Valerie Plame for Congress

[Rigby5]

Well I said Plame was a covert CIA operative and I proved I was right about that.

We'll just add this to the list of shit you're wrong about.

You did nothing of the sort. You quoted an establishment hack who had a vested interest in a particular answer.

LOLOL

I quote the lead investigator into the matter. Whereas your source to anything contrary -- is you.

He is the guy with the vested interest in your position, shit for brains.

LIbby appealed the conviction and lost.
He was clearly lying and lost track of his lies.

What lies?

Libby lied about calling a list of journalist and telling them that Plame was guilty of nepotism by recommending her husband, Ambassador Wilson, for the yellowcake investigation in Niger.

First here is the over view:
Plame affair - Wikipedia
{...
The Plame affair (also known as the CIA leak scandal and Plamegate) was a political scandal that revolved around journalist Robert Novak's public identification of Valerie Plame as a covert Central Intelligence Agency officer in 2003.[1][2][3]

In 2002, Plame wrote a memo to her superiors in which she expressed hesitation in recommending her husband, former diplomat Joseph C. Wilson, to the CIA for a mission to Niger to investigate claims that Iraq had arranged to purchase and import uranium from the country, but stated that he "may be in a position to assist".[4] After President George W. Bush stated that "Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa" during the run-up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, Wilson published a July 2003 op-ed in The New York Times stating his doubts during the mission that any such transaction with Iraq had taken place.[5]

A week after Wilson's op-ed was published, Novak published a column which mentioned claims from "two senior administration officials" that Plame had been the one to suggest sending her husband. Novak had learned of Plame's employment, which was classified information, from State Department official Richard Armitage.[2] David Corn and others suggested that Armitage and other officials had leaked the information as political retribution for Wilson's article.

The scandal led to a criminal investigation; no one was charged for the leak itself. Scooter Libby was convicted of lying to investigators. His prison sentence was ultimately commuted by President Bush, and he was pardoned by President Donald Trump in 2018.
...}

Second is that clearly everyone has established that Plame was an under cover CIA agent.
An NOC, or a CIA agent with a Non-Official Cover, is an undercover agent of the CIA.
The only reason Novak was not prosecuted, is that he said he was not aware Plame was an NOC.
But clearly outting an NOC is illegal if done intentionally.

{...
Eight days after Wilson's July 6 op-ed, columnist Robert Novak wrote about Wilson's 2002 trip to Niger and subsequent findings and described Wilson's wife as an "agency operative".

In his column of July 14, 2003, entitled "Mission to Niger", Novak states that the choice to use Wilson "was made routinely at a low level without [CIA] Director George Tenet's knowledge." Novak goes on to identify Plame as Wilson's wife:

Wilson never worked for the CIA, but his wife, Valerie Plame, is an agency operative on weapons of mass destruction. Two senior administration officials told me that Wilson's wife suggested sending him to Niger to investigate the Italian report. The CIA says its counter-proliferation officials selected Wilson and asked his wife to contact him. "I will not answer any question about my wife," Wilson told me.[10]

Novak has said repeatedly that he was not told, and that he did not know, that Plame was – or had ever been – a NOC, an agent with Non-Official Cover. He has emphatically said that had he understood that she was any sort of secret agent, he would never have named her.[11]

On July 16, 2003, an article published by David Corn in The Nation carried this lead: "Did Bush officials blow the cover of a U.S. intelligence officer working covertly in a field of vital importance to national security — and break the law — in order to strike at a Bush administration critic and intimidate others?"[12]

In that article, Corn notes: "Without acknowledging whether she is a deep-cover CIA employee, Wilson says, 'Naming her this way would have compromised every operation, every relationship, every network with which she had been associated in her entire career. This is the stuff of Kim Philby and Aldrich Ames.'" Wilson has said: "I felt that ... however abominable the decision might be, it was rational that if you were an administration and did not want people talking about the intelligence or talking about what underpinned the decision to go to war, you would discourage them by destroying the credibility of the messenger who brought you the message. And this administration apparently decided the way to do that was to leak the name of my wife."[13]

In October 2007, regarding his column "A White House Smear", Corn writes:

That piece was the first to identify the leak as a possible White House crime and the first to characterize the leak as evidence that within the Bush administration political expedience trumped national security.

The column drew about 100,000 visitors to this website in a day or so. And—fairly or not—it's been cited by some as the event that triggered the Plame hullabaloo. I doubt that the column prompted the investigation eventually conducted by special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, for I assume that had my column not appeared the CIA still would have asked the Justice Department to investigate the leak as a possible crime.
...}

And finally, here is the jury, who heard all the evidence:
{...
Jury reaction
After the verdict was read to the court, Denis Collins, a member of the jury and a journalist who has written for The Washington Post and other newspapers, spoke to the press. According to Collins, some in the jury felt sympathy for Libby and believed he was only the "fall guy". Collins said that "a number of times" the jurors asked themselves, "what is [Libby] doing here? Where is Rove and all these other guys. I'm not saying we didn't think Mr. Libby was guilty of the things we found him guilty of. It seemed like he was, as Mr. Wells [Ted Wells, Libby's attorney] put it, he was the fall guy."

According to Collins,

What we're in court deciding seems to be a level or two down from what, before we went into the jury, we supposed the trial was about, or had been initially about, which was who leaked [Plame's identity]. Some jurors commented at some point: 'I wish we weren't judging Libby. You know, this sucks. We don't like being here.' But that wasn't our choice.

Collins described how after 10 days of deliberations,

What we came up with from that was that Libby was told about Mrs. Wilson nine times ... We believed he did have a bad memory, but it seemed very unlikely he would not remember about being told about Mrs. Wilson so many times ... Hard to believe he would remember on Tuesday and forget on Thursday.[105][106]

Collins told the press "Well, as I said before, I felt like it was a long, you know, haul to get this jury done. And if Mr. Libby is pardoned, I would have no problem with that."[107]

Another member of the jury, Ann Redington, who broke down and cried as the verdict was being read, also told Chris Matthews, in a March 7, 2007, appearance on Hardball, that she hoped Libby would eventually be pardoned by President Bush; she told Matthews that she believed Libby "got caught in a difficult situation where he got caught in the initial lie, and it just snowballed" and added: "It kind of bothers me that there was this whole big crime being investigated and he got caught up in the investigation as opposed to in the actual crime that was supposedly committed.
...}

 

[Rigby5]

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.

It is NOT that Plame worked for the CIA that is classified.
What was classified was the WMD investigations, and the fact Plame was involved in those investigations.
Working for the CIA did not make Plame at risk of her life.
But being in charge of WMD stings and investigations, like yellowcake in Niger, IS classified and makes Plame at risk when exposed.

As far as HIllary being classified or not, clearly if Hillary's identity could have been secret, it would have made her travel much easier and safer. But there is no way to make the Secretary of State confidential. That does not mean it would not be illegal to reveal her identity if she could have been secret.

 

[bripat9643]

You did nothing of the sort. You quoted an establishment hack who had a vested interest in a particular answer.

LOLOL

I quote the lead investigator into the matter. Whereas your source to anything contrary -- is you.

He is the guy with the vested interest in your position, shit for brains.

LIbby appealed the conviction and lost.
He was clearly lying and lost track of his lies.

What lies?

Libby lied about calling a list of journalist and telling them that Plame was guilty of nepotism by recommending her husband, Ambassador Wilson, for the yellowcake investigation in Niger.

First here is the over view:
Plame affair - Wikipedia
{...
The Plame affair (also known as the CIA leak scandal and Plamegate) was a political scandal that revolved around journalist Robert Novak's public identification of Valerie Plame as a covert Central Intelligence Agency officer in 2003.[1][2][3]

In 2002, Plame wrote a memo to her superiors in which she expressed hesitation in recommending her husband, former diplomat Joseph C. Wilson, to the CIA for a mission to Niger to investigate claims that Iraq had arranged to purchase and import uranium from the country, but stated that he "may be in a position to assist".[4] After President George W. Bush stated that "Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa" during the run-up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, Wilson published a July 2003 op-ed in The New York Times stating his doubts during the mission that any such transaction with Iraq had taken place.[5]

A week after Wilson's op-ed was published, Novak published a column which mentioned claims from "two senior administration officials" that Plame had been the one to suggest sending her husband. Novak had learned of Plame's employment, which was classified information, from State Department official Richard Armitage.[2] David Corn and others suggested that Armitage and other officials had leaked the information as political retribution for Wilson's article.

The scandal led to a criminal investigation; no one was charged for the leak itself. Scooter Libby was convicted of lying to investigators. His prison sentence was ultimately commuted by President Bush, and he was pardoned by President Donald Trump in 2018.
...}

Second is that clearly everyone has established that Plame was an under cover CIA agent.
An NOC, or a CIA agent with a Non-Official Cover, is an undercover agent of the CIA.
The only reason Novak was not prosecuted, is that he said he was not aware Plame was an NOC.
But clearly outting an NOC is illegal if done intentionally.

{...
Eight days after Wilson's July 6 op-ed, columnist Robert Novak wrote about Wilson's 2002 trip to Niger and subsequent findings and described Wilson's wife as an "agency operative".

In his column of July 14, 2003, entitled "Mission to Niger", Novak states that the choice to use Wilson "was made routinely at a low level without [CIA] Director George Tenet's knowledge." Novak goes on to identify Plame as Wilson's wife:

Wilson never worked for the CIA, but his wife, Valerie Plame, is an agency operative on weapons of mass destruction. Two senior administration officials told me that Wilson's wife suggested sending him to Niger to investigate the Italian report. The CIA says its counter-proliferation officials selected Wilson and asked his wife to contact him. "I will not answer any question about my wife," Wilson told me.[10]

Novak has said repeatedly that he was not told, and that he did not know, that Plame was – or had ever been – a NOC, an agent with Non-Official Cover. He has emphatically said that had he understood that she was any sort of secret agent, he would never have named her.[11]

On July 16, 2003, an article published by David Corn in The Nation carried this lead: "Did Bush officials blow the cover of a U.S. intelligence officer working covertly in a field of vital importance to national security — and break the law — in order to strike at a Bush administration critic and intimidate others?"[12]

In that article, Corn notes: "Without acknowledging whether she is a deep-cover CIA employee, Wilson says, 'Naming her this way would have compromised every operation, every relationship, every network with which she had been associated in her entire career. This is the stuff of Kim Philby and Aldrich Ames.'" Wilson has said: "I felt that ... however abominable the decision might be, it was rational that if you were an administration and did not want people talking about the intelligence or talking about what underpinned the decision to go to war, you would discourage them by destroying the credibility of the messenger who brought you the message. And this administration apparently decided the way to do that was to leak the name of my wife."[13]

In October 2007, regarding his column "A White House Smear", Corn writes:

That piece was the first to identify the leak as a possible White House crime and the first to characterize the leak as evidence that within the Bush administration political expedience trumped national security.

The column drew about 100,000 visitors to this website in a day or so. And—fairly or not—it's been cited by some as the event that triggered the Plame hullabaloo. I doubt that the column prompted the investigation eventually conducted by special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, for I assume that had my column not appeared the CIA still would have asked the Justice Department to investigate the leak as a possible crime.
...}

And finally, here is the jury, who heard all the evidence:
{...
Jury reaction
After the verdict was read to the court, Denis Collins, a member of the jury and a journalist who has written for The Washington Post and other newspapers, spoke to the press. According to Collins, some in the jury felt sympathy for Libby and believed he was only the "fall guy". Collins said that "a number of times" the jurors asked themselves, "what is [Libby] doing here? Where is Rove and all these other guys. I'm not saying we didn't think Mr. Libby was guilty of the things we found him guilty of. It seemed like he was, as Mr. Wells [Ted Wells, Libby's attorney] put it, he was the fall guy."

According to Collins,

What we're in court deciding seems to be a level or two down from what, before we went into the jury, we supposed the trial was about, or had been initially about, which was who leaked [Plame's identity]. Some jurors commented at some point: 'I wish we weren't judging Libby. You know, this sucks. We don't like being here.' But that wasn't our choice.

Collins described how after 10 days of deliberations,

What we came up with from that was that Libby was told about Mrs. Wilson nine times ... We believed he did have a bad memory, but it seemed very unlikely he would not remember about being told about Mrs. Wilson so many times ... Hard to believe he would remember on Tuesday and forget on Thursday.[105][106]

Collins told the press "Well, as I said before, I felt like it was a long, you know, haul to get this jury done. And if Mr. Libby is pardoned, I would have no problem with that."[107]

Another member of the jury, Ann Redington, who broke down and cried as the verdict was being read, also told Chris Matthews, in a March 7, 2007, appearance on Hardball, that she hoped Libby would eventually be pardoned by President Bush; she told Matthews that she believed Libby "got caught in a difficult situation where he got caught in the initial lie, and it just snowballed" and added: "It kind of bothers me that there was this whole big crime being investigated and he got caught up in the investigation as opposed to in the actual crime that was supposedly committed.
...}

No one has established that Plame was undercover. That's just plain horseshit. If she was, then why didn't Fitzgerald charge him with revealing her identity? The answer is that he knew he couldn't get a conviction on that because it simply isn't true.

 

[bripat9643]

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.

It is NOT that Plame worked for the CIA that is classified.
What was classified was the WMD investigations, and the fact Plame was involved in those investigations.
Working for the CIA did not make Plame at risk of her life.
But being in charge of WMD stings and investigations, like yellowcake in Niger, IS classified and makes Plame at risk when exposed.

The law is about whether an agent is working undercover, not whether what they do is classified. You can't seem to get that through your head. She was at no risk by being exposed. Everyone already knew she was an employee of the CIA, especially the press.

 

[daveman]

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.

I repeat: What the hell happened to you people? You can pretend the question isn't there. It would require more introspection that you're capable of to answer it.

 

[daveman]

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.

Poor Saddam. Did you cry when he was executed? Such a terrible injustice, wasn't it?

 

[Faun]

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.

Fucking moron, it's not my problem you're incapable of discerning the difference between Patrick Fitzgerald and the CIA records.

It's not Fitzgerald's opinion that Plame worked overseas -- that's CIA record

It's not Fitzgerald's opinion that the CIA provided Plame NOC coverage for plame -- that's CIA record

It's not Fitzgerald's opinion when Plame worked for the CIA -- that's CIA record

It's not Fitzgerald's opinion that the CIA kept Plame's work classified -- that's CIA record

When are you going to learn "nuh-uh" isn't an argument?

 

[Faun]

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.

They don't care about any of that. All they care about is that Bush got re-elected.

 

[Faun]

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.

Fucking moron, you're not debating. You're saying, "nuh-uh." You've literally offered nothing other than "nuh-uh" to refute a word Fitzgerald said.

And again, I have more than Fitzgerald's opinion. I have the unclassified CIA record of her employment showing she served overseas under cover. And I have the CIA asking the Department of Justice to open an investigation into who outed one of their agents.

But even if all I had was Fitzgerald's opinion, that would still be infinitely more than what you're bringing to the debate, which is no more than "nuh-uh." Fitzgerald, like Mueller, was a Special Counsel who investigated a potential crime. If I were a fucking moron like you, my argument would be nuh-uh trump is innocent of colluding with Russia. That's only Mueller's opinion.

Do you see now why you're a fucking moron, fucking moron?

 

[Faun]

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.

Fucking moron, the CIA sending her overseas under cover made her covert.

 

[Faun]

LOLOL

I quote the lead investigator into the matter. Whereas your source to anything contrary -- is you.

He is the guy with the vested interest in your position, shit for brains.

LIbby appealed the conviction and lost.
He was clearly lying and lost track of his lies.

What lies?

Libby lied about calling a list of journalist and telling them that Plame was guilty of nepotism by recommending her husband, Ambassador Wilson, for the yellowcake investigation in Niger.

First here is the over view:
Plame affair - Wikipedia
{...
The Plame affair (also known as the CIA leak scandal and Plamegate) was a political scandal that revolved around journalist Robert Novak's public identification of Valerie Plame as a covert Central Intelligence Agency officer in 2003.[1][2][3]

In 2002, Plame wrote a memo to her superiors in which she expressed hesitation in recommending her husband, former diplomat Joseph C. Wilson, to the CIA for a mission to Niger to investigate claims that Iraq had arranged to purchase and import uranium from the country, but stated that he "may be in a position to assist".[4] After President George W. Bush stated that "Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa" during the run-up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, Wilson published a July 2003 op-ed in The New York Times stating his doubts during the mission that any such transaction with Iraq had taken place.[5]

A week after Wilson's op-ed was published, Novak published a column which mentioned claims from "two senior administration officials" that Plame had been the one to suggest sending her husband. Novak had learned of Plame's employment, which was classified information, from State Department official Richard Armitage.[2] David Corn and others suggested that Armitage and other officials had leaked the information as political retribution for Wilson's article.

The scandal led to a criminal investigation; no one was charged for the leak itself. Scooter Libby was convicted of lying to investigators. His prison sentence was ultimately commuted by President Bush, and he was pardoned by President Donald Trump in 2018.
...}

Second is that clearly everyone has established that Plame was an under cover CIA agent.
An NOC, or a CIA agent with a Non-Official Cover, is an undercover agent of the CIA.
The only reason Novak was not prosecuted, is that he said he was not aware Plame was an NOC.
But clearly outting an NOC is illegal if done intentionally.

{...
Eight days after Wilson's July 6 op-ed, columnist Robert Novak wrote about Wilson's 2002 trip to Niger and subsequent findings and described Wilson's wife as an "agency operative".

In his column of July 14, 2003, entitled "Mission to Niger", Novak states that the choice to use Wilson "was made routinely at a low level without [CIA] Director George Tenet's knowledge." Novak goes on to identify Plame as Wilson's wife:

Wilson never worked for the CIA, but his wife, Valerie Plame, is an agency operative on weapons of mass destruction. Two senior administration officials told me that Wilson's wife suggested sending him to Niger to investigate the Italian report. The CIA says its counter-proliferation officials selected Wilson and asked his wife to contact him. "I will not answer any question about my wife," Wilson told me.[10]

Novak has said repeatedly that he was not told, and that he did not know, that Plame was – or had ever been – a NOC, an agent with Non-Official Cover. He has emphatically said that had he understood that she was any sort of secret agent, he would never have named her.[11]

On July 16, 2003, an article published by David Corn in The Nation carried this lead: "Did Bush officials blow the cover of a U.S. intelligence officer working covertly in a field of vital importance to national security — and break the law — in order to strike at a Bush administration critic and intimidate others?"[12]

In that article, Corn notes: "Without acknowledging whether she is a deep-cover CIA employee, Wilson says, 'Naming her this way would have compromised every operation, every relationship, every network with which she had been associated in her entire career. This is the stuff of Kim Philby and Aldrich Ames.'" Wilson has said: "I felt that ... however abominable the decision might be, it was rational that if you were an administration and did not want people talking about the intelligence or talking about what underpinned the decision to go to war, you would discourage them by destroying the credibility of the messenger who brought you the message. And this administration apparently decided the way to do that was to leak the name of my wife."[13]

In October 2007, regarding his column "A White House Smear", Corn writes:

That piece was the first to identify the leak as a possible White House crime and the first to characterize the leak as evidence that within the Bush administration political expedience trumped national security.

The column drew about 100,000 visitors to this website in a day or so. And—fairly or not—it's been cited by some as the event that triggered the Plame hullabaloo. I doubt that the column prompted the investigation eventually conducted by special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, for I assume that had my column not appeared the CIA still would have asked the Justice Department to investigate the leak as a possible crime.
...}

And finally, here is the jury, who heard all the evidence:
{...
Jury reaction
After the verdict was read to the court, Denis Collins, a member of the jury and a journalist who has written for The Washington Post and other newspapers, spoke to the press. According to Collins, some in the jury felt sympathy for Libby and believed he was only the "fall guy". Collins said that "a number of times" the jurors asked themselves, "what is [Libby] doing here? Where is Rove and all these other guys. I'm not saying we didn't think Mr. Libby was guilty of the things we found him guilty of. It seemed like he was, as Mr. Wells [Ted Wells, Libby's attorney] put it, he was the fall guy."

According to Collins,

What we're in court deciding seems to be a level or two down from what, before we went into the jury, we supposed the trial was about, or had been initially about, which was who leaked [Plame's identity]. Some jurors commented at some point: 'I wish we weren't judging Libby. You know, this sucks. We don't like being here.' But that wasn't our choice.

Collins described how after 10 days of deliberations,

What we came up with from that was that Libby was told about Mrs. Wilson nine times ... We believed he did have a bad memory, but it seemed very unlikely he would not remember about being told about Mrs. Wilson so many times ... Hard to believe he would remember on Tuesday and forget on Thursday.[105][106]

Collins told the press "Well, as I said before, I felt like it was a long, you know, haul to get this jury done. And if Mr. Libby is pardoned, I would have no problem with that."[107]

Another member of the jury, Ann Redington, who broke down and cried as the verdict was being read, also told Chris Matthews, in a March 7, 2007, appearance on Hardball, that she hoped Libby would eventually be pardoned by President Bush; she told Matthews that she believed Libby "got caught in a difficult situation where he got caught in the initial lie, and it just snowballed" and added: "It kind of bothers me that there was this whole big crime being investigated and he got caught up in the investigation as opposed to in the actual crime that was supposedly committed.
...}

No one has established that Plame was undercover. That's just plain horseshit. If she was, then why didn't Fitzgerald charge him with revealing her identity? The answer is that he knew he couldn't get a conviction on that because it simply isn't true.

Fucking moron, the CIA established she was covert.

 

[Faun]

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.

Poor Saddam. Did you cry when he was executed? Such a terrible injustice, wasn't it?

So you think sending off Americans to die based on bullshit reasons is ok, do you?

 

[Faun]

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.

I repeat: What the hell happened to you people? You can pretend the question isn't there. It would require more introspection that you're capable of to answer it.

Not being a product of the 60's, that's not a question I can answer. I don't speak for anyone but myself.

What I do see is a covert CIA operative was exposed and her job at counter nuclear proliferation was jeopardized. What I also see is traitorous fucking morons being ok with that because she's a Democrat.

 

[bripat9643]

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.

Fucking moron, it's not my problem you're incapable of discerning the difference between Patrick Fitzgerald and the CIA records.

It's not Fitzgerald's opinion that Plame worked overseas -- that's CIA record

It's not Fitzgerald's opinion that the CIA provided Plame NOC coverage for plame -- that's CIA record

It's not Fitzgerald's opinion when Plame worked for the CIA -- that's CIA record

It's not Fitzgerald's opinion that the CIA kept Plame's work classified -- that's CIA record

When are you going to learn "nuh-uh" isn't an argument?

You haven't posted any CIA records, dumbfuck. All you've posted is Fitzgerald's opinion? Do you really expect us to accept Fitzgerald's characterization of the evidence?

Sorry, asshole, but no sensible person would trust him as far as they could throw him. Produce some actual evidence, or shut the fuck up.

None of what you claimed is on the CIA record proves she was covered by the law in question.

It is purely Fitzgerald's opinion that she was an undercover agent. She wasn't. She was a desk jockey, and her job at the CIA was public information.

 

[bripat9643]

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.

I repeat: What the hell happened to you people? You can pretend the question isn't there. It would require more introspection that you're capable of to answer it.

Not being a product of the 60's, that's not a question I can answer. I don't speak for anyone but myself.

What I do see is a covert CIA operative was exposed and her job at counter nuclear proliferation was jeopardized. What I also see is traitorous fucking morons being ok with that because she's a Democrat.

Once again, she wasn't a covert CIA operative. She was a desk jockey.

 

[bripat9643]

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.

Fucking moron, the CIA sending her overseas under cover made her covert.

Sorry, but an occasional trip to Iraq doesn't make you a covert agent. Her cover was flimsy and only intended to avoid immediate scrutiny by low level bureaucrats. The intelligence services of every country she went to knew exactly who she was.

 

[bripat9643]

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.

Fucking moron, you're not debating. You're saying, "nuh-uh." You've literally offered nothing other than "nuh-uh" to refute a word Fitzgerald said.

And again, I have more than Fitzgerald's opinion. I have the unclassified CIA record of her employment showing she served overseas under cover. And I have the CIA asking the Department of Justice to open an investigation into who outed one of their agents.

But even if all I had was Fitzgerald's opinion, that would still be infinitely more than what you're bringing to the debate, which is no more than "nuh-uh." Fitzgerald, like Mueller, was a Special Counsel who investigated a potential crime. If I were a fucking moron like you, my argument would be nuh-uh trump is innocent of colluding with Russia. That's only Mueller's opinion.

Do you see now why you're a fucking moron, fucking moron?

I don't need to refute a single word he said because you haven't provided a single official document to support it.

You have "unclassified CIA record of her employment showing she served overseas under cover?" Then post it.

Otherwise, shut the fuck up.

Furthermore, even Mueller didn't claim that Trump colluded with Russia

 

[bripat9643]

He is the guy with the vested interest in your position, shit for brains.

LIbby appealed the conviction and lost.
He was clearly lying and lost track of his lies.

What lies?

Libby lied about calling a list of journalist and telling them that Plame was guilty of nepotism by recommending her husband, Ambassador Wilson, for the yellowcake investigation in Niger.

First here is the over view:
Plame affair - Wikipedia
{...
The Plame affair (also known as the CIA leak scandal and Plamegate) was a political scandal that revolved around journalist Robert Novak's public identification of Valerie Plame as a covert Central Intelligence Agency officer in 2003.[1][2][3]

In 2002, Plame wrote a memo to her superiors in which she expressed hesitation in recommending her husband, former diplomat Joseph C. Wilson, to the CIA for a mission to Niger to investigate claims that Iraq had arranged to purchase and import uranium from the country, but stated that he "may be in a position to assist".[4] After President George W. Bush stated that "Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa" during the run-up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, Wilson published a July 2003 op-ed in The New York Times stating his doubts during the mission that any such transaction with Iraq had taken place.[5]

A week after Wilson's op-ed was published, Novak published a column which mentioned claims from "two senior administration officials" that Plame had been the one to suggest sending her husband. Novak had learned of Plame's employment, which was classified information, from State Department official Richard Armitage.[2] David Corn and others suggested that Armitage and other officials had leaked the information as political retribution for Wilson's article.

The scandal led to a criminal investigation; no one was charged for the leak itself. Scooter Libby was convicted of lying to investigators. His prison sentence was ultimately commuted by President Bush, and he was pardoned by President Donald Trump in 2018.
...}

Second is that clearly everyone has established that Plame was an under cover CIA agent.
An NOC, or a CIA agent with a Non-Official Cover, is an undercover agent of the CIA.
The only reason Novak was not prosecuted, is that he said he was not aware Plame was an NOC.
But clearly outting an NOC is illegal if done intentionally.

{...
Eight days after Wilson's July 6 op-ed, columnist Robert Novak wrote about Wilson's 2002 trip to Niger and subsequent findings and described Wilson's wife as an "agency operative".

In his column of July 14, 2003, entitled "Mission to Niger", Novak states that the choice to use Wilson "was made routinely at a low level without [CIA] Director George Tenet's knowledge." Novak goes on to identify Plame as Wilson's wife:

Wilson never worked for the CIA, but his wife, Valerie Plame, is an agency operative on weapons of mass destruction. Two senior administration officials told me that Wilson's wife suggested sending him to Niger to investigate the Italian report. The CIA says its counter-proliferation officials selected Wilson and asked his wife to contact him. "I will not answer any question about my wife," Wilson told me.[10]

Novak has said repeatedly that he was not told, and that he did not know, that Plame was – or had ever been – a NOC, an agent with Non-Official Cover. He has emphatically said that had he understood that she was any sort of secret agent, he would never have named her.[11]

On July 16, 2003, an article published by David Corn in The Nation carried this lead: "Did Bush officials blow the cover of a U.S. intelligence officer working covertly in a field of vital importance to national security — and break the law — in order to strike at a Bush administration critic and intimidate others?"[12]

In that article, Corn notes: "Without acknowledging whether she is a deep-cover CIA employee, Wilson says, 'Naming her this way would have compromised every operation, every relationship, every network with which she had been associated in her entire career. This is the stuff of Kim Philby and Aldrich Ames.'" Wilson has said: "I felt that ... however abominable the decision might be, it was rational that if you were an administration and did not want people talking about the intelligence or talking about what underpinned the decision to go to war, you would discourage them by destroying the credibility of the messenger who brought you the message. And this administration apparently decided the way to do that was to leak the name of my wife."[13]

In October 2007, regarding his column "A White House Smear", Corn writes:

That piece was the first to identify the leak as a possible White House crime and the first to characterize the leak as evidence that within the Bush administration political expedience trumped national security.

The column drew about 100,000 visitors to this website in a day or so. And—fairly or not—it's been cited by some as the event that triggered the Plame hullabaloo. I doubt that the column prompted the investigation eventually conducted by special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, for I assume that had my column not appeared the CIA still would have asked the Justice Department to investigate the leak as a possible crime.
...}

And finally, here is the jury, who heard all the evidence:
{...
Jury reaction
After the verdict was read to the court, Denis Collins, a member of the jury and a journalist who has written for The Washington Post and other newspapers, spoke to the press. According to Collins, some in the jury felt sympathy for Libby and believed he was only the "fall guy". Collins said that "a number of times" the jurors asked themselves, "what is [Libby] doing here? Where is Rove and all these other guys. I'm not saying we didn't think Mr. Libby was guilty of the things we found him guilty of. It seemed like he was, as Mr. Wells [Ted Wells, Libby's attorney] put it, he was the fall guy."

According to Collins,

What we're in court deciding seems to be a level or two down from what, before we went into the jury, we supposed the trial was about, or had been initially about, which was who leaked [Plame's identity]. Some jurors commented at some point: 'I wish we weren't judging Libby. You know, this sucks. We don't like being here.' But that wasn't our choice.

Collins described how after 10 days of deliberations,

What we came up with from that was that Libby was told about Mrs. Wilson nine times ... We believed he did have a bad memory, but it seemed very unlikely he would not remember about being told about Mrs. Wilson so many times ... Hard to believe he would remember on Tuesday and forget on Thursday.[105][106]

Collins told the press "Well, as I said before, I felt like it was a long, you know, haul to get this jury done. And if Mr. Libby is pardoned, I would have no problem with that."[107]

Another member of the jury, Ann Redington, who broke down and cried as the verdict was being read, also told Chris Matthews, in a March 7, 2007, appearance on Hardball, that she hoped Libby would eventually be pardoned by President Bush; she told Matthews that she believed Libby "got caught in a difficult situation where he got caught in the initial lie, and it just snowballed" and added: "It kind of bothers me that there was this whole big crime being investigated and he got caught up in the investigation as opposed to in the actual crime that was supposedly committed.
...}

No one has established that Plame was undercover. That's just plain horseshit. If she was, then why didn't Fitzgerald charge him with revealing her identity? The answer is that he knew he couldn't get a conviction on that because it simply isn't true.

Fucking moron, the CIA established she was covert.

We only have Fitzgerald's word for that, and only a fool would accept it.

 

[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.

Fucking moron, it's not my problem you're incapable of discerning the difference between Patrick Fitzgerald and the CIA records.

It's not Fitzgerald's opinion that Plame worked overseas -- that's CIA record

It's not Fitzgerald's opinion that the CIA provided Plame NOC coverage for plame -- that's CIA record

It's not Fitzgerald's opinion when Plame worked for the CIA -- that's CIA record

It's not Fitzgerald's opinion that the CIA kept Plame's work classified -- that's CIA record

When are you going to learn "nuh-uh" isn't an argument?

You haven't posted any CIA records, dumbfuck. All you've posted is Fitzgerald's opinion? Do you really expect us to accept Fitzgerald's characterization of the evidence?

Sorry, asshole, but no sensible person would trust him as far as they could throw him. Produce some actual evidence, or shut the fuck up.

None of what you claimed is on the CIA record proves she was covered by the law in question.

It is purely Fitzgerald's opinion that she was an undercover agent. She wasn't. She was a desk jockey, and her job at the CIA was public information.

Wrong as always, fucking moron. The information about Valerie Plame's employment history came from the CIA, not from Fitzgerald, entered into the Provacy Act systems of records.

 

[Faun]

LIbby appealed the conviction and lost.
He was clearly lying and lost track of his lies.

What lies?

Libby lied about calling a list of journalist and telling them that Plame was guilty of nepotism by recommending her husband, Ambassador Wilson, for the yellowcake investigation in Niger.

First here is the over view:
Plame affair - Wikipedia
{...
The Plame affair (also known as the CIA leak scandal and Plamegate) was a political scandal that revolved around journalist Robert Novak's public identification of Valerie Plame as a covert Central Intelligence Agency officer in 2003.[1][2][3]

In 2002, Plame wrote a memo to her superiors in which she expressed hesitation in recommending her husband, former diplomat Joseph C. Wilson, to the CIA for a mission to Niger to investigate claims that Iraq had arranged to purchase and import uranium from the country, but stated that he "may be in a position to assist".[4] After President George W. Bush stated that "Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa" during the run-up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, Wilson published a July 2003 op-ed in The New York Times stating his doubts during the mission that any such transaction with Iraq had taken place.[5]

A week after Wilson's op-ed was published, Novak published a column which mentioned claims from "two senior administration officials" that Plame had been the one to suggest sending her husband. Novak had learned of Plame's employment, which was classified information, from State Department official Richard Armitage.[2] David Corn and others suggested that Armitage and other officials had leaked the information as political retribution for Wilson's article.

The scandal led to a criminal investigation; no one was charged for the leak itself. Scooter Libby was convicted of lying to investigators. His prison sentence was ultimately commuted by President Bush, and he was pardoned by President Donald Trump in 2018.
...}

Second is that clearly everyone has established that Plame was an under cover CIA agent.
An NOC, or a CIA agent with a Non-Official Cover, is an undercover agent of the CIA.
The only reason Novak was not prosecuted, is that he said he was not aware Plame was an NOC.
But clearly outting an NOC is illegal if done intentionally.

{...
Eight days after Wilson's July 6 op-ed, columnist Robert Novak wrote about Wilson's 2002 trip to Niger and subsequent findings and described Wilson's wife as an "agency operative".

In his column of July 14, 2003, entitled "Mission to Niger", Novak states that the choice to use Wilson "was made routinely at a low level without [CIA] Director George Tenet's knowledge." Novak goes on to identify Plame as Wilson's wife:

Wilson never worked for the CIA, but his wife, Valerie Plame, is an agency operative on weapons of mass destruction. Two senior administration officials told me that Wilson's wife suggested sending him to Niger to investigate the Italian report. The CIA says its counter-proliferation officials selected Wilson and asked his wife to contact him. "I will not answer any question about my wife," Wilson told me.[10]

Novak has said repeatedly that he was not told, and that he did not know, that Plame was – or had ever been – a NOC, an agent with Non-Official Cover. He has emphatically said that had he understood that she was any sort of secret agent, he would never have named her.[11]

On July 16, 2003, an article published by David Corn in The Nation carried this lead: "Did Bush officials blow the cover of a U.S. intelligence officer working covertly in a field of vital importance to national security — and break the law — in order to strike at a Bush administration critic and intimidate others?"[12]

In that article, Corn notes: "Without acknowledging whether she is a deep-cover CIA employee, Wilson says, 'Naming her this way would have compromised every operation, every relationship, every network with which she had been associated in her entire career. This is the stuff of Kim Philby and Aldrich Ames.'" Wilson has said: "I felt that ... however abominable the decision might be, it was rational that if you were an administration and did not want people talking about the intelligence or talking about what underpinned the decision to go to war, you would discourage them by destroying the credibility of the messenger who brought you the message. And this administration apparently decided the way to do that was to leak the name of my wife."[13]

In October 2007, regarding his column "A White House Smear", Corn writes:

That piece was the first to identify the leak as a possible White House crime and the first to characterize the leak as evidence that within the Bush administration political expedience trumped national security.

The column drew about 100,000 visitors to this website in a day or so. And—fairly or not—it's been cited by some as the event that triggered the Plame hullabaloo. I doubt that the column prompted the investigation eventually conducted by special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, for I assume that had my column not appeared the CIA still would have asked the Justice Department to investigate the leak as a possible crime.
...}

And finally, here is the jury, who heard all the evidence:
{...
Jury reaction
After the verdict was read to the court, Denis Collins, a member of the jury and a journalist who has written for The Washington Post and other newspapers, spoke to the press. According to Collins, some in the jury felt sympathy for Libby and believed he was only the "fall guy". Collins said that "a number of times" the jurors asked themselves, "what is [Libby] doing here? Where is Rove and all these other guys. I'm not saying we didn't think Mr. Libby was guilty of the things we found him guilty of. It seemed like he was, as Mr. Wells [Ted Wells, Libby's attorney] put it, he was the fall guy."

According to Collins,

What we're in court deciding seems to be a level or two down from what, before we went into the jury, we supposed the trial was about, or had been initially about, which was who leaked [Plame's identity]. Some jurors commented at some point: 'I wish we weren't judging Libby. You know, this sucks. We don't like being here.' But that wasn't our choice.

Collins described how after 10 days of deliberations,

What we came up with from that was that Libby was told about Mrs. Wilson nine times ... We believed he did have a bad memory, but it seemed very unlikely he would not remember about being told about Mrs. Wilson so many times ... Hard to believe he would remember on Tuesday and forget on Thursday.[105][106]

Collins told the press "Well, as I said before, I felt like it was a long, you know, haul to get this jury done. And if Mr. Libby is pardoned, I would have no problem with that."[107]

Another member of the jury, Ann Redington, who broke down and cried as the verdict was being read, also told Chris Matthews, in a March 7, 2007, appearance on Hardball, that she hoped Libby would eventually be pardoned by President Bush; she told Matthews that she believed Libby "got caught in a difficult situation where he got caught in the initial lie, and it just snowballed" and added: "It kind of bothers me that there was this whole big crime being investigated and he got caught up in the investigation as opposed to in the actual crime that was supposedly committed.
...}

No one has established that Plame was undercover. That's just plain horseshit. If she was, then why didn't Fitzgerald charge him with revealing her identity? The answer is that he knew he couldn't get a conviction on that because it simply isn't true.

Fucking moron, the CIA established she was covert.

We only have Fitzgerald's word for that, and only a fool would accept it.

Wrong as always, fucking moron. The CIA confirmed it. The CIA spokesman who spoke with Novak testified under oath....

Harlow said that after Novak's call, he checked Plame's status and confirmed that she was an undercover operative. He said he called Novak back to repeat that the story Novak had related to him was wrong and that Plame's name should not be used. But he did not tell Novak directly that she was undercover because that was classified.

Prosecutor In CIA Leak Case Casting A Wide Net​