Posted on 07/19/2005 4:59:17 AM PDT by NathanBookman
What is known thus far suggests that:1) Mr. Wilson has misrepresented his wife's role in getting him the assignment and his own findings of his investigation in Niger; 2) In July 2003, when columnist Robert Novak first mentioned in passing that Mrs. Plame worked for the CIA, she was not functioning as a covert agent and her work for the CIA was common knowledge; and 3) That if there were-- against the public record -- a covert status to be exposed, it was possibly Mr. Wilson, with a speculative assist from David Corn, who writes for the Nation magazine. (snip)
Ironically, Mr. Rove says he learned of Mrs. Plame's identity from a reporter. How did a journalist get that information? Very possibly, Mr. Wilson himself was the original source of the leak of his wife's identity as a secret agent. The first person to speculatively write on the assertion was Mr. Corn of the Nation, who wrote two days after Mr. Novak's original article was published that Mrs. Plame may have been a secret agent. Clifford May, writing last week in National Review Online, noted that Mr. Novak did not reveal that she was a secret agent. But Mr. Corn, who talked with Mr. Wilson, did raise the possibility of Mrs. Plame's "undercover" status. The bottom line is that based on what is currently known about the Plame case thus far, there is absolutely no legitimate reason to believe that Mr. Rove is the original source of the leak about Mrs. Plame's identity.
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
Time to compare and contrast. Here are "highlights" from NYT editorial today:
Joseph Wilson's report This is one of the biggest red herrings in this case - that administration officials were simply attempting to wave reporters off an erroneous story about this report.
Mr. Cooper said he had gotten a "specific waiver" of confidentiality from Mr. Rove. Ms. Miller says she has not received any such thing from her sources...More broadly, it is up to the source, not the reporter, to speak out. If Mr. Rove or any other officials involved were really concerned about getting out the truth, all they would need to do would be to stand up in public and tell it.
Mr. Rove knew it when he spoke to Mr. Cooper, and he tried to give the impression that Mr. Wilson was an unreliable person who had been sent to Niger only because of his wife's influence. In fact, Mr. Wilson had excellent credentials for the mission, and the entire Niger story had already been pretty thoroughly debunked by the time Mr. Cooper and Mr. Rove spoke.
There's a lot we don't know about this case. But these things are clear:
• Journalists should not tailor their principles to the politics of the moment.
• Coerced waivers of confidentiality are meaningless.
• Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/19/opinion/19tue1.html
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
What do ya bet, Wilson was millers source.
I am currently on business in Spain. The only channel from France, TV 5, has just mentioned a report on the whole affair. It looked more like a hatchet job from moveon.org than a report! It was as if Wilson were credible and the bi-partisan Senate report didn't happen! The report totally made it seem like Karl Rove was guilty and was just about to go to jail. They took parts of Democrat party advertising attacking Rove during the last Presidential election, talked about how some say that Karl Rove is President's Bush's brain, then they show Karl Rove walking next to President Bush and smiling (a somewhat forced smile according to the report - I don't know how they concluded about that), and that the White House fell in their own trap and was now embarrassed (without mentioning any evidence of such). It was one of the most outrageous pieces of propaganda I have ever seen this side of Pravda. I am not too surprised about TV5 as last year they were showing a report showing some old French commies remeniscing about the good old days. If the media in the rest of Europe is this one-sided, no wonder that George W. is so hated in Europe.
I recall (unfortunately only vaguely) seeing something in the WSJ about leaked documents in the Clinton years: they were sent to either the NYT or WashPost -- and returned with a prissy note to the effect that of course a respectable paper couldn't print anything lacking appropriate provenance!
Concise but incomplete. Wilson's motives and the results of his lies are never addressed. Wilson, a former State Dept. official and adviser to John Kerry, and his wife, a CIA employee, actually concocted this lie in an attempt to smear a sitting President during wartime. They are operatives for the democrats who used the dem controlled media to subvert the national security objectives of this administration. Traitors, the lot of 'em.
Don't feel like the Lone Ranger. Nearly every media outfit here at home is spinning it the same way.
It's getting sickening watching the MSM treat this as though Ms Plame is like Agent 99 being hung menacingly over a vat of acid by a KAOS agent.
Does anyone have the definitive date Wilson signed on as an advisor to the Kerry campaign?
A previous posting said he signed on with Kerry prior to July 2003 when Wilson (who in effect was a temporary contract employee of the CIA) wrote the NYTimes article criticizing the Bush Administration's Iraq policy.
Thirdly: Isn't there some type of rule saying employees of the CIA (past or present) cannot use or reveal any information about their service WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE CIA.
exactly, Wilson IS Miller's source and that's why she's in jail. She is the one who told Rove, so the prosecuter is trying to find HER source. Someone needs to ask Wilson if he has offered immunity to Miller like Rove did.
In May 2003, after his mission to Niger but before his July 6, 2003, Times op-ed piece, Mr. Wilson began working for Mr. Kerry as an unpaid adviser, offering foreign policy advice and speechwriting tips.
I don't think so. Don't get me wrong, I think it's ludicrous the way the NYT et al omit many juicy details that destroy Wilson's credibility, and obviously try to maximize the damage on the White House even if it means selective reporting of the facts.
The NYT has been very adamant that Miller's source is not herself. Read between the lines. They know who the source is. There is a criminal investigation and it involves someone in the Administration who is almost certainly not Karl Rove.
I suspect that Wilson is French Intl's butt boy. The forged documents that Wilson "saw but didn't see" were traced back to the Frogs. Perhaps Wilson really did see them --- as they were being forged.
Follow the money.
I'm going to need a little assistance to read between that line. How could Miller's source be on not be herself?
Miller, as a journalist, and Plame, as a CIA employee, both specialized in investigating the proliferation of WMD's. I suspect that they knew each other because of this shared interest. I'm going with Plame being Miller's source.
The summary is good but he gets the last paragraph wrong, The president said that he would fire the leaker IF he a law was broken.
Mark Levins article of a few days ago, really makes you wonder why 'she'(Mrs. Plame Wilson) would insert herself into this? If she was so 'covert', you'd think she would keep out of the public eye. Wilson thought he could hid behind her?
Does the Media even admit she was behind Wilsons trip?
Funny... for a moment I thought you were referring to the piece of hurl that I stumbled across on the CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) last night.
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.