Posted on 03/16/2007 5:55:58 AM PDT by Mo1
Edited on 03/16/2007 5:57:55 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
ON CAPITOL HILL Valerie Wilson Testifies
Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) chairs a House Oversight and Government Reform Ctme. hearing on the disclosure of CIA Agent Valerie Plame Wilson's identity. The hearing will look into whether White House officials followed appropriate procedures for safeguarding the identity of Ms. Wilson.
FRIDAY, C-SPAN AT 10AM ET
The text of the act does not designate which individuals are covert - it identifies the factors that make one covert. What you are saying is that Ms. Toensing knows more about those facts as they are pertinent to Ms. Plame - i.e. her overseas assignments, the efforts made by CIA to maintain her cover - than Gen. Hayden. I suspect you know how ridiculous that assertion is. I also suspect you don't care.
How come Fitzgerald did not prosecute Libby or anyone else for that matter for violating The Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982?
Negligently disclosing such information, however, should be the basis for at least a review of one's security clearance. If the WH ever decided to conduct a review of the disclosure of classified information by its officials, that is.
In other words, the fact that Fitzgerald didn't prosecute an IIPA violation does not mean she wasn't covert. It certainly doesn't trump the statement officially reviewed and approved by the DNI that she WAS, as a matter of fact, covert. Those who don't believe the statement approved by Hayden wouldn't believe she was covert if their own mother ripped off a mask, Mission-Impossible-style, and revealed herself to be Valerie Plame.
Oh, I believe Fitzgerald had sufficient evidence alright or lack of. The evidence showed he did not have a case against anyone and consequently chose not prosecute.
However, we may never find out 100% why Fitz did not prosecute under the IIPA unless you were a fly on the wall inside Fitz's office.
In other words, the fact that Fitzgerald didn't prosecute an IIPA violation does not mean she wasn't covert.
If there was a violation of the IIPA, it is Plame herself who needs to be prosecuted. It was no secret in DC that she worked for the CIA. Her neighbors knew and so did the DC cocktail party goers.
So Hayden said that she still had covert status. OK however, since the IIPA has a narrow area of concern: the CIA agent has to be in the field actively working as an agent undercover in an official capacity.
A violation under the narrow statute of the IIPA, is when a US citizen informs the world publicly or to foreign parties of CIA operative(s) in the field actively working cases that causes harm to their mission.
Since nothing of this sort happen with Valerie Plame, Fitzgerald knew no crime was committed, and had no case.
BTW, you're flat-out wrong about Toensing's law - she wrote it, she gets to say whether or not it applies to Plame.
Period.
Otherwise, you're as much as admitting that legislation is merely jumbles of words on paper, to be interpreted by the Philosopher-Kings in black robes.
Which then leads to the question, why have a legislature at all? Why not cut out the middleman and end the pretense - let the black-robed Philosopher-Kings just tell us that "the law is in their mouths"?
I said nothing about philosopher kings. I said the law - like all laws - only has meaning when applied to a set of facts. The facts in question here are whether Plame had overseas assignments in the pertinent time frame and whether the CIA took steps to preserve her covert status. The DNI says yes. Toensing - who is not in a position to know those things - says no. If you want to believe the person who is not in a position to know, that's fine. It is stupid, but it is fine.
The law does not say who is covert and who isn't. It doesn't say 'Valerie Plame isn't covert.' It says that persons who meet the specified criteria are covert. The person in the most authoritative position to say whether she meets the criteria says she did. A TV commentator says she didn't.
Period.
Lugsoul agrees! Downsize Congress now!
We're talking - and Victoria Toensing was talking about - a non-covert CIA employee.
**snicker**
Get over it.
Or are you actually trying to claim that Gen. Hayden has his facts wrong?
simple question ;
Why was no one charged by the special prosecutor of violating the law (other than perjury)?
See my #1463.
I think you stated yourself very well but being a layman I would have to go with Victoria Toensing, who said this:
The court permitted Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald to refer to Valerie Plame as being “covert” or having a “classified” job throughout trial and specifically during closing argument. Neither of those highly prejudicial characterizations was proven at trial. Even if Plame’s job were “classified,” as Fitzgerald reiterated in his press conference after conviction, there is no criminal violation in publishing her name. That legal gap is why Congress passed the Intelligence Identities Protection Act in 1982.
I realize you think Ms Toensing doesnt know first hand what Valerie Plames status was and whether or not she was covered, but I would bet that if Fitz saw a chance to go for the jugglar and charge someone (whether he could prove they knowingly outed her or not) he would have gone for it
You've been tiresome throughout this thread, luggie.
If "covert" don't fit, then FitzFong won't prosecute it...
And that's pretty much what happened. Toensing 1, FitzFong is a zero. :-)
They would have ridiculed him out of the legal profession.
Everyone runs around acting like Fitzgerald was itching to prosecute anything he could find. That is belied by the fact that, rather than prosecute Rove for perjury, he let Rove come back multiple times and correct the record. He had him for perjury after his first appearance, and let him come back four more times to "fix" his prior misstatements. He gave Libby the same chance, but Libby chose to stick with his story.
Do you have a link to what he said or a direct quote?
I decided to google this up and try to answer my above question: Do you have a link to what he (Hayden) said or a direct quote?
All I could find was some leftist drivel such as this :
During House hearings today, Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) announced that CIA Director Gen. Michael Hayden recently told Reps. Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Silvestre Reyes (D-TX) that there was no doubt Victoria Plame Wilson was covert. Cummings — relaying what Waxman had told him — said that Gen. Hayden expressed clearly and directly, “Ms. Wilson was covert.”
I sure hope Lugsoul can do better than that
During her employment at the CIA, Ms. Wilson was undercover. Her employment status with the CIA was classified information, prohibited from disclosure under Executive Order 12958.
At the time of the publication of Robert Novak's column on July 14, 2003, Ms. Wilson's CIA employment status was covert. This was classified information.
Ms. Wilson served in senior management positions at the CIA, in which she oversaw the work for other CIA employees and she attained the level of GS-14, Step 6, under the federal pay scale.
Ms. Wilson worked on some of the most sensitive and highly secretive matters handled by the CIA.
Ms. Wilson served at various times overseas for the CIA.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/plame/plame_transcript_031607.html
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.