Novak: The abuse of my integrity provokes this response

Houston Chronicle ^ | July 31, 2005 | Robert Novak

[processing please hold]

Nothing worse than a sanctimonious libertarian.

Yes there is. Ex-smokers and ex-whores.

[popdonnelly]

The CIA assassinated JFK? Sounds like Oliver Stone.

[finnman69]

But Novak is suggesting that some in the media and the CIA are lying about what actually happened

Judith Miller is protecting someone....perhaps Joe Wilson himself?

[finnman69]

Why care? Are you unable to think for yourself? I don't listen to him these days. He says something, then says it agains, then again, then again... you get the picture. I enjoyed the Rush Limbaugh Show of the early days in the '90's. He actually added something fresh. With his updates, and all the fun-poking he did, it was a hoot. He always preaches to the choir, but the chorus button has become stuck...Now he just hashes, and rehashes! He still has a voice, but it doesn't say as much, these days, except to the choir! My voice keeps me out of it... If you want to support a lying druggie, that's fine! I'll get my news from FR, and the net! I usually find out things the same way he does!

Who peed in your cheerios?

[Archon of the East]

So much for compassionate Conservatism. Quite frankly I don't care if someone like's Rush or not or what side of the argument you might be on, but that is just wrong.

[bjcintennessee]

ping

[Arizona]

I haven't even finished reading all the comments yet but just HAD to stop and say I love your Rove/Rumsfeld 2008 graphic! LOL!

[NetValue]

"When Fitzgerald is finished, I'm hoping Wilson, Larry Johnson and some State and CIA traiters get what's coming to them."

Wilson should be indicted for perjury IMHO.

[Enchante]

MEMO TO JUDITH MILLER:

Journalists are NOT above the law and all of you snotty twits are NOT superior to the rest of us. You can testify under oath or you can stay in jail for awhile longer. If it were up to me you would never emerge from that jail until you testify. Unfortunately, I fear the law will only allow you to be kept there until the Grand Jury is finished its work, so you are hoping to outlast it..... THAT is a travesty of justice which should not be allowed. Why don't you just tell us all which 'Rat(s) you are protecting??? Is it Joe Wilson and/or Valerie Plame? Is it some other lib mole in the CIA or State Dept.??? Some leftist pal in the MSM? Tell us, Judith, inquiring minds demand to know and the Grand Jury needs to complete its work properly and accurately.

[ladyinred]

According to her boss at the CIA she was NOT covert at the time, but let's not confuse them with the facts.

[Enchante]

"The supposed 'outing' appears to be nothing more than a manufactured scandal to cover up what appears to be a real scandal. What were 'agents' of the US government, elected, appointed or civil servants doing protecting Saddam/France/UN in the first place?"

Yes, and I sure hope someone is thoroughly studying Joe Wilson's business activities, among other things - his 'consulting' business which he began in 1998 may have benefitted enormously from his prostituting himself on behalf of France, Niger, the UN, the IAEA, and Euro-weenies in general. Wilson has worked tirelessly to advance the cause of Euroweenies who want to sweep Oil-for-Food and all of the financial scandals and improprieties under the rug. Has Wilson received contracts from companies and/or individuals who had a direct financial interest in blocking US actions??? Certainly Wilson has worked to give France, Niger, and Saddam's Iraq a clean bill of health..... has he benefitted in his business/financial dealings from his dishonest public campaign against the Bush administration????

[Enchante]

Yes, the Wilson wealth (pre-book) is very fishy! I raise some related questions in a post I wrote before I got to yours:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1454575/posts?q=1&&page=251

[Just mythoughts]

Obviously the Niger government and the French can't feed the starving population "yellowcake".




http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1446491/posts

[Just mythoughts]

"According to her boss at the CIA she was NOT covert at the time, but let's not confuse them with the facts."


True. That being the case why did the CIA demand an investigation for somebody outing her????

[cyncooper]

That being the case why did the CIA demand an investigation for somebody outing her????

Read an article recently that the referring letter asking the DOJ to investigate did not cite the covert agent law.

I'll see if I can find it.

[cyncooper]

Here it is (Newsweek so not reliable on its own, still...):

Leak Investigation: The Russert Deal—What It Reveals

excerpt:

Fitzgerald has been said to be investigating whether any aides violated the 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act—which makes it a felony to disclose the identity of a covert CIA employee: it requires showing the violator knew the agent's undercover status. (The State memo makes no reference to that.) But the CIA's initial "crimes report" to the Justice Department requesting the leak probe never mentioned that law, says a former government official who requested anonymity because of the confidential material involved. Fitzgerald may be looking at other laws barring the disclosure of classified info or the possibility that current or former White House aides made false statements or obstructed justice.

~snip~

I would just add that Newsweek is being narrow-minded by just considering that the only people who have testified that might have made false statements and/or obstructed justice come from the WH.

[Just mythoughts]

Thanks. I have read this before and now again. I am tired right now and for me considering it is a story done by "—Michael Isikoff " I read it with skepticism of what direction he is seeking to move his story.

There is really no way to verify any of the claims he has made regarding the investigation, and it doesn't address the initial request for the investigation at the beginning.

I will read again in the am to see if I glean something different.

[cyncooper]

My only point is IF Newsweek's source is correct that the CIA request for an investigation did not cite the covert agent law, then perhaps my initial thoughts on why the CIA wanted the investigation was broader from the start (perhaps leaks emanating from their agency), nevermind Newsweek's lame attempt to interpret facts as always weighing against an honest WH.

[pageonetoo]

... but that is just wrong.

That's why I posted it! Compassionate conservatism? I guess that is the kind that says that Rush is fine with his drug use, but don't you even think about toking that joint! You'll go to jail...

[Just mythoughts]

You have a point given the "IF", but lol, it actually raises more questions for me.

Why has it taken this long to discuss what was actually in the CIA requested investigation. Certainly was not a benefit to the liberal agenda to make clear exactly what was requested and there is no doubt that the request was accessible to be leaked, as the Senate Intel Committee had to have access to it.