Powerline’s Indictment Analysis: Up = Down
By on Oct 29th, 2005 at 11:09 am
Powerline’s Indictment Analysis: Up = Down
More crackerjack analysis from our friend John Hinderaker on the right-wing blog Powerline:
Fitzgerald appears to have concluded that Plame was not, in fact, a covert agent…
Mr. Hinderaker has clearly been watching Fox News. But he hasn’t read Libby’s indictment very carefully. From page 3 of the indictment:
At all relevant times from January 1, 2002 through July 2003, Valerie Wilson was employed by the CIA, and her employment status was classified. Prior to July 14, 2003, Valerie Wilson’s affiliation with the CIA was not common knowledge outside the intelligence community.
Then again, everyone is entitled to an occasional mistake.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Maddow
McCain
Media
Military
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Public Plan
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Steve King
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Technology
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Ohhhhh. That Hinderaker makes me so mad.
October 29th, 2005 at 11:12 amSigh…. and the carefully coiffed talking head of Fox will repeat this false claim over and over again, so that 50% of the population will believe it to be true.
October 29th, 2005 at 11:16 amThey are masters of shell games.
They are making a distinction between “classified” and “covert” that they somehow think makes a difference. Remember that their main audience is the kool-aid crowd that still believes the Iraq War is about 9/11. No amount of truth will work with them.
October 29th, 2005 at 11:22 amCOVERT…CLASSIFIED… explain the difference – anyone?
“…It was known that a CIA officer’s identity was blown, it was known that there was a leak…
October 29th, 2005 at 11:26 am…And given that national security was at stake, it was especially important that we find out accurate facts…
…I can say that for the people who work at the CIA and work at other places, they have to expect that when they do their jobs that classified information will be protected…” -Fitzgerald 10/28/05
Visit the Rove/PlameGate Resource Center for all of your CIA leak scandal needs. From the original Wilson op-ed and the Novak column to the Libby indictment text and Fitzgerald transcript, it’s all there:
- How it all started
October 29th, 2005 at 11:31 am- Latest news and articles
- Key White House briefings
- Scandal timelines
- Key statutes and laws
- Other essential resources
A prime example of what it is to be “stuck on stupid”.
October 29th, 2005 at 11:36 amSunday morning, are we going to be treated to Falwell, Dobson, Robertson, Bauer and the rest of them pontificating on how Libby’s indictment does not reflect that he committed a crime, and that his morals are not in question, and that God is pleased with the behavior of his favorite political party.
October 29th, 2005 at 11:42 amI can hardly wait for them to talk about morality.
The biggest thing that the wingnuts fail to see is that the CIA asked the Justice Dept. to investiage this. They are spinning themselves into the ground. Also, hasn’t her collegue, Larry Johnson said that she was a NOC?
October 29th, 2005 at 11:48 amWe are seeing the ‘downward sprial’ of spin, by the right. They are still hoping to show only the ‘oneway’ picture to the sheep in America. It’s over folks, the pandora’s box is now wide open and can’t be closed until it is empty. The MSM is being expoised for the ‘filtered’ news. We all have waited for this for a long time. Join me in having a very nice day, to bad the days ahead will be bad for all the crooks. Sleeping pills,stress,phone calls, panic,judgments, CYA,fear of the ‘unknown’.
October 29th, 2005 at 11:49 amWhy did TP leave off the rest of powerline’s statement? There is no period after “covert agent”.
“Indeed, Fitzgerald appears to have concluded that Plame was not, in fact, a covert agent, since there is no count in the indictment alleging violation of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act.”
I guess everyone is entitled to an occasional mistake, but this is not a mistake. Just another lie by omission from TP.
October 29th, 2005 at 11:50 amMarie, how right you are. They don’t CARE that they are being dishonest. They want to ge their side out regardless of fact. That way the MSM will not point out the dishonesty in fear of being labeled “biased”. So the Russerts and the Mathews of the world will continue to reports “both sides of the story” all the while they will fail to inform the viewers that only one side is telling the whole truth.
October 29th, 2005 at 11:55 amPowerline is making an argument based on implication. There are many reasons that you wouldn’t prosecute under the IIPA other than Plame not being covert.
The larger point is that this argument by implication is completely unnecssary because Fitzgerald tackles the issue directly.
If I really wanted to distort the facts I wouldn’t have linked to Powerline’s post. Which is, of course, what they do when they respond to our criticism.
October 29th, 2005 at 11:55 amThere are some people who have gotten the memo (Libby did it now let’s move on) and there are others (e.g. Hinderacker, Sean Hannity) who haven’t checked their inboxes and are still using the old talking points.
October 29th, 2005 at 12:00 pmHow many degrees of separation????
MSM is helping push Libby away from Bush by playing down his role. News junkies may not get this, but for casual news consumers across America it
Almost no reports mention Libby’s title as ‘assistant to the president’ or even ‘national security adviser’ to Cheney.
“Libby held three titles: chief of staff and national security adviser to the vice president and assistant to President George W. Bush — a sign of his broad influence.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051028/pl_nm/bush_leak_libby_newsmaker_dc
http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=109719
Also, MSM likes to say he’s a ‘former’ aide. Again, a small but helpful way to separate him from Bush/Cheney.
October 29th, 2005 at 12:03 pm#10. Do we have to spell out EVERYTHING for you idiots?
They werent able to PROVE the leak violation b/c of Libby’s obstruction of justice. Just because they cant prove the leak and therefore cant bring an indictment on the leak itself, DOESNT MEAN THAT PLAME WAS NOT A COVERT AGENT.
Show me where in the indictment or where in Fitzgerald’s new conference does he say that Plame was NOT covert.
WHAT?!?! YOU CANT?!?! wow. how odd. especially given the topic of this very post. Pg 3 of the indictment of I. Lewis Libby:
“”"At all relevant times from January 1, 2002 through July 2003, Valerie Wilson was employed by the CIA, and her employment status was classified. Prior to July 14, 2003, Valerie Wilson’s affiliation with the CIA was not common knowledge outside the intelligence community.”"”
here let me help you some more:
“her employment status was classified”
“her employment status was classified”
“her employment status was classified”
“her employment status was classified”
idiot.
October 29th, 2005 at 12:05 pmseriously – is there a difference, what are the specifics of “covert” and “classified” – anyone?
October 29th, 2005 at 12:09 pmSo “covert agent” refers to the definition as spelled out in the IIPA (Intelligence Identities Protection Act). If Plame did not leave the country within the five years before the outing, she was not “covert” by that statue (as I recall). However, by the standards of the English language, Plame was covert.
Hinderacker is not so much wrong as missing the point, which is the point of his line of spin. Plame’s affiliation with the CIA was classified info and there are other laws against KNOWINGLY releasing classified info (the Espionage Act, I think).
Hinderacker is trying to move the goalposts by ignoring laws other than the IIPA.
Fact is, in English, Libby outed a spy. And yeah, it’s illegal, and if Fitzgerald can prove that Libby knew what he was doing (and he may yet) then he will do so.
Just read his press conference. It is in clear English.
BTW, I do think that Think Progress is missing the point in this particular post about Hinderacker.
October 29th, 2005 at 12:28 pmre: covert vs. classified. the june 10, 2003 memo clears things up:
Plame’s Identity Marked As Secret
WaPo 7/21/05
The paragraph identifying her as the wife of former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV was clearly marked to show that it contained classified material at the “secret” level, two sources said. The CIA classifies as “secret” the names of officers whose identities are covert, according to former senior agency officials.
Anyone reading that paragraph should have been aware that it contained secret information, though that designation was not specifically attached to Plame’s name and did not describe her status as covert, the sources said.
###
of course the 2nd graph leaves a LITTLE wiggle room for some RWNs who wont take no for an answer. but why else would that paragraph that contains sensitive info abt a CIA Agent involved in WMDs be marked as SECRET, OTHER than the fact that it names a covert agent? what else is in that paragraph? i dont think we know. but nevertheless, common sense dictates that the SECRET in the Secret Paragraph WAS PLAME.
So we have an extremely solid paper trail indicating that she was a COVERT AGENT. And, theres, of course, the little fact of the matter that NO RWN has shown one smidgeon of evidence that she WASNT a covert agent. If they had ANY evidence at all, we wouldve seen it by now, so I think even they know their case is a loss except for fringe idiots like #10.
October 29th, 2005 at 12:38 pm“Why did TP leave off the rest of powerline’s statement? There is no period after [']covert agent['].
I guess everyone is entitled to an occasional mistake, but this is not a mistake. Just another lie by omission from TP.”
Comment by D.V.D.A. — October 29, 2005 @ 11:50 am
The elipsis (. . . ) is supposed to inform the reader that more information exists, but isn’t being quoted – a long way from being a “lie by omission”. Are you acquanted with common grammar and usage? Apparently not.
October 29th, 2005 at 12:47 pmThat would be “acquainted” must learn to spell-check, sorry.
October 29th, 2005 at 12:48 pmthanks to all for your helpful info…just so you all know – i am on your side!
October 29th, 2005 at 12:55 pmi fully understand the charges and ramifications involved, but, being as i am one lone progressive out of at least 40 close relatives of the wing-nut variety, i was hoping for a 2nd-5th grade level explanation in case the argument came up… thanksgiving is coming! i’m hoping there will be even more fuel on the fire by then!
Why did TP leave off the rest of powerline’s statement?
Because the rest of the statement doesn’t make one iota of difference as to the truth of Hinderasshole’s statement. He was wrong about what Fitz’s investigation found regarding Plame-Wilson’s covert status no matter what his reasoning.
But I think Judd should have included the full quote because what it does show is how HinderacKKKer uses facts to lie to his readers. Fitz didn’t indict on the outing, that is a fact. Does that mean Plame-Wilson was not covert? No. But PL readers will cling to the one fact as validation for the rest of the BS because they are unable to think logically or for themselves.
The question is whether Hinderhack’s cognitive dissonance is so great that he can’t smell his own BS? Are his mental gymnastics as convincing to himself as they are to his readers? Is his devotion so great that he really can’t see how illogical his reasoning is? Because if that is the case, then he isn’t so much a liar as he is brainwashed. So, is he in need of a truth serum, or deprogramming? I honestly don’t know.
For the PL readers: What Fitz not indicting on the outing means is that Libby was successful in obstructing justice, which is what Libby WAS charged for. That is why Fitz says it is necessary that the investigation continue: to get to the bottom of the outing. We will no doubt eventually get indictments on the outing, provided the obstruction does not continue.
October 29th, 2005 at 1:14 pmneat little logical fallacy you built, mrboma– if they don’t get indicted for outing a covert, then it must be due to continued obstruction. *LAUGH*
October 29th, 2005 at 1:21 pmstuck on stupid: story of AssRocket’s life.
Amazaing how these guys get more air time than Atrios, Kos, Digby, et al. Liberal Media, harumph!
October 29th, 2005 at 1:36 pm“Amazaing how these guys get more air time than Atrios, Kos, Digby, et al…”
Who?? :)
October 29th, 2005 at 2:08 pm#7 – “I can hardly wait for them to talk about morality.
Comment by Marie — October 29, 2005 @ 11:42 am”
***** Stay tuned, Marie, you might learn something – I think to counter-balance all the right wing pundits, you guys should demand they give equal time to these paragons of honesty and virtue – Mumia Abu, the Big Dog, Barney Frank, – maybe one them can explain in very simple terms the meaning of covert as written in the 1982 legislation.
“….while they will fail to inform the viewers that only one side is telling the whole truth.
October 29th, 2005 at 2:14 pmComment by deegahl — October 29, 2005 @ 11:55 am”
Which side would that be??? heh-heh!! What (key word) “IS” the difference between “black and white”? “Hot and warm”?
“Covert and classified”?
#10 Actually, Hindrocket has the big non sequitur mojo going here.
You can’t possibly conclude that she wasn’t covert, just because there were no indictments for outing a covert agent. That’s just balls-out, Nimitz-class mendacity. Hinderaker’s an attorney, so he knows better…and he knows what he’s saying is baloney.
Plame’s covert status is only one issue that has to be established in order to support an indictment, as Fitzgerald repeatedly pointed out. Right now, he’s working on awareness, intent and possible conspiracy.
And, as he said, this investigation isn’t over. He has all the timelines and testimony he needs. Now all he needs is a rat…and you can already hear them skittering behind the walls.
October 29th, 2005 at 2:30 pm#19,
October 29th, 2005 at 3:09 pmThe ellipsis were not there this morning when I posted. Judd did the right thing by making the correction.
The real point here is it doesn’t matter how much of Powerline’s post you read. Hindracker is still completely wrong.
October 29th, 2005 at 4:01 pm#10 DVDA
October 29th, 2005 at 5:11 pmDid you sleep through high school English class? What do you think an ellipsis is? Look it up.
Funny thing about reference books, dictionaries, encyclopedias, etc., on the way to looking something up, you actually may learn about something else too!
#19, Sorry, I guess I made a similar reply to #10 as you.
October 29th, 2005 at 5:12 pmWhy is it that ALL the right wing, morally superior, Judeo-Christian blog sites have ads for shirt with big-titted tramps on them. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t mind, but it does make me wonder. Up IS Down!
October 29th, 2005 at 5:25 pmUgh, to prove my point that the carefully coiffed talking heads of Fox who lie with a straight face, and sneer at Democrats and the facts, are powerful propagandists: I just saw a man-on-the-street interview about the Libby affair. One guy said it rates #3 on a scale of 10 and when asked why, he said because people dying in Iraq are more important. He needs a slap upside the head — what the hell does he think the Libby lies were about?!!
October 29th, 2005 at 5:29 pmMarie
If we slapped upset the head every idiot that watches or appears on FAUX news are palms would indeed be raw.
Though, not hairy, like our man loofah Bill. He gots the hairy palms. The nuns tried to warn him at his catholic school, but the falafel man wouldn’t listen.
October 29th, 2005 at 5:50 pmYou would think with the frequency that Reichwingers lie, that they’d get better at it – they only get sloppier.
“Last winter, Plame drafted an op-ed article to explain her role in her husband’s Niger trip, but the agency would not permit her to submit it for publication.
The CIA responded to Plame by telling her “publication of your article has the potential to affect your ability to perform your official duties and the agency’s ability to perform its mission.”"
Now if only her ‘employment’ was classified, why would the CIA consider her discussions to be potentially damaging to the ability of the CIA to perform it’s job? Any halfwitted moron can see from the response what this means – but then again, if the republicans had 1/2 the wit of the average democrat – they wouldn’t be a republican! Republicans are such stupid jackass loser liars! What a sack of traitors and terrorists they ALL are!
October 29th, 2005 at 5:53 pm#31, #32 Marie
Boy, you’re quick to jump down his throat, Marie, but did you read to #29 before posting? There was only a period there originally. You go off on a tirade about “looking something up,” but you only had to read the same page you were on, just a little above the “Leave a comment” section. He even gives Judd credit for changing the period to an ellipsis. Did you perhaps stop reading there, thinking that in the five hours since #10 was posted no one else had been so smart as you to see there was an ellipsis?
Of course, in #19 dano347 already took D.V.D.A. to task for the same thing mistakenly, going to far as to mock D.V.D.A.’s basic knowledge of grammar and usage, meanwhile I count 2 spelling errors and at least two grammatical errors in dano347’s paragraph. That’s why I don’t mock people’s grammar and spelling – as perfect as I am, I still make the occasional mistake ;)
October 29th, 2005 at 5:54 pmDVDA and Powerline are both wrong. They all jumped to a conclusion, because that’s not what fitzgerald said. If it was proven that Plame was no covert – he would have said so – that’s the way fitzgerald tends to operate.
Not to mention the fact that a fellow retired CIA agent (Johnson – A LIFELONG REPUBLICAN), already reminded everyone that Plame did travel (work) abroad for her cover company in the last 5 years. You don’t have a ‘cover company’ to work for abroad unless you are a covert agent. That’s just a basic fact.
So not only was DVDA WRONG, but so was the jackass, illogical and irrational conclusion of assrocket. Then again he’s wrong on virtually everything he posts, so why not this one as well.
October 29th, 2005 at 6:02 pmRotgut,
Accidentally misusing grammar is entirely different than being so ignorant of grammar that you accuse a site of bias based on that ignorance. Or is that basic premise beyond your comprehension ability.
October 29th, 2005 at 6:04 pmYou clearly misunderstand the course of events here. There was a period there this morning, according to D.V.D.A. I won’t stoop to your level, however, and accuse you of being *unable* to understand it.
October 29th, 2005 at 6:07 pm#33-A. Patriot wrote: “Why is it that ALL the right wing, morally superior, Judeo-Christian blog sites have ads for shirt with big-titted tramps on them.”
For every one conservative site that you can point out that has them, I’ll be I can find two that do not. Not “ALL” do, without or without capital letters.
October 29th, 2005 at 6:12 pmI’ll “bet” I can find… (
October 29th, 2005 at 6:13 pmIt has taken me until age 72 to finally realize that 99 percent of politicians on both sides of the aisle are running nose to nose with the other “worlds oldest profession”. Money is their God and for their God they will do anything.
October 29th, 2005 at 6:14 pmThree periods and the ellipsis can drive query writers insane. This is because Windows can be set up to either recognize three periods in a row as either an ellipsis or three periods when documents are created. In a client/server environment, this creates havoc. Back before I retired, I’ve had countless colleagues come to me with problems because of this. The same applies to the poetic use of dieresis.
October 29th, 2005 at 6:50 pmWhew! I set off a firestorm! Sorry! I didn’t look at the clock.
October 29th, 2005 at 7:12 pmIn my own defense, however, defenders of the Right think they are so morally superior, they make me angry.
Marie:
If you refer to me at a “defender of the Right,” and you presume to know what I think, you are wrong. I do not consider myself morally superior to you or anyone else. In fact, most of my ilk that I know are quite humble, which is a big part of Christianity. However, we are called to uphold morality (which cannot be defined as “individual choice”) and speak out against we think are wrong. Moral relativists are often offended when a “right wing wacko” speaks an opinion contrary to their worldview. They think they’re being preached to by someone who thinks himself to be morally superior. But that’s just their perception, it’s not necessarily true, though I do not purport to speak for all those holding Judeo/Christian beliefs.
In this light, and in an attempt to be consistent with what I just wrote, let me say that IF Mr. Libby is guilty (but I will not presume him to be so without due process), he was wrong to lie and obstruct justice.
I wish you all a pleasant evening. I have plans and will now check out.
October 29th, 2005 at 7:28 pmPerhaps Hinderaker believes that Plame could not be “covert” under the IIPA because she did not “work outside the country” within the 5 years preceding 14Jul03 (after 15Jul98). No facts in evidence to support this negative finding. Actually, a single foreign trip on official business during this period would qualify according to teh precise wording of the Act. How can we prove she never went abroad?
Maybe Hinderaker knows for certain that Plame never left the country after July 1998 (this would exempt her from the plain language of IIPA as posed on his site even if her identity were also classified). Somehow I doubt it.
So Hinderaker appears to be using a hair-splitting argument with an unsupported assumption to butress his assertion of “you cannot convict, she was not covert.” This smells like “it depends on what is is” or perhaps more like “the income tax is voluntary because the 15th Amendment was never properly ratified.”
October 29th, 2005 at 8:43 pm“Moral relativists are often offended when a “right wing wacko†speaks an opinion contrary to their worldview.”
I admit to being a moral relativist. But I’m not a hypocritical moral relativist as those who worship Bush-Christianism.
October 30th, 2005 at 12:10 am#6 “A prime example of what it is to be “stuck on stupidâ€.
Enough said.
#42 Charles Howard, I agree.
October 30th, 2005 at 12:11 amIt’s not so much that religious people are hypocrites, it’s more that there are hypocrites who claim they are religious. Big difference. I do not support torture or the death penalty.
October 30th, 2005 at 12:10 pm[...] In an earlier post we criticized Powerline’s John Hinderacker for arguing that Fitzgerald “appears to have concluded that Plame was not, in fact, a covert agent.†We noted that the indictment concludes “her employment status was classified,†which suggests she was a covert agent. [...]
October 30th, 2005 at 5:38 pmThe 2003 Bush State of the Union: President Lies About Iraq Nuclear Capability
In his January 2003 State Of The Union, President Bush made his case for war in Iraq. He included this now-infamous 16-word deception about Iraq’s nuclear capability: “The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.”2
But the White House had known for nearly a year that this claim was false. In February 2002, the CIA sent former Ambassador Joseph Wilson to Niger to investigate the unsubstantiated claim that Saddam Hussein tried to buy uranium from Niger for use in nuclear weapons.3
Wilson had discovered that the claims were bogus and documents used to support the claims had been forgeries. He reported this to the CIA, and the CIA told the White House.3
Why Did The President Ignore Wilson’s Findings And Lie? It’s About Iraq
Why did President Bush use the discredited nuclear claims in his January 2003 State of the Union Address to make the case that Iraq was a nuclear threat? They wanted to invade Iraq.
A CBS News polling report in late 2002 made clear, “there is no consensus on adopting a pre-emptive strike policy in general—except where a nuclear attack against the United States is contemplated…”4
Only well after the war had begun would the Washington Post report on “a pattern in which President Bush, Vice President Cheney and their subordinates…made allegations depicting Iraq’s nuclear weapons program as more active, more certain and more imminent in its threat than the data they had would support. On occasion administration advocates withheld evidence that did not conform to their views.”5
Wilson Strikes Back—Exposes Bush’s Lie In Lead-Up To War
Six months after the President’s 2003 State of the Union Address, as Bush’s WMD and nuclear claims began to unravel, Wilson went public and exposed the Bush Administration’s false nuclear claims in a New York Times op-ed.6
The full July 6, 2003 op-ed, “What I Didn’t Find In Africa,” can be read here: http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1070
The White House saw Wilson as a major threat. According to the Los Angeles Times, “Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff was so angry about the public statements of former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, a Bush administration critic married to an undercover CIA officer, that he monitored all of Wilson’s television appearances and urged the White House to mount an aggressive public campaign against him, former aides say.”7
White House Retaliates—Outs Valerie Plame Wilson As CIA Agent
The week after Wilson’s op-ed in the New York Times, “two senior administration officials” were cited by conservative columnist Robert Novak in his column outing CIA agent Valerie Plame Wilson.8
The White House Iraq Group (WHIG), originally formed to sell the war to the public, “morphed into a virtual hit squad that took aim at critics who questioned its claims.”9 WHIG was run out of Vice President Cheney’s office, and included Cheney’s Chief of Staff “Scooter” Libby, top Bush strategist Karl Rove, and other top Bush administration officials.
Not only did this leak end Valerie Plame Wilson’s 20-year career as a CIA covert agent, but it also exposed a longstanding CIA front company, Brewster Jennings & Associates, where Plame worked and put at risk many of the undercover agents who had worked with Wilson in the past.10
Today’s Indictment—White House Official Obstructed Investigation Into The Lie
Today’s indictment says Libby illegally obstructed the investigation into the White House outing of an undercover CIA agent, Valerie Plame Wilson. He also was charged with perjury and making false statements to FBI agents. The ongoing investigation of Karl Rove revolves around the same issues, among possible others.
October 30th, 2005 at 8:33 pmFormer President George H. W. Bush was right in 1999 when he said, “I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious, of traitors.”11
Former Republican National Committee Chair Ed Gillespie was right when he said, “I think if the allegation is true, to reveal the identity of an undercover CIA operative—it’s abhorrent, and it should be a crime, and it is a crime.”12
The American people must know this important truth: Today’s indictment is about a cover-up of the lies that led our nation to war in Iraq.
[...] To this day, Rove has maintained his security clearance in spite of evidence that he mishandled classified information regarding Valerie Wilson’s position at the CIA. Rove was named as in the indictment of Scooter Libby as “Official A.†[...]
April 19th, 2006 at 11:11 amPay Day Loans
If a family member are small on dollar just effortlessly sign up for an online payday advance that is incomparable, easy, and speedy today!
March 17th, 2008 at 11:16 pmline of credit definition
Interestingly, this was on CNN last week.
March 19th, 2008 at 6:24 amMy Cracks and Serials
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 21st, 2008 at 12:19 pmEasy Scooter Travel
and rest information about travel
March 30th, 2008 at 5:47 amRalph
On guard, you rascal!
April 8th, 2008 at 8:08 am