Fitzgerlad nails Novak, Bush and Cheney to soon fall!

MonsterMark

Dedicated LVC Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2004
Messages
9,225
Reaction score
3
Location
United States
Yep, looks like Patrick Fitzgerald got his man. After 2-1/2 years.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From the Drudge Report...

BOB NOVAK, My Leak Case Testimony: 'I learned Valerie Plame's name from Joe Wilson's entry in 'Who's Who in America'... MORE Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has informed my attorneys that, after two and one-half years, his investigation of the CIA leak case concerning matters directly relating to me has been concluded. That frees me to reveal my role in the federal inquiry that, at the request of Fitzgerald, I have kept secret... MORE... My primary source has not come forward to identify himself... Bill Harlow, the CIA public information officer who was my CIA source for the column confirming Mrs. Wilson's identity. I learned Valerie Plame's name from Joe Wilson's entry in 'Who's Who in America'... I answered questions using the names of Rove, Harlow and my primary source.
 
Novak Says He Named 3 Sources in Leak Case

By Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, July 12, 2006; A04

Syndicated columnist Robert D. Novak acknowledged for the first time yesterday that he identified three confidential administration sources during testimony in the CIA leak investigation, saying he did so because they had granted him legal waivers to testify and because Special Counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald already knew of their role.

In a column to be published today, Novak said he told Fitzgerald in early 2004 that White House senior adviser Karl Rove and then-CIA spokesman Bill Harlow had confirmed for him, at his request, information about CIA operative Valerie Plame. Novak said he also told Fitzgerald about another senior administration official who originally provided him with the information about Plame, and whose identity he says he cannot reveal even now.

"I'm still constrained as a reporter," Novak said in an interview. "It was not on the record, and he has never revealed himself as being the source, and until he does I don't feel I should."

In the column, he wrote: "I have cooperated in the investigation while trying to protect journalistic privileges under the First Amendment and shield sources who have not revealed themselves. . . . Some journalists have badgered me to disclose my role in the case. . . . I have promised to discuss my role in the investigation when permitted by the prosecution, and I do so now."

Novak triggered one of the capital's most tangled investigations with a July 2003 column reporting that Plame had suggested sending her husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, to Niger to investigate whether Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was trying to obtain nuclear material from that country -- an unsupported claim that was included in President Bush's State of the Union speech. Fitzgerald, who decided last month not to pursue charges against Rove, is prosecuting I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, a former chief of staff for Vice President Cheney, for allegedly lying to a grand jury. Judith Miller, then a New York Times reporter, went to jail for 85 days last year for initially refusing to name Libby as her source.

A mystery had swirled around Novak because he refused to say for 2 1/2 years whether he had testified while other journalists in the case -- Miller, Time magazine's Matthew Cooper, NBC's Tim Russert and, it was later disclosed, The Washington Post's Bob Woodward -- appeared before Fitzgerald, sometimes under duress.

Novak says in the forthcoming column that he initially refused to reveal his sources in an October 2003 interview with three FBI officials. He says he remained reluctant to testify before Fitzgerald, even with the waivers the three officials had given the prosecutor, but that his lawyer told him he was sure to lose a costly legal battle and be jailed for contempt of court. Novak says he testified under subpoena before a grand jury a few weeks later, in February 2004, after reading a statement about his discomfort in discussing confidential sources.

Novak said he is speaking out now because Fitzgerald notified his attorneys that the investigation, as it relates to him, has been concluded. There is no legal prohibition, however, against a witness discussing his own testimony, as other journalists in the case quickly did.

Novak's role in revealing Plame's CIA employment, which was classified, was the most controversial of his 49-year career as a Washington reporter. "What was frustrating," he said, "was that there were a lot of crazy things being said, that I had taken the Fifth Amendment or I had made a plea bargain. . . . It's obviously caused me a lot of trouble. If I had it to do all over again, would I have done it? It's a hard question to answer."

Critics say that Novak helped the administration retaliate against Wilson, who had become a prominent critic of Bush's conduct in the run-up to the Iraq war, by revealing that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA. Novak said yesterday he does not feel that he was used.

"The primary source was not a political operative," he said, and he mentioned Plame's role in the middle of a conversation about other subjects. "I don't believe it was part of a plan to discredit anybody."

A spokesman for Rove, Mark Corallo, said Novak's account of phoning Rove confirms what the White House strategist has said. "Karl never reached out to any reporters," Corallo said. "They called him."

Novak said he and Rove had differing recollections of what happened when he asked about Plame. Novak recalls Rove saying, "Oh, you know that, too?" Rove, according to Corallo, has said he responded, "I've heard that, too."

Harlow, who declined to comment yesterday, has told The Post that he challenged aspects of Novak's account three days before the column was published and warned the columnist that if he did write about Wilson's Niger trip, Plame's name should not be revealed. Novak said he has a different recollection of the conversation.

"I certainly wouldn't have used her name if anyone had indicated she might be in danger," Novak said.
 
MonsterMark said:
Yep, looks like Patrick Fitzgerald got his man. After 2-1/2 years.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From the Drudge Report...

BOB NOVAK, My Leak Case Testimony: 'I learned Valerie Plame's name from Joe Wilson's entry in 'Who's Who in America'... MORE Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has informed my attorneys that, after two and one-half years, his investigation of the CIA leak case concerning matters directly relating to me has been concluded. That frees me to reveal my role in the federal inquiry that, at the request of Fitzgerald, I have kept secret... MORE... My primary source has not come forward to identify himself... Bill Harlow, the CIA public information officer who was my CIA source for the column confirming Mrs. Wilson's identity. I learned Valerie Plame's name from Joe Wilson's entry in 'Who's Who in America'... I answered questions using the names of Rove, Harlow and my primary source.


So nice of you to use a fake news source. Let's try one with a little more credibility....

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,203051,00.html

Robert Novak: Karl Rove Was One of My Sources
Tuesday, July 11, 2006

WASHINGTON — Columnist Robert Novak said publicly for the first time Tuesday that White House political adviser Karl Rove was a source for his story outing the identity of CIA officer Valerie Plame.

In a column, Novak also says his recollection of his conversation with Rove differs from what the Rove camp has said.

"I have revealed Rove's name because his attorney has divulged the substance of our conversation, though in a form different from my recollection," Novak wrote. Novak did not elaborate.

A spokesman for Rove's legal team, Mark Corallo, said that Rove did not even know Plame's name at the time he spoke with Novak, that the columnist called Rove, not the other way around, and that Rove simply said he had heard the same information that Novak passed along to him regarding Plame.

"There was not much of a difference" between the recollections of Rove and Novak, said Corallo.

Novak said he is talking now because Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald told the columnist's lawyer that after 2 1/2 years his investigation of the CIA leak case concerning matters directly relating to Novak has been concluded.

Triggering the criminal investigation, Novak revealed Plame's CIA employment on July 14, 2003, eight days after her husband, White House critic and former U.S. Ambassador Joseph Wilson, accused the administration of manipulating prewar intelligence to exaggerate the Iraqi threat from weapons of mass destruction.

Novak's secret cooperation with prosecutors while maintaining a public silence about his role kept him out of legal danger and had the effect of providing protection for the Bush White House during the 2004 presidential campaign.

The White House denied Rove played any role in the leak of Plame's CIA identity and Novak, with his decision to talk to prosecutors, steered clear of potentially being held in contempt of court and jailed.

Novak said he had declined to go public at Fitzgerald's request.

In a syndicated column to be released Wednesday, Novak says he told Fitzgerald in early 2004 that Rove and then-CIA spokesman Bill Harlow had confirmed information about Plame.

Contacted Tuesday night, Harlow declined to comment. But a U.S. intelligence official familiar with the matter denied that Harlow had been a confirming source for Novak on the story. The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Harlow repeatedly tried to talk Novak out of running the information about Plame and that Harlow's efforts did not in any way constitute confirming Plame's CIA identity. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because Harlow may end up being a witness in a separate part of Fitzgerald's investigation, the upcoming criminal trial of Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff, I. Lewis Libby, on charges of perjury, obstruction and lying to the FBI.

In his column, Novak said he also told Fitzgerald about another senior administration official who originally provided him with information about Plame. Novak said he cannot publicly reveal the identity of that source even now.

"I have cooperated in the investigation while trying to protect journalistic privileges under the First Amendment and shield sources who have not revealed themselves," Novak said in his statement. "I have been subpoenaed by and testified to a federal grand jury. Published reports that I took the Fifth Amendment, made a plea bargain with the prosecutors or was a prosecutorial target were all untrue."

Rove's role in the scandal wasn't revealed until last summer when Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper disclosed that Rove had leaked him the CIA identity of Wilson's wife. Cooper cooperated with prosecutors only after all his legal appeals were exhausted and he faced jail.

While Rove escaped indictment, Libby has been charged with lying about how he learned of the covert CIA officer's identity and what he told reporters about it.

Additionally, the "I found Plame's name in 'Who's Who in America' excuse" is merely a lame attempt at a smokescreen by the RWWs trying to defend the BuSh administration ......

http://foi.missouri.edu/voicesdissent/columnistnames.html

Novak, in an interview, said his sources had come to him with the information. "I didn't dig it out, it was given to me," he said. "They thought it was significant, they gave me the name and I used it."

And the assertions that Wilson "outed his own wife" in the "Who's Who in America" entry is more partisan political bull-crap. The book contains no reference to Plame being a CIA employee, and Wilson's wife's maden name was certianly listed on their marriage licence in the public record.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/docs/wilson.whoswho.pdf
 
JohnnyBz00LS said:
So nice of you to use a fake news source. Let's try one with a little more credibility....


And the assertions that Wilson "outed his own wife" in the "Who's Who in America" entry is more partisan political bull-crap. The book contains no reference to Plame being a CIA employee, and Wilson's wife's maden name was certianly listed on their marriage licence in the public record.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/docs/wilson.whoswho.pdf

How about the man himself as a source? Is that fake? Is he himself full of partisan bullcrap?

I think not.

"Le-hew...ze-hyer."

- Ace Ventura
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Novak

My role in the Plame leak probe

July 12, 2006

BY ROBERT NOVAK SUN-TIMES COLUMNIST

Primary source not revealed

I have revealed Rove's name because his attorney has divulged the substance of our conversation, though in a form different from my recollection. I have revealed Harlow's name because he has publicly disclosed his version of our conversation, which also differs from my recollection. My primary source has not come forward to identify himself.

When I testified before the grand jury, I was permitted to read a statement that I had written expressing my discomfort at disclosing confidential conversations with news sources. It should be remembered that the special prosecutor knew their identities and did not learn them from me.

In my sworn testimony, I said what I have contended in my columns and on television: Joe Wilson's wife's role in instituting her husband's mission was revealed to me in the middle of a long interview with an official who I have previously said was not a political gunslinger. After the federal investigation was announced, he told me through a third party that the disclosure was inadvertent on his part.

Following my interview with the primary source, I sought out the second administration official and the CIA spokesman for confirmation.

I learned Valerie Plame's name from Joe Wilson's entry in Who's Who in America.

I considered his wife's role in initiating Wilson's mission, later confirmed by the Senate Intelligence Committee, to be a previously undisclosed part of an important news story. I reported it on that basis.

[snip]

http://www.suntimes.com/output/novak/cst-nws-novak12.html

*owned*
 
fossten said:
I learned Valerie Plame's name from Joe Wilson's entry in Who's Who in America.

I wasn't referring to that, I was referring to this:

fossten said:
You mean like when Joe Wilson outed his own wife in order to attack the Bush administration in his book?

In this thread: http://www.lincolnvscadillac.com/showthread.php?t=24090

And "Who's Who in America" isn't Joe Wilson's book, he did NOT author it. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that Novak (or ANYBODY) could've looked up the maiden name of Wilson's wife, but he DID put 2 (the un-classified part which was his wife's name which is on public record) and 2 (the "classified" part that his wife was a CIA spy which Rove confirmed for Novak) together for his story.

YOUR quoted statement above mis-represents the facts.

:slap: *owned*
 
Do you have a point, JohnnyBz00LS?

There's no cover up. There was no violation of the law. There was nothing. The "scandal" was truely a non-story.

The only bold faced liar here is, and always was, Joe Wilson.

Now let this story rest, because it only makes the liberal-attack machine look more desperate and dishonest.
 
Was Presidential Helicopter Deal a Pay Off for Italy's Pre-War Yellow-Cake Intel Role

fossten said:
So much for the big conspiracy.

We're just getting to the juicy stuff.....

source: http://news.newamericamedia.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=e5f90f38b05836fede6d7b5a217b3a40

Was Presidential Helicopter Deal a Pay Off for Italy's Pre-War Yellow-Cake Intel Role?

New America Media, Special Investigative Report, Jeffrey Klein and Paolo Pontoniere, May 11, 2006

SAN FRANCISCO-Italian journalists and parliamentary investigators are hot on the trail of how pre-Iraq War Italian forged documents were delivered to the White House alleging that Saddam Hussein had obtained yellowcake uranium ore from Niger.

New links implicating Italian companies and individuals with then-Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi now raise the question of whether Berlusconi received a payback as part of the deal -- namely, a Pentagon contract to build the U.S. president's special fleet of helicopters.

The yellowcake story in the United States has long been linked to the ongoing investigation into the outing of CIA agent Valerie Plame. Plame's diplomat husband Joe Wilson had probed the Niger connection and concluded that the Bush administration was twisting intelligence reports to fit its case for war.

Two people -- Carlo Rossella and Giovanni Castellaneta -- are at the center of Italian inquiries into the transfer of the yellowcake dossier from the SISMI, the Italian intelligence agency, to the White House.

According to the influential Rome-based La Repubblica, Carlo Rossella -- at the time editor-in-chief of Berlusconi's Panorama, one of Italy's largest weeklies -- delivered the dossier in the autumn of 2002 to the U.S. Embassy in Rome. Rossella's actions were puzzling because its top investigative reporter, Elisabetta Burba, was in the midst of discounting the file as a gross falsification.

Besides directing Panorama, Rossella -- once a foreign policy advisor to Berlusconi -- had been considered a candidate to direct RAI, Italy's state broadcasting system.

A more direct connection to Berlusconi is Giovanni Castellaneta, current Italian ambassador to the United States and Berlusconi's former national security adviser.

According to La Repubblica, Nicola Pollari, the head of SISMI, tried to dispel the CIA's misgivings about the authenticity of the yellowcake papers and failed. Castellaneta then arranged for Pollari to bypass the CIA and meet directly with then-National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice and Stephen Hadley, Rice's chief deputy and currently national security advisor. The meeting took place on Sept. 9, 2002, in the White House, and has been confirmed by White House officials.

It was after this meeting that the story of the yellowcake uranium ore from Niger took off. In late September, CIA director George Tenet and Secretary of State Colin Powell cited the attempted yellowcake purchase from Niger in separate classified hearings before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. In advance of President Bush's January 2003 State of the Union address, Hadley asked for the CIA's approval to include the Niger claim in the president's speech. Even though the CIA had explicitly excised the claim from a prior address given by the president and now repeated its misgivings to Hadley, Bush ended up saying in his speech that, "Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." Bush attributed this intelligence to the British government. No mention was made of any connections between the Italian and American governments.

What did the Berlusconi government get in return for providing the Bush administration with a convenient "smoking gun" to attack Iraq? At the end of the yellowcake trail may be the prestigious contract an Italian firm won to manufacture Marine One -- the fleet of presidential helicopters. In January 2005, the U.S. Navy awarded the contract for the construction of 23 new Marine One helicopters to AgustaWestland. Marketing itself as an Anglo-Italian firm, AgustaWestland is wholly owned by Finmeccanica, Italy's largest defense conglomerate.

The choice of AgustaWestland for Marine One surprised most industry observers because U.S.-based Sikorsky Aircraft Corp. was the heavy favorite. Sikorsky patented the first helicopter design in 1939 and built virtually every president's helicopter since 1957. President Eisenhower regularly flew in a Sikorsky to his Gettysburg farm, and the Sikorsky that Nixon boarded when he resigned from the White House is now being restored for permanent display at the Nixon Library.

Not only did Sikorsky lose, but it lost to a foreign firm that has no problems selling its helicopters to the United States' adversaries. (See side bar, "Choppers for Sale, to Everyone")

As with the yellowcake dossier, the key figure in the Marine One contract is Gianni Castellaneta. When the Pentagon put the Marine One contract out for bid, Castellaneta was deputy chair of Finmeccanica and national security advisor to Prime Minister Berlusconi. By the time the contract was awarded, Castellaneta had been appointed Italy's ambassador to the United States.

Castellaneta proudly told U.S. Italia Weekly, "At noon President Bush received me for the official delivery of credentials. He didn't make me wait a single day. An exceptional courtesy."

Castellaneta's role in obtaining the Marine One contract has never been examined before, but according to Affari Italiani, Italy's first online daily, and disarmo.org, an Italian arms control advocacy group, Castellaneta has long managed the most sensitive dossiers in U.S.-Italian bilateral relations.

When Ambassador Castellaneta was asked about his role, the embassy press officer, Luca Ferrari said, "In his capacity as ambassador, representing all of Italy in the United States, the ambassador does not care to speak any more about Finmeccanica."

"Castellaneta's double role as ambassador and corporate businessman has come under scrutiny at various junctures," says Carlo Bonini, an Italian journalist who has extensively investigated the yellowcake affair. "His duality has inspired animated debate in the Italian Parliament, but due to the absolute majority of seats held by Berlusconi, the matter could never be fully discussed."

With center-left opposition leader Romano Prodi taking the helm of Italy's new government, the newly reconfigured Parliament is expected to open a probe into the "Yellowcake One" affair. For Italians, the main question is whether Berlusconi personally profited from the helicopter deal. For Americans, the question is whether the Bush administration paid the Italians back for providing the false intelligence that helped justify launching the war in Iraq.


SIDEBAR - "Choppers for Sale, to Everyone"

Long before the Dubai ports controversy raised security concerns about foreign management of U.S. ports, the Bush administration awarded a $1.6 billion contract to an Italian firm to build new Marine One helicopters -- the specialized fleet that carries the president. Ultimately, the contract will be worth $6.1 billion -- $3.6 billion for 23 Marine Ones and the rest for research and development. Though the deal has eluded serious media scrutiny, it could become more explosive since the Italian firm, Finmeccanica, subsequently sold helicopters to Libya and China, and has sought a deal with Iran.

In February of 2005, just a month after it was awarded the Marine One contract, Finmeccanica was pitching its helicopters in Iran, at Kish's annual international air show. (See http://www.iran-airshow.com/exhibitors.htm) When questioned about this by the Connecticut Post, a spokeswoman for AgustaWestland, Finmecannica's wholly owned subsidiary charged with building the new Marine One, said the company was not involved in the air show and had not sold anything to Iran in the last 20 years. But Steven Bryen, the president of Finmeccanica in the United States, conceded to NBC's Lisa Meyers that Finmeccanica does business with Iran. Why? "In Europe, they don't call it the enemy," Bryen said.

"Analyzing the defense industry for nearly 30 years, I try to stay calm and nonpartisan," says John Pike, head of GlobalSecurity.org, a nonprofit think tank based in Virginia near the Pentagon. "But the Finmeccanica deal raised every hair on my neck. Apparently no one else sees the irony in a foreign military contractor building Marine One and Ayatollah One."

In January of this year, Finemeccanica sold 10 helicopters for about $100 million to the Libyan military. AgustaWestland itself has formed a joint venture company with Chinese Jiangxi Changhe Aviation Industries Company to produce 10 to 15 helicopters a year.

Few industry observers expected the Rome-based company to win the contract, given the widespread expectation the White House would never allow a foreign-designed helicopter to serve as Marine One. In 2003, the Pentagon conducted its first open bidding to manufacture the Marine One since 1970. Sikorsky offered a military version of its new S-92, a helicopter that makes extensive use of lightweight composite materials and is designed to meet recent safety standards. These should have been competitive advantages since the current Marine Ones, both Sikorsky and Finmeccanica agree, are now so weighed down with security equipment that they are less safe when lifting off. Certainly the business stakes for Sikorsky couldn't have been clearer. George David, chief executive of United Technologies, the parent company of Sikorsky, told industry analysts that getting the contract for Marine One was "win or drop dead as far as we are concerned."

Before focusing on aerospace and defense, Finmeccanica was "an industrial basket case," according to the British publication Flight International. Its winning helicopter was marketed to the Pentagon as a proven warhorse. The Engineer, another British trade journal, described the chopper as "a re-branded version of the EH-101, already in use in the UK, Italy, Japan and Canada and firmly European in heritage." The Pentagon will pay Finmeccanica $2.6 billion to upgrade the EH-101s into Marine Ones, thus providing expensive and potentially sensitive knowledge that Finmeccanica can use for its sales to other countries.

Gino Colangelo, a public relations representative for Finmeccanica USA, told NAM the firm won the contract solely on the basis of the quality of the product.

While seeking the contract, Finmeccanica's helicopter subsidiary, AgustaWestland, positioned itself as an Anglo-Italian firm even after it had bought out Britain's remaining ownership in the firm. AgustaWestland also partnered with U.S. companies Bell Helicopter and Lockheed Martin; although Lockheed doesn't make helicopters, it acted as the lead partner on the bid.

As part of its marketing campaign, Finmeccanica ran an eight-page advertising section in Aviation Week and Space Technology that sported a smiling Bell Helicopter employee below the headline: "Built By Americans Like Robert Stockard." The ad claimed that Stockard, a former Air Force master sergeant now working in Amarillo, Texas, was "one of thousands of Americans across 41 states who will help make the helicopter."

When finally announcing the winner in January 2005, the Pentagon stressed that two-thirds of the work on Marine One would be performed in the United States. But today, with no press notice, Finmeccanica's first Marine Ones are primarily being constructed in Somerset, England on an accelerated schedule. Company officials told London's Evening Standard that President Bush has said to them, "I want to see one of those new machines on the White House lawn before I leave office."

Jeffrey Klein, a founding editor of Mother Jones, freelances for magazines, radio and television. Paolo Pontoniere is a New America Media European commentator.

Calabrio said:
The only bold faced liar here is, and always was, Joe Wilson.

So WHAT exactly was Joe Wilson lying about again?

*owned*
 
JohnnyBz00LS said:
We're just getting to the juicy stuff.....
When all else fails, when reality slaps you square in the face, create new conspiracy....

Could you please do me a favor... are you going to continue all this crap after the next Republican is elected in 2008, or are will you finally give it up and try constructing a philosphy and policies that actually are applicable to the real world

So WHAT exactly was Joe Wilson lying about again?
What did Joe Wilson lie about? Are you kidding me?

He lied about having been appointed to his position by Cheney.
He lied throughout his NY Times piece.
And he's been lying the last few years as a political opportunist and a stooge for the Democrat cover.

By the way, I'm sure I would instruct my "deep-undercover-wife" to pose for Vanity Fair too.



First let me state, I think that is the most obnoxious smiley in use on this board.

With that said, I get the impression, repeatedly, that you don't exactly understand what it's supposed to mean. In this context, you're supposed to use that after you've constructed an article counter-point that renders everyone elses arguments false. You seem to use that "smiley" like a period, despite never winning an argument.
 
Calabrio said:
When all else fails, when reality slaps you square in the face, create new conspiracy....

Could you please do me a favor... are you going to continue all this crap after the next Republican is elected in 2008, or are will you finally give it up and try constructing a philosphy and policies that actually are applicable to the real world


What did Joe Wilson lie about? Are you kidding me?

He lied about having been appointed to his position by Cheney.
He lied throughout his NY Times piece.
And he's been lying the last few years as a political opportunist and a stooge for the Democrat cover.

Let me clear some smoke for you. This story is NOT about Plame, or a CIA leak of her identity, or whether Cheney appointed Wilson to go to Niger or not. The story is about a forged document originating from an Itialian inteligence source finding its way across the red carpet into the White House, where is it then taken as fact despite reservations about the reliability of the information from the CIA and others within our OWN inteligence community. Then BuSh runs it up the flagpole at the '03 SOTU to scare us Americans into buying his load of crap and backing his invasion into Iraq. All the subsequent crap that transpired regarding Wilson, Plame et al is inconsequential. THE QUESTION REMAINS, who forged those documents and why were they delivered to the White House on a silver platter in the first place??

IF you are so defensive about claims that "Bush LIED" and instead claim that Bush was duped by "flawed inteligence", why are you NOT wanting the answer to this same question?? Are you afraid of the answer???

Calabrio said:
By the way, I'm sure I would instruct my "deep-undercover-wife" to pose for Vanity Fair too.

And your point IS?? Her cover had already been blown by the time this story was published in VF. The damage had already been done.
 
JohnnyBz00LS said:
Let me clear some smoke for you. This story is NOT about Plame, or a CIA leak of her identity, or whether Cheney appointed Wilson to go to Niger or not. The story is about a forged document originating from an Itialian inteligence source finding its way across the red carpet into the White House, where is it then taken as fact despite reservations about the reliability of the information from the CIA and others within our OWN inteligence community. Then BuSh runs it up the flagpole at the '03 SOTU to scare us Americans into buying his load of crap and backing his invasion into Iraq. All the subsequent crap that transpired regarding Wilson, Plame et al is inconsequential. THE QUESTION REMAINS, who forged those documents and why were they delivered to the White House on a silver platter in the first place??

IF you are so defensive about claims that "Bush LIED" and instead claim that Bush was duped by "flawed inteligence", why are you NOT wanting the answer to this same question?? Are you afraid of the answer???



And your point IS?? Her cover had already been blown by the time this story was published in VF. The damage had already been done.

LOL You could have fooled me. All we've heard on the MSM and ON THIS SITE FROM YOU FIBERALS is that this story is about Rove outing Plame.

By the way, just seeing you using the phrase "FORGED DOCUMENTS" causes a belly laugh to arise in me that I can't control.

LIBERALS=HYPOCRITES

The rest of your rant about Bush lying is hardly worth answering for the 337th time. Everybody knows that the whole world, not just Bush, was convinced Saddam had WMDs and in fact sought to buy yellowcake. This is documented fact. Now that we've uncovered WMDs in Iraq, nobody's even going there anymore, except you, of course. Time for you to give it a rest, bloviator.
 
After you've been proven wrong, it seems like you want to reshape the debate. Purely for entertainment reasons, I'll indulge:

JohnnyBz00LS said:
This story is NOT about Plame, or a CIA leak of her identity, or whether Cheney appointed Wilson to go to Niger or not.The story is about a forged document originating from an Itialian inteligence source finding its way across the red carpet into the White House, where is it then taken as fact despite reservations about the reliability of the information from the CIA and others within our OWN inteligence community. Then BuSh runs it up the flagpole at the '03 SOTU to scare us Americans into buying his load of crap and backing his invasion into Iraq. All the subsequent crap that transpired regarding Wilson, Plame et al is inconsequential. THE QUESTION REMAINS, who forged those documents and why were they delivered to the White House on a silver platter in the first place??

Let's put this to rest.
The intelligence regarding Iraq attempt to aquire yellow cake uranium from Nigeria has been supported, and to this day is has not been withdrawn, by British intelligence.

But, that "question" you are now restating has nothing to do with the hard-on liberals have had to see Karl Rove indicted. That was purely political, and had nothing to do with intelligence, the law, or the war on terror.



IF you are so defensive about claims that "Bush LIED" and instead claim that Bush was duped by "flawed inteligence", why are you NOT wanting the answer to this same question?? Are you afraid of the answer???
I've addressed this issue already.

The issue of Iraq seeking yellow cake uranium from Nigeria was supported by British intelligence. It wasn't the result of a single source.

And your point IS?? Her cover had already been blown by the time this story was published in VF. The damage had already been done.
No, even if you want to argue "some" damage had been done (for which I would blame Wilson), it can always be worse. Like, say, posting your picture of the cover of a major magazine.
 
Calabrio said:
Let's put this to rest.
The intelligence regarding Iraq attempt to aquire yellow cake uranium from Nigeria has been supported, and to this day is has not been withdrawn, by British intelligence.

Sure, Saddam made an attempt to buy yellow cake from Niger. And taken in that context alone it sounds pretty scary. Then throw in ALL the facts that Niger assured everyone, including the CIA that they'd never sell yellowcake to Iraq, and that such a transfer would be nearly impossible to occur undetected, and now the REALITY of BuSh's SOTU statement is much less alarming. Yet it was the risk of BuSh's deceit being exposed that initiated the whole, politically motivated Plamegate.

Calabrio said:
But, that "question" you are now restating has nothing to do with the hard-on liberals have had to see Karl Rove indicted. That was purely political, and had nothing to do with intelligence, the law, or the war on terror.

It's called fighting fire with fire.
 
fossten said:
Now that we've uncovered WMDs in Iraq, nobody's even going there anymore, except you, of course. Time for you to give it a rest, bloviator.

I'm going there too... Those articles about 20 year old sarin gas & Gen. Georges Sada were not conclusive.
 
JohnnyBz00LS said:
Sure, Saddam made an attempt to buy yellow cake from Niger. And taken in that context alone it sounds pretty scary. Then throw in ALL the facts that Niger assured everyone, including the CIA that they'd never sell yellowcake to Iraq, and that such a transfer would be nearly impossible to occur undetected, and now the REALITY of BuSh's SOTU statement is much less alarming. Yet it was the risk of BuSh's deceit being exposed that initiated the whole, politically motivated Plamegate.

This is revisionist history, this witch hunt started out under the guise that it was important out who "revealed the top-secret" identity of a CIA agent. While, all along, we all knew well and good that the liberal establishment didn't give a rat's ass about national security. Case in point: The New York Times.

So, now, it's not about the classified leak to the press or perjury, now, out of desperation, you're back to arguing the validity of the yellow cake uranium reports.

Maybe I'm alone, but that sounds like an ENTIRELY different topic. Fitzgerald wasn't investigating the intelligence Bush saw, or the numerous lies Wilson was uncovered having reported to the New York Times. He was investigating the "illegal leak" from the White House. And, now, this has been exhaustively investigated and NO CRIME WAS COMMITTED. The issue is dead.

Now, in a desperate attempt to save face, you're attempting to change the topic. Perhaps thinking so much time has elapsed that we won't remember the details surrounding it. Not likely.

It's called fighting fire with fire.
That doesn't make any sense. Joe Wilson is a pawn of the DNC. He was a shill for John Kerry. He relied on an eager media to publish his lies in an effort to discredit the President. The fact that virtually everything he wrote has been thoroughly discredited doesn't matter, you can't put the genie back in the bottle, once his lie his the Times it was out there forever.

And, as Bush stated, SADDAM WAS TRYING TO ACQUIRE YELLOW CAKE URANIUM. Successful or not, would you care to explain what his intentions were. We have established, HE WAS ABSOLUTELY TRYING TO ACQUIRE YELLOW CAKE URANIUM. What do you think he intended to do with it, should he manage to secure the sale? Do you think he was going to find a way to refine it and provide the Kurds catscan machines? I await your answer.
 
95DevilleNS said:
I'm going there too... Those articles about 20 year old sarin gas & Gen. Georges Sada were not conclusive.

No, they absolutely concluded that they did find Sarin and Mustard Gas. The mere fact they exist proves two things. 1. Saddam did not destroy his old stock piles. 2. He was lying to the U.N. END OF STORY.

There's a quite a bit of information coming out of Iraq that has not yet been review or has not yet been unclassified. This is due in large part to the U.S.' inability to find native Farsi speakers to read all of the material. Sadly, I took Spanish in high school and they don't seem to offer Farsi in college.

If I were a Democrat, I would be a little leary about going any farther out on the Iraqi WMD branch. Those things have nasty tendency to be leaked just prior to elections.
 
Calabrio said:
And, as Bush stated, SADDAM WAS TRYING TO ACQUIRE YELLOW CAKE URANIUM. Successful or not, would you care to explain what his intentions were. We have established, HE WAS ABSOLUTELY TRYING TO ACQUIRE YELLOW CAKE URANIUM. What do you think he intended to do with it, should he manage to secure the sale? Do you think he was going to find a way to refine it and provide the Kurds catscan machines? I await your answer.

So where does BuSh's secret "pre-cogs" reside? Are we now living in times where we can justify actions to stop a crime before it happens? Seems pretty Orwellian to me.

I stopped trusting our government to tell us the truth along time ago, after the Iran-Contral scandal, after Waco, and the credibility of our government has been in a downhill slide ever since. Blind faith in this administration , which has demonstrated much less "transparency" and much more secrecy, even before 9/11, than any administration before it, indicates a "lemmings" mentality which I refuse to buy into. EXCUSE ME for asking questions and searching for real answers that don't require me to "trust" what comes out of the mouth of politicians.
 
JohnnyBz00LS said:
So where does BuSh's secret "pre-cogs" reside? Are we now living in times where we can justify actions to stop a crime before it happens? Seems pretty Orwellian to me.
That would be correct. I hope the continue to stop terrorist attacks before they happen. And, I'd prefer to stop all rogue leaders from obtaining nuclear weapons before they have them as well.

It doesn's sound Orwellian, it sounds like survival and national security to me.

I stopped trusting our government to tell us the truth along time ago, after the Iran-Contral scandal, after Waco, and the credibility of our government has been in a downhill slide ever since.

Blind faith in this administration , which has demonstrated much less "transparency" and much more secrecy, even before 9/11, than any administration before it, indicates a "lemmings" mentality which I refuse to buy into. EXCUSE ME for asking questions and searching for real answers that don't require me to "trust" what comes out of the mouth of politicians.
So, what you're really saying is- you want to change the topic again. What does any of that have to do with Karl Rove, Valerie Plame, Joe Wilson, Fitzgeral or Novak? I don't agree with your last statement, but I'm not going to disect it because it has nothing to do with the topic of the thread.

And, for the record, you haven't been "asking questions" you've been issuing false charges.
 
JohnnyBz00LS said:
Blind faith in this administration , which has demonstrated much less "transparency" and much more secrecy, even before 9/11, than any administration before it, indicates a "lemmings" mentality which I refuse to buy into.

That's a Democratic talking point, and it won't hold water. Let's talk about the secrecy of the Clinton administration, shall we? Why not? You're the one making the claim, let's talk about it.

900 FBI files
Whitewater
Travelgate
Vince Foster's death
Chinagate
Lewinsky
Paula Jones
The Gorelick Wall - caused 9/11 by keeping secrets
Sandy Burglar stealing classified files
Susan MacDougall
White House email scandal


I could go on and on. Scandal after scandal and secret after secret. You get the idea.

What about the secrecy of the New York Times? Why don't they reveal their sources? They are at this moment refusing to assist in an investigation regarding Judith Miller tipping off terrorist organizations to FBI raids right before 9/11. What's their problem?
 

Members online

Back
Top