Memeorandum


Powered by TypePad

« His Silence Was Thunderous | Main | Valerie, Briefly »

March 16, 2007

Comments

Semanticleo

"OK, I had a brilliant insight, but its gone."

That's happening a lot lately.

BTW

Do you think Gonzalez should clean out his desk?

Neo

I haven't noticed if Bush is back from his Souther/Central American trip, but when he gets in DC he should call an press conference and fire someboyd at DOJ who Sen Schumer likes, Comey perhaps. Not for cause, but to show that he can do it if he wants to.

Rick Ballard

Neo,

Comey left "to pursue other interests" some time ago. Not fired - I suppose that people just stopped talking to him and he got a little lonely.

clarice feldman

The Prowler says Schumer's (and Comey and Fitz') last good friend in DOJ is Gonzales' deputy, Paul McNulty.


TM--Thank you for this--I've been arguing it all day to chuckleheads:
"Really Last Bit - the new attack theme, that Bush never had his security team investigate, is more comic gold. IF the White House security team had been overlapping with the FBI investigation, Waxman would have screamed about obstruction and cover-up and insisted that the White House stand back and let the pros do it. Well, if the other side is scraping that far under the barrel, they must be suffering."

Christopher Fotos

Well, we all know how long WaPo links last, but in At Hearing, Plame Rebukes Bush Administration linked at 9:48 pm east coast time here, reporter William Branigan does not mention the lawsuit. FWIW that was filed at 6:56 pm; perhaps it will turn into Saturday's story.

Enlightened

REP. YARMUTH: Without destroying - or disclosing classified information, what does *covert* mean?

MS. PLAME WILSON: I'm not a lawyer, but my understanding is....

So only a lawyer can define "covert"? And Fitzass didn't? She doesn't even know?

Priceless.

Enlightened

MS. PLAME WILSON: I found out very early in the morning when my husband came in and dropped the newspaper on the bed and said, "He did it."

"He" did it. Meaning they knew someone was going to do it. And it sure as HELL was not Cheney/Rove/Bush/Libby.

It was a pre-planned precision attack against the White House.

Alcibiades

Enlightened:

"He" did it. Meaning they knew someone was going to do it. And it sure as HELL was not Cheney/Rove/Bush/Libby.

Later she clarifies that this "he" means Novak. Apparently they had some notice he was writing the story.

And even so, none of the higher ups at the CIA could get in touch with him - and in code recognizable to him tell him not to publish.


azaghal

I don't have the energy or time to redo my last post (on the previous thread), which reproduced Toensing's cites to the legislative history of the IIPA. However I think her discussion of the IIPA is so important for a clear understanding of what's going on that I'm providing a link to my post--not for my few comments but for the reproduced material:

LegislativeHistory

Enlightened

MS. PLAME WILSON: .....

And I of course alerted my superiors at the agency, and I was told, don't worry; we'll take care of it.

Her superiors at CIA told her the leak would not happen. So who dropped the ball on getting her name out there again?

clarice feldman

Well, kudos for azaghal who sometime ago persuasively argued from Toensing's earlier remarks that the Fitzgera;d prosecution was from the outset a Bait and Switch operation.

Barry Dauphin

So, Val doesn't know her what her legal status was, even today?! Then how could any of the "leakers" have known her status back in 2003? She doesn't know her legal status...exactly what kind of spy is she? The incompetent kind? Maxwell Smart anyone?

Sue

Leave Smart out of this. He would be embarrassed by the way the Wilsons have handled her covertiness.

azaghal

MS. PLAME WILSON: I found out very early in the morning when my husband came in and dropped the newspaper on the bed and said, "He did it."


Posted by: Enlightened | March 16, 2007 at 06:53 PM

No doubt balancing breakfast on a tray in his other hand.

jerry

"'He' did it. Meaning they knew someone was going to do it. And it sure as HELL was not Cheney/Rove/Bush/Libby."

Oh please Enlightened, Novak had called them about his soon to be published article, and Wilson had reacted strongly - "he" is clearly Novak.

"It was a pre-planned precision attack against the White House." What are you 'smoking' Enlightened?

The only precision was that only someone like a VP or his Chief of Staff could have possibly known details about Plame's ID.

And TM, why now cling to the "partisan power-lines/OVP talking points" that 1) Plame wasn't "covert" (think of Toensing as a very bad investment advisor defending her recs, and ignore Hayden's recent advice to Waxman) and 2) that Val was responsible for sending Joe (why not just say that his mother sent him, it's about as honest given what we've learned today)?

We can always more and more narrowly define "covert" like Toensing (as previous positions are overrun). I'm looking forward to Victoria T pleading the 5th as to whether "someone" like Libby or Matalin consulted with her about outing Val (IMO the real target of the OVP, and maybe the President, rather than Joe).

Enlightened

Here's another person, tears in eyes, running to Val-the-Patriot. And the bi-partisan SSCI refused to let him change his testimony?

REP. VAN HOLLEN: Now we don't want to reveal -- we don't want you to reveal any classified information or anyone's identity, but my question is, have you talked with that CPD reports officer who was interviewed by the Senate committee?

MS. PLAME WILSON: Yes, Congressman, and I can tell you that he came to me almost with tears in his eyes. He said his words had been twisted and distorted.

He wrote a memo, and he asked his supervisor to allow him to be re-interviewed by the committee. And the memo went nowhere, and his request to be re-interviewed so that the record could be set straight was denied.

REP. VAN HOLLEN: So, just so I understand, Mr. Chairman, if I could -- so, therewas a memo written by the CPD officer, upon whose alleged testimony the Senate wrote its report that contradicts the conclusions --

MS. PLAME WILSON: Absolutely.

REP. VAN HOLLEN: -- contradicts the conclusions from that report.

MS. PLAME WILSON: Yes, sir.

Enlightened

Yeah, ok, CIA didn't cover her back when she allegedly told them Novak was gonna spew. Ohhhkayyyy. The plan worked.

clarice feldman

Roberts says otherwise, per York.

Rick Ballard

Enlightened,

Can you think of a better way for the CIA to say: "Screw you Val, you made your bed, shut up and go to sleep in it."

'Cause that's what they did.

azaghal

Who's this clown "jerry"? I miss Carol.

Enlightened

Rick - What really irks me is the absolute phoniness of this whole circus.

The pontificating by Dems re subject matter with no relation to the Committee agenda, their preamble to reciting libtard talking points, and the ultimate in hilarity is she doesn't even know what "covert" means, she's just not an attorney dang bust it.

Priceless.

jerry

"Clown"... but I'm a regular, well maybe that should be an 'irregular,' but nevertheless....

"azaqhal"

I feel like I'm in Ghostbusters, are you The Gatekeeper (wishing for an engendered 'you' here)?

Jose

She gave a pretty clear and simple definition of what "covert" means, not that anyone with an IQ over 80 really needed it.

Sue

Please. Scary Larry Johnson will tell you he was covert. At the same time he tells you he was an analyst. Covert means something entirely different within the CIA as it does within the DoJ.

MayBee

REP. LYNCH: Thank you. And I want to go back to that Senate Intelligence Committee hearing. There were three Republican senators who included a more definitive statement which -- now this is a quote. It said, "The plan to send the former ambassador to Niger was suggested by the former ambassador's wife, a CIA employee." What is your reaction to that statement in the Senate report about the genesis of your husband's trip to Niger in 2002?

MS. PLAME WILSON: Congressman, it's incorrect. It's been borne out in the testimony during the Libby trial, and I can tell you that it just doesn't square with the facts.
---
What is she talking about?
Jeff would never let Toensing get away with such a blatant misstatement.

Enlightened

MayBee - Val says the CPD guy that wrote that memo for the SSCI was crying and said the SSCI changed his testimony and would not let him re-testify...

TexasIsHeaven

"Who's this clown "jerry"? I miss Carol."

azaghal, I miss Carol too.

Half the time I could never understand what she was saying, half the time I could never make some of the connections, but the imagery of her writings I found very interesting.

Much more interesting and entertaining than the drooling and slobbering trolls that come by here.


MayBee

enlightened- I read that, and I also remember Joe having made a similar assertion years ago.
I'm just curious how she thinks that assertion was borne out by the Libby trial, as she said today.
If anything, all evidence in the Libby trial (and Fitzgerald himself) contradicts her assertion.

Tom Maguire

So why didn’t Patrick Fitzgerald, the special counsel investigating the “leak,” close up shop long ago?

One possible answer is that someone lied about a material fact when testifying before the grand jury or obstructed justice in some other way. If that is the case, the prosecutor should indict.

A NoPrize for guessing who wrote that in Oct 2005, just before the Libby indictment.

In the larger context of her article, I am not sure how she would rally an argument that her key "material" qualifier was not met.

yes, it is V Toensing herself.

And TM, why now cling to the "partisan power-lines/OVP talking points" that 1) Plame wasn't "covert" (think of Toensing as a very bad investment advisor defending her recs, and ignore Hayden's recent advice to Waxman) and 2) that Val was responsible for sending Joe (why not just say that his mother sent him, it's about as honest given what we've learned today)?

Kidding?

I think the "not legally covert" is much stronger than yesterday, since Waxman played waltz music rather than nailed it down as best he could (which would have been citing a CIA Counsel opinion.)

As to "Val not involved", did you seriously learn something today that made you think she was not?

What I learned was that the guy with the idea talked it over with her first; she and the guy went to her boss, who asked her (not the other guy) to write it up; she invited Joe, then introduced him at the meeting.

Oh, yeah - in 1999 she really had been involved.

Add it up, and don't make me laugh by saying she was not involved.

Or actually, go ahead - it's almost St. Patrick's Day, so starting it with a laugh is fine.

MikeS

The White House asks, “Who sent Wilson?”
The answer comes back, “His wife did it.”
The wife says, “No, I didn’t do it.”

It would be easy to just assume that the CIA had made yet another mistake. In this case I find it easier to believe that Valerie simply suffers from the same muddle as Joe Wilson. Joe thought his report had debunked the Niger rumor, while the CIA judged that his report reinforced the suspicions. Similarly, when Val and the CIA look at the same set of facts, they reach opposite conclusions.

You would think that when Joe was complaining to State and hustling reporters, his GS14 wife would say, “But Joe it’s not true! You didn’t debunk anything, and the VP doesn’t know who you are.”

Lew Clark

So, lets get this straight. Armitage blows our topmost super-secret agent's cover to Novak. Novak calls the agent's house and talks to her husband (part-time not-so-top secret CIA mint tea drinker) about the story. But, Mr. and Mrs. Double 00 can't get anyone in CIA to call Navak and get him to quash the story. Why wasn't the result of the Special Council's investigation into the disclosure of the identity of a covert agent's identity, the indictment of someone (everyone?) at CIA?
But, on the positive side, sending the VP's COS to prison for perjury will put the fear of God into those people at CIA. Because, next time the CIA screws up, the punishment will be sending the President's dog to the pound!

Pofarmer

We can always more and more narrowly define "covert" like Toensing (as previous positions are overrun).

Toensing has same the same thing since the beginning. It's just that moving the goal posts on something this solid won't work. She just keeps on kicking em through.

MayBee

Westmoreland tries to clear up the paper trail issue. Plame has not been Wilson's wife for nothing- she has learned the art of the non-answer:
REP. WESTMORELAND: Mm-hmm. But -- but what I'm trying to say is, do you think therewould not have been a paper trail of how his name came about, who would have mentioned it first, or -- I mean, to me that's a pretty important assignment to give somebody and, you know, maybe somebody would want to say, "Hey, that was my idea. That was my guy that I was sending over the re," and want to take credit for it. But it seems like everybody's running from it.

MS. PLAME WILSON: Congressman, I believe one of the pieces of evidence that was introduced in the Libby trial was an INR memo of that meeting, where it states, in fact, my husband was not particularly looking forward to -- he didn't think it was necessary. ..

Pofarmer

Similarly, when Val and the CIA look at the same set of facts, they reach opposite conclusions.

Some analyst.

Pofarmer

One last time, then I quit.

And why, oh why, would it be important if her name came out as working at the CIA? How many women work at the CIA? You gonna tell me she was doing "covert" work using her real name?

Man, the left is a bunch of suckers.

Enlightened

Waxman the asshole really frosted me on this one, and BTW I think Westmoreland scared them, and had ALOT more questions.


WESTMORELAND
But my point is in his piece titled, "What I Didn't Find in Africa," he disputes the Bush administration's claims of -- therewas no evidence that Niger was selling it.

*****But you coming from a(n) intelligence background, you don't just depend on one report from one country or one source to base all your intelligence on, do you?*****

Wouldn't you gather it from a bunch of different sources and then kind of put it together and look at it, and not just one -- from one particular instance?

MS. PLAME WILSON: That's correct, Congressman.

REP. WAXMAN: The gentleman's time has expired.


So again, nothing was ever debunked about The Congo references to uranium. And Waxman cut that line off -

Cuts off the Bush Lied/People Died meme at the knees. Since there's NO PROOF other countries in Africa were not proliferating for Iraq.

Jeff

Tom

Thank you for the priceless quotation from Toensing circa October 18 2005. Beautiful.

From the coverage I have seen (and it's true, I haven't seen Fox, but I don't take that to be determinative), it has in fact not been a bad day for Wilsophiles.

Also, you missed the point, I think, of the hearing, which Waxman was quite explicit was not limited to the necessarily narrow question of criminal culpability. Also, there's no question the Democrats (and Plame) were floating the alternative, Fitzgerald interpretation of covertness under IIPA to counter Toensing's interpretation. True, they don't cite any CIA counsel interpretation. But did the minority? Seemed to me the line they stuck with was that there's no evidence that anyone at the White House knew she was covert, under cover, and that her status was classified.

Also, I don't believe Plame claimed today that she was not involved. I believe she claimed that she neither suggested, nor recommended, nor authorized her husband for the mission. Yes, Wilson initially said she wasn't involved apart from asking him to come to the CIA. (Note that I don't believe he ever categorically said she was not involved at all - the notion that he did arose, I believe, from a seemingly malicious misquotation of his book.) And he changed his story once he learned of the memo/email - isn't it possible that he did not know about the memo/email?

As for the SSCI's apparent misuse of evidence, we'll see if the committee can get its hands on the memo written by Plame's coworker explaining that and how the SSCI twisted what he said to make it appear that he was saying Plame offered up her husband's name in the sense that she suggested him originally.

lurker
Do you think Gonzalez should clean out his desk?

I don't think he should but he probably will next week.

Rick Ballard

"Man, the left is a bunch of suckers."

Even worse, they're fools. Flocking as moths to the flicker of every halfassed philospher's glow since Hegel. Nothing they propose has ever worked nor will it in the future, yet for the simpletons of the left 'new' will forever equal 'better'. The fact that it has yet to in two hundred years means nothing to those as capable of cheap emotion as they are incapable of thought.

Pofarmer

Also, you missed the point, I think, of the hearing, which Waxman was quite explicit was not limited to the necessarily narrow question of criminal culpability.

Well,shit man, where's the fun if you limit the scope of a Kangaroo Court. Just make sure you don't let the opposition ask any, ya know, questions.

Sue

isn't it possible that he did not know about the memo/email?

Anything is possible. He probably didn't know she was also responsible for him going in 1999. Or, wait, didn't Joe tell us that? Yes, it is possible for someone not to know something. Especially if they lean your direction in the political arena.

jerry

"Oh, yeah - in 1999 she really had been involved.

Add it up, and don't make me laugh by saying she was not involved.

Or actually, go ahead - it's almost St. Patrick's Day, so starting it with a laugh is fine."


This really has been all about Val all along, hasn't it?

Wrap it up in Joe, but Val was the real knife in the heart of the fake PR for the war, wasn't she?

Of course Val would be outed by the war hawks in the WH, how could their BS war PR hope to survive the light of day if a dedicated and patriotic WMD analyst had done all she could for this cause and yet could not find 'real' evidence of WMDs in Iraq.

Who needs real facts, after all, the right wing fog machine only needs a 'leader' to defend, and the support of it's herd... over the cliff, why not?

Charlie (Colorado)

On the "val doesn't know if she's convert" thing...

Bullshit.

Back when I was NOC'ed, I *knew*. I was told who I could tell what I was doing, which is to say "Nobody,l not even my fiancee". I was told where I was going --- but only after I was cleared onto the program. Before that, I was told "you'll be with 100 miles of such-and-such". I was told what I could tell other people, what my "cover firm" was, and who to call in emergency.

There is no goddamn way that she could be "covert" and not know it.

Jeff

Your Rove-Miers analogy is actually quite telling, but not in the way you suggest, because you gloss over precisely one of the important issues in both cases: who originally had and brought up the idea. You say:

Rove and Miers discuss firing 93 US attorneys.

But a key question presently at issue is, just whose idea was it? Who brought it up with whom between them? Who suggested it, in other words?

If the origin was in fact:

Rove suggested to Miers that Bush fire 93 US attorneys (including that damn pesky Patrick Fitzgerald)

then you wouldn't say

Miers suggested that Bush fire 93 attorneys

would you? I mean, of course, if you're telling the truth.

Similarly, if Bush went on to fire 93 USAs, you wouldn't suggest that Miers had fired 93 USAs.

"Recommended" is a little trickier - I think there's a non-analogy here. Because you might say "MIers went to Bush and recommended that he fire 93 USAs" even if the idea originated with Rove. But if Rove and Miers intended to go together to Bush to tell him about the great idea, and Gonzales told Miers to write up a memo on the idea, including why it was a good one, you wouldn't say Miers recommended the idea in the sense that she picked it out of all the ideas in the universe, which is the sort of thing people are saying when they say Plame recommended Wilson. She singled him out, the same way you single out a resaurant when someone says, "Where do you recommend we go for dinner?"

Sue

Jeff,

Is it possible you could explain to me why Valerie's assistant was upset about a phone call from 'someone' in the OVP? Why she needed consoling? Why she was so upset it caught the attention of 'someone' passing by who had the idea to send Joe? Any plausible reason we should believe her story?

lurker
Of course Val would be outed by the war hawks in the WH, how could their BS war PR hope to survive the light of day if a dedicated and patriotic WMD analyst had done all she could for this cause and yet could not find 'real' evidence of WMDs in Iraq.

Once again, Val wasn't outed by the war hawks. Val was outed by Armitage and Wilson.

Once again, WMDs were found. Saddam had every intent to get those sanctions lifted in order to resume his WMD programs.

Pofarmer

Well Jeff, you have a problem there. You see, Fitzgeraled was given "The powers of the AG with regards to this case" Removing him as a U.S. attorney wouldn't have done shit.

Face it, this was getting out some deadwood. Deadwood the Dims wanted in.

Pofarmer

And why, oh why, would it be important if her name came out as working at the CIA? How many women work at the CIA? You gonna tell me she was doing "covert" work using her real name?

Charlie (Colorado)

Of course Val would be outed by the war hawks in the WH, how could their BS war PR hope to survive the light of day if a dedicated and patriotic WMD analyst had done all she could for this cause and yet could not find 'real' evidence of WMDs in Iraq.

It's the drugs, right?

Come on, Jerry, you're circling back. Plame was a "dedicated and patriotic WMD analyst" but she didn't have the authority to suggest Joe but the SSCI has the memo in which she did it. And she was the one and only voice saying "no WMDs" while the Bush Administration ignored overwhelming evidence of no WMDs that no one else saw, not in the US, in Britain, in France, in Russia, in Israel, or in Arab countries ... and managed to warp time so as to mislead Congress and the other intelligence communities two and three years before the election.

MayBee

And he changed his story once he learned of the memo/email - isn't it possible that he did not know about the memo/email?

He changed his story once he learned OTHER people knew about the email.
Do you remember Wilson's elaborate tale of how Valerie had the 'misfortune' to greet him at the door to the CIA, and so just walked him into the meeting. And it was from that coincidence that other people mistook her participation in the meeting?

lurker

And they probably forgot about that email to this very day.

OT:

Senators To Probe Khalid Sheik Mohammed’s Handling

Lindsey Graham is involved.

Pofarmer

Senators To Probe Khalid Sheik Mohammed’s Handling

Lindsey Graham is involved.

You gotta be frickin kiddin me.

I've lost all respect for Lindsey Graham.

I wanna know more about Fred Thompson. I want a hard ass for Pres.

Elliott

Maybee,

Apropos of the recycling you note, doesn't this exchange Enlightened noted seem somehow familiar?

REP. VAN HOLLEN: So, just so I understand, Mr. Chairman, if I could -- so, there was a memo written by the CPD officer, upon whose alleged testimony the Senate wrote its report that contradicts the conclusions --

MS. PLAME WILSON: Absolutely.

REP. VAN HOLLEN: -- contradicts the conclusions from that report.

I am reliably informed by someone involved in the Plame witness prep caper that Val was supposed to deliver the following answer to Rep. Van Hollen: "Yes, Congressman, that is correct. And, if standard intelligence procedures were followed, that report would go straight to the Vice President. That report was prepared at the behest of the Vice President, the conclusions of that report were conveyed to the Vice President, and the Vice President chose to ignore the findings of that report when he made his case for war to the American people."

Pofarmer

Sure are a bunch of CIA types constantly changing their story on this thing.

Hmmmmmm.

MayBee

Politics of Truthiness, p 5
Were they suggesting that my wife had somehow influenced a decision to send me to the middle of the Sahara Desert?...

Apart from being the conduit of a message from a colleague in her office asking if I would be willing to have a conversation about Niger's uranium industry, Valerie had nothing to do with the matter.
Though she worked on weapons of mass destruction issues, she was not at the meeting I attended where the subject of Niger's uranium was discussed, when the possibility of my actually traveling to the country was broached. She definitely had not proposed that I make the trip.

jerry

"she didn't have the authority to suggest Joe but the SSCI has the memo in which she did it."

I think the point from today's testimony is that she didn't suggest Joe, someone else did and she supported it. All this "nepotism" nonsense is a smear.

"And she was the one and only voice saying "no WMDs" while the Bush Administration ignored overwhelming evidence of no WMDs that no one else saw, not in the US, in Britain, in France, in Russia, in Israel, or in Arab countries"

But there were a variety of opinions saying that the Iraq WMD story was nonsense Charlie: UNSCOM, Australia, probably France, the UN weapons inspectors (especially Scott Ritter)... hey I'm no pro but I'd bet there were many more (I might even be able to find them on the web).

I think there was testimony today that the SSCI was misleading, given that it was controlled by the Republican majority I think we should see what the Democrats can add to the much quoted SSCI report.

Pofarmer

I think the point from today's testimony is that she didn't suggest Joe, someone else did and she supported it. All this "nepotism" nonsense is a smear.

According to whom?

Pofarmer

Scott Ritter was after Iraqi Freedom, correct?

The Egyptians were warning us Saddam had WMD's, the Kuwaiti's, the Saudi's, were all warning us to be cautious. Most everybody thought Iraq had WMD's.

lurker

Scott Ritter? He's part of that VIPS.

She was the one that typed the email.

And there were many quotations made by people world wide, including the Democrats, that say Saddam had WMDs and he was an imminent threat to the entire world.

Plame made the claim, which made it hearsay on her part.

Remember Wilson was forced to change his story once he was shown that email.

I am glad that the SSCI was produced by an unbiased group. I seriously doubt that the report was controlled by the Republican majority.

What the Democrats will add to are their blatant lies.

Sue

I think there was testimony today that the SSCI was misleading, given that it was controlled by the Republican majority I think we should see what the Democrats can add to the much quoted SSCI report.

How about we go ahead and write it for them, since we all know what they're going to say? BTW, Senator Bond said, as late as this evening, that the entirety of the memo Val prepared, parts of which you have seen through declassification, supports their conclusion. He has offered it to the Oversight committe for review. Wonder how they will spin it?

clarice feldman

Very funny article by IBD:"When all was said and done, the least preposterous sight at Friday's House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing could be found in the audience: namely, the woman dressed in hot pink who kept standing up behind Plame during her testimony to show the television viewers her 'Impeach Bush' T-shirt.(snip)


"By placing Plame under the hot spotlights, Democrats have unwittingly caused her story to melt before the public."

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=258936799316774>That's a Tranny IBD


Pofarmer

I don't know, but I hope Senator Bond is righteously pissed off. His private jet was late getting in tonight because of these hearings.

Jeff

Is it possible you could explain to me why Valerie's assistant was upset about a phone call from 'someone' in the OVP?

I don't know, but the fact that Plame first said that her subordinate was concerned suggests that perhaps she wasn't used to getting calls directly from OVP on an important topic. We also don't know the substance and tone of the person calling from OVP.

Why she needed consoling?

What on earth gave you the idea she needed or was receiving consoling? Could it be, oh I don't know, John Podhoretz' belittling and inaccurate representation of what Plame testified to?

Why she was so upset it caught the attention of 'someone' passing by who had the idea to send Joe?

Again, what on earth gives you the idea that Wilson's fellow officer's attention was caught by the subordinate being upset? In fact, given the substance of his response, it sounds much more like the substance of the conversation caught his attention - namely, the fact that there was a report of Iraq in the process of purchasing uranium from Niger that the OVP wanted to know more about.

Any plausible reason we should believe her story?

Well, apart from the fact that she was under oath, a fact she herself emphasized, I take it part of the reason we should believe her is that the story is subject to disconfirmation from at least three people in CPD. What's more, it is also subject to disconfirmation from OVP. I also know of no public information that is inconsistent with what she testified to.

Are you saying you believe she is lying? Why do you believe she is lying under oath, if so?

Sue

Here is Senator Bond's quote on the memo...

We have also checked the memorandum written by Ms. Wilson suggesting her husband to look into the Niger reporting. I also stand by the Committee’s finding that this memorandum indicates Ms. Wilson did suggest her husband for a Niger inquiry. Because the quote [the portion of the memo quoted in the Senate report] obviously does not represent the entirety of the memorandum, I suggest that the House Government Reform Committee request and examine this memorandum themselves. I am confident that they will come to the same conclusion as our bipartisan membership did.

pete

03/16/07 VOI: Mortar fire killes 1, wounds 12 in Hilla

03/16/07 VOI: Gunmen kill member of the Missan Chamber of Commerce

03/16/07 VOI: Roadside bomb kills 1 civilian wounds 4 in Baghdad

03/16/07 VOI: Suicide attack wounds 11 in in Diala province

03/16/07 MCT: Violence, fear pervade once-vibrant Baghdad

03/16/07 DoD Identifies Marine Casualty
Lance Cpl. Raymond J. Holzhauer, 19

03/16/07 DoD Identifies Army Casualty
Pfc. Alberto Garcia Jr., 23

03/16/07 DoD Identifies Army Casualty
Sgt. Robert M. Carr, 22

03/16/07 DoD Identifies Army Casualty
Spc. Stephen M. Kowalczyk, 32

03/16/07 DoD Identifies Army Casualty
Cpl. Brian L. Chevalier, 21

03/16/07 DoD Identifies Army Casualty
Spc. Adam J. Rosema, 27

03/16/07 DoD Identifies Marine Casualty
Lance Cpl. Steven M. Chavez, 20

03/16/07 AP: More Iraqi refugees expected in Europe

03/16/07 Reuters: Mortar fire kills 1, wounds 5 in southern Baghdad

03/16/07 Reuters: Two policemen killed in Kirkuk

03/16/07 Reuters: Gunmen wound Mayor of Sadr City

03/16/07 TexasObserver: Suicide Was the Only Way Out

03/16/07 BBC: 'Friendly fire' killing unlawful

03/16/07 MNF: Task Force Lightning Soldiers attacked - 1 soldier killed

03/15/07 zanesvilletimesrecorder: Former Crooksville resident killed in Iraq

03/15/07 Reuters: One policeman kill, one wounded in Mosul

03/15/07 Reuters: Clashes between insurgents and police leave 6 dead

arrowhead

"...[that] Bush never had his security team investigate, is more comic gold. IF the White House security team had been overlapping with the FBI investigation, Waxman would have screamed about obstruction and cover-up and insisted that the White House stand back and let the pros do it. Well, if the other side is scraping that far under the barrel, they must be suffering." TM

Waxman and Van Hollen's frantic comments/questions on the lack of a White House investigation were particularly amusing. After all, it was all that remained after Victoria Toensing basically demolished their little witch hunt. I thought Van Hollen was going to burst into tears and throw a temper tantrum!

MayBee

Here is what the unanimous portion of the SSCI says:

Some CPD officials could not recall how the office decided to contact the former
ambassador, however, interviews and documents provided to the Committee indicate that his wife, a CPD employee, suggested his name for the trip. The CPD reports officer told Committee staff that the former ambassador's wife "offered up his name" and a memorandum to the Deputy
Chief of the CPD on February 12, 2002, from the former ambassador's wife says, "my 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 CPD sent a cable [redacted] requesting concurrence
with CPD's idea to send the former ambassador to Niger and requesting any additional
information from the foreign government service on their uranium reports. The former
ambassador's wife told Committee staff that when CPD decided it would like to send the former
ambassador to Niger, she approached her husband on behalf of the CIA and told him "there's this
crazy report" on a purported deal for Niger to sell uranium to Iraq.
The former ambassador had traveled previously to Niger on the CIA's behalf |
The former ambassador was selected for the 1999 trip after his wife
mentioned to her supervisors that her husband was planning a business trip to Niger in the near
future and might be willing to use his contacts in the region

That is not from the (supposedly) controversial Republican remarks.
As you can see, Valerie tried very hard today to pretend she didn't understand that she was being asked why there wouldn't be a paper trail or memory of how/why someone was selected to go on a CIA mission for our country -for the Vice President!
Instead, we have two crying low-level CIA employees and a wife too afraid to be left alone with her 2 year olds.

Pofarmer

Are you saying you believe she is lying? Why do you believe she is lying under oath, if so?

Because she is heavily invested in this story and it is worth a ton of money to her.

jerry

"I am glad that the SSCI was produced by an unbiased group. I seriously doubt that the report was controlled by the Republican majority."

Oh come on lurker, if you hadn't added that "unbiased group" garbage (did I get the French inflection right?) I might have only attacked the absurd idea that Saddam was a threat to anyone other than the poor citizens of Iraq.

But now I must say, that anyone who can view Senator Pat Roberts (UT) as unbiased - is someone who has never been distracted by an original thought.

Pat Roberts made his short career on the Senate intel committee notable by blatantly blocking any substantial inquiry by the Senate into the behavior of the WH regarding Plame, you might as well have suggested that the SSCI report was written by Libby's attorneys.

MayBee

Jeff- did you think it was borne out by evidence in the Libby trial that Plame didn't suggest Wilson for the trip?

Sue

What on earth gave you the idea she needed or was receiving consoling? Could it be, oh I don't know, John Podhoretz' belittling and inaccurate representation of what Plame testified to?

I don't know. I don't remember anything he has written today, but I could have. I was going on what I would have done had a colleague of mine had come to me upset. Console them.

Again, what on earth gives you the idea that Wilson's fellow officer's attention was caught by the subordinate being upset?

The description she gave. Someone just passed by? And just happened to overhear?

what had just happened, someone passed by -- another officer heard this.

Are you saying you believe she is lying?

Not yet. But I'm close.

MayBee


Are you saying you believe she is lying? Why do you believe she is lying under oath, if so?

Because she is heavily invested in this story and it is worth a ton of money to her.

And there is absolutely no consequence to her doing so. Nobody is going to go after her for perjury if she lies.

jerry

Sorry, the Great Roberts is from Kansas. There's another guy (Senator) from UT that also bothers me.

Pofarmer

Let's look at this another way.

Let's say you are a super duper, super secret, super important, super covert, double naught spy. You happen to be married to someone who publishes an op-ed in the NY times calling the President, Vice President, and their staffs, liars.

A while later it becomes apparent, and gets written in print, that you behested said individul for his fact finding tour, and are, in fact, married to said individual.

You have two options.

a) Jump up and down screaming. "Oh, damn, it's me, it's me, I've been outed." And pose on the cover of Vanity Fair.

b) Keep your head down and STFU, becuase your work is very important, and nobody knows you by your real name anyway,(because, remeber, you are covert and all) and after all, there aren't any pictures published in any of the stories about you.

Robin Roberts

This is hilarious, quoting Plame's own words is now a "smear". Typical Democrat spin.

MayBee

What on earth gave the impression that the employee needed consoling?
PLAME: In February of 2002, a young junior officer who worked for me -- came to me very upset. She had just received a telephone call on her desk from someone -- I don't know who -- in the office of the vice- president asking about this report of this alleged sale of yellow cake uranium from Niger to Iraq . She came to me, and as she was telling me this --

Pofarmer

I might have only attacked the absurd idea that Saddam was a threat to anyone other than the poor citizens of Iraq.

Tell it to the Kuwati's.

MayBee

Anyway, I do think it is interesting that Plame's story is that someone from the OVP called a low-level staffer to ask about the Niger report.
Does anyone remember EW's FITZGERALD JUST CAUGHT LIBBY IN A LIE!!!! during Pincus's testimony, when Pincus reported just that? Seems that OVP had gotten this version of the story at one time, too. Was it a LIE?

Heh.

Sue

Maybee,

I asked Jeff that question earlier. I didn't catch his response, if he made one as to how Libby could be lying about the aide to Cheney initiating the question, and using the same information to show that the question from the VP came on the 13th. Another inconvenient fact, I suppose. It certainly explains how Val had ESP though. What it doesn't explain is how Joe Wilson knew the question came from the OVP. One of Libby's questions, too, that remained unanswered.

Sue

I worded that badly. I was trying to say the same thing you said and couldn't even get it right copying you. ::grin::

MayBee

I understood completely, Sue!

Sue

He knew that Joe had already -- my husband -- had already gone on some CIA mission previously do deal with other nuclear matters.

I need to look at the SSCI report again, but didn't it say that Joe had gone to Niger in 1999 on matters not related to Iraq? What other nuclear matters had Joe dealt with for the CIA? Maybe AJ was on to something. Maybe Joe was also a covert operative for the CIA. Maybe they have been hiding the real NOC right in front of our noses.

Sue

I understood completely, Sue!

Oh...jeeze...that is scary. ::grin::

ben

The Iraq WMD story was not nonsense, of course, Jerry conveniently forgets that not only did Iraq have WMD, they actually used it against their own people and the Iranians. The fact they refused to come clean on it, kicked out the inspectors for years, hobbled them when they were forced to allow them back in, was not a confidence booster. While no WMD was found, there is plenty of evidence Iraq was certainly interested in obtaining them. Jerry forgets that Saddam Hussein invaded Iran and Kuwait without provocation, lobbed Scud missiles into civilian areas of Israel which was not even a party to the First Gulf War, was paying families of suicide bombers in Israel. By deliberately setting fire to a thousand oil wells in Kuwait, he wasted billions in lost oil and caused one of the worst environmental disasters ever. One of the best statements Bush ever made was when he said "trusting in the sanity of Saddam Hussein is not an option"..If Saddam wanted to appear like he had WMD he did a good job of it..its like the guy who kills a bunch of people and then rushes out of a house and points a toy gun at police officers..

Jeff

The legislative history that Toensing cites in her statement is quite thin gruel for supporting her gloss of the IIPA's requirement that an intelligence officer have served overseas within five years of her outing to mean a foreign assignment of some extended duration, as distinct from having worked under cover overseas in the previous five years. As far as I can see, it amount to this from the Senate Report:

[T]he Committee has carefully considered the definition of "covert agent" and has included only those identities which it has determined to be absolutely necessary to protect for reasons of imminent danger to life or significant interference with vital intelligence activities.

So far so good. It's not disputed that Plame was involved in vital intelligence activities; and certainly being unable to continue participating in them interferes with them, and given her role as chief of operations (according to Hubris) for a unit of CPD working on Iraqi WMD, presumably it's significant interference. Anyway, none of this is among the elements of the statute. But then we get this:

Undercover officers and employees overseas may be in special danger when their identities are revealed. . . . (Emphasis added).

Does this settle it? It clearly cannot mean that the undercover officers have to be overseas when their identities are revealed. So it means that it's undercover officers who are or who have gone overseas. Is there any specification of the amount of time they must spend overseas? Is there any specification that the undercover officers must be on foreign assignment?

As far as I can tell, this offers nothing to support the notion that serving overseas must mean not just doing work overseas as an under cover officer, but having some foreign assignment of some extended duration where you are stationed abroad.

(I'll leave aside the point that the Senate Report does not specify what the point of its statement about undercover officers and empoyees overseas being in particular danger is supposed to mean as far as the statute goes. Is it just a statement of fact?)

Ralph L.

Jerry said:
"...Val (IMO the real target of the OVP, and maybe the President, rather than Joe)."

Too funny!

Pofarmer

Jeff

Even if work overseas means a day trip here or there, she wasn't overseas when she revealed her identity. She was in no danger.

MikeS

The US has been harmed by scandals such as Abu Ghraib, the failure to find stockpiles of WMD in Iraq, and the Bush Lied narrative. A loss of international esteem has a direct and negative effect on our ability to conduct diplomacy. A dwindling confidence that our own citizens have for our leadership affects our ability to conduct war.

The outrage is that the Bush Lied fable is itself a lie. It is made up out of whole cloth. No reasonable person could possibly believe it based on the evidence. Indeed President Bush is the central victim of the lie and the intelligence failures that spawned it. He is the poor soul who had to decide what to do about the terrifying intelligence he was receiving about Iraq’s WMD programs.

Whether by coincidence or design Joe Wilson saw an opportunity, early in the genesis of this outrage, to further his political ambitions. He seized that opportunity without regard for the truth or for the damage he would do to his country.

Sue

I'm still waiting on someone to start the cry to find out who outed the 3 covert operatives in the front pages of the LA Times. I believe it is time for some right wing blogger to start the ball rolling.

And I would also think someone would also want to know whether Ms. Plame was involved in the pressure leaks...

REP. KUCINICH: Now, again, these could all be isolated instances, but they seem to be part of a larger pattern. And I'm struck by what your husband, Joe Wilson, was quoted as saying in the book, "Hubris." Now according to the book, here's a quote, "Joe Wilson was upset, and said he regarded the leak as a warning to others. Stories like this are not intended to intimate me, since I've already told my story. But it's pretty clearly intended to intimidate others who might come forward. You need only look at the stories of intelligent analysts who say they've been pressured. They may have kids in college. They may be vulnerable to these types of smears."

Is this what you think was going on here?

MS. PLAME WILSON: When you look at -- and I will speak only to the realm of intelligence and you have the politicizing of that. Certainly Vice President Cheney's unprecedented number of visits to CIA headquarters in the run up to the war might be one example.

Did she reveal her own identity to a reporter in order to gripe about the VP's "unprecedented number of visits"?

Pofarmer

And, once again Jeff. Toensing wrote the frickin law. I think she outta know what it means.

MayBee

Poltics of Truth, p 6:


There had been a number of anonymous leaks to reporters from the intelligence community during thelate spring and early summer of 2003, claiming that Vice President Cheney, his chief of staff, Lewis "Scooter" libby, and even former Speaker of the House of Representatives Newt Gingrich had pressured analysts to skew intelligence analyses to back up the administrations preconceived political intentions.

I never knew he had thrown Newt in there at one time as well. Good thinking, Joe, to blame Gingrich for the Clinton era.

Pofarmer

He is the poor soul who had to decide what to do about the terrifying intelligence he was receiving about Iraq’s WMD programs.

Can you imagine? Savaged for not reading between the lines and somehow breaking up 9/11. Savaged reading the direct intelligence and going into Iraq and then be accused of lying.

Sue

We have a true case of someone revealing the identities of 3 covert operatives. A test case, if you will. Let's investigate, find out who revealed their identity, and try out the law on whether or not they are classified under the IIPA if they are not stationed overseas (or a foreign country). I'll even lead the way for calling on Fitzgerald to do the lead again. I'm sure we are just a matter of days from those over at the swamp and EW in getting behind me and calling for an investigation into the something so serious.

chirp...chirp...chirp...

Sue

BTW, their identities have been revealed and for some reason they are not on the cover of Vanity Fair, in full disguise, mind you. I wonder when their book deals will be in the works?

Pofarmer

Hey

I hear Fitz still has a GJ empanelled. It would be a great second act Sue.

lurker

Ah...so re-pete is the sockpuppet of sam. Or the other way around.

Sue

There had been a number of anonymous leaks to reporters from the intelligence community during thelate spring and early summer of 2003, claiming that Vice President Cheney

I'm convinced Valerie was behind the leaks. Maybe not directly to the press but to members of VIPS who were going to the press for her. Man, what I wouldn't give for the power to investigate her activities myself.

Jeff

how Libby could be lying about the aide to Cheney initiating the question, and using the same information to show that the question from the VP came on the 13th.

I think this is garbled, but I think I get the point.

This episode on February 12, 2002 is clearly not what Libby was referring to when he told Pincus that the CIA's decision to send an emissary to Niger was triggered by questions raised by an aide to VP Cheney during an agency briefing on intel about the purported Iraqi effort to acquire the uranium.

Now, we don't know the substance of the conversation between the member of OVP and Plame's subordinate at the Counterproliferation Division of the CIA. We don't know whether the aide simply asked questions directly of the CPD employee, in his/her own name, or whether the aide told the CPD employee that Cheney himself had questions about the intel.

But it is easy to imagine either way, that the aide simply asked questions as a member of OVP, CPD jumped, came up with the mission, and then the next day the word came of Cheney's interest in that question, and that of course overshadowed what they might have heard from a mere aide the day before. That undoubtedly would explain why Wilson was told by the CIA that his mission was in response to questions from Cheney (or from OVP - I can't remember). That undoubtedly would explain why the analyst (not the one involved in the INR memo, or the underlying report on the February 19, 2002 meeting at CIA with Wilson) at INR who was tasked with drawing up INR's own assessment of the African uranium story was also told that it was in response to interest from the Vice President's office (per the SSCI report, p. 42).

Sue

I hear Fitz still has a GJ empanelled.

Well there you go. I miss seeing Fitz! written everywhere. I'm sure he is more than willing to track down those who are putting our IC in danger by revealing their identities.

ben

Hey Jeff, get off this gloss B.S....the only thin gruel here is your plaintive bleating that Toensing "glossed" over IIPA..she didn't gloss over anything...name someone who is a greater authority than her on this topic..it is already clear that Plame was not "outed" by anyone except Armitage, so the question was she covert or not is really moot...but Toensing's testimony is pretty definitive that she wasn't covert..and this "chief of operation of a unit on WMD" sounds important, but its like Vice Presidents in banks, Valerie Plame was not a high level operative and don't kid yourself that "interrupting her work" was somehow crucial to our national security. Valerie and Joe are political hacks who are parties of an ongoing civil suit..do you really think there is any objectivity in anything she says? If there was any justice Joe and Val would have been charged with perjury ages ago.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame