Replies

Thanks for the links, JJ. I thank everyone, in fact for their links and data. This entire event is part of a larger pattern which continues to be used by Democrats, IME.

Peripheral links:

http://www.wisconsinproject.org/pubs/articles/1999/lithotripter.html

My question is: Why and who wanted to float a story in order to focus on Africa, and not other countries?

http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20040322-082826-7678r.htm

----------------

And these other two:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1045272/posts>

http://www.nationalreview.com/ledeen/ledeen200407120941.asp

It becomes increasingly clear, reading a ton of data, someone wanted attention focused away from specific countries and with focus paid to Africa where the "at that time" issue was concerned with "harboring" of terrorists; but not specifically upon uranium. The directional focus of "who outted Valerie Plame" is the hunt directional. Aimed at the Bush Admin. And as I panned story after story.. search after search.. it is patently, overwhelmingly obvious there are efforts to take down not just the President, but the WH Cabinet and Admin. From Gary Hart taking potshots at Rice to demands for Rumsfeld to resign over "abu ghraib".

The point is to focus on Who Outted Valerie Plame. right. It most certainly is a breach of security, but I don't think it came from the WH. Why would they shoot themselves in the foot? They have absolutely nothing to gain through the Plame "outting" and the attention being focused on Africa but not other "certain" nations, and at that particular time.

Thanks Alia,
I'll check out those links...

You know what I've never really understood other than the money factor, is why Joe Wilson came out with his book when he did, knowing his story could be debunked. Why attract such attention to yourself??? Reminds me of the Shell game...

The point is to focus on Who Outted Valerie Plame. right. It most certainly is a breach of security, but I don't think it came from the WH.

I've long thought it was not a breach of security as I don't think she had been a covert agent for years. Of course the WH had nothing to do with it.

I have posited that the grand jury is looking at a wider issue of leaks, not who "leaked" Plame's name, but perhaps how she and others were involved in disseminating disinformation.

I also was on record as stating flatly that I expected the appellate court to uphold the contempt citations for Judith Miller and Matt Cooper. Yesterday they did so---unanimously.

I read the first part of the ruling and found a fascinating tidbit regarding what the grand jury wants from Miller. Regarding a "specified government official" they want to know of any discussions that took place between July 6 and July 13, 2003, involving Plame OR about discussions about *Iraq and uranium*.

Keep in mind this is an appellate court citing the above to justify upholding an order that she testify so they have found it is not beyond the scope of the investigation.