BuSh lies again. How come he hasn't fired Rove as promised?

[fossten]

2003

BUSH: If there is a leak out of my administration I want to know who it is, and if that person has violated law, that person will be taken care of.

2005

BUSH: We have a serious ongoing investigation here (laughter) and it is being played out in the press -- and I think it is best that people wait until the investigation is complete before you jump to conclusions, and I will do so as well. I don't know all of the facts. I want to know all of the facts. The best place for the facts to be done is by someone spending time investigating it. I would like this to end as quickly as possible so we know the facts and if someone committed a crime, they will no longer work in my administration.

In 2003 Bush said quite clearly that if anybody violated the law, that person would be taken care of. In 2005, he said if someone committed a crime , they will no longer work in my administration.

Let's compare the two, shall we. In 2003, he indicated that if the law were broken; ie: committed a crime. In 2005 he says if someone committed a crime. Pretty darn consistent if you ask me.

The reason the left is so upset is because they know that they can't get Rove on the committing of a crime because no crime was committed. She was outed well before the statue would have been in effect. So lefties, cry all you want but YOU LOSE, AGAIN! Time to look for the next 'crime of the century'.

This is so cut and dried. But the left simply cannot believe this is slipping through their fingers. That Bush guy and his wonks are surely dumb as foxes.:gr_hail:

GWB, all hail the King.:bow:

The poor libs, they really miss the glory days of Watergate, don't they?

 

[barry2952]

Gloat all you want. It's not over.

 

[MonsterMark]

You might catch a guppy, but the whale just slipped away.

 

[barry2952]

Apparently now there is a report that GWB was directly involved in a plan to out the agent. No wonder he's covering Rove's behind. I told you this was a house of cards.

I love the smell of impeachment in the air.

 

[MonsterMark]

I guess I will say it again. The agent was not covert, therefore, based on how the law is written, there could be no violations of that law.

 

[barry2952]

Whatever you say Bryan. I guess we'll just have to wait for the Justice Dept. ruling.

 

[MonsterMark]

That seems to be the concensus of opinion so far. But like our illustrious President said, let's wait for the results from the investigation. You can only play this out in public so long. What bothers me is the vindictiveness on the left to 'get' Rove, and now to 'get' anyone, purely for political gain, nothing else.

Whatever you say Bryan. I guess we'll just have to wait for the Justice Dept. ruling.

 

[fossten]

Whatever you say Bryan. I guess we'll just have to wait for the Justice Dept. ruling.

Nobody on the left can wait for that. They've already tried and convicted Rove in the press, DESPITE THE EXCULPATORY FACTS.

 

[97silverlsc]

I guess I will say it again. The agent was not covert, therefore, based on how the law is written, there could be no violations of that law.

Plame's Identity Marked as Secret
By Walter Pincus and Jim VandeHei
The Washington Post

Thursday 21 July 2005

Memo central to probe of leak was written by state dept. analyst.

A classified State Department memorandum central to a federal leak investigation contained information about CIA officer Valerie Plame in a paragraph marked "(S)" for secret, a clear indication that any Bush administration official who read it should have been aware the information was classified, according to current and former government officials.

Plame -- who is referred to by her married name, Valerie Wilson, in the memo -- is mentioned in the second paragraph of the three-page document, which was written on June 10, 2003, by an analyst in the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR), according to a source who described the memo to The Washington Post.

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. It is a federal crime, punishable by up to 10 years in prison, for a federal official to knowingly disclose the identity of a covert CIA official if the person knows the government is trying to keep it secret.

Prosecutors attempting to determine whether senior government officials knowingly leaked Plame's identity as a covert CIA operative to the media are investigating whether White House officials gained access to information about her from the memo, according to two sources familiar with the investigation.

The memo may be important to answering three central questions in the Plame case: Who in the Bush administration knew about Plame's CIA role? Did they know the agency was trying to protect her identity? And, who leaked it to the media?

Almost all of the memo is devoted to describing why State Department intelligence experts did not believe claims that Saddam Hussein had in the recent past sought to purchase uranium from Niger. Only two sentences in the seven-sentence paragraph mention Wilson's wife.

The memo was delivered to Secretary of State Colin L. Powell on July 7, 2003, as he headed to Africa for a trip with President Bush aboard Air Force One. Plame was unmasked in a syndicated column by Robert D. Novak seven days later.

Wilson has said his wife's identity was revealed to retaliate against him for accusing the Bush administration of "twisting" intelligence to justify the Iraq war. In a July 6 opinion piece in the New York Times and in an interview with The Washington Post, he cited a secret mission he conducted in February 2002 for the CIA, when he determined there was no evidence that Iraq was seeking uranium for a nuclear weapons program in the African nation of Niger.

White House officials discussed Wilson's wife's CIA connection in telling at least two reporters that she helped arrange his trip, according to one of the reporters, Matthew Cooper of Time magazine, and a lawyer familiar with the case.

Prosecutors have shown interest in the memo, especially when they were questioning White House officials during the early days of the investigation, people familiar with the probe said.

Karl Rove, President Bush's deputy chief of staff, has testified that he learned Plame's name from Novak a few days before telling another reporter she worked at the CIA and played a role in her husband's mission, according to a lawyer familiar with Rove's account. Rove has also testified that the first time he saw the State Department memo was when "people in the special prosecutor's office" showed it to him, said Robert Luskin, his attorney.

"He had not seen it or heard about it before that time," Luskin said.

Several other administration officials were on the trip to Africa, including senior adviser Dan Bartlett, then-White House spokesman Ari Fleischer and others. Bartlett's attorney has refused to discuss the case, citing requests by the special counsel. Fleischer could not be reached for comment yesterday.

Rove and Vice President Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, have been identified as people who discussed Wilson's wife with Cooper. Prosecutors are trying to determine the origin of their knowledge of Plame, including whether it was from the INR memo or from conversations with reporters.

The Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday that the memo made it clear that information about Wilson's wife was sensitive and should not be shared. Yesterday, sources provided greater detail on the memo to The Post.

The material in the memo about Wilson's wife was based on notes taken by an INR analyst who attended a Feb. 19, 2002, meeting at the CIA where Wilson's intelligence-gathering trip to Niger was discussed.

The memo was drafted June 10, 2003, for Undersecretary of State Marc Grossman, who asked to be brought up to date on INR's opposition to the White House view that Hussein was trying to buy uranium in Africa.

The description of Wilson's wife and her role in the Feb. 19, 2002, meeting at the CIA was considered "a footnote" in a background paragraph in the memo, according to an official who was aware of the process.

It records that the INR analyst at the meeting opposed Wilson's trip to Niger because the State Department, through other inquiries, already had disproved the allegation that Iraq was seeking uranium from Niger. Attached to the INR memo were the notes taken by the senior INR analyst who attended the 2002 meeting at the CIA.

On July 6, 2003, shortly after Wilson went public on NBC's "Meet the Press" and in The Post and the New York Times discussing his trip to Niger, the INR director at the time, Carl W. Ford Jr., was asked to explain Wilson's statements for Powell, according to sources familiar with the events. He went back and reprinted the June 10 memo but changed the addressee from Grossman to Powell.

Ford last year appeared before the federal grand jury investigating the leak and described the details surrounding the INR memo, the sources said. Yesterday he was on vacation in Arkansas, according to his office.


Wrong again. :slam

 

[97silverlsc]

What bothers me is the vindictiveness on the left to 'get' Rove, and now to 'get' anyone, purely for political gain, nothing else.

Kinda like the vidictiveness of the right in impeaching Bubba for lying about a blow job? Except here again, the consequences for the nation are far greater.

 

[JohnnyBz00LS]

Kinda like the vidictiveness of the right in impeaching Bubba for lying about a blow job? Except here again, the consequences for the nation are far greater.

Lest we forget the fact that MUCH more money was allocated to Ken Starr's investigation of Clinton (casualties = ZERO) than was allocated for the 9/11 Commission investigation of the failed inteligence (casualties = 3000+).
:bsflag:

Makes me sick thinking about it.

 

[97silverlsc]

Ex-Intel Officers Speak on Plame's Behalf

Wed Jul 20, 7:10 PM ET

WASHINGTON - Eleven former intelligence officers are speaking up on behalf of
CIA officer Valerie Plame, saying leaking her identity may have damaged national security and threatens the ability of U.S. intelligence gathering.
ADVERTISEMENT

In a statement to congressional leaders, the former officers said the
Republican National Committee has circulated talking points focusing on the idea that Plame was not working undercover and deserved no protection.

There are thousands of U.S. intelligence officers who work at a desk in the Washington, D.C., area every day who are undercover as Plame was when her identity was leaked, the 11 former officers said in a three-page statement.

The former officers' statement comes amid revelations that top presidential aide Karl Rove was involved in leaking Plame's identity to columnist Robert Novak and Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper, and that Vice President
Dick Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis Libby, also was a source for Cooper on the Plame story.

The leaking of Plame's identity followed public criticism leveled against the Bush White House by Plame's husband, former U.S. Ambassador Joseph Wilson. He suggested the administration had manipulated intelligence to justify going to war in
Iraq. A criminal investigation into the leaks is ongoing.

"Intelligence officers should not be used as political footballs," the 11 said. "In the case of Valerie Plame, she still works for the CIA and is not in a position to publicly defend her reputation and honor."

___
Just goes to show that in their zeal to defend Shrub and his brain, Rove, the repugs will jeopardize the people who truly put there lives on the line to defend this country. Very sad indeed.

 

[fossten]

Lest we forget the fact that MUCH more money was allocated to Ken Starr's investigation of Clinton (casualties = ZERO) than was allocated for the 9/11 Commission investigation of the failed inteligence (casualties = 3000+).
:bsflag:

Makes me sick thinking about it.

Which failed intelligence, I remind you yet again, was the fault, if any, of the CIA that was left over from Clinton's presidency. Once again you try to blame Clinton's failures on the man who succeeded him, and who succeeds in spite of him.

 

[97silverlsc]

Which failed intelligence, I remind you yet again, was the fault, if any, of the CIA that was left over from Clinton's presidency. Once again you try to blame Clinton's failures on the man who succeeded him, and who succeeds in spite of him.

:bsflag:

You really have no clue, do you? CIA officers are career officers, meaning they aren't all replaced whenever the administration changes. It's becoming more and more clear that the CIA was pressured to give the Intel the Shrubbites wanted to justify going to war in Iraq, evidenced by the Downing street memos for one. What they have done is criminal and the only reason he's not being investigated is the repugs have the majority in the house and senate.

 

[fossten]

CIA officers are career officers, meaning they aren't all replaced whenever the administration changes.

You make my point for me. These were leftovers and their intelligence was leftover. Obviously they weren't replaced or there would have been better intel.

Oh, by the way, the DIRECTOR was replaced.

 

[JohnnyBz00LS]

Which failed intelligence, I remind you yet again, was the fault, if any, of the CIA that was left over from Clinton's presidency. Once again you try to blame Clinton's failures on the man who succeeded him, and who succeeds in spite of him.

Once again, you fail to see through your shrub colored glasses. The BuSh administration blamed the failure to find WMDs in Iraq on "failed inteligence" and pointed the fingers squarely at the CIA / FBI and everyone else except themselves. The TRUTH of the matter, as evidenced by many testimonies of the CIA agents themselves, the DSM, and other souces, is that they provided in-conclusive data about WMDs in Iraq, full of disclaimers as to the reliability and accuracy of that data and the sources from which they were obtained, to the BuSh administration. It was the BUSH ADMINISTRATION that, INSTEAD OF DIGGING DEEPER to prove out what few threads of info provided to them were saying, conciously INFLATED "facts", cherry-picked what was convienient and supported their pre-conceived cause, and SPUN a story around the bits and pieces of intel to FABRICATED A JUSTIFICATION for the Iraq war. The CIA agents who dug up and provided the intel reports never stood behind the intel upon which the BuSh admin built their story. The only person who stood behind the intel was the HEAD of the CIA, who was nothing more than a puppet for GW and a scape-goat.

You neo-cons are a joke, how you eat up the propiganda spun up by the GOP and the shrub farm. Stay around and keep them coming, I need more laughs.

 

[MonsterMark]

The TRUTH of the matter, as evidenced by many testimonies of the CIA agents themselves, the DSM, and other souces, is that they provided in-conclusive data about WMDs in Iraq, full of disclaimers as to the reliability and accuracy of that data and the sources from which they were obtained, to the BuSh administration.

Holy Worthless Intel Batman!!! Now our whole intel community has just been discovered to be worthless. And you want to blame Bush for relying on that intel? I suppose the intel gathered from all the other countries is worthless too.

Why don't you admit to yourself that while Bush was busy having to 'justify' a war with a combatant that was in violation of every treaty stipulation that he signed in '91, that while this same President had to make the case so that all the lefties would stop whining, that in that period of time our country lost the opportunity to catch the bad guy red-handed? Because that is exactly what happened. Months and Months of ultimatums allowed the Russians and Syrians to come in and grab their stuff. Saddam had over 700 munition sites scattered around the country. You actually believe that those WMDs never existed, and aren't buried or sitting just over the border? That to me is dangerous thinking.

 

[fossten]

Holy Worthless Intel Batman!!! Now our whole intel community has just been discovered to be worthless. And you want to blame Bush for relying on that intel? I suppose the intel gathered from all the other countries is worthless too.

Why don't you admit to yourself that while Bush was busy having to 'justify' a war with a combatant that was in violation of every treaty stipulation that he signed in '91, that while this same President had to make the case so that all the lefties would stop whining, that in that period of time our country lost the opportunity to catch the bad guy red-handed? Because that is exactly what happened. Months and Months of ultimatums allowed the Russians and Syrians to come in and grab their stuff. Saddam had over 700 munition sites scattered around the country. You actually believe that those WMDs never existed, and aren't buried or sitting just over the border? That to me is dangerous thinking.

Well, we have conclusive proof that they existed. See Halabja in Google. It's not even a stretch to assume that Saddam didn't use up all his wmds on the Kurds. In fact, it's more of a stretch to assume he did and then decided, "Nah, I guess I won't make any more."

If you use common sense, it has to lead you to one of two likelihoods: Either Saddam shipped the weapons out from underneath Hans Blick's nose before we could get there, or he hid them so well nobody can find them.

When you eliminate the impossible, the remaining choice, however improbable, must be the truth.

 

[MonsterMark]

If you use common sense, it has to lead you to one of two likelihoods: Either Saddam shipped the weapons out from underneath Hans Blick's nose before we could get there,...

Good 'ol Hans was MIA for 4 years thanks to a certain Willy in the White House, so plenty of opportunity to both produce/purchase and move/hide.

 

[MonsterMark]

Hey Barry! Notice my new sig? Did it just for you! Don't worry, I'll only torture you for a little while and then I'll change it.

 

[barry2952]

That picture would look good on a "Wanted" poster. Better yet, it would look good on a milk carton.

 

[JohnnyBz00LS]

Holy Worthless Intel Batman!!! Now our whole intel community has just been discovered to be worthless. And you want to blame Bush for relying on that intel? I suppose the intel gathered from all the other countries is worthless too.

Let me try to follow your logic:

Before 9/11, "intel" was warning the BuSh admin that OBL was planning on attacking the US using airliners. The excuse given to the 9/11 commission: "We didn't believe it, scattered reliability, too much coming in, GW was tired of swatting flies, it didn't give us specific dates or places, it was FLAWED".

So the "intel" community was punished, re-organized. But do you think the quality of the "intel" went from 0 to 100% reliable overnight?

After 9/11, "intel" was indicating that Saddam "might" have or "might" have the capability of producing WMDs, DESPITE the fact that many prior inspections of Iraq over the past decade had proven otherwise. So now the BuSh administration not only puts 100% faith in this same "flawed" intel, it inflated it beyond it's level of credibility to make the case for the Iraq war.

After the capture of Saddam, no WMDs have been found, proving that the latest intel was in fact "flawed" and the Iraq inspectors were right. BuSh administration response, "The intel was flawed", "We just haven't found the WMDs yet", and my personal favorite from Rumsfeld himself, "I don't think anyone contended Iraq had WMDs" WTF???????????

:bsflag:

When "intel" was right, BuSh ignored it, 3000+ innocent America civilians died.

When "intel" was wrong, BuSh inflated it, 1700+ American soldiers and 100,000s of innocent Iraq civilians died.

BuSh's batting record is 0.000, and you RWWs continue to find no fault in his performance? :bsflag:

Why don't you admit to yourself that while Bush was busy having to 'justify' a war with a combatant that was in violation of every treaty stipulation that he signed in '91, that while this same President had to make the case so that all the lefties would stop whining, that in that period of time our country lost the opportunity to catch the bad guy red-handed? Because that is exactly what happened. Months and Months of ultimatums allowed the Russians and Syrians to come in and grab their stuff. Saddam had over 700 munition sites scattered around the country. You actually believe that those WMDs never existed, and aren't buried or sitting just over the border? That to me is dangerous thinking.

Why don't you admit to yourself that those treaty stipulations actually accomplished their purpose by the end of that decade? After years of being harrassed by inspectors, who time after time came up empty handed, I could almost see why Saddam refused to let the inspectors back in again and again towards the end there. Our troops have had 2 years of free run of Iraq to search for and find WMDs. WHERE THEY AT? You actually believe that while BuSh was making the case for war, that Saddam just gave away his WMDs? When he's staring down the double-barrel of the US armed forces? Saddam may be a maniac, but he's NOT STUPID. That'd be like emptying your gun of bullets on your way to a gunfight. AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN. THAT my friend is perverted logic, and is truly dangerous.

BuSh has "played" the US not once, but twice homie! And you fools on the right want to keep giving him chances to do it again. God pray for us.

 

[MonsterMark]

You actually believe that while BuSh was making the case for war, that Saddam just gave away his WMDs? When he's staring down the double-barrel of the US armed forces? Saddam may be a maniac, but he's NOT STUPID. That'd be like emptying your gun of bullets on your way to a gunfight. AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN. THAT my friend is perverted logic, and is truly dangerous.

Saddam was told by the French and Germans that he would not be attacked. IN FACT, EVEN HOURS BEFORE THE ACTUAL "SHOCK & AWE" CAMPAIGN STARTED, SADDAM WAS BEING TOLD WE WERE ONLY SABER-RATTLING AND THAT THEY (GERMANS AND FRENCHIES) WOULD PREVAIL OVER U.S. POLICY. So of course he unloaded his gun. He never expected to have to use. He called our bluff based on 'bad intel' (how ironic, eh) and lost.

This question has been asked thousands of times already of those on the left but bears repeating:

Is the world not better off with Saddam out of power?

 

[fossten]

Let me try to follow your logic:

Before 9/11, "intel" was warning the BuSh admin that OBL was planning on attacking the US using airliners. The excuse given to the 9/11 commission: "We didn't believe it, scattered reliability, too much coming in, GW was tired of swatting flies, it didn't give us specific dates or places, it was FLAWED".

So the "intel" community was punished, re-organized. But do you think the quality of the "intel" went from 0 to 100% reliable overnight?

After 9/11, "intel" was indicating that Saddam "might" have or "might" have the capability of producing WMDs, DESPITE the fact that many prior inspections of Iraq over the past decade had proven otherwise. So now the BuSh administration not only puts 100% faith in this same "flawed" intel, it inflated it beyond it's level of credibility to make the case for the Iraq war.

After the capture of Saddam, no WMDs have been found, proving that the latest intel was in fact "flawed" and the Iraq inspectors were right. BuSh administration response, "The intel was flawed", "We just haven't found the WMDs yet", and my personal favorite from Rumsfeld himself, "I don't think anyone contended Iraq had WMDs" WTF???????????

:bsflag:

When "intel" was right, BuSh ignored it, 3000+ innocent America civilians died.

When "intel" was wrong, BuSh inflated it, 1700+ American soldiers and 100,000s of innocent Iraq civilians died.

BuSh's batting record is 0.000, and you RWWs continue to find no fault in his performance? :bsflag:




Why don't you admit to yourself that those treaty stipulations actually accomplished their purpose by the end of that decade? After years of being harrassed by inspectors, who time after time came up empty handed, I could almost see why Saddam refused to let the inspectors back in again and again towards the end there. Our troops have had 2 years of free run of Iraq to search for and find WMDs. WHERE THEY AT? You actually believe that while BuSh was making the case for war, that Saddam just gave away his WMDs? When he's staring down the double-barrel of the US armed forces? Saddam may be a maniac, but he's NOT STUPID. That'd be like emptying your gun of bullets on your way to a gunfight. AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN. THAT my friend is perverted logic, and is truly dangerous.

BuSh has "played" the US not once, but twice homie! And you fools on the right want to keep giving him chances to do it again. God pray for us.

You can't have it both ways.

After 9/11 the libs and press accused Bush of not acting to prevent the attack, despite the questionable intel info we had. Dang it, we should have just DONE SOMETHING!

Then we go to Iraq to prevent more war and to punish Saddam for not following the rules, and the libs and the press scream, "HEY! YOU CAN'T GO IN THERE UNLESS HE FIRES AT YOU FIRST!"

You can't have it both ways.

 

[barry2952]

Iraq didn't attach us. Our buddies the Saudis provided the vast majority of the skyjackers. Why don't we go after their oppressive society? They torture and kill hundreds of their citizens and even provide torture to the US for a price. Women fared better in Iraq than in Saudi Arabia.

I acknowledge that Saddam is a bad man. Kind of a mini-Hitler. Yes the world is better off without him. Since BuSh could have make a valid case for attacking him for being a bad man why fabricate the information on WMD? Where was the urgency? Saddam was truly a limp-dick tyrant. He wasn't going anywhere. I was behind invading Afghanastan due to the proven link (video) of OBL. Where was the smoking gun that offered us GWB's link of Saddam to the terrortists that attacked this land?

Even if none of the WMD info was fabricated it was, indeed, the basis for my getting behind the effort. That is what got many of us behind the effort. I believe I was sold a bill of goods and an awful lot of us feel the same way. Like it or not that is my opinion.

While the end play may have been necessary, I believe we have been deceived by the President and all of his minions. I believe that GWB will be held accountable by the American People.

Here's an analogy for all you business people. Lets say you bought a company and kept all the current staff in place. Lets say this staff had been lying to the previous owner about the financial health of the business and now they continued to deceive you. They were able to do so because there was no external oversight to keep them in line so they used their skills to mask their past failures. Not uncommon. Everyone wants to keep their job.

The business is called on the carpet by the IRS and the business has to shut down when it is discovered that the business is a house of cards. Who would take the hit? The previous owner didn't know his staff was incompetent so you can't go after him. Actually you can but those efforts are rarely sucessful. The staff may have not known that they were incompetent, since this is often the case. The guy that takes the hit is the one that owns the company. He's the one with the ultimate responsibility. He is the one that has a duty to do due dilligance.

Do you believe that Ken Lay didn't know what was going on at Enron? If you do then it's possible that GWB didn't know what was really going on. The ultimate responsibility for the failure of the intelligence community may not fall on his shoulders but the fact that he used the information clearly makes him guilty of poor judgement, which he has failed to admit to.

That would probably be all that would be necessary to get a lot of people back in his camp. Just own up to the mistake and go forward. Continued cover-up is wrecking the national view of the whole political process and the rift is getting wider. GWB promised to be The Great Uniter. When is that going to happen?