Set up? Anatomy of the contrived Wilson "scandal"

Multiple & linked in article | 10/2/03 | Wolfstar

[Wolfstar]

Thank you for your observations, CyberAnt. I also believe Mrs. Plame-Wilson is more involved than the public record indicates. As for a possible Clinton angle, I wouldn't argue against that point of view. May I draw your attention back to the start of my article, in the section titled "Background?" Seymour Hersh has a "former high-level intelligence official" in the Clinton administration talking about how the British were spreading disinformation about Iraq in the late 1990's. This source implies that the Clinton administration was actively encouraging the British to do so, if not participating themselves.

Specifically as regards how the Iraq-Niger sentence got into the State of the Union Address, Hersh writes that this source said, "Somebody deliberately let something false get in there," the former high-level intelligence official added. "It could not have gotten into the system without the agency being involved. Therefore it was an internal intention. Someone set someone up." So, according to Hersh, we have a former Clinton administration high-level intelligence official saying bluntly that there was a set up.

[Wolfstar]

Although I didn't focus on that angle, you are right in that there is at least one (if not several) shadowy CIA offical who anonymously pops up in many of the articles about the Iraq-Niger connection and Wilson. In my opinion, the President and the nation have not been well-served by the CIA under Tenet. I mean look at the glaring CIA failures:

It was and remains their responsibility to get Osama bin Laden. It was Tenet who caused the President to pull the trigger on the Iraq invasion early, because Tenet claimed he knew exactly where Saddam Hussein was. That proved wrong. He did it again a couple of weeks into the war, and again was wrong. CIA still doesn't know where Hussein is. Then there's the whole WMD question. None have been found. Why? Were we being suckered all these years? If so, by whom? Supposedly, CIA has been monitoring Iraq's WMD program for years, so why didn't they have a far better handle on the matter before we went in? Frankly, while I think President Bush's famously deep loyalty is admirable, I think it's misplaced in Tenet's case. He should have been fired long ago.

So many questions. So few answers. To me, if it weren't for the Dems screaming for a special counsel, the Wilson matter would be a sideshow. I think something is deeply rotten at CIA and I wish I had the time and resources to look into the matter in depth.

[Wolfstar]

You are very welcome, Yoe. And thanks for passing it on to others. FR is kind of like a pond. Throw a nugget of truth into it, and the ripples spread to the farthest shore. Although we may never know the impact, especially with huge stories going on now, like what's happening to Rush and Arnold Schwarzenegger, I'm certain our efforts do have an impact.

[CyberAnt]

"former high-level intelligence official" in the Clinton administration "

Yes, yes! I saw that and Mrs. Wilson was my first candidate.

Also .. this brings up a standard operating procedure for the democrats (which I'm sure you're aware of). Blame conservatives for doing what the democrats are actually doing. In other words, here was this "official" vetting information which indicated that this "official" suspected the Bush admin was doing something wrong - when in reality - I believe the "official" was revealing the truth about what the democrats (clinton holdover goons) were actually doing TO the Bush admin.

Did I make that clear ..?? The democrats have been using this method for years and years. The only problem for the democrats is - we now know about this method - and we are able to recognize it very readily. It also informs us OF WHAT THE DEMOCRATS ARE ACTUALLY DOING - I'd say this "official" has just admitted that they were fully aware of a "set-up" against the Bush admin. because they were involved in it.

[Wolfstar]

One thing that always bugs me about how reporters attribute anonymous sources is that they use a sort of inside-baseball code to vaguely describe the source's qualifications for saying whatever is being quoted. The problem is that the those of us who don't know the code are left scratching our heads trying to put pieces of a puzzle together. In any case, when someone is described as an administration official, I take that to mean one of the political appointees rather than one of the career bureaucrats and agents who populate the government no matter who is president.

On re-reading the Hersh exerpt to refresh my memory from a couple of days ago, it appears he has two sources. One is a former Clinton administration official who claims the British government was spreading disinformation and that the Clinton administration knew about it. This person seems to be blaming the Brits for Iraq-Niger "hoax" (if it really was a hoax). The other is described both as a former intelligence officer, and as a former high-level intelligence official. In any case, "former" is a key word, and indicates that Mrs. Wilson can't be the source for Hersh's "set up" quote if she's still in the government.

What's most significant about Hersh's piece is that in March, as the controversy over the Iraq-Niger reference in the SOUA was building, a "former high-level intelligence official" stated declaratively that the insertion of that reference in the SOUA was a set up. It is no great stretch to observe that Wilson then either piggybacked his insertion into the story onto the original set up, or he continued to develop the set up. In my opinion, the latter is most likely.

What I think is possible, although we have no evidence and may never know for sure, is that Mrs. Plame-Wilson was among the (or THE) lower-level CIA analysts who OK'd use of the Iraq-Niger reference in the SOUA. WMD is supposedly her area of expertise, after all, and her husband did go to Niger for the CIA 11 months prior. Oh, the outlines of a set up are quite clear, no doubt. In my opinion, Justice is now investigating the wrong end of this saga. They should start at its genesis rather than poke around in one of its all-but-inevitable by-products, the supposed "outing" of Mrs. Plame-Wilson.

[piasa]

Since they are pulling phone records as far back as Feb 1 2002, thay may bery well include a close look at Wilson. He went to Niger in Feb 2002. This is well before ANY leaks came out.

[nopardons]

You're correct about the " code ". Novak has said, that when he called Pame-Wilson an " opperative ", he meant that term ( as everyone in D.C. knew ...but not US ! ), was that she was a " HACK " .

[lainde]

looks like great analysis...Bump for later read!

[chichipow]

That is Soros the billionaire who just this week called for Regime change this year in America.

Isn't Soro's a Clinton buddy (Marc Rich style), and didn't he make off like a bandit in Bosnia and Kosovo?

[ForGod'sSake]

Great piece of research and excellent presentation. All of which leads you, and many of us likely, to this conclusion amongst others:

I think something is deeply rotten at CIA and I wish I had the time and resources to look into the matter in depth.

Could it be, for lack of a better term, social engineering on a global scale? Seems to work here at home. Fact is, none of us know exactly what this agency does, really. And can we rely upon our surrogates in D.C. to watch the henhouse? It's possible this agency is so good at flim flam that our congresscritters don't even know what they're up to.

Thanks for the ping to this terrific piece Mom.

FGS

[Grampa Dave]

Same guy, and many of the dead in those countries are dead do his lies and politics.

Do a Free Republic search on Soros for some scary reading.

[Freedoms Chaser]

In my opinion, Justice is now investigating the wrong end of this saga. They should start at its genesis rather than poke around in one of its all-but-inevitable by-products, the supposed "outing" of Mrs. Plame-Wilson.

I think you are correct in this opinion. The thought occurred to me...maybe they are poking behind the scene, quietly. Let us hope so.

[Wolfstar]

Re your post #167, I'm really pleased to learn that Justice may investigate that far back. The difficult thing, of course, is that these investigations take way too long to unfold and for the full truth to make its way to the public. In the meantime, demagogues have free rein to cause considerable damage.

[Wolfstar]

I believe Tom Clancy took a shot at explaining the code in one of his novels, although I don't remember which one. For example, there is some kind of sliding scale of adjectives used to hint at just how close or far the source is from the inner circle in a case. "A source familiar with..." is not as inside as someone described as "a source close to..." or "an official close to" for example. It's all BS, in my opinion, because almost all stories these days are attributed to anonymous sources, even when there is no need for a source to be anonymous. Unfortunately, most people in the general public don't have a clue as to just how fraudulent many news stories are — sigh.

[Wolfstar]

And can we rely upon our surrogates in D.C. to watch the henhouse?

Thanks for your comment, FGS. Although I'm sure your question is rhetorical, the answer is no. And I include in "our surrogates" both elected representatives and the media. The media claims to be our self-appointed watchdogs when, in reality, they are nothing more than a bunch of sales people pitching superficial tales.

[Wolfstar]

I hope so too, and we're not alone. See Piasa's post #167.

[OneLoyalAmerican]

Greetings FReeper Wolfstar:

NICE WORK!

One can only wonder if career diplomat bureaucrat Wilson's spouse was terminated for cause from her job a CIA operative. We sure heard enough complaining from the Washington Press Corps(e) over the lack of leaks from the Bush White House. "Loose lipped" morons are always popular with lazy reporters.

Chances are that over the years, many reporters, including Novak, used mopes like Ms. Plume-Wilson as an "anonymous CIA source," and former Ambassador Joseph Wilson as an "anonymous administration official."

One question ‘rats on the Congressional investigation will not ask: "Ambassador Wilson, who signed the travel orders authorizing your travel to Niger for a conclusive investigation determining if, and when Iraqi agents sought the purchase of uranium?"

[ForGod'sSake]

The media claims to be our self-appointed watchdogs when, in reality, they are nothing more than a bunch of sales people pitching superficial tales.

Just so. As you can likely tell from my tag, I'm not a fan of our "free press". Truth be known, were it not for the air head dreamers in the media, the socialisms so readily embraced by so many, wouldn't stand a chance in the ideas market. Their influence is formidable; not only on the electorate, but the elected as well. No politician, including(especially?) our own conservatives, wants to run afoul of the media machine. Conservative ideals have to be couched in smarmy language and diluted to the point of near ineffectiveness to even rise to the level of "marginal" by our "free press". So, who's minding the store?

A bit off subject; hope you don't mind the brief rant...

FGS

[Wolfstar]

You're right. All the Dems will do is trample anyone between them and the nearest microphone in a haste to grandstand and demagogue, rant and rave in mock horror.

[piasa]

Interesting bits and pieces on Seamole's thread regarding Wilson and Ray McGovern and more...