Posted on 07/26/2005 2:43:29 PM PDT by STARWISE
Tuesday 26th July 2005 (18h58) :
A neighbor’s view of Valerie Wilson’s ’outing’
Joe and Valerie Wilson are my next door neighbors in a hilly neighborhood just west of Georgetown. We moved in within months of each other seven years ago, attracted to our respective houses by the view of the Capitol in the distance and the Washington Monument in the foreground. The patriotic view is stirring.
I have another view from my window, of a neighbor who is a working, devoted mother of 5-year-old twins, a volunteer for charities, a woman active in her church, and a caring person. Soft-spoken, self-effacing and very private, Valerie is very easy to label "the lovely woman next door."
To some, I am known as Joe and Valerie’s lawyer, a fact that has surfaced by my occasional statements on their behalf. The Wilsons don’t need a lawyer for any pending proceeding; I am simply helping them understand some of the technicalities of the criminal investigation and collecting facts for any eventual civil suit. Before Robert Novak’s column, I was simply their friend and neighbor, a role that will continue long after the White House leak matter is over.
'What do you do?'
CIA LEAK UNFOLDS
2002
February: Joe Wilson, a former foreign service officer and diplomat who had served in Niger and Iraq, is sent to Niger by CIA to investigate rumors Saddam Hussein had tried to purchase enriched "yellowcake" uranium from the African country.
Feb. 22: Wilson tells CIA and State Department the rumors are "unequivocally wrong."
2003
January: President Bush in State of the Union speech says: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
June 10: A memo for undersecretary of State refers to Valerie Plame as ....
Rest at link
(Excerpt) Read more at livejournal.com ...
Feb. 22: Wilson tells CIA and State Department the rumors are "unequivocally wrong."
2003
January: President Bush in State of the Union speech says: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
---
Disengenuous, right off the bat. Wilson did no fact gathering on the scene (he admits this), and while *one* strand of evidence re Saddam's interest in yellowcake was proven false (prop planted by the French), the other strands all held up under scrutiny.
Its all in the 9-11 commision report. As well as diplomatic-speak that Joe Wilson lied to them.
"Wilson's probably upset that someone in the beltway suggested that he had to depend on his wife to get a job."
Following all of this since day one, and can't help but see patterns that Joe Wilson is some amatuer fop trying to impress the cocktail party set.
Who's on deck?
Democrats will assume that the lawyer will speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. This is of course true...
... Except that the law recognizes various types of truth, and the degrees of difference between the truths at any given moment depending on certain situational factors - such as the requirement to speak the truth under oath on penalty of perjury.
What the lawyer says at any given time must never conflict with the interests of their clients. That is why one can never trust someone else's lawyer to work on your behalf. Press releases or publications like this are not required to adhere to any rigorous standard of truth. In such statements the lawyers are free to say whatever they wish, so long as it has some basis in fact.
In other words, ignore the lawyers and pay attention to the facts. The facts must, by definition, adhere to a higher standard of truth. In this instance - the facts surrounding the Rove-Wilson-Plame matter are quite plain, even if the press continues to obfuscate and obscure those facts in favor of a sexier political story.
It is a fact that statements made by Joe Wilson regarding his selection to go to Africa on what is essentially a fact finding mission were misleading in most cases, and in a couple of cases blatantly false. While Wilson did not literally say that he was sent at the behest of Dick Cheney and the White House, he certainly implied it. Wilson also asserted that his wife had nothing to do with his being sent on that mission. An assertion that has since proven to be false. And that is only the beginning of Wilson's stretching of the facts...
Wilson went on to publish an Op/Ed piece and to give interviews where he based his conclusions and criticisms of the Bush Administrations justifications for the war, on his trip to Niger. As it turned out, his conclusions did not and could not have derived themselves from his trip to Niger. The Senate Committee that reviewed his findings came to the opposite conclusions, a fact that seems to not have made the news for all that it is public information. A possible conclusion is that Joe Wilson had determined the results of his mission prior to being dispatched to Africa. It is also a very likely possibility that he did not do so on his own.
Now, how can a man with absolutely no credibility remain the darling of the media? Is it an example of institutional bias against the Republican Party? Or is it deeper? Is the Plame matter a badly run and failed psychological operation targeted at the American population during a time of war by domestic political operatives? Was it an attempt to perform a flanking maneuver to influence an election and bring down a President?
And what exactly is it that the special prosecutor is investigating?
If there is a cabal rooted in the institutions of our government that we rely on for national security, and if this cabal is attempting to subvert those resources for the purpose of non-productive political operations, then we are in great danger until this cabal is uprooted. If, however, there is a nothing more than a bunch of loosely affiliated, unorganized groups working at cross purposes to our national security for the sake of political currency, then the danger is lessened by their incompetence but they must also be stopped.
The Plame matter has all the earmarks of a single hand having stirred the pot. Joe and Valerie Wilson were merely tools. Novak and Cooper were both planted with just enough information. My guess is that there is someone pulling the strings - as to whether or not they are a genius, who knows. It might just be a lucky amateur with the right connections. But a government at war with itself can't be expected to win the confidence of the public. And that might just be the goal.
I meant nothing offensive about my Wolf comment, but I was picturing a neighbor "lady" with the tone and rather flowery descriptive phrases in the opening of the piece... Then when I saw it was a man, I was surprised, and I formed an opinion. I certainly could be wrong, but either way .. it was just a spontaneous comment, and not meant to be derisive.
Thank you, Sam
Once I knew this guy was a Wilson supporter I knew you'd show up! ;)
I don't know the real facts of Plame's employment, and no one else here does either. But, if one allows for the mere possibility that she was, in fact, covert, then the disclosure of her employment under those circumstances would be scornful, not something to be celebrated - regardless of why it was done.
I'm still amazed that no self-described conservative will acknowledge that basic truth.
I acknowledge that basic truth.
I also acknowledge that anyone who tries to stand up for Wilson is a loser.
June 10: President, asked whether he'd fire anyone who leaked Plame's name, replies: "Yes."
This is an inaccurate summary of what transpired on this day in 2004. What the reporter asked was whether the President stood by his previous position--stated on September 30, 2003. In asking this question the reporter inaccurately implied that Bush had said he'd fire anyone who had leaked. What he actually said is that he wanted to know who had leaked and if anyone broke the law he'd take care of him.
If it weren't for their ability to twist and fabricate, the mainstream media wouldn't have any so-called news stories to peddle.
Joe? Or Valerie? Or both?
Joe, mainly.
Oh give me a frickin break.I don`t care particularly what point the guy is trying to make but the Broadway melodramatics make me suspect that his opinions are pretty thin on evidence and fact and he is hoping to obscure that with tear jerking horse muffins.
Tear jerking horse muffins?
ROFL!! I've never heard that one before.
Maybe this is the mysterious 'person' unnamed by the Washington Post who approached Robert Novak on the street several days before Novak's column appeared and questioned him about yellowcake uranium and Wilson. The Post says Wilson was the one who sent this 'person' whom he won't name to the Post to question Novak. What was Wilson up to?
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.