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

Skip to comments.

If Rove Wasn't Initial Source of Leak, Who Was? [LATimes laments]
LATimes ^ | July 17, 2005 | By Doyle McManus

Posted on 07/17/2005 4:22:38 AM PDT by johnny7

Some in GOP fear more revelations, and hope naming a court nominee will overshadow case.

WASHINGTON — If Karl Rove was source No. 2, who was source No. 1? Rove, President Bush's top political advisor, has survived a bruising week of controversy over his role in the unmasking of a CIA officer. But White House officials and their Republican allies acknowledge that they may face more revelations in the weeks and months to come.

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


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: cialeak; laslimes
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-247 next last
To: Arkie2

Actually that is close to the theory presented on FOX news. FOX news contributers had heard she was CIA on the Washington social circuit prior to the publishing of the articles. "Everybody knew it."


151 posted on 07/17/2005 7:43:29 AM PDT by Cold Heart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: sirchtruth
But would finding that out negate Plame being covert?

If the complainer was lying, yes.

152 posted on 07/17/2005 7:43:31 AM PDT by syriacus (To WHICH entity does LIBELLER JOE WILSON pledge his allegiance?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: You Dirty Rats
Members of the lamestream media and the 'Rats keep playing no-limit Texas hold 'em and keep losing. I say let's keep those morons pushing chips into the pot while GWB holds the nuts.

Its more like they're playing Omaha Hi-Low. The MSM tried for the high hand. Now they're going for the low. It seems like the White House is slowing playing a perfect Hi-Low hand and will beat them for the whole pot.

153 posted on 07/17/2005 7:45:41 AM PDT by Ghengis (Alexander was a wuss!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: depenzz

I normally don't, but forced myself on the outside chance there might be one who was half way fair.


154 posted on 07/17/2005 7:48:21 AM PDT by go-ken-go
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: johnny7
Washington Post 7/16/2005

"Wilson set out to discredit the charge, working largely through back channels at first to debunk it. He called friends inside the government and the media, and told the New York Times's Nicholas D. Kristof of his findings in Niger. Kristof aired them publicly for the first time in his May 6, 2003, column but did not name Wilson. This caught the attention of officials inside Cheney's office, as well as others involved in war planning, according to people who had talked with them."
155 posted on 07/17/2005 7:49:00 AM PDT by tobyhill (The War on Terrorism is not for the weak.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #156 Removed by Moderator

To: sirchtruth
"Can you find a source for that? I heard that too, but then I found the article reporting the CIA still considered her covert. Post #119

*********************************************************** "A statement by Wilson on Wolf Blitzer's July 14, 2005 CNN program that, "my wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity", has caused some to consider it an indication that Wilson acknowledged Plame was no longer covert at the time. However, this statement was made in response to a question about whether Plame's actions had blown her cover, and Wilson went on to continue with his assertion that Novak was responsible for his wife's exposure.

Here is where he attempts to back track, poorly imo.

"Wilson later explained that his wife was not covert on that day because that was the day her cover was blown, although the original statement matches with other statements of that nature. Former covert CIA agent Fred Rustmann, for instance, has claimed in the Washington Times on 15 July 2005 that "she made no bones about the fact that she was an agency employee and her husband was a diplomat...Her neighbors knew this, her friends knew this, his friends knew this." It was the position of the CIA, according to Rustmann, that she was a "non-official cover," or NOC, until 1997, and hadn't been out as that type of agent since then, instead having overt status. These statements are contrary to information in an older October 1, 2003 Knight Ridder report entitled "Justice Launches Probe Into CIA Leak," where an anonymous CIA official was quoted as saying, "If she was not undercover, we would have no reason to file a criminal referral," referring to the referral by the CIA to the Justice Department that a crime may have been committed." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valerie_Plame

157 posted on 07/17/2005 7:54:38 AM PDT by Eagles Talon IV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

Comment #158 Removed by Moderator

To: sirchtruth
Yes she was [covert], as far as the CIA was concerned.

The same 2003 article that you reference says [in one sentence, no less] [Direct quote from the article]

  1. "The Justice Department launched the investigation at the request of the CIA;"
  2. "some CIA officials think the White House misrepresented intelligence information to make the case for war"

Question: Are the CIA folks who say she was covert the same lying CIA folks who say Bush misrepresented intelligence?

159 posted on 07/17/2005 7:58:03 AM PDT by syriacus (To WHICH entity does LIBELLER JOE WILSON pledge his allegiance?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: sirchtruth
Good morning.

I read all of the article from post #119 and came away with the impression that back in 2003 CIA was scurrying to shift attention away from the question of why CIA allowed Val to recommend Joey for this mission in the first place. To me the article was about CYA from CIA.

I didn't see who wrote the article. It is just attributed to Knight-Ridder. Is the author listed?

If the story had actually unfolded as the article states, I don't think W and Karl Rove would be walking around with grins on their faces and Joey Wilson wouldn't be looking like his shoes and shorts are too tight.

Michael Frazier
160 posted on 07/17/2005 7:58:22 AM PDT by brazzaville (No surrender,no retreat. Well, maybe retreat's ok)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

Comment #161 Removed by Moderator

To: syriacus
If the complainer was lying, yes.

But the CIA would have put a stop to this already if she truely wasn't covert at the time, others would have had to know.

162 posted on 07/17/2005 8:00:54 AM PDT by sirchtruth (Words Mean Things...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: MojoWire
I still believe that the special prosecutor might be checking into whether or not Wilson and his wife tried to dupe the CIA and/or the govt. by hatching a plot to discredit President Bush with a phony yellowcake report.

That would explain a few things. For one, it would explain why Wilsom went to Niger instead of using the diplomats already in country. I keep wondering about that. What were Wilson/Plame OR the CIA trying to hide?

163 posted on 07/17/2005 8:02:46 AM PDT by NEPA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: 1dadof3
Fred Rustmann, a covert agent from 1966 to 1990,

Ah this happened in 2003, she was covert at that time according to the CIA.

164 posted on 07/17/2005 8:03:27 AM PDT by sirchtruth (Words Mean Things...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: Eagles Talon IV

Cooper just stated that Rove was his source. But if they both agree that the original call was about another issue, and that Cooper brought up the Plame/Wilson thing, and that Rove answered something like 'Yeah, I heard that too...", then

HOW can Rove be his initial source????????????????


165 posted on 07/17/2005 8:06:16 AM PDT by bitt ('We will all soon reap what the ignorant are now sowing.' Victor Davis Hanson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: johnny7

bttt


166 posted on 07/17/2005 8:06:33 AM PDT by hattend (Alaska....in a time warp all it's own!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: johnny7
All the MSM is now trying to say if Rove didn't commit a crime he at least lied to the President by not telling him he heard it. Now the one point they miss is that Rove sent an e-mail to security right after Cooper talked to him.
167 posted on 07/17/2005 8:07:51 AM PDT by tobyhill (The War on Terrorism is not for the weak.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: brazzaville
If the story had actually unfolded as the article states,

I can only say the report stated the CIA sent a criminal referral for outing/leaking Plame.

I beleive Plame was covert at the time according to the statement.

I don't know who wrote the article.

168 posted on 07/17/2005 8:08:18 AM PDT by sirchtruth (Words Mean Things...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: sirchtruth
Good morning.
"But would finding that out negate Plame being covert?"

It could bring into question the validity of the assertion.

It could also bring unwelcome attention to some DemocRAT lifers in CIA. Go Porter.

Michael Frazier
169 posted on 07/17/2005 8:13:31 AM PDT by brazzaville (No surrender,no retreat. Well, maybe retreat's ok)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: brazzaville
Joey Wilson wouldn't be looking like his shoes and shorts are too tight.

Especially those panties... er... shorts.

When he gave that press-conference with Chuckie "Face-Time' Schmoozer... he was citing his beef and reflected “I was going to tell a lawyer joke here, but I decide... ”. Schmoozer broke in stammering“No... no don't... ”.

Wilson's face got beet-red as he finished blubbering out the rest of his schpeel... 'whatta hoot!

170 posted on 07/17/2005 8:13:54 AM PDT by johnny7 ('Deservin ain't got 'nothin to do with it! -Will Money)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: brazzaville
If the story had actually unfolded as the article states, I don't think W and Karl Rove would be walking around with grins on their faces and Joey Wilson wouldn't be looking like his shoes and shorts are too tight.

And top Democrats wouldn't be popping up all over the place, saying that

it was wrong of Rove to mention Plame,
EVEN if she wasn't covert at the time,
because Rove was endangering people
she HAD associated with
when she HAD BEEN COVERT.

171 posted on 07/17/2005 8:16:28 AM PDT by syriacus (To WHICH entity does LIBELLER JOE WILSON pledge his allegiance?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: syriacus
The thing The Rats forgot,
Wilson started running the muck before any of this created scandal got rolling.
Washington Post 7/16/2005

"Wilson set out to discredit the charge, working largely through back channels at first to debunk it. He called friends inside the government and the media, and told the New York Times's Nicholas D. Kristof of his findings in Niger. Kristof aired them publicly for the first time in his May 6, 2003, column but did not name Wilson. This caught the attention of officials inside Cheney's office, as well as others involved in war planning, according to people who had talked with them."
172 posted on 07/17/2005 8:21:16 AM PDT by tobyhill (The War on Terrorism is not for the weak.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]

Comment #173 Removed by Moderator

To: Turbo Pig
From CIA World Factbook

Only two autocratic presidents have ruled Gabon since independence from France in 1960. Gabon's current President, El Hadj Omar BONGO Ondimba - one of the longest-serving heads of state in the world - has dominated Gabon's political scene for almost four decades. President BONGO introduced a nominal multiparty system and a new constitution in the early 1990s. However, the low turnout and allegations of electoral fraud during the most recent local elections in 2002-03 have exposed the weaknesses of formal political structures in Gabon. Presidential elections scheduled for 2005 are unlikely to bring change since the opposition remains weak, divided, and financially dependent on the current regime. Despite political conditions, a small population, abundant natural resources, and considerable foreign support have helped make Gabon one of the more prosperous and stable African countries.

174 posted on 07/17/2005 8:23:32 AM PDT by OneLoyalAmerican (The only 180 Flipper John hasn't done is the SF-180.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

Comment #175 Removed by Moderator

To: ScaniaBoy

Suddenly, this really does make the most sense. Wow! The possibility that Valerie Plame, as a CIA agent, was leaking for the past few years directly to the press. Intentionally. Wow!

Valerie has been on a year's unpaid leave. Wonder if that was her choice or was she put on "administrative leave" by the agency.

Also, wonder if the Special Prosecutor would be allowed to prosecute a CIA agent. Is Valerie protected by an agency cloak?


176 posted on 07/17/2005 8:24:45 AM PDT by Kay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: gunnedah

You forgot Sandy Berger's top secret documents down his pants scandal the press "jumped" on.


177 posted on 07/17/2005 8:28:56 AM PDT by Hildy ("You miss 100% of the shots you never take." - Wayne Gretzky)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: 1dadof3
Not from anything i have seen from statements issued from the agencys head. Show me a statement from the CIA stating she was covert.

Post #119. Read the whole article.

BTW, someone asked who referred the plame leak case from the CIA, this is from the article:

Corallo said the decision to investigate the leak was made by counterespionage section chief John Dion without consulting Ashcroft.

178 posted on 07/17/2005 8:32:32 AM PDT by sirchtruth (Words Mean Things...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: sirchtruth
Good morning.
"I beleive Plame was covert at the time according to the statement."

I believe Plame was a pencil pusher in Langley at the time, and likely a pencil pusher all along.

I believe she and Joey Wilson are DemocRAT operatives trying to hinder the war effort and, at the same time, bring down a sitting President.

We'll see who's right when the SP issues his report.

Michael Frazier
179 posted on 07/17/2005 8:36:44 AM PDT by brazzaville (No surrender,no retreat. Well, maybe retreat's ok)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

Comment #180 Removed by Moderator

To: brazzaville
Good point!

This whole investigation, pushed by Democrats, could end up exposing the fact that there was a faction in the CIA that leaked classified info to undermine the Bush administration.

We Republicans have been complaining about this for some time, but this shines a spotlight on this all-to-common phenomenon.

If people in the gov't disagree with administration policy, they should make their concerns known within channels (not by writing op-eds in the NYT). If they are ignored, they can tender their resignations. They are not supposed to leak clasified data, or worse, misrepresent classified data, to undermine the administration.

181 posted on 07/17/2005 8:39:16 AM PDT by Montfort (Many liberals hate Bush more than they love life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: NEPA
I still believe that the special prosecutor might be checking into whether or not Wilson and his wife tried to dupe the CIA and/or the govt. by hatching a plot to discredit President Bush with a phony yellowcake report.

Wilson didn't mind endgangering American lives around the world by publicly spreading lies, in the New York Times, that America went into Iraq based on Yellowcake lies.

From his own op-ed words, we can see that Wilson didn't care about Americans.
So...,
to which entity did Wilson pledge allegiance?

  1. John Kerry?
    (Maybe Woodward and Bernstein can investigate Wilson, to see if he was involved in a "dirty trick" to elect a Democratic president).
  2. Oil for food criminals?
    (I'll bet Wilson has shaken hands with one or two of them).
  3. The Sunnis?
    (Their "freedom fighters" were killing Americans, then, and they probably welcomed Wilson's op-ed as another excuse to kill some more Americans)
  4. Saddam?
    (He was still on the loose)
  5. The terrorists?
    (Any day that "The Great Satan's" credibility is attacked, is a day for them to feel justified in beheading another American)
A combination of the above? It's unfortunate, in a way, that there are so many people Joe Wilson aided and abetted in their crimes.

It will be as hard to find out who Wilson was trying to help, as it is hard to find out who "outted" Val Plame.

182 posted on 07/17/2005 8:39:47 AM PDT by syriacus (To WHICH entity does LIBELLER JOE WILSON pledge his allegiance?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123
 

 

 
 
<<Russert shows TIME cover. Cooper says the first time he knew about Plame was from Rove. (very damaging if true, just as damaging if Fitzgerald believes it is true.) >>

I have a hard time buying your premise.  Let's look at two facts that everyone agrees upon.

1. The world found out about Valerie Plame from an article written by Robert Novak. 
2. Robert Novak and Karl Rove both say that Novak informed Rove of her not the other way around.

Therefore, it was Novak that was responsible for the public knowing about Valerie Plame.  Who told Novak needs to be discovered, but we know it wasn't Karl Rove. 

Now, Cooper says Rove informed him of Plame.  So What??  Free Republic informed me of all of this information two years ago.  Did FR leak?  Of course not. The Matt Cooper story is not germane to the question of who is responsible.

Podesta & Russert this morning are attempting to say that Karl Rove confirmed the crime with Novak by saying "I heard that too."  How on earth does that "confirm" anything?  I heard that the "earth was flat."  Does that confirm that it is flat?  I heard that Clinton didn't have sex with Monica; is that confirmation that he didn't?

In conclusion, Cooper saying the first time he knew about Plame was from Rove is actually a moot point.
 

 

 

183 posted on 07/17/2005 8:39:52 AM PDT by HawaiianGecko (Doing the same thing over and over again, expecting different results is the definition of insanity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: brazzaville
Corallo said the decision to investigate the leak was made by counterespionage section chief John Dion without consulting Ashcroft.

I found that in the article rereading it!

184 posted on 07/17/2005 8:40:44 AM PDT by sirchtruth (Words Mean Things...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

Comment #185 Removed by Moderator

To: HawaiianGecko
Podesta & Russert this morning are attempting to say that Karl Rove confirmed the crime with Novak by saying "I heard that too."

  How on earth does that "confirm" anything?  I heard that the "earth was flat."  Does that confirm that it is flat? 

I heard that Clinton didn't have sex with Monica; is that confirmation that he didn't?

Good reasoning!!

186 posted on 07/17/2005 8:47:28 AM PDT by syriacus (To WHICH entity does LIBELLER JOE WILSON pledge his allegiance?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: 1dadof3
Not interested in a news article

Ah, It's my pleasure to inform you that I can only report what the article states. Basically the CIA would not have sent a referral if she was NOT a covert agent at the time. It really doesn't matter whether or not legally she was covert, the CIA sent the referral as if she was and the prosecutor is investigating based on that criteria.

187 posted on 07/17/2005 8:49:23 AM PDT by sirchtruth (Words Mean Things...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: sirchtruth
This is why there is an investigation, the above indicates she WAS covert as far as the CIA was concerned.

The CIA declined to discuss Plame's intelligence work, but an agency official disputed suggestions that she was a mere analyst whose public exposure would have little consequence.

"If she was not undercover, we would have no reason to file a criminal referral," the CIA official said, insisting on anonymity because of the sensitivity of the investigation.

Justice launches probe into CIA leak - Knight Ridder News - October 1, 2003

The CIA is not a monolith, and some agents are apt to be working against the administration. Those agents would have a reason, albeit not a legitimate one, to file a complaint.

If Plame met the criteria for cover, required by 50 USC 421-426, maybe the leaker was a CIA agent. It wouldn't be the first time.

Anyway, I can imagine a couple scenarios, one being filing a complaint even though the agent wasn't covert, just to clarify the formal and public record.

Notice too, the comment, "If she was not undercover, we would have no reason to file ..." is NOT an official position of the CIA. The comment comes from an anonymous source, and for all we know, was made up out of whole cloth by the reporter.

188 posted on 07/17/2005 8:49:36 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: brazzaville
 

 

 
 

Something I find humorous in all of this story is this: 
People have screamed to high heaven that our information on WMDs was pathetic. 
Valerie Plame is an important counterintelligence operative on weapons of mass desctruction.

Why hasn't this fool been fired?

 

 

189 posted on 07/17/2005 8:49:39 AM PDT by HawaiianGecko (Doing the same thing over and over again, expecting different results is the definition of insanity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: 1dadof3
So if it is a "news" article, it HAS TO BE TRUE!!

I'm not saying it's true. I kept asking the question why is Fitzgerald investigation if she was NOT a covert agent. The media keeps portraying this as if she was a covert agent, so I investigated and that is what I found.

Based on the facts that you have a reporter sitting in jail for not revealing a source about where she learned the name of a COVERT agent leads one to conclude certain things.

Go back on this thread and read my post, you'll see I didn't for one second believe she was covert until I saw that article.

I beleive she is or was covert now based on the article only because the facts tend to lead in that direction.

190 posted on 07/17/2005 8:57:02 AM PDT by sirchtruth (Words Mean Things...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt
It doesn't say in the article that the CIA made a complaint. What it does say is the following:

"Corallo said the decision to investigate the leak was made by counterespionage section chief John Dion without consulting Ashcroft."

John Dion works at Justice and is in counterespionage section. Maybe there is more that meets the eye going on here.
191 posted on 07/17/2005 9:05:18 AM PDT by WHBates
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt
Notice too, the comment, "If she was not undercover, we would have no reason to file ..." is NOT an official position of the CIA. The comment comes from an anonymous source, and for all we know, was made up out of whole cloth by the reporter.

Right, and I can buy that scenario, but the fact remains there is an ongoing investigation as if she WAS covert. That's a fact, unless there's something we really do not know.

My whole reason for bringing up this article is because I kept thinking based on reports that she was NOT covert, but the MSM kept writing articles as if she was. I was saying why would the MSM be so blantantly wrong about her status and keep reporting bogus info. So, I did a search and found that article.

Futhermore, based on a reporter sitting in jail for not revealing a source of someone who was NOT convert is pretty stupid and unneccessary UNLESS there is more to it! I believe this was setup against Bush and Rove, if you noticed in the article Schumer immediately suggested Rove be investigated.

192 posted on 07/17/2005 9:18:57 AM PDT by sirchtruth (Words Mean Things...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: syriacus
What criminal referral is he referring to?

A referral to the Justice Department that Valeri Plame's covert status was illegally divulged.

Who instigated it?

The Novak column stated that Plame worked for the CIA. The DEMs and the media whipped up a firestorm that this revelation involved a criminal leak of confidential information. The CIA prepared and sent the referral.

Justice launches probe into CIA leak - October 1, 2003 <- Some details

And what were the results?

Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor, has not announced any results. There is rampant speculation as to whether Plame was in fac covert (i.e., whether or not there is a violation of law); as well as to who the leaker was in any event. The DEMs and the media assert that no matter what, Rove's conduct in acknowledgement, even if he wasn't a leaker, merits dismissal from his post.

193 posted on 07/17/2005 9:25:51 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill
Wilson started running the muck before any of this created scandal got rolling. Washington Post 7/16/2005

Great point!!

Poor op-ed-libeller Joey Wilson suddenly found that he had to shovel a heavy load, didn't he?

Not quite the easy life of retirement he was anticipating.

194 posted on 07/17/2005 9:27:30 AM PDT by syriacus (To WHICH entity does LIBELLER JOE WILSON pledge his allegiance?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: Eagles Talon IV
Is there a definitive statement from any credible source in the know that counters this?

No definitive source, but Isikoff's employer signed on to an amicus brief that agrues there was no violation of 50 USC 421-426.

The below links relate to a brief filed on behalf of 36 news organizations. One of the authors of the brief is Victoria Toensing, who has posed the same points in editorial columns expressing the function of the statute that forbids disclosure of covert operatives.

The brief itself is a 1.5 Mb PDF file - fair warning.

March 23, 2005 brief filed by 36 News organizations <- Arguing "no crime committed"
http://beldar.blogs.com/beldarblog/2005/03/journalists_ami.html <- Commentary

195 posted on 07/17/2005 9:27:49 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

Nice answers, thanks.


196 posted on 07/17/2005 9:29:09 AM PDT by syriacus (To WHICH entity does LIBELLER JOE WILSON pledge his allegiance?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

Bookmarking, thanks.


197 posted on 07/17/2005 9:30:12 AM PDT by syriacus (To WHICH entity does LIBELLER JOE WILSON pledge his allegiance?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies]

To: syriacus
Are the CIA folks who say she was covert the same lying CIA folks who say Bush misrepresented intelligence?

That's my $64,000 Question. I believe the answer to that question is YES.

198 posted on 07/17/2005 9:41:22 AM PDT by meema
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: WHBates
It doesn't say in the article that the CIA made a complaint.

It can be failrly inferred. CIA has no legal prosecution power, so it has to file complaints with Justice. Justice doesn't act on all complaints filed, in most cases because no leads are provided. That is, they have no person to go after, just the presence of a leak.

The President wants to know who the leaker is too, and the press called for an independent investigation. In principle, CIA and Justice are on the same side, using the same laws, etc.

There is considerable speculation, and it is well described in the media's brief, that the CIA filed the complaint as a matter of CYA or as a defense against a charge that the CIA was unprofessional in handling the covert status of Plame.

199 posted on 07/17/2005 9:41:44 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: sirchtruth
Good morning.

Is John Dion one of those US Attorneys that bill and hill put in place in the Justice Dept when they came to Washington? I know he was around in '97.

I've been saying for years that W should have purged clintonistas from Justice, State, the FBI and the CIA.

Some people here are waiting for CW2. I think it began with Watergate and has never stopped.

Michael Frazier
200 posted on 07/17/2005 9:41:45 AM PDT by brazzaville (No surrender,no retreat. Well, maybe retreat's ok)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-247 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