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

To: Brillo_Breaks
Presumably the CIA knew her status and whether a law may have been violated when they asked for an investigation, and if not, I'm relatively certain the Ashcroft's investigation would have figured that out...

So do we conclude from this? 1) She was a covert agent who had been compromised or 2) that the DOJ upon dismissing that claim turned up something else or 3) that they wanted an independent confirmation because of the politics involved?

67 posted on 10/25/2005 10:16:02 PM PDT by Dolphy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]


To: Dolphy

2 & 3


70 posted on 10/25/2005 10:19:41 PM PDT by Mo1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies ]

To: Dolphy
So do we conclude from this? 1) She was a covert agent who had been compromised or 2) that the DOJ upon dismissing that claim turned up something else or 3) that they wanted an independent confirmation because of the politics involved?

Any of the three are posibilities really. Looking at what's going on, who's doing what, what's been going on as far as who's being called to testify, and what the various people leaking are saying, I'm guessing #1. But no one really knows for sure of course. Guess we'll find out soon enough.

76 posted on 10/25/2005 10:23:18 PM PDT by Brillo_Breaks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | 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