Posted on 03/08/2007 11:26:28 PM PST by april15Bendovr
CIA Operative Plame To Testify Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald Also Invited To Testify
POSTED: 1:04 am EST March 9, 2007 CAPITOL HILL -- Valerie Plame, the CIA operative exposed after her husband criticized President George W. Bush's march to war, has agreed to testify before Congress.
A House panel is looking into how the White House handled her identity.
Congressman Henry Waxman, who chairs the panel, has also invited special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald to testify March 16. But he hasn't responded yet.
Fitzgerald just won conviction of Vice President Cheney's former aide, Lewis Libby, on obstruction and perjury charges.
Plame's name was leaked to reporters in mid-2003 after her husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, began criticizing the Bush administration's handling of prewar intelligence on Iraq.
To make this complete wouldn't it be nice to have the judge from the Anna Nicole Smith hearing testify?
Please, don't talk that way about Henry Waxman... ;)
Oh, please!
I'm eating breakfast!
Are CIA operatives even allowed to testify in open court ?
I'm sure it will be a lovely bush-bashing party where Libs will have carte blanche to lie their faces off.
Any bets that someone named Armitage isn't even "invited" to testify?
My God the issue over ABSOLUTELY NOTHING continues.
Maybe Valerie will get a bookdeal after all.
As I understand the report, it is not testimony, it is an appearance.
That means that nothing the 'ho' says will be under oath.
Same goes for Fitzgerald, who has already lied in court when he said that Libby's lie clouded the "government's attempt to get to the Truth!".
So, two liars and no testimony.
No, that one is too easy.
However, in a previous thread someone posted questions that the Pubbies should ask her. One of them was something like: "What do you think about the fact that the person who leaked your name, Richard Armitage, was given immunity by the prosecutor?"
Other questions suggested regarded how well her husband knew Armitage, how often she had been invited to parties with members of the media, and lots others.
In short, seemingly soft-ball questions, but in reality loaded grenades.
Now, the question is if the Republicans in the House have any pitchers.
I am told the only the person who did not have Valerie Plame's phone number was Ron Jeremy.
Here's how the republicans can win this. DEMAND everyone be sworn in under oath, then "guarantee" prosecutions for perjury from the Justice Dept. for anything Plame or Wilson or Fitzgerald says that is the least bit untrue.
"Swim The Witch !!!"...;0)
Aw geez, now you've done it! They're going to puddle the floor. The Stupid Party can't handle things like that.
waxman is one ugly prehistoric relic who cant seem to find any real crimes?? Why doesnt he look into that crook with the cash in his freezer???
Members of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
Democrats
Henry A. Waxman, California, Chairman
Rep. Tom Lantos, California
Rep. Edolphus Towns, New York
Rep. Paul E. Kanjorski, Pennsylvania
Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney, New York
Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, Maryland
Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich, Ohio
Rep. Danny K. Davis, Illinois
Rep. John F. Tierney, Massachusetts
Rep. Wm. Lacy Clay, Missouri
Rep. Diane E. Watson, California
Rep. Stephen F. Lynch, Massachusetts
Rep. Brian Higgins, New York
Rep. John A. Yarmuth, Kentucky
Rep. Bruce L. Braley, Iowa
Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of Columbia
Rep. Betty McCollum, Minnesota
Rep. Jim Cooper, Tennessee
Rep. Chris Van Hollen, Maryland
Rep. Paul W. Hodes, New Hampshire
Rep. Christopher S. Murphy, Connecticut
Rep. John P. Sarbanes, Maryland
Rep. Peter Welch, Vermont
Republicans
Rep. Tom Davis, Virginia, Ranking Minority Member
Rep. Dan Burton, Indiana
Rep. Christopher Shays, Connecticut
Rep. John M. McHugh, New York
Rep. John L. Mica, Florida
Rep. Mark E. Souder, Indiana
Rep. Todd Russell Platts, Pennsylvania
Rep. Chris Cannon, Utah
Rep. John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee
Rep. Michael Turner, Ohio
Rep. Darrell E. Issa, California
Rep. Kenny Marchant, Texas
Rep. Lynn A. Westmoreland, Georgia
Rep. Patrick T. McHenry, North Carolina
Rep. Virginia Foxx, North Carolina
Rep. Brian Bilbray, California
Rep. Bill Sali, Idaho
Vacancy
.. uh ,. will KanYAY West be testifryin' ?
.. maybe even "Cornball" West ,.. he'll hav'tuh be lured outta Princelyton
Yes. And then they should ask Valerie what she knows about her husband's past -- his rehab and his addictions while he was ambassador. Ask her if she is a co-dependent.
She had his....
My guess is that Fitz-fong is not going to be participating in a Waxman circus.
Was it necessary to call her a "ho"?
Are you the morality police? Are you in charge now?
And I wonder what the macho Republicans are going to do during this hearing.
"We're so sorry, Ms. Plame, that our Republican operative Libby gave away your identity."
"I make a motion to impeach the President for this dastardly deed."
"Mr. Wilson, you are an honorable man."
Insert other spineless phrases as you like.
Well I have no objections to calling the ho a "ho".
She willingly lied, peed on our feet and said it was raining, arranged for her pervert husband to undermine this country at war, then sat back and watched an innocent man be convicted.
Calling her a whore is flattering her now that I think about it.
Inside the beltway nonsense.
So true.
NRO Corner:
http://corner.nationalreview.com/
Valerie Plame Wilson's Testimony [Byron York]
If Valerie Plame Wilson testifies before Congress, she will likely be asked detailed questions about her job status. Judge Reggie Walton tried, unsuccessfully, to keep the issue out of the Libby trial. But as Henry Waxman pointed out, that was a narrow legal proceeding, and a congressional hearing would have a broader scope.
So Mrs. Wilson will likely be asked what years she operated under non-official cover. She will likely be asked about her return to the United States, about her maternity leave, and about her job description when she returned to work. She will likely be asked whether that job description could accurately be called covert. She will likely be asked whether her area of work had changed, or was changing, at the time of Robert Novak's July 14, 2003 column that mentioned her name. And she will likely be asked what, if any, damage to national security resulted from the publication of her name.
These questions have never been answered publicly — even Judge Walton said he didn't know the answers — and Mrs. Wilson's appearance before the House committee will finally give us an opportunity to learn the answers.
Hey Waxman ... that works both ways
This is the never ending TV trail. Imagine seeing OJ in court for the rest of your life. The DEMS are repeating the lie until you believe it. The RINOS of the GOP will believe it just hoping it will go away. How long can you hold out?
I seem to remember reading early when this broke that Plame's neighbors had known for years that she worked in a classifed position for the CIA. So much for her security; seems to have been common knowledge.
Plame's name was leaked to reporters by Joseph Wilson before he began telling everyone Vice President Cheney sent him to Niger and long before he criticized the Bush administration's handling of prewar intelligence on Iraq.
Well, only if you are sure she'll tell the truth.
If we really want to know the answers to those questions, we should call her boss.
She will seem like a nice little mommy, and the Republicans won't stand a chance of asking her any hard questions because the Dems will accuse themof wanting this nice woman to get killed because Libby said her name.
This IS the Anna Nichol case of the govt!!
Anyone know who the Reps are on this committee? This could backfire on the Dems big time if the Reps are focused and articulate.
The facts are against Ms. Phlame in my opinion.
CIA wants to block her book. Maybe testifying is the only way around getting her book released for her sorry ass and her liberal friends.
When liberals are initiated working for the CIA do they swear in to protect a living document or the constitution of the United States?
Does this mean her "testimony" is under oath?
If not, then it is a false headline.
If it is, then she must confess or perjure herself.
EOM!
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.