No, Christy, It's Just You

Christy Hardin Smith of firedoglake seems to favor the stifling of dissent - here she is commenting on Victoria Toensing's testimony before Rep Waxman's Plame hearing yesterday:

Waxman says that he is going to hold the record open, and check Toensing's statements on the record.  Waxman says he will be checking with Fitzgerald on his interpretation of the law.  [CHS asks:  Is it me, or is that a "correct the record, or there may be a perjury question in the offing if we find errors in your testimony?"]

A perjury charge against an expert witness for expressing the same view of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act that she presented in op-eds and court filings (15 page word file)?  Is it me, or is that ridiculous?

Oh, well - Ms. Smith was also sure that Judy Miller was in trouble for perjury.  Her fawning over Fitzgerald's sleuthing skills ought to be embarrassing in retrospect, but maybe Waxman has a cast a similar spell.

LET THE RECORD NOTE: My current official editorial position on Ms. Plame's status is that this element of the statute has not been tested in court, briefs have not been filed, no judge has ruled, and we just don't "know".  However, I think the weight of history favors Ms. Toensing (and snippets of that history are in the "More On The IIPA" portion of this post).

MORE:  Why so negative?  If expert witnesses can be nailed for perjury for offering their view, maybe we can call back all the economists who testified over the years...

LEST I FORGET - I ought to hat tip pgl of The Angry Bear, with whom I have a gloomy personal history.  His habit of posting on topics about which he knows nothing and then being rude about his own ignorance sort of irks me.  Go figure.

ERRATA:  This Victoria Toensing piece from Oct 2005 includes this:

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.

Well, it would include that if the link worked - try the Google cache.  For search purposes the excerpted text is fine, but the title is "The White House’s Legal Katrina" by Victoria Toensing, Posted: 10/18/2005.

Comments

[Dalton]

sara,
did sean tell you it's really neat to use the term; "leftist losers?"

cool.

[Sara (Squiggler)]

Sweep? I don't think so. They are barely hanging on in the Senate and whether you like it or not, the moderate Dems are not with you.

And you are so interested in GWB's poll numbers, but I notice you don't quote the poll numbers for Congress.

[hubel458]

Dalton. Other reasearchers feeling that
Waxmam wasn't believable called the Cia and
were told that no calls were logged to
Hayden by Wax. Person on the phone says all calls are logged. Says if info about plame
was given it would have been in writing,
so that Wax could wave it in front of cameras. Hayden wasn't even there when she was there, And she hasn't been there
for a while either. Waxman is just doing a snowjob. Sure he is in contact with
somebody to aide continuing this scam, like
members of the media and VIPS group that
planned and started the scam.
Think of this-Ole Joe was in delegations to
a bunch of Uranium producing African countries,in the eighties,
before he was in Iraq. When we helped Iraq
against Iran we never wanted them to have nukes, but yet they got yk from those places Joe was, before being Iraq.This was in the eighties. He got praise for saving some folks,big deal was made out of it, but it
was just Saddam paying for services rendered.
That yk is what IAEA had sealed that we hauled out when we invaded.He was friendly with Iraq's point man on nukes, Zahawie. The same guy in 99-2000 mucking around Africa to get more yk, while Joe was mucking around there also(Niger yk ended up in Libya).
Doing his "consulting" with Niger and Cogema.
Joe's been greasing a lot of crooked
skids for years. The Cia was EITHER stupid, or complicit.
IF THEY HADN'T OF BEEN EITHER...
WOULD JOE HAVE DONE A HOFFA.........Ed

[Spartacvs]

Only her word as a non-lawyer that once a general always a general.

Only her sworn testimony as a covert CIA officer, not contradicted by the CIA but indeed supported by a statement cleared with the head of CIA and read into evidence by the committee chairman.

And the BIG news out of the hearing was the disclosure of sloppy procedures of the CIA, not the White House.

Actually the big story was that the WH instituted no investigation in the two and a half month period before Justice opened their investigation, of who in the WH or Administration may have leaked Plame's name and no subsequent investigation or action taken by the WH in regard to the security clearances of those implicated by Fitzgerald's investigation.

[Sara (Squiggler)]

Dalton: if you had been around here for any length of time you'd know how stupid your Sean remark is. I can't stand the guy and haven't watched him in years.

[hit and run]

If he was a Republican, it was long ago.

You might want to check out who was the acting US ambassador in Baghdad immediately prior to Gulf War 1 and what HW Bush had to say about the man at the time.

I remember it as if it were yesterday.

How many days ago was it, though?

5,000? 6,000?

[Dalton]

hubel458,
get real.

[Dalton]

spartacvs,
the hearings aren't over.

[Dalton]

spart,
you might want to run this one by hubel:

Only her sworn testimony as a covert CIA officer, not contradicted by the CIA but indeed supported by a statement cleared with the head of CIA and read into evidence by the committee chairman.

[Syl]

I think one of our major triumphs in Itaq which is rarely mentioned is the fact we killed Uday. Uday was in no way secular, in fact he was an extreme Islamist. It was Uday who had ties with Zarqawi's training camp. It was Uday who was involved with the THREE other terrorist training camps in Iraq proper (which we only found out about AFTER the war).

Uday was in line to take over Iraq.

al Masri who heads up al Qaeda in Iraq after Zarqawi (under the aegis of the proclaimed caliph al Baghdadi) was already in one of those training camps long before the war began.

The Left's insistence that Saddam had no relationship with bin laden therefore nothing to see here is misdirection.

And as has been shown by the fighting in Iraq, it is not necessary to have tens of thousands of al Qaeda present to do damage. The majority of Iraqi deaths are due to actions of the minor number of al Qaeda as compared to the insurgents. The 'true' insurgents target Americans, not Iraqis.

al Qaeda uses car bombs and truck bombs and has killed far more people than IEDs have.

And for those who haven't been paying attention, the situtaion vis-a-vis insurgency has changed considerably since it began later in 2003. al Qaeda brought under its umbrella many unaffiliated Iraqi sunni insurgent groups, promising them protection.

After the bombing of the Golden Mosque, the shia took revenge. al Qaeda could not protect those Iraqi sunni insurgent groups and they started pulling away from al Qaeda and in fact many are now joining the political process and turning in al qaeda fighters right and left.

I saw a retired general on BookTV who said since the surge began there is three times the number of tips on insurgents and al Qaeda as the total number of tips from the previous years.

To win against an insurgency, you must have the population actively involved.

Sounds like a tipping point to me.

Uday is gone. Uday's radicals are dying or dead. al Qaeda is still setting off lethal truck bombs, but they're not going to win because the people of Iraq are against them.

So, go ahead and spout your outdated talking points and claim other people 'don't read' just because you can't keep up.

[Syl]

Spart

You might want to check out who was the acting US ambassador in Baghdad immediately prior to Gulf War 1 and what HW Bush had to say about the man at the time.

We don't have to. Wilson will proclaim it to anyone in the room with him. 'See what a great guy I am!'

Ego knows no political affiliation. It just is.

[Dalton]

syl:
"The Left's insistence that Saddam had no relationship with bin laden therefore nothing to see here is misdirection."

No, saying there are WMD, and that it was more important to invade Iraq instead of hunting down Osama is..."misdirection."

[windansea]

Well, I'm out of here.

what's wrong dolton? no Plame threads at FDL or Kos?

bwaaaaaaaaahaaaaaaaaahaaaaaaaaa

[Syl]

Spart

The fact that nobody in the administration, or Armitage for that matter, KNEW she was classified TRUMPS EVERYTHING ELSE coming out of the hearing. Everything!

And whose fault is that?

The CIA!

[Dalton]

windansea,
did you miss me?

[Dalton]

syl,
you actually believe the administration didn't know that joe wilson's wife was a covert cia agent??

oh, please.

[Syl]

Dalton

No, saying there are WMD, and that it was more important to invade Iraq instead of hunting down Osama is..."misdirection."

Well, it might be if anyone said that.

Besides, we invaded Iraq in 2003. Tora Bora was, ahem, in 2001!!

[Syl]

Dalton

you actually believe the administration didn't know that joe wilson's wife was a covert cia agent??

VALERY doesn't even know if she was 'covert' agent. She was brought in from the field in 1997. Once a general, always a general. Not under the IIPA.

[Syl]

Hey, I'll even say it again:

The Left's insistence that Saddam had no relationship with bin laden therefore nothing to see here is misdirection.

[Dalton]

syl,
you REALLY need to read more.

instead of pursuing osama, finding him, then killing him and his cohorts...we instead, invaded iraq...for reasons that a vast majority of americans now believe was "cooked."

[Dalton]

syl:
what are you trying to say here?

"Hey, I'll even say it again:

The Left's insistence that Saddam had no relationship with bin laden therefore nothing to see here is misdirection."

[Dalton]

syl,
do you know how to read??

Valerie Plame, during Friday's testimony:
"I am here to say I was a covert officer of the Central Intelligence Agency."

what is it you don't understand???

[Syl]

Dalton

Don't take her statement out of context. She said she is not a lawyer. She said once a general, always a general.

In her eyes she will always be a covert officer. The CIA protects its own and would say that. But CIA counsel said not a peep.

But the statute don't fit and that's all folks.

[Syl]

Dalton

The expansionist ideological movement known by various names (Islamofascism for one) is not dependent on Osama bin laden. Nor on al Qaeda for that matter.

Saddam and his sons were very much a part of that movement and supported terrorism. That they did not depend on Osama to do so should WORRY you. That the movement would continue whether Osama lives or dies should WORRY you.

[Dalton]

syl,
the quote is not out of context. it is exactly what she said.

what is it you're still confused about??

she was COVERT...period.

[Syl]

she was COVERT...period.

At one time, yes. But not under the terms of the IIPA.

I never said she was never covert.

[Dalton]

syl,
it's people like you that really worry me.

as for terrorism, maybe you should read about china, russia, syria, iran, pakistan (osama's probably residence at present), north korea, etc.

[Dalton]

syl,
forget it, dude. you're a lost cause.

[Dalton]

sara:
thought you might like an update on how great everything is:

• Percentage who say they're confident, proud of Iraq war drops by more than half
• In 2003, 83 percent of Americans said they were confident, 65 percent proud
• 61 percent of those polled now say it was not worth invading Iraq, poll says
• Support for Afghanistan war drops from 88 percent in 2001 to 53 percent today

[windansea]

Dalton is talking to itself :)

[Sara (Squiggler)]

I'll tell you what I don't understand.

I don't understand how a CIA agent can be brought back to Langley from overseas in 1997 to protect her life and the lives of her contacts because of Aldrich Ames' traitorous revelations and anyone with any brain cells left would think the CIA would send her back to do dangerous covert work. That's what I don't understand.

I also don't understand how a woman who comes back in from the field under those circumstances then marries and gets pregnant with twins and has to take nearly 2 years off for childbirth then followed by such a horrible bout of post partum depression she has to go into group therapy is considered fit to return to the field at the end of that period. Or would even agree to go back with twin babies at home.

It didn't happen. The CIA with all its faults and the total incompetence they've shown in the past several years, isn't so stupid as to send a compromised agent back into the field. Nor are they going to trust someone just out of therapy with any sensitive field ops.

Valerie Plame may have served her country well before 1997, we don't really know. But, I am 100% sure that any service since then has been at a desk at Langley and not covert field work.

In fact, if that isn't the case, then I would say we have far greater problems within the CIA than their present incompetence would indicate.

[Tom Maguire]

From hit and run:
I'm jealous of sferris.

That's the kind of attention I usually try and garner for myself.

I wonder if I should pick a new name and ham it up as a faux troll?

Come back as Abbott *and* Costello?

Or just post as "hit" and "run" - I'm sure you'll fools some of us, unless sferris leaves.

[Tom Maguire]

It was a few of Clarice's articles that brought me to this site...

I was at a dinner party and the hostess had carefully seated the only other blog reader next to me. So this lovely woman says to me "I love your blog - I check it every day".

As I commenced to clear my throat and deliver a modest yet deeply insightful reply, she continued, "That Clarice Feldman has the greatest comments - I can't wait to see what she will say next."

Evidently my modesty was not misplaced.

[clarice feldman]

TM--you make me blush.

Actually, I think there is a great synergy here among you and the regulars--if you can say "synergy" without laughing after the dot.com bubble burst.

[Spartacvs]

Syl:

The fact that nobody in the administration, or Armitage for that matter, KNEW she was classified TRUMPS EVERYTHING ELSE coming out of the hearing. Everything!

Who testified to that and how is it relevant? Since all involved at senior levels of the administration were aware of the requirement to treat all information regarding intelligence matters and the CIA including the identity of CIA personnel as classified information that should not be shared with persons not cleared to receive such information. The presumption is its classified unless and until you are affirmatively certain it isn't, placing the onus of responsibility to keep the information classified on both parties to any conversation. A person passing on information received from CIA he assumes to be unclassified without making an affirmative determination that it isn't classified, is just as guilty as the CIA person who blabbed.

[Spartacvs]

Syl :

At one time, yes. But not under the terms of the IIPA.

I would prefer that if we are going to interpret and stretch the meaning of covert under the IIPA then we do so in an effort to protect those it was clearly intended to protect, viz. CIA officers. Not senior members of the Bush Administration implicated in outing her for the purposes of political payback.

Makes sense to me, probably would make sense to most people when explained in those terms don't you think?

[Tom Maguire]

Actually, I think there is a great synergy here among you and the regulars...

United we stand! (OK, I agree, but now I'm blushing.)

Meanwhile, this Dalton and Spartacus thing is baffling - Spartacus, you want me to parse Hayden's statement today, but I posted quite clearly on that yesterday. Do you suppose I have changed my mind, or forgotten my analysis, or what? Let's see, from Hayden via Waxman:

At the time of the publication of Robert Novak's column on July 14, 2003, Ms. Wilson's CIA employment status was covert.

And my thought:

Telling us that the CIA considered her to be covert as per their employment practices is smoke - the WaPo understood this point this morning (but the Times never will).

The link was to a WaPo article I had excerpted in the preceding post- the key bit was this:

Some news stories created initial confusion over Plame's status by suggesting that disclosure of her name and employment may have violated the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982. That law, passed in response to disclosure of the names of CIA officers serving overseas by former CIA employee Philip Agee, made it a crime to disclose the names of "covert agents," which the act narrowly defined as those serving overseas or who had served as such in the previous five years.

"Covert agent" is not a label actually used within the agency for its employees, according to former senior CIA officials. Plame, who joined the agency right out of Pennsylvania State University, underwent rigorous spycraft training to become an officer in the Directorate of Operations.

But here is the weird bit - "Spartacvs" appears in that comment thread saying this:

It would also seem that outing her covert status literally wasn't a prosecutable crime under the Identities Protection Act.

Most CIA covert agents, not being lawyers, are probably going to rely on the common sense definition of covert to shield them from vindictive members of their own government and not the definition within the Identities Protection Act the apologist for the leaker's are hiding behind.

The italics blew up, but I think I am quoting you there. You seemed to have gotten the point then - what happened?

Baffling.

Well, moving on. Dalton, who is so excited that Ms. Plame testified UNDER OATH that she was covert, and feels the issue settled - let's see what else Ms. Plame said under oath, okay:

REP. DAVIS: The Intelligence Identities Protection Act makes it a crime to knowingly disclose the identity of a covert agent, which has a specific definition under the act. Did anyone ever tell you that you were so designated?

MS. PLAME WILSON: I'm not a lawyer.

REP. DAVIS: That's why I asked if they told you. I'm not asking for your interpretation.

MS. PLAME WILSON: No, no. But I was covert. I did travel overseas on secret missions within the last five years.

REP. DAVIS: I'm not arguing with that. What I'm asking is, for purposes of the act -- and maybe this just never occurred to you or anybody else at the time -- but did anybody say that you were so designated under the act? Or was this just after it came to fact?

MS. PLAME WILSON: No, no one told me that.

She is not a lawyer, she does not know her status under the Act, and no one at the CIA has ever told her her status under the Act.

Pretty compelling stuff.

Now, something about that is unclear to you, Dalton - can you articulate for us just where you are unable to grasp the idea that Ms. Plame herself does not know her legal status?

I am uncharacteristically pessimistic.

[Spartacvs]

Syl :

But the statute don't fit and that's all folks.

The statute don't seem to fit for criminal prosecution, nonetheless - regarding Waxman's hearing, stay tuned - there's a lot more coming from where that one came.

Enjoy.

[Spartacvs]

Tom Maguire : what happened?

I have seen the light, and you are still stumbling around in the darkness.

What relevance would the IIPA definition of covert have to the publics understanding of whether or not Plame was covert when she was outed by senior Bush Administration officials as part of a scheme to smear her husband, who had the temerity to write an op-ed highlighting the Administrations mendacity regarding the intelligence concerning WMD that led to this disastrous war in Iraq, if Waxman doesn't contemplate bringing a criminal prosecution under the IIPA?

Toestink can't help you with that friend.

[Jeff]

She is not a lawyer, she does not know her status under the Act, and no one at the CIA has ever told her her status under the Act.

You're actually missing several points here. First off, Plame is saying that she indeed was covert under the IIPA. That's the point when she says:

But I was covert. I did travel overseas on secret missions within the last five years.

She is picking up the Fitzgerald interpretation of the "serve overseas" clause of the IIPA. This is obviously just her contention, and she's not a lawyer. But she's not saying she doesn't know.

Beyond that, is it really so shocking that no one told her, "There's this act that refers to what it confusingly calls 'covert agents' which really has nothing to do with our categories - and no wonder, it was not only championed by old windy Goldwater, his go-to staffer on it at the time was Vicky Toensing! - and although the categories in the act are all goofy and don't correspond to anything in the real world, let us assure you that you qualify as a 'covert agent' for the purposes of the Act! You know, just in case your cover gets blown."

No, they just told her about her actual status. Under cover, covert, and that status was classified.

And again, not to say this is dispositive of anything, but your missing what's going on if you don't see that Plame is contending, in response to Davis, that in fact she was covert under the Act, because, she says under oath, she traveled overseas on secret missions within the five years before her cover was blown.

[Syl]

Sure, Jeff

That's why she had to say 'once a general, always a general'.

Fitz definition of 'serve overseas', which you don't know anyway, is neither here nor there. There is no indication from the referral what her status is otherwise Walton wouldn't be in the dark after reading it.

Fitz only pretended to be investigating IIPA charges when all he was doing was investigating the release of classified information.

Sham from the beginning to the end.

[Dalton]

tom,
you say; "Well, moving on. Dalton, who is so excited that Ms. Plame testified UNDER OATH that she was covert, and feels the issue settled - let's see what else Ms. Plame said under oath, okay:"

well, yes i read what she said, and it was in response to davis, doing his best as the stereotypical administration defender, to do what he could to move away from the real topic at hand: that she was covert when outed by armitage, novak, cheney, libby and anybody else they could rope in.

it's libby and cheney who are the real fools here.

if libby keeps his big mouth closed during the grand jury questioning and doesn't "lie," they're home free...at least until the civil trial...which by the way, i predict will not only be fun, but a book and movie, too!!

yeah, there's plenty more to come from what is proving to be the most inept and possibly corrupt administration of all time.

even if it is tough to beat: iraq, katrina, the veteran's hospital, the u.s. attorneys, plame...and god knows what's next.

[Sara (Squiggler)]

Dalton: how old are you? You don't seem to have even a rudimentary knowledge of either history or how organizations as large as the U.S. government function. You also seem extremely gullible. I chalk that up to a limited knowledge base that you've obviously garnered from your Kiddie Korps talking points memos. You come here a complete stranger, although more likely a sock puppet troll, and regurgitate your garbage over and over and completely ignore any information that would make your opinions even slightly informed. You are the fool. Now go get your prayer rug, turn toward Mecca and start your obeisance to your god al-Qaeda and their democrat enablers.

[John G. Ryan]

Although I support Ms. Toensing, sound principles of statutory construction suggest "in construing a statute . . . the worst person to construe it is the person who is responsible for its drafting. He (she) is very much disposed to confuse what he intended to do with the effect of the language which in fact has been employed . . . Hilder v. Dexter, AC 474 (1902) (British opinion by the Earl of Halsbury)

[clarice feldman]

Dear Mr. Ryan.. When there was a question of law in a matter I was involved in we urged one of the law's sponsors who agreed w/ out interpretation (the co-sponsor was dead) to write a lw review article detailing his point on the legislative history. When the case got to the SCOTUS, we cited that law review article to the Court which found it reliable and useful in interpreting the Statute. People who rely on 1902 cases from Great Briatin might be surprised to learn they are meaningless in evaluating how SCOTUS operates today in the USA>

[Dalton]

Sara,
You say about me: "You come here a complete stranger, although more likely a sock puppet troll, and regurgitate your garbage over and over and completely ignore any information that would make your opinions even slightly informed."

1.You evidently consider this some kind of private party you and your friends are throwing, instead of being a discussion board, open to the public, regardless of their political views (or, at least it's supposed to be)...which is where this "stranger" silliness comes in. I didn't realize I needed an invitation from you or anyone else to express my views.

2. The "puppet troll" slurs are straight out of the Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh play book and mean absolutely nothing to me. It's obvious that as you're concerned anyone who doesn't agree with you must be some kind of "troll," spouting contrary views you just can't understand, fathom or want to hear. That's you're problem, Sara, not mine.

3. As for your "regurgitate" comment, it's you and your ilk who continue to play the part of Bush sycophants, constantly repeating the party line, relating to how well things are going in Iraq or to what a wonderful President G.W. has been.

Well, I'm sorry to inform you, but it's me who's on the side of about 70% of the American public, not you and your right wing friends who just can't accept he fact (or anybody else's views for that matter) that you're backing an inept administration, lead by one of the worst Presidents in our nation's history.

And that's exactly why the Republicans lost the last elections: People just like YOU.

[Syl]

Dalton

You addressed everything but Sara's comment about you being uninformed about how government works and that you ignore new information that when acknowledged would at least seem to make you appear more informed.

As for the election there were several reasons why the Democrats (barely) took over the House and Senate. But the 2006 election was not a Presidential election which Bush won TWICE. The 2004 election was a validation of his post 9/11 policies.

As for Bush's approval rating, please note that it is higher than the approval rating for Congress.

You figure it out.

[Sara (Squiggler)]

Dalton: you have some mistaken idea that I'm a Republican. I'm not. I'm not even a conservative. You obviously monitor Hannity and Limbaugh, I do neither, so I'm at your mercy as to what they say. As far as my remarks to you, they are based on an entire day of watching you repeat yourself over and over and completely ignore any information that would open up any kind of informed dialog. You are a typical Kos Kiddie Korp Kadet and you are free to keep posting all you want unless Mr. Maguire decides differently. It isn't my call. But I have every right to call your bluff and to laugh at you all I want. I can't help it everyone but Sparty thinks your a dumbass. And for your information, the biggest reason the President's poll numbers are down is because his supporters are angry that he doesn't come out swinging. We think he is too soft and too accommodating to our domestic terrorist enablers. And what is it again that those dems you love so much have done since taking over in January?

My advice to you is get a geography book, study the strategic value of Iraq and our other allies in the Middle East and you might begin to get a clue why I support this President's actions and the War on Terror.

[Dalton]

Syl,
First of all, who are you or anyone else to evaluate what I do or do not know about anything? What you're really saying is this:

You don't agree with US...so you must be "uninformed" or just don't know "how the government works." (Based on what we've seen over the past 6 years, I do know this is exactly how government is NOT supposed to work. *Iraq, Katrina, Walter Reed, etc.)

With that said, if you think Bush is doing a good job, that's your right as an American citizen...you ARE an American, right?

But, as for me, I think the man has been a disaster and I believe a vast majority of the America public and the world agrees with me.

The elections were a wake-up call, and an indication that our citizens are finally paying closer attention to what's going on...and as for the Presidency, we'll just have to wait until 2008.

[Sara (Squiggler)]

I posted this link on another thread early this morning, but I think it really belongs right here. Instructions from a jihadi website to their Islamic warriors:

Influencing the Views of the Weak-Minded American

“Raiding American Forums is Among the Most Important Means of Obtaining Victory in the Fierce Media War... and of Influencing the Views of the Weak-Minded American”

“There is no doubt, my brothers, that raiding American forums is among the most important means of obtaining victory in the fierce media war... and of influencing the views of the weak-minded American who pays his taxes so they will go to the infidel American army. This American is an idiot and does not [even] know where Iraq is... [It is therefore] mandatory for every electronic mujahid [to engage in this raiding].”

“It is better that you raid non-political forums such as music forums and trivia forums... which American people... favor... Define your target[ed forum]... and get to know it well... Post your contribution and do not get into... futile arguments...”

Indicate You Are an American

“Obviously, you have to register yourself using a purely American name... Choose an icon that indicates that you are an American, and place it next to your nickname [in the forum].”

“In my experience, the areas most visited in American forums... [are titled] ‘Random Thoughts’ and ‘What’s going on in your mind?’... [The former] takes priority in the American forums, and is highly popular. You should post your contribution there... This should include films of the mujahideen in Iraq, mujahideen publications in English, and images and films of the Americans’ crimes, [such as] killing unarmed civilians in Iraq... etc.”

“Invent Stories About American Soldiers You Have [Allegedly] Personally Known”

“Obviously, you should post your contribution... as an American... You should correspond with visitors to this forum, [bringing to their attention] the frustrating situation of their troops in Iraq... You should invent stories about American soldiers you have [allegedly] personally known (as classmates... or members in a club who played baseball and tennis with you) who were drafted to Iraq and then committed suicide while in service by hanging or shooting themselves...”

“Also, write using a sad tone, and tell them that you feel sorry for your [female] neighbor or co-worker who became addicted to alcohol or drugs... because her poor fiancé, a former soldier in Iraq, was paralyzed or [because] his legs were amputated... [Use any story] which will break their spirits, oh brave fighter for the sake of God...”

How to Make Americans Feel Frustrated With Their Government

“You should enter into debate or respond only if it is extremely necessary... Your concern should [only] be introducing topics which... will cause [them to feel] frustration and anger towards their government..., which will... render them hostile to Bush... and his Republican Party and make them feel they must vote to bring the troops back from Iraq as soon as possible.”

“Do not... discuss issues pertaining to Arabs or Muslims at all, whether negatively or positively... because this could be a trap for you... In addition, do not ask people to circulate the material [you have posted] in other forums... as these types of requests will expose you...”

Gee Dalton, this sounds an awful lot like you, now doesn't it?

[TMF]

Republicans lost the last election because the mainstream media is a propaganda machine for the DNC.

And b/c of the war in Iraq.

Not because the Democrats had any alternative "vision" or policy that they preferred.

THat is abundantly clear now- the Dems have absolutely nothing to offer except partisan poo-flinging and empty "non binding" resolution gestures. Pathetic. SPineless and vacuous.

When the public figures this out (soon, in my opinion) the democrats time will be up (again)

Thats a fact.

[Dalton]

Sara,
You say you're not a Republican (oh, sure) or a conservative (oh, please)yet have the temerity to say this: "the biggest reason the President's poll numbers are down is because his supporters are angry that he doesn't come out swinging???" (have you forgotten his "mission accomplished" or "you're either with us or against us" or "we'll get him dead or alive" or "cut and runners" comments??)

And you actually believe the Iraqi fiasco, Katrina, Walter Reed, Harriet Meirs, Libby, Gonzales, etc. have nothing to do with the American souring on him as President??

And I suppose the last elections were just some kind of crazy fluke, and not based on his administration's lack of performance?

Are you on drugs?

Oh, and by the way...people who call others "trolls" or refer to them as "Kos Kiddie Korp Kadets" do so because they lack the intellectual capacity to provide logical and sustainable arguments supporting their views.

[Dalton]

TMF,
"Republicans lost the last election because the mainstream media is a propaganda machine for the DNC."

Yeah, that's it. The American public is so dumb, so uninformed, so out of touch with the realities of the world around them...they merely listen to that nasty ol' "mainstream media" to make their voting decisions for them.

And, of course, Fox News, Rush, Sean, Bill, Ann, Michael, Beck or any of the others don't fall into that category...right?)

Get real.

[Dalton]

Sara,
You are truly delusional.

By the way, when and where did YOU serve in the military?

[Sara (Squiggler)]

Dalton: LOL. LOL. LOL. LOL.

Give up boy, give it up.

I know, the President blew up the levies and he is so god-like he controlled the wind and sea and blew right into the Gulf Coast. LOL.

I think our soldiers were more offended at your minions sending them hate mail and spitting on them, than they were at some falling tiles in the ceiling of a WWII era bldg. But then, having spent time AS A PATIENT at 3 different military hospitals, maybe I'm more aware of the sad state of military health care dating back at least to my first hand knowledge in 1967 thru today.

Harriet Miers? Huh? How 'bout our newest Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito? Your side got bluffed out big time on that move. Too bad you don't get it. As to Gonzales, at this point, I hope the President stands firm, but frankly, I want Guiliani or a Rudy clone as Attorney General, so I'm neither here nor there on Gonzales. It is an idiotic argument since the President has the authority to fire any U.S. Attorney he wants and he doesn't have to justify it to anyone if he doesn't want to. Did I forget anything on your list -- oh yeah, Libby -- well 3 years of JOM posting on the subject speaks for itself.

[Sara (Squiggler)]

One last remark to you Dalton. Here is my publicly posted poltical position:

What being a modified libertarian means to me:

Absolute belief that the Bill of Rights, which limits government and guarantees the rights of the individual, gives me the right to be biased against those (can you say liberals) who try to legislate my mind with their ridiculous political correctness and other huge government programs designed to control rather than enhance me as an individual. I strongly believe in the 2nd Amendment and the right to bear arms. I believe government's prime purpose is to defend and protect its citizens from foreign and domestic terror through a well-trained and well-equipped military. I believe in capitalism, competition, and the right to keep what I earn and I think corporations are better equipped as business managers than the government ever could be. I believe in the right to own property and the right to be left alone on that property, should I desire to be left alone. I believe that the human conscience is the closest thing I can explain as being the "spirit of God" and that the absence of a conscience (or God or good) is the definition of evil.

I am a libertarian pragmatist.

[Gary Maxwell]

the Dems have absolutely nothing to offer except partisan poo-flinging and empty "non binding" resolution gestures.

You left out non-binding resolutions that don't draw a majority vote in a chamber where you control the majority and the means to bring the resolutions ( or not ) to a vote. When you are not even smart enough to count to 50 and see which side you are on before the vote, it does not bode well for holding your majority position.

[Dalton]

Sara,
"I think our soldiers were more offended at your minions sending them hate mail and spitting on them..."

Who are YOU talking about?

Before you start throwing slurs out like that, you might just want to know exactly who you're talking to.

*And, as for Bush; If you think he's doing a good job that's your prerogative, but right now 70% of America disagrees. Oh, and you might want to find out what a libertarian really is. True "libertarians" believe in free will, and certainly do not agree with invasions, wiretapping or sticking one's nose into the private lives of Americans or anyone else for that matter.

Maybe you should consider reading more and blathering on less.

[Dalton]

Gary Maxwell,
The Democrats were smart enough to win the last elections, weren't they?

And, as for being "smart," you do know G.W. Bush is President, right?

[Tom Maguire]

What relevance would the IIPA definition of covert have to the publics understanding of whether or not Plame was covert when she was outed by senior Bush Administration officials as part of a scheme to smear her husband...

Good point - so as part of the Dems PR offensive (and I choose my words carefully) they called for a Special Counsel to investigate a non-crime, figuring it would make great photo-ops. Mission Accomplished.

From Jeff:

Beyond that, is it really so shocking that no one told her, "There's this act that refers to what it confusingly calls 'covert agents' which really has nothing to do with our categories...

I am not at all surprised that the CIA does not focus on legal definitions when figuring out how to maintain and use classified officers.

I *am* surprised that the left is whooping that, since Ms. Plame says she was covert under CIA procedures, all the issues are settled.

but your missing what's going on if you don't see that Plame is contending, in response to Davis, that in fact she was covert under the Act

Subject to her disclaimers about not actually knowing, of course. But I see your point.

Although I support Ms. Toensing, sound principles of statutory construction suggest "in construing a statute . . . the worst person to construe it is the person who is responsible for its drafting.

My laymen's understanding is that statutory construction and interpretation by way of legislative intent are very different intellectual approaches. In the latter, obviously the drafter's view is relevant.

[Syl]

Dalton

Maybe you should consider reading more and blathering on less.

Good advice, maybe you should take it.

[Dalton]

Syl,
Hey, come up with your own material.

[Dalton]

Tom Maguire,
Why do you keep saying Plame didn't know if she was covert/undercover?

That is patently false.

From Plame's own (under oath) testimony:

* "I was a covert officer of the Central Intelligence Agency."
* "I could count on one hand the number of people who knew where my true employer was the day that my name and true affiliation was exposed in July 2003."

[sylvia]

"I am not at all surprised that the CIA does not focus on legal definitions when figuring out how to maintain and use classified officers."

I am. Don't you think the agents would always be abreast of their status, so they knew their legal rights and what they were allowed to do and not do, during their times of utmost secrecy?

[clarice feldman]

Your material is so tired, Dalton, we are forced to use new more creative stuff for you let we fall asleep over our keyboards.

[clarice feldman]

***Least we fall asleep********

[sylvia]

"I was a covert officer of the Central Intelligence Agency."

How did she know if no one in the CIA ever bothered to tell her? She then later said she didn't know if she was covert under the statute, because she wasn't a lawyer. So the mystery is not solved.

[clarice feldman]

**lest we fall sleep**(oh just forget it .LOL)

[Dalton]

clarice feldman,
What you really mean is this: If you don't agree with us...you're wrong.

Better yet, why not provide a factual rebuttal of what I've posted?

We know that ain't gonna happen soon.

[sylvia]

I think TM is on post strike today. Must have been that nice woman he was seated next to at that dinner party.

[Syl]

* "I was a covert officer of the Central Intelligence Agency."

'Covert' is a legal term, not a CIA officer designation. The term is used by CIA as a descriptive adjective for the type of work engaged in, not an administrative status.

* "I could count on one hand the number of people who knew where my true employer was the day that my name and true affiliation was exposed in July 2003."

Her 'true' employer was the Counterproliferation Division at CIA..the entity that wrote her checks, rather than the more general term 'CIA'. This is, in fact, a distinction with a difference.

Novak's article mentioned 'CPD'--her true affiliation. Libby, Fleischer, Rove, and whomever else one cares to name mentioned only that she was CIA which fact was apparently known by more than a handful of people. Including a few in green rooms across America where Wilson bragged about his CIA wife.

[Dalton]

sylvia:
"How did she know if no one in the CIA ever bothered to tell her? She then later said she didn't know if she was covert under the statute, because she wasn't a lawyer. So the mystery is not solved."

From Plame's questioning and testimony:

Plame repeatedly described herself as a covert operative, a term that has multiple meanings. Plame said she worked undercover and traveled abroad on secret missions for the CIA.

But the word "covert" also has a legal definition requiring recent foreign service by the person and active efforts to keep his or her identity secret. Critics of special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's investigation said Plame did not meet that definition for several reasons and that was why nobody was charged with the leak.

"No process can be adopted to protect classified information that no one knows is classified. This looks to me more like a CIA problem than a White House problem," Davis said.

Plame said she wasn't a lawyer and didn't know her legal status, but said it shouldn't have mattered to the officials who learned her identity.

"They all knew that I worked with the CIA," Plame said. "They might not have known what my status was but that alone — the fact that I worked for the CIA — should have put up a red flag."

[Sara (Squiggler)]

Does anyone think that Dalton is sounding more and more like Scary Larry?

[sylvia]

"the fact that I worked for the CIA — should have put up a red flag."

It doesn't matter what Plame says, what matters are the facts. And Libby and Co. thought she was a WMD analyst with a desk job. They probably work with the CIA employees everyday, they are not going to ask each one if they are covert. The responsibilty is on the CIA to inform them when they see or can conceive of the necessity.

[Sara (Squiggler)]

If the CIA is forbidden to run ops within the USA, how could a desk analyst or managerial-type working from Langley, VA be covert? She apparently did her job by telephone or electronic communication, when she wasn't attending meetings and introducing her husband. Either could be traced back to Langley by anyone who wanted to trace the communications. And, there was nothing stopping her from operating under an assumed name when sending electronic communications or making a phone call. Shoot, I worked for a newspaper for over 15 years that wouldn't let us use our own names when dealing with the public. I was assigned a "phone name" when I was hired.

[Dalton]

sylvia,
What makes you think this is true?

"Libby and Co. thought she was a WMD analyst with a desk job."

I've never read anything of the sort.

[Syl]

Dalton quotes Plame:

"They all knew that I worked with the CIA," Plame said. "They might not have known what my status was but that alone — the fact that I worked for the CIA — should have put up a red flag."

Dalton, does your left eye tell your right eye what it has seen any more readily than Val's eyes speak with each other?

Valery, I'm sure, was interested in every word of testimony at the Libby trial. Therefore she knows damn well that it was the CIA who informed members of the administration that she was, er, CIA and did so without any hint that the information was sensitive, classified, verboten, or magical.

If you receive this information from one CIA official, then maybe you might question it. But if it was being bandied about by THREE CIA officials without caveat then ::yawn::

Val's beef is not with the administration, it is with the CIA but damned if she will ever admit it.

[Dalton]

Sara,
Plame, during her testimony flatly stated that she had indeed traveled out of the country and was working on many projects related to Iraq and Iran.

As in:

"In the run-up to the war with Iraq, I worked in the Counterproliferation Division of the CIA, still as a covert officer whose affiliation with the CIA was classified. I raced to discover solid intelligence for senior policymakers on Iraq’s presumed weapons of mass destruction program.

While I helped to manage and run secret worldwide operations against this WMD target from CIA headquarters in Washington, I also traveled to foreign countries on secret missions to find vital intelligence."

Maybe you should read her testimony.

[sylvia]

"What makes you think this is true?

Well I know Armitage said that to Woodward, and he got the same info the others did. I assumed Libby thought the same.

[Syl]

Dalton

"Libby and Co. thought she was a WMD analyst with a desk job."

I've never read anything of the sort.

Then what the heck are you doing here arguing for? Catch up. Read the trial testimony.

I'll just give you a couple of fer instances:

Armitage to Woodward: [...] analyst
Fleischer to Pincus: analyst
Libby to Miller: WINPAC (analyst)
Rove to Cooper: CIA generic

[Syl]

Dalton

Have you ever padded a resume?

I raced to discover solid intelligence for senior policymakers on Iraq’s presumed weapons of mass destruction program.

I sent hubby to Niger to check on the purported sales agreement between Iraq and Niger for yellowcake.

I also traveled to foreign countries on secret missions to find vital intelligence

I went to Jordan to check on the aluminum tubes shipment.

She also communicated with agents in the field.

I'm not dissing what she did, I just don't think it rises to the level of the Big Stink that ensued.

[TMF]

LOL DULLton thinks the Democrats "won" the last election

BZZZ

Thanks for playing

The dummycrats won nothing

The GOP lost the election by pissing off their base. THe dems didnt "win it"

If they did, their policies would be implemented

EVERY dem proposal for the war has been shot down

Reid "non binding resolution": Eviscerated

Murtha slow bleed: Killed

Reid pull out by march '08: Dead

Most polls show a 55% majority of Americans do NOT want our soldiers to pull out of Iraq and think we need to succeed there. As always, DULLton misreads the public and thinks the majority is san fransisco KOStard lefties like him

Great win there DULLton. You must really have the "majority" behind you to be this ineffectual, impotent, powerless and PATHETIC

[Sara (Squiggler)]

Dalton: in the "run up to the War in Iraq" which was when? She had her twins in 2000 and was on maternity leave most of that year. She then took extended leave for a mental disorder caused by post partum depression. You know, PPD that causes women to murder their children and do all kinds of crazy stuff. She was brought in from the field in 1997 because Aldrich Ames had "outed" her and she was no longer a viable covert field agent after that. But, that didn't end her compromised state as she was compromised again by the Cubans. So when again could she be covert during the run up to the war which was in 2001 and 2002 thru Mar 2003. Or are you saying that not only is the CIA so careless they bandied her name about to anyone who asked, but also sent a compromised field ops agent back to the field? And are you also saying that she went off to dangerous lands, doing dangerous covert work and left 2 newborn infants at home uncared for? Doesn't wash. We know she was around for backyard BBQs and for Democratic Policy meetings and with breakfast with the NYT reporters, so start accounting for her time and all the other hindrances to her returning to covert overseas ops and then ....

[MayBee]

The presumption is its classified unless and until you are affirmatively certain it isn't,

Where does this come from? Is it the FDL book of legalisms or something?
It is in the mode of other FDL legalisms, such as accepting a pardon is an admission of guilt.
Not to mention granting Libby a pardon will make him testify to Congress without being allowed the 5th, and therefore he'll have to turn on Cheney.
And of course, Toensing is in danger of perjury charges for her opinions on the IIPA.

[TMF]

Grading the Democrats 1st two Months:

Thus far the Dummycrats have accomplished 2 things for the American people as I see it:

1. Passed a meaningless, completely empty gesture increasing the minimum wage (but only after the Republicans rightly gutted it with tax incentives for small business)

2. Got Valerie Plame to testify that her desk job at Langley was super duper double secret covert

GRADE: F

[Gary Maxwell]

Gary Maxwell,
The Democrats were smart enough to win the last elections, weren't they?

Well no. They got there do to fecklessness on the part of many of their opponents. In their less than smart approach, they managed to all but alienate one of their more senior Senators, so much so that he has publicly been quoted as toying with the idea of caucusing with the Republicans. And continues to do so.

[Spartacvs]

Tom Maguire:

Spartacvs: "What relevance would the IIPA definition of covert have to the publics understanding of whether or not Plame was covert when she was outed by senior Bush Administration officials as part of a scheme to smear her husband...

...who had the temerity to write an op-ed highlighting the Administrations mendacity regarding the intelligence concerning WMD that led to this disastrous war in Iraq, if Waxman doesn't contemplate bringing a criminal prosecution under the IIPA?"

Tom Maguire: Good point - so as part of the Dems PR offensive (and I choose my words carefully) they called for a Special Counsel to investigate a non-crime, figuring it would make great photo-ops. Mission Accomplished.

I see you are not above selectively quoting someone out of context to make your point. I put the highlighted text back in to restore the context.

What evidence do you have that back in 2003 GW Bush was sufficiently intimidated by Democrats to call for an investigation into who leaked Plame's name. Do you think a CIA referral to Justice and the AG's recusal because of ties to Rove might have had anything to do with it or do you contend fear of the Democrats was responsible for that too?

[TMF]

"The American public is so dumb, so uninformed, so out of touch with the realities of the world around them..."

Well, uh, actually, ...

1/3 of Washington DC Functionally Illiterate

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8NVBUV81&show_article=1

God bless liberalism and democrat rule

[Dalton]

Gary Maxwell |

"Well no".....really?

New election results just in??

Duh.

[Dalton]

Gary:
"fecklessness"???

cool.

[Dalton]

TMF...is...
Dumb as a stump.

[TMF]

DULLton

Impressive. You can make rhymes!

Do you have any more tricks?

Any more original thoughts? How about telling us about Bushs "incompetence". I love that one

Or something about halliburton? Ooo, I know, tell us the one about Katrina!

The man is a genius!

[Sara (Squiggler)]

Take your meds Dalton, you are out of control.

[TMF]

All work and no play makes DULLton a chatty boy!

Hey DULLton, time to fit those walls for new padding!

[Sara (Squiggler)]

He's getting a bit screechy, isn't he?

[TMF]

He makes some really good points..

If you have the mental capacity of a cigarette butt

[Dalton]

Syl,
Oh, please.

Are trying to say that Libby and Cheney didn't know Plame's position with the CIA...and only found out because of an interview Armitage had with Woodward???

Get real.

[Dalton]

Based on the what I read here, with a few exceptions, I can understand why the Republicans got their asses kicked in the last elections...and why the elections in 2008 could be even better for the Democrats.
(And before you even type it out...I know, I know...everybody hates Hillary...blah, blah, blah.)

I've read very few comments that I couldn't have also heard from the likes of Rush, Sean, Michael, Ann, Bill, Beck or other right wing mouthpieces. (And I know, Sara...you and nobody else listens to them anymore...right.)

For people here to continue supporting (and defending) the Bush administration at this point in time, after seeing how they've handled everything from the Iraqi invasion aftermath, Katrina, the Libby convictions, Walter Reed, The U.S. Attorney firings and who knows what's next...tells me you could care less about America's stand in the world...as long as Republicans are in control.

Well, I have one thing to say to that: GFL

[TMF]

DULLton you are the quintessential one trick pony

[Dalton]

After slamming Plame over the past few days about what she did or did not know or understand about her own position at the CIA...even as she testified UNDER OATH...
we get exactly what I told you would happen when it came time for Bush administration people to answer questions about the U.S. Attorney flap:

The White House will allow the president's top political adviser, Karl Rove, and former White House counsel Harriet Miers to be interviewed by congressional committees investigating how the firing of several U.S. attorneys was handled, Rep. Chris Cannon said Tuesday.

BUT ROVE AND MIERS WILL NOT TESTIFY UNDER OATH.