Powered by TypePad

« A Nervous (Albeit Boring) Bob Herbert Keeps Hope Alive | Main | Everybody's A Media Guru »

November 27, 2007



Someday we will get an answer to the question about whether Ms. Flame was a "covered" as opposed to "covert" agent, and I'm sure everybody will be dissatisfied with that answer.


This answer: Also, do you take seriously the claim that a person driving her car every day from her home to CIA headquarters at Langley was a covert agent?

Addresses this part of Jeff(?)'s question/statement:
it has been disclosed publicly by the government both that Valerie Wilson was a covert employee by the CIA's own standards,
And also addresses the question of whether the government was taking steps to hide its affiliation with her.

I think it is his way of saying he doesn't believe Patrick Fitzgerald's late IIPA assertion.

Look at the recent Hezbollah spy situation. She was definitely overseas, definitely covert, and her name has been published as has her picture. I've not heard an outcry about how dangerous that is to her whole network.


she indeed had performed missions abroad undercover in the period immediately preceding the public blowing of her cover in your column

AFAIK her travel abroad to investigate the aluminum tubes was as a CIA analyst.

Besides the IIPA was never intended to cover agents who take missions. If one cover is blown they can simply use a new one.

It was intended to cover agents living undercover abroad at risk of capture if they can't escape in time when their cover's busted. The 5 year rule was to protect the agent's former foreign contacts who could be linked to the CIA by association.

Isolated 007 type missions would not fall under either intended protection of the IIPA.


Social theory? It's Lucifer!!!!

Anyone can be covered under IIPA. Any(one) government employee can be 'vetted' and cleared by a diplomat's husband or wife like Plame or Prouty. So, if your a US government employee overseas and there is a military coup and the country is breaking apart into new countries and the US citizen, who happens to be a US government employee, needs a 'classifed' clearance, a clearance which is not supposed to be there and has to be classified; Plame, Prouty or even someone like Ames could do this. The classified classifcation would be at DoJ or, now, DoD; CIA would be excluded(of course, CIA is now at DoD), unless the classifying agency was CIA, then it would be a harder counter intelligence work, depending on what the CIA operations officer was doing; like Plame investigating classified, classified IIPA of non CIA personnel related to the arrest of Ames, which is why it was classified, classified to arrest a bad CIA agent, counter intelligence, which, of course, could not and did not exist, unless someone like Plame starts poking around, which is how counter intelligence works, but this operations officer is not bad like Ames and didn't intend to get everybody killed like the 10 operations officers in Iraq the day after Plame went public in 'Vanity Fair' requesting action on her behalf.

So, Prouty was a FBI and CIA, so it's not really important who at DoJ leaked the IIPA because that was the intent once the files had been requested by CIA. Basic counter intelligence. So, someone like Plame or Prouty would have been 'run' by CIA or DoJ after requesting the files. Prouty now has a bunch of overseas cleared CIA/FBI US citizens, possibly government employees that are classified, classified who have no protection,except for IIPA when they get home and, gee, maybe, when someone requests their files we can do some counter intelligence because they are listed as blown anyway. Prouty doesn't have a future and neither do those classified, classified people - she could have been smart like Plame.

Novak can't loose.

Cecil Turner

To respond to Novak, yes, I believe that a CIA officer who had been stationed overseas in the previous five years could have been covered by the IIPA (i.e., "covert" in that specific sense) even if she was driving daily to CIA headquarters.

Well, I think it may be arguable that she may have qualified as "covert" under the IIPA definition (i.e., her employment was classified, and had had something that could be argued as "service" overseas in the previous five years), but I think it's risible to claim that, for someone who'd been driving to Langley for several years:

the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent's intelligence relationship to the United States.
Which is the other requirement under the IIPA. If that's what Novak meant, I think he's got the better argument here.

Besides, it's not Novak's job to protect Plame's cover. That's the CIA's responsibility (and particularly, Plame's). If she's chairing interagency meetings just assuming everyone is going to know she's covert, suggesting her hubby for high-profile CIA missions and then sitting in on his discussions with reporters . . . well, when that information finally filters around to Novak (and Woodward, Dickerson, Pincus, and whoever else got told), it's not a secret anymore. And if the CIA is passing the info out to anyone who asks--without bothering to mention it's a secret--then it soon won't be much of one. Trying to blame this on Novak is more than a bit hard to credit. Seems to me the question could much more profitably be asked of Ms Plame . . . but she apparently won't even answer that sort of question from her fans.


Jeff apparently believes that Rove and Libby had seperate access to knowledge of supposed covertiness untainted by Val's own sloppy tradecraft. By confirming to Novak ("You heard that too") Rove was immeasurably more guilty of evil than Armitage who's leak was ultimately based on Val's slip up.


OK, good point about the affirmative measures.


"Living My Cover" apparently means being a social spouse in the company of reporters while your husband discusses the very classified information of your employment that would compromise said cover.

And now that we know the CIA did have those forgeries, why did she sit idly by while her husband discussed the details of them?


This is pretty classic:

Denver: Have you rethought the admiration you expressed for Ambassador Joseph Wilson in the column that he still claims ruined his wife's life?

Robert D. Novak: Yes, I was much too kind to him.


And now that we know the CIA did have those forgeries, why did she sit idly by while her husband discussed the details of them?

She didn't just sit idly by. She was actively emailing her (bosses?) at the CIA about what Joe was discussing, at least with Grossman.
The question really is, why did her department at the CIA let it keep happening?


Jeff, who writes long, rambling comments with cherry-picked facts leading to illogical conclusions teaches "political thought?" Yikes!


Of course, he does. If academics had to keep to a strict word limit, it'd be so much easier to see they are spouting nothingness.


Thanks, Cecil, for pointing out ONCE AGAIN the affirmative measures requirement.



1. This whole debate over the "covert" or not status of Plame is a complete waste of time.

2. Plame nominated her husband, a former ambassador, to a secret mission for the CIA.

3. Said husband went on said mission.

4. Said husband, the husband supposedly of a CIA **covert** officer, then penned a lengthy New York Times Op-Ed piece on said mission.


What part of **covert** justifies any of this? How on earth could a **covert** officer believe for one single second that her cover wouldn't be completely blown when her husband, with her encouragement, writes an explosive, and ultimately wrong, Op-Ed in the **New York Times**?

Does anyone think for a second that, if during the Cold War, an actual covert CIA officer in Moscow would tell her husband "Oh yeah you definitely need to write that opinion piece for the New York Times!"??

Does anyone think it advisable for a covert CIA officer in Beijing to laud her husband for becoming a notorious celebrity?

Utter and complete nonsense.


memomachine: Agreed!


Scott McClelland non-story sank like a stone...


Plamaniacs are evidently thick on the ground in Minneapolis.

Look: The good prof. blogs at http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/tapped_archive?month=02&year=2007&base_name=post_2896 about another nemesis' Post chat and there too there's a "Minneapolis"-based inquiring mind whose sally he helpfully reports on.

And he wouldn't fail to disclose his own authorship of the query in question, would he?


Gotta learn how to do those html tag thingys.

Oh wait. Is this it?


Scott McClelland non-story sank like a stone...

Yes, to the Plame-Wilson's chagrin. They were on Huffington Post this weekend, expressing jealousy that Natalee Halloway's murder was getting more attention than them.


Oh, man! Forget Plame for a moment--well, there is a tie in: Plame knew Hillary.

The LATimes as an article here called Clinton the organized. Hugh Hewitt (Stop the Presses!) has some selections from the article:

Here's a lovely glimpse of the inner Red Queen at work in Senator Clinton, from the article's extensive account of the rise and fall of HillaryCare:

She courted skeptical Senate Finance Chairman Daniel Patrick Moynihan, but undercut the stroking with threats. At a weekend retreat after the State of the Union address in 1993, she dismissed worries about meeting a 100-day deadline set by her husband for a healthcare bill. Asked what would happen if they were late, she said: "You don't understand. We will demonize those who are blocking this legislation and it will pass."

Another glimpse of the senator channeling Madame Defarge:

As a boss, she inspired equal amounts of devotion and fear. She built an insular White House fiefdom known as Hillaryland, surrounding herself with a tightknit band of loyalists who skillfully advanced her causes, but who were also criticized for isolating her from political realities.

Hillaryland's denizens began to jokingly refer to themselves as "the Stepford Wives." Their unflinching devotion gained them wide berth in the West Wing.

Staffers were expected to work grueling hours and report back any development that involved the first lady. She kept them busy with news clippings that she covered with scrawled questions and filed in a cardboard carton in her office.

Mistakes were tolerated, but Clinton led intense post-mortems to keep her people focused. A well-aimed glare or a roll of the eyes told them all they needed to know. "She'd stare at us and say, 'Who was the cause of this?' And all of us would raise our hands," press assistant Neel Lattimore recalled.

Read the whole thing.

Other Tom

Cecil Turner and Memomachine have nailed this one so thoroughly that I can't think of anything to say. Just wanted you all to know I'm still here...


OT, there appears to be a growing revulsion among Democrats at the thought of Hillary as candidate. Seems there a lot of people who knew her and came away not liking her one bit. A unique talent for making enemies.


I wonder if those who know her and dislike her are responding to the same thing those who don't know her and dislike her are, that is, fear.


Well from what I've read about Hillary, and I try to avoid reading about her as much as I can, she is a total bitch to those who do not serve her political ambition. And, she has a very foul mouth and is not shy about directing her wrath at those she deems unimportant in her ambition schemes. Office workers, security details, etc. all are fair game, or so I've heard.


If you get an advance for a book, and your book doesn't sell well, do you have to pay the publisher back?


No. And in the past few years, it's clear to me that publishers like Simon & Schuster are paying off their friends with lavish book deals on which it'll lose money.
Ted Kennedy reportedly is getting an $8 million advance. Now, you know his book will be ghost written, fluffed up to avoid some unsavory truths about the "author" and will be on the remainder shelves before the last book reviews are in.


Plame's husband grew up in Spain. His dad was a diplomat. He might have been CIA working against the Basks(Madrid bombing and Iraq operations officers) . Joe might have been CIA while at the State Department. The contracts might have been a cover for his previous employment at CIA. Plame referred him for the contracts. She would be referring a covert CIA operations officer, retired under cover, for contracts based on his relationship in Africa, where he was in PC. It's possible, based on the laws at the time, that Joe was a CIA operations officer in PC and his cover was excellent. Plame would be referring a retired CIA operations officer for contracts. This would be excellent cover and a better reason for hiring him than his father.

Plame was shopping for this type of cover,with an emphasis on CIA. Of course, a non CIA person would be less desireable for her cover(see Ames trainers), but an emphasis on PC, referring to her investigation of Ames, which lead to counter intelligence and her marriage to Joe(she would be run from here by CIA or DIA); the perfect cover for a bad agent(Ames trainers).

Joe was famous.


"On the remainder shelves before the last book reviews are in?"

Ya think the public's not just dying to read something, anything, about Teddy?


Is anyone going to care what a grossly fat lecherous old drunk has to say?


anduril, I think not. The moving finger having writ and all


 More on Hillary, the Democratic front runner, from the LATimes, a presumptively Democrat friendly newspaper:

The healthcare initiative started out as Clinton's most ambitious experiment in policymaking and ended up as her greatest management failure, trailing criticism that her performance was flawed by hubris, inflexibility and a penchant for secrecy and political combat.

 But her gates-drawn stance raised concerns that shadow her presidential bid today -- that she reacts with a siege mentality under pressure, retreating behind a restrictive wall of presidential and attorney privilege.

 Her doggedness was not matched by her coalition-building skills. Chicagoan Dan Rostenkowski, the gruff, powerful former House Ways and Means chairman, felt that congressional committees should lead the way. "None of the people in your think tank can vote," he recalls telling Clinton. "She wasn't persuaded."


A charming picture.  Just charming. 

And isn't this bit odd:

Clinton wrote later in her autobiography, "if I was going to be working on Bill's agenda." Her purview, as she saw it, was "issues affecting women, children and families."

 Since her baby was health care, what would be the point in omitting MEN from her purview?  Bashfulness?  Humility?  Probably not.  But after all, men interact continually with women and children--approximately half of whom (children) grow up to be men--and every man comes from a family of one sort or other.  Given her "hubris," how odd that she would exempt half the human race from her purview in a field like health care. A strange, disjointed, unnatural way of looking at the world--and half the human race.




Is this our Jeff?


SunnyDay- yes.


Hillary was active while in Arkansas at a 501(c)(3) operation called the Womens Legal Defense Fund which a few years ago changed its name. I believe it's now a 527 with a focus on "families". It's former head, Judith Lichtman is now on Hil's payroll as a liaison with womens groups.

Keep an eye on it--surely it will be chruning out "non partisan" reports on the dreadful straits of women and children in the US.

There's a big interview with Ben Bradlee posted onLucianne. He says his wife and most of the women he knows hate Hil.

Hil's latest shtick is that old women love her. Possibly. My mother is 88 and still can't quite fathom--smart as she still is--that FDR is dead and Hil isn't Eleanor.


(Please) Speak for yourself. I take no ownership herein -in the package or the product. Its like when I show up to the basketball game and the announcer says in deep timbre " YOUR Dallas Mavericks" and I think, "when did Cuban sell them to me?"


(Please) Speak for yourself. I take no ownership herein -in the package or the product. Its like when I show up to the basketball game and the announcer says in deep timbre " YOUR Dallas Mavericks" and I think, "when did Cuban sell them to me?"

Other Tom

"...still can't quite fathom--smart as she still is--that FDR is dead and Hil isn't Eleanor."

That's probably because, late at night, Hil actually talks to Eleanor, and obviously is getting some pointers straight from the horse's mouth (so to speak).


Hillary lost me completely when she started spouting "it takes a village to raise a child," when it was clear she meant that it takes a village to indoctrinate/brainwash a child using nanny-state tactics and laws.


Clarice, OT, doesn't it appear that there's a growing conviction among fairly mainstream liberals that Hillary just may be unelectable? Isn't that why we're seeing all these hatchet jobs on her?


She lost me when she said disparagingly that she could have just stayed home and baked cookies. But I still believed her when she pooh-poohed Gennifer Flowers' claims.


She is unelectable but don't tell the oppo.

OTOH as Kaus points out most of the reporting these days is why__________is unelectable. It beats you know like actually analyzing whatever positions may seep out of their programmed mouths or the nonsensical polls.


I misspoke up above, the prganization once known as the womens legal defense fund is now the National partnership for women and familes and is a 501(c) (3) organization.



Sorry Gmax! That was a figurative "our" :D

Rick Ballard

"doesn't it appear that there's a growing conviction among fairly mainstream liberals that Hillary just may be unelectable?"

Perhaps "growing uncertainty" would be more correct. The Red Witch lacks the basic political skill set (ability to fake sincerity) to gull the muddle. Mainstream liberals know she's Red as a fire engine, much more so than Bubba, and they know that the muddle won't go for fire engine red candidates. I'd like to see the party and age splits for the "popular among older women" numbers. If "older" averages above seventy then you're talking Yellow Dog territory - women who have never considered voting for a Republican in their lives.

I'm not sure that she is unelectable but I'm sure to this point that she hasn't gulled the muddle and she won't win unless she can. The Red Witch keeps trying to call that hatchet in her hand a wand but nobody is buying.


Rick, re Hillary as red, here's another excerpt from the LATimes:

  "Bill talked about social change, I embodied it," Clinton wrote in "Living History," her autobiography.

 Now, who thinks the majority of Americans are about to march in the streets shouting: Rah, rah, social change!  I think stability and growth is what people want, not throw-it-up-for-grabs social experimentation/change.  I love that, BTW: "social change."  No modifiers, no qualifications.  Just "change," apparently for the sake of change.  Actually, I think most of us know what's left unsaid.


Social change or socialist change?

Other Tom

Way off topic, but for future reference, Taranto at Best of the Web Today picked off this excerpt from the book "Fiaco" concerning the Democrats' new favorite general"

"There was, and is, much to respect about Sanchez, even if one thinks that he failed as a commander in Iraq. 'I think there are some really admirable qualities,' said Maj. Gen. [David] Petraeus, who reported to him for a year. . . .

"Even so, the methodical Sanchez often appeared overwhelmed by the situation, with little grasp of the strategic problems he faced. The opinion of many of his peers was that he was a fine battalion commander who never should have commanded a division, let alone a corps or a nationwide occupation mission. 'He was in over his head,' said Lt. Col. Christopher Holshek, who served in Iraq in 2003. 'He was a fulfillment of the Peter Principle.' . . .

"'It was my view after seeing him that Rick Sanchez was exactly in the wrong place,' said Richard Armitage. . . . 'And when you look in retrospect, a lot has improved since Rick went out. . . . I came away from my first meeting with him saying that this guy didn't get it.'"

Taranto goes on to opine that "with Sanchez having embraced the role of Democratic spokesman, he comes to look increasingly like the George McClellan of the war on terror."

How very apt.

Rick Ballard

"Social change" was code language developed by the Commie Saul Alinsky. We're going to be able to follow the Red Witch's shape shifting for the next year. From loving devotee of the Commie Alinsky through her serving as an "intern" to the Commie lawyer Treuhaft and onto the Democrat Socialists who got her the job for the House committee working on Watergate.

Then on to Arkansas where her commitment to "social change" lifted the state's ranking in education from 49th to 49th - then on to the WH where her true skills shown through in getting her health care politburo to come to detest her as a parasite that no human should ever have to endure.

She has a hell of a resume - as an utter failure.

It sounds as if Sanchez would make the perfect military advisor to her campaign.


HEH! Taranto was especially good today and Rick, that's Ms Hil in a nutshell.I like the way she claims her role as First Lady was on the job experience and how Bill is claiming paternity for the health care fiasco.


OT, re Sanchez, how many ambitious people reach the top of the heap only to discover that, after all those years of striving, they never developed an idea of what to do once they got to the top--except to have the title.  Bureaucracies are designed to advance people like that and only crises can force the system to change.  Petraeus would almost certainly have never got to where he is but for the debacle that Iraq became--he was distrusted by the rest of the brass as an egghead intellectual.

 Shown = shone, often pronounced "shahn."  Irregular.


About the CIA commute, Plame testified

And I'd just like to add that when an operations officer -- whether they are posted in the field or back at headquarters -- we are given training to understand surveillance detection training so that we understand very carefully that we are not being followed and that we feel very comfortable that our status can be protected.
Sure. Everyday when she drove to and from work she kept a well-trained eye out for vehicles traveling down the freeway in a manner suspiciously different from the thousands of others headed in the same direction.


Re: Hillary - there are benefits to being a shrew. I don't begrudge her that. She lost me when I realized that she doesn't have a shred of ethics and wouldn't know right v wrong if she fell over it.


Joe Wilson and Robert Novak are surprisingly
in cinc in a few key areas. They're both amateur arabist, with the conviction that Israel is to blame for the problems in the
reason. As Robert Kaplan, pointed out in
"the Arabists," back in 1992, Wilson was
an obsequious chief of mission in Baghdad; with only his sax playing to redeem his efforts who was out of his depth to be charitable; so when the invasion of Kuwait
came about; he was in the dark. Novak innured by a generation of attention by Arab
potentates; had deep skepticism to the case
against Saddam. Years later, Wilson's business contacts with the Al Amoudis through Rock Creek Partners and seat at the MIddle East Institute; essentially a sinecure provided by Saudis for retired diplomats furthered the same impulses for the second such engagement. Novak is still opposed to the war; but he hates political hacks more; (re; his take on Paul Pillar in the fall of '04)Meanwhile, Carlos Alberto Montaner sheds light on the reason for the IIIA, Phillip Agee, is considered a reliable source by a history professor, Ronn Pena; to the nature of left politics
crushed by the US. Mr. Pena apparently doesn't know of Agee's long time connection
to Comrad Simonov; the KGB man who founded
the Cuban DGI; who in turn directed a major desinformatya program, which colors his portrayal of South America. An interesting side note to the previous post; his diary
for November 1963; has no comment on the Kennedy assasination or subsequent events

Rick Ballard

"wouldn't know right v wrong if she fell over it."


Sure she does. Clinton definitions - "right" = I win, "wrong" = I lose. What's with this "ethics" word? What's it got to do with win/lose?

I need to work on true comments about Clinton that don't sound so negative. There's nothing tougher.


If the insider reports of her "services" are accurate, the experience she has as Bill's wife qualifies her only to run the secret service.(How's that for a positive statement, Rick?)


MJW, that's a perfect example of Plames, um, disingenuousness.  Intelligence officers who are covert and are meeting agents in a hostile environment are trained to detect surveillance by following what are called--you guessed it--surveillance detection routes.  The idea is that, by making a series of planned, elaborately circuitous yet seemingly innocuous maneuvers the intelligence officer will ultimately force the surveillance, if it is present, to reveal itself.  Here's the rub: this takes time--lots of time--and requires that the intelligence officer keep moving for virtually all of that time.  Here's why.  In an authoritarian country the security services may have resources (cars, people, etc.) coming out the wazoo and may be able to keep switching units on and off the target, making identification of surveillance almost impossible, since the only way to detect surveillance is if the same car or individual pops up at more than one spot over an elaborately circuitous route.  The long and the short of it is, professional intelligence officers are trained to spend easily four hours performing their surveillance detection route before heading to a meeting or whatever.  And their are pitfalls.  If the surveillance detection route appears unreasonable (that amount of free time for moving about has to have some plausible explanation) to the surveillance the intelligence officer may have tipped the surveillance off that he/she IS, in fact, an intelligence officer engaging in clandestine activity.  They will now double and redouble coverage of such an officer.  Or if the officer follows the same route more than once, that may allow the security services to post fixed surveillance that will not have to move to follow the officer--they can simply confirm that the officer passed a checkpoint, while the main surveillance effort will only begin once the surveillance detection route is complete.  Very complicated and dangerous, for both the officer and the officer's agent.

 Now, do you think our gal Val was doing all that while commuting?  Varying her route most days, for example?  Her commute would have consumed hours and hours of her day, and still would likely have been utterly ineffective as a surveillance detection route.  She's a real B.S.er, but no one calls her on this nonsense.


Ugh! Too many typos.


Actually, there is very little possibility of varying a route from her then house to Langley. We aren't talkingabout rural East Germany, but a city with few thru routes and in the suburbs to Langley--a freeway.See. http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&tab=bl


Absolutely.  That's the point.  If you suspect she's with the Agency you select a few choke points around Langley and station fixed surveillance to keep an eye out for her car--what was it, a Jag?  What's with these people who give her a free pass?

 New transcript up at Hugh Hewitt: Rudy, On Reforming The Intelligence Community, and "American Gangster"

Other Tom

Anduril, you've hit on a point I saw addressed very nicely the other day--by somebody like the estimable Victor Davis Hanson, or other knowledgeable commentator.

Whoever it was, his point was that a collateral benefit of this war will be that we will have gained invaluable knowledge about which of the colonels ought to become brigadier generals, and which of the brigadiers ought to become major generals, and so on. There is absolutely nothing like the crucible of combat command to decide these questions. No one has ever come up with a substitute, and every time there is a shooting war we get a chance to readjust, and thank God for that if nothing else.


Jane and Elliott,

Will you blog the CNN/YouTube Republican debate tomorrow night at 8pm? Please!!

I don't understand why we can't have our activists ask questions, Anderson said they were people, too.

Anyone, want to guess if an angry vet and his mother will YouTube a question?


--what was it, a Jag?--



Oh, well, Algore's son has taught us that a Prius is pretty hot, too. I guess the Jag was only for the covert front cover photo.


Contrast Sanchez with Eisenhower:

Sanchez --

It was Bush's and Rumsfeld's fault.

Eisenhower --

Our landings in the Cherbourg-Havre area have failed to gain a satisfactory foothold and I have withdrawn the troops.

My decision to attack at this time and place was based on the best information available. The troops, the air and the navy, did all that bravery and devotion to duty could do. If any blame or fault attaches to the attempt, it is mine alone.

Fortunately, Eisenhower never had to deliver his message on D-Day. The fact that he was prepared to do so is one of his finest moments. This little bit of history should have been well-known to anyone becoming a three star. Sanchez apparently did not get the message.


Bill Clinton now says he ALWAYS opposed the war in Iraq. Steve Gilbert cites his statement in 1998 when he faced impeachment and bombed the aspirin factory. I don't recall Clinton saying anything about the war in 2003. Do you? Have you ever known him to be shy about expressing his views? If the war was so wrong you'd think such an influential person would have spoken out. Is this another triangulation--Hillary votes for it so if it turns out okay she can say she supported it. If it turns out badly, her forever co- President opposed it?


Correct me if I'm wrong here, but don't "covert" CIA agents or "operatives" get training that tells them that their spouses shouldn't be doing high profile activities like writing in the pages of the New York Times Op-Ed section that he took a trip for the CIA ?

When my (late) father worked on classified programs for the US Army, he was told that his family should be low profile and especially never mention anything, any time or any place that might be even indirectly be tied to his military activities.

If Ms. Flame should be mad at anybody, she should look to the guy in the bed next to her (assuming that it is her husband, of course), but, even more so, she should look at that person in the mirror.


The old Clinton Straddle. Brilliant, Clarice.


vnjagvet--the two of them only have a couple of moves between them, and we've all seen them 10 or 20 times. Anyone who doesn't get the tapdance by now is truly slow witted.


This isn't 2003, but here is Clinton on his wife vote to go to war in Iraq ..

A surprise guest at the meeting was Bill Clinton, whose agenda seemed to be protecting his wife. But things didn't work out quite as planned. When Guy Saperstein, a retired lawyer from Oakland, asked Clinton if Democrats who supported the war should apologize, the former President " went fucking ballistic," according to Saperstein. Forget Hillary, Clinton said angrily during a ten-minute rant; if I was in Congress I would've voted for the war. "It was an extraordinary display of anger and imperiousness," Saperstein says.

Now, let's analyze how idiotic all this focus on NH and Iowa is--anyone can vote in those elections. That's right. On the day of the caucus in Iowa or the primary in NH you just have to go in and sign a card saying you are resident in that state. In Iowa you needn't be 18--you just have to say you will be by the time of the general election:Ergo whoever has the money and will to truck in enough people is the winner.



I was just getting ready to post this article from RUSH today:
What a joke:

The Red Witch Will Win


The beauty of Iowa and NH is they become a canvas on which the spinmeisters' can paint whatever message strikes their collective fancies.

No substance, all style and "theme".


I think your theory on Bill is dead on, too. My husband got his GQ magazine today. Big Picture of Bill with the headline: BILL CLINTON LEADS OUR MEN OF THE YEAR ISSUE.

PUH-LEEZE. Here's hoping Bill defeats her first!


NEO: It wasn't just those in intelligence or clandestine work who were told to keep a low profile. Part of the problem for active duty military and their families during VN is we were all told to keep a low profile, don't bring attention to ourselves in any way that could reflect badly on the Navy.

I'm still wondering how Val kept her security clearance after marrying Joe who had a previous wife in another country's intelligence service. When my husband was under investigation as part of getting his top secret clearance, we had to produce all kinds of documentation on his step father because he was born in Russia. His parents came to America when he was only 3 as escapees from the Russian communist revolution of 1917ish. His own father died when he was 7, his mother remarried when he was an older teenager. As I recall we felt like we had to jump thru hoops. I remember writing away for all kinds of things. And by then the step father was dead too. So Val marries a man previously married to a foreigner and spook and she has to go into therapy after her twins were born, but she was still covert with a high clearance?


Sweetness and Light has all Bill Clinton's remarks on Iraq and going to war. The last couple of lines are really funny after such a long post.

Bill Clinton Claims He Opposed Iraq War



Good Catch. Clarice is right: "Anyone who doesn't get the tapdance by now is truly slow witted."


Bill Clinton Claims He Opposed Iraq War
Countdown to Bill's little finger wag...DON"T ATTACK ME BY PUTTING OUT I AM A LYING SACK!

Dirty Dem money, runs deep in the family, saga continues:

The Louisiana Supreme Court on Tuesday suspended a Gretna lawyer for one year and one day because he paid $1,800 in campaign contributions to the daughter of Rep. William Jefferson upon the request of the congressman's brother-in-law, a sitting state judge at the time.

Walter J. LeBlanc Jr. was caught on FBI videotape passing an envelope of $100 bills to state District Judge Alan Green in 2002. Green's office was videotaped during "Operation Wrinkled Robe," an investigation into corruption at the Jefferson Parish Courthouse. LeBlanc cooperated with federal investigators and was not charged in that case...



Program used in two state prisons raises eyebrows

An expensive and controversial educational software program being used in three Kentucky school districts has also been bought by Kentucky's prison system, the only corrections department in the country currently using it.

The Kentucky Department of Corrections used a little-known fund to buy the I Can Learn program for two facilities at a cost of $210,000 over five years after the program was recommended to Commissioner John Rees by a friend who had worked as a lobbyist for the New Orleans-based software company.

In other locations where it's been used, the I Can Learn program has been the subject of questions about its effectiveness and about the political connections of its parent company. This past summer, a former Orleans Parish (La.) school board president pleaded guilty to federal fraud and kickback charges for taking money to put I Can Learn in some New Orleans public schools...

...The latest hit occurred this past summer when the former Orleans Parish School Board president pleaded guilty to taking money to put I Can Learn in some New Orleans public schools. According to press accounts, I Can Learn's parent company, JRL Enterprises paid as much as $900,000 to Mose Jefferson, the brother of Rep. William Jefferson, D-La., who was indicted last year on numerous corruption charges.

As a third-party vendor for JRL Enterprises, Mose Jefferson allegedly paid up to $140,000 through a series of phony bank accounts to Ellenese Brooks-Simms, the former school board president. Jefferson has not been charged with any crime.

"We were shocked and appalled to hear about it," said J.R. Lee, director of marketing and communication for I Can Learn and son of founder John R. Lee. "It was truly a saddening event for us to hear that someone we had hired in good faith as a third-party vendor was illegally using funds that we provided for allegedly bribing Ellenese Brooks-Simms. We found out about it when the reporter called; we immediately severed ties with Mose Jefferson."

The New Orleans Times-Picayune reported that in July 2005, William Jefferson issued a news release indicating that he had gotten a $2.5 million federal earmark to help JRL add more of its terminals to schools in Orleans Parish.



anduril, thanks for the very interesting comments on surveillance detection routes. The first time I read her silly claim, I got an image -- a la "The Godfather" -- of Val heading down a tunnel in the opposite direction from Langley, pulling a J-turn and hopping the median. Every morning.



Thanks for reminding me about the debate. I'm planning to blog.

Hit and Run,

As you often comment on the supremacy of The Narrative™, I commend to your attention the concept of narrativity, of which I have just now become aware.



True, the CIA recalled her from Europe in 1997, fearing that her name might have been passed to the Russians by the mole Aldrich Ames. But, she writes, she still took different routes to work each day, "traveled domestically and abroad using a variety of aliases" and continued to hope for another foreign posting.

All 2 of them, alternated every other day! You know that true covert agents spit their drink at that line of embarrassment by her.

Can't remember the author of the book, but Ames told him the Russian's asked him for names of agents ripe for recruitment by them and Ames said those are the only names of our guys he gave.



Yes, to the Plame-Wilson's chagrin. They were on Huffington Post this weekend, expressing jealousy that Natalee Halloway's murder was getting more attention than them.

Didn't they refer to Natalie as a "blonde" teenager?

Funny, Joe was so bummed about Val's devastatingly negligent Vanity Fair spread, he was bummend she had to be depicted in the picture as "generic blonde" - I guess being depicted as a genieric blonde is soooooooooooooo much worse than being a Missing or DEAD "blonde". These people are truly scum.

[Update, Jan. 5, 2004: The striptease continues. Perhaps sensing inconsistency in his position on whether his wife may or may not be photographed, Wilson changed his story yet again. In a Dec. 26 news story, Wilson was quoted telling the Washington Post that the Vanity Fair shoot did not compromise national security because Plame's cover had already been "completely blown":
"My only regret about the Vanity Fair photo is that after all my wife and I have been through on this, that she had to be clothed as generic blonde in order to deal with the genuine concern that some wacko on the street might easily identify her," he said. "It was just in the interest of personal security."

It makes perfect sense that Wilson would see no point in keeping Plame's physical appearance a secret after the White House leaker blew her cover. But that commonsensical take on the matter contradicts Wilson's Dec. 3 insistence to Howard Kurtz that Plame had to stay in the shadows because she "has obligations to her employer." Now Wilson was saying that Plame was only kinda staying in the shadows out of concern for her "personal security." Whatever.


Other Tom

A further delightful note on Eisenhower (maybe apocryphal, but it was told to me): Ike's entry in Who's Who, which he himself wrote, read

"Graduated West Point, 1915;
Commanded allied forces in the liberation of Europe, 1944-45; Served as President of the United States, 1953-61."

This at a time when far lesser lights went on for pages. Let us now imagine what, say, a John F. Kerry might pen for his own entry...


"Was graduated from"


"And suddenly he doesn't remember this?" Of course Bill remembers. He doesn't expect the American people to remember it, because he knows the American people trust MSM to remember for them.

That trust is misplaced, and once lost, will be forever.


WAPO, about Plame:

But, she writes, she still took different routes to work each day, "traveled domestically and abroad using a variety of aliases" and continued to hope for another foreign posting.
Perhaps I'm missing something obvious, but though I see how taking a different route to work each day might protect her from ambushes, I don't see how it would protect her super-secret identity. The only points at which she's vulnerable to being exposed as a CIA employee are entering and leaving the Langley area, and no matter what path she takes, she's going to wind up there.


Somebody kindly please indulge this non-Plamiac. I was reading the Senate Select Committee Pre-War Intelligence Assessment (this was the report issued on July 7, 2004).

Basic questions:

On page 39 of the document, we read:

"The former ambassador [Wilson] had previously traveled to Niger on the CIA's behalf... The former ambassador was selected for the 1999 trip after his wife mentioned to her superiors that her husband was planning a business trip to Niger in the near future and might be willing to use his contacts in the region."

Valerie arranged for Joseph's 1999 Niger trip as well? Or is this a typo and the authors really meant to say "2002 trip"?

The report goes on to mention that the US ambassador to Niger, Barbro Owens-Kirkpatrick, also investigated the Niger claims, and that she instructed Wilson that he was not allowed to interview any current Niger officals; that was her jurisdiction. Wilson could only interview former officials. (p. 42)

Nepotism aside, what was the logic of dispatching one ambassador to Niger if another ambassador was already in-country conducting the same investigation? And why send Wilson if they never wanted him to debrief any current members of the Niger government? That would be like the Washington Post siccing Woodward and Bernstein on Watergate with the proviso, "Just don't interview anyone from the Nixon administration. Talk to Hubert Humphrey and see what he knows."


Joe went to Niger in 1999, in 2002, and at least twice more, all at the behest of the CIA. It would bear investigating.


Scary Larry let that slip in an unguarded moment once when he was trying to pump up Joe as a legitimate expert.

If true, something more than checking out 'crazy reports' was in the air.



How bout you blog and I provide color commentary. You are better at the substance I think. I'll look for the snark.


OT: Can one of you technically literate people help me. I hit something so that I lost the box on my toolbar that shows the link. How do I recover it?



I found it - nevermind.


Just a question...if someone has SEVERE post partum depression, and is on a lot of medication to treat said depression, can she truly perform here COVERT responsibilities? I would think the CIA would assign her to an insignificant desk job, stateside, to wait it out....certainly not a vitally important job. Could anyone answer that?


Elliott/Jane: Which thread do you plan to live blog on?

Dear Mr. Maguire, since live blogging debates is becoming a regular "feature" here, maybe you could just create a live blog post for it?


And, completely off topic, but I got a great chuckle out of Lucianne this morning, with the suggestion that Ted Kennedy's new opus be called "If I Did It."



She was transitioning to State in the spring of 03. How do you go back to covertiness after being in State?


You know, J, it is really not hard to feel sorry for Val. With bad girls, it's usually the bad men around them.


Joe went to Niger in 1999, in 2002, and at least twice more, all at the behest of the CIA. It would bear investigating.

And don't forget Valerie was embarrassed by the last go-round.

Tops- exactly. While I believe the Halloway story gets more press than it needs, there is something so unseemly and petty about the Wilsons complaining about it. That Joe and Valerie both seem to relish the coverage Val gets on behalf of her own blondeness, it is just that much more vile.



That sounds good. I'll try to avoid any all caps outbursts this time. Do you think the "Role Models" thread would make a suitable spot for debate blogging?


Elliott: " I'll try to avoid any all caps outbursts this time."

Don't you dare.


http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2007/11/deconstructing_bill_again.html>Deconstructing Bill

The comments to this entry are closed.