Set up? Anatomy of the contrived Wilson "scandal"

Multiple & linked in article | 10/2/03 | Wolfstar

[Wolfstar]

I most certainly do not mind your "rant." In fact, I agree with it. Like several elements of the Bill of Rights, over the course of the last half-century or so, freedom of the press has been so broadly interpreted by our courts that they now have virtually unlimted, unchecked power. They can lie, steal, cheat, destroy the lives of innocent people, and it's almost impossible to win any kind of legal action against them. The media's product is news, information and opinion. They are the only business that can market defective or even fraudulent product and have no fear of criminal or civil legal action against them. That such breathtaking power leads to some degree of corruption should be no surprise to anyone. Unfortunately, our only defense as consumers of news is to develop a healthy skepticism and the patience to let stories play themselves out before making judgements.

[Wolfstar]

Thanks, Piasa.

[nopardons]

I don't read Tom Clancy, so thanks for your input; much appreciated.:-)

[CyberAnt]

Rita Cosby reported tonight that the Wilson's have hired a lawyer. Rita said she couldn't think of any reason why the Wilson's would need a lawyer. Hmmmm?

But .. on the other hand, while discussing Rush .. they're saying .. if he's hiring a lawyer .. he must be guilty.

No bias here folks.

[Reb Raider]

I have been reading your excellent research for a couple of hours and it exceeds anything any reporter has done to date on this subject. The information you have assembled has so many implications that I finally started taking notes.

One thing coming through loud and clear--Ms.Plame and Mr.Wilson have an agenda to discredit not only Bush,but the CIA officials that didn't give his "investigation" much credence. His puffed up sense of self importance and need for recognition is obscene and quite nauseating. It had to have been obvious to those in the CIA that knew the couple where the information being printed in left leaning publications was coming from. Solution... the leakers accuse the ones they savaged as being vicious leakers.

The storyline the dems have created around this one man and his wife just doesn't flow smoothly. It works in the media because most reporters don't have the slightest curiosity once the dems have given them the talking points. The fact they have a lawyer,which "reportedly" is to see who they can sue,is dubious at best. But alot is suposition right now and I can only hope some filth is cleaned out during this fiasco and that Bush sees being nice to dems in Washington gets you nowhere especially with the Clintons and their cronies still running the party.

I have benefited greatly from all your hard work Wolfstar. For those of us that have kindergarten level computer skills, it is awesome to see the incredible creativity and quick research done on FR.

[mass55th]

"the laugh is on the Left, because they don't expect any of us in "the great unwashed masses" to take the time or effort to pull such info together."

That's because they're the same a-holes who wouldn't read the evidence against Bill Clinton during his impeachment, or David Kay's preliminary report. The Left lets the media set their agendas.

[JusPasenThru]

Bump for later read.

[Gothmog]

Thanks, great work on this. As far as who got Wilson his assignment to go to Niger, IMHO it was his wife. From the LATimes 10/1/03:

In addition to Wilson's report "a senior CIA official, Alan Foley, told the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence that he, too, was skeptical of the uranium claim, and said he had urged the NSC's chief weapons proliferation expert, Robert Joseph, to leave it out of the president's speech.

"Wilson's wife works with Foley in the CIA's Nonproliferation Center."

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-scandal1oct01,1,1890560.story?coll=la-home-leftrail

And, IMHO, I think the only reason this got elevated to an actual FBI investigation was because Sen. Schumer was pushing for it.

But, why is Schumer so involved with this. He serves on the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs; the Judiciary Committee; the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, and the Rules Committee. He is also Ranking Member of the Administrative Oversight and the Courts Subcommittee and the Economic Policy Subcommittee. None of this (except maybe administrative oversight) would seem to be related to the issue of CIA leaks.

Schumer is much more known for his penchant for political grandstanding, not devotion to national security issues, yet no one has questioned his motivations. Or who leaked to NBC's Andrea Mitchell that the investigation request was upgraded to an FBI investigation.

Anyway, thanks once again.

[Wolfstar]

There aren't words to express how much the kindness you have accorded me in your comments about this piece mean. Thanks to the ugly tone Wilson put on it, I'm loathed to use the prase "it's not about me." But it truly isn't in my case. My interest in doing this was only to help FReepers and others with open minds to see at least the outlines of the truth. My "payoff" is that the piece succeeded so well.

As for news that the Wilsons have hired a lawyer, as the status of the matter now stands, there is no one they can target for a lawsuit. Wilson seems to hold a lot of venom for Karl Rove, but fat chance trying to prove anything against Rove. Also fat chance trying to sue Novak. Today, Wilson, himself, has said he didn't think the president would authorize anything like what Wilson has been charging. Besides, what are the damages to Wilson? There may be some to his wife's career, but even that is not clear right now.

One other significant thing that happened today probably didn't get much notice. But it perked up my ears. Rep. Peter King (R-NY) was on MSNBC this morning (Pacific time) saying that he believes the CIA is actively working to undermine President Bush. He believes this Wilson matter is one example. He said he believes the reason is to deflect criticism away from the CIA's poor performance on a number of matters over the last couple of years.

While I do agree with King that the CIA's performance has been poor, given the current state of the public record, I'm not sure I would go so far as to charge the CIA with actively working to undermine the President — in other words, with bona fide treason. Nevertheless, King wants to look into the possibility. If he is right, this country is in greater danger than we all may have thought.

[CyberAnt]

"CIA is actively working to undermine President Bush"

While I'm not a conspiracy theory person - people must realize that it only takes 2 people to make a conspiracy. That said, I believe Peter King has opened a door which needed to be opened.

Remember recently when Newt Gingrich was complaining about the State Dept. I was paying attention to his statements and to me Newt was basically saying the same thing about the State Dept that Peter is saying about the CIA.

The reason I bring up the Newt statements is because recently Rush made a statement which may have triggered the attack upon him. While Rush was discussing the Wilson story, and talking with a caller about it .. Rush said something about the Clintons having people inside the admin (chief deputies of Reno for instance in DOJ), who the Clintons can reach with the touch of a finger .. it was a stunning prouncement of the Clintons still existing power within this admin (including DOJ, DOD, DOS, etc., and what it would take to start a scandal within the Bush admin - to get Bush embroiled in controversy - leading up to the election.

Two days later - the story about Rush and drugs hits the airwaves. A story they had been sitting on for over a year. I believe Rush was set-up .. until I hear differently.

Next day, Wilson admits he and his wife have hired an attorney .. why ..??

And .. I believe the attack against our President is also a set-up. The dems biggest mistake - giving permission for the admin to conduct a CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION. The dems are sooooo stupid.

I believe the reason for these attacks is because Hillary wants to run for President in 2004, and to do that, she has to do 2 things: Get rid of Rush (or basically nullify his influence) .. and destroy the President's poll numbers.

[Wolfstar]

Whatever the reasons for it all may be, the notion that there are some in the CIA who might actively work to undermine their commander-in-chief is terrifying. Although I'm a conservative Republican, I would say that no matter who the current president was. Rogue elements in so sensitive an agency as the CIA are terribly dangerous for this nation. We need the CIA focusing on preventing more 9/11's, on finding Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, and on monitoring North Korea, not messing around in domestic politics. Peter King is pretty influential for a congressman. I hope he can do something more to throw light on this.

[woofie]

Bump for later

[CyberAnt]

"CIA ... undermine their CIC"

Yes .. I agree .. the thought is terrifying. Especially because if Rush is correct about Hillary's connection within the Bush admin .. Bush's new tone is naive at best .. and blatantly stupid at worst.

[ForGod'sSake]

Unfortunately, our only defense as consumers of news is to develop a healthy skepticism and the patience to let stories play themselves out before making judgements.

A workable policy for self defense. What to do about yer Joe Six Pack that hasn't a clue concerning the machinations of the media. The internet may or may not be our saviour, but I gotta admit, something seems to be turning the tide. Hope springs eternal.

FGS

[ForGod'sSake]

The Left lets the media set their agendas.

From your keyboard to God's ears!

FGS

[ForGod'sSake]

If he is right, this country is in greater danger than we all may have thought.

A master of the understatement? This country is in the deepest kinda $#!+! IMHO of course. If the CIA is a loose cannon, I think it is indicative of a larger problem, ie, their handlers, our surrogates, are unable to control them. Or maybe unwilling. Which would be worse???

FGS

[Mo1]

.

[Wolfstar]

What to do about yer Joe Six Pack that hasn't a clue concerning the machinations of the media.

First accept that we can't reach them all. But second, realize that, just by actively participating on a forum such as FR, and then taking what we learn here and passing it along as much as possible, we will reach many more people than we know.

In the early days of FR, the software tracked not only how many responses there were to a post, but how many total hits a post received. On some threads, there might only be, say, 20 or 30 active posters with maybe 100 to 200 posts, but the total hits would be well over 1000 to 2000. So we need to keep in mind that there are many, many more "lurkers" than active posters. It's a similar situation when we take an article or piece of credible information and share it with local news outlets, friends, family, etc. Even if we never know the effect of our effort, it does have an effect.

[philosofy123]

Robert Novak was against the war on Iraq, did that enter the equation?

[Wolfstar]

If the point of your question is to wonder if Novak published Mrs. Plame-Wilson's name because he was against the war, I would not discount the possibility. I wouldn't understand what his goal would be, though. What is clear is that he got the name and then called one or more CIA sources for confirmation. He says the CIA asked him not to publish her name, but he did because the CIA did not indicate that doing so would damage national security or damage her career. But the fact is we only have his word for what he did and why.