Posted on 11/02/2005 11:01:51 AM PST by inpajamas
It's like a spy thriller. Institutional rivalries and political loyalties have fostered an intelligence officer's resentment against the government. Suddenly, an opportunity appears for the agent to undercut the national leadership. A vital question of intelligence forms the core justification for controversial military actions by the current leaders. If this agent can get in the middle of that question, distort that information and make it public, the agent might foster regime change in the upcoming election.
But the rules on agents are clear. They can't purposely distort gathered intelligence, go public with secret information or use their position or information to manipulate domestic elections or matters without risking their job or jail. But their spouse can! The agent realizes her spouse can go out on behalf of the spy agency, can distort information, go public with classified information and use all this spy-agency-sponsored material and credentials to try to pull down the current government, and it is all perfectly legal.
Suppose the spouse adds just one more brilliant, well-aimed lie: claim your foremost political opponent put the spouse up to the trip. As your spouse uses your agency's name to mount attacks, your enemy may fall into your trap. Will your enemy suffer your spouse's lies or take the bait and try to clarify his non-role? If he tells the press he didn't hire your spouse, the press will demand to know, "Then who did?"
(Excerpt) Read more at ajc.com ...
Actually, one could make the argument that they Violated the Hatch Act.
btt
Makes me wonder what Ashcroft was thinking when he allowed the FBI to investigate this "outing"..
mark
The light switch is up!
Clearly this will restrict the flexibility of the CIA. But who ever thought that the flexibility given to CIA agents would be misused to destabilize a U.S. President? No one — until Valerie Plame.
An excellent rule for eliminating CIA sponsored dirty political tricks. Zell Miller is such a veritable fount of good ideas! He's certainly found a way to lay the Plame nonsense to rest.
("Denny Crane: Gun Control? For Communists. She's a liberal. Can't hunt.")
Well, I don't think we'll have to worry about the CIA sending spouses and relatives to do investigations ever again.
...Something has to be done. We can't let the CIA become the domestic dirty tricks shop, with Republican and Democratic agents each trying to pull down their opposing presidents.
We need a Plame rule. Any family member of a CIA agent tapped to help out must live by the same rules regarding information disclosure and domestic political manipulations as those imposed on the agent. If the family member fails to live by those rules, the agent is terminated.
Clearly this will restrict the flexibility of the CIA. But who ever thought that the flexibility given to CIA agents would be misused to destabilize a U.S. president? No one — until Valerie Plame.
Finally, some one of prominence is saying what needs to be said. I bet this Op-Ed made Cynthia Tucker's head implode.
It this is not stopped,and the truth about Plame not being a covert spoken by every republican possible, this really could end this Presidency.They are out to get Cheney NOW!
Sweet! Bump!
The Wilsons are still trying to get Karl Rove. That was the whole point. At least it was for Wilson. He is still spinning that Rove was behind Valerie's "outing." Getting an indictment or even a conviction of Scooter Libby does not make Joe Wilson a hero to the left, or ensure him millions of dollars in book sales and speaking fees. Only Rove does that. Wilson stuck his neck out with his remarks about Rove being frog-marched out of the White House, and last week Fitzgerald chopped it right off.
Wilson's plot has failed, and his 15 minutes are almost up.
I hope you are right!
The obvious attempt to affect the 2004 presidential election is especially dirty. The timing and Wilson's meeting with presidential candidate Kerry, is the smoking gun.
No one should forget Wilson's and Plame's financial gain from this operation. Wilson wrote a book. A book that would not have been possible without Plame's help.
A political operation, planned by Plame/CIA, payed for by U.S. taxpayers, with financial gain for Wilson and Plame.
Shouldn't Wilson, Plame and the CIA be investigated?
"SEN. KIT BOND: Now the ambassador (Joe Wilson) is going around on the John Kerry Web site and saying the president misled the nation. I'm told that he has written that the president lied. And that is an egregious political charge. It's not a literacy flair. It's a hoax and a fraud."
That was a great picture of her standing by Reid's side....Worth a thousand words, as they say.
Not too long ago, Bubba (high on meds) said that if they could get rid of Rove, they could get the Whitehouse back. (In my words).
Has “Fitzmas” not given the lawyers representing Mr. Libby the perfect opportunity to go question the CIA operatives that were trying to get Bush in trouble? Go get the records of the major networks that escalated this story and made Wilson a hero. Get some detail information of the special relationships between the DNC and MSM. Show the American people how and why the country is maligned by these people. It is time to switch from defence to offence which changes the perspectives for 2006 and 2008.
Will the victims of this hoax fight back and assist this President to complete his term? I seriously doubt it based on past performance!
LOL, agreed.
Man oh man, Zell is a man with a brain I can love. This whole thing stinks of politics and IMO money. Oil for Food, has to be. Why else would they be so intent on protecting Saddamn.
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/10/8/112447.shtml
[500 tons of uranium in Iraq-- my headline]
With Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff
Friday, Oct. 8, 2004 11:16 a.m. EDT
No WMD Stockpiles in Iraq? Not Exactly ...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.