Friday, October 14, 2011

Some Interesting Facts on the Plame Caper

1) Robert Novak was never approached by the Bush administration.............2) Valerie Plame drove to work/Langley in public view every day.............3) Henry Waxman allowed only one rebuttal witness at the hearings; Victoria Toensing, who he constantly harangued and threatened.............4) Plame was not covert as defined by the Intelligence Identities Act of 1982 (this, in that she hadn't been stationed overseas during the previous 5 years).............5) All that Robert Novak reported was that the wife of former Ambassador, Joe Wilson, is/was "an agency operative on weapons of mass destruction". Nothing was ever reported by Mr. Novak that Joe Wilson's wife was ever covert.............6) A media brief (comprised of some 36 media outlets) clearly states that "NO CRIME HAD BEEN COMMITTED" (in this supposed outing of Valerie Plame).............7) The first indication that Valerie Plame had ever been a covert operative came from a column by liberal ramrod, David Corn (2 days full after the Novak column).............8) In this column, Mr. Corn hypothesizes that Plame had been outed to punish Joe Wilson, something that Mr. Novak had NEVER suggested....9) Mr. Corn's source? It had to have been Joe Wilson. I mean, he doesn't mention anybody else in the piece, does he? And being that Robert Novak never mentioned it.............10) The original leaker of Plame-Wilson's name was Richard Armitage, in the words of Mr. Novak himself, "not a partisan gunslinger" (not to mention, an opponent of the Iraq War).............11) In the aforementioned media brief, it was alleged that Mrs. Plame-Wilson's cover was actually blown (in the mid-90s) by the C.I.A., first in Russia, and then through a C.I.A. disclosure to Fidel Castro.............12) According to Novak, he only learned the name, Valerie Plame, by reading Mr. Wilson's entry in "Who's Who in America".............13) Only two Republicans bothered to show up for the hearings. This, according to former Connecticut Congressman Christopher Shays (not exactly a partisan gunslinger, either), was predominantly because of Henry Waxman's "extreme bias".............14) Mr. Novak also points to sworn F.B.I. testimony which states that Mrs. Plame-Wilson's C.I.A. employment was common knowledge in Washington.............15) Novak never denigrated Wilson in the initial column. In fact, he spoke quite highly of him (referring to Mr. Wilson's "heroism" during the first Iraq War).............16) Novak opposed BOTH Iraq Wars and was never a fan of either Bush.............17) Conservative columnist, Cliff May (who I almost always disagree with when it comes to issues of foreign policy), lays it all out pretty well, I think; Either the Bush administration intentionally exposed a covert CIA agent as a way to take revenge against her husband who had written a critical op-ed OR this same Bush administration was attempting to set the record straight by telling reporters that it was NOT Vice President Cheney who had sent Wilson on the Africa assignment, as Mr. Wilson himself had claimed, but rather it was Wilson’s wife, a CIA employee, who had helped get him the assignment (and that that in fact is the conclusion of the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee). You make the call, I guess.............18) Yeah, I know, I'm a little late to the party on this one.

33 comments:

Jerry Critter said...

What's your point?

It is not obvious to me with a quick reading, but after a bottle of wine this evening, this is the best I can do. Maybe I will re-read it in the morning.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

The Bush administration did a lot of things wrong, a truckload in fact. But, in my opinion, this whole Plame situation was just a dog and pony show in which the media and the Democratic party acted like a bunch of clowns.

w-dervish said...

Jerry Critter: What's your point?

His point is to denigrate an American hero and fulfill a new addendum to his existing agenda... to act as a bush apologist. Most of what Will writes is in incorrect.

Will: the Bush administration intentionally exposed a covert CIA agent as a way to take revenge against her husband who had written a critical op-ed

Yes.

Will: ...OR this same Bush administration was attempting to set the record straight...

No.

Will: ...by telling reporters that it was NOT Vice President Cheney who had sent Wilson on the Africa assignment...

His office made a request to have the intell verified, so in essence Cheny DID send Joe Wilson on the Niger assignment.

Will: Plame was not covert...

Excerpt from: Plame was "covert" agent at time of name leak...

An unclassified summary of outed CIA officer Valerie Plame's employment history at the spy agency, disclosed... in a court filing by Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, indicates that Plame was "covert" when her name became public in July 2003. (By Joel Seidman, Producer NBC News, updated 5/29/2007).

w-dervish said...

Will: ...this whole Plame situation was just a dog and pony show in which the media and the Democratic party acted like a bunch of clowns.

No.

w-dervish said...

Some interesting questions regarding the Plame "caper".

1. Why did bush (when questioned) say he would fire anyone in his office if it was proven (disclosed) they leaked the name of an undercover CIA operative? Why didn't he say Plame wasn't undercover so no crime? Why would he even consider firing someone for "setting the record straight"?

2. Why did Scooter Libby "throw sand" in Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald's face? If Plame wasn't undercover why not tell the whole truth? Why did he risk jail time for no reason? The man cannot now work in his chosen profession because he was disbarred. He is also a felon. Why not tell the truth and avoid destroying his career and reputation?

Honestly Will, your version of events makes absolutely no sense.

w-dervish said...

FYI, I wrote a post on this subject and reached a very different conclusion. One that you'll probably strongly disagree with. If you want something else to go off on... you should take a gander.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

the Bush administration intentionally exposed a covert CIA agent as a way to take revenge against her husband who had written a critical op-ed......There is absolutely no evidence for that. The administration never sought out Robert Novak or anybody else. David Corn, the true leaker of the name, Valerie Wilson, hypothesized that purely out of thin air.......And Plame was NOT covert. a) She hadn't been overseas in 5 years (the criteria set by the IIA). b) She drove to work in plain view every single day. c) There was sworn FBI testimony that Mrs. Wilson's employment at the F.B.I. was common knowledge in Washington. d) The media's own damn brief clearly stated that Plame had already been outed twice in the 90s. This is a joke - straight up.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Bush obviously didn't know the facts. If he had taken the time to read the media brief, he'd have known that the lady wasn't covert and that she had been outed almost a decade previously.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

NBC News? They were one of the 36 media organizations that had signed onto that court brief which plainly stated that NO CRIME HAD BEEN COMMITTED, that Plame had been outed almost a decade earlier. What a disgraceful performance by the press.......And it is abundantly clear that Plame indeed may have committed perjury. This, in that the bipartisan report clearly stated that it was Plame herself who had recommended her husband for that assignment. I mean, come on, why in the world would the Vice President send an opponent of military intervention to check out the story. THAT doesn't make any sense.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

And where is the proof that Armitage (clearly an opponent of military intervention/purportedly an individual who despised Cheney) KNEW that Plame was a covert agent?......That, and what about Novak's testimony? He (you know, the actual writer of the first piece) never implied that this "leak" was a retaliatory action (as opposed to one of merely setting the record straight). That was frigging Corn's and Wilson's bald accusation and little more.

w-dervish said...

Will: ...the lady wasn't covert...

Former Nixon WH Counsel John Dean, in an article on the legal website FindLaw.com (8/15/2003) The Bush Administration Adopts a Worse-than-Nixonian Tactic: The Deadly Serious Crime Of Naming CIA Operatives. On July 14... Chicago Sun-Times journalist Robert Novak reported that Valerie Plame Wilson... was a covert CIA agent. ... Why was Novak able to learn this highly secret information... he has said, the "two senior Administration officials"... sought him out, eager to let him know. And in journalism, that phrase is a term of art reserved for a vice president, cabinet officers, and top White House officials.

New York Times (10/2/2003) Cover Story Kept Work for C.I.A. a Secret. Valerie Plame was... a covert operative who specialized in nonconventional weapons and sometimes worked abroad, she passed herself off as a private energy expert, what the agency calls nonofficial cover. But that changed over the summer, when her identity as a C.I.A. officer was reported in a syndicated column by Robert Novak.

Video of Valerie Plame's Congressional testimony (3/15/2007). Excerpt from the transcript... Rep Elijah Cummings: I know that Mr. Waxman, our chair, and Congressman Reyes, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, spoke personally with General Hayden, the head of the CIA. And Chairman Waxman told me that General Hayden said clearly and directly, quote, "Ms. Wilson was covert", end of quote. There was no doubt about it. And by the way, the CIA has authorized us to be able to say that. In addition... Chairman Waxman sent his opening statement over to the CIA to be cleared and to make sure that it was accurate. In it he said, quote, "Ms. Wilson was a covert employee of the CIA", end of quote. Quote, "Ms. Wilson was undercover", end of quote. The CIA cleared these statements. I emphasize all of this because I know that there are people who are still trying to suggest that -- that what seems absolutely clear isn't really true, and that you weren't covert. And I think one of the things we need to do in this hearing is make sure there isn't any ambiguity on this point.

CBS News (5/29/2007) Yes, Valerie Plame Was Covert. In a court filing today, Patrick Fitzgerald provides a summary of Valerie Plame Wilson's status with the CIA's Counterproliferation Division at the time she was outed to the press by members of the Bush administration. Guess what? She was covert... So that settles that.

New York Times (5/30/2007) Leak Prosecutor Says Plame Was Covert. Valerie Plame Wilson’s covert status at the CIA is old news for many observer... One side of the political divide argued that she was actually on desk duty at Langley at the time of Robert Novak’s infamous column naming her, which would mean that the leaking of her identity was... not illegal... The other side, and Ms. Wilson herself, said the opposite. [According to] Patrick Fitzgerald... Wilson "was a covert employee"... Kevin Drum at The Washington Monthly [said] "The leakers had to know that leaking Plame's name could be damaging"...

Rusty Shackelford said...

Come on guys,its almost 2012....do you think any one really gives a flying f#*k about Joe Wilson or Valerie Plame?

Rusty Shackelford said...

Am I mistaken or did Obama just send troops to Uganda? I'm beginning to change my mind about this guy...talk about a hawk.This guy is really starting to shoot people.....you go Barack.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

a) Why then did the media brief say that there was no crime committed in the Plame outing, and that Mrs. Plame had already been outed twice in the 90s? b) How is it possible that a covert operative drives to work at Langley every day in open view? c) How can a person be covert when she hadn't been overseas in the previous 5 years (the length of time specified in the IIA)? d) How can a person be covert when there are copious amounts of FBI testimony saying that her employment at the CIA was common knowledge inside the beltway? If this lady was any sort of special agent, then she God damned lousy at it.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

John Dean? John Dean frigging hates Bush! And where is your evidence that White House officials "sought out" Mr. Novak? Novak was the frigging reporter and his version of events (the actual version) is markedly different than that of John Dean's. According Novak (and, again, it was David Corn who initially leaked Valerie Plame's name to the media, HIS source undoubtedly Joe Wilson), it was Richard Armitage (an opponent of intervention) who initially leaked the name of Valerie Plame, it was through the "Who's Who in America" that Novak first leaned the name, Valerie Plame, and it was Novak who went to Karl Rove to verify the fact that it was Wilson's wife who got him the Niger assignment. And NOWHERE has Novak so much as intimated that Armitage, Rove, or anybody at the White House claimed to him that Valerie Plame was covert. So, even if Plame was STILL covert (and that is highly dubious), there is no evidence that Armitage, Rove, or ANYBODY KNOWINGLY outed a covert agent. This is something that Joe Wilson and David Corn totally invented out of whole cloth.......Look, I'll admit it. There is a lot that the Bush administration really needs to answer for (on waterboarding, on warrentless wiretaps, on not being able to prevent 9/11, on getting us involved in Iraq, etc.) but this whole Plame thing is total bullshit, in my opinion.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

And I ask you again, why would the Vice President's office send an opponent of the Iraq intervention on such a delicate assignment? It makes absolutely NO sense. Face it, dude. Valerie Plame flat-out committed perjury and the woman is lucky that she didn't get sent on up the river with Libby.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

These are Robert Novak's own words from Realclearpolitics.com........"Claims of a White House plot became so discredited that Wilson was cut out of John Kerry's presidential campaign by the summer of 2004. Last week's hearing attempted to revive a dormant issue. The glamorous Mrs. Wilson was depicted as the victim of White House machinations that aborted her career in secret intelligence. 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?" For the record.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/03/was_valerie_covert.html

w-dervish said...

Will: Why then did the media brief say...

I don't know what "media brief" you're referring to.

Will: How is it possible that a covert operative drives to work at Langley every day in open view [or] hadn't been overseas in the previous 5 years [or] when there are copious amounts of FBI testimony saying that her employment at the CIA was common knowledge...?

Says who? Says who? Why would there be FBI testimony about someone in the CIA? When was this supposed testimony given? Where can I see it? (I provided a link to a video and transcript for the testimony I cited).

Will: John Dean frigging hates Bush! And where is your evidence that White House officials "sought out" Mr. Novak? ...it was David Corn who initially leaked Valerie Plame's name to the media...

What's your evidence that John Dean "hates" bush (and lied because due to this "hatred")? Pointing out the wrongdoing of another individual isn't proof of "hate". My evidence that WH officials sought out Novak is the article by John Dean that I linked to. David Corn leaked Plame's name? Says who? In any case, if she wasn't covert (as you claim), how could anyone "leak" her name?

Will: it was Richard Armitage...

David Corn says, "though Armitage had been a source for the leak, he may not have been the only source... Karl Rove may have also leaked the information". The proof that this is so is the fact that Scooter Libby "threw sand" in prosecutor Fitzgerald's face... he was protecting Cheney and Rove.

Will: ...it was Novak who went to Karl Rove to verify the fact that it was Wilson's wife who got him the Niger assignment.

Excerpt from an 8/1/2005 TPM article... "the so-called 'bipartisan' Senate Intelligence Committee report... makes note of a memo sent by Plame outlining her husband's bona fides to her boss... What the Senate Republicans... [left out is] the simple fact that [Plame's] boss had first asked her to write the memo. Senior mangers in CPD suggested the mission and authorized it".

Will: NOWHERE has Novak so much as intimated that Armitage, Rove, or anybody at the WJ claimed to him that Valerie Plame was covert. So, even if Plame was STILL covert... there is no evidence that... ANYBODY KNOWINGLY outed a covert agent. This is something that Joe Wilson and David Corn totally invented ... this whole Plame thing is total bullshit, in my opinion.

Excerpt from the same TPM article quoted above... "[Novak] admits that he was told that revealing Plame's identity would cause 'difficulties'. He describes her in his original article as an 'operative'. Note, not 'analyst' but 'operative'. Bob Novak has been in town long enough to know the difference".

According to the head of the CIA she was covert (see the video and transcript I previously linked to). It's my opinion that Cheney and Rove committed treason.

w-dervish said...

Will: ...why would the Vice President's office send an opponent of the Iraq intervention...? It makes absolutely NO sense. Face it... Plame flat-out committed perjury...

It makes perfect sense. The VP's office (not him personally) made a request for verification of the intell. They didn't know the request would generate a fact-finding mission or who would be sent. I'm not going to "face it" that Valerie Plame "flat-out committed perjury" because I'm completely convinced she told the truth.

Also, using the dmarks' standard of determining guilt... Plame was never charged or convicted of perjury... thus she is totally innocent of your slanderous charge.

Will: These are Robert Novak's own words from Realclearpolitics.com...

Novak was a dupe used by Rove.

dmarks said...

WD: That's the Constitutional standard, actually. And more than Plame, Bush was determined to be innocent by the ICC: the "charges" against him were such a joke that they were not worth of any proceedings.

w-dervish said...

Plame was determined to be innocent by US courts: the "charges" of perjury against her were such a joke that they were not worthy of any proceedings.

Also, regarding the "constitutional standard"... an individual can charged, go to trial and found innocent OR they could never be charged at all... and STILL be guilty!

I never asserted bush was guilty of war crimes using the "constitutional standard"... that's a red herring you introduced. Also, why would the (United States) "constitutional standard" apply in the INTERNATIONAL Criminal Court?

bush is a war criminal any way you slice it... although if he is ever prosecuted it will probably be for the torture he authorized.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

The fact that you have no knowledge of this media brief underscores just how little you actually know of this "story" and of just how you you've come to rely upon these Democratic talking-points of yours. In an effort to get Judy Miller and that Cooper guy out of jail, 36 Media organizations filed a brief which stated that NO CRIME HAD BEEN COMMITTED in this supposed Plame leak. Nada. Plame in fact had been outed nearly a decade prior. This is from the Washington Post 2005............"The 40-page brief, filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, argues that there is "ample evidence . . . to doubt that a crime has been committed" in the case, which centers on the question of whether Bush administration officials knowingly revealed the identity of undercover CIA operative Valerie Plame in the summer of 2003. Plame's name was published first by syndicated columnist Robert D. Novak and later by other publications."

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61388-2005Mar23.html

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

The FBI testimony and the fact that Valerie Plame allegedly drove herself to work in plain view every day I got from Mr. Novak's column. What, now that you know that he hasn't provided you everything that you need to hang Dick Cheney, you're going to call him a liar, too?............I know that John Dean hates Bush because of the dozens of appearances that he used to make on Olbermann's show and of how he used to literally echo every single one of the latter's conspiracy theories of how Mr. Bush was a fascist, etc.. That's how I know that he hates Bush.............Novak used the term, "operative", to spice up his narrative. All writers do it and there isn't any "there there"............."Novak was a dupe used by Rove". There is NO evidence for this whatsoever. And, no, you not liking somebody isn't evidence............."Also, regarding the "constitutional standard"... an individual can charged, go to trial and found innocent OR they could never be charged at all... and STILL be guilty!" Yeah, you're right, wd. Valerie Plame either lied under oath or she has the worst memory this side Reagan (post Alzheimer's).

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Here is Mr. Armitage speaking about Valerie Plame. Try to fit this into your Dick Cheney led conspiracy to punish Joe Wilson theory.............http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OwJCUZHZjV8

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Dude, you have made so many outrageous comments and accusations here that my head is spinning. On the one hand, you have this Dick Cheney is an evil mastermind paradigm. And the the other you have the Vice President's office run so idiotically that they a) send a well-known interventionist opponent to try and buffer their case and b) enlist the services of a State Department official who is also against the intervention to be the first leaker. The whole thing is patently absurd.......And there is a hell of a lot more evidence that Valerie Plame committed perjury than Karl Kove (an admittedly unsympathetic figure) committed treason. I mean, talk about slander.

w-dervish said...

The fact that you reject the word of CIA Chief Hayden underscores how you've come to rely upon these Republican talking points of yours.

Will: ...The fact that you have no knowledge of this media brief underscores...

I did a google search on "media brief" and "Plame" and 3 of the top 5 results were YOU. The other was Rush Limbaugh's site and another site called "Marijuana.com". At the top of the list is a post on "nationalbroadside" authored by.... Will "take no prisoners" Hart.

None of these sites include a link to an actual news source. I don't know about the Limbaugh site, because when I clicked the link the page I was shown said "members only, please log in".

I still don't know what "media brief" you're talking about, and I say your claim that this "underscores just how little [I] actually know of this story" is bullshit... the google results being proof of that... Apparently only partisan Republicans and Will Hart know about it.

w-dervish said...

Will: ...the fact that Valerie Plame allegedly drove herself to work in plain view every day I got from Mr. Novak's column.

How would he know?

Will: ....you have the VP's office run so idiotically that they send a well-known interventionist opponent to try and buffer their case...

I did not say that. I explained what happened more than once... obviously you're just choosing to ignore what I actually said.

Will: ...you not liking somebody isn't evidence.

YOU not liking someone (Plame), or liking someone (Novak) isn't evidence.

Will: Valerie Plame either lied under oath or [some other possibility that really isn't a possibility at all... meaning Will thinks VP lied]...

Valerie Plame told the truth, as CONFIRMED by her boss, CIA Chief Hayden.

Will: The whole thing is patently absurd.

I agree. Before this post of yours I thought the facts on this were so obvious that everyone except hard-core Republican partisans and deluded fools would be able to see the truth of the matter.

I guess you gotta take the Republican stance on this one to keep your "moderate" bona fides.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

DUDE, I gave you a Washington Post site, for Christ, AND Novak's column. You didn't read either of these? You explained what happened. You explained what happened! LOL Plame said that the Vice President's office had sent her husband, A WELL KNOWN OPPONENT OF INTERVENTION, on the Niger mission. This was obviously a lie (not to mention, an absurdity) and it was shown to be a lie by the bipartisan Senate summary which I provided to you as a direct quote (replete with pdf source). As for Hayden, he was totally wishy-washy. He refused (according to Novak) to provide the Republicans with an answer on Plame's status and finally gave the Democrats an answer that, yeah, she WAS covert. Nobody is questioning the fact that she was covert at one time. But the fact that she hadn't been overseas in 5 years and was working in plain sight at Langley in an apparently administrative function clearly indicates a past tense at work here.......And where do you get off calling Robert Novak a dupe to anybody. His politics aside (though, no, not really, he was actually against BOTH Iraq Wars and didn't particularly like EITHER Bush), the man was one of the best journalists and interviewers in all of D.C.. If anybody was being duped, it was frigging Karl Rove.

w-dervish said...

I think Will Hart is being duped.

dmarks said...

WD said: "bush is a war criminal any way you slice it... "

Only in your imagination. The grown-ups disagree, and I side with them.

The Heathen Republican said...

Will, I'm about to cite you as a second-hand source here. Apologies if you get hit with shrapnel.