Posted on 03/22/2007 9:47:22 AM PDT by Enchante
Waxman and Democratic colleagues did not ask these pertinent questions: Had not Plame been outed years ago by a Soviet agent? Was she not on an administrative, not operational, track at Langley? How could she be covert if, in public view, she drove to work each day at Langley? What about comments to me by then CIA spokesman Bill Harlow that Plame never would be given another foreign assignment? What about testimony to the FBI that her CIA employment was common knowledge in Washington?
Instead of posing such questions, Waxman said flatly that Plame was covert and cited Hayden as proof. Hayden's endorsement of Waxman's statement astounded Republicans whose queries about her had been rebuffed by the agency. That confirmed Republican suspicions that Hayden is too close to Democrats.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Still, Novak is right in some of his comments on the disgraceful exhibition in Waxman's hearing..... both by the dishonest vicious 'Rats and the cowardly absence of almost all of the Republicans who lack the guts to fight this out.
Plame testified that she was sitting at her desk, when she heard her neighbor's phone ring as he took the call from the VP's office. He popped over to her desk to complain about it, when a shadowy passer-by came past, overheard what was going on, and suggested she ask husband Joe Wilson about making the trip.
Now, is it everyday practice for "covert" agents to sit around in a cubicle farm, overhearing each other's conversations and phone calls? Is it typical that a hotshot "covert" agent would forget the name of someone who knew her marital status, husband's name, and husband's background?
The whole Plame version of the story makes no sense and is clearly a horror of prevarication.
Waxman is a disgraceful liar, but that is what makes him a hero of the left. The left never cares about the truth.
Was she covert? Nope. Next question...
The WH ought to be takin 2nd looks at Hayden...
It is a wild story. The incredible aspect of it, is the fact that she said it under oath.
A lot of the "spineless Republican" talk is just nonsense from people who don't know anything about politics, but I have to agree that the behavior of the Republicans at the Plame testimony was 100% spineless and disgraceful.
This is all a bunch of Bunk. I would assume ANY spouse of an Ambassador to be a spook or providing info to the spooks.
If I spoke to the spouse of a Foreign Ambassador that was of interest to them, (not that it would ever happen) I would expect that person to fill out a contact form (in triplicate) briefing our conversation to their intellegence services.
If the wife of the Bulgarian President tells the wife of US ambassador to Bulgaria that poor Yuri has gallstones, then you can bet you last dollar that the wife of the US ambassador passes that info on.
Spouses are assumed to be operatives.
"it is Novak who did so much (and omitted so much) to allow this farce to become a national embarrassment."
Yes, but he didn't do anything more than several people in the news media did. Bob Woodward, for example. This entire story could have been put to bed early, if it weren't for a lack of honesty on the part of the news media.
"The left never cares about the truth."
True. They care about "winning".
It's so obvious that she was no longer covert that I can't believe that 3 years after the event, we're still discussing whether she was covert. LOL
But we have come to expect this behavior from practically every Republican from Jorge on down..........(Fred and Duncan, excepted)
The Republicans backed down/ran and hid when the White House foolishly recanted on the 16 words in the SOTU speech.
Biggest mistake of the Bush Admin.
On his radio show last week Don Imus cited that specific part of her testimony and said it sounded like some idiocy from "four frames of a Dilbert cartoon."
Why on earth would a partisan Democrat rodent like Waxman ask "such questions"?
Where were the Republicans??
(....And I will continue to throw away my RNC mailings with vigor.)
The U.S. simply didn't give a damn about whether there was any truth to the Niger angle of the story.
Hayden should have made that clear. Looks like the CIA is still working against the administration.
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.