Posted on 07/14/2005 3:04:54 PM PDT by hispanarepublicana
"... by the disclosure of her C.I.A. employment."
And .. since her husband was the person who made this DISCLOSURE PUBLIC - then there is no need for Rove to do anything.
"And .. your evidence for that is .......??? And "analyst" is not "covert"."
I didn't say definitively that she was covert at the time of the article. My point is more that just because she doesn't meet the narrow scope of the criteria laid out in the act, doesn't mean she's not covert. That criteria was intended to cover only a specific portion of covert employees.
I believe she was covert for several reasons, including the fact that at the time friends and neighbors expressed surprise that she worked at the CIA and were under the impression she was a contractor for another government agency, and the fact that she was apparently a Career Trainee, who are all covert, and the fact that this proceeded at all. I don't know how it could have proceeded if she wasn't a covert employee. The point of proceeding would be to determine if the situation met the criteria of the act.
If she was an analyst at any time during her career, she still would have been covert if she was a Career Trainee. She wouldn't go in and out of undercover status. There are analysts who are covert.
"I thought you might have been defending Wilson and Plame in a roundabout way"
No way--I'm sickened that they've made people think U.S. citizens and sources and operations have been endangered by this, national security endangered, her career and their lives destroyed--and they know none of that is true.
During Wilson's interviews today, he forcibly reminded me of Scott Ritter after Ritter overplayed his 15 minutes of fame as an agent of Saddam. Remember how he contradicted himself every few minutes? Then his disgusting perversions were revealed. I distinctly remember that the Democrats accused Rove of ultimately being behind the revelation of his arrest for soliciting minors over the Internet and demanded Republican heads on platters.
Funny how Ritter disappeared out of the limelight. Guess he shuffled off into the Ritterbox of history.
This whole dog and pony show is putting me in an evil mood.
Please read post #212 for legal definition of "covert". If for any reason from the legal definition that exempts her from being "covert" is she hasn't been working outside the US in the past 5 years.
Thanks. That's exactly how I feel; also extreme anger and disgust that those same people are using this fabrication as a tool to destroy a innocent people, including Rove and a president whom I believe history will categorize as among the Greats if he can outgame the left's games.
"Please read post #212 for legal definition of "covert". If for any reason from the legal definition that exempts her from being "covert" is she hasn't been working outside the US in the past 5 years."
It is description of a covert agent as referred to in this statute. It lays out what they mean when they refer to "covert agent" in the writing of the statute.
But really, there's no "legal" definition. If they wrote some other act regarding covert employees, they might have different criteria for the scope of the act and they would lay out that criteria and define what they meant by "covert agent" as it pertains to that statute. The criteria could be completely different. Look at any legal document--they define what they mean by the various terms for purposes of that document.
If you're an undercover employee, and you don't meet the criteria of that statute, that doesn't mean you're not "legally" an undercover or covert employee. There's just no such thing. Your employer makes that decision and that makes it so. If they tell you you're covert, you are. You're not pseudo-covert because you haven't worked overseas in the past 5 years.
BTTT
You may well be right on that. A thought I had (and another FReeper said the same on a post in the last few days) is that Matt Cooper is married to Mindy Grunwald - a HUGH Hitlery supporter (think she does work or has worked for H). I wouldn't at all be surprised if H is involved in this somehow and JM knew she better take the perp walk.
It makes you wonder what is under investigation at this point? Maybe it isn't Rove at all? This has probably evolved into other areas?
Well I hope anyway. LOL
You're right there may not be a legal definition for "covert" in general but to which there is a law that determines a premise of legal liability to a certain situation and it relates to an uncharacterized legal definition, the act itself is the definition. In short, what this means is if there is no specification to a person or group of persons then the law is general, one size fits all, but because they have the specific definition of what is meant by "covert" she is not "covert" because she doesn't fit the criteria. I think we agree but have a different way of reaching the same conclusion?
They have a definition of "covert agent" in that statute because they don't want it to apply to ALL covert agents. Just the covert agents who fit the criteria.
I think where we're hung up here is the intent of the statute defining covert. Those who wrote the statute did not intend to say that this is what is considered officially undercover. That these employees are who they consider to be legally undercover. They intended to say that they want the statute to apply only to these certain covert employees. They're not saying that these employees who meet this criteria are the only legal covert agents.
They don't want it to apply to all covert agents because then we'd have messes like the one we have now. The statute is not concerned with people who blow a covert agent's cover unless they're doing what Agee was doing.
She is still covert if the agency says she's covert. The intent of the statute was never to define what is technically covert. The definitions are there to narrow it down to only certain covert employees.
This from Joe Wilson's own book... a covert agent is covert and she wouldn't have been able to tell him this information.
The question that needs asking, is: Was she ever covert?
"I didn't say definitively that she was covert at the time of the article"
YOU SAID #185 - "She IS covert"
You said definitely!
I'd have to go back and look for the year she/he claims she started at the CIA, but 23 years ago is 1982. This is at the end of Jimmy Carter and start of RReagan. Jimmy Carter initiated massive Affirmative Action hiring/promotion programs that were mandated by all federal agencies. Different forms of it still exist today.
The truth won't ever come out--cause Valerie and Joe can use the national security shield for everything they don't want to say. But I think this scenario might well be the way it was.
In or about 1982, Valerie Plame got a job with the CIA in Virginia in either a clerical position or that of a Trainee. If she started in the clerical ranks she could of jumped to the Trainee ranks via Affirmative Action/Upward Mobility. After a number of years as a paper shuffler, she met Joe Wilson and fell for his worldly charms (hahaha). Blinded by love and ambition, she and boJoe got the CIA to transfer her to a European station where she could continue her Trainee studies and be with Ambassador Joe. When she and Joe returned to Virginia in the early 1990s, Joe was able to get her a promotion to a "manager" analyst slot cause Joe was then tight with a former CIA Director, who was then President --Bush Sr.
It's no secret the CIA is loaded with radical left wing incompetent liberal democrats.
Valerie's CIA ticket for Joe's Africa Tea Trip is par for the course.
Vanity Fair, Books, TV, Hollywood to follow...
The rest of the office staff thought Valerie was the donut fetcher and coffee maker. The only secrets were who took one lump of sugar in their coffee, and who preferred two-who preferred glazed donuts and who preferred jelly.
"YOU SAID #185 - "She IS covert" "
I said she WAS covert. We know she was covert at one time because she was overseas. Everyone who gets stationed overseas is covert and remains covert for a certain period of time upon return.
We have her VIPS cronies saying she was a Career Trainee. So she most likely continued to be covert no matter what her job.
All the evidence says she was covert. It doesn't matter whether she was or wasn't. She didn't fit the criteria of the statute.
"If she was a covert agent, why did she tell him on something like their second date, during a heavy makeout session, that she was CIA???"
She did, but she shouldn't have.
I'm not in an evil mood .. but foul would probably describe it better. I would really like to tape the dems mouths shut - just for a week or so - their constant whining is really beginning to grate on my nerves.
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.