Skip to comments.
Plame was ‘covert’ agent at time of name leak (unclassified document details CIA employment)
MSNBarfC ^
| May 29, 2007
| Joel Seidman
Posted on 05/29/2007 3:40:41 PM PDT by lowbridge
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-52 next last
1
posted on
05/29/2007 3:40:43 PM PDT
by
lowbridge
To: lowbridge
The summary is part of an attachment to Fitzgerald's memorandum to the court That was classified?
2
posted on
05/29/2007 3:42:03 PM PDT
by
lowbridge
("The mainstream media IS the Democratic Party." - Rush Limbaugh)
To: lowbridge
If so, why wasn’t Armitage charged with an actual crime? This is BS
3
posted on
05/29/2007 3:43:23 PM PDT
by
NonValueAdded
(Fred Thompson in 2008 - there is no doubt about it!)
To: lowbridge
“The nature of Plame’s CIA employment never came up in Libby’s perjury and obstruction of justice trial.”
Yes it did, the judge kept it out show Libby was railroaded.
4
posted on
05/29/2007 3:43:51 PM PDT
by
edcoil
(Reality doesn't say much - doesn't need too)
To: lowbridge
Known as the CIA’s Who’s Who in America operative.
5
posted on
05/29/2007 3:44:59 PM PDT
by
Tarpon
To: lowbridge
So she was covert when she illegally disclosed her CIA status to her boyfriend on something like the third date?
Where was the prosecution of Miss Plame for leaking?
6
posted on
05/29/2007 3:45:00 PM PDT
by
weegee
(Libs want us to learn to live with terrorism, but if a gun is used they want to rewrite the Const.)
To: lowbridge
This sounds thin, and if true wouldn't’t Libby be charged with that in the beginning?
7
posted on
05/29/2007 3:45:17 PM PDT
by
cmsgop
( "cmsgop" a Mark Goodson / Bill Todman Production)
To: NonValueAdded
More to the point, why wasn't Joe Wilson charged with the crime?
To: lowbridge
“Covert” is CIA-speak for “employed by us”. BFD.
To: edcoil
10
posted on
05/29/2007 3:49:13 PM PDT
by
Captain Rhino
( Dollars spent in India help a friend; dollars spent in China arm an enemy.)
To: lowbridge
Staffing, training and recruiting
Notice nobody claimed she ever had a phone on her desk.
11
posted on
05/29/2007 3:49:18 PM PDT
by
Doctor Raoul
(What's the difference between the CIA and the Free Clinic? The Free Clinic knows how to stop leaks.)
To: NonValueAdded
"If so, why wasnt Armitage charged with an actual crime? This is BS."
Because Armitage didn't fit into Fitz's conspiracy theory. Fitz the moron was totally bamboozled by Wilson.
12
posted on
05/29/2007 3:51:52 PM PDT
by
Steve_Seattle
("Above all, shake your bum at Burton.")
To: lowbridge
"..No one was ever charged with the leak of Plame's name itself, which would have been a crime only if someone knowingly gave our information about someone covered by a specific law protecting the identities of covert agents..."
If Fitzgerald had a chance to make a leak charge stick he certainly would have filed it.
Also, nobody is jumping on this obvious perjury:
Fact-Checking Valerie Plame Wilson, Pt. 1(Plame lied to Congress-Under Oath)
To: lowbridge
Well OK then! We now know that Plame was covert and have known that Dick Armitage then Colin Powell were the leakers.....................Hello? hello?......guess nobody’s home at the MSM.
To: lowbridge
Sounds like jail time for Richard Armitage.
15
posted on
05/29/2007 3:53:04 PM PDT
by
reg45
To: lowbridge
“Plame worked as an operations officer in the Directorate of Operations and was assigned to the Counterproliferation Division (CPD) in January 2002 at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia.”
So as a covert CIA officer, her cover was...a CIA employee?
16
posted on
05/29/2007 3:54:50 PM PDT
by
james500
To: lowbridge
In my personal opinion that is another lie by a big time left wing Democrat. As I said before he was Nifonged.
17
posted on
05/29/2007 3:55:33 PM PDT
by
YOUGOTIT
(The Greatest Threat to our Security is the US Senate)
To: lowbridge
This is more double-talk from Mr. crooked-arrow Fitz. Plame had a cover involving some phony energy consultancy she used to go to conferences and some meetings. That's common in the CIA and it is not the same thing as being a covert agent, which is why Armitage wasn't charged. She didn't meet the statutory definition.
Why is this suddenly relevant when Fitz claimed through the trial it wasn't? Because she couldn't continue in her CIA position? Who's fault is that? Armitage and the CIA officer who confirmed her employment and did not claim she was covert in talking to Novak, that's who. Or 007 Plame herself, who involved herself and her husband in a CIA hit on the Bush administration by running this operation to Niger, having "Ambassador" Joe write his NYT hit piece and sign on as a Kerry adviser. Look in the mirror, babe.
To: lowbridge
You know, time to face the music for the Libby supporters and the Wilson supporters. Plame WAS covert. That’s why this was such a big deal. Libby, Armitage, etc. weren’t prosecuted for outing her because of national security reasons. Her cover was compromised. The agents who used Brewster-Jennings as cover were compromised - you can read about them on the Internet.
And the idiot/traitor who started it all was Joe Wilson. He knew his wife’s status, and he went out of his way to compromise it for his own glory. Wilson, Libby, Armitage, and all the others - a pox on all of them. They all think their petty little political games are more important than national security.
19
posted on
05/29/2007 4:00:49 PM PDT
by
Toskrin
(It's not what you do at your best, but what you do at your worst)
To: lowbridge
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-52 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson