Boris and Natasha.
Posted on 08/31/2006 10:08:00 PM PDT by West Coast Conservative
Edited on 09/01/2006 5:56:51 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
WE'RE RELUCTANT to return to the subject of former CIA employee Valerie Plame because of our oft-stated belief that far too much attention and debate in Washington has been devoted to her story and that of her husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, over the past three years. But all those who have opined on this affair ought to take note of the not-so-surprising disclosure that the primary source of the newspaper column in which Ms. Plame's cover as an agent was purportedly blown in 2003 was former deputy secretary of state Richard L. Armitage.
Mr. Armitage was one of the Bush administration officials who supported the invasion of Iraq only reluctantly. He was a political rival of the White House and Pentagon officials who championed the war and whom Mr. Wilson accused of twisting intelligence about Iraq and then plotting to destroy him. Unaware that Ms. Plame's identity was classified information, Mr. Armitage reportedly passed it along to columnist Robert D. Novak "in an offhand manner, virtually as gossip," according to a story this week by the Post's R. Jeffrey
Smith, who quoted a former colleague of Mr. Armitage.
It follows that one of the most sensational charges leveled against the Bush White House -- that it orchestrated the leak of Ms. Plame's identity to ruin her career and thus punish Mr. Wilson -- is untrue......
Nevertheless, it now appears that the person most responsible for the end of Ms. Plame's CIA career is Mr. Wilson. Mr. Wilson chose to go public with an explosive charge, claiming -- falsely, as it turned out -- that he had debunked reports of Iraqi uranium-shopping in Niger and that his report had circulated to senior administration officials. He ought to have expected that both those officials and journalists such as Mr. Novak would ask why a retired ambassador would have been sent on such a mission and that the answer would point to his wife. He diverted responsibility from himself and his false charges by claiming that President Bush's closest aides had engaged in an illegal conspiracy. It's unfortunate that so many people took him seriously.
Boris and Natasha.
But can Fitzgerald prove it? Can he prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Libby willfully lied and can Fitzgerald provide a plausable Libby motive to the jury. Is Fitzgerald taking the word of reporter(s) over Libby's testimony because he want to believe it without any real proof? A he said she said scenario?
President Bush should pardon Scooter Libby now and save him from further legal expenses. He should also explain at a press conference that Fitzpatrick should have never allowed this investigation to continue after he knew Armitage was the "leaker". Then he should pardon Armitage, Fitzpatrick and Colin Powell to imply that they may have been the real law breakers in this preposterous investigation. They all certainly wronged Scooter Libby.
I'm going to bed with a smile on my face, thinking about how humiliating this article is going to be when Joe and Val find it on their doorsteps in a few hours.
Ah, life is good.
You are exactly correct, there are some ruthless people in DC.
Paybacks from Rove and Libby will be a bitch.
Good Night, I'll be smiling too :-)
That was my first reaction when I clicked on the thread. Talk about a jaw dropper!
Of course, when you click the link to read the whole editorial, the Washington Post briefly reverts to form as it goes on to characterize Cheney's and Libby's efforts as trying to "discredit" Wilson and in the process being "careless with classified information".
But then the Washington Post ends the editorial with this incredible bombshell of a conclusion (a conclusion you would never see in the scumbag New York Times in a million years):
"Nevertheless, it now appears that the person most responsible for the end of Ms. Plame's CIA career is Mr. Wilson. Mr. Wilson chose to go public with an explosive charge, claiming -- falsely, as it turned out -- that he had debunked reports of Iraqi uranium-shopping in Niger and that his report had circulated to senior administration officials. He ought to have expected that both those officials and journalists such as Mr. Novak would ask why a retired ambassador would have been sent on such a mission and that the answer would point to his wife. He diverted responsibility from himself and his false charges by claiming that President Bush's closest aides had engaged in an illegal conspiracy. It's unfortunate that so many people took him seriously."
________________________________________________
Wow....!
I ain't going yet; the storm is just getting to me and I won't be able to sleep with all this crap hitting my roof!
Hope you all got to see Brit publicly slam Armitage, BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY >>>>> bluntly nail COLIN POWELL, tonight. Thank you, Brit. The world now knows what we've known about these self-absorbed operators.
So when does Fitzie give up the ghost? He was had. The Rats and MSM got what they wanted: they sullied decent, innocent folks, in a time of war relentlessly for 3 years to plant the perception of disrepute and stained integrity (like they have) .. just in time for the '06 elections. They know the sheeple are too indiferrent and apathetic to ponder complicated and nuanced details.
Top of my list of the lowest of the low, selected by this decent and honorable President to be in his closest circle of trusted government executives in wartime, and who swore allegiance to this country and her constitution, but put ego, pettiness, petulance, power and politics first. And STILL, they don't have the cojones to fess up like men and save the innocents needless further abuse:
Tenet
Armitage
Powell
Feel free to add more.
I still think this Plame deal was an unintended consequence...the action was in Wilson's article, who put him up to it, why did it seem to be coordinated with the attack on Blair, who gave him access to information and who was behind the 16 words that the WH retracted when, to this day, they are still correct.
Can you see me smiling?
ouch
My list grows longer by the day.
But Scooter was not a private citizen, and could not do that, and thus needed more subtle legal advice, about testifying that he did recall precisely who said what to whom, and perhaps if the deposer would tell him what someone else said he said, that might refresh his recollection, and absent that, what someone else said might well be perhaps accurate, with his recollection refreshed, Otherwise, it would be inappropriate for him to speculate as to his recall, as to the precise interplay of the subject conversations. Do you get my drift?
What's happening there?
It's simple, I hate everybody: theirs AND ours.........LOL.
If the Right had ANY serious investigative reporters we could maybe find out.
But of course our reporters only spent their time on defense or slamming the Pres for more party invites.
I was suggesting on another thread (in response to calls for the charges against Libby to be dropped) - maybe we want the Libby trial now, in light of these revelations. the testimony at Libby's trial might get interesting. yes, its tough on him personally - but I have to figure the defense fund is going to swell after this.
my guess is, if we do see Fitzgerald drop the charges, its because the "cabal" here will get a message through Fitzgerald's handlers and tell him that they don't want to risk being dragged into court, and its better to drop it. Fitz will of course claim he is dropping the charges to sustain the "rule of law" or some other platitude, which will be nonsense of course.
Like me, from ear to ear.
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.