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 code pink gals are STILL THERE? WTH?
Now they are talking about the briefing report the President gets and classified/declassified documents
Why oh why do I get the feeling they are going to being up the Downing Street Memo
I'm screaming the same thing over and over!
Since when did it become a crime for an administration to DEFEND themselves against lies told by people like Wilson?
This Plame thing is a red herring, IMO, and I'm sick of it.
OMG, you could be right!
And when is somebody, anybody going to mention two words: Richard Armitage; because without him, we aren't here, period.
These questions are no longer about Plame being a CIA agent
"I cannot answer that question. But it would harm national security to reveal her connection".
That would have stopped Novac, without violating classified information.
He didn't say that.
Davis is correct that, if the CIA wanted to keep Valerie a secret, they should have done a better job of communicating that.
Valerie says she wasn't even told. She was driving by a public gate so anybody who was making a list of CIA workers would have a picture of her car and drivers license and could track down who she was.
They briefed the white house without letting them know her status, so they would have no reason not to reveal her name.
And realise this: Novac used the term he used for her "operative" because it sounded cool. He didn't "out" her.
Wilson "outed" her when he confirmed Novak's story. anybody who has been briefed on security issues knows the first rule is to never acknowledge the veracity of a published leak.
The Wilson's revealed her status in order to try to get people in the White house arrested. They should have kept quiet. Her name would have been used for a couple of weeks and it would have faded away and nobody would have known what her job was or why she would be involved, or that she had ever been covert or had a cover story.
And she NEVER should have gotten involved in a political battle, nor should her husband. He was privy to her classified status (because she leaked it to him -- you aren't allowed to just tell your friends or family without specific permission), and should have known he was risking that by speaking out publicly.
Where's Joe?
"They're making a mountain out of an anthill - smaller than a molehill".
That is what everyone first thought when the US Attorney's "scandal" was brought up...and look at what has happened.
In FACT, this whole case was blown up...and Libby could go to prison.
There is NO SUCH thing as anything being too small for the dems and the MSM to use to take down the POTUS and VP Cheney.
OH>>>LORD...they are going to show video????
I dispise these freaking dims. They are so full of hate and anger that they do not care about anything but getting back 100% power. God be with our country. It is ashame what these dims will do and have done.
Yes, and her hubby and her were so fearful of their lives that they allowed themselves to be photographed and interviewed for an article in Vanity Fair just 4 months after she claimed her "covert" cover was breached.
"I still want to know how a supposed covert, undercover agent is allowed to use her CIA cover company to make a donation to Al Gore's Presidential campaign. I believe by law, you are not allowed to participate in political campaigns through your job, especially if you are employed by any government agency. And with the company name being affiliated with her supposed CIA position as a covert agent, that would definitely have violated the law."
That is the "Hatch Act":
Hatch Act of 1939 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatch_Act_of_1939
It has been subsequent loosened quite a bit to the point where really all bets are off.
Kerry's sister is a Federal Government employee (works with the UN), and yet she campaigned for him extensively.
In 1993 the Hatch Act was reduced to meaninglessness -- under Clinton. Which makes sense, since the Dems own the bureaucracy.
And they are using it in every single part of the government and about every single news story.
And this is ALL a concerted effort to lay the groundwork to impeach Bush.
And yes, they are and will impeach him.
Norton playing a video of Scott McClelland at a press conference
They are after Rove, too.
This was NOT a concerted leak, period.
Nobody has been charged with that and the person who DID the leak wasn't even charged.
Is it me or has Armitage not been so much as mentioned yet? I admit I've only been listening sporadically. If this was a serious investigative hearing at getting at the truth, Armitage would have been discussed at length. Ridiculous. I've never seen such hypocrisy as from the dems. I'm convinced these people are incapable of being ethical.
This hearing does not have anything to do with Val. It is a backdoor into the impeachment of the President. It is an absolute disgrace what is happening here.
One of the dems managed to get the words "Abu Ghraib" into his questioning. Is that like getting a triple square in scrabble?
I'm waiting for a chorus to break out in song, ala a Gilbert & Sullivan musical! LOL
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.