Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: lugsoul
Her name was tied to the company through FEC records. I doubt anyone wanting to determine whether she was CIA would consider that a lack of 'proof.'

Those records are meaningless. Anyone can disclose whatever employer name they want, nobody check or cares unless there's an investigation like this.

Jeebus, this is just getting 'totally ridiculous.' Do you people really believe that it is a good thing that this woman's former NOC status and her former front company's status

What is your evidence for NOC status? The only thing I have seen is Wilson's claim two years ago that she was NOC then, now changed to she was NOC before then. The man has been caught lying several times already.

98 posted on 07/15/2005 11:22:16 AM PDT by palmer (If you see flies at the entrance to the burrow, the ground hog is probably inside)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies ]


To: palmer

If you want to contend she wasn't NOC, fine - go ahead. Her former supervisor is quoted in the Wash Times saying she was. A former colleague (Larry Johnson) says she was. If you want to call them liars or claim you have some proof that she wasn't NOC, go ahead. But, given that fact that disclosure of details of her cover would likely effect a lot of folks other than her, I doubt you will ever see whatever definitive proof you want to see of her cover. The CIA made a criminal referral - which would be completely frivolous if she wasn't covert at least at some point. The SP has been investigating it for two years. I doubting that there is 'no evidence' she was NOC.


100 posted on 07/15/2005 11:29:08 AM PDT by lugsoul ("She talks and she laughs." - Tom DeLay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson