Memeorandum


Powered by TypePad

« A Teachable Moment | Main | Lebanon / Israel / Gaza »

July 13, 2006

Comments

Jackson

I haven't seen anyone asking this question: Where did Fitz get the knowledge to obtain a release from the 3rd person (UGO)? How did he learn of that person's involvement?

Charles

Well, since the administration actually cooperated with the special prosecutor and encouraged its people to do so, maybe the UGO told him.

That might explain Fitzs reluctance to charge him with anything.

R C Dean

I see nothing but help here for Libby.

Gary Maxwell

Whos Who.

Joe Wilson is a damn liar.

Democrats made a mountain out of a molehill ( again).

Bob

To me this is part of Fitz slowly walking away from the whole mess. I've always felt that Wilson and company planned this just to hurt Bush during the election. But it took on more of life then they had hoped for. Remember, if Kerry had won the election this case would have never seen the light of day... But the cat was out of the bag, and Bush won. They then were counting on Bush not to appoint a SP. But they mis-underestimated Bush, and he called their bluff. Now their only story was to accuse the Bush administration outing Plane in revenge. Once that seemed to go nowhere, they tried to nail the administration on lying to the GJ.

They overplayed their hand and lost... it was as simple as that!

goddessoftheclassroom

The AP story (on Fox) is disgusting. They're paddling frantically to keep their meme afloat, but it's going down for the third time.

Sue

Jackson,

I don't think the 3rd person is UGO. UGO is the unnamed source. The waiver Fitzgerald had was from Harlow at CIA.

Lurker

I think Jackson was still wondering how Fitz learned of all 3 sources, specifically UGO, prior to bringing Novak in.

Lurker

WAPO says Novak named 3 sources.

Huh? Guess what WAPO's saying is that Novak is just revealing the names yesterday and today; not that Novak actually named three sources when he was subponaed before the GJ.

TS

Has anyone a link to the compendium of Joe Wilson's fabrications? I have seen him called "liar" but have never seen the full dossier.

Obliged,

Tim

Jimmy's Attack Rabbit

*****NOTE TO FUTURE HISTORIANS******

The story known as Nada-gate will rot your brain. However, if you have gotten this far, please contact one of your scientists as this story seems to be a perfect perpetual motion machine.

Now back to our regular scheduled Plame programming.

Lurker

OT: Army is going to end the Halliburton contract because the Iraqi reconstruction from our perspectiveis winding down. What this means is that Iraq is going to be responsible for continuing the reconstruction work - either through themselves or contract the work out.

So if Iraq ends up renewing the contract with Halliburton, there's nothing the dems can do to criticize the political connections between Halliburton and our government.

SaveFarris

Anyone else think that the next Jason Leopold article will be an Instant Comedy Classic?

Lurker

Joe Wilson and his cohorts had been saying that Plame was a covert agent and that WH reacted with revenge against Joe Wilson for his allegations that WH went to war against Iraq for the wrong reasons by "outing" Plame's identity.

Truth: there was no leak. There was no conspiracy in outing Plame's identiy on WH's part. BUT there's a heck of a conspiracy coming from the organizations that have connections with Joe Wilson.

pgl

The subtitle should be "Novak Reveals Nothing". And why isn't he revealing the name of his primary source?

Lurker

Anyone interested in Murtha's connection with the ABSCAM, the rest of the tape transcript is now online at American Spectator. Pretty damning.

Murtha - ABSCAM connections .

Harry

On the question of what did Fitz know and when did he know it, this shows that by January 12, '04 Fitz knew the source of the "leak" to Novak that Wilson's at-the-time-unnamed wife sent him, and knew that Novak had subsequently found her name in Who's Who and confirmed it with Harlow. Fitz therefore knew that her identity was not leaked in retaliation for anything, that Libby had not done it, and that there was no underlying crime. By this time Libby had been interviewed twice by the FBI, but had not appeared before the grand jury.

Redcoat

The WaPost continues it's absurd coverage of Plame,Howard Kurtz:

Critics say that Novak helped the administration retaliate against Wilson, who had become a prominent critic of Bush's conduct in the run-up to the Iraq war, by revealing that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA.

He wasn't a critic,he was a liar,there was no retaliation.

Novak triggered one of the capital's most tangled investigations with a July 2003 column reporting that Plame had suggested sending her husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, to Niger to investigate whether Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was trying to obtain nuclear material from that country -- an unsupported claim that was included in President Bush's State of the Union speech.

It has since been proven that,she did send him,and Saddam had tried to obtain Yellowcake,according to Wilson's own report.

At this point,I cannot operate under the assumption that Kurtz is just a lazy ignoramus,because this information has been out there,and even the most cursory examination of the Plame affair would expose a person to these facts.

He is a flat out liar.

Here's a link,but don't bother,nothing to see here.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/11/AR2006071100903.html

Pete

What about this Novak quote from July 21 2003 before he had a chance to make up a cover story:

Novak, in an interview, said his sources had come to him with the information. "I didn't dig it out, it was given to me," he said. "They thought it was significant, they gave me the name and I used it."

http://foi.missouri.edu/voicesdissent/columnistnames.html

topsecretk9

-- don't think the 3rd person is UGO. UGO is the unnamed source. The waiver Fitzgerald had was from Harlow at CIA.--

Novak says Fitz told him he had "2" waivers from his sources, when Novak showed for the day of questioning Fitz had a "3rd" Harlow too.

Lurker

OT: Both Powerline and AJStrata took a strong note in light of today's leftwingers' reporting of the recent SCOTUS ruling on the Hamdan case, which I was not aware of back in year 2002:

Geneva Treaty

Think this is one of many reasons that destroys the argument that this SCOTUS ruling of the Hamdan case destroys the argument of the NSA terrorist surveillance program.

Did SCOTUS consider this 2002 article before establishing the ruling?

I wonder.

Good Lt

TS -

Here's a WSJ editorial from Jun 2005 - practically clarivoyant in hidsight - which lays out some of Wilson's lies (and indicated that Rove wouldn't be charged, and that he was trying to warn the press "not to get too far out on Plame.")

topsecretk9

Pete

unfortunately, your beef is with Patrick Fitzgerald, not Novak, now.

Other Tom

How come Joe and Val aren't clamoring for John Harlow to be frog-marched? What did Rove do that Harlow didn't do? At least Rove never used her name. This thing is truly wondrous.

Lurker

According to a Wizbang post, it was Carville that had the Who's Who book...opened up to Joe Wilson's entry. It was in that show when Novak walked out. Think topsecret added the link to that post in the other thread yesterday.

According to Novak's recent article, it was UGO that gave him the info and the other two sources confirming Plame's identity.

Back to OT / Geneva, Jeb Babbin says:

"[W]ith the exception of the military tribunals tossed out by the Supreme Court's decision in Hamdan, the treatment of the terrorist enemy combatants - under the cited Defense Department and Army manuals - is believed to be consistent with Geneva standards. The media hype of this is entirely wrong.

In other words, our treatment of detainees is already in compliance with Common Article 3."

So...how can SCOTUS rule that the military tribunals were NOT in compliance with Common Article 3????

Wilson's a liar

Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive.

dan

I caught a couple of seconds of Chris Matthews on this subject. Once again, Matthews stated that Wilson challenged Bush's SOTU claim that Iraq had done a deal for yellowcake in Africa.

CosmicConservative

I think that there is something very interesting in the Fox News story on this. Apparently they attempted to interview Bill Harlow to confirm Novak's story and were told that Harlow could not comment on it because of the investigation. But then someone at the CIA said that Novak was lying and that Harlow had not only not confirmed Joe's wife was CIA, but that Harlow had repeatedly tried to talk Novak out of printing the story. This is a direct and very significant contradiction to Novak's story.

But Fitzgerald has statements from both Novak and Harlow. If there were such significant contradictions in their stories, it is extremely unlikely that Novak would be getting a free pass from Fitzgerald. So it is highly likely that Harlow is telling Fitzgerald essentially the same story that Novak is.

Which strongly implies that the CIA official who contradicts Novak's story is lying, and lying in a big way.

So the question that should be getting asked in all this is why this CIA official would tell such a lie? It smells like a coverup to me. And what this CIA official is covering up is likely the fact that the Plame affair as well as the engineered leaks to the media have been a concerted effort to damage George W. Bush by some element within the CIA itself.

So if I were an investigative reporter in Washington D.C., I would be trying to find out who this anonymous CIA official is who is calling Novak a liar. Because if you find that person, you are almost certainly finding one of the key anti-Bush people within the CIA, and by finding out who he/she spends their time with, you could blow the lid off of the biggest story that hasn't been told in Washington. Who are the people in the CIA that have been criminally conspiring to damage their sitting President in violation of statutes, ethics and their specific oaths taken as members of the U.S. Intelligence community.

I wish someone would pursue that angle.

Bruce Hayden

Novak indicated that he had waivers from all three of his sources. But only two of them, Rove and Harlow, have admitted publically that they talked to him, and that is why he has only named them publically. Fitz though knew of all of them before interviewing him.

jerry

Novak's and Rove's public statements have indicated that the investigation isn't over, there was even some indication of particular targets in sight in Karl's Aspen comments.

As to WH motive's there's still that creepy quote that Wilson's wife "is fair game." Real phony-baloney tough guys in this Administration - sort of like their recent phony preening regarding the economy.

Lurker

CosmicConservative, the liberals and leftwingers are not interested in exploring that avenue. Perhaps this is one of the investigations that DOJ had been doing the last few months?

Is this finally clicking in Pete's head?

I wonder....

topsecretk9

Cosmic...does it say Current ot Ex Cia official?

Bruce Hayden

I also found interesting that apparently this all started inadvertantly: In my sworn testimony, I said what I have contended in my columns and on television: Joe Wilson's wife's role in instituting her husband's mission was revealed to me in the middle of a long interview with an official who I have previously said was not a political gunslinger. After the federal investigation was announced, he told me through a third party that the disclosure was inadvertent on his part.

Lurker

Actually, it's Libby's Aspen comments. Of course, Plame was fair game once Joe Wilson outed her out. She never was fair game on WH's part.

I would consider Clinton and Gore's reporting of "zero deficits" phony-baloney as there was alot of fudging of those numbers back then to throw off the conclusion.

capitano
At this point,I cannot operate under the assumption that Kurtz is just a lazy ignoramus,because this information has been out there,and even the most cursory examination of the Plame affair would expose a person to these facts.

He is a flat out liar.

Redcoat --

I'm with you. Some say he's one of the straighter MSM reporters. But, I've seen Kurtz dodge and weave when confronted with inconvenient facts, claiming ignorance about mini-blockbuster news that anyone with a link to Drudge would at least have one of his minions check before going on TV or writing a column.

No, he's not just too busy to know everything, he's lying.

Wilson's a liar

CosmicConservative - didn't you get the memo? The High Priests of Our Right To Know at the New York Times and Washington Post have already decided that us hoi polloi do not need to know who the traitors within the CIA and State Department are. All we need to know is their warped version of events that they push to their favorite biased reporters.

topsecretk9

--As to WH motive's there's still that creepy quote that Wilson's wife "is fair game." Real phony-baloney tough guys in this Administration - sort of like their recent phony preening regarding the economy.--

contrast that quote to this tough guy class act:

It still amazes me when I still see that drunk Bill Kristol on tv every week still spewing the same nonsense he was spewing 3 years ago

Drive a stake through the heart of every single neoconservative, if that's what it takes

Zalmay Khalilzad? I'd like to punch him right in the face

he neocons need to be forced back into the dark holes from which they crawled. They are nothing but parasites who serve nobody and nothing but themselves who are using the Republican Party as a serving host

and that is the short version...you werre played.

Lurker

Since Soylent Red, PUK, and a few others discussed Nationalists v. Socialists, here's an article: Nationalists v. Socialists

Republicans == Nationalists
Democrats == Socialists.

topsecretk9

oh...sorry, kink

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/25/0382/50871

PeterUK

"A Canticle for Leopold"

Lurker

Plame's identity all public information.

So much for the media hype and the leftwingers continuing some weird conspiracy theories without considering the facts like the one above.

Of course, the investigation is still going but appears to be reaching conclusion. Judge Walton said so, too.

Pete

CosmicConservative - Even Novak admits that his own recollection of the Harlow's conversation differs from Harlow's recollection.

cathyf

If Novak's UGO is Armitage, and if it was Grossman who was a primary driver of the attempt to frame Rove for what Armitage did, then I think that this demands some serious investigation.

One explanation is that Grossman tried to frame Rove strictly as a favor to his college friend Wilson, and because of his own desire to bring down Bush. And that Armitage had nothing to do with it, and that Grossman didn't even know that Armitage was UGO until after he planted his 1x2x6 invention with the press.

The other explanation is that Grossman knew from Day 1 that Armitage was UGO, and that 1x2x6 was a baldfaced knowing lie, specifically designed to cover up Armitage's involvement by diverting attention to Rove. And that Armitage was an accomplice after the fact (by not speaking up until forced to by Woodward in Nov 2005), and may have been an accomplice from the beginning.

I thought that the rules of journalism and anonymous sources was that when a source lies to you then you burn the source. If Armitage spent 1.5 years lying to Novak about his involvement in a campaign to frame Rove, then Novak should burn Armitage. Now. If Armitage has convinced Novak that he had nothing to do with it and it was Grossman doing this on his own as Joe Wilson's college buddy, then Novak owes us a story telling us that.

cathy :-)

topsecretk9

==Of course, the investigation is still going but appears to be reaching conclusion.==

Yes...isn't it a little odd Fitz cut Rove loose before Novak, and yet Harlow is still not free to talk?

Other Tom

Keep Hope Alive, Jeff: My sources tell me that Rove was indicted May 13. The indictment will remain under seal while Rove continues to rat out Cheney. So you're really on to something there...

Lurker: The "treatment" of prisoners at Gitmo has been, and will continue to be, in accordance with the Geneva Convention provisions re humane treatment. What the Court said was that the method proposed for conducting their trials did not comport with the Convention.

topsecretk9

Cathy

That's where I think Novak's reference to the "3rd" party "TELLING" Novak what his primary source's motive was AFTER the investigation was "ANNOUNCED" (note, not commenced or during)...an odd way for UGO to communicate, no?

Also, I still can't get over it was "inadvertent" AFTER the fact and AFTER he'd done it before...

clarice

Here's my take.
http://americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=5664

cathyf

I'm really stuck on the fact that it appears that the guy who invented the 1x2x6 fantasy/frameup is the deputy of the guy who first leaked Plame's role in sending Wilson.

Maybe it's all just a small world coincidence (I live in a town of 10,000 people in a county of 15,000 and come across such coincidences every day) but it sure does look suspicious. Like, ya know, worth investigating.

cathy :-)

jerry

Lurker, Karl told Matthews Wilson's wife is fair game.

CosmicConservative, I don't see why the investigation could still be ongoing but Novak is no longer central (to a conspiracy say) or at risk. Perhaps the unnamed CIA person is representing the Agency's position but Harlow is limited to his involvement in the case.

I do read most anything about WH-CIA conflicts with interest, my bias is that the CIA has been scapegoated about Iraq (this won't surprise you I think). Most recently I read that the CIA is unusual in that it is the only government agency accountable only to Congress, not the Executive, a structure probably designed in anticipation of the pressures we've seen over the past 5 years.

Outing Plame was unnecessary and cheap, I think we'll find it was all quite deliberate and planned at high levels (Novak was peripheral) and that Plame was a NOC and the WH knew it.

I'm still interested in the declassification authority given to Cheney in 2003, it seems there might be a lot of material to retroactively cover with that.

Canticle for Liebowitz was a great book.

Specter

jerry,

CIA is not part of Congress as far as I know. It was created by the executive branch around the time of WWII - Wild Bill Donovan and the OSS were the precursors. Otherwise wouldn't Congress be appointing the leader...

jerry

Clarice, do you think that Comey's

"extra-statutory (and I think unconstitutional) appointment"

of Fitz is behind the "Sealed vs Sealed" case we've heard about? Do you know of any dispute in the DOJ about the appointment?

Bruce Hayden

If outing Plame was intentional, it was not to destroy her former role as a covert agent, but rather to set the record straight about how Wilson got his junket to Niger.

Remember, the original NYT article by Wilson implied that he was sent by Cheney's office. This apparently incensed Cheney, esp. when it turned out that Wilson was an enemy of the Administration, or at least the War in Iraq. (And that, of course, is the top of the Administration that you are talking about).

I think that it should be obvious that rebutting Wilson's article is what this was all about, if you will reread both the original Wilson article and Novak's original column (reinforced by the article today). The whole purpose was to point out that Wilson got the junket at the strong suggestion of his wife, who was in a position to make this suggestion because she worked in the area at the CIA that would be sending someone there.

Bruce Hayden

I think that there would be significant Constitutional problems with the CIA under Congress, instead of the President. It is clearly an Executive function, and for that reason, Congress doesn't have the authority under the Constitution to run such an agency.

jerry

Specter, I wasn't saying that the CIA is part of Congress, beyond that I'm not enough of an expert. I'd be interested in learning if oversight of the CIA by Congress is significantly different from the other agencies.

TallDave

Outing Plame was unnecessary and cheap, I think we'll find it was all quite deliberate and planned at high levels (Novak was peripheral) and that Plame was a NOC and the WH knew it.

File that with the other fairy tales for leftists, right next to "Bush was behind 9/11."

The Left has been trying to sell that BS for years now. It's crap. It's no more true than Wilson's proven false assertions that 1) his wife had nothing to with the trip 2) the trip debunked the Niger uranium story (it bolstered it) 3) he had known the memos were fake at the time of the trip (no one had even seen them).

But don't try to confuse them with facts.

CosmicConservative

Jerry:

I agree with you on Canticle For Leibowitz.

Pretty much everything else you said was unfathomable.

topsecretk9

CIA's boss is the pres...dem or repub., it's also a virtual waste of tax payers dollars too.


Cathy

--I'm really stuck on the fact that it appears that the guy who invented the 1x2x6 fantasy/frameup is the deputy of the guy who first leaked Plame's role in sending Wilson.--

I am really stuck on that AND that this person supposedly warned Libby late in the game while his boss was busy inadvertently blabbing away early on...

Lurker

"I'm still interested in the declassification authority given to Cheney in 2003, it seems there might be a lot of material to retroactively cover with that."

The Executive Order was updated prior to 2003 extending the declassification authority to Cheney. The release of the NIE report confirms what Bruce Hayden said in his last post.

The way the Plame game played out, Plame was fair game no matter what but the odds that WH played this game is very low. It was Joe Wilson and the CIA detractors that played her.

clarice

jerry, I have no idea what sealed v sealed is..I have considered it was a discovery matter in this case, but I could be wrong. Certainly it doesn''t involve the appointment.

I want a Congressional hearing into the CIA set up more than anyone though I don't see it on the horizon ..I want to know which bozos sent it and who at DoJ accepted it,,and why Fitz continued on when it was obvious it was fraudulent.

Pete

After all the scruntiny paid to the words of Russert and Andrea Mitchell, it is surprising that there is little scrutiny paid to Novak's words here.

Novak himself said shortly after his column that the name was given to him by his sources. Now he has changed his story. Also Novak does not mention that three days after he learned of the investigation, he called and spoke to Rove.

And then there is no explanation from Novak on why he used the maiden name instead of saying Valerie Wilson. Or even any explanation at all on why he had to use the name, which he was strongly warned against using.

And then Novak expects us to believe that the word "operative" that he used was just an honest mistake on his part.

Lurker

"The Left has been trying to sell that BS for years now. It's crap. It's no more true than Wilson's proven false assertions that 1) his wife had nothing to with the trip 2) the trip debunked the Niger uranium story (it bolstered it) 3) he had known the memos were fake at the time of the trip (no one had even seen them).

But don't try to confuse them with facts."

They still are.

Novak is still right. The UGO GAVE him the name. This was really an inadvertent action on the UGO's part. Not Novak's part.

Wilson's a liar

Jerry:

I've said this before, if Karl Rove really wanted to mess up Joe Wilson's life he would have done it. Wilson would be standing on a street corner somewhere, bankrupt and begging for quarters, instead of posing for Vanity Fair with his glamorous wife dressed in Versace. If that's your idea of a White House retaliation campaign, you have much to learn.

For a real example of a whistleblower destroyed by a White House leak and smear operation, see Tripp, Linda.

Lurker

The last few posts from the lefties confirms Rick Moran's article (also available at AT), btw.

And good article, Clarice.

topsecretk9

--After all the scruntiny paid to the words of Russert and Andrea Mitchell, it is surprising that there is little scrutiny paid to Novak's words here.--

Pete...tell it to the Prosecutor.

Other Tom

I have read that the charter of the CIA says absolutely nothing about its having a responsibility to Congress. (I haven't checked the charter myself.) As one of my profs used to say, we can argue about it or we can look it up. I'm just too old and unskilled to look it up, so I'm issuing the challenge to some of the younger types here. Let us all know what you find.

Gabriel Sutherland

Who, What, Where, When, Why, and How did this legend begin that the CIA is ONLY accountable to Congress?

I think we'll find it was all quite deliberate and planned at high levels (Novak was peripheral) and that Plame was a NOC and the WH knew it.

How old are you? You might be dead if you wait for long. You might as well come over to the actual reality based community where we figured out Plame failed to meet every single requirement to fit the bill designed to prevent the exposure of espinoge assets.

But keep waiting if you like. Though, I'd advise you read some better sources.

I've noticed Joe Wilson's friends in the blogosphere propping up Bill Harlow as a means to rebut Novak's very covered statements referring to Harlow as the confirming source for Novak.

topsecretk9

--And then there is no explanation from Novak on why he used the maiden name instead of saying Valerie Wilson. --

Who's Who said Valerie Elise Plame...please ask Wilson for an explanation...

Wilson's a liar

Now we just have to wait for Woodward's book. That should be a doozy.

Jane

Clarice,

Great piece (that rhymes). I too would like to hear more about Comey.

PeterUK

"Outing Plame was unnecessary and cheap, I think we'll find it was all quite deliberate and planned at high levels (Novak was peripheral) and that Plame was a NOC and the WH knew it."

But Jerry,who outed Plame? There has been a Special Prosecutor investigating this for years,so far no "culprit" has been identified.
All the SP has come up with are a mish mash of charges on secondary issues.
So far none of you people have produced any tangible reason why "outing" was in any way a punishment,or why anyone other than David Corn should have thought so.

Specter

Sorry Pete...game over. Slam Dunk. No outing.

It makes sense in some ways though. Novak says the info about Wilson's wife sending him was given to him during an interview with UGO - who is not a political gunslinger.

Novak then looked up Wilson in Who's Who, and what did he fine - Plame. Called Harlow who found it in the directory of employees (some security for and undercover operative there, right?) and confirmed she worked for CIA (Harlow of course checked with higher ups after that and then called back to ask Novak not to publish - I wonder who in the cabal told Harlow to call back? That would be interesting to find out - MOM?). Then called Rove and got the "I heard that too" line.

But since Fitz has let him off we can assume that his testimony under oath all fit together nice and neat as opposed to what got published. Imagine that - if you look at what was published and take it at face value it appears slanted. Wow...whoda thunk that of MSM?

Larry

Novak will name UGO on Fox Special Report with Brit Hume tonight. Check your local listings.

TallDave

For a real example of a whistleblower destroyed by a White House leak and smear operation, see Tripp, Linda.

Now, let's be fair. Tripp (along with "trailer trash" Paula and "emotionally disturbed stalker" Monica) was actively working against the foreign policy of our elected President by lying repeatedly about matters of national security.

I mean, it's not like they were just blowing the whistle on the gross personal misconduct of a President. Demonizing them was perfectly reasonable.

(Hey, has anyone seen Linda Tripp in Rolling Stone or Vanity Fair yet?)

topsecretk9

--I've noticed Joe Wilson's friends in the blogosphere propping up Bill Harlow as a means to rebut Novak's very covered statements referring to Harlow as the confirming source for Novak.--

And yet Fitz has not cut Harlow loose but has Novak.

Sad.

Lurker

How can Novak name UGO tonight after writing today that he cannot name UGO????

Unless UGO went public today????

topsecretk9

I'd really like to know the identity of Wilson's friend on the street who happened to bump into Novak...I hope they ask him that.

Lurker

NRO article

"It’s Fall 2003. Democrats and many media commentators are in an uproar over the publication, by conservative columnist Robert Novak, of the name Valerie Plame. “There must be an investigation,” they demand. “And that investigation must be independent, free from the influence of Attorney General John Ashcroft or anyone else too closely allied with the Bush White House. This is very, very serious stuff.”

Good comparison!!

cboldt

I wondered about the Sealed v. Sealed case <- at this comment a few days ago.


The post links to a FAS page that purports to identify the parties in one "Sealed v. Sealed" case.

clarice

Thanks, Lurker and Jane.(I'm slowly piecing together the DoJ stuff).
Specter when MOM surfaced I checked. She was not at the agency when the referral was made.

I want to know--and hope we will find out someday soon, who at the agency wrote and pushed the referral and who at DoJ accepted it. Joe DeGenova's arguments on this have always impressed me as sound:It was a total set up.

clarice

cboldt--it is my understanding (can't remember the article from which I derived it) that at this moment there are 20 Sealed v Sealed cases on the DC docket.

PeterUK

Tall Dave,
Valerie Wilson had severe postpartum depression,if the Administration had wanted to smear her they would have used that.Quite simply her judgement would have been put in question.Instead she and ex-Ambassador Munchhausen were allowed to come dancing down the stairs and take their bow before the adoring audience of the left.
"Outing" has been the makings of the Wilsons,I trust they have slipped David Corn the usual brown envelope.

CosmicConservative

Based on the Wilson's lifestyle and celebrity, I sure wish the White House would target me for retribution.

verner

TS,

We don't know who Fitz has cut loose. Remember, he's not suppose to tell.

Who knows if Harlow was ever in trouble? My guess is that he was not. As a press officer, he was just doing his job. If Valerie had been covert, veterans like Harlow and Novak would have known--and Novak would not have printed the article. And on the very slight chance that there was a FU at the agency over Val's cover, how could Harlow be blamed?

How could anyone cling to the notion that Valerie had any position of authority in 2002. She had barely recovered from a debilitating mental illness--not to mention being the mother of twins and married to a big mouth, politicaly active ex-diplomat that worked for a shady Saudi billionaire. There is just NO WAY. My guess is that (like most federal employees) they couldn't fire her, so they stuck her in a cubby hole.

By all indications, this investigation is over. Now the public has a "right to know" who started all of this mess at the CIA.

jerry

PeterUK
Who outed Plame? Why only these secondary charges?

I can't review the whole train of events, but as Rove and Libby admit talking to reporters about Plame there is the outline of a conspiracy, and Cheney and Bush have been reported to have authorized a response to Wilson "getting it all out."

Rove is apparently cooperating but Libby (the VPs Chief of Staff!) has not, has been accused of lying to the FBI and grand jury by Fitz. The prosecutor himself has said that the investigation cannot move forward when he's being obstructed (by Libby's behavior and perhaps by the self-defensive behavior of others as well).

The advantage you have is that only exonerating decisions and "secondary charges" have become public so far.

My position is that this whole investigation exists because some serious harm has already occurred - despite the protests of those involved, the accused, and their defenders.

Redcoat

It's disturbing how Pete and others are incapable of adapting their thinking when confronted with facts.

They are like the Sheep in Animal Farm,bleating the same talking points in an attempt to dround out any views that contradict their fragile word view.

Hopefully in the future Lefty D.N.A will mutate,and the Critical thinking gene will re-appear.

Neo

This investigation was over before Novak testified before the grand jury on Feb. 25, 2004. That's over 2 fringin years ago.

I have to check the timeline, but I'm not even sure that Libby had had the opportunity to perjure himself by that time.

Specter

Keep Hope Alive jerry. The facts as we know them now say that Fitz knew within a few weeks who the leaker was (UGO) and did not prosecute. Why bother going on for another 2.8 years - investigating what? What a waste of time and money. We should be reimbursed from Fitz's pockets for the money spent.

maryrose

pete:\
You are flat out wrong on this, completely off base; just admit it and then move on.

Neo

Isn't it time for Jason Leopold to reveal his source ?

No more procrastination.
No more prevarication.

Let's have it.

lurker

"I can't review the whole train of events, but as Rove and Libby admit talking to reporters about Plame there is the outline of a conspiracy, and Cheney and Bush have been reported to have authorized a response to Wilson "getting it all out."

Rove is apparently cooperating but Libby (the VPs Chief of Staff!) has not, has been accused of lying to the FBI and grand jury by Fitz. The prosecutor himself has said that the investigation cannot move forward when he's being obstructed (by Libby's behavior and perhaps by the self-defensive behavior of others as well).

The advantage you have is that only exonerating decisions and "secondary charges" have become public so far.

My position is that this whole investigation exists because some serious harm has already occurred - despite the protests of those involved, the accused, and their defenders."

Huh?

First of all, Rove simply confirmed the sources. Rove was NOT the original source. Novak's UGO was the original source and that is NOT Libby.

Libby did cooperate with the FBI. Fitz thought Libby lied but over time, it appears that Libby did not lie and did not obstruct the justice. Fitz's case is weakening over time since the evidence he planned to use has been impeached by Judge Walton.

The link to WSJ and NRO articles above explained why CIA started this investigation as there was so much hype put on by the dems and leftwingers.

"It’s Fall 2003. Democrats and many media commentators are in an uproar over the publication, by conservative columnist Robert Novak, of the name Valerie Plame. “There must be an investigation,” they demand. “And that investigation must be independent, free from the influence of Attorney General John Ashcroft or anyone else too closely allied with the Bush White House. This is very, very serious stuff.”

Well, they got what they wanted. The CIA-leak investigation began in September 2003, and in December of that year it came under the leadership of prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, who continues in that job today. Two months from now, we should all take a moment to commemorate the probe’s third birthday. Perhaps there will be a fourth, and a fifth, and, well, who knows?

Given that the Justice Department has gone to such extraordinary lengths to investigate a leak that has never been shown to have seriously damaged U.S. national security — in the case of perjury charges against Lewis Libby, Fitzgerald has said he does not plan to offer “any proof of actual damages” done by the Plame leak — it should certainly also be investigating a leak that clearly has done significant harm to our government’s efforts to keep us safe.

...."

Appears to be nothing at all.

owl

That is another great article clarice. You asked the questions that keep bouncing in my head. Novak dropped a bomb on Fitz when he proves that Fitz knew The Leaker and even his confirming sources by Jan. That is truly shocking even for a Plameaholic because a)he set up perjury traps and b)he deliberately sent Miller up the river.

Can you believe his press conference?

Btw ts, I did my part and sent your questions to both Hannity and Hume.

Pete

maryrose - wrong on what?

That Novak has changed his story from when he initially claimed that the name was given to him by his sources?

That Novak called up Rove three days after he learned the investigation?

Redcoat

Jerry,

Who outed Plame? Why only these secondary charges?

You answered your own question.

My position is that this whole investigation exists because some serious harm has already occurred

Does your position allow you to tell us exactly what that harm was?

stevesh

This isn't prescient trend/meme spotting but something noticed bubbling up in the left side's reaction posts to Novak column: the new "TruthOut" type theory in the face of Fitzmas disappointments is that Fitz has sold out and is now part of the totalitarian coverup.

Carol Herman

This is like trying to cure cancer with homeopathy. Won't work. Hasn't worked. And, things get worse. While the desease is unimpeded.

Interesting, too, because the story has enough legs that when it appears on the Internet, the comments come flying in. While Judge Walton sits there; clueless about justice. As if "justice" isn't sought, EVER, these days. Just jolly appointments made. Because you own the genetalia. Or the "color."

Hey, in NYC a suicidal maniac blew up the home that was supposed to go to his ex-wife. And, this wasn't the first time he tampered with the gas line to do it, either. He did the same thing on June 8th of this year. But Con Ed fixed the pipe BEFORE the building exploded.

So there ya go. Justice doesn't work IF judges are IN on the case, BUT DO NOTHING AT ALL. Paper pushing isn't a job. Let alone a job in our computer age;

Nope. I've got no solutions. Because while Fitzgerald took his extra-ordinary appointment to mean he could destroy the Executive Branch of government; "independents" within our government; but who think only the democrats should be in the White House, have been rip-tearing secrets into the New York Times, now, for years. Their motive? To destroy our War on Terror! Can they get away with this? Well, doesn't the UN?

Isn't the whole thing now just one big hoax?

cathyf
Novak himself said shortly after his column that the name was given to him by his sources. Now he has changed his story.
No he hasn't. "Mrs. Wilson" is her name (one of them.) His 2 statements add up to the compound statement that Armitage gave him the name "Mrs. Wilson" while Who's Who gave him the name "Valerie Elise Plame Wilson" and then Harlow told him that "Valerie Plame" was what she used in the CIA.

cathy :-)

Pofarmer

"I have read that the charter of the CIA says absolutely nothing about its having a responsibility to Congress. (I haven't checked the charter myself.)"

Congress controls the purse strings of CIA through appropriations, and is subject to "appropriate oversite" via the House and Senate Intelligence committies. Congress must also approve the director.

You can go to the CIA's website and see it's charter pretty easily.

lurker

"However, on Jan. 12, two days before my meeting with Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor informed Hamilton that he would be bringing to the Swidler Berlin offices only two waivers. One was by my principal source in the Valerie Wilson column, a source whose name has not yet been revealed. The other was by presidential adviser Karl Rove, whom I interpret as confirming my primary source's information. In other words, the special prosecutor knew the names of my sources.

When Fitzgerald arrived, he had a third waiver in hand -- from Bill Harlow, the CIA public information officer who was my CIA source for the column confirming Mrs. Wilson's identity. I answered questions using the names of Rove, Harlow and my primary source."

via Principle source giving him the information. And Joe Wilson's book, too.

The whole thing is a hoax. No leaks. No conspiracies. No damages. Nada.

Tollhouse

/[This isn't prescient trend/meme spotting but something noticed bubbling up in the left side's reaction posts to Novak column: the new "TruthOut" type theory in the face of Fitzmas disappointments is that Fitz has sold out and is now part of the totalitarian coverup.]/

Of course it is. The left in this country has constructed this perfect little circular Weltanschauung.

Redcoat

Lurker

The whole thing is a hoax. No leaks. No conspiracies. No damages. Nada.

I'm waiting for Jerry to prove us all wrong.

After all, there was an investigation,so there must have been a crime.

Right?

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame