Indictment Dissected: A Campaign Against Wilson
Indictment Dissected: A Campaign Against Wilson
[This is the third part of a Think Progress series breaking down the significance of the Libby indictment.]
At various points in the indictments, evidence is put forth to suggest that a broad, collaborative effort was undertaken in the Bush administration to smear Joe Wilson.
1. Libby “participated in discussions in the Office of the Vice President concerning how to respond†to Walter Pincus’s story in the Washington Post suggesting that the Bush administration was aware of bad intelligence on uranium prior to the war (see #8).
2. Libby had “a conversation†with Official A [Rove] in which the identity of Wilson’s wife was discussed (see #21).
3. Libby had discussions aboard Air Force 2 with officials in the Vice President’s office regarding how best to respond “to certain pending media inquiries, including questions from Time reporter Matthew Cooper,†about Wilson’s claims (see #22).
4. After Libby asked the Under Secretary of State to investigate Wilson’s trip, the State Department official told Libby that his wife worked at the CIA (see #4 and 6).
5. Libby had lunch with White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer in which they discussed the fact that Wilson’s wife worked at the CIA (see #16) [comment: Ari seems to have flipped]
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
The White House will unravel through this trial. Mark my words
October 30th, 2005 at 12:41 amVisit 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
- Latest news and articles
- Key White House briefings
- Scandal timelines
- Key statutes and laws
- Other essential resources
Check out the Rove/PlameGate Resource Center.
October 30th, 2005 at 12:47 amI’d like to comment on the “why didn’t Fitz indict Libby for the Original Crime of disclosing information?” refrain.
Fitzgerald discussed this directly during the press conference, remember? He said that the statute as written is quite broad, and that it has NEVER been prosecuted, and that applying it successfully (thus becoming part of precedent) could have unforseen ramifications regarding personal freedoms in the future. I suppose also there might be constitutional difficulties; If Libby were indicted under this law, I could imagine a very long and tortuous trial followed by appeals and more trials, finally ending up in the Supreme Court five years later, with a chance of the law being struck down.
Rather than opening this legal can-of-worms, Fitzgerald took a more pragmatic, time-tested and well-accepted approach by indicting for the coverup instead. This is NOT – as the WH spin would have us believe – a “technicality”. Instead it directly confronts the provable and concrete evidence available. I’m sure there’s a legal term for this distinction between concrete and abstract, where it’s so much easier to pursue the provable and concrete facts of what-he-said and when-he-said-it than the more abstract “a bad thing was done”. Look at the RICO Act (do I have my term right?), where mobsters are brought down not for their “real” but harder-to-prove crimes, but for tax evasion. I don’t hear the “technicalities” argument – at least from the MSM – on those trials.
October 30th, 2005 at 6:19 amWhat was the purpose of outting Wilson’s Wife?
October 30th, 2005 at 6:41 amUnrelated to my previous comment, thus a seperate post:
I sometimes wonder if Joe Wilson was the real target in the Valarie Plame outing. What if Plame herself was the primary target, and Wilson a convenient by-product or perhaps catalyst for the outing? In other words, instead of using Plame to get at Wilson, what if they used Wilson to get at Plame?
I’ve seen this suggested briefly somewhere before (dang – I can’t remember which blog), but I haven’t noticed any follow-up. Perhaps it’s been blogged into the ground, but if there’s any intelligent information on this I’d appreciate the reference.
Here’s the idea:
Consider what Valarie Plame/Wilson did for the CIA: her cover was as a consultant to an “energy company”, with international contacts. According to USA Today (Oct 1, 2002): “Plame was assigned to the CIA’s Non-Proliferation Center, an organization of analysts, technical experts and former field operatives who work on detecting and, if possible, preventing foreign proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.”
She was right in the middle of the Weapons of Mass Destruction issue, and her work probably intersected the whole Cheney/Libby/??? conspiracy in some small or great way. (Note that her association with an *energy* company implies that her focus would have been on *nuclear* WMDs, not biological or chemical.)
What if Plame’s work had direct implications on Cheney’s War on Truth, or the ‘Saddam has nuclear capability’ claim? There are many others more qualified than I am to make guesses on this, but I’ll float some ideas: she might have had a role within the CIA for telling Cheney there was no evidence of WMDs – particularly nuclear – in Iraq. Or her operation might have been pursuing evidence that – if allowed to continue – would have led back to the Iraq Group or Cheney himself (say for example the Italian uranium documents forgery).
If Plame’s work could have challenged the veracity to the lead-up to the war, she would have been a threat to those who had lied to make that war happen.
Outing Plame didn’t simply hurt her status as an agent, it clobbered her work and her operation. Perhaps that was the real goal. Joe Wilson would have been a convenient way to get Plame off the trail, yet do it in a very indirect way without Cheney/Libby et al having to tell Tenent what to do (”plausible deniability”). Embarrassing Wilson was a bonus – but not the primary goal.
It’s a long shot and, considering that secrecy of the players, not likely to be proven one way or another. But it’ll be interesting to hear what Libby says at his trial.
October 30th, 2005 at 7:16 amDid some reading last night as there was no shortage of opinions on what Fitz was up to. Seems to me that it can be boiled down to two schools of thought. There’s this: Based on what’s transpired (years long investigation, Libby indictments) Fitz is likely finished with indictments and will now concentrate on the case against Libby. One very interesting perspective was that of AirAmerica co-founder Sheldon Drobny. He was not optimistic and feels that based on what we already know he should have been able to nail someone on the original crimes. He actually calls into question just how nonpartisan Fitzgerald truly is.
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1029-26.htm
The second theory is that Fitz is a mastermind and is using a tactic he applied when prosecuting mob kingpins, which is a series of indictments that ultimately lead to the big fish. Showing enough of his cards to spook the defendant into spilling the beans and copping a plea for a lesser charge.
Obviously we all hope that its the latter and that Fitzgerald does exactly what was mandated when Comey assigned him to the case, which includes pursuing any crime uncovered while investigating the original crime of outing Plame. In my humble opinion, I see Patrick Fitzgerald as a smart, tough and honest American. If those characteristics apply, I don’t see how he avoids exacting as much justice as possible on the Bush cabal. Honest people know that they took us to war based on bogus/cherry-picked/stovepiped intelligence and that they were willing to do anything, crush anyone that stood in the way. If this guy takes a step back and looks at the facts in context, I’m confident that he recognizes what’s at stake and that he has the balls to do the right thing.
October 30th, 2005 at 7:56 amDid some reading last night as there was no shortage of opinions on what Fitz was up to. Seems to me that it can be boiled down to two schools of thought.
Maybe it’s both. He is a smart man. He is keeping his options open. I read him as an ambitious man. Depending on which way he jumps, he can go far, or farther.
October 30th, 2005 at 9:06 amI will say this. If I had to chosse between a Giuliani or a Fitz, I’d take a Fitz anytime.
October 30th, 2005 at 9:08 amCan anyone PLEASE answer the following question – Where did Ms Plame “Physically” work- at the CIA offices or at the offices of Brewster-Jennings?
October 30th, 2005 at 9:38 amThanks for any help regarding this question!
billjpa@aol.com
Isn’t it refreshing to finally have a man of integrity and sense of honor, a political nonpartisan, step up and make this administration accountable?
October 30th, 2005 at 9:40 ambill e #9. She physically worked at the CIA offices. Brewster-Jennings was the phony company set up as a cover for CIA agents including Ms. Plame. The company was first listed by Dunn and Bradstreet in 1994 and was phycically located at 101 Arch St. Boston, MA, as a “legal services office” with annual sales of $60,000, one employee, and a legal services officer.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but this outing by of Plume by Libby has far reaching implications not delt with by the media or the Republican rightwing. Overlooked by them and the press in all this was that when Robert Novak again exposed Plame on CNN and stated on national television that he thought there as no such comany as Brewster and Jennings, agents all over the world who were using that company as cover were placed in harms way. We will probably never know the true extent the damage. Nor will be ever know how many of Plames double-agents around the world that worked for us have been eliminated. One of her main jobs, you know, was recuit other agents.
I mean, instead of the likes of Limbaugh and Sean Hannity attacking Fitzgerald and his “agenda” or “motives” wouldn’t you think these arm-chair PATRIOTS would be appalled? Help me out here, aphrodite and Northeast Dilemma; I need help defending the Republican party and its administration.
October 30th, 2005 at 10:09 amWhat I want to know is, “Where is the outrage!? Why haven’t hearings been scheduled!?” For the first time in 130 years, an advisor to the President has been indicted. There are clear indications that unacceptable practices were in place in this administration, yet many act as if this is the end of the matter.
This cannot stand. Conduct like this cannot go unchecked! I really don’t understand it at all.
October 30th, 2005 at 10:56 amCollaborating to refute the lies of Joe Wilson is not in any way criminal or unethical.
#13,”For the first time in 130 years, an advisor to the President has been indicted.”
False. In addition to his own crimes, Clinton had two cabinet officials indicted.
October 30th, 2005 at 11:12 amCollaborating to refute the lies of Joe Wilson is not in any way criminal or unethical.
Comment by wwallace
What lies, you mewling synchophant?
October 30th, 2005 at 12:07 pmOkay, forget the Intelligence Identities Act if that is too hard to prove.
The Espionage Act. That is the one that someone violated. That is the one they use on spies when they divulge classified information to unauthorized sources.
When you get a security clearance, they brief you and you sign a statement that you understand that you will be subject to this, that it constitutes treason, and that you can be convicted of a felony that carries a sentence of life without parole.
Violation of the Espionage Act is a serious offense, and there is no question that someone violated it. D’ya think Fitz misses that? I don’t.
October 30th, 2005 at 12:21 pm#14: The lies of Joe Wilson are well documented. No need to re-invent the wheel here.
October 30th, 2005 at 1:41 pm#16 wwallace
It seems you didn’t learn a thing last night. Do you want me to cite that reference again? I am still waiting for your apology.
October 30th, 2005 at 1:51 pm#3 Stefan -
I hold to the second theory – that Fitzgerald is performing as previously (indict to make the indictee squeal names) – I hold to this theory because as Dr. Phil always says …the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior.
However many on both sides of the spectrum hold to theory 1 – that Fitzgerald is through and won’t do anymore cause down deep he’s just a good ole baseball metaphoring boy.
It makes for interesting reading to see how the “liberals” the “leftists” the “true conservatives” and the “neo-cons” are all part of a shifting of the sands
theory #1 – Avowed leftists – Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair
http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn10292005.html
theory #2 – “liberal” Frank Rich NYTimes`
October 30th, 2005 at 2:33 pmhttp://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/103005X.shtml
The only thing that I would accuse Wilson of not being accurate on is that he initially stated that the Veep’s office sent him on the mission to Niger and now he’s claiming that the CIA sent him. Truth is that the Veep’s office made the request to the CIA and they sent Wilson. Not that egregious and completely irrelevant to what transpired. He stood up for the truth and against a blatant lie told to the American people. That act defines patriotism.
October 30th, 2005 at 2:35 pm#19 Jay
October 30th, 2005 at 2:37 pmTHat is a splitting of hairs to the point that there are no hairs left
Cheney requested that the CIA do something and the CIA did it – I see no deception there -
Hey wwallace, #16. Glad to have someone here help me out with attacking Joe Wilson by pretending to have some baseless facts that Wilson is a liar. Boy, you sure have guts to show up here and echo the phony BS that the hatred-based media in the likes of Hannity and Limbaugh are using.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but even if by some yet to be uncovered facts proving that indeed Wilson lied, what has that got to do with Libby outing Ms. Plume as a CIA agent? I mean, I’m on your side here in wanting to present the truth, but I fail to see any connection in breaking the law, lieing to a grand jury, callously releasing top secret information you are sworn to keep, all in order to punish Mr. Wilson for geing disloyal.
Hey, pal, I got an idea. Why don’t you just “reinvent the wheel” (your words in #16) and enlighten us about a few of Wilson’s lies and why (even if true) that would justify releasing secret information just to get the media to try and discredit him.
You have to admit, wallace, that it sure was pretty funny watching old “Scooter” live up to his name and scoot his sorry ass right on out the back door of the White House, huh? Heh, heh!
October 30th, 2005 at 2:39 pmIf anything – one has to wonder at the apparent stupidity of Libby and Cheney
But then again – hubris makes men believe they are immune to normal cause and effects – hubris is the underminer of the very egos it inflates
A Shakespearean tragedy is unfolding before our eyes – the hubris of stupid men who should know better but could not help themselves look away from the riches and power beckoning to them behind the Hallibacon/Carlyle curtain
October 30th, 2005 at 2:48 pm“How fortunate for leaders that men do not think.”
Adolph Hitler
“Those that vote decide nothing. Those that Count the votes decide everything.”
Joseph Stalin
Hitler or Goebels also said something along the lines of: If you repeat lies often enough, the people will believe it.
Then along comes dumbya and repeats this.
Long come the reich-wing-moon bats here on this blog and they have fallen for the lies of the administration.
October 30th, 2005 at 3:55 pmJust for shitsandgiggles, wally, tell us what you think about “Operation Northwoods” and how it looks like it was dusted off for 9/11?
I thought so.
October 30th, 2005 at 3:56 pmVeteran journalist Robert Parry just penned an article in which he makes the following points:
1. Fitz’s press-conference and indictment indicate that he may not understand how national security classifications work.
“As an outsider to Washington, special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald appears to have misunderstood the finer points of how national security classifications work when a secret is as discrete – and sensitive – as the identity of an undercover CIA officer.â€
2. Because he does not understand, he may be over-looking an important clue* that indicates Plames’ outing was part of an organized WH conspiracy, and therefore may not be expanding his investigation in that direction. (*The clue being that it was highly irregular for Plames name to be discussed between WH officials.)
“In both the Libby indictment and a hour-long press conference on Oct. 28, Fitzgerald showed no indication he understood how extraordinary it was for White House officials to be bandying about the name of a covert CIA officer based on the flimsy rationale that she was married to an ex-diplomat who had been sent on a fact-finding trip to Niger.â€
“Fitzgerald, who is the U.S. Attorney in Chicago, appears to have bought into the notion that government officials had a right to discuss Plame’s covert status among themselves as long as they didn’t pass the secret on to journalists. (My question here is if that is technically illegal, or just extremely unusual. If illegal, then why not in the indictment unless Fitz doesn’t understand? -Glenn) Then Fitzgerald didn’t even seek punishment for that, limiting his criminal case to Libby’s lying about how and when he learned of Plame’s identity.â€
3. If Fitz does not plan to broaden his investigation significantly, then he has missed the boat, and the Bush administration is being let off the hook for the most part.
“Fitzgerald did leave open the possibility there might be more charges against other officials but said ***he had completed the “substantial bulk†of his investigation.*** He also ***discouraged speculation that major new revelations were ahead*** and even skirted questions about whether an underlying crime had occurred in leaking Plame’s identity.â€
“The larger conspiracy – to punish an Iraq War critic for telling the truth about false intelligence used to take the United States to war – will go unpunished and unexplained, at least for now. In street terms, it looks a lot like the White House got a walk.â€
I’m afraid additional WH officials are going to get away with this. Here is the whole article. I’d enjoy to hear any feedback as to what you guys make of it:
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2005/102905.html
October 30th, 2005 at 5:36 pmBush did not lie though, that’s a fact. Joe Wilson did lie, repeatedly, that is also a fact. I have no obligation to provide the same documentation 1000 times just because some slow-witted lefty asks for the same evidence 1000 times.
Those who are not completely brain-dead may start their journey towards the truth here: http://patterico.com/2005/10/29/3870/our-27-months-of-hell-brought-to-us-by-lyin-joe-wilson/
October 30th, 2005 at 6:01 pm#24: It’s no surprise really to see Democrats/liberals fondly quoting their heros Hitler and Stalin.
October 30th, 2005 at 6:02 pmRyan #23,
I remember the specific statements that Wilson made. He said exactly: “The Vice Presidents’s office sent him on a fact finding mission to Niger”. I have the articles in a box in my garage, trust me that’s what he said.
#27 wwallace,
Bush has lied about everything so I’m not sure what planet you’re living on. Let me give you a short list:
Mission Accomplished
You’re doing a heckuva job Brownie
I’ll be a uniter not a divider
I now have a mandate
I want to get to the bottom of this and if I find that someone in my administration was involved, they’ll be dealt with (hello Karl).
Social Security is on the brink of bankruptcy
We are against torture
Iraq was an imminent threat
And on and on and on…….
October 30th, 2005 at 6:33 pmJay,
“Mission Accomplished” – Bush didn’t say that, it was on a banner behind him. The mission of the vessel he was on was accomplished. The end of the bloody Hussein dictatorship was accomplished. Iraq now has a democratically ratified constitution and scheduled democratic elections in December.
“You’re doing a heckuva job Brownie” – opinion. Opinions cannot be lies. Brownie did a lot better job than the Democrat hacks in Louisiana, for sure.
“I’ll be a uniter not a divider” – True, he has made every effort to unite the country. He isn’t responsible for the actions of all you hate-filled leftists.
“I now have a mandate” – True, a win is a mandate. How much of a mandate is a matter of opinion, see above.
“I want to get to the bottom of this and if I find that someone in my administration was involved, they’ll be dealt with” (hello Karl) – He said “involved in wrongdoing.” You’re lying by omission.
“Social Security is on the brink of bankruptcy” – obviously true.
“We are against torture” – True. Lynndie England was prosecuted for her wrongdoing. Others have also been prosecuted. All harsh treatment opposed by terrorist-coddling liberals is not torture.
“Iraq was an imminent threat” – Iraq was considered a threat throughout the 1990s. That is a fact. Liberals only changed sides after Clinton, who signed the ‘Iraq Liberation Act’, left office. Bush did not say Iraq was an imminent threat. That’s a lie perpetuated by your fellow travelers on the Democrat/anti-victory side.
Thank you for demonstrating that you cannot come up with any lies told by President Bush. If you could have, you would have.
October 30th, 2005 at 5:45 pm#25, you sound like a lunatic conpiracy kook.
October 30th, 2005 at 5:48 pmJay, re #31 –
“Mission Accomplished†– Bush didn’t say that, it was on a banner behind him. The mission of the vessel he was on was accomplished. The end of the bloody Hussein dictatorship was accomplished. Iraq now has a democratically ratified constitution and scheduled democratic elections in December.
“You’re doing a heckuva job Brownie†– opinion. Opinions cannot be lies. Brownie did a lot better job than the Democrat hacks in Louisiana, for sure.
“I’ll be a uniter not a divider†– True, he has made every effort to unite the country. He isn’t responsible for the actions of all you hate-filled leftists.
“I now have a mandate†– True, a win is a mandate. How much of a mandate is a matter of opinion, see above.
“I want to get to the bottom of this and if I find that someone in my administration was involved, they’ll be dealt with†(hello Karl) – He said “involved in wrongdoing.†You’re lying by omission.
“Social Security is on the brink of bankruptcy†– obviously true.
“We are against torture†– True. Lynndie England was prosecuted for her wrongdoing. Others have also been prosecuted. All harsh treatment opposed by terrorist-coddling liberals is not torture.
“Iraq was an imminent threat†– Iraq was considered a threat throughout the 1990s. That is a fact. Liberals only changed sides after Clinton, who signed the ‘Iraq Liberation Act’, left office. Bush did not say Iraq was an imminent threat. That’s a lie perpetuated by your fellow travelers on the Democrat/anti-victory side.
Thank you for demonstrating that you cannot come up with any lies told by President Bush. If you could have, you would have.
October 30th, 2005 at 5:50 pmNor east dimentia or ahprodyie or wally, what ever personality he/she/it is using today is trying the typical repugnican tactic of taking the focus off of the issues.
They can’t stand it when they get their tit in the wringer. Repungicans want to blame the ringer, not the tit.
It will not change the fact that Dumbya, Rove, Libby and Cheeney (just to mention a few in the wh) LIED! And committed TREASON.
Dumbya’s ship has sailed, and it is now taking on water fast!
And still another quote:
“Dissent is the highest form of Patriotism.”
October 30th, 2005 at 7:17 pmThomas Jefferson
A “slow witted lefty” dares to challenge your inaccuracies, which you cannot substantiate, so you continue your irrelevant and moronic rant.
October 30th, 2005 at 7:19 pmAs was pointed out in Post #23, this lie about Wilson has been repeated so often — it is a redux of the old Al Gore internet lie that was also repeated so often that people believed it.
I think that is a tried and true method of Goebbels, the Nazi propagandist.
#33, when liberals refer to the Nazis, it is hardly with fondness — it is to indicate to the obstinate poster that he is endorsing Nazi tactics. That may be too nuanced for you.
October 30th, 2005 at 7:24 pmThey’re beat and they hate it.
We have the goods on the whole bunch, and they’re headed out of the WH.
Merry Fitzmas!
October 30th, 2005 at 7:25 pm“Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are H. L. Hunt (you possibly know his background), a few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid. ”
D. Eisenhower
October 30th, 2005 at 7:28 pmDumbya lies, people die. 2K why?
October 30th, 2005 at 7:38 pm#39, I never gave Eisenhower enough credit. I felt he was a fill-the-seat, former war-hero president. But before he left office he made some very prescient statements. So while he was no intellectual, he was brilliant at understanding people and the military.
October 30th, 2005 at 7:39 pmMarie, I was never a fan of his either, but as I grew older he was quite a good President.
I just posted his quote to knock the wind out of a troll. It hates quotes of the truth.
October 30th, 2005 at 7:41 pm“What was the purpose of outting Wilson’s Wife?
Comment by Mary Poppin — October 30, 2005 @ 6:41 am ”
***** Thank you Mary, for helping me understand why you are a proud “progressive”. Joe Wilson’s wife was outed because Joe Wilson lied about who sent him on a fact-finding mission to Africa. Joe returned from Niger without hard evidence to prove or disprove the “Saddam shopping for yellowcake” theory. But he let it be known (falsely) that the Vice President’s office had sent him. When questioned repeatedly by reporters, the VP office denied it. That’s how Valerie Plame’s name got out there – denying Joe
Wilson’s LIES. The yellowcake assertion by the administration was found to be INCONCLUSIVE by Wilson. Gosh, I wonder if they have shredders in the backwards lands of the Middle East??? Hmmmmmmmm….
Joe sixPACK- Isn’t it funny when the reporter writes for a liberal publication, he/she is described as a “veteran journalist”? When a journalist works for conservative outlet – they are hacks. WAAAYYY tooooo funny. P.S. Joe, Puny Putz says your name does NOT describe the cheap pissy beer you drink, but rather, your abs. WOW!!!!!
October 30th, 2005 at 7:55 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 8:22 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.
In the interest of objectivity, I visited the link suggested by wwallace, http://patterico.com/etc, to see if there was something we were missing.
Let me tell you all that we are not missing a thing. There’s nothing there more illuminating than what we already get from wwallace. It’s too bad; I had hoped that wwallace was simply parroting someone else who had better information. I was wrong: he’s simply parroting someone else.
There’s no information other than the already too-well-known echo-chamber of spin. Every “fact” links back to some other piece of fantasy, or the splitting of hairs taken to absurd. Specifically, there’s NOTHING there to support wwallace’s claim that “Wilson lied”. If I missed some REAL evidence, I’d be happy to look at it. But until then I can only conclude he’s full of smelly hot air.
What gets me is the suspension of reality that those like wwallace engage in. OK, maybe you support the president and his war. Or maybe you really do think the WH policies are exactly what we need for a better America. All that would be fine with me – after all there ARE other points of view out there and they should be discussed. But what I do NOT understand is how people like wwallace are willing to ignore both the spirit and letter of the law, ignore the most blatant facts in front of all of us, think shitting on the poor and middle class helps our country, that dimissing science improves our future, thinks cronyism is perfectly fine, that the truth is a “technicality”. I am willing to hear cogent arguments for why wwallace and his ilk support that stuff. But we don’t hear arguments designed to convince. Instead it’s all PR and spin and insults. Whatever he claims, I personally do not believe that “anything for our team nothing for our country” serves America in any way whatsoever.
October 30th, 2005 at 8:42 pmIs wally more demented than NED? I didn’t think it was possible.
October 30th, 2005 at 9:15 pmkjlovell, #44: “The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.â€
The British stand by that assessment today. In any case, being the recipient of incorrect intel does not make one a liar. Given that all intel is imperfect, the prudent course was not to give your friend Saddam Hussein the benefit of the doubt.
“Wilson had discovered that the claims were bogus and documents used to support the claims had been forgeries.â€
Wilson went to Niger in February 2002. The forged documents were received in October 2002. The documents had nothing to do with Wilson or his trip to Niger. Wilson never saw the documents. Thank you for providing this proof that Wilson lied.
In February 2002 the former prime minister of Niger, Ibrahim Mayaki, told Wilson, “An Iraqi delegation had visited Niger in 1999 to explore “expanding commercial relations†between Iraq and Niger. Mayaki had met with the Iraqis and later concluded that their request for enhanced trade meant they wanted to discuss purchasing uranium.â€
October 30th, 2005 at 9:28 pmYour a moron wally.
Your nonsense proof is right wing crap and only the demented support the criminals in the White House.
Your loser Libby is going to jail, deal with it.
Focus your energy on the definition of INDICTMENT and there may be hope for you. Until then, get a life and do something good for a change.
October 30th, 2005 at 9:39 pmIn #43, MA shows a measure of her vindictiveness, vengeance, retribution and irrelevancy. She apparently believes similarly to Karl Rove who told Chris Matthews that Valerie Plame is “fair game” because she is married to Wilson.
October 30th, 2005 at 9:54 pmDoes wwallace think of himself as Braveheart?
October 30th, 2005 at 9:56 pmI don’t think that even Faux news viewers have their head as far up their azzes as wally/ned/nor east dimentia/aphrodykie…. which ever handle he/she/it is using at the time.
It takes generations to breed people like that. You know the ones that are confronted with facts and proven to be liars that still refuse to either go away or open their minds.
Minds are like parachutes, they only work properly when open.
I hope wally bails out of the plane.
But the sad truth is he/she/it will be spewing it’s garbage years into dumbya’s prison term. Or if he gets tried at the Hague, after the final dispensing of Justice.
October 30th, 2005 at 10:02 pmNo, Braveheart was a warrior. Wally is a chickenhawk coward.
October 30th, 2005 at 10:03 pmNotice that wally won’t address Dumbya’s lies above?
chickenhawk-coward.
October 30th, 2005 at 10:04 pm#50, wally is ned. you never see wally around when ned is here. nor do you see aphrodykie when wally is around. We all know that there can’t be more than say 10 people in the U.S. that think like that.
October 30th, 2005 at 10:12 pmAs long as I am rubbing salt into reich-wing-moron-chickenhawk-cowards wounds:
Laura Welch Bush (aka Ms.dumbya) planned with her best friend to crash into her boyfriend’s car and kill him. They did, and have LIED about it ever since. She has lied about what kind of car he was driving. She has lied about what kind of car she was driving. She has lied about telling him she was pregnant.
she has lied about him telling her he wouldn’t marry her.
she has lied, about every aspect of the case. She only got off because her family had money.
Crooks, lying sacks of poo, chicken hawks the lot.
October 30th, 2005 at 10:22 pmYesterday I was approached by a guy who said that Saddam Hussein had WMD’s. I replied by asking him..if that is so then why didn’t he use them before his capture? Why hasn’t anyone who is still at large used them? Again, he ran away with his tail between his legs.
Maybe the multiple personality chickenhawk troll can answer the question for me. Come on…why haven’t the WMD’s been used? Why do our troops continue to allow them to possess them? Come on…show me the WMD’s already.
October 30th, 2005 at 10:27 pm#44: “The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.â€
“The British stand by that assessment today. In any case, being the recipient of incorrect intel does not make one a liar. Given that all intel is imperfect, the prudent course was not to give your friend Saddam Hussein the benefit of the doubt.”
The Bush admin well knew this “intel” was dubious, and chose to use it anyway in the State of the Union. That is why they immediately back-tracked after Wilson’s op/ed.
It is now perfectly clear that the bush admin was indeed “fixing the facts around the policy,” and decieved the US into an un-necessary war.
All due respect Wally, your partisanship is preventing you from seeing the truth.
October 30th, 2005 at 10:32 pmBarbara ‘Marie Antoinette’ Bush on New Orleans evacuees at the Houston Astrodome
Let Them Eat Cake: “What I’m hearing, which is sort of scary, is they all want to stay in Texas. Everyone is so overwhelmed by the hospitality. And so many of the people in the arena here, you know, were underprivileged anyway, so this [chuckles]– this is working very well for them.”
Such class and integrity.
October 30th, 2005 at 10:38 pmWe all know that Blair and Bushie are puppets cut from the same cloth. Blair is as big a liar as Bushie. Who cares what British intel disputes or doesn’t dispute. Its irrelevant when the intel is fixed.
October 30th, 2005 at 10:39 pmThe only thing that remains un-fixed in the WH is dumbya’s brain.
October 30th, 2005 at 10:40 pmAnyone find it interesting that the 1960’s CIA (can you say H.W. Bush) were the ones that placed Saddam in power. Brought him from Egypt to Baghdad, paid for his apartment, installed him in power, kept him on CIA payroll. Later in the 1990’s sold him the gas he is now on trial for using, and now they want him to stand trial in Iraq! Not the Hague?
Sounds like some loose ends need to be tied up.
Except the American people (we the people) are on to them. And Justice will be served.
October 31st, 2005 at 4:14 amThe Next step is ….
Forged Documents. Fitz has obtained info from Italy
Follow
NATO sources told United Press International Monday that Fitzgerald’s team of investigators has sought and obtained documentation on the forgeries from the Italian government.
According to the report, “Fitzgerald’s team has been given the full, and as yet unpublished report of the Italian parliamentary inquiry into the affair, which started when an Italian journalist obtained documents that appeared to show officials of the government of Niger helping to supply the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein with Yellowcake uranium.
Keep the Pressure on.
They are on the RUN.
Its Time to Take out the Trash and kick it to the curb.
Lets Roll. –AJ
October 31st, 2005 at 12:36 pmCalling me names will never change the facts I posted. :()
October 31st, 2005 at 1:09 pmned/wally/aphrodykie which ever handle you are using now –
what ever are you talking about?
You post lies, not facts.
To Quote facts:
Its Time to Take out the Trash and kick it to the curb.
Lets Roll. –AJ
October 31st, 2005 at 1:16 pmNotice that wally won’t address Dumbya’s lies above?
chickenhawk-coward.
October 31st, 2005 at 1:26 pm#51 Wallace- YOU ARE BRAVEHEART! Anyone who would continue to post the truth on this blog is subject to invective and occasional questions regarding their sexual preferences….which, I of course, don’t have due to the fact that I’m married and have forgotten all about sex….
November 1st, 2005 at 3:51 pmRyan and kj- Again, you have delighted and amused me today. God Bless You! I may change my mind about universal health scare just so you two can get extra meds….
tank/ned/dumbass/nor east dimentia/aphrodykie, whoever you are
pretending to be today
You fool no one, you have to have your head burried up your ass so far that you breathe farts not to know your side is sunk.
If you like the current climate of corruption in the Government, keep voting. If you don’t like the FACTS in here
GO AWAY
Pure and simple much like yourself, your the minority here.
dumbya is corrupt, he lies so much that he has to have someone else call his dog.
his school marm wife murdered her highschool boyfriend.
KKKarl rove is so crooked he has to screw his pants on.
crash-cart cheeney has no heart, and engineered this war with some of the other criminals you will no doubt be defending later.
war crimes are being committed by these nazis, and you sit back and call someone else a fool.
LOOK IN THE MIRROR.
Now go away if you don’t like the ideas and FACTS here.
November 2nd, 2005 at 2:06 amBraveheart was a warrior, not a chickenhawk coward.
ned/wally/aphro/turk whoever they are pretending to be is a
CHICKENHAWK COWARD
Besides, Braveheart was slaughtered, and his side lost.
November 2nd, 2005 at 2:08 amThe bush family is corrupt and supports racism and hate.
THEY MUST GO!
November 2nd, 2005 at 3:42 amI admit it, I have seen how wrong I am.
I just want to say I am sorry for being such an idiot.
Bush is an idiot, and he must be impeached.
November 2nd, 2005 at 3:01 pmI want to see Bush and Cheeney removed from office NOW.
VOTETOIMPEACH.ORG
I was soooo wrong, and such an idiot for supporting a murdering administration.
I want to extend a personal apology to all on this blog.
I want to say those of you that thought I was
mighty aphroditie, Northeast Delima, Turk, Joe Sixpack and Jeff Gannon were
totally correct.
I am only one person, and I have tried to show that there are more than one person that support the
Bush administration.
I am paid by the administration, and i feel totally dirty and guilty.
November 2nd, 2005 at 3:07 pmDid you notice that cracker dumbya and his boyfriend-killing wife didn’t even speak at Rosa’s funeral?
Cracker Mo.Fo.
I hate that lying bastard!
He sends poor kids off to be killed and his cracker ass daughters live the life of a princess.
Impeach they lying bastard
November 3rd, 2005 at 2:17 amInsurance Small Business Health Insurance Nationwide Insurance
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 14th, 2008 at 12:48 pmAss Thick Ass Babes Kick Ass
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 5th, 2008 at 7:53 pmAll about Digimon Adventure Online Game. Digimon Adventure Fans Blog….
…Digimon is a small virtual pet. You can download and play an online RPG in the Digimon universe. It looks and feels like 2D graphic RPG adventure. You can train and level up your Digimon, make hundreds of quests, and travel through a huge universe a…
March 2nd, 2009 at 10:37 pmShag Hairstyles and Haircuts…
shag hairstyle basically gotits name from the word “shaggy” since …once the hair is cutand layered it gives off a shaggy look. The shag hairstyle has always been apopular hairstyle, and there are plenty ofshag hairstyles to choose from…
April 3rd, 2009 at 1:53 pmThe truth about Arbonne Skin Care Products…
Arbonne International is one of the main companies in the world when it comes to beauty and skin care. Its skin care line is one of the best in the world that many women. The products of Arbonne skin care products are formulated in Switzerland….
April 28th, 2009 at 9:23 am