Memeorandum


Powered by TypePad

« How About A Few Facts With That Coffee? | Main | Talking Point (Mis)Managament »

July 13, 2005

Comments

jerry

Just one minute, check this out regarding Wilson, Plame, and the RNC:

http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/7/13/04720/9340

fanny

Does the CIA give background briefings to journalist? If so, wouldn't they have assigned an articulate, respected analyst with expertise in WMDs to brief journalists? (This line of speculation is complete conjecture but wouldn't it be rich if the CIA had tasked Valerie Wilson to provide WMD tutorials to journalists.)

jerry

Another comment on the current Republican smear campaign on Wilson by Juan Cole:

Rove Unfit for Public Office

The real question is whether we want a person to occupy a high office in the White House when that person has cynically endangered US national security to take a petty sort of revenge on a whistleblower.

...

Ambassador Joe Wilson, who once dared Saddam to hang him while wearing a rope around his neck while acting ambassador in Baghdad in fall of 1990, was the first to let the American people know that the Bush administration lied about Iraq's alleged attempt to purchase uranium yellowcake from Niger.

...

But Rove's revenge on Wilson was the ultimate. Plame was undercover as an employee of a phony energy company. She was actually investigating illegal proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. When Rove blew her cover to the US press, everyone who had ever been seen with her in Africa or Asia was put in extreme danger. It is said that some of her contacts may have been killed. Imagine the setback to the US struggle against weapons of mass destruction proliferation that this represents.

...

The actions are those of a traitor. What is the difference between Robert Hanssen revealing key secret information for money to the Soviets and Karl Rove revealing it to the proliferators for political gain for the Republican Party and the Bush White House? Both are traitors who traded secrets for gain.

BumperStickerist

------------------------

At this point I have to ask - is there some sort of 'Greater Niger' movement going on in Africa?

Should its neighbors fear Niger's hegemonic goals?

If Very Smart People like Joe Wilson and Juan Cole insist on equating 'Niger' with 'Africa' I can only guess that they're on to something ... something that's gone woefully underreported in the Main Stream Media and all other media in languages with whihc I'm familiar, it's this: Niger must have adopted a variation of 'Manifest Destiny' as national policy.

I'm still at a loss as to how Very Smart People like Juan and Joe manage to confuse Britain with the US - sure, we each speak the same language, kind of - but a generation's worth of James Bond movies should have given them some ability to distinguish between the two.

kim

Except:
1. Joe Wilson is a liar. Among other things he reported a genuine uranium contact.
2. Saddam was working toward aquiring nuclear capability.
3. It was not a mistake to invade Iraq.
==========================

kim

Two worthwhile points:

Saddam alreaady had 400 tons of Yellow Cake.
Yellow Cake manufacture, from ore, is easy.
==============================

kim

Joe Wilson is a liar and Juan Cole has to be a museumpiece for ignorance illustrated by partisanship. How he can still be taken seriously is a mystery to me. I can't resist the urge to edge away from his analysis, and go off and pee and get a breath, somewhere.
=============================

BumperStickerist

Jerry -

if nothing else, the TPMCafe post gives merit to the 'Renegade Factions within the CIA' line of thought.

The 'expertise' displayed by the guest poster is limited to two paragraphs out of the whole piece, starts out with an unsupported statement that she was an NOC working at the CIA. And the last half is a screed against Bush.

That said, the involvement of 'Brewster Jennings' in the article as a locus for outing other NOCs is a potentially more serious breach. One that has nothing to do with Rove, however.

I'd point out that the CIA did not go to particularly great lengths to establish Brewster Jennings as a legitimate company - a thought Valerie might have considered before listing Brewster Jennings as her employer on a publicly available listing of campaign contributions.

There's a Boston Globe article that details the site and the records around the company. Unfortunately, I didn't save the link. One comment from a former deputy DCIA was that Brewster Jennings was sort of a 'holding' company for agents - that NOC agents would go overseas with 'real jobs'. So, the 'leak' may have compromised Valerie's (and others) ability to be used in future operations. I'm not up-to-date with my 'Alias' viewing, so I don't know what effect having Valerie change hair, name, and clothes would have on her ability to go out on assignments.

Perhaps the CIA should take lessons in setting up phony locations from local Democratic voter registration groups
(zing!)

What's baffling to me, though, is Joe's inclusion of 'the twins' and the presumed hassle that Valerie would incur by having the kids for a week as a reason for her to not suggest him for the trip to Niger, which is not all of Africa.

Given Ms. Plame's level of awareness of the issue terrorism and the need to counter the proliferation of its most destructive tools, I would hope Valerie would be willing, nay eager, to undergo a week's, maybe two, of hassle with the kids in order to protect the world.

Baffling.

Especially in light of Valerie's rather clear headed memo regarding the suitability of Joe for the task.

Slartibartfast

On the other hand, obtaining HEU from yellowcake...that's hard. Very, very hard. Still, when you're buying uranium oxide by the ton, you're going to invite some scrutiny. You never know, though: Saddam just may have been going into the stoneware business.

As if.

Slartibartfast

I know I've probably said this here, somewhere, before, but I wonder how many security regs Plame broke by breaking cover with Wilson? Clearance does not equal need-to-know, and if she was indeed NOC, the number of folks having need-to-know on that bit of information would be very small.

kim

Good one. I'm sure uranium processing for glazes differs technically from uranium processing for bombs, but Saddam was adept at hiding a potentially weapons producing process as a harmless civilian production vehicle.

Bus to Bomb, so to Saddam Speak.
============================

Dwilkers

"I know I've probably said this here, somewhere, before, but I wonder how many security regs Plame broke by breaking cover with Wilson?"

Exactly.

This mess is starting to become more clear and the clearer it becomes the more interested I am in wth Plame and Wilson thought they were doing. People may end up being prosecuted here, but I'm beginning to think it is possible there may be a bit of a surprise coming in who gets prosecuted for what.

TexasToast

"Republicans should stop holding back and go on the offense: fire enough bullets the other way until the Supreme Court overtakes" events, said Rep. Peter T. King (R-N.Y.).

Looks like Rep. King agrees with you about "establishing context", from the prospective of a left wing hack, that is. ;)


kim

SBF: I remain hopeful that Valerie and/or Joe are Fitzgerald's targets. It's not as if they haven't fairly obviously broken any number of laws.

Fitzgerald can't compel their testimony, however. That's one of the ironies, here: The fact of the marriage outs her but protects them both. Funny.
===============================

Patrick R. Sullivan

'...they are strong on documenting that Wilson's wife was involved in picking Wilson for the trip, but very light in explaining why that matters.'

Ordinarily it would matter at all, in fact it might bolster his credibility. His wife thought enough of him to recommend him without worrying he might screw up and damage her career. He had useful connections not widely shared in the population at large.

It's only Wilson's acting outraged about it that makes it matter. He's got a guilty conscience.

Something that does deserve more scrutiny is the source of Wilson's income. He said that it was getting difficult to live on two government salaries. So, he decides to open a small business!

Let's remind ourselves that we discovered that high school grad Linda Tripp was making almost $100,000 (plus generous govt benefits) in a secretarial government job. So Wilson and wife must have been raking in about a quarter million in salaries. Just what would Wilson be able to offer the market that could top his income from government?

kim

Cherchez de l'argent? Mais toujour, c'est la femme. Or the butler. Who's the butler here?

Can we say publishing empire scion?
=============================

kim

Bien. Toujours, autre choses peut etre, mais tous cet jour, c'est la femme.
==============================

ed

Hmmm.

"Just what would Wilson be able to offer the market that could top his income from government?"

I believe, though I may be wrong on this, that Wilson was working as a lobbyist for the Saudis.

Crank

The RNC link is busted.

Martin

"Anyway, if the RNC had any sense..." And if Grandma had...

Anyway, you're behind the curve. I see the WSJ is now touting Rove as a whistleblower. Now that kind of twisted propaganda takes just what Grandma lacks!

But forget Rovegate. Why don't you right wing freaks just focus attention on Bush's positive accomplishments, like:

1. Bush's Social Security Plan. Sorry, couldn't find a link.

2. The Iraqi Constitution that's to be finalized by August 15. Sorry, couldn't find a link.

3. Ok, never mind. I see the problem.

TM

From the Larry Johnson diatribe at TPM:

The Republicans insist on the lie that Val got her husband the job. She did not. She was not a division director, instead she was the equivalent of an Army major. Yes it is true she recommended her husband to do the job that needed to be done but the decision to send Joe Wilson on this mission was made by her bosses.

Hold the goalposts! The conclusion that the Senate Dems would *not* support (in the release of what Johnson calls the "biased" Senate report) was this (from the supplementary views of Roberts, Hatch, and Bond, p. 443 of the report/p. 453 pf the .pdf))

While there was no dispute with the underlying facts, my Democrat colleagues refused to allow the following conclusions to appear in the report:

Conclusion: The plan to send the former ambassador to Niger was suggested by the former ambassador's wife, a CIA employee.

The former ambassador's wife suggested her husband for the trip to Niger in February 2002. The former ambassador had traveled
previously to Niger on behalf of the CIA, also at the suggestion of his wife, to look into another matter not related to Iraq. On February 12, 2002, the former ambassador's wife sent a memorandum to a Deputy Chief of a division in the CIA's Directorate of Operations which said, "[m]y husband has good relations with both the PM [prime minister] and the former Minister of Mines (not to mention lots of French contacts), both of whom could possibly shed light on this sort of activity." This was just one day before the same Directorate of Operations division sent a cable to
one of its overseas stations requesting concurrence with the division's idea to send the former ambassador to Niger.

And now Mr. Johnson is on board. Well done - that is brilliant Talking Point (Mis)Management.


That's a beaut.

Appalled Moderate

Of course, one could wonder why Rove should survive at all and why the GOP should invest in his survival.

Let's get past the parsing and word interpretations for a few moments. I agree that the President pinned his implication that those leaking would be fired to the leaking of clasified information. (And there is still a question about whether Plame's status really fits the word "classified" in any common-sense meaning of the term.) I don't think the President promised to fire anyone based on the situation we now face.

But...

It is clear that (1) Rove lied to the WH Press Secretary when he said he was "not involved" in the leaking of Plame's name or (2) McCllan intentionally lied to reporters when he said Rove was not involved in the leak.

Somebody needs to be held accountable for the fibbing. In other words, either the flack goes, or the Mayberry Machiavelli goes. It's pretty simple, once you strip the issue of hyperbole.

Of course, accountability is neither a word the President respects or pronounces correctly.

MeTooThen

AM,

Yawn.

Again, for the umpteenth million time, there is as yet, no proof that the Evil-and-Dangerous-Mastermind-that- is-Karl Rove actually "leaked" anything.

He gave background to a reporter that sought him out, and for all we know, the reporter (or reporters) may have already known that Madame Plame worked at the CIA.

Now, as to your rage at the President, what else is new?

Got anything else?

kim

Yeah, who's your old leaker?
===============================

Appalled Moderate

MTT:

Actually, I don't have anything else. There is one piece of solid information at the core of this that makes either Rove or McClellan a knowing liar. Is it a "big deal" in the world of Washington? Probably not. Would you tolerate this kind of lying from your employees? Probably not.

As for rage at the President? Well, I figure I should expend a little of it now so that my head does not explode at the time my taxes skyrocket to cover Bush's deficit and my niece and nephew get drafted to fight in Bush's underplanned war.

kim

Your solid core is dissolving. For it to be a leak, the disclosure had to be deliberate. Rove deliberately disclosed(maybe) the existence of a pertinent wife; he did not betray a classified operative. Her husband was the betrayor but what besides his wife he betrayed is unclear. Besides betraying the truth, I mean.

Oh, and about your taxes and your collateral descenents. Dread times require dread measures. And show me a planned war.
================================

megapotamus

Moderate, hold onto that explosion. It will turn out to be a Stewart-esque IMplosion. The draft is a fantasy of Democrats, Rangel in the House, Hollings in the Senate. Iraq in five years will be widely understood as the great advance for global peace and stability it is. The deficit is DOWN. Why? Because revenues are UP, just as Supply-Siders have said again and again and been proven right, again and again. Why obvious Leftwingers LOVE to mis-identify themselves as moderates is baffling. For three seconds.

Appalled Moderate

Kim:

Key issue for me here is Rove's denial he was involved. Given that he has been talking about Ms. Wilson with at least one reporter, that denial is disingenuous.

I see you argue differently. When you are done here, perhaps you can help Mr. Clinton with the meaning of "is" and "sex".

Mega:

I see you believe "Moderate" means "agrees with me, only wimpy about it." Sorry I don't qualify. Used to get these kind of comments from irritable lefties at Kevin Drum's site until I gave up on that rat's nest of a comment section.

kim

I'm not arguing at all. To argue would require fine definitions of 'leak' and 'involved'. I'm trying to give you my opinion of what happened and why I believe that what Rove did was defensible as the right thing to do. I have no such belief about Wilson's actions. I hold in abeyance my opinion of Plame's actions at least in part because she has been closed mouthed about it all, at least publicly.
===========================

Patrick

It's simple. It matters because it gives credence to the notion that Rove was not trying to "out" Plame - he was trying to warn Cooper and Time away from publishing the Wilson story as presented. Since that's exactly what he told Cooper.

Speculation Alert (at least I label my suppositions, unlike other comments here): It's entirely likely that Rove thought, because he knew of Plame through social and publishing sources, that the tangental reference to her in the Cooper quote was harmless. The real point of the "double secret" background was to smack down Wilson, not out his wife.

All the while, the New York Times outs an entire covert operation (CIA Air Operations) and the left says nothing.

MeTooThen

AM,

Deficit?

What deficit?

Oh, you mean the one that may be halved by 2009?

That same reduction that is fueled by record tax revenues from corporations?

You mean those same record tax revenues that followed W.'s EVIL reductions in marginal tax rates?

Is that what you're talking about?

My friend, I am a life-long Democrat, really I am.

Still am.

Hell, I even voted for Jerry Brown, Paul Simon, and wait for it...

Carol Mosley Braun.

All true.

But what is happening in the US amongst its polity, and among the Democratic Party in particular, is shocking.

The.Wheels.Have.Come.Off.the.Wagon.

We are at war.

People are trying in earnest to kill you, me, everyone we know.

It's true.

Every gaffe, mispoken word or mistake is not treason or a high crime.

Every week there is some new hysterical rage leveled at W. and his administration.

L'affiare Plame is a non-event.

The only crimes if any, it appears, may have been committed by Joseph Charles Wilson IV, Madame Plame, or Ms. Miller.

Rove, OK, so he's Satan.

Got it.

But can we move on to governance of this great nation?

Am I asking too much?

Must you be appalled all the time?

C'mon, give it a rest.

Have a popsicle or something. You'll feel better.

Trust me, I'm a doctor.

TexasToast

MTT

“Because there is a war on”, its “fair game” to –

deliberately and systematically release the identity of a CIA operative who you don’t know is not undercover to score debating points against her husband because the husband embarrassed your boss by raising questions about the “sixteen words”

“Because there is a war on”, its “fair game” to –

deny involvement (and get others, like Scott McClellan, to deny involvement on your behalf) because you know the reporter you told is bound by a pledge not to reveal his source, and further complain that said reporter “burned” you after repeatedly stating through your lawyer that you had given complete waivers to everyone.

“Because there is a war on”, its “fair game” to –

claim that “everybody” knew she was with the CIA (while continuing to claim that you didn’t know she just might be covert), when its perfectly clear that “everybody” didn’t know.

“Because there is a war on”, its “fair game” to –

claim that you were merely discouraging a reporter from writing a false story based on Wilson’s claim that Cheney or Tenet “authorized” the trip when that claim was not made until after you spoke to that reporter.

“Because there is a war on”, its “fair game” to –

tell Ed Gillespie to change his mind. It is not and should not be a crime – it is “just politics”.

“Because there is a war on”, its “fair game” to –

insist that its only a firing offense if it can be shown beyond a reasonable doubt to have been a criminal act.

So, I’d like to know, “If there had been a war on”, would it have been “fair game” to –

have a bit o’ fun with a White house intern?

Appalled Moderate

MTM

If I wasn't appalled all the time, people wouldn't know it was me....

I rather doubt l'affaire Plame is that big a deal in the grand scheme of things. I have a problem with Rove lying, to get the hounds off of him in 2003, and then allowing his proxies at the RNC to act all injured and offended when the hounds re-find him in 2005. You may not find what Rove did a firing offense. Fine. But I have little patience for those who are arguing he didn't commit some kind of offense in pursuit of political aims.

BTW, if you find l'affaire Plame such an unimportance, what ARE you doing in this comment section?

MeTooThen

AM,

L'affaire Plame is emblematic of the untreated narcissism that is the post-post-modern world.

For a very wealthy and unimaginably privileged man to cloak himself in the guise of "victim" is both fascinating and revolting.

That Joseph Charles Wilson IV used and was used by the Democratic Party as a means by which to discredit the POTUS while at a time of war is especially noteworthy.

Furthermore, that the powerful media and academic elites were party to this faux outrage and scandal, again, to discredit a sitting president at the time of war, makes for excellent study.

Reg

Mr. Wilson and His Credibility:

Question:
Mr. Wilson, did the former Niger prime minister meet with any Iraqi officials in June 1999?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

1. March 5, 2002 Wilson debriefed by CIA just after returning from Niger (SSCI, p.43-44): "Mayaki said, however, that in June 1999, XXXX businessman, approached him and insisted that Mayaki meet with an Iraqi delegation to discuss “expanding commercial relations” between Niger and Iraq. The intelligence report said that Mayaki interpreted “expanding commercial relations” to mean that the delegation wanted to discuss uranium yellowcake sales. The intelligence report also said that “although the meeting took place, Mayaki let the matter drop due to the UN sanctions on Iraq.”

2. July 6, 2003: “What I Didn’t Find In Africa” Wilson’s NY Times Op/ed: Wilson fails to mention the Iraqi/Niger meeting, in the NYT op/ed or in his first “Meet the Press” interview that same day.

3. July 11, 2003: DCI Tenet Releases a Statement on Niger Controversy and Amb. Wilson: "He [Wilson] reported back to us that one of the former Nigerien officials he met stated that he was unaware of any contract being signed between Niger and rogue states for the sale of uranium during his tenure in office. The same former official also said that in June 1999 a businessman approached him and insisted that the former official meet with an Iraqi delegation to discuss "expanding commercial relations" between Iraq and Niger. The former official interpreted the overture as an attempt to discuss uranium sales."

4. October 5, 2003 Wilson Appears again on “Meet the Press”(MSNBC, transcript):
Russert: "...the White House will say Ambassador, ... that your meeting with officials in Niger, including the suggestion that in June ’99 Iraqi officials met with officials from Niger, confirmed exactly that point: that by expanding commercial relations, they could have been talking about uranium, which would confirm the president’s suggestion that they were seeking uranium from Niger.

Wilson: Well, there’s a couple of problems with that. First of all, the meeting never took place. An intermediary came to this official, and said, “I want you to meet with these guys. They’re interested in talking about expanding commercial relations.” The person who talked to me said, “Red flags went up immediately, I thought of U.N. Security Council sanctions, I thought of all sorts of other reasons why we didn’t want to have any meeting. I declined the meeting,” and this was out of the country, on the margins of an OIC meeting. So it was a meeting that did not take place."

5. January, 2004 Wilson Speaks Again to His Source [Mayaki] (“The Politics of Truth” p.28): Source [Mayaki] tells Wilson that “Baghdad Bob” was probably the Iraqi he [Mayaki] met at the OAU meeting in 1999,.

6. May 2, 2004 Wilson Appears on “Meet the Press”(MSNBC, transcript): "MR. RUSSERT: George Tenet in a statement said that a Niger official did say to you there may have been discussions about a potential business dealings and maybe that could have been a suggestion of uranium.

AMB. WILSON: That's right. And, of course, as I put in the book, there was a meeting on the margins of an OAU summit between a senior Niger official and an Iraqi official who turns out to be the former minister of information, Baghdad Bob."

7. July 7, 2004 Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Report released: [Wilson] said that Mayaki did meet with the Iraqi delegation but never discussed what was meant by “expanding commercial relations." (Senate Intelligence report, page 44).

Patrick R. Sullivan

'I believe, though I may be wrong on this, that Wilson was working as a lobbyist for the Saudis.'

He'd have to be registered then.

richard mcenroe

Say! This just got LOTS easier!

If Juan Cole's agin it, I'm for it...

kim

JC is so emblamatic of ignorant partisanship that it is safe to oppose whatever he says or writes, thinks or means. Pere Ubujuanu al-Flamoidiota.
==============================

kim

Juan's cabeza en el Colo.
==========================

Jor

My quick glance says they are strong on documenting that Wilson's wife was involved in picking Wilson for the trip, but very light in explaining why that matters.

That's the key point. Why does it matter? How many people honey moon in Niger?

Just pretend for a second Clinton was president, and all the details of this story were the same. What would you then do?

ed

Hmmm.

"That's the key point. Why does it matter? How many people honey moon in Niger? "

How about nepotism?

How about a partisan analyst in the CIA arranging a fact finding mission for her husband, who has no obvious qualifications, who then goes on and lies about it in a NYT op-ed and spends a few months on the talk show circuit?

Does that look like a setup to you? Because that sure looks like a setup to me.

And that's not important?

Rider

Clue: Leakgate has nothing to do with a trip to Niger.

Clue: The prosecutor is not interested in who took a trip to Niger or why or who paid for the peanuts on the flight.

Clue: Leakgate has nothing to do with anything that Mr. Wilson said or did.

Clue: Leakgate has everything to do with what Matt Cooper's and Judy Miller's source(s) said and did.

On the basis of Matt Cooper's e-mails alone, it is clear that Karl Rove has breached security by revealing highly classified information about an American agent (thereby blowing the cover of a CIA front company and an entire network of agents involved in keeping WMD out of the hands of terrorists, btw).

At a minimum, the President should revoke Mr. Rove's security clearance, so that he does not have access to classified materials...if he really is concerned about protecting national security, the identities of American agents now working, etc.

sniveling lurker

So many folks waxing so many lies. As I understand the majority of the above comments, this incident apparently took place in an absolute vacuum in that we are to completely discount both individuals' life work; in the case of Rove, a long-documented career made of just these kind of dishonorable (behind-the-scenes innuendo) smear campaigns, and for Wilson, a well-documented honorable career as a diplomat in the service of this great nation. I guess neither counts for much when people have already decided what they want to believe, eh?

ed

Hmmmm.

@ sniveling lurker

and for Wilson, a well-documented honorable career as a diplomat in the service of this great nation.

You're not JukeBoxGrad in disguise are you?

And it's really funny that you think you're going to be able to do anything with such a lame post. Pretty much everyone here knows what a liar Wilson is.

Man that's the way to build credibility! With strong fact-filled posts that extend everyone's understand with vigorous new ideas.

Have you considered starting your own blog? With insightful comments like those, you'll be dragging in those visitors by the millions!

Really!

ed

Hmmmm.

@ Rider

Oh goody. A game of "clue:".

Clue: Leakgate has nothing to do with a trip to Niger.

Absolutely correct! Instead it has everything to do with a deceitful NYT op-ed written by Wilson.

Clue: The prosecutor is not interested in who took a trip to Niger or why or who paid for the peanuts on the flight.

Absolutely correct! He is however interested in whomever revealed classified information. And, in case you didn't know this, a grand jury can extend their inquiry into acts other than for which it was originally empaneled.

So who knows where the prosecutor is going? Perhaps he's going after a bunch of anti-Bush people in the CIA, or their spouses. That would be a funny thing wouldn't it?

Clue: Leakgate has nothing to do with anything that Mr. Wilson said or did.

Awww. You were doing so well up til now. Too bad.

This whole PlameGate thing is about Wilson using a government funded trip to Niger as the basis of an attack on the President and his policies. An attack that has been shown to largely be built on a bedrock of deceit and lies.

Clue: Leakgate has everything to do with what Matt Cooper's and Judy Miller's source(s) said and did.

Whoops! Looks like a trend, could be trouble for "Rider".

Wrong. The investigation goes far beyond those two reporters and encompasses many other individuals.

On the basis of Matt Cooper's e-mails alone, it is clear that Karl Rove has breached security by revealing highly classified information about an American agent (thereby blowing the cover of a CIA front company and an entire network of agents involved in keeping WMD out of the hands of terrorists, btw).

Yep it's a trend alright. It's a terrible losing streak, but hopefully you'll pull something out of your butt at the end.

You should read up on the actual statutes involved. And then read up on the actual facts of the case. And then read up on the details of the case. And then perhaps read up on all the updates since this started a couple years ago. And then perhaps read up on who Plame really is and what her actual status is at the CIA.

It can't hurt. The case of virulent ignorance you've got now must be painful.

I suggest an antibiotic and a cold compress.

At a minimum, the President should revoke Mr. Rove's security clearance, so that he does not have access to classified materials...if he really is concerned about protecting national security, the identities of American agents now working, etc.

Oh well, nice try.

Please come back next time for the next showing of our fabulous show: "clue:"!

Thank you! You're beautiful! All of you!

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame