Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sources: No Indictments Wednesday in CIA Leak Probe
Fox News ^ | October 26, 2005 | Jane Roh

Posted on 10/26/2005 9:36:57 AM PDT by West Coast Conservative

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-125 next last
To: kabar

" No friendly neighbor is going to rat out Valerie and Joe."

One of the neighbors named in the article, David Tillotson, is listed in opensecrets.org as having given 2,000 to Kerry and he and the wife gave 500 to the DNC. Same zip as Wilson, I assume it's the same guy.


81 posted on 10/26/2005 10:58:02 AM PDT by Wild Irish Rogue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: ohioWfan
I thought that it was well established that she was no longer undercover, and that there was no crime in revealing her identity because of that fact.

Agreed. I heard her boss say say that. I don't understand why that's even considered not established fact at this point.

82 posted on 10/26/2005 10:58:46 AM PDT by twigs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Wild Irish Rogue

Very interesting. Nice catch. I bet the MSM won't report that.


83 posted on 10/26/2005 10:59:39 AM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: js1138

because Miller is going to be indicted.


84 posted on 10/26/2005 11:03:47 AM PDT by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard; Howlin

where are you getting this from?


85 posted on 10/26/2005 11:04:56 AM PDT by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: demlosers
"(c) If the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office determines that information is classified in violation of this order, the Director may require the information to be declassified by the agency that originated the classification. Any such decision by the Director may be appealed to the President through the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs. The information shall remain classified pending a prompt decision on the appeal. "

If the President could arbitrarily declassify any classified information, why would it be necessary to refer it back to the originating agency or establish a procedure for them to appeal the declassification?

Does it make sense that any President can divulge sensitive, classified information to a foreign power and can escape prosecution because he can automatically declassify it? No man is above the law, even the President.

86 posted on 10/26/2005 11:05:20 AM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: lugsoul
This theory does depend, necessarily, on her having covert status at some point after July 1998. And, as I've said repeatedly, none of us know whether she did or not.

If she did, it was a bureaucratic oversight. Aldrich Ames killed her undercover career.

87 posted on 10/26/2005 11:05:21 AM PDT by AmishDude (If Miers isn't qualified, neither are you and you have no right to complain about any SC decision.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Wild Irish Rogue
Neighbors rarely know the details of one's personal life, friends do.

I've lived in the same house for 15 years, and had several jobs over that time. And very often, my neighbors did not know where I worked. Nor do I know where they work.

Of course, I can tell you how often they cut their grass, and how much trash they put in the dumpster each week.

88 posted on 10/26/2005 11:05:23 AM PDT by TravisBickle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: AmishDude
I agree that this has been reported. Like a lot of other stuff that has been reported, it isn't officially sourced and none of us know if it is true.

The fact that a NOC was outed by a mole isn't the kind of thing that people confirm for the press. Anyone who says it definitely happened doesn't know what they are talking about.

89 posted on 10/26/2005 11:07:35 AM PDT by lugsoul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: twigs
Rush was saying today that there must be something else going on because there clearly was no crime committed in 'outting' Valerie Plame.

The media (even Fox) keeps talking as though it was a crime, but I've heard many say that no law was broken, even in the worst case scenario.

I'm beginning to agree that this is over. Friday we'll find out.

90 posted on 10/26/2005 11:09:35 AM PDT by ohioWfan (Take comfort, Friend George, God is with thee!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: jennyjenny
I thought the law stated the CIA had to be taking measures to keep her covert status secret in order for this law to apply.

Some have said that assigning her to work for a front company was just that.

91 posted on 10/26/2005 11:10:24 AM PDT by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: twigs
Nope. You heard someone who was her boss years before she ever met Wilson and who left the Agency in 1990 say that.

Her bosses in 2003 sent a criminal referral to the DOJ after Novak published her name, and the spokesman for her bosses told Novak not to publish her name.

IOW, Rustmann doesn't have the final say on her status, and may not even have a basis to know. That's why it is not considered established fact.

92 posted on 10/26/2005 11:11:36 AM PDT by lugsoul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: ohioWfan

I hope so. Unless Wilson himself is indicted. Well, I can hope, can't I? I heard Joe DiGenova sound rather positive that Fitzgerald may be looking into the role of the CIA against the president. I personally can't believe that would be the case, but I've read that Fitzgerald is a pretty independent prosecutor. I just hope for justice. We see it too seldom in these times.


93 posted on 10/26/2005 11:13:21 AM PDT by twigs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: lugsoul

Thanks for clearing that up.


94 posted on 10/26/2005 11:14:09 AM PDT by twigs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: js1138

"Although the routine is that the jury does whatever the prosecutor asks . . ."

So that's why Earle was so angry at the jury that refused to indict DeLay.


95 posted on 10/26/2005 11:15:30 AM PDT by rwa265 (The Promise of the Lord, I Will Proclaim Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative

As I said, I know from experience that people in these kind of neighborhoods don't know much about their neighbors and, if they do have passing relationships with them, it's considered gauche to ask too much (if anything) about where people work, what they do, etc. It's assumed your some kind of professional. Also many people in the D.C. metro area work in sensitive or political positions and people really don't want that dynamic to intrude onto whatever social dynamic there is in the neighborhood.


96 posted on 10/26/2005 11:25:14 AM PDT by wouldntbprudent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: half-cajun

What about this? What if they are going after Wilson and Plame, instead of Rove and Libby?

If their neighbors did not know Plame worked at the CIA, that would make it worse and more intentional when Wilson and Plame embarked on a course (getting him sent to Niger and publishing a piece in the NYT) that pretty much ensured she would be found out.


97 posted on 10/26/2005 11:27:30 AM PDT by wouldntbprudent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
but Libby can't tell Miller (assuming Plame really was undercover).

Even then Libby does nothing wrong if the person who first passed the information did not info the recipients that the info was classified and appropriate procedures/safeguards applied.

98 posted on 10/26/2005 11:29:17 AM PDT by wouldntbprudent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: kabar
I just don't know if Libby and Rove had them.

OK. I see your point now.

But my belief is that the senior White guys like Cheney, Libby and Rove would all have the necessary tickets. You cannot be an advisor to the President of the United States and be excluded from the key security data and meetings. My arguments are based on that assumption. I'm certain I'm right about that. I used TOP SECRET as an example of a high level clearance. The Valerie Plame info could be compartmentalized special access or could be only SECRET. Hard to tell. You are correct that it would probably be on Need To Know basis.

99 posted on 10/26/2005 11:38:14 AM PDT by InterceptPoint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint
But my belief is that the senior White guys like Cheney,

LOL. I assume you left out House.

The Valerie Plame info could be compartmentalized special access or could be only SECRET.

Believe me, it is far above SECRET.

100 posted on 10/26/2005 11:45:25 AM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-125 next 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson