same set of assumptions, and/or intelligence regarding Iraq’s WMD capabilities. Look, important assumptions turned out wrong; but mistakenly relying on faulty intelligence is a world apart from lying about it. One can play politics with the truth and distort the facts, but in the end the President did not lie about WMD. I think the newly released Saddam documents are spreading a new light on this entire thing.
10:06 pm [ Quote ]
oops…..that was #23
10:23 pm [ Quote ]
Adding to #24
Why did John Kerry, in voting to give the president the authority to use force, say, “I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a threat, and a grave threat, to our security.” Why did Ted Kennedy say this, “We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.” Why did Hillary Clinton say this, “In the four years since the inspectors, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability and his nuclear program.” These are but a few of the statements prior to the war in Iraq made by those on the left.
No serious person would justify a war based on information he knows to be false and which would be shown to be false. Not even GWB. The world community thought he had WMD. The people I mentioned above thought he had WMD. Our own intelligence did or in the words of George Tenet “it a slam dunk.” Let me say this, most of the world was operating from essentially the same set of assumptions, and/or intelligence regarding Iraq’s WMD capabilities. Look, important assumptions turned out wrong; but mistakenly relying on faulty intelligence is a world apart from lying about it. One can play politics with the truth and distort the facts, but in the end the President did not lie about WMD. I think the newly released Saddam documents are spreading a new light on this entire thing.
Good response!
10:26 pm [ Quote ]
She and her husband are examples of those who put their selfish goals ahead of a nation’s interest. If they were so embarassed and in “fear of their safety”, how is it that they did the vanity fair, speaking tours, and dinners? I mean, if I feared my gov’t was out to get me, I probably would’ve left the country and looked for asylum somewhere. I think they’ve wasted enough taxpayer money and I hope they never make it to trial or get one more red dime.
10:31 pm [ Quote ]
Right on, this pair dont seem overly concerned that they might have matching heart attacks one night, or be the victims of an unexplained explosion in their boat-house.
10:43 pm [ Quote ]
I think that the Plume lawsuit reflects knowledge on the part of certain opponents of the Bush Administration that absent the lawsuit, the so-called “Plumegate” affair would die away. The problem with it for those people is that the Plume lawsuit will backfire against Plume, Wilson and the anti-Bush people at the CIA. Joe Wilson’s lying, Plume’s status at the CIA as at best classified but not covert and the game involving Joe Wilson that was played at the CIA by Bush opponents there will come out, and it will be in the context that Saddam government documents show that Saddam did go yellow cake uranium shopping in Niger.
The public pinning down of Plume’s status free of spin will be a welcome development. The Newsweek article cited above for the proposition that Fitzgerald “found” that Plume did covert work was spin showing ignorance. Fitzgerald did not find that Plume was covert because Fitzgerald did not have the power to find that she was covert or find anything else. Fitzgerald could only present an indictment to a grand jury that alleged something. The only indictment brought through this process was the one against Scooter Libby for perjury, not the violation of the Agent Identities Protection Act; and in that indictment, Fitzgerald alleged that Plume’s status was classified, not covert. It seemed to me, when reading the Libby indictment, that Fitzgerald was trying to fudge the issue, which to me suggested that Fitzgerald knew that the statutory requirements for “covert” status at the CIA were not met in Plume’s case—and they weren’t. Had those requirements been satisfied, Fitzgerald would have been in a much better position to bring indictments that he never did.
11:17 pm [ Quote ]
Does anyone besides me hear an annoying buzzing sound eminating from silly, little ignorant Moon Bat stomptheirass????
Jack.
stomptheirass: Who was charged and convicted of ‘ratting’ out Plame in the Administration? NO ONE!
Plame was sitting at a desk for over 5 years, and she is a whore because she is selling herself for money by suing this adminstration.
You are absolutely wrong about absolutely every detail because you are a kool aid drinking liberal!!
It’s about time she sues the bastards. If you rightees weren’t such hypocrites you would be supporting her against those who ratted out an agent who was fighting for our freedom. Shame on the pig who called her a ho. What a dirty rotten SOB you are. If bush wasn’t such a bastard by changing his words he would have fired those she is suing. If you little pricks, (the right) weren’t such political assholes you would have been upset about what happened to her.
You’re a moron who can’t seem to string together a logical argument other than bush = bastard. Don’t your fingers get tired of typing out tirades that equate to nothing more than an internet tantrum with a dash of internet epilepsy to boot that make you look like a foolish liar and a liar that types lies as well?
Oh, your comments really bother me. I am so concerned about some fascist supporting right wing nut doesn’t like what I have to say…..
11:30 pm [ Quote ]
Is the GOP tough on defense?
Yes, they vigorously defend President Chimpy’s every misstep. They show no mercy to anyone that dares to cast a negative light on thier little charade. Even if those people are like the Wilsons; a couple that has devoted their lives to serving and protecting this country.
Shame on all the ingrates.
11:49 pm [ Quote ]
Shame on all the ingrates.
I agree wholeheartedly, shame on the DNC for turning these two shamsters into icons of truth.
Ill just have to forgive your use of the term ‘President Chimpy’, seeing as how you arent one us ingrates.
3:29 am [ Quote ]
stomptheirass: Who was charged and convicted of ‘ratting’ out Plame in the Administration? NO ONE!
Reminds me of those who supported and defended John Gotti when he was called the Teflon Don. They swore up and down he was not a criminal because he was not convicted, where as everyone esle knew he was guilty. This is how this administration comes off.
Plame was sitting at a desk for over 5 years, and she is a whore because she is selling herself for money by suing this adminstration.
The CIA asmitted she had done covert work overseas in the five years prior to her being outed.
The reason no one will be charged on this case is because it’s legal for the Vice-President to declassify material and have one of his staff leak it to reporters.
It may have been legal, but it show the lack of moral character of the Bush administration, and the lengths it will go to silence those who disagree with them.
If what you said was true, then Cindy sheehan, Maureen Dowd, Michael Moore, Susan Sarandon, et al would all be silenced. They are not, hence you are wrong.
No logical thought; just purulent, feel-good false hoods erupting as a pimple.
7:37 am [ Quote ]
Howard (re post 55): Your admiration for the Wilsons is entirely misplaced, and your use of the word ingrate to describe the Bush Adminstration is a hoot.
Joe Wilson lied in his op-ed NY Times column, which was written to savage the Bush Administration. Contrary to the op-ed column, Wilson was not sent to Niger by Vice President Cheney, and he did not come back with the report that Saddam was not attempting to buy yellow cake uranium in Niger. Instead, he was sent by the CIA as a result of a selection process that prominently included his wife, and he orally reported that Saddam was up to something in Niger (yellow cake uranium is the only thing that would have been the only thing of ionterest to Saddam in Niger). When it came out that his wife had sent him, he denied it; the Senate Intelligence Committee found, however, that it was his wife, and the Committee majority members separately issued a supplememntal report basically saying Joe Wilson lied.
It was Wilson’s op-ed column that led to the disclosure of his wife’s employment as a Washington desk bound analyst at the CIA. Wilson clearly implied that it was the Vice President who had sent him to Niger (reported as fact by CNN and ABC). The Vice President did not. So it was natural to ask, as Robert Novak did, who sent Wilson, a known left wing Democrat on a sensitive fact finding mission? The notion that Plame was “outed” is a crock. You don’t go on a Government financed trip and come back to write an op-ed column in the NY Times falsely implying that the Vice President sent you and falsely stating that your report shows the President had knowingly stated false information, and then expect to keep your wife’s identity secret when it was your wife who sent you and you did no such report as stated in the op-ed column.
To keep his wife’s identity at the CIA out of the public eye, all Wilson had to do are: (i) not put his wife’s name in his listing in o’s Who in America; and (ii) not write an op-ed column in the NY Times making false statements about a CIA financed trip that his wife sent him on.
8:23 am [ Quote ]
The lawsuit will go no place. And still the left will complain. Where’s the damage to Wilson? Book deals, Vanity Fair article’s, etc. No one in the general public knew what Ms. Plame looked like until Wr. Wilson got her all that publicity. If they feared for their lives why do it? Yeah that covert thing is tough to keep with all that going on.
Even those who support Joe Wilson should see what this guy really is.
9:21 am [ Quote ]
Phil,
Bush stated during his SOU that an African country was seeking to purchase this yellow cake uranium. After Wilson’s article, the Bush people retracted this statement. What does that say about Bush? What does it say about Wilson? Hint: One of them was telling the truth, the other was not.
Bush promised full cooperation with the special prosecutor in the investigation. Yet the VP’s chief of staff gets indicted for essentially not cooperating.
The GOP attack dogs can play their games and attempt to turn it around on Wilson, but the American public is not so easily fooled. This is only one of the reasons that the GOP is going to be voted out of the House this fall, and the Senate and Presidency in 08.
9:30 am [ Quote ]
Wilson, Plame Sue Rove, Cheney, And Libby…
I think they’re grasping here, trying to keep this story in the public eye:
Former CIA officer Valerie Plame and her husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, filed a lawsuit yesterday against Vice President Cheney, presidential adviser Karl …
10:54 am [ Quote ]
Anybody remember this?
“World tour, MEDIA WHORE, please the press in Belgium. This was your life, but you could have said no if you wanted to. You could have walked away couldn’t you.”
12:00 pm [ Quote ]
howardd (re post 60); You got your facts wrong and thus your argument is wrong.
1. Bush stated in his State of the Union address that British intelligence had reported that Saddam was attempting to buy yellow cake uranium in Niger. In fact, British intelligence had so reported, and indeed never backed off that report thereafter. There was a lot of spin painting the information as bad. But lo and behold, Saddam government documents show that Saddam was indeed seeking to buy yellow cake uranium in Niger. As Christpoher Hitchens has put it in his Brit way, “So sorry, everyone, but Saddam did go yellow cake shopping in Niger.”
2. As for Scooter Libby, the only person who was indicted as the result of the Fitzgerald investigatin, he did cooperate, testifying before the grand jury numerous times, as did Karl Rove and other Administration officials. So the Bush Adminsitration did cooperate with Fitzgerald’s investigation. Fitzgerald did not seek indictments under the Agent Identities Protection Act or any other national security law because there were no violations. Libby was idicted for perjury and lying to the FBI based on the fact that his recollection of certain conversations differed somewhat from reporters such aas Tim Russert. When announcing the indictment, Fitzgerald admitted that he was drawing “fine distinctions” in the indictment. Suffice it to say, that Libby has vigorously defended, hiring Ted Welles, a lwyer you would hire to win a case; and Libby may win that case. As a litigator, I see differences in recollection all the time, and it does not necessarily mean that someone is lying intentionally.
3. It is certainly not a game and not a matter of attack politics to point to Joe Wilson as the real culprit in the case. He wrote a scathing op-ed column in the NY Times bashing the Bush Admisnistration but doing so by falsely implying that Cheney had sent him on a fact finding mission to Niger and falsely stating that he (Wilson) had submitted a report that found that Saddam had not attempted to buy yellow cake uranium in Niger contrary to what Bush said in his State iof the Union Address. Since the Vice President did not send Wilson, a known left-wng Democrat on such a sensitive mission. The natural question arose: who really sent Wilson? Enter Novak, who finds out that it was Wilson’s wife who worked at the CIA. The Senate Intelligence Committee, after hearings and without dissent, then found that Plume was the one responsible for sending Wilson and further that Wilson did no written report upon his return. Wilson only orally reported that Saddam was up to something in Niger, which is actually consistent with what British intelligence had reported since the only thing Niger has of interest to Saddam was yellow cake uranium. That caused the Senate Intelligence Committee majoity members to issue asupplemental report saying that Wilson had lied. As I wrote in my post 58, you don’t go on a Government financed trip and come back to write an op-ed column in the NY Times falsely implying that the Vice President sent you and falsely stating that your report shows the President had knowingly stated false information, and then expect to keep your wife’s identity secret when it was your wife who sent you and you did no such report as stated in the op-ed column.
1:17 pm [ Quote ]
You people who keep calling her names are siding with treasonists. Your hypocrisy is amazing. I thought you neocons hated people who compromise national security?
Valerie Plame is a saint. Now, you guys play nicely. I have to go contribute to her legal fund.
Bye, bye!
2:24 pm [ Quote ]
Re: #6
“1. Bush stated in his State of the Union address that British intelligence had reported that Saddam was attempting to buy yellow cake uranium in Niger. In fact, British intelligence had so reported, and indeed never backed off that report thereafter. There was a lot of spin painting the information as bad. But lo and behold, Saddam government documents show that Saddam was indeed seeking to buy yellow cake uranium in Niger. As Christpoher Hitchens has put it in his Brit way, ‘So sorry, everyone, but Saddam did go yellow cake shopping in Niger.’”
Phil, like most people on this site you keep chasing your tail with this issue. As far as British Intelligence, they based their conclusion on the very same faulty information that the Bush Administration did. Quoting Vanity Fair:
“Over the next two years, the Niger documents and reports based on them made at least three journeys to the C.I.A. They also found their way to the U.S. Embassy in Rome, to the White House, to British intelligence, to French intelligence, and to Elisabetta Burba, a journalist at Panorama, the Milan-based newsmagazine. Each of these recipients in turn shared the documents or their contents with others, in effect creating an echo chamber that gave the illusion that several independent sources had corroborated an Iraq-Niger uranium deal.”
Hitchens should be working for Dick Cheney, as he has the same penchant for reaching wild conclusions from a minimum of evidence. His whacked-out logic is debunked here:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/4/11/195156/594
6:29 pm [ Quote ]
Constantine (re post 65); Was that suppose to be a response? Relyimg on Vanity Fair to “impeach” British intelligence that has always stood by its report?? Why don’t you rely on People magazine while you are it??
Get serious. You never deal with the fact that Saddam governemnt documents establish that Saddam did go uranium shopping in Niger, and it was those documents that prompted Christopher Hitchens to say what he did about Saddma going uranium shopping in Niger. For you to say that Hitchens works for Cheney instead of adjusting to what the documentary evidence establishes is silly on your part.
6:43 pm [ Quote ]
Not just Vanity Fair, Phil, but a Frontline documentary as well; but I suppose they (and the intelligence officials they interviewed) are liars as well, as others have suggested.
You didn’t even follow the link, did you? Hitchens concludes that a visit from a state official = shopping for uranium, and he has no evidence of this whatsoever… except, oh yes, a non-forged document saying the deal was made, which somehow nobody has produced. Where is the document? Why hasn’t the Bush administration brought it forward to prove their case? Why haven’t they called Wilson a liar? No, they leave that to the GOP web site, where there’s even less accountability.
Perhaps you should read things 2-3 times before responding. I said Hitchens should work for Cheney because they have the same poor aptitude for drawing logical conclusions.
8:17 pm [ Quote ]
In The Politics of Truth, former ambassador Joseph Wilson writes that he and his future wife both returned from overseas assignments in June 1997. Neither spouse, a reading of the book indicates, was again stationed overseas. They appear to have remained in Washington, D.C., where they married and became parents of twins.
Six years later, in July 2003, the name of the CIA officer
— Valerie Plame — was revealed by columnist Robert Novak.
The column’s date is important because the law against unmasking the identities of U.S. spies says a “covert agent” must have been on an overseas assignment “within the last five years.” The assignment also must be long-term, not a short trip or temporary post, two experts on the law say. Wilson’s book makes numerous references to the couple’s life in Washington over the six years up to July 2003.