A blast from the past...This is what they were saying back then...
“...aides to Pelosi and Conyers said they have already had brief discussions with staffers in the office of Congressman Henry Waxman, D-Calif., chairman of the Government Oversight Committee, about his intention of calling for hearings into the leak case and possibly getting answers to lingering questions about...the leak, and the role White House political adviser...Played as well.
Today Rep. Waxman’s office has announced that his Oversight Committee will hold:
a hearing on whether White House officials followed appropriate procedures for safeguarding the identity of CIA agent... At the hearing, the Committee will receive testimony from...and other experts regarding the disclosure and internal White House security procedures for protecting...identity from disclosure and responding to the leak after it occurred. The hearing is scheduled for...
In addition, the Committee today sent a letter to Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald commending him for his investigation and requesting a meeting to discuss testimony by Mr. Fitzgerald before the Committee.
The Oversight Committee will webcast the hearing live at www.oversight.house.gov.
Hhhhhhuuuuuummmmmm, so Pelosi, Waxman, and Conyers got all liquored up on the idea to have a special prosecutor look into “the leak.” Where are they now?
Special Prosecutor anyone?
The WH has complete control of many media outlets who use WH and DNC talking points and have stories checked for “accuracies.” This is definitely not what the framers of the Constitution had in mind when writing that document.
Why do people bother to call them progressives. They’re the same Liberals they’ve always been.
Yes that word itself had been bastardized, but everyone knew it defined them as anti-US losers. Why not continue to call them that? Instead folks have bought into the propagandist ploy to run away from what they really are.
No it wasn't. Fitzgerald cleared everybody from wrongdoing. Plame wasn't even covert. He got Scooter Libby for allegedly lying under oath.
Count on The Media to fix this by demanding Obama fire Karl Rove!
(He didn’t have anything to do with the last one either)
The real story is, “What did the CIA station chief write/say/do that pissed off Obama?”
Did this CIA agent have anything to do with Benghazi?
I'm reminded of the movie "Being There"BHO billed as Chauncey Gardiner
“Why bother with newspapers if this is all they offer? Agnew was right The press is a gang of cruel faggots Journalism is not a profession or a trade. It is a cheap catchall for f$$koffs and misfits - a false doorway to the backside of life, a filthy piss-ridden little hole nailed off by the building inspector, but just deep enough for a wino to curl up from the sidewalk and masturbate like a chimp in a zoo-cage” Hunter S. Thompson - 1971
The American news media.....paid Democrat liars.
Patrick Fitzgerald should be in prison for that circus of an investigation he did and he should stay there until he pays back every dime he wasted on it.
In this case, the pool report was filed by Washington Post White House bureau chief Scott Wilson. Wilson said he had copied the list from the e-mail provided by White House press officials. He sent his pool report to the press officials, who then distributed it to a list of more than 6,000 recipients.
Wilson said that after the report was distributed, he noticed the unusual reference to the station chief and asked White House press officials in Afghanistan whether they had intended to include that name.
Initially, the press office raised no objection, apparently because military officials had provided the list to distribute to news organizations. But senior White House officials realized the mistake and scrambled to issue an updated list without the CIA officer’s name. The mistake, however, already was being noted on Twitter, although without the station chief’s name.
******
Scott Wilson - Washington Post Bureau Chief
http://www.mrc.org/biasalert/uploads/ScottWilsonWashPost-2010-04-13.jpg
Meet Washington Post’s Scott Wilson, Obama’s Summit News Butler
Washington Post reporter Scott Wilson topped Wednesday’s paper with a “news analysis” headlined “On world stage, Obama at ease as seminar leader.” The word that came to mind wasn’t “analysis.” It was “unanimous.” Everyone in Wilson’s supine story praised Obama’s command and personality. It’s like Wilson was Obama’s news butler at this summit:
The Washington Post is certainly trying to improve the stature of an American president struggling with a poor economy and political unpopularity at home.
http://www.mrc.org/bias-alerts/meet-washington-posts-scott-wilson-obamas-summit-news-butler
I first noticed Scott Wilson specifically when he managed to have a three page article published in the Washington Post about the role of drones used by Israel over Gaza
Wilson’s specialty in his articles is slipping in nuanced misrepresentations about Israel that are probably overlooked by the majority of Washington Post readers. They help to paint a subtly inaccurate picture of Israel. For example, drones are not used to detect and deter terrorists – they are there to terrorize the innocent Gazans.
CAMERA caught Wilson out in an attempt to avoid naming Israel’s capital as Jerusalem when he wrote in an article headed Obama to Iranian people in holiday message: ‘Americans seek a dialogue’:
November 10, 2010 – Leo Rennert: A WaPo reporter’s anti-Israeli bias stretches from Sderot to Jakarta
When Washington Post reporter Scott Wilson did a stint as the paper’s Jerusalem correspondent, he earned a well-deserved and well-documented reputation for anti-Israel bias, shading and spinning his copy to portray Israel in the darkest of hues while swallowing Palestinian narratives hook, line and sinker. Wilson spared no effort in writing lengthy up-close and personal features about the plight of Palestinians in Gaza, but studiously avoided chronicling the plight of Israeli residents of Sderot when they were prime targets of thousands of missiles launched from Gaza.
Scott Wilson @PostScottWilson · 1h
Smart @TheFix reading of Obama’s West Point speech as a tacit critique of (Rand) Paulist foreign policy.
https://twitter.com/PostScottWilson
Scott Wilson @PostScottWilson · 4h
“With a kind word and a strong embrace, she had the ability to remind us that we are all God’s children.” President Obama on Maya Angelou
Scott Wilson @PostScottWilson · 5h
Nearly everything Obama has said in this speech-emphasis on alliances, values, cautious use of force-I knew about him before he took office.
Reporter on White House’s CIA Leak: ‘I Drew It to Their Attention Before They Had Noticed’
The reporter who was given the name of the CIA’s top agent in Afghanistan by the White House said he realized the significance of the leak even before the press office did.
“I drew it to their attention before they had noticed what had happened,” Washington Post White House bureau chief Scott Wilson told the Guardian Monday.
Wilson was given a list of individuals meeting with President Barack Obama during his surprise weekend visit to Afghanistan, including a person listed as “chief of station” — the highest-ranking CIA officer. The list was provided by U.S. military officials to the White House press office, and then sent out as part of Wilson’s pool report summary of Obama’s travels to more than 6,000 recipients.
“I asked the press official that was with us on the trip if they knew that the station chief had been identified in the list. That person said that they did not know that, but that because the list was provided by military, they assumed it was OK. By this time the list was out,” Wilson said.
He added, “Soon after, I think that they talked to their bosses, and realized that it was not OK. And they tried to figure out what to do about this, if there was a way to kind of un-ring the bell.”
Wilson said he thinks the highly pressurized situation combined with “very junior people” led to the error.
“My impression is these were very junior people trying to follow an order, that they don’t fully understand or get the ramifications of,” he told the Guardian. “There were a number of misunderstandings and mistakes, including my own failure to review the list before including it in my email, in my pool report. I wish I had, I regret it.”
Why do national reporters do such a transparently inaccurate (and insensitive) job of assessing terrorist attacks on President Obama's watch? On the front page of Saturday's Washington Post, reporter Scott Wilson spun furiously to avoid the obvious fact that candidate Obama's promises and President Obama's record on the War on Terror are remarkably at odds.
Worse yet, Wilson insisted that only the Boston Marathon bombings (death toll: three) counts as a "successful mass terrorist attack on Obama's watch," which completely avoids the mass shooting at Ford Hood by an Islamic radical (death toll: 13), which is often ridiculously categorized as workplace violence:
Only the bombings in Boston last year could be considered a successful mass terrorist attack on Obama’s watch, although there have been some near misses.
Fort Hood can't be put on a list of "near misses." Sadly, this isn't the first time Obama-friendly Scott Wilson had used this inaccurate, insensitive math that slaps the families of Fort Hood victims in the faced. Is this guy auditioning to be the next Jay Carney to revolve through the door into a White House PR job?
