3/20/2007
Valerie Plame was not covert; Libby should be released
As far as I can tell by the articles that have been published as of late, Plame hadn’t been covert for some years.
When Plame was testifying, we had the transgender freak, Midge Potts from Missouri sporting that ever so fashionable “Impeach Bush” Code Pink-o t-shirt. Fitting, isn’t it?
For the idiot who said in comments that I haven’t published anything about Valerie Plame, take a trip down memory lane, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here .
Then read When and Why Joe Wilson IV Outted Valerie Plame at Sweetness and Light, What Joe Wilson’s Lies Have Wrought at Rightwing Nuthouse, numerous articles by Clarice Feldman, an attorney in Washington, at the American Thinker on the Libby affair and its injustice, and do me a favor.
Shut the hell up.
Update: Well my little commenters don’t know how to shut the hell up, they come back with the assertion that I didn’t notice Plame’s testimony in front of Congress. That’s interesting, because the picture above is taken from that very thing.
Let’s review:
Plame was not covert at the time of the leak; she’d been on a desk at Langley for the last 10 years.
Wilson acknowledged his wife was no longer in an undercover job at the time Novak’s column first identified her. “My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity,” he said.
So how then could he ‘blow’ her identity? The most notable expert I previously quoted, in my opinion, beyond Clarice Feldman is Victoria Toensing:
Toensing, in fact, was the Senate negotiator for the “Identities Protection Act of 1982″, and helped Congress craft it. In the Wall Street Journal, she said “I also know that covert officers are not assigned to Langley,” as Valerie Plame was at the time this all occurred.
The court permitted Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald to refer to Valerie Plame as being “covert” or having a “classified” job throughout trial and specifically during closing argument. Neither of those highly prejudicial characterizations was proven at trial. Even if Plame’s job were “classified,” as Fitzgerald reiterated in his press conference after conviction, there is no criminal violation in publishing her name. That legal gap is why Congress passed the Intelligence Identities Protection Act in 1982.
She should know, she helped craft it.
Plame ommitted certain inconvenient facts and put an emphasis on others. So…
Sen. Bond has issued a statement standing by the parts of the report that Plame Wilson disputes:
We have checked the transcript of the comments made to the Committee by the former reports officer and I stand by the Committee’s description of his comments. If the reports officer would like to clarify or change his remarks, I’m certain that the Committee would welcome his testimony.
We have also checked the memorandum written by Ms. Wilson suggesting her husband to look into the Niger reporting. I also stand by the Committee’s finding that this memorandum indicates Ms. Wilson did suggest her husband for a Niger inquiry….I suggest that the House Government Reform Committee request and examine this memorandum themselves. I am confident that they will come to the same conclusion as our bipartisan membership did.
Plame is just trying to muddy the water and discredit the findings of the Senate Intelligence Committee Report. It’s disgusting.
If Bond’s characterization of the evidence is correct, she may actually have lied. Lying under oath before Congress constitutes perjury and a violation of the False Statements Act — the same crimes that accounted for three of the four charges that Scooter Libby was recently convicted of. Wouldn’t it be ironic if Valerie Plame Wilson were to share Libby’s fate?
bwahahahaha!
Fitzgerald and Nifong should be sharing a jail cell, in my opinion. It’s outrageous. And what’s more outrageous is all the people who are allowing this to happen.
March 20th, 2007 at 4:30 pm
Just three more questions. Do you hold this covert status at the time of the leak — did you — the covert status at the time of the leak?
MS. PLAME WILSON: Yes, I did, Congressman. Yes.
REP. CUMMINGS: Number two, the Identities Protection Act refers to travel outside the United States within the last five years. Let me ask you this question — again, we don’t want classified information, dates, locations or any other details — during the past five years, Ms. Plame, from today, did you conduct secret missions overseas?
MS. PLAME WILSON: Yes, I did, Congressman.
REP. CUMMINGS: Finally, so as to be clear for the record, you were a covert CIA employee and within the past five years from today you went on secret missions outside the United States , is that correct?
MS. PLAME WILSON: That is correct, Congressman.
March 20th, 2007 at 4:48 pm
**** your questions. Plame was not covert at the time of the leak; she’d been on a desk at Langley for the last 10 years.
The Washington Post:
So how then could he ‘blow’ her identity? You haven’t read the numerous posts and articles I cited, which makes me believe you’re just an annoying troll….The most notable is Victoria Tonsing:
Tonsing, in fact, was the Senate negotiator for the “Identities Protection Act of 1982″, and helped Congress craft it. In the Wall Street Journal, she said “I also know that covert officers are not assigned to Langley,” as Valerie Plame was at the time this all occurred.
She should know, she helped craft it.
Plame ommitted certain inconvenient facts and put an emphasis on others. So…
bwahahahaha!
March 22nd, 2007 at 6:44 pm
She put on quite the show huh? And it bothers me that so many of the MALE bloggers took note of her appearance more than her lies. Stupid men.(lol)
She’ll end up making a lot of money out of this. And in the far off future the History Channel will have documentaries about this…was she or wasn’t she a covert????
BWAHAHA.
March 23rd, 2007 at 3:46 am
Yeah Raven, I was appalled to find out that Rush Limbaugh said if she wasn’t married, in spite of her politics, he’d be interested in her.
March 23rd, 2007 at 8:38 am
GAG ME. LOL…this is what I was referring to.
What was he thinking? I just don’t care for him anyway and now I have more reason.
September 22nd, 2007 at 12:22 am
Thank you for this information. I had heard the Plame allegation against Rove, the white house, ect I just didn’t know all the facts. Funny you don’t see this on mainstream media huh? They would then have to admit they were wrong.
_thanks again
Tim