Skip to comments.Set up? Anatomy of the contrived Wilson "scandal"
Posted on 10/02/2003 7:47:17 AM PDT by Wolfstar
click here to read article
Corn, of course, really started that particular ball rolling. He planted the entirely false notion that the WH was deliberately targeting poor old Val to get back at her husband. All it took was that accusation in the form of sly question by the far Left Corn for the rest of the media to take off and run with the bait.
Yes, thank you Ernest. These days my time online is limited only to short periods before and after work, and on weekends. But I can monitor FR on my breaks and at lunch via my cell phone. So I appreciate pings to subject matter that interests me. :)
GREAT work in putting this together. A few comments, not necessarily in chronological order......
1. It is pretty clear that the faceless drones within the CIA wanted to gather information that would represent both sides of the WMD issue. CYA at it's finest. What is simply astonishing is that factions within the CIA actually USED portions of this one-sided info to mount a covert, political attack on the president during a war for the purpose of weakening him.
2. Calling Valerie Plame an "CIA operative" is nowhere NEAR the level of outing that David Corn does. Had Joseph Wilson actually been concerned about his wife's outing, he would have tried to offhandedly explained away her role there. Instead, Wilson fully revealed the true nature of her employment to Corn.
3. Getting Novak on the stand is devastating to Fitzgerald's case. Novak reveals who leaked. This removes the reason for Libby to lie. Libby KNEW he wasn't the leaker. Novak confirmed to the jury that Libby wasn't the leaker. If Libby's lawyer is any good, he'll call Richard Armitage and ask him how often he had contact with Libby. When the jury find out that Libby and Armitage basically never communicated, then Libby is shown to:
a) not be the leaker
b) not be involved in any conspiracy with Armitage to leak
c) have no reason to lie to Fitzgerald about the leak.
Thank you. I, a lowly "pajamadeen," put the essential outline of this case together in 2003 with just a few hours of reading through publically available info. Fitzgerald knew the essential truth within weeks of being handed the case. Yet here we are, four years later, and this mindless nonsense still drags on.
This case was first, last and always about two things: media arrogance and the eagerness of many reporters to lie to the public in support of a Leftist cause.
If we ever forget this lesson, we are the fools.
It just occured to me that Niger may have been like the first of the "spontaneous Arab Spring uprisings" that have the Obama funk on them:
To: Selene The mindset of the current administration (and the state department always) is pretty transparent. No collectivist left behind.
In Honduras, the guy trying to subvert the constitution in order to run for an illicit additional term is an avowed Marxist with close ties to Hugo Chavez - his party is in good standing with Socialist International. Obviously the current US administration supports the wannabe usurper. In Niger, the guy trying to subvert the constitution in order to run for an illicit additional term is a pro-market reformer who slashed the nations external public debt by cutting government spending. Tandjas main opposition party is some workers party affiliated with the Socialist International, and it was previously behind imprisoning Tandja (as a leader of the peaceful political opposition) when they ruled Niger several years ago, having captured power in a violent coup). Obviously the current US administration supports the political opposition, and not the wanna usurper.
(though, I cannot understand why Tandja does not simply just step down after his term ends and allow the current PM (Seyni Oumarou, who supports Tandja) to run for president while Tandja transparently provides counsel). 77 posted on Thursday, July 02, 2009 10:49:22 AM by M203M4