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

Skip to comments.

The Public's Right To Know [Liar: Joe Wilson]
Investor's Business Daily ^ | April 10, 2006 | None cited

Posted on 04/11/2006 10:42:12 AM PDT by Quilla

Lost in the brouhaha over President Bush's "leak" of "classified" information is the real reason for the outrage: The "leak" proved that Joe Wilson was a liar.

Among the things that bothered us in this affair is that it's deemed first-rate, Pulitzer-worthy journalism when a major newspaper prints classified information that our enemies find useful, but when the commander-in-chief authorizes the release of declassified material to defend his administration's position it is treated as a betrayal of the public trust, if not an impeachable offense.

When the New York Times last December revealed that the National Security Agency listened in on communications between terrorist suspects abroad and U.S. residents, or when the Washington Post ran a story about the existence of CIA prisons where the worst terrorists were being held and interrogated, the information aided our enemies.

(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bushlied; cialeak; declassification; demlies; fitzgerald; ibd; joewilson; josephwilson; nie; plame; presidentbush; wilson
Snip:

After more than 2 1/2 years of investigation, special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, whose 39-page filing revealed this "leak," has charged no one with leaking Valerie Plame's name, or established that it was even a crime.

We wonder what this revelation has to do with Fitzgerald's investigation, which has produced nothing except a claim that Libby "misled" investigators about a crime for which no one has been charged.

We also wonder, in this scenario where the only proven liar is Joe Wilson, whether Fitzgerald is out to get the truth or out to get the Bush administration.

1 posted on 04/11/2006 10:42:15 AM PDT by Quilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Quilla

Fitzgerald is probably interesting in adding a bit of history to his resume. It would be a crowning career achievement for a prosecutor to get a president impeached, regardless of politics.


2 posted on 04/11/2006 10:44:49 AM PDT by doc30 (Democrats are to morals what and Etch-A-Sketch is to Art.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Quilla

I wonder if the Truth will ever sink into the American people.


3 posted on 04/11/2006 10:46:32 AM PDT by Ann Archy (Abortion: The Human Sacrifice to the god of Convenience. T)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Quilla

Actually, "liar" is too kind a word to use in describing Joe Wilson. He is a traitor who peddled lies in an effort to subvert a sitting President at a time of war for a potential cabinet seat in a Kerry administration.


4 posted on 04/11/2006 10:48:19 AM PDT by Quilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Quilla

Don't know about the whole article, but the first snipets are dead on.


5 posted on 04/11/2006 10:49:11 AM PDT by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Quilla; Dilbert56; Ann Archy; doc30; Always Right

Here's something I didn't know until yesterday:

"Could one story about Joe Wilson, any one story, mention that he was working for the Kerry campaign?

"He was a foreign policy advisor to Kerry and Kerry's election website linked to Traitor Joe's.

"Then the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence showed Wilson to be a liar.

"They put the rat under oath and all his smug assertions evaporated into admissions of using "literary license", "must have misspoke" and the ubiquitous charge that the reporter misunderstood what he's said.

"Only then did Kerry drop him.

"That relationship taints everything Wilson did and said.

"But the MSM won't ever bother to mention it because they know the American people will factor his partisan ambitions in.

"Between Wilson's lies and Berger's theft/destruction of classified documents the Kerry Administration will forever stand out as one that managed to have major scandals without even getting elected. "

13 posted on 04/10/2006 7:25:45 AM PDT by Dilbert56
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1612370/posts?page=13#13


6 posted on 04/11/2006 10:54:46 AM PDT by LucyT ("Whether it's the best of times or the worst of times, it's the only time we've got." Art Buchwald)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ann Archy
Never, if it's the Truth as reported by the mainstream media. The sheeple have bought the "sixteen words in the SOTU are lies" mantra hook, line, and sinker.


7 posted on 04/11/2006 10:55:42 AM PDT by Quilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Quilla

Best Article I have read in the 4 months of 2006! However, Fitzgerald does not gain anything by proving Wilson is a liar. On the other hand he will become immortal if he "gets" Bush. I would predict that Fitzgerald will go after the President.


8 posted on 04/11/2006 11:03:56 AM PDT by SelectiveJNJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Quilla

Presumably the last line, about whether Fitzgerald is out to get the truth or out to get the Bush administration, is a rhetorical question.


9 posted on 04/11/2006 11:05:35 AM PDT by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Quilla

Today the local paper printed several letters on this topic, uncluding several who described this non-leak as an impeachable offense, even though virtually every legal expert who has commented on it says nothing illegal was done. But even to say "nothing illegal was done" creates the wrong impression, because it suggests that something improper or immoral was done. And I blame the press for this impression, because they described the leak as a leak of "highly sensitive" information. It was no such thing; it was simply a rehash of what Bush and other administration officials had been publicly referencing for months. The info was so stale that Judith Miller - to whom it was given - never even wrote about it. (If the information really had been highly sensitive, you can be sure the New York Times would have splashed it all over the front pages.) That's why these media types make me so sick; they aren't even clever at diguising their blatant biases and hypocrisy.


10 posted on 04/11/2006 11:09:43 AM PDT by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SelectiveJNJ
I would predict that Fitzgerald will go after the President.

Messing with the President might be just too much to handle.

11 posted on 04/11/2006 11:10:32 AM PDT by Logical me (Oh, well!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Quilla
"He is a traitor who peddled lies in an effort to subvert a sitting President at a time of war for a potential cabinet seat in a Kerry administration."

Exactly.

Aided and abetted by Patrick Fitzgerald, of course.

12 posted on 04/11/2006 11:14:53 AM PDT by Redbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Quilla

I've been reading some very similarly worded letters to the editor in my local paper about how Bush should be impeached for "leaking" classified information. Apparently the DNC has sent out a form letter for it's zombies to copy. I wrote a letter informing the nuts that the President can un-classify anything he has classified, but it won't see print.


13 posted on 04/11/2006 11:24:58 AM PDT by ozzymandus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SelectiveJNJ
I would predict that Fitzgerald will go after the President.

Yeah, but for what? A President declassifying info? He can't get to first base on that.

14 posted on 04/11/2006 11:27:55 AM PDT by Siena Dreaming
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

Joe Wilson's Perfidy

Joe took the Islamicists' side,
When he said that the President lied.
While he sat on his tush
His words undermined Bush.
I'm thinking the louse should be fried.


15 posted on 04/11/2006 11:33:31 AM PDT by syriacus (Millions of lives might have been saved if FDR had pre-emptively deposed Hitler in 1936.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Redbob
"We also wonder, in this scenario where the only proven liar is Joe Wilson, whether Fitzgerald is out to get the truth or out to get the Bush administration."
This bothers me the most 'bout Fitzerald. Up to this point, Fitz HAS NOT proven himself to be a non-partisan hack.
16 posted on 04/11/2006 11:42:17 AM PDT by Toidylop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Siena Dreaming

For the power...for the fame...for the money from a book deal...to know that the mainstream media will make a hero out of him...if he wants to run for political office...blackmailed...when is the last time the truth and the law mattered?


17 posted on 04/11/2006 12:22:48 PM PDT by SelectiveJNJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Quilla
I am afraid I cannot see in this picture Satan, or Kerry, or Gore, or to whomever it is this unclad worshiping thong of Kerry sycophants is bowing. Is he-she-it shown in another picture of this walpurgus frolic?
18 posted on 04/11/2006 12:46:03 PM PDT by Pete from Shawnee Mission
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: LucyT; Steve_Seattle
Here's something else the MSM won't tell you. From my files:

FYI...the statement the MSM has been making:

On July 18, 2003, the administration, facing criticism for the intelligence used to justify the war, declassified an eight-page part of the NIE dubbed "key judgments" and conducted a lengthy background briefing with reporters to discuss it.

“Key judgments" is the operative word here. They were declassified by Tenet in October of 2002, six days after the NIE was complete per the following information:
On October 7, 2002 DCI Tenet sent a letter to the Senate Intelligence Committee declassifying portions of its new National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq.

Sen. Carl Levin News Release

Another article:

A 25-page version of the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction was released in October 2002. It made clear-cut statements about Iraq's nuclear, biological and chemical weapons capabilities in two pages of "Key Judgments."

Source

A copy of the Key Judgments document can be found here. Warning: .pdf file.

As usual, the MSM gets it wrong. More info I just found:

The American people needed to know these reservations, and I requested that an unclassified, public version of the NIE be prepared. On Oct. 4, Tenet presented a 25-page document titled "Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction Programs." - Statement of Sen. Bob Graham (D-FL).

IOW, Bush didn't authorize anything, Tenet did and the info was public in Oct 2002.

19 posted on 04/11/2006 1:44:24 PM PDT by ravingnutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Quilla
Here are Wilson's manipulative comments from an interview on CNN with Wolf Blitzer yesterday 4/10/06.

Note that Wilson no longer says his wife was "covert", which would make her "outing" illegal under the Intelligence Identites Protection Act. Now Plame was/is merely "classified", like the 20,000 other federal employess in DC Metro with any kind of security clearance. In other words, Wilson now half-admits that no crime was committed.

As a consequence, Wilson now asserts that some kind of "administrative" security violation was nonetheless committed by whomever said that Plame worked at CIA. In typical Wilson fashion, he doesn't explain how this "administrative" violation would come about. You can read the DCI/D classification regulations all day and not find an answer to that. In any case, for one cleared federal employee that say that another "works at CIA/NSA/NRO" is hardly an unusual event. It's more a breach of clearance etiquette than anything else, not a "national security violation," which is a fabrication in Wilson's mind.

WILSON: Well, it certainly makes the case that my wife was a classified officer and, therefore, the leak of her name is a violation of national security. Whether that can be prosecuted and other relevant acts, I have no idea. But at a minimum, it's a violation of national security. There are administrative procedures for that.

BLITZER: But Patrick Fitzgerald is not going after that. He's going after the -- he's simply investigating, at least based on what he's charged so far, that Lewis "Scooter" Libby lied.

WILSON: Well, Mr. Fitzgerald has made it very clear and made it very clear in his press conference two things. One, justice would be served so long as somebody was prosecuted for a crime. And second, he made it very clear that the fact that Mr. Libby had perjured himself and had obstructed justice in the view of the special prosecutor, that had stymied his effort, really, to get to the bottom of the organic crime that he was -- that he was looking in to. But irrespective of whether he prosecutes on the crime, it's important to understand that if you're a classified officer -- and Mr. Fitzgerald has said that repeatedly, that Valerie was -- then the leaking of her name is a violation of the national security.

BLITZER: But why wouldn't somebody be prosecuted for that?

WILSON: Well, again, there may well be administrative sanctions. I think it's very clear if you look at the tact that Mr. Fitzgerald is taking, he's narrowing his prosecution of Mr. Libby to what -- what is, I think, prosecutable under the circumstances.

20 posted on 04/11/2006 1:56:38 PM PDT by angkor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Logical me

Not to hard with the majority of the mainstream media, 90% of Washington DC and 49% of the country cheering you on.


21 posted on 04/11/2006 6:34:17 PM PDT by SelectiveJNJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Siena Dreaming

The President nor Scooter Libby has done anything wrong but there is a Grand Jury and the Media has convicted them already...you don't need the truth when you have the media!


22 posted on 04/11/2006 6:36:42 PM PDT by SelectiveJNJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Siena Dreaming

The President nor Scooter Libby has done anything wrong but there is a Grand Jury and the Media has convicted them already...you don't need the truth when you have the media!


23 posted on 04/11/2006 6:36:44 PM PDT by SelectiveJNJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ravingnutter
"IOW, Bush didn't authorize anything, Tenet did and the info was public in Oct 2002."

Belated reply: The MSM's coverage of this story has been without shame. Either that, or utterly incompetent. Take your pick. It is simply a flat-out lie to state - as the story on the front page of the Seattle Times did last week - that this was a leak of "highly-sensitive" information. It was neither a "leak" in the normal sense of that term, nor was it new, sensitive information. It was info that had been publicly discussed for months. Moreover, THE INFO SHOWED THAT BUSH WAS NOT LYING ABOUT THE INTELLIGENCE HE WAS GIVEN.
24 posted on 04/12/2006 7:18:10 AM PDT by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: LucyT
"Could one story about Joe Wilson, any one story, mention that he was working for the Kerry campaign?"

Some backup for what I wrote the other day.

New York Post July 29, 2004 -- DEMOCRAT John Kerry's campaign yesterday gave a ringing endorsement to Bush-bashing Ambassador Joe Wilson — even though a bipartisan Senate committee just found so many holes in his story that even his own wife won't back it up. Wilson claimed President Bush lied about whether Saddam Hussein was seeking yellowcake uranium from Niger, and Wilson knew it because the CIA sent him there. The Senate report says, if anything, the truth is the opposite of what Wilson claimed. But that doesn't seems to bother the Kerryites, who yesterday hailed Wilson's "integrity" and said he's still very much a part of the team that Kerry hopes will make him commander in chief. "Joe Wilson has served for many months as an informal adviser to the Kerry campaign and continues to do so," said Kerry foreign policy adviser Susan Rice.

It is amazing how the MSM completely bury this fact in their accounts.

25 posted on 04/13/2006 10:52:02 AM PDT by Dilbert56
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert56
Somehow it was left to Larry King to bring that little tidbit to light. Transcript:
KING: And is that why you joined the Kerry campaign?

Have you ever endorsed a candidate before?

WILSON: I have never been honored. I've never been invited to endorse a candidate before. I'm just a simple civic servant. I was foreign service officer. I was an political appointee for George Herbert Walker Bush. I was very comfortable in that role. I was very comfortable when we did the first Gulf War. I make that clear in the book.

KING: Scowcroft and all...

WILSON: Scowcroft, and Jim baker...

KING: Cheney.

WILSON: Well, Cheney, I didn't know. As, he likes to point out he never met Joe Wilson, I'm equally pleased to point out I never met Dick Cheney. Well, certainly, Scowcroft and the president and Jim Baker.

KING: So why have you endorsed John Kerry?

No only endorsed you're working for him.

WILSON: Well, no I'm not working for him in the sense that I'm not drawing a salary. What I have done, I have endorsed him and I serve on an advisory committee that advises the campaign, that advises the foreign policy adviser. That's a policy thing.


26 posted on 04/13/2006 10:56:42 AM PDT by Dilbert56
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

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