Valerie Plame for Congress

[bripat9643]

Deleting the "and" doesn't change the context or implication. Keep on spinning commie loser, keep on spinning.

.

And the fact that Armitage also was used by the press to confirm the leaks Libby was deliberately spreading about Plame, does not alter the fact Libby clearly was attempting to harm Plame in retaliation for her attempt to get out the truth about there being no significant WMD in Iraq.

Yep, telling the truth about here certainly would harm her. That's because she was a double dealing scumbag using her office to harm the President. However, that doesn't make it a crime. The only question at issue here is whether she was a covert agent, and she obviously wasn't.

Clearly before Libby did that, Plame could travel to the Mideast for her job often, because she did. But after what Libby did, she could no longer travel to the Mideast. Not only would it be too dangerous, but there was no point in trying to conduct a WMD sting any more if everyone knows the CIA was trying to do that.

Maybe so, but that doesn't mean she was a covert agent.

There can be no question Libby deliberately destroyed an important CIA sting, and Plame's career, in order to try to deliberately harm Plame. And it also should be obvious that Libby did not do this on his own. There were others in the Bush administration who planned this, told Libby what to do, and used him as the scapegoat. And the fact he never admitted who put him up to it, makes it unpardonable. He is a traitor.

ROFL! Hardly. If anyone is a traitor, it's Plame. She's the one abusing her office to undermine the Administration's agenda. Even if everything you claimed were true, that still doesn't make identifying her a crime.

WTF??

Fucking moron... how was Valerie Plame using her office to harm the president?

ROFL! She was running a propaganda operation to undermine his claims. Plame's husband was not an objective investigator, and hh produced no evidence to support his claims.

LOLOL

You're a complete fucking moron.

She said nothing about Bush by using her office. And her husband, referenced a fake bill of sale for yellow cake Uranium which was proven to be a forgery.

I'm not going to rehash he entire Nigergate/Wilson/Plame episode. Joe Wilson was a douchebag, and so was Valerie. They were trying to undermine the President. End of story.

 

[bripat9643]

You posted no evidence. You posted his opinion, and nothing more.

LOLOL

Fucking moron, it was evidence submitted to the court and came from CIA records.

Are you ever not a fucking moron?

Post the evidence, douchebag.

I already did, fucking moron.

No, you didn't. You posted Fitzgerald stating an opinion. Where is the document that proves Valerie Plame was undercover?

Fucking moron, it was based on CIA records, provided to him by the CIA.

Post the records. Otherwise, shut the fuck up.

 

[Faun]

And the fact that Armitage also was used by the press to confirm the leaks Libby was deliberately spreading about Plame, does not alter the fact Libby clearly was attempting to harm Plame in retaliation for her attempt to get out the truth about there being no significant WMD in Iraq.

Yep, telling the truth about here certainly would harm her. That's because she was a double dealing scumbag using her office to harm the President. However, that doesn't make it a crime. The only question at issue here is whether she was a covert agent, and she obviously wasn't.

Clearly before Libby did that, Plame could travel to the Mideast for her job often, because she did. But after what Libby did, she could no longer travel to the Mideast. Not only would it be too dangerous, but there was no point in trying to conduct a WMD sting any more if everyone knows the CIA was trying to do that.

Maybe so, but that doesn't mean she was a covert agent.

There can be no question Libby deliberately destroyed an important CIA sting, and Plame's career, in order to try to deliberately harm Plame. And it also should be obvious that Libby did not do this on his own. There were others in the Bush administration who planned this, told Libby what to do, and used him as the scapegoat. And the fact he never admitted who put him up to it, makes it unpardonable. He is a traitor.

ROFL! Hardly. If anyone is a traitor, it's Plame. She's the one abusing her office to undermine the Administration's agenda. Even if everything you claimed were true, that still doesn't make identifying her a crime.

WTF??

Fucking moron... how was Valerie Plame using her office to harm the president?

ROFL! She was running a propaganda operation to undermine his claims. Plame's husband was not an objective investigator, and hh produced no evidence to support his claims.

LOLOL

You're a complete fucking moron.

She said nothing about Bush by using her office. And her husband, referenced a fake bill of sale for yellow cake Uranium which was proven to be a forgery.

I'm not going to rehash he entire Nigergate/Wilson/Plame episode. Joe Wilson was a douchebag, and so was Valerie. They were trying to undermine the President. End of story.

LOLOL

So you bitch, but you're a fucking moron. Meanwhile, you can't show how she used her office to harm Bush, as you ridiculously claimed.

 

[Faun]

LOLOL

Fucking moron, it was evidence submitted to the court and came from CIA records.

Are you ever not a fucking moron?

Post the evidence, douchebag.

I already did, fucking moron.

No, you didn't. You posted Fitzgerald stating an opinion. Where is the document that proves Valerie Plame was undercover?

Fucking moron, it was based on CIA records, provided to him by the CIA.

Post the records. Otherwise, shut the fuck up.

LOLOL

Fucking moron, I posted the trial evidence. All you can say is, "nuh-uh."

 

[OKTexas]

Semantics, the last bastion of a loser, the implication was clear. You don't have an intellectually honest bone your body. Evidently she doesn't either.

.

LOLOL

There are no semantics

She made two separate and distinctive claims, both of which are are.

• Libby leaked her identity. True and she never said he was convicted for that in her ad.

• Trump pardoned Libby. Also true

Your inability to comprehend she didn't say Libby was convicted of leaking her identity nor did she say that trump pardoned Libby for leaking her identity is no one's problem but yours

You stupid fucking hick, she said "his name is Scooter Libby and guess who pardoned him", try watching the lying video again. As I said, the implication was clear.

.

Your quote is a lie. She didn't say, "and."

You inserted that yourself in a failed attempt to connect the two statements together that were never connevted to begin with.

Like I always say, if conservatives didn't lie, they'd have absolutely nothing to say.

Deleting the "and" doesn't change the context or implication. Keep on spinning commie loser, keep on spinning.

.

And the fact that Armitage also was used by the press to confirm the leaks Libby was deliberately spreading about Plame, does not alter the fact Libby clearly was attempting to harm Plame in retaliation for her attempt to get out the truth about there being no significant WMD in Iraq.

Clearly before Libby did that, Plame could travel to the Mideast for her job often, because she did.
But after what Libby did, she could no longer travel to the Mideast.
Not only would it be too dangerous, but there was no point in trying to conduct a WMD sting any more if everyone knows the CIA was trying to do that.

There can be no question Libby deliberately destroyed an important CIA sting, and Plame's career, in order to try to deliberately harm Plame.
And it also should be obvious that Libby did not do this on his own.
There were others in the Bush administration who planned this, told Libby what to do, and used him as the scapegoat.
And the fact he never admitted who put him up to it, makes it unpardonable.
He is a traitor.

You can type as much crap as you wish, it doesn't alter the fact of the implication in the ad that was declared a lie by WAPO. Deal with it.

.

 

[Faun]

LOLOL

There are no semantics

She made two separate and distinctive claims, both of which are are.

• Libby leaked her identity. True and she never said he was convicted for that in her ad.

• Trump pardoned Libby. Also true

Your inability to comprehend she didn't say Libby was convicted of leaking her identity nor did she say that trump pardoned Libby for leaking her identity is no one's problem but yours

You stupid fucking hick, she said "his name is Scooter Libby and guess who pardoned him", try watching the lying video again. As I said, the implication was clear.

.

Your quote is a lie. She didn't say, "and."

You inserted that yourself in a failed attempt to connect the two statements together that were never connevted to begin with.

Like I always say, if conservatives didn't lie, they'd have absolutely nothing to say.

Deleting the "and" doesn't change the context or implication. Keep on spinning commie loser, keep on spinning.

.

And the fact that Armitage also was used by the press to confirm the leaks Libby was deliberately spreading about Plame, does not alter the fact Libby clearly was attempting to harm Plame in retaliation for her attempt to get out the truth about there being no significant WMD in Iraq.

Clearly before Libby did that, Plame could travel to the Mideast for her job often, because she did.
But after what Libby did, she could no longer travel to the Mideast.
Not only would it be too dangerous, but there was no point in trying to conduct a WMD sting any more if everyone knows the CIA was trying to do that.

There can be no question Libby deliberately destroyed an important CIA sting, and Plame's career, in order to try to deliberately harm Plame.
And it also should be obvious that Libby did not do this on his own.
There were others in the Bush administration who planned this, told Libby what to do, and used him as the scapegoat.
And the fact he never admitted who put him up to it, makes it unpardonable.
He is a traitor.

You can type as much crap as you wish, it doesn't alter the fact of the implication in the ad that was declared a lie by WAPO. Deal with it.

.

There was no such implication. If there was, you wouldn't have had to lie about what Plame actually said in the ad and misquote her.

 

[OKTexas]

You stupid fucking hick, she said "his name is Scooter Libby and guess who pardoned him", try watching the lying video again. As I said, the implication was clear.

.

Your quote is a lie. She didn't say, "and."

You inserted that yourself in a failed attempt to connect the two statements together that were never connevted to begin with.

Like I always say, if conservatives didn't lie, they'd have absolutely nothing to say.

Deleting the "and" doesn't change the context or implication. Keep on spinning commie loser, keep on spinning.

.

And the fact that Armitage also was used by the press to confirm the leaks Libby was deliberately spreading about Plame, does not alter the fact Libby clearly was attempting to harm Plame in retaliation for her attempt to get out the truth about there being no significant WMD in Iraq.

Clearly before Libby did that, Plame could travel to the Mideast for her job often, because she did.
But after what Libby did, she could no longer travel to the Mideast.
Not only would it be too dangerous, but there was no point in trying to conduct a WMD sting any more if everyone knows the CIA was trying to do that.

There can be no question Libby deliberately destroyed an important CIA sting, and Plame's career, in order to try to deliberately harm Plame.
And it also should be obvious that Libby did not do this on his own.
There were others in the Bush administration who planned this, told Libby what to do, and used him as the scapegoat.
And the fact he never admitted who put him up to it, makes it unpardonable.
He is a traitor.

You can type as much crap as you wish, it doesn't alter the fact of the implication in the ad that was declared a lie by WAPO. Deal with it.

.

There was no such implication. If there was, you wouldn't have had to lie about what Plame actually said in the ad and misquote her.

Tell it to one of your favorite commie rags, WAPO. LMAO

.

 

[Faun]

Your quote is a lie. She didn't say, "and."

You inserted that yourself in a failed attempt to connect the two statements together that were never connevted to begin with.

Like I always say, if conservatives didn't lie, they'd have absolutely nothing to say.

Deleting the "and" doesn't change the context or implication. Keep on spinning commie loser, keep on spinning.

.

And the fact that Armitage also was used by the press to confirm the leaks Libby was deliberately spreading about Plame, does not alter the fact Libby clearly was attempting to harm Plame in retaliation for her attempt to get out the truth about there being no significant WMD in Iraq.

Clearly before Libby did that, Plame could travel to the Mideast for her job often, because she did.
But after what Libby did, she could no longer travel to the Mideast.
Not only would it be too dangerous, but there was no point in trying to conduct a WMD sting any more if everyone knows the CIA was trying to do that.

There can be no question Libby deliberately destroyed an important CIA sting, and Plame's career, in order to try to deliberately harm Plame.
And it also should be obvious that Libby did not do this on his own.
There were others in the Bush administration who planned this, told Libby what to do, and used him as the scapegoat.
And the fact he never admitted who put him up to it, makes it unpardonable.
He is a traitor.

You can type as much crap as you wish, it doesn't alter the fact of the implication in the ad that was declared a lie by WAPO. Deal with it.

.

There was no such implication. If there was, you wouldn't have had to lie about what Plame actually said in the ad and misquote her.

Tell it to one of your favorite commie rags, WAPO. LMAO

.

No need to. I've already exposed your lying misquote here.

 

[daveman]

LOL

You say you were privy to the evidence yet you keep denying Plame was a covert CIA operative even though the evidence showed she was.

And again, the only source you have on your opinion of Fitzgerald is you. And you're a fucking moron, rendering your source, DOA.

Other than Fitzgerald, the only evidence supporting his opinion on the subject is him venting his ill-informed opinion on the subject. Where is the evidence that Plame was undercover? Show us the documents. Otherwise, shut the fuck up.

LOL

I already posted the evidence Fitzgerald relied on. You were too busy being a fucking moron to notice it.

You posted no evidence. You posted his opinion, and nothing more.

MY PROOF THAT FITZGERALDS OPINION IS CORRECT IS FITZGERALDS OPINION

-- faun

Great, let's see your evidence the CIA records, which proved Plame was a covert operative, were falsified...

You've been repeatedly asked for proof that Fitzgerald's opinion is correct.

You then repost Fitzgerald's opinion.

I'm sure you believe that's a devastating point. But it's not.

Meanwhile, I have a question for you:

In the 60s, the left wouldn't trust anyone from the government as far as they could throw them. Now -- disagreeing with a government functionary to you is treason.

What the hell happened to you people?

 

[bripat9643]

Yep, telling the truth about here certainly would harm her. That's because she was a double dealing scumbag using her office to harm the President. However, that doesn't make it a crime. The only question at issue here is whether she was a covert agent, and she obviously wasn't.

Maybe so, but that doesn't mean she was a covert agent.

ROFL! Hardly. If anyone is a traitor, it's Plame. She's the one abusing her office to undermine the Administration's agenda. Even if everything you claimed were true, that still doesn't make identifying her a crime.

WTF??

Fucking moron... how was Valerie Plame using her office to harm the president?

ROFL! She was running a propaganda operation to undermine his claims. Plame's husband was not an objective investigator, and hh produced no evidence to support his claims.

LOLOL

You're a complete fucking moron.

She said nothing about Bush by using her office. And her husband, referenced a fake bill of sale for yellow cake Uranium which was proven to be a forgery.

I'm not going to rehash he entire Nigergate/Wilson/Plame episode. Joe Wilson was a douchebag, and so was Valerie. They were trying to undermine the President. End of story.

LOLOL

So you bitch, but you're a fucking moron. Meanwhile, you can't show how she used her office to harm Bush, as you ridiculously claimed.

Wilson said Bush's famed "16 words" in his 2003 State of the Union address -- "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa" -- were a lie.

Britain's Butler Commission reviewed its government's pre-war intelligence on Iraq and concluded that "the British government had intelligence from several different sources indicating that this visit was for the purpose of acquiring uranium."

Wilson's claim was again proved false when our own Senate Intelligence Committee also concluded, in July 2004, that Saddam Hussein had sought uranium from Niger.

So there went the White House's motive for muddying up Wilson: Government fact-finding commissions, here and in the United Kingdom, were muddying up Wilson on their own simply by finding facts.

Plame and Wilson were obviously collaborating to discredit the Bush administration, and they were lying.

 

[bripat9643]

Post the evidence, douchebag.

I already did, fucking moron.

No, you didn't. You posted Fitzgerald stating an opinion. Where is the document that proves Valerie Plame was undercover?

Fucking moron, it was based on CIA records, provided to him by the CIA.

Post the records. Otherwise, shut the fuck up.

LOLOL

Fucking moron, I posted the trial evidence. All you can say is, "nuh-uh."

You posted Fitzgerald's opinion. That's evidence of nothing.

 

[bripat9643]

WTF??

Fucking moron... how was Valerie Plame using her office to harm the president?

ROFL! She was running a propaganda operation to undermine his claims. Plame's husband was not an objective investigator, and hh produced no evidence to support his claims.

LOLOL

You're a complete fucking moron.

She said nothing about Bush by using her office. And her husband, referenced a fake bill of sale for yellow cake Uranium which was proven to be a forgery.

I'm not going to rehash he entire Nigergate/Wilson/Plame episode. Joe Wilson was a douchebag, and so was Valerie. They were trying to undermine the President. End of story.

LOLOL

So you bitch, but you're a fucking moron. Meanwhile, you can't show how she used her office to harm Bush, as you ridiculously claimed.

Wilson said Bush's famed "16 words" in his 2003 State of the Union address -- "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa" -- were a lie.

Wilson's wife was then revealed to be an "undercover" spy at the CIA, exposing Wilson and his family to danger.

Therefore, she was "outed" by the White House as retaliation against Wilson for calling Bush a liar.

Britain's Butler Commission reviewed its government's pre-war intelligence on Iraq and concluded that "the British government had intelligence from several different sources indicating that this visit was for the purpose of acquiring uranium."

It was again proved false when our own Senate Intelligence Committee also concluded, in July 2004, that Saddam Hussein had sought uranium from Niger.

So there went the White House's motive for muddying up Wilson: Government fact-finding commissions, here and in the United Kingdom, were muddying up Wilson on their own simply by finding facts.

Plame and Wilson were obviously collaborating to discredit the Bush administration, and they were lying.

I'd say hiring a guy who calls the President a liar is harming him.

 

[Faun]

Other than Fitzgerald, the only evidence supporting his opinion on the subject is him venting his ill-informed opinion on the subject. Where is the evidence that Plame was undercover? Show us the documents. Otherwise, shut the fuck up.

LOL

I already posted the evidence Fitzgerald relied on. You were too busy being a fucking moron to notice it.

You posted no evidence. You posted his opinion, and nothing more.

MY PROOF THAT FITZGERALDS OPINION IS CORRECT IS FITZGERALDS OPINION

-- faun

Great, let's see your evidence the CIA records, which proved Plame was a covert operative, were falsified...

You've been repeatedly asked for proof that Fitzgerald's opinion is correct.

You then repost Fitzgerald's opinion.

I'm sure you believe that's a devastating point. But it's not.

Meanwhile, I have a question for you:

In the 60s, the left wouldn't trust anyone from the government as far as they could throw them. Now -- disagreeing with a government functionary to you is treason.

What the hell happened to you people?

"You've been repeatedly asked for proof that Fitzgerald's opinion is correct."

And it's been explained to you multiple times, it was not his opinion. It came from CIA records. It was from CIA records of Plame's employment with the agency that were unclassified.

Furthermore, the CIA would not have initially asked the Department of Justice to open a criminal investigation into who outed a covert agent of theirs had Plame not been covert.

 

[basquebromance]

 

[bripat9643]

LOL

I already posted the evidence Fitzgerald relied on. You were too busy being a fucking moron to notice it.

You posted no evidence. You posted his opinion, and nothing more.

MY PROOF THAT FITZGERALDS OPINION IS CORRECT IS FITZGERALDS OPINION

-- faun

Great, let's see your evidence the CIA records, which proved Plame was a covert operative, were falsified...

You've been repeatedly asked for proof that Fitzgerald's opinion is correct.

You then repost Fitzgerald's opinion.

I'm sure you believe that's a devastating point. But it's not.

Meanwhile, I have a question for you:

In the 60s, the left wouldn't trust anyone from the government as far as they could throw them. Now -- disagreeing with a government functionary to you is treason.

What the hell happened to you people?

"You've been repeatedly asked for proof that Fitzgerald's opinion is correct."

And it's been explained to you multiple times, it was not his opinion. It came from CIA records. It was from CIA records of Plame's employment with the agency that were unclassified.

Furthermore, the CIA would not have initially asked the Department of Justice to open a criminal investigation into who outed a covert agent of theirs had Plame not been covert.

In other words, we should trust Fiztgerald.

 

[Faun]

WTF??

Fucking moron... how was Valerie Plame using her office to harm the president?

ROFL! She was running a propaganda operation to undermine his claims. Plame's husband was not an objective investigator, and hh produced no evidence to support his claims.

LOLOL

You're a complete fucking moron.

She said nothing about Bush by using her office. And her husband, referenced a fake bill of sale for yellow cake Uranium which was proven to be a forgery.

I'm not going to rehash he entire Nigergate/Wilson/Plame episode. Joe Wilson was a douchebag, and so was Valerie. They were trying to undermine the President. End of story.

LOLOL

So you bitch, but you're a fucking moron. Meanwhile, you can't show how she used her office to harm Bush, as you ridiculously claimed.

Wilson said Bush's famed "16 words" in his 2003 State of the Union address -- "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa" -- were a lie.

Britain's Butler Commission reviewed its government's pre-war intelligence on Iraq and concluded that "the British government had intelligence from several different sources indicating that this visit was for the purpose of acquiring uranium."

Wilson's claim was again proved false when our own Senate Intelligence Committee also concluded, in July 2004, that Saddam Hussein had sought uranium from Niger.

So there went the White House's motive for muddying up Wilson: Government fact-finding commissions, here and in the United Kingdom, were muddying up Wilson on their own simply by finding facts.

Plame and Wilson were obviously collaborating to discredit the Bush administration, and they were lying.

Fucking moron, you're quoting an op/ed by Ann Coulter.

Meanwhile, what Butler said was that Britain's Intel was "seriously flawed" and their sources were "unreliable."

Iraq intelligence 'seriously flawed'​

As far as Bush's infamous 16 words, no less than 6 different people with intimate knowledge admitted those words, which had been pulled out of a previous speech due to lack of credibility, should not have been in Bush's State of the Union address...

• "Those 16 words should never have been included in the text written for the president. This was a mistake" ~ George Tenet, CIA Director

• "What we've said subsequently is, knowing what we now know, that some of the Niger documents were apparently forged, we wouldn't have put this in the President's speech -- but that's knowing what we know now." ~ Condoleezza Rice, National Security Adviser

• "That was a big mistake. It should never have been in the speech. I didn't need Wilson to tell me that there wasn't a Niger connection. He didn't tell us anything we didn't already know. I never believed it." ~ Colin Powell, Secretary of State

• "should have been taken out of the State of the Union." ~ Stephen Hadley, top aide to Condoleezza Rice

• "The process failed." ~ Dan Bartlett, White House Communications Director

• "Now, we've long acknowledged -- and this is old news, we've said this repeatedly -- that the information on yellow cake did, indeed, turn out to be incorrect." ~ Ari Fleischer, White House Press Secretary

Stephen Hadley also said, "the CIA had reservations about the British reporting" on Iraq's alleged attempts to buy uranium from the west African country of Niger. "These reservations were confirmed by the CIA," Hadley said about why Tenet had those 16 words pulled out of a previous speech.

 

[Rigby5]

Ex-CIA operative, Valerie Plame, running for New Mexico's 3rd district.

"Operative"?

You misspelled "analyst whom everyone in DC knew worked for CIA".

Yo're welcome.

Dumbfuck.

Transcript of Special Counsel Fitzgerald's Press Conference

"Valerie Wilson was a CIA officer. In July 2003, the fact that Valerie Wilson was a CIA officer was classified. Not only was it classified, but it was not widely known outside the intelligence community. Valerie Wilson's friends, neighbors, college classmates had no idea she had another life. The fact that she was a CIA officer was not well-known, for her protection or for the benefit of all us. It's important that a CIA officer's identity be protected, that it be protected not just for the officer, but for the nation's security. Valerie Wilson's cover was blown in July 2003. The first sign of that cover being blown was when Mr. Novak published a column on July 14th, 2003. But Mr. Novak was not the first reporter to be told that Wilson's wife, Valerie Wilson, Ambassador Wilson's wife Valerie, worked at the CIA. Several other reporters were told." ~ Patrick Fitzgerald, lead investigator​

You know how much any of this matters?

None. Zip. Zilch. Nada.

You didn't get the W perp walk you so desperately wanted and you were breathlessly promised. You got a low-level functionary who was charged with lying to prosecutors because they didn't let him use his notes.

That's it. That's all you got. And it was funny to watch you guys, so convinced W and Rove were going to be frog-marched to the Hague for war crimes.

ROFL!!

Sure Libby was used as a scapegoat, so then when he got pardoned, all the guilty escaped justice.
But why are you happy about that?
Iraq really was innocent, and Plame, about 6,000 dead US soldiers, and half a million Iraqis were harmed by those in the Bush administration who lied.
That is a terrible outcome.

 

[bripat9643]

ROFL! She was running a propaganda operation to undermine his claims. Plame's husband was not an objective investigator, and hh produced no evidence to support his claims.

LOLOL

You're a complete fucking moron.

She said nothing about Bush by using her office. And her husband, referenced a fake bill of sale for yellow cake Uranium which was proven to be a forgery.

I'm not going to rehash he entire Nigergate/Wilson/Plame episode. Joe Wilson was a douchebag, and so was Valerie. They were trying to undermine the President. End of story.

LOLOL

So you bitch, but you're a fucking moron. Meanwhile, you can't show how she used her office to harm Bush, as you ridiculously claimed.

Wilson said Bush's famed "16 words" in his 2003 State of the Union address -- "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa" -- were a lie.

Britain's Butler Commission reviewed its government's pre-war intelligence on Iraq and concluded that "the British government had intelligence from several different sources indicating that this visit was for the purpose of acquiring uranium."

Wilson's claim was again proved false when our own Senate Intelligence Committee also concluded, in July 2004, that Saddam Hussein had sought uranium from Niger.

So there went the White House's motive for muddying up Wilson: Government fact-finding commissions, here and in the United Kingdom, were muddying up Wilson on their own simply by finding facts.

Plame and Wilson were obviously collaborating to discredit the Bush administration, and they were lying.

Fucking moron, you're quoting an op/ed by Ann Coulter.

Meanwhile, what Butler said was that Britain's Intel was "seriously flawed" and their sources were "unreliable."

Iraq intelligence 'seriously flawed'​

As far as Bush's infamous 16 words, no less than 6 different people with intimate knowledge admitted those words, which had been pulled out of a previous speech due to lack of credibility, should not have been in Bush's State of the Union address...

• 
  
  
  • "Those 16 words should never have been included in the text written for the president. This was a mistake" ~ George Tenet, CIA Director

• 
  
  
  • "What we've said subsequently is, knowing what we now know, that some of the Niger documents were apparently forged, we wouldn't have put this in the President's speech -- but that's knowing what we know now." ~ Condoleezza Rice, National Security Adviser

• 
  
  
  • "That was a big mistake. It should never have been in the speech. I didn't need Wilson to tell me that there wasn't a Niger connection. He didn't tell us anything we didn't already know. I never believed it." ~ Colin Powell, Secretary of State

• 
  
  
  • "should have been taken out of the State of the Union." ~ Stephen Hadley, top aide to Condoleezza Rice

• 
  
  
  • "The process failed." ~ Dan Bartlett, White House Communications Director

• 
  
  
  • "Now, we've long acknowledged -- and this is old news, we've said this repeatedly -- that the information on yellow cake did, indeed, turn out to be incorrect." ~ Ari Fleischer, White House Press Secretary

Stephen Hadley also said, "the CIA had reservations about the British reporting" on Iraq's alleged attempts to buy uranium from the west African country of Niger. "These reservations were confirmed by the CIA," Hadley said about why Tenet had those 16 words pulled out of a previous speech.

We can spend the next two years debating the whole Nigergate episode all over again, but I'd rather not. The bottom line is that you have nothing other than Fitzgerald's say-so that Plame was covert, and no one but bootlicking delusional Trump haters are going to accept that.

 

[Rigby5]

Dumbfuck, you can't lie your way out of this....

FITZGERALD SAYS PLAME WAS A COVERT AGENT

“She traveled at least seven times to more than 10 countries. When traveling overseas, Ms. Wilson always traveled under a cover identity … At the time of the initial unauthorized disclosure in the media of Ms. Wilson’s employment relationship with the CIA on 14 July 2003, Ms. Wilson was a covert CIA employee for whom the CIA was taking affirmative measures to conceal her intelligence relationship to the United States.”​

Victoria Toensing wrote the law against revealing the identify of covert agents, and she says Plame didn't qualify.

Your committing the logical fallacy known as the "appeal to authority," and Fitzgerald has a conflict of interest.

It is obvious to anyone that Victoria Toensing lied.

USA Today again relied only on Toensing to suggest that outing Plame was not a crime
{...
In an October 21 article, USA Today reporters Judy Keen and Mark Memmott relied exclusively on a reading of the law by Republican operative Victoria Toensing in presenting the question of whether senior White House officials may have committed a crime by outing CIA operative Valerie Plame.

The article marked at least the second time that Memmott cited Toensing -- without offering a contrary legal perspective -- in reporting that leaking Plame's identity likely wasn't a crime. Toensing has made frequent media appearances in defense of the Bush administration and the alleged leakers, but she is not the only voice on this issue. Former Nixon White House counsel John W. Dean III argued in 2003 that leaking Plame's identity might constitute a violation of the 1917 Espionage Act and, more recently, that it could also violate Title 18, United States Code, Section 641, which addresses the theft of information and, Dean wrote, contains “broad language [that] covers leaks” and “has now been used to cover just such actions.”

USA Today did not mention that Toensing is a partisan Republican or that she is a personal friend of syndicated columnist Robert D. Novak, who originally outed Plame in July 2003.

The article also misleadingly reported that Novak “hasn't publicly identified his two sources.” In fact, White House senior adviser Karl Rove is known to be one of Novak's two sources, according to reports of Rove's own grand jury testimony.

From the October 21 USA Today article, a series of questions and answers regarding “the latest developments and what might happen next” in the Plame leak investigation:

Q: Is it clear that the original leak most likely came from Rove or [Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff I. Lewis “Scooter” ] Libby?

A: Not at all, but Rove made his fourth grand-jury appearance a week ago, and Miller detailed her conversations with Libby last Sunday. The leak could have originated with someone who hasn't been identified. Names of other administration officials have cropped up in recent news reports, but none is as high-ranking. Columnist Robert Novak first revealed Plame's name and hasn't publicly identified his two sources. Washington Post reporter Walter Pincus, who did not write about the matter, hasn't publicly named his. Miller wrote that she can't recall who first told her Plame's name.

[...]

Q: What laws would have been broken if someone revealed Plame's identity?

A: The Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982 bars anyone authorized to handle classified information about a “covert agent” from knowingly revealing the agent's identity. Lawyer Victoria Toensing, who as a Senate staffer helped write that law, says Plame wasn't covert because she hadn't been stationed overseas since 1997 and worked at CIA headquarters. If Fitzgerald instead is investigating possible violations of the 1917 Espionage Act, Toensing argues that that would be inappropriate. The act makes it illegal to divulge national-security information. Toensing says that law was meant to prevent disclosure of ship routes, munitions plants' locations and other secrets during wartime.
...}

So Toensing did not write that law, but only helped in a junior staff capacity, and she lied by claiming Plame was not stationed over seas since 1997. Clearly Plame traveled to the dangerous zones in the Mideast, over half a dozen times a year.

You're using the notorious liar and convicted felon John Dean as an authority? Really?

No, John Dean is only 1 paragraph of the article, which is WRITTEN BY ANDREW SEIFTER.
Anyone over seas, like a courier, is covered by the laws against disclosure.
All CIA employees and their operations are always classified and illegal to disclose.
Again, there is not just 1 law, and there is not just 1 source.

Care to explain how outing a WMD sting in progress is not a crime?

Hmmmm, no, that's wrong. Only agents who are undercover are covered, not any CIA flunky who goes overseas. Plame wasn't undercover, period.

Wrong.
If Plame was not secretly running a WMD sting that was classified, then there would have been no point in outing her.
Can a WMD sting work if not classified and done undercover?
Of course not.
Plame was not a CIA flunky, but the manager of a very important WMD sting in the Mideast.
One of the WMD that Plame was targeting was nuclear material, and that by definition is always classified.
Anything involving nuclear weapons is always classified by law.
If a top CIA agent was under cover as a chauffeur for another CIA agent, then that chauffeur would still be undercover even though everyone would know they were working for the CIA. It is not whether or not one works for the CIA that makes one undercover, but what they do for the CIA.

 

[bripat9643]

Victoria Toensing wrote the law against revealing the identify of covert agents, and she says Plame didn't qualify.

Your committing the logical fallacy known as the "appeal to authority," and Fitzgerald has a conflict of interest.

It is obvious to anyone that Victoria Toensing lied.

USA Today again relied only on Toensing to suggest that outing Plame was not a crime
{...
In an October 21 article, USA Today reporters Judy Keen and Mark Memmott relied exclusively on a reading of the law by Republican operative Victoria Toensing in presenting the question of whether senior White House officials may have committed a crime by outing CIA operative Valerie Plame.

The article marked at least the second time that Memmott cited Toensing -- without offering a contrary legal perspective -- in reporting that leaking Plame's identity likely wasn't a crime. Toensing has made frequent media appearances in defense of the Bush administration and the alleged leakers, but she is not the only voice on this issue. Former Nixon White House counsel John W. Dean III argued in 2003 that leaking Plame's identity might constitute a violation of the 1917 Espionage Act and, more recently, that it could also violate Title 18, United States Code, Section 641, which addresses the theft of information and, Dean wrote, contains “broad language [that] covers leaks” and “has now been used to cover just such actions.”

USA Today did not mention that Toensing is a partisan Republican or that she is a personal friend of syndicated columnist Robert D. Novak, who originally outed Plame in July 2003.

The article also misleadingly reported that Novak “hasn't publicly identified his two sources.” In fact, White House senior adviser Karl Rove is known to be one of Novak's two sources, according to reports of Rove's own grand jury testimony.

From the October 21 USA Today article, a series of questions and answers regarding “the latest developments and what might happen next” in the Plame leak investigation:

Q: Is it clear that the original leak most likely came from Rove or [Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff I. Lewis “Scooter” ] Libby?

A: Not at all, but Rove made his fourth grand-jury appearance a week ago, and Miller detailed her conversations with Libby last Sunday. The leak could have originated with someone who hasn't been identified. Names of other administration officials have cropped up in recent news reports, but none is as high-ranking. Columnist Robert Novak first revealed Plame's name and hasn't publicly identified his two sources. Washington Post reporter Walter Pincus, who did not write about the matter, hasn't publicly named his. Miller wrote that she can't recall who first told her Plame's name.

[...]

Q: What laws would have been broken if someone revealed Plame's identity?

A: The Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982 bars anyone authorized to handle classified information about a “covert agent” from knowingly revealing the agent's identity. Lawyer Victoria Toensing, who as a Senate staffer helped write that law, says Plame wasn't covert because she hadn't been stationed overseas since 1997 and worked at CIA headquarters. If Fitzgerald instead is investigating possible violations of the 1917 Espionage Act, Toensing argues that that would be inappropriate. The act makes it illegal to divulge national-security information. Toensing says that law was meant to prevent disclosure of ship routes, munitions plants' locations and other secrets during wartime.
...}

So Toensing did not write that law, but only helped in a junior staff capacity, and she lied by claiming Plame was not stationed over seas since 1997. Clearly Plame traveled to the dangerous zones in the Mideast, over half a dozen times a year.

You're using the notorious liar and convicted felon John Dean as an authority? Really?

No, John Dean is only 1 paragraph of the article, which is WRITTEN BY ANDREW SEIFTER.
Anyone over seas, like a courier, is covered by the laws against disclosure.
All CIA employees and their operations are always classified and illegal to disclose.
Again, there is not just 1 law, and there is not just 1 source.

Care to explain how outing a WMD sting in progress is not a crime?

Hmmmm, no, that's wrong. Only agents who are undercover are covered, not any CIA flunky who goes overseas. Plame wasn't undercover, period.

Wrong.
If Plame was not secretly running a WMD sting that was classified, then there would have been no point in outing her.
Can a WMD sting work if not classified and done undercover?
Of course not.
Plame was not a CIA flunky, but the manager of a very important WMD sting in the Mideast.
One of the WMD that Plame was targeting was nuclear material, and that by definition is always classified.
Anything involving nuclear weapons is always classified by law.
If a top CIA agent was under cover as a chauffeur for another CIA agent, then that chauffeur would still be undercover even though everyone would know they were working for the CIA. It is not whether or not one works for the CIA that makes one undercover, but what they do for the CIA.

The fact that she may have worked on something classified doesn't make her identity classified. Hillary handled classified information all the time. Was her identity classified?

Your arguments are full of holes a mile wide.