Posted on 10/24/2005 9:05:41 PM PDT by InvisibleChurch
Monday, Oct. 24, 2005 10:24 p.m. EDT Times: Cheney First Disclosed CIA Official's Name
The New York Times reported late Monday that Vice President Cheney has been directly linked to the so-called "Plamegate" scandal involving the disclosure of the name of Valerie Plame, a CIA officer.
The paper reported that Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby "first learned about the C.I.A. officer at the heart of the leak investigation in a conversation with Mr. Cheney weeks before her identity became public in 2003."
The paper sourced their story to "lawyers involved in the case."
The Times said that notes taken by Libby differ from his own testimony before the grand jury as to when he first learned of Plame's identity.
"The notes, taken by Mr. Libby during the conversation, for the first time place Mr. Cheney in the middle of an effort by the White House to learn about Ms. Wilson’s husband, Joseph C. Wilson IV, who was questioning the administration’s handling of intelligence about Iraq’s nuclear program to justify the war."
Cheney apparently discovered details of Plame's CIA work after he questioned then CIA Director George J. Tenet about her husband, Ambassador Wilson.
But even if Libby or Cheney had disclosed Plame's identity as a CIA officer they may not have committed a crime.
"Disclosing a covert agent’s identity can be a crime, but only if the person who discloses it knows the agent’s undercover status," the Times said.
"It's not a good sign when what a prosecutor does, in the three days before his grand jury expires, is to create a Web site and announces the vehicle to announce something. I think people better be ready for charges," criminal defense attorney Abbe Lowell told "FOX News Sunday."
The investigation has taken nearly two years and cost over $700,000 so far. Some believe Fitzgerald, though widely described as "apolitical" and "above board," may feel pressured to produce an indictment. But those who know him maintain Fitzgerald will not pursue charges if the facts aren't there.
"He will make a responsible judgment here. And if that judgment is to walk away from this, notwithstanding the pressure, notwithstanding the money that may have been expended, I have every confidence that he will do so," said former Independent Counsel Robert Ray.
I think that you mean "Monica Lewinsky", not "Paula Jones".
Interesting. I had lost sight of any limitation on the loss of license. Has Clinton made any attempt to regain it? Or has the five years not quite elapsed? It should make interesting reading to find out what further questions an investigation of Clinton's fitness to practice law might bring up. Perhaps Juanita Brodderick might be asked for a statement.
I see two interesting items.
First the article suggests that there is a nefarious purpose in digging into the details of intelligence. This despite the fact that the article notes the "on-the-one-hand/on-the-other analyses handed up by the intelligence bureaucracy". An administration contemplating going to war has no business allowing intelligence analysts to have a monopoly on the facts.
The other interesting item is that Hannah's lawyer denied his client's involvement completely. He could have just said, "we have no comment regarding an ongoing investigation".
No, I meant Paula Jones:
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/05/22/clinton.disbarred/
On Jan. 19, 2001, the day before he left office, President Clinton agreed to admit to giving false testimony in the Jones case and to accept a five-year suspension of his law license and a $25,000 fine in return for an agreement by the independent counsel, Robert W. Ray (Starr's successor), to end the investigation and not prosecute him.
You were just the last person to post. It wasn't meant as a reply to anything by you.
Sorry.
There was never a claim by anyone that Clinton had had sex with Paula Jones, even using the tortured definition that Clinton was presented with during his testimony.
Fuhrman plead no contest to a perjury charge and got probation and a fine of $200, after which he left the LAPD and moved to Idaho to pursue his career as an investigative journalist.
He probably deserves the lion's share of the credit for getting OJ off, given that the only reasonable theory under which one might find OJ not guilty was that The Man had framed him by tampering with the forensic evidence, and the exposure of Fuhrman's crypto-racism leant that theory credibility.
Ames, you out there anywhere? "No, I'm in here."
The NY Times reports that these notes reflect a conversation between the Vice President and Libby on June 12, 2003.
Joe Wilson was quoted anonymously in the NYT on May 6, 2003 by Nicholas Kristof, who wrote, "I'm told by a person involved in the Niger caper that more than a year ago the vice president's office asked for an investigation of the uranium deal, so a former U.S. ambassador to Africa was dispatched to Niger."
So reporters already knew Wilson long before 6/12/03, and it is entirely possible that Libby learned about him and his wife before then from reporters, just like he said. That would not stop Libby from noting what the VP told him later on.
This is bizarre and frightening --- frightening that perhaps almost alone the CIA and the media (and a few others) can take down an administration.
Well, I guess they did it twice before.
Agreed.
............... and the people who contrived to send the goon over there.
Right................ yet I continually hear people here say that the old media is dead, irrelevant, ineffective. Baloney. Enough relatively inattentive voters will hear just enough of this garbage to believe it. The old media is alive and still manufacturing the lies!
****
The old established/liberal/socialist media is America's most ruthless, relentless, and destructive enemy.
***
Hannah?
****
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1508146/posts
Is Valerie Plame the new Deep Throat?
Peruse this:
*****
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1508146/posts
Is Valerie Plame the new Deep Throat?
Bureau of spies?
Except for one minor fact - it was illegal to do so.
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.