Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
NO again, the LAW is very clear, it is not up to Plame at all, it is up to the usa gvt to acknowledge such to the Prosecutor BEFORE he can investigate an outing of such person.
The usa gvt, did this, thus Fitzy continued investigating the "outing", not investigating whether she was covert or not, that had to be extablished AHEAD OF TIME, according to the Law.
And besides, what is the argument of the other side?
She was an undercover agent but not according to the law undercover agent that Cheney outed?
Does this make it any better or more ethical of Cheney?
lol ridiculous that this is even being argued.
On March 16, 2007, at the hearings about the disclosure, Chairman Henry Waxman read a statement about Plame's CIA career that had been cleared by CIA director Gen. Michael V. Hayden and the CIA:
During her employment at the CIA, Ms. Wilson was under cover.
Her employment status with the CIA was classified information prohibited from disclosure under Executive Order 12958.
At the time of the publication of Robert Novak's column on July 14, 2003, Ms. Wilson's CIA employment status was covert.
This was classified information.
Ms. Wilson served in senior management positions at the CIA, in which she oversaw the work of other CIA employees, and she attained the level of GS-14, step 6 under the federal pay scale.
Ms. Wilson worked on some of the most sensitive and highly secretive matters handled by the CIA.
Ms. Wilson served at various times overseas for the CIA.
Without discussing the specifics of Ms. Wilson's classified work, it is accurate to say that she worked on the prevention of the development and use of weapons of mass destruction against the United States.
In her various positions at the CIA, Ms. Wilson faced significant risks to her personal safety and her life
I feel sorry for the other liberals carrying you through this discussion like a ball and chain and doing their best to counter your nonsense and irrelevancies with at least a basic understanding of what's going on.
Heck he's their point doggie, Care4 just goes 'right tm' then says her own stuff. Sounds like he managed something useful.
Excuse me, which law? Are you saying that there is a law which tells the special prosecutor that he could only prosecute process crimes IF the substantive crime he is investigating can be proven to have happened? Clarify your statement so that I can rip it to shreds.
Talk about being dumber than a box of rocks....
I will give her credit where it's due ... obviously I don't agree with her argument, but at least she's making one and addressing the actual issue instead of being off in lalaland with no clue whatsoever.
If Plame wasnt covert to begin with there would have been nothing to investigate.
That is a fact.
Libby would not be caught lying if there was nothing to be caught lying about.
The tortured thought processes of those who continue to support an administration which would risk our own intelligence gathering is just unbelievable
Um, that's not the way I read her posts. She's dead set on using some fictional prosecutorial process to claim that there HAD to be a violation of the IIPA or related statute or Fitzgerald wouldn't have prosecuted Libby for his perjury, etc. Until she can wrap her little noodle of a brain around the fact that Fitzgerald can and DID prosecute Libby for his process crime while still proceeding with his investigation of a possible substantive crime in good faith, she's just blowing smoke and hot air.
lolUm, that's not the way I read her posts. She's dead set on using some fictional prosecutorial process to claim that there HAD to be a violation of the IIPA or related statute or Fitzgerald wouldn't have prosecuted Libby for his perjury, etc. Until she can wrap her little noodle of a brain around the fact that Fitzgerald can and DID prosecute Libby for his process crime while still proceeding with his investigation of a possible substantive crime in good faith, she's just blowing smoke and hot air.
tm,
it is possible, that the veep did not understand or know the intricasies of Plame's job or status within the CIA.
It is possible that in the least, he is guilty of haphazardly handling the declassifying of classified information, of not following the procedures and protocols in place to do such, which indirectly outed an undercover officer of the CIA and put our country's intelligence gathering and the agent outed at risk.
And of course, it is possible that he didn't give two pennies about who he outed, he just wanted to try to discredit what Wilson said in his op ed, any way that he could.
We will NEVER know.
You also don't know that the VP is responsible for Plame's name coming out. The only REAL evidence points at Joe Wilson's quest for notoriety, and th emedia asking all the basic questions. Y'know, like ...Who's his wife and what does she do?
Let's try the common sense approach here (wasted air, I'm sure) ... How "undercover" are you when you drive in and out of CIA headquarters, daily, for 3+ years? Like anyone but you couldn't figure that one out.
Lets start with you Prooving this is true?
You have not yet prooved this as a verifiable fact.
