Skip to comments.
'Hard Evidence' Shows Cheney's Staff Outed CIA Operative
Cap Hill Blue ^
| Feb. 6, 04
| RICHARD SALE
Posted on 02/06/2004 5:59:25 AM PST by churchillbuff
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-39 last
To: hellinahandcart
Sale, the UPI's so-called "Terrorism Correspondent" is a past-master at using the unattributable quote. His most notorious pieces include: "U.S. Syria Raid Killed Eighty" (7-17-03), "Mossad Gives Orders to Kill Terrorists in USA", and "Saddam Key in Early US Plot".
21
posted on
02/06/2004 7:30:18 AM PST
by
gaspar
To: MizSterious
of possible criminal misconduct related to the unlawful exposure
could lead to indictments
And it has yet to be determined if there is even a crime.
22
posted on
02/06/2004 8:48:07 AM PST
by
StriperSniper
(Manuel Miranda - Whistleblower)
To: G.Mason
Hard evidence? We're waiting.........LOL! "Hard Evidence" to the media is when their anonymous gooney-bird repeats the claims . . . thereby allowing them to say they had two witnesses.
23
posted on
02/06/2004 8:52:01 AM PST
by
geedee
(They who give up essential liberty to obtain temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.)
To: Quilla
Exactly! The Bush administration did NOT send Wilson.
In fact, the reasons why he was sent and by whom is still a mystery.
To: geedee
Actually, Richard Sales is a reporter for UPI (there's a UPI copyright at the bottom of the CHB Story). The Washington Times owns UPI and ran the same story (and the last time I looked the Times was considered pro-administration.
25
posted on
02/06/2004 8:58:59 AM PST
by
arj
To: MamaLucci
And if Sale isn't lying through his teeth, proverbially speaking, about the leak to him about this investigation, who in the FBI or Justice leaked the info to Sale? And wouldn't that definitely be a violation?
26
posted on
02/06/2004 9:00:43 AM PST
by
mewzilla
To: MEG33
We are really getting somewhere now. The part I like the best is that the "Bush administration sent -WILSON-".
That being the case then why did WILSON not submit a report to the "Bush administration", but rather to the NYTimes, and join the JFKerry campaign?
So they got an independent INQUISITION, two days later "federal law enforcement is leaking". Who would have thought.
To: Interesting Times
Changed sides? Really?
I notice these two stories on Capitol Hill Blue's home page this morning:
"Federal Nominees Bought Kerry's Support"
"Kerry Took Payoffs From Firm He Helped As Senator"
Seems to be they are on the same side they have always been on: Nobody's.
28
posted on
02/06/2004 9:08:58 AM PST
by
arj
To: mewzilla
you are right, of course. this leak is a felony, but only if it turns out to be true. My guess is that it is a fishing expedition to 1. smear the subjects of it to make them questionable even if innocent 2. try to put pressure on someone, anyone, to cough up needed evidence which they obviously do not have. If you have enough for an indictment, where is the indictment. Also, the enemy here is probably not the left. This is a "get the neo-cons" effort coming from the right and the intelligence community, i'd bet. Not that I know anything, just a guess.
To: babble-on
Who would commit a definite violation in order to screw with the investigation of a possible violation?
30
posted on
02/06/2004 9:15:22 AM PST
by
mewzilla
To: mewzilla
you want to make these guys too hot to handle in the public mind. If you can't get an indictment, then leak that they are "under suspicion" and "might be indicted". That way you totally smear their reputations and undermine their work even though they are innocent. My guess is that the Bush 41 people want to come back in and seize the foreign policy reins back from the neo-cons. In this they would have a welcome ally in the intelligence community, including FBI. QED. just a theory of course, but I like it.
To: babble-on
Works for me :) Sounds like they're getting pretty desperate, though, if this is the worst they can do.
32
posted on
02/06/2004 9:20:36 AM PST
by
mewzilla
To: MEG33
If it's in Capitol Hill Blue,it's a fact/sarcasmAll the same, I'd like to see what Debka thinks before I make up my mind
To: Right Wing Professor
Wise,very wise,indeed!
34
posted on
02/06/2004 9:24:53 AM PST
by
MEG33
(BUSH/CHENEY '04)
To: mewzilla
internecine warfare is the nastiest kind. The Baker people are already back though. There's Bob Blackwell back at NSC running the Iraq portfolio. Tutwiler is back at State. Revenge of the Turds.
To: nutmeg
read later
36
posted on
02/06/2004 9:25:46 AM PST
by
nutmeg
(Tick off a terrorist - Vote for George W. Bush!)
To: babble-on
Well, if someone at the FBI did leak this, I can see why the USSS might have waited to turn over the info about that Ricin letter to the WH. Sounds like Mueller has some more housecleaning to do...
37
posted on
02/06/2004 9:27:16 AM PST
by
mewzilla
To: mewzilla
I'm just assuming that "Federal Law Enforcement Officials" means FBI.
To: arj
Actually, Richard Sales is a reporter for UPI (there's a UPI copyright at the bottom of the CHB Story). The Washington Times owns UPI and ran the same story (and the last time I looked the Times was considered pro-administration.What about the Washington Post, The New Yawk Times, and Walter Pincus . . . which are all quoted as fact-purveyors in this article?
I give you a quote about Pincus . . .
"Pincus was uniquely positioned to delve into the intricacies of the weapons question. At 70, he had been reporting on national security for 25 years at the Post. Along the way he had cultivated sources in Congress, the CIA, the Pentagon, and the scientific community. For decades, he has been close to chief UN weapons inspector Hans Blix."
Pincus had an agenda before the war started. Whether his agenda proves to be accurate or not doesn't matter . . . he formed his opinions before the facts, ANY FACTS, were in and he's been running with his "pre-ordained" conclusion ever since. He's won all kinds of awards over his long career . . . but so have the owner of the New Yawk Times and it's editorial staff.
Jeanne Dixon used to be a sooth-sayer widely quoted in newspapers and magazines and on TV . . . about her phenomenally predicting the future. No one brought up the thousands and thousands of predictions that were wrong . . . just the miniscule amount that had come close to being right.
I give you Walter Pincus. If he was so concerned about us "lying" about WMD's in 2002 . . . why didn't his righteous indignation rear it's ugly head in . . . oh say 1998? Which, I think, is the year Congress declared our Iraqi policy was one of "regime change." Or any other period between 1992 and 2000? We bombed Iraq because of WMD's. We threatened much more. Where were Mr. Pincus and all the other "righteous" protestors then?
Feeding at Pee Wee and Hitlery Clinton's trough . . . that's where.
Also, him being good friends with Inspector Blix should make most rational folks question anything he quotes as fact.
My point is this about the WMD subject . . . What in the hell's the hurry? Why can't everyone in the media just wait for the facts to come out? They will . . . they always do. Answer . . . there's a conservative in the White House and this is an election year.
I know this thread isn't about WMD's but you say because the hip bone is connected to the thigh bone and it's connected to the leg bone . . . then the entire body is conservative. I say when the parts making up the hip bone quote liberal sources who wouldn't know the truth if it bit them on the teeter, then I'll go with my gut feeling and question all the conclusions reached by this body.
39
posted on
02/06/2004 9:36:01 AM PST
by
geedee
(They who give up essential liberty to obtain temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-39 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson