Questions For Joe And Valerie

Rick Ballard and company have some questions for Joe and Valerie Wilson as a prep for the Waxman show trial tomorrow.

Here is the witness list:

• Ms. Valerie Plame Wilson, former employee, Central Intelligence Agency
• Dr. James Knodell, Director, Office of Security, The White House (invited)
• Mr. Mark Zaid, Attorney
• Ms. Victoria Toensing, diGenova & Toensing, LLP

Ms. Plame needs no introduction, nor does Ms. Toensing (her article on Ms. Plame's covert status and my current thoughts.)

Dr. James Knodell is at the White House, as described.

And here is a bit about Mark Zaid:

Mark S. Zaid is the Managing Partner in the Washington, D.C. law firm of Krieger & Zaid, PLLC and specializes in litigation and lobbying on matters relating to international transactions, torts and crimes, national security, foreign sovereign and diplomatic immunity, defamation (plaintiff) and the Freedom of Information/Privacy Acts (FOI/PA).

Through his practice Mr. Zaid often represents former/current federal employees, intelligence officers, Whistleblowers and others who have grievances or have been wronged by agencies of the United States Government or foreign governments, as well as members of the media. He has participated in cases against or involving the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the National Security Agency, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Departments of Defense, Health & Human Services, Justice and State, the Marshal's Service, Secret Service, Library of Congress, Taiwan, Mexico, Macedonia, the Government of Libya, and the Republic of Georgia.

Presumably he has been retained by the Wilsons, which means we should have seen his name on earlier civil suit filings.  Or maybe he is an impartial expert.

Comments

[arcanorum]

FITZ!

[Sara (Squiggler)]

This was just posted by "lurker" in another thread. Looks like Dean is planning a coup. First the Kerry campaign, via the Wilsons, and now Dean does a Kerry:
Dem Dean admits to major felony

"Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean has been meeting with world leaders to repair "the extraordinary damage" that the Bush administration has done to America's image and to prepare the way for a new Democratic president.

"I am trying to build relationships with other governments in preparation for a Democratic takeover," Dean told me. "I want to make clear that there is an opposition in America and that we are ready to take power and that when we do, we are going to have much better relationships with them."

[MayBee]

Good job, Fab Four!

[tomh]

Is there something in the questions that I don't understand. Of course CIA employees, particularly those working as undercover operatives, have to maintain more or less normal lives in order to maintain cover. They are married, they are included in publications that include their spouses, their names are routinely linked to their spouse, etc. I don't get the significance of the questions about the linkage of Plame with her husband. Can someone help me?

Further, the fact that Plame might have made political contributions is relevant to what? That undercover CIA agents should not do this sort of thing? I know I might be dense but what is the relevance.

[clarice feldman]

The House Dems are trying to use Plame to argue for a strengthening of the "whistleblower" provisions. Plame never availed herself of the current ones in place and Wilson, not an employee, could not.

I take it they have no high hopes of winning the presidency the next time around.

[sylvia]

You know I was theorizing that Plame must have been covert or Fitz couldn't have brought an investigation, and Libby must have known that and so that's why he didn't challenge it. However, I think now is not the time to play nice for Libby, and he should demand to see public evidence that Plame was covert. And if he doesn't get it, ask for a mistrial and sue Fitz for malicious prosecution. Libby could at least try and make a statement anyway.

[Sara (Squiggler)]

tomh -- the point is that Joe Wilson and his wife have been complaining loudly that her life and their security have been severely put in jeopardy because Valerie Plame's identity was compromised by the White House and the Office of the Vice President. This has been the gist of everything they claim as their damage due to the supposed "outing." But, anyone with half a brain and a computer could identify Valerie as the wife of Ambassador Wilson thru a number of different sources. Sources that all lead back to Joe Wilson, himself, and not the WH or the OVP. Do you really think that spy agencies worldwide didn't know who Val was? They knew her name from the Aldrich Ames outing. So, if there was any attempt to keep her linkage to the Ambassador secret, he sure made sure that those links were available. He outed his own wife with her help in the interest of a John Kerry political campaign not some dumb high school revenge plot ginned up by the media to make the WH/OVP look bad and hopefully throw an election as a result.

[centralcal]

Sylvia: Hear! Hear!

[lurker]

Agreed. The jury panel ruled Libby guilty by including Plame's status as one of the justifications.

[tomh]

Perhaps foreign intelligence services knew she was an undercover CIA agent. I have no way of knowing that. But the fact she was married to Amb. Wilson does not mean her cover was blown. How does that association lead to the conclusion that she must be an undercover CIA agent and that foreign intel services would know this? Help me understand the linkage.

[lurker]

IIPA definition, written by Toensing, indicate that her public appearances means that she was not covert.

Ames outed her, which eliminated her status as covert.

Her driving to work at Langley makes her non-covert.

If she told Wilson that she was covert on their 3rd date or at any time...is a clear violation on her own part.

Her business travel overseas was so brief that it was not considered as an assignment as per IIPA definition.

There are other things as well.

She was most definitely not covert. She wasn't a whistleblower either. Exactly what did she whistleblow????

[lurker]

And foreign intelligence probably knew Valerie was covert until Ames outed her.

[Sara (Squiggler)]

I don't think she was covert at least since 1999 or before. At least since she went out on maternity leave and subsequent leave for post partum depression. Her twins are now 7 years old, you do the math. Outing Valerie Plame is a red herring that the media has foisted on the public as if it is a big deal. Outing her obviously was not a big deal to the Wilsons themselves. Their carelessness is being laid at the feet of others and a man is now facing jail time.

[Alcibiades]

Mark Zaid is the same attorney representing LTC. Antony Shaffer from Able Dange.

Geez, it really is one big conspiracy.

[lurker]

Good news.

Reid resolution failed on vote 50-48.

Gregg amendment passed on vote 82-16.

Murray amendment passed on vote 96-2.

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/017042.php

[PeterUK]

"Ms Plame,or would you prefer Mrs Wilson"?

"Sorry I couldn't hear you Ms Plame".

"Ms Plame,would you please take the paper bag off your head,we can't hear what you are saying?"

[lurker]

Almost all CIA employees are classified but a small percentage of CIA employees are covert (NOC). A NOC agent is so secret that one should not be driving to work and park a car at Langley. A NOC agent should not be listed in a CIA directory. And so on.

I have classified status but am not NOC.

When one goes on an extended leave of absence for whatever reason that may be, one loses classified status. If an agent is NOC, the agent also loses NOC status.

When they return to work from an extended leave of absence, they have to reapply for classified status first. Then once they get it, then they apply for NOC.

There are a few levels of classified status (security clearance), btw. In this case, the about-to-be NOC agent would have to apply for the highest security clearance.

[Jane]

Tomh,

First of all, the only conclusion possible given her activity was that Plame was not an undercover CIA agent and there was no involvement by foreign intel services.

And the linkage is cumulative. First of all you have a woman who is employed at the CIA who says she doesn't want anyone to know. So on her third date with a married man, she tells him. Now any rational person dating a married man has absolutely no hope that he will ever marry her, so clearly a smart CIA agent, didn't really think her employment was much of a secret.

Then in her job with the CIA she recommends her husband for a trip to Niger. The husband goes, promptly returns and lies and says that the VP sent him, and tells the press he found nothing while he tells the CIA he found something.

If her husband told the truth, her identity would not be an issue. It would have never come up. Since he lied he drew scrutiny. You would think a smart CIA agent who was protective of her identity would either not send a husband that she knew to be a liar on a secret mission. Or maybe she really wasn't all that protective of her identity.

Then you have the grandstanding husband flaunting his wife everywhere he goes. In washington where A knows B who knows C who is sleeping with D, it's not hard to put two and two together. You would think that someone who was a little concerned about her identity would have made sure she had a lower profile.

Plame was asking for something. And I suspect she got it.

[Other Tom]

For my part, I don't see anything compromising about her acknowledging her relationship with Joe Wilson. Where her behavior becomes irresponsible, reckless and utterly inconsistent with a duty to maintain her cover is when she appears at political events, when she proposes her husband for a venture in which he is not asked to sign a non-disclosure agreement, after which he publishes a political attack in the newspaper of record and accepts a job as consultant to a political campaign, and when she meets with a reporter while her husband discusses his madcap adventures. All of this behavior invites scrutiny into her background and, as we have seen, it was child's play to determine from publicly available documents that her Brewster Jennings cover was nonsense.

[Other Tom]

Jane and I were writing at the same time, making the same point. She just did it better.

[lurker]

To apply for the lowest security clearance, it takes between 2 to 4 months to get it. I'm guessing that to apply and get the highest security clearance would take three times as long. Anyone know?

Sue, how long was Valerie on leave for post-partum depression?

And when she returned, she got a desktop job, didn't she? That sure wasn't a NOC job.

[Jane]

She just did it better.

That would be a first!!!

[Other Tom]

Hell. I thought Spymaster Larry was supposed to testify. Anyone know where that rumor started? I, for one, am bitterly disappointed--he is a gasbag and a buffoon, and it would have been wonderful to see him actually have to respond to questions from someone other than a fawning MSNBC dolt.

[PeterUK]

"Hell. I thought Spymaster Larry was supposed to testify"

He was,but realised that he is still a covert analyst.

[lurker]

Blond hair makes a NOC agent?

HHHmmmm....

[lurker]

"Plame was asking for something. And I suspect she got it."

Attention and Money.

[Syl]

tomH

How does that association lead to the conclusion that she must be an undercover CIA agent and that foreign intel services would know this?

It doesn't and that's the point.

The Wilson's are claiming that the White House revealed the same information they themselves had already revealed.

'Covert' has nothing to do with it. Never has. 'Covert' only exists in the political minds of the Dems.

[hit and run]

Jane:
And the linkage is cumulative.

Kinda like a slow bleed? I like that concept!

Other Tom:
he is a gasbag

I like that word!

[Rick Ballard]

I just hope Plame is asked some of Jane's questions. I know Waxman is going to try and shield her but those questions (or questions similiar to those) come from the public domain and do not pertain to anything that seems 'classified' to me.

[Larry]

"...three times as long. Anyone know?" The background investigation for one's initial security clearance is quite extensive, goes all the way back and includes interviews with acquaintances and relatives. I suspect an application to "renew" a clearance would not have to cover anything more than a review of the record before the first clearance was issued. The "renewal" process ought to be much quicker.

[Sara (Squiggler)]

Valerie Plame Wilson was a hot potato for the CIA. First she is outed by Ames, then the Cuba debacle, then she suffers mental instability. There is no way they were going to send her back to NOC status and, in fact, probably couldn't wait to get rid of her.

[PeterUK]

Since,as far as I know,the CIA is not allowed to operate on the continental USA,what was Valerie Plame covert for?
Secondly,any citizen of totalitarian countries like Iran or North Korea, who had dealings with an American would be under suspicion,its the way all these intelligence services work.
Covert,closet,coven,wouldn't matter,Val meets anyone she would be checked out.
Lastly,does anyone really think Langley isn't under surveillance?

[Syl]

probably couldn't wait to get rid of her.

I don't remember his name, but a former boss of hers said she was very bright and capable but the moment she involved herself with Wilson her value to the CIA dropped to nil.

[lurker]

I don't think "not so much quicker", Larry. I have seen my co-workers go on extended leave of absences and when they come back, they have to reapply. I do remember that their re-application took slightly less time. This is for the lowest security clearance.

I doubt that we would see a shorter time for the highest security clearance and especially for the re-application of NOC status. These two are very serious.

[jerry]

"'Covert' has nothing to do with it. Never has. 'Covert' only exists in the political minds of the Dems."

Things this Dem has been puzzling over:

Is 'overt' somewhere between covert and classified?

If she lived in the US but "served" abroad is she covered by IIPA?

Is Toensing the last word on these issues?

When is Tenet's book coming out (when will the WH stop blocking it)?

[Sara (Squiggler)]

Jerry -- how is the WH blocking Tenet's book. It is the CIA that would approve or disprove publishing it.

[Larry]

Lurker, you're probably right. I was guessing it ought to make a significant difference, but didn't factor in that we're working with the gummint here, so all common sense notions are off the table. Measure it with a micrometer, mark it with a grease pencil and cut it with an axe.

[lurker]

Valerie had not served abroad in her last five years. Byron York was quick to point out that one of her addresses was a US Embassy overseas. That eliminates her as a covert or overt agent.

Yes, Toensing is the last word on it, as far as I'm concerned.

Covert is covered under the IIPA, written by Toensing.

Classified is NOT covered under the IIPA. Therefore, outing of her under classified status does not mean that it is a crime.

Since Valerie is not covert (or overt), outing of her identity is not a crime.

As far as I am concerned, overt and covert are similar.

How can Valerie be covert in any one of those ME countries?

[maryrose]

I really wish every issue that arises doesn't immediately have to find its way to a WH connection. I'm so sick of seeing Schumer's face on television. I think he is jealous of all the air time Hillary is getting so he has to thrust himself into the limelight. Al D'Amato was right -he is a Putz!

[Syl]

jerry

It's possible and, in fact, probable that val worked undercover at some point in her career. But that was long over.

I don't think even Larry claims she was covert at the time Novak mentioned her in his column.

The discrepancy, if any, concerns trips she may have taken overseas within five years of the Novak column. But she was not stationed overseas, which is the point in the IIPA (where Toensing comes in). The CIA could very well be unhappy about the definition, but the IIPA also took 1st Amendment rights into consideration when making the statute.

IOW, the CIA did not have the final word as to who would be considered 'covert' in the legal sense. The final word came from Congress. If the CIA had its druthers then 'once covert always covert' would be their mantra.

The whole notion of Val being covert was presented by Corn and devoured by the press to make a big scandal. There was never any real there there.

Classified information, however, was revealed in the form of the Niger trip combined with Wilson's association with CIA through his wife who worked on yellowcake.

[lurker]

Jerry -- how is the WH blocking Tenet's book. It is the CIA that would approve or disprove publishing it.

And this is NOT a new procedure.

This procedure has been around for many, many years.

[Enlightened]

Is 'overt' somewhere between covert and classified?

Are you serious? Overt would mean she was "open to view". Not covert or classified.

If she lived in the US but "served" abroad is she covered by IIPA?

Served abroad? You mean she commuted to Jordan once a week? Or Iraq? Or some other third world nuclear proliferating country? Or you mean she travelled extensively? After she had kids? Uh - no.

When is Tenet's book coming out (when will the WH stop blocking it)?

Why don't the lib rottweilers Tweety and Potato Head haul Tenet onto their shows and ask him? WH stopping that too?

GMAB.

[maryrose]

This hearing is going to be a big yawn. Just a promo for the book and movie. Why can't these people Joe and Val just go away already? Their 15 minutes are up already.

[Rick Ballard]

Lurker,

What happens to your clearance if you disclose classified (or closely held) information under your control?

[lurker]

enlightened, you're right about overt.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/dict.asp?Word=overt

1. Open and observable; not hidden, concealed, or secret: overt hostility; overt intelligence gathering.

2. Of, relating to, or being military or intelligence operations sanctioned or mandated by Congress: overt aid to the rebels.

[Enlightened]

Covert is the reverse of overt. Hidden from view.

Overt does not fit in the covert/classified group.

But I do agree with Jerry's innuendo - Plame was in fact - overt.

[lurker]

Rick Ballard, it becomes a condition of employment. Once one loses it in a job like mine, then one cannot perform his or her job so that person's employment will be terminated. In this case, it's easier for a subcontrator to terminate someone's employment than it is for a government agency to terminate someone's employment. What happens in this case is that this person's job will be redefined (aka demoted) into a non-secure job until a RIF takes place.

Same goes for "non-disclosure agreement", btw.

[jerry]

Sarah and enlightened, this is probably why I thought the WH was slowing Tenet's book release:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20070109-122510-8257r.htm

But this seems to clarify, the CIA is blamed (and the book comes out April 30!):

http://theedge.bostonherald.com/bookNews/view.bg?articleid=188462

Thanks for the other answers, looking forward to inching toward an answer tomorrow. Plame and Toensing won't be on the same panel hopefully!

[lurker]

Rick, in the case of a government agency, it is a general rule but exceptions do take place.

From what I've read of Valerie's chronology in her job, she was "demoted" when she returned to her job from her two extended leaves of absence. Add to the long list of reasons why she was not covert in year 2003.

[Enlightened]

Heh. Let's trip back in time, oh say - 4 months ago.

What did Hamas say about secret meetings with US Democratic officials?

And what is Dean saying about secret meetings with foreign governments?

I do believe I said at the time that it was none other than Mr. Yeeehaw Dean.

I still believe it was Mr. (now Dickwad) Dean.

http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Top_News/20061206-051951-7895r/

[PeterUK]

Lurker,
It is highly probable that Plame would lose any "covert" status when she embarked on an affair with a man married to a French woman of unusual employment.

[lurker]

Jerry, I don't think there will be a definite answer in tomorrow's hearing regarding Valerie's status.

[Enlightened]

Yep - I sure did - over at Patterico's.

"Hmmm - Saw this on another blog - Could Howard Dean be the Senior Democrat alluded to?"

http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=politicsNews&storyid=2006-12-07T204342Z_01_L0796336_RTRUKOC_0_US-EUROPE-SOCIALISTS-US.xml&src=rss&rpc=22

Comment by Enlightened — 12/8/2006 @ 11:16 am

[lurker]

PUK, you're probably right. CIA was probably concerned about maintaining Valerie's status (according to law) when Plame was having an affair with someone as you described. This affair created too much of a risk for Plame to even be covert.

Covert means that the agent must NOT reveal classified information to anyone that does not have a "need-to-know" status in addition to classified status. The lowest security clearance does not generally have a "need-to-know" criteria but the next two levels do with the highest level being far more restrictive with its "need-to-know" requirements of passing classified information.

[Enlightened]

Pssst. Don't tell anyone I'm a hater - but I really do hate Howard Dean. I would love to see him roast for this treason. IMO of course.

[topsecretk9]

--Mark Zaid is the same attorney representing LTC. Antony Shaffer from Able Dange.--

His partner is representing the silly Doe vs. CIA too.

[lurker]

I wouldn't be surprised if CIA knew immediately that Valerie told Joe Wilson of her status, whatever her status was at the time of their third date.

[Rick Ballard]

Subtract the slow bleeding gasbag from the equation and Plame would still be boring her compatriots to death at Langley.

She knew what Kristof's buy off on Munchausen's tale meant the moment the Times was dumb enough to publish it. Even if she hadn't been careless at the meeting memorialized by the State Department somebody was bound to track down the doofus responsible for sending a loud mouthed clown to do anything for the agency that wound up in the Times.

[PeterUK]

Lurker,
This seems to have been forgotten(American Thinker).I had not read it before, but had come to the same conclusions myself.This also accounts for Powell's attitude,he was made to look a fool at the UN.The "forgeries" were a booby trap,which is why they were so poor,though there were reports of another ,better,set in existence.
This was all very fortuitous for the Democrats and the anti-war movement,the rest is history.

[lurker]

Rick Ballard, since Joe Wilson blabbermouthed this whole thing AND did not sign a non-disclosure agreement, then CIA had to know up front that Valerie's "covert" status was at threat so CIA had to do something to remove Valerie's status as covert early on. Providing that Ame's outing her had not removed her status.

But didn't she return to the states once Ames (supposedly) outed her? Which means she lost her covert status at that time.

Also, the "Who's Who" book is another reason why Valerie was not covert.

I'm sure Charlie of Colorado would attest that once you lose your covert status, you're no longer covert. Same applies for classified. It means that you no longer have access to classified information.

Charlie can confirm this but I'm willing to bet that depending on how secret the classified information is, when one loses classified and/or covert status, one may be required to sign a form that they cannot talk about the classified information for so many years in their post-employment and post-classified / post-covert years.

Nope, Valerie wasn't covert.

[clarice feldman]

Enlightened I just blogged a little something on that. Don't know if it'll run, but I sent it in.

[Enlightened]

I still think an important question to ask Val is:

Did you dicuss classified intel with your husband? What was his security clearance at the time you discussed classified intel with him?

[verner]

I just re-read some of Fedora's excellent research, and here's another question I think they need to ask her.

Seymour Hersh (not exactly a friend of the Bush administration) reported that the so-called "Niger forgeries" were a CIA "inside job" carried out by retired operatives etc, who wanted to "get the neo-cons" in the Bush administration.

Were you in on it? Did you send Joe knowing that you could "spring the trap" and undermine the war effort in Iraq? What were you promised for your role in the "cabal"?

Of course, we'll never be allowed to know the truth about that.

[Jane]

The problem is those kinds of questions hint at the answer and give Val-the-superspy, too much wiggle room. Far better to entrap her with innocuous information which she later cannot back down from.

For example, asking Val whether she discussed classified intel with Joe is like asking Clinton if he had sex with an intern. It depends on the defintion of classified.

And as we all know she and all her allies can change that defintion, parse that definition, split that defintion at the drop of a hat.

Better to ask Val in a lefthanded way to tell us about the outrages involved in others leaking classified info, and get her to define it. Meanwhile, wander her down a road where she lets us know all the cool things she and Joey did and talked about. And then later draw the conclusions for her.

Because trust me, there will be nothing at all straightforward about her testimony.

[PeterUK]

Further the French oil giant,Total Elf Fina had contracts to develop Iraq oil fields.
Add in Oil For Food,the huge forgotten multi-billion scam and there seems to be sufficient grounds to suspect a conspiracy.

[clarice feldman]

PUK, thanks for reminding me of the excellent James Lewis article. He packs so much into what he writes, doesn't he.

[PeterUK]

"Did you dicuss classified intel with your husband? What was his security clearance at the time you discussed classified intel with him".

Were either of you taking the necessary precautions?

[PeterUK]

Clarice,
Yes.I have always turned this on its head,Plame was the conspirators push back against the administration.Amazing how a war,an incompetent intelligence agency and a whole polity can be subsumed by an unemployed diplomat and an over the hill bureaucrat.Notice what got lost in all this outrage.

[Syl]

lurker

I love ya, but sometimes you don't make sense.

Same applies for classified. It means that you no longer have access to classified information.

A CIA employee's status is not the same thing as a security clearance.

[Another Bob]

Syl | March 15, 2007 at 05:50 PM

Thanks Syl, I was confused, too. AFAIK a security clearance entitles one to have access to certain information.

This classified/NOC stuff regards Plame is something entirely different. (But exactly what it is I do not know, and would appreciate an explanation.)

[Another Bob]

(clicked post too soon)

The terms "NOC", "classified" and "covert" have been tossed around, and I think many think the terms are interchangeable. I suspect they are not.

[MayBee]

She knew what Kristof's buy off on Munchausen's tale meant the moment the Times was dumb enough to publish it. Even if she hadn't been careless at the meeting memorialized by the State Department somebody was bound to track down the doofus responsible for sending a loud mouthed clown to do anything for the agency that wound up in the Times.

Exactly.

[jerry]

I'm back, with a critique of the James Lewis article in AT (mainly because it doesn't fit my standing theory for the Plame saga).

If the French developed the Niger forgeries as a "stink bomb" to undermine the WH, and empower Wilson, why did the WH persist in using the Niger/Africa uranium story in the 2003 SOTU?

They'd been warned off the forgeries more than once by the CIA (and if the WH was actually told they were Forgeries, how could they possibly include the story in the SOTU?).

Could the (rabidly anti-French) Bushies be simply naive? I just can't fit Cheney, Libby, Rover, and Bushie, into that picture.

My working theory is that Plame was their big worry rather than Joe. So, by including the forgeries in the SOTU the WH creates an opponent (Joe), a public person to fight as a critics of the war and, by bank shot, to undermine the person in charge of the Iraq WMD group at the CIA (Val).

(I can see Maybee and Sara rising to protest my Rube Goldberg scheme already)

Now I'll go tune my tinfoil toward the question of who killed Anna Nicole... does the trail lead to DC, someone in the WH?

[lurker]

"

lurker

I love ya, but sometimes you don't make sense.

Same applies for classified. It means that you no longer have access to classified information.

A CIA employee's status is not the same thing as a security clearance."

No, it is not the same thing as a security clearance.

Which shows how complicated such information can be.

[lurker]

(clicked post too soon)

The terms "NOC", "classified" and "covert" have been tossed around, and I think many think the terms are interchangeable. I suspect they are not.

You are right. They are not interchangeable. Neither is the employee's status.

[Sara (Squiggler)]

Jerry -- because their information was based on an entirely independent source from the British, and they said so. And it included Africa, not specifically Niger. The Niger forgeries concerned Niger, not other African countries, such as the Congo, or any of the huge A.Q. Khan network which had set up shop in Timbuktu.

[MayBee]

Larry Johnson answers for http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/3/15/19258/6186>Valerie P.

[lurker]

If the French developed the Niger forgeries as a "stink bomb" to undermine the WH, and empower Wilson, why did the WH persist in using the Niger/Africa uranium story in the 2003 SOTU?

Because WH was correct in the first place. And the action of retracting those 16-words was a major mistake.

The Butler Report among other sources proved that Saddam and his country SOUGHT to acquire uranium from Niger and Africa.

[hit and run]

OK, let's clear up the Lewis French theory tomorrow in the hearings:

Mrs. Wilson, please describe for the committee the heavy makeout session you had with Joesph Wilson on your 3rd or 4th date, specifically the method of kissing that was employed.

[narciso]

You could ask Vince Cannastraro about that, he was outed in Agee's CIA in Africa, when
he was in Jiddah, Saudi Arabia, in '75, or
Clair George, when he was Beirut station
chief around that time. Gust Avrokotos, the
Greek-American political officer who later
became liason to Charlie Wilson's Afghan
arms pipeline. George Cave, chief Agency
Iranian ops specialist, later a part of the
Iran initiative, all these were outed by
Agee with the approval of Halperin's ACLU,
the NY Times, et al. Other sites like the
German 'Geheim'took up the slack, when Counter-Spy, and the Covert Action
Information Bulletin, got out of the business of "Naming Names. NAMEBASE, Daniel
Brandt's website and John Young's Cryptome
follow in this tradition, the latter having
gone as far as to identify the children of the Milan base chief in the Mullah Abu Omar
rendition. When he doesn't provide the satellite maps of Air Force 1 at Andrews,
The White House, et al

[Sara (Squiggler)]

The only question I see about the Niger forgeries is how it came about that Wilson was able to debunk them before they were in U.S. hands?

[MayBee]

So, by including the forgeries in the SOTU the WH creates an opponent (Joe),

The forgeries were included in the SOTU?

the person in charge of the Iraq WMD group at the CIA (Val)

So now she was in charge of the group? So "in charge" she didn't have the authority to send her husband on the trip she wanted him to go on.

[lurker]

No I did not. My contributions to legitimate political candidates is irrelevant. What is relevant is whether I complied with U.S. law in making those contributions. And I did comply. I had to identify where I worked and, at the time, I was working in an undercover position with the firm Brewster Jennings. I could not list the CIA as my true employer because I was undercover. At no time did I ever identify myself to someone not entitled to know that I worked with the CIA. I lived my cover.

Yes, it is very relevant. NOC agents cannot contribute to legitimate political candidates.

Working for the firm Brewster Jennings in an undercover position? Hah! NOC agents cannot reveal front companies and CIA as their companies.

Was Joe Wilson entitled to know Valerie worked for CIA on their 3rd date?

The rest of Larry's answers can be torn apart that easily.

[Syl]

Jerry

So, by including the forgeries in the SOTU

That's a false assumption.

First, the forgeries were of a sales agreement. No claim was ever made by the Administration in the SOTU or otherwise that Saddam had actually gotten yellowcake from Niger or anywhere else.

Second, there was evidence that Iraq on at least two occasions had made overturnes re obtaining yellowcake from Niger.

Third, Niger is not the only uranium source in Africa.

Fourth, the SOTU is sourced to British intelligence and they stand by it.

Fifth, a yellowcake ring was recently broken up by the Brits in DRC, an African country which was a basis for their intel the 16-words were based on.

[PeterUK]

"If the French developed the Niger forgeries as a "stink bomb" to undermine the WH, and empower Wilson, why did the WH persist in using the Niger/Africa uranium story in the 2003 SOTU?"

One the "forgeries" were not to "empower" Wilson,they were to undermine the UN resolutions,Wilson was backup.
The Uranium from Africa story was based on totally different intelligence from Britain.

"My working theory is that Plame was their big worry rather than Joe."

Governments don't "out" people,they declare them mentally unstable,unreliable,a loose cannon.Believe me,if a government wants you gone,your reputation is finished.None of this weedy girls school "outing" claptrap.
Get a grip Jerry

[SlimGuy]

Lurker

I tried to send you an email and it bounced.
Please email me.

[clarice feldman]

My own belief is that these crappy forgeries were crappy because they were intended to be quickly noticed as forgeries and they were created to divert attention from real sales and diminish the credibility of sales reports which were sound.

[Enlightened]

BWAHHHHHHHHHAHHHHHHHH - Evidence by Larry Johnson that the AT article hit way too close to home. Why else would he revert to the nutroot tried and true MO - never answer the question at hand without roaring in feigned anger and/or superiority.

Larry Johnson is just a piece of shit in a bigger diarrhea pile. He just happens to think his shit rises above.

What a pathetic loser. And Valerie Plame is a even worse loser by using this jackass as her mouthpiece. Oh well, I guess they eat a lot of fiber - no wonder they keep floating around the rim.

[topsecretk9]

Valerie:

Please buy Joe's book, The Politics of Truth. He accurately recounts that story.

Oh really? Hmmmm....this will be interesting.

[topsecretk9]

BWAHHHHHHHHHAHHHHHHHH - Evidence by Larry Johnson that the AT article hit way too close to home. Why else would he revert to the nutroot tried and true MO - never answer the question at hand without roaring in feigned anger and/or superiority.

No kidding, it's almost like Valerie and Joe hit the TM refresh button every minute or so.

[hit and run]

Enlightened, one of these days you're gonna have to come out of your shell and not be afraid to express how you really feel. ::grin::

[SlimGuy]

Clarice

Small point is Lybia had 2600 tons of yellowcake when they shut down their program.

It didn't grow on trees, they got it from somewhere.

[Enlightened]

Sorry....I'm venting today. Home situation is dire and I'm needing to stay away from the hurt. I guess it's coming out in other ways. No pun intended...:o(

[lurker]

Governments don't "out" people,they declare them mentally unstable,unreliable,a loose cannon.Believe me,if a government wants you gone,your reputation is finished.None of this weedy girls school "outing" claptrap. Get a grip Jerry

It's very difficult for our government agencies to fire people except in extraordinary situations. For most of the government employees that are...let's say...incompetent, they are moved to non-essential jobs where they do absolutely nothing or little at their desks until it's time for them to go.

Yup, it's the best job for job security in the entire world. They are still paid their salaries, vacation, and still get retirement benefits for the remainder of their lives.

[jerry]

Thank you to Sarah and Maybee, I knew you wouldn't let me down.

And a quick responses all around regarding the British support for African uranium... I'll try to work up some argument undermining that position.

"Get a grip Jerry" But Peter you are very willing to say that Joe and Val were a threat:

"Amazing how a war,an incompetent intelligence agency and a whole polity can be subsumed by an unemployed diplomat and an over the hill bureaucrat."

If you ignore that, the Libby trial (and the trial testimony) you might well think that Plame was ignored by an all powerful government.

"None of this weedy girls school "outing" claptrap."

I take it you refer to Rove's comment that Plame is "fair game." I have always thought that only a woman could attack a guy's wife in a political argument.

[jerry]

Duke lost, damn! I had them winning in the first round even though I'm a UNC alumn.

[lurker]

The Butler report isn't the only source confirming the 16-words in the SOTU.

Plame was never in the position to be ignored or considered by an "all-powerful" government. Wasn't the Clinton ADM considered an "all-powerful" government?

[Enlightened]

Who testified that Rove said Val was fair game? Is that somewhere in the trial transcripts that I missed?

Or is that going to be testified to tomorrow? I didn't see Tweety on the witness list?

[PeterUK]

Larry JohnsonFrom 1985 through September 1989 Mr. Johnson worked for the Central Intelligence Agency. During his distinguished career, he received training in paramilitary operations, worked in the Directorate of Operations, served in the CIA’s Operation’s Center, and established himself as a prolific analyst in the Directorate of Intelligence. In his final year with the CIA he received two Exceptional Performance Awards.

Also the neatness badge and a Good Housekeeping certificate.

1985(no month) to September 1989 less than four years,this a career does not make,more like passing through.
By his own admission he has been out of the game seventeen years,to be generous.In that time natural wastage of personnel, policy procedure will have changed considerably,as they do in most large organisations.They will have even redecorated since Larry was there.Sorry "Buller" Johnson knows nothing.

[clarice feldman]

So, jerry, you thinnk the "fair game" comment, if in fact it was actually made by Rove, meant she could be hunted and shot or something ? I always read that as a statement of fact--Novak had made her name and connection to the Mission public, it was no longer in any way secret, and the WH could point anyone who asked to the article--which they did.