Posted on 08/03/2005 10:36:52 AM PDT by Sam Hill
Edited on 08/03/2005 10:55:20 AM PDT by Lead Moderator. [history]
Are you being sarcastic?
I can't tell.
Everybody lay off lugsoul.
I know we disagree with his take, but he's not a troll and he knows why I'm sticking up for his right to have his say.
Simply present your documentation to buttress the points you wish to make but don't attack him, please.
Ok. I'll accept your vouching for him.
But you may want to address the fact that HE is the one who jumps in and starts it. It's not like we go looking for him.
Newsweek reported last week that a source told them the CIA request to DOJ for an investigation did not cite the covert agent law.
I thought that was interesting and hope it means that my thinking that the leaks from the CIA (Wilson/Plame) are the actual focus and they are targets is correct.
In a just world, anyway.
Newsweek still thought it meant WH wrongdoing would still be the issue but the facts simply don't back that up.
No. Why would that post have been sarcastic?!
nuffsenuff, I really think you need to revisit your history a little on the rise of the conflict on this thread. If you did, I think you'd see that your very first post on this thread was jumping on to note my presence as 'the Plame apologist.' Your casting of stones is not well taken.
Though it does look like the Espionage Act would be a much easier prosecution than the IIPA.
As far as what the facts will support, I stand by my position what we don't have any idea what the facts will support, because we don't know what they are. Every tidbit you've heard is a tidbit that someone let slip because they want you to view this a certain way. The operative facts will be the ones they don't want you to know. And we haven't heard those yet.
Also, thanks for your astute observation on Miller. Anyone who read her reporting in the pre-war period would know that she was anything but anti-Administration or pro-Saddam. Just read her book, FGS. No, it is pretty obvious she was using some pretty well-connected government sources, and she wants to maintain her rep as one who won't burn such a source. She may be a player in this thing, but not the way most here think.
More than that: the Pincuses and the Wilsons socialize together.
E.g., the two couples spent Independence Day, 2003 together -- grilling steaks in the Wilsons' backyard.
Yet, in his reporting (and opinionating), Pincus has never revealed that he is a friend-of-the-family.
Well, she has almost certainly spoken to Pincus. The two couples know each other and socialize together. For example, the Pincuses were guests of the Wilsons at a backyard barbecue on July 4, 2003.
So, your question might be better put...
" Pincus has never revealed that he is a friend-of-the-family."
I suspect they became friends around the time of Pincus' article--which was just a couple weeks before.
What probably happened was Wilson went to work for Kerry and Lehane or whoever came up with a list of people for him try to pitch this cock and bull story to: Corn, Kristof, Pincus, as well as Ray McGovern and Larry Johnson.
In May and June Wilson's life was a social whirl.
"What's funny about it is that there is no requirement that the CIA cite the applicable law in the referral. The idea that the complainant has to ID the laws they think were broken just ain't a part of US criminal law. The prosecutor decides what law applies."
You know this how?
Where's the citation?
One would think when you make a "criminal referral" you would cite the law you think was broken. Elsewise how can you claim a crime might have been committed.
I know you won't have a cite. It's just more of your uninformed misinforamtion parading as an authoritative statement.
If I thought you'd do anything but lie and name-call, I'd find it for you (aren't you the one crowing about others being 'uniformed'?). But you won't, so you aren't worth my time.
Do you have some basis for claiming that Daou is lying other than his Democratic affiliation? Or would you rather just believe the male prostitute?
"The questionnaire they have to fill out to make the referral has been publicized. Of the eleven questions on it, 'what law was broken?' isn't one of them."
Good. Post the link.
Oh, and don't post something the equivalent of Wilson appearing at a fundraiser for the AZ Democrat Party when I said he wasn't campaigning with Kerry.
You won't.
As for you Daou claim, the fact that they dumped Wilson's site and the many pages already up--show he was lying.
He wasn't in any position to know anyway. You were lying when you said he ran the site. He didn't. He ran some blog outreach program.
But you play fast and loose with the truth.
"Or would you rather just believe the male prostitute?"
Again with the Gannon point. How very DU.
I never saw Gannon talk about this. I'm sure most people didn't, if he did.
It got plenty of coverage here and elsewhere without him.
But you cite people like a VIPS member as a CIA expert. And a guy who writes for "Truthout" (an ultra lefty operation) as oracles of truth.
You're very obvious. Soros isn't getting his money's worth, if he's paying you.
The only people suggesting such a subtext are liberals -- while claiming it is conservatives who feel this way.
I can only imagine that liberals are projecting...
We have to remember that the Clinton administration gave all kinds of speeches saying Saddam had WMD and IN FACT, regime change in Iraq was the Dem Party policy....even if it meant war....WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF THE UN.
That would make Miller, Clinton Administration "friendly" at the time.
Kerry, ignoring the Dems "past intelligence" took on an anti-war stance (flip-flop)...and Wilson came in to help him out. But there is no way either Wilson or Berger would have wound up in the campaign without the blessings of the Clinton REGIME.
Wilson dumped his wife's name to Hillary and her best friend and MEDIA ADVISOR, Mandy Grunwald....extolling the grandeur of his insiders information. Sure, publish the June 6th article...it can't hurt. What he forgot to mention was that Valerie was instrumental in sending him to Niger.
Novak, an old timer...knew Valerie from the time she married Wilson. Novak also knew that she worked at the CIA and MIGHT HAVE gotten Wilson the appointment. Novak used the term CIA "operative" in his article.......a very broad term. I could not get "Undercover" out of the term, as many times as I have read it.
Eventually, Wilson interpreted "Operative" for us. Novak DID NOT know she was, at one time, undercover but he did know her when she was just plain, old Valerie Plame.
So here comes Mandy Grunwald (Hillary's friend) with a solution. She'll get her hubby, Matt Cooper, to call Rove and Libby and get them "involved". It would be a second chance (after Rathergate) to use the MEDIA to its optimum against the Bush Administration.
It became a tangled web and Bush called for a Special Prosecutor instead of a Senate Investigation. In other words, Bush and Rove said: "Something Smells" and it's not from within this room.
I'm thinking that Novak has something as stupid as a copy of a Plame/Wilson marriage certificate in his files.
The bottom line. Wilson outed his wife by interpreting Operative as "Undercover Agent". That was NOT what Novak said...or inferred. After Wilson had talked with his "man on the street" who had informed Wilson that Novak knew that Valerie worked at the Cia, Wilson called Kerry. Wilson got sent to Mandy and Hillary and Bubba. Mandy called her husband. Voila!! A tangled web....meant to deceive.
Miller WAS Dem friendly at one time. She got the info from a DEM....and my best guess is Mandy Grunwald.
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.