Covrt or not? That is the QUESTION?????

[Psychoblues]

VALERIE PLAME CONFIRMS HER COVERT STATUS PRIOR TO NOVAK LEAK



"This morning, in her testimony under oath before the House Government and Oversight Committee, Valerie Plame Wilson asserted that she was in fact a covert officer at the time that columnist Robert Novak revealed her employment at the CIA. "In the run-up to the war with Iraq, I worked in the Counterproliferation Division of the CIA, still as a covert officer whose affiliation with the CIA was classified," Plame sad in her opening testimony.

She added, "While I helped to manage and run secret worldwide operations against this WMD target from CIA headquarters in Washington, I also traveled to foreign countries on secret missions to find vital intelligence."

The right-wing, aided by the mainstream media, have engaged in an unhalting effort to spread false claims that Plame was not covert, despite the fact that the CIA, Plame's former colleagues, and Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald have all previously reported that she was covert. The conviction of Scooter Libby only intensified conservatives' efforts to further propagate their lie."

More: http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/16/plame-covert-testimony/


I get it and I am well below the pay-grade. What is your problem with this testimony?

[lily]

Definately covert, which has been my stance from day one.

[stephanie]

Not.....:poke:

[Gaffer]

She was not covert under the definition of the law. And that is the question she was not asked.

"Were you covert under the definition of the law?" Her answer would have had to be no.

Is she still able to work for the CIA, yes.

[Psychoblues]

She was asked that direct question, gaffer, on at least 2 occasions and her answer was "yes". She was considered "covert" and the administration knew it and blew it.



She was not covert under the definition of the law. And that is the question she was not asked.

"Were you covert under the definition of the law?" Her answer would have had to be no.

Is she still able to work for the CIA, yes.

Certainly she is still able to work for the CIA but why would she want to?

[Mr. P]

She was asked that direct question, gaffer, on at least 2 occasions and her answer was "yes". She was considered "covert" and the administration knew it and blew it.




Certainly she is still able to work for the CIA but why would she want to?

She lied, it's all a lie. evreryone knew what she did before any of this happened..hell I think her husband even said so.

[lily]

Well then Mr. P, I'm sure they will have no problem trying her for purgery, since she was under oath.

[Mr. P]

Well then Mr. P, I'm sure they will have no problem trying her for purgery, since she was under oath.

Who knows? Maybe. For me it's a non-issue, only the Bush haters want to keep the issue alive. Did they convict Libby of this? No. because why?

Vallely said, citing CIA colleagues, that in addition to his conversations with Wilson, the ambassador was proud to introduce Plame at cocktail parties and other social events around Washington as his CIA wife.
"That was pretty common knowledge," he said. "She's been out there on the Washington scene many years."
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=47242

[lily]

Who knows? Maybe. For me it's a non-issue, only the Bush haters want to keep the issue alive. Did they convict Libby of this? No. because why?

Libby was not on trial for that.


Vallely said, citing CIA colleagues, that in addition to his conversations with Wilson, the ambassador was proud to introduce Plame at cocktail parties and other social events around Washington as his CIA wife.
"That was pretty common knowledge," he said. "She's been out there on the Washington scene many years."
[url]http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=47242[/url

No offense, but I believe that staement about as much as I believe what world net dailey posts. What do you want me to believe, Wilson said, I'd like you to meet my wife, the CIA agent? Please! You guys will fall for anything.

[Mr. P]

Libby was not on trial for that.

Yeah he was..it was dropped.

No offense, but I believe that staement about as much as I believe what world net dailey posts. What do you want me to believe, Wilson said, I'd like you to meet my wife, the CIA agent? Please! You guys will fall for anything.

Fine, check it out..many sources say the same..

[stephanie]

Libby was not on trial for that.



No offense, but I believe that statement about as much as I believe what world net daily posts. What do you want me to believe, Wilson said, I'd like you to meet my wife, the CIA agent? Please! You guys will fall for anything.

Na, I think you have that backwards my dear..

It seems it is you, who will fall for anything..

It's been proven over and over she was not outed by this administration, because if she had of been, Scotter Libby would of been tried for that...He wasn't...yet you all continue on...Nothing New though

Continue on you good little soldier...

[Gaffer]

She was asked that direct question, gaffer, on at least 2 occasions and her answer was "yes". She was considered "covert" and the administration knew it and blew it.




Certainly she is still able to work for the CIA but why would she want to?

She was asked if she had been covert. Not if she was covert under the law. Under the law are the key words, and they were specifically left out.

[Mr. P]

She was asked that direct question, gaffer, on at least 2 occasions and her answer was "yes". She was considered "covert" and the administration knew it and blew it.




Certainly she is still able to work for the CIA but why would she want to?
She was also asked, (and I saw it) do you know if the administration revealed this information? and she said NO.

Go fish, Bush haters!

[Psychoblues]

If I had been asked if I knew who Valerie Plame was or anything about her prior to the very public exposure to her earthly presence by as yet to be determined, I would have answered, No, I don't know her.



She was also asked, (and I saw it) do you know if the administration revealed this information? and she said NO.

Go fish, Bush haters!

Kiss my ass, ignoramous.

[Mr. P]

If I had been asked if I knew who Valerie Plame was or anything about her prior to the very public exposure to her earthly presence by as yet to be determined, I would have answered, No, I don't know her.




Kiss my ass, ignoramous.

Was a question to her, dumb ass.

[Psychoblues]

And she, like me and you, we are all unsure as just who the hell fucked her over at this stage of the investigation. You got information or otherwise interesting observation to share? Share it, tell it or just shut the fuck up.



Was a question to her, dumb ass.

I posed a question as obligue as the one you refer. Just how would she know that at this time?

Valerie Plame has already been deprived of her continued dedicational inspiration to serve this country. Who is to blame for that? Valerie? I think not, you imbecile.

[stephanie]

Someone needs to cool their jets???:poke:

[Mr. P]

And she, like me and you, we are all unsure as just who the hell fucked her over at this stage of the investigation. You got information or otherwise interesting observation to share? Share it, tell it or just shut the fuck up.




I posed a question as obligue as the one you refer. Just how would she know that at this time?

Valerie Plame has already been deprived of her continued dedicational inspiration to serve this country. Who is to blame for that? Valerie? I think not, you imbecile.

I posted it already..google a bit.

[Psychoblues]

Posted what? Bullshit?




I posted it already..google a bit.

You ain't posted anything that I care to google, dipstick.

You got probs the doctors don't have cures for.

Get back with me when you have actual information and is opposed to anything I have written or linked in this thread. Otherwise, really, just shut the fuck up!!!!!!

[Mr. P]

Posted what? Bullshit?





You ain't posted anything that I care to google, dipstick.

You got probs the doctors don't have cures for.

Get back with me when you have actual information and is opposed to anything I have written or linked in this thread. Otherwise, really, just shut the fuck up!!!!!!

Yer such a fucking MORON!:laugh2:

[Gaffer]

Mr. P I think you have him upset. Must be time for his meds.

[Mr. P]

Mr. P I think you have him upset. Must be time for his meds.

Yup, facts do that to him. :laugh2:

[Psychoblues]

So, that is the information that you have?



Yer such a fucking MORON!:laugh2:

FUCK YOU, MR. PISSYASS

[Mr. P]

So, that is the information that you have?




FUCK YOU, MR. PISSYASS

:clap: :laugh2:

[Gaffer]

Don'tcha love it when he goes balistic.

[Mr. P]

Don'tcha love it when he goes balistic.

Ya, I do...:laugh2:

[Psychoblues]

Sweet, victory is so sweet!!!!!!



Don'tcha love it when he goes balistic.


Do you have any idea as to how ignorant and avoiding of the conversation that you appear?

I thought not.

Sit on this and clear your mind. :fu:

You got to be smilin' after that!!!!!!!!!!

[Mr. P]

Well, I’m going to bed to dream about the evil the GOP can perpetrate next.
wait...


WND Exclusive THE PLAME GAME
Analyst says Wilson
'outed' wife in 2002

can I dream better than that?

[avatar4321]

I love how Libs have to literally change the word of covert to make her a covert agent.

Covert is a clearly defined word. Its specific in the act. She wasn't a covert agent.

[avatar4321]

She was asked that direct question, gaffer, on at least 2 occasions and her answer was "yes". She was considered "covert" and the administration knew it and blew it.




Certainly she is still able to work for the CIA but why would she want to?

Which means she is an outright liar. If she was covert, Armitage would have been put in jail. But she was never covert.

It wasn't a coincidence that the Democrats never let the woman who wrote the act testify that she was not covert.

[avatar4321]

Well then Mr. P, I'm sure they will have no problem trying her for purgery, since she was under oath.

Of course they wont have a problem with it. They wouldn't have had a problem prosecuting Sandy Burger for his crimes. They didn't.

Of course, that is probably why Bush has replaced the prosecutors. And it explains why Democrats are so opposed to it.

[avatar4321]

She was asked if she had been covert. Not if she was covert under the law. Under the law are the key words, and they were specifically left out.

There is only one way to be covert and that's covert under the law.

She lied, period. Don't fall for the Democrats trying to make covert mean more than what it means.

[avatar4321]

Yer such a fucking MORON!:laugh2:

Please dont degrade morons so much. They don't deserve that treatment...

[CockySOB]

Well then Mr. P, I'm sure they will have no problem trying her for purgery, since she was under oath.

Well, considering Armitage admitted to the "leak" yet was never charged with a crime by Fitzpatrick, I guess that no crime was actually committed. Except of course for the apparent perjury and obstruction charges Libby was convicted of.

BTW Lily, is Fitz-mas gonna be this year, or next, or when?

[Gunny]

She was not covert under the definition of the law. And that is the question she was not asked.

"Were you covert under the definition of the law?" Her answer would have had to be no.

Is she still able to work for the CIA, yes.

Yeah, she was all kinds of "covert." Driving in and out the front gate at CIA Headquarters daily for a couple of years wouldn't give anybody a clue she might actually work there.:lame2:

[lily]

Yeah he was..it was dropped.B]

I'd like a link to your claim that Libby was originally charged with outing Plame, please.

[lily]

Well, considering Armitage admitted to the "leak" yet was never charged with a crime by Fitzpatrick, I guess that no crime was actually committed. Except of course for the apparent perjury and obstruction charges Libby was convicted of.

BTW Lily, is Fitz-mas gonna be this year, or next, or when?


Armitage wasn't the only one, nor could he tell if he was the first. Libby obstructed justice, so who knows who else?

Oh yes Cocky........it is Fitz-mas. Plame testified under oath, Fitzgerald said it on the court steps AND the head of the CIA confirmed that she was covert.

[lily]

It wasn't a coincidence that the Democrats never let the woman who wrote the act testify that she was not covert.

Actually she did and made a fool of herself in the process.

[stephanie]

Actually she did and made a fool of herself in the process.

:laugh2:

[lily]

Hey stephanie........you're allright! I was laughing too when Toensing testified. Who'd have thought we would agree on this?!

[Mr. P]

I'd like a link to your claim that Libby was originally charged with outing Plame, please.
Geeeezzzzzzz have you been in a cave? Go fish! It was the primary reason for the charges to start with, that part was dropped a few months back because it was baseless. Then they focused on the obstruction and stuff. A little Google goes along way. :slap:

[lily]

Hey........I'm not the one making the claim, you are. You want me to look it up and debate myself? What fun is there in that?

[manu1959]

Hey........I'm not the one making the claim, you are. You want me to look it up and debate myself? What fun is there in that?

a women playin with herself....hell you could sell tickets

[stephanie]

Hey Stephanie........you're alright! I was laughing too when Toensing testified. Who'd have thought we would agree on this?!

Don't flatter yourself, I was laughing At YOU...
I guess your now an expert in things pertaining to the CIA..

She really is an expert on it....Too bad she just didn't report what you all wished...So you label her a fool..

[Abbey Marie]

...

**** YOU, MR. PISSYASS

Mr. Pissyass? OMG, that's hysterical! :laugh2:

[lily]

Don't flatter yourself, I was laughing At YOU...
I guess your now an expert in things pertaining to the CIA..

Well, then I might suggest that you watch one of the many re-plays on CSPAN. You'll be laughing right along with me.


She really is an expert on it....Too bad she just didn't report what you all wished...So you label her a fool..

What we all wished? Stephanie, she was given exactly the same time and the same amount of questions as every other witness there. Including opening statements. She made a fool of herself.

[Psychoblues]

I don't think so, lily. She opened some doors that now must be gone through. She spoke some truth that needed to be spoken.



What we all wished? Stephanie, she was given exactly the same time and the same amount of questions as every other witness there. Including opening statements. She made a fool of herself.


How do you surmise that "she made a fool of herself?"

[lily]

I don't think so, lily. She opened some doors that now must be gone through. She spoke some truth that needed to be spoken.

Examples please?

[CockySOB]

BTW, I have some catching up to do on the hearing testimonies. I'm not forgetting you, Lily. Just enjoying the first solid days of Spring!

[Psychoblues]

You, lily, said that "she made a fool of herself". I asked you for examples and now you reverse the question? I didn't think that she made a fool of herself.



Examples please?


Could you share with us how and why you do think think that she did? Can it be more simple than that? Or are you just repeating something you might have heard or genuinely are you that freaking confused?

[CockySOB]

OK, I just finished going through Victoria Toensing's 15-page statement to the court (March 23, 2005) on the Plame topic.

Lily, I maintain that Plame was NOT covert based on the requirements of the IIPA and the actions of the CIA themselves. The CIA took no affirmative measures to conceal Plame's identity or her employment at the CIA. Moreover, there is ample public information available which made teh Plame-Wilson-CIA connection which is the basis of the alleged "covert" status and claim of violation of the IIPA.

Sorry, the CIA may claim she was "covert" on paper, but the fact is that the CIA did not take the requisite actions to confirm that status. Ergo, such a paper-classification is meaningless under the US Codes (IIPA).

[lily]

You disappoint me Cocky. You're taking the word of Tonesing, who wrote the legal brief to defend Cooper and Miller? Someone that had no idea where Plame worked, when she did her work, or where she did her work, over the head of the CIA? The very same agency that is blocking her book for the reason that she was undercover? I know it's hard to admit when you're wrong, but now the evidence is out. We've waited years for the proof. Sad. I thought you would consider all the proof, not just what you chose.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/plame/plame_transcript_031607.html

But General Hayden and the CIA have cleared these following comments for
today's hearing.

During her employment at the CIA, Ms. Wilson was undercover. Her employment
status with the CIA was classified information, prohibited from disclosure
under Executive Order 12958.

At the time of the publication of Robert Novak's column on July 14, 2003,
Ms. Wilson's CIA employment status was covert. This was classified
information.

Ms. Wilson served in senior management positions at the CIA, in which she
oversaw the work for other CIA employees and she attained the level of
GS-14, Step 6, under the federal pay scale.

Ms. Wilson worked on some of the most sensitive and highly secretive matters
handled by the CIA.

Ms. Wilson served at various times overseas for the CIA.

[CockySOB]

Lily, your citation is hearsay. That statement was made by Rep. Waxman regarding something Gen. Hayden was alleged to have said. I would have expected more of you than to simply use hearsay evidence to support your position (anti-GWB administration).

Let me give you some examples from the transcripts of the recent hearing.


REP. DAVIS: I mean, it looked -- they're supposed to -- the CIA is supposed to report to Congress each year on the steps taken to protect this highly sensitive information. And I'm told few, if any, reports are even filed. So, I think the re's a responsibility from the CIA. And I think what's missing, and I think -- at least from a criminal perspective -- not from a policy, but from a criminal perspective -- that the special prosecutor in this case looked at that and found that the people who may have been saying this didn't know that you were covert. And you don't have any evidence to the contrary.

MS. PLAME WILSON: That, I think, is a question better put to the special prosecutor, Congressman.

REP. DAVIS: Shouldn't the CIA have made sure that anyone who knew your name and your work be told of your status? Would that have been helpful in this case? That would have made it very clear if anybody leaked it at that point they were violating the law, at least.

MS. PLAME WILSON: The CIA does go to great lengths to create and protect all kinds of covers for its officers. There's a lot of money and a lot of time and a lot of energy that goes into that. And the onus also, the burden, falls on the officer himself or herself to live that cover, but it's not a perfect world.

REP. DAVIS: The Intelligence Identities Protection Act makes it a crime to knowingly disclose the identity of a covert agent, which has a specific definition under the act. Did anyone ever tell you that you were so designated?

MS. PLAME WILSON: I'm not a lawyer.

REP. DAVIS: That's why I asked if they told you. I'm not asking for your interpretation.

MS. PLAME WILSON: No, no. But I was covert. I did travel overseas on secret missions within the last five years.

Notice here how Plame does a dance of double-talk? On one hand she insists she was "covert" because she traveled overseas, yet she also flat-out admits no one ever informed her that she was "covert" under the definition used by the IIPA. Moreover she had already said....

MS. PLAME WILSON: The CIA does go to great lengths to create and protect all kinds of covers for its officers. There's a lot of money and a lot of time and a lot of energy that goes into that. And the onus also, the burden, falls on the officer himself or herself to live that cover, but it's not a perfect world.
Guess what? She just said that her cover was her own responsibility. Couple that wit hall the publicly accessible information about her relationship to Joe Wilson, her employment at Brewster & Jennings, her donations to the Democrat Party (FEC records), the Wilson/Plame entry in Who's Who from well before GWB was in office, etc. See the problem?

Then we have the CIA itself who obviously didn't consider her position to be classified (i.e. covert in terms of the IIPA). They verified her employment at the CIA numerous times to reporters following this story!

Frankly my original assertions hold; either,
1) Plame was never a covert agent deserving the protection of the IIPA; or,
2) Plame and the CIA exhibited extremely shoddy spycraft in creating and protecting her "identity."

You disappoint me Lily.

[Psychoblues]

It's all complicated delusions, CSOB. You give, you take, you become satisfied or you become skeptical.



Lily, your citation is hearsay. That statement was made by Rep. Waxman regarding something Gen. Hayden was alleged to have said. I would have expected more of you than to simply use hearsay evidence to support your position (anti-GWB administration).

Let me give you some examples from the transcripts of the recent hearing.



Notice here how Plame does a dance of double-talk? On one hand she insists she was "covert" because she traveled overseas, yet she also flat-out admits no one ever informed her that she was "covert" under the definition used by the IIPA. Moreover she had already said....

Guess what? She just said that her cover was her own responsibility. Couple that wit hall the publicly accessible information about her relationship to Joe Wilson, her employment at Brewster & Jennings, her donations to the Democrat Party (FEC records), the Wilson/Plame entry in Who's Who from well before GWB was in office, etc. See the problem?

Then we have the CIA itself who obviously didn't consider her position to be classified (i.e. covert in terms of the IIPA). They verified her employment at the CIA numerous times to reporters following this story!

Frankly my original assertions hold; either,
1) Plame was never a covert agent deserving the protection of the IIPA; or,
2) Plame and the CIA exhibited extremely shoddy spycraft in creating and protecting her "identity."


The case is continuing. The truth will NEVER be known, many of the crooks in this episode of human dilemma will never be compelled to pay a price and those that do pay a price will never be hailed as any kind of American Heroes. That's about it, CSOB.

Valerie Plame was genuinely "fucked over" by somebody and there was a reason for it. I doubt very seriously that you can provide or describe that reason.

You disappoint me Lily.

[Psychoblues]

It's all complicated delusions, CSOB. You give, you take, you become satisfied or you become skeptical.



Lily, your citation is hearsay. That statement was made by Rep. Waxman regarding something Gen. Hayden was alleged to have said. I would have expected more of you than to simply use hearsay evidence to support your position (anti-GWB administration).

Let me give you some examples from the transcripts of the recent hearing.



Notice here how Plame does a dance of double-talk? On one hand she insists she was "covert" because she traveled overseas, yet she also flat-out admits no one ever informed her that she was "covert" under the definition used by the IIPA. Moreover she had already said....

Guess what? She just said that her cover was her own responsibility. Couple that wit hall the publicly accessible information about her relationship to Joe Wilson, her employment at Brewster & Jennings, her donations to the Democrat Party (FEC records), the Wilson/Plame entry in Who's Who from well before GWB was in office, etc. See the problem?

Then we have the CIA itself who obviously didn't consider her position to be classified (i.e. covert in terms of the IIPA). They verified her employment at the CIA numerous times to reporters following this story!

Frankly my original assertions hold; either,
1) Plame was never a covert agent deserving the protection of the IIPA; or,
2) Plame and the CIA exhibited extremely shoddy spycraft in creating and protecting her "identity."


The case is continuing. The truth will NEVER be known, many of the crooks in this episode of human dilemma will never be compelled to pay a price and those that do pay a price will never be hailed as any kind of American Heroes. That's about it, CSOB.

Valerie Plame was genuinely "fucked over" by somebody and there was a reason for it. I doubt very seriously that you can provide or describe that reason.

You disappoint me Lily.

Valerie Plame was genuinely "fucked over" by somebody and there was a reason for it. I doubt very seriously that you can provide or describe that reason.

[CockySOB]

Psycho, do yourself a favor and shut up for a minute, and read what lily posts. You could learn how a lot from her about supporting an argument with facts and logic. She and I disagree on a lot of issues, but I respect her opinion a helluva lot more than yours because she will research and analyze rather than spew emotional bile.

So kindly sit on the sidelines and watch the grown-ups debate.

[Gunny]

Psycho, do yourself a favor and shut up for a minute, and read what lily posts. You could learn how a lot from her about supporting an argument with facts and logic. She and I disagree on a lot of issues, but I respect her opinion a helluva lot more than yours because she will research and analyze rather than spew emotional bile.

So kindly sit on the sidelines and watch the grown-ups debate.

You're just feeding the ego by acknowledging its existence.

[lily]

Lily, your citation is hearsay. That statement was made by Rep. Waxman regarding something Gen. Hayden was alleged to have said. I would have expected more of you than to simply use hearsay evidence to support your position (anti-GWB administration).

Let me give you some examples from the transcripts of the recent hearing.

Hearsay? Ok, I see your transcripts and raise you with what you are refering to as hearsay, from the transcripts:


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/plame/plame_transcript_031607.html

This hearing is being conducted in open session. This is appropriate, but it
is also challenging. Ms. Wilson was a covert employee of the CIA. We cannot
discuss all of the details of her CIA employment in open session.

I have met, personally, with General Hayden, the head of the CIA, to discuss
what I can and cannot say about Ms. Wilson's service. And I want to thank
him for his cooperation and help in guiding us along these lines.

My staff has also worked with the agency to ensure these remarks do not
contain classified information.

I have been advised by the CIA and that even now, after all that has
happened, I cannot disclose the full nature, scope and character of Ms.
Wilson's service to our nation without causing serious damage to our
national security interests.

But General Hayden and the CIA have cleared these following comments for
today's hearing.

During her employment at the CIA, Ms. Wilson was undercover. Her employment
status with the CIA was classified information, prohibited from disclosure
under Executive Order 12958.

At the time of the publication of Robert Novak's column on July 14, 2003,
Ms. Wilson's CIA employment status was covert. This was classified
information.

Ms. Wilson served in senior management positions at the CIA, in which she
oversaw the work for other CIA employees and she attained the level of
GS-14, Step 6, under the federal pay scale.

Ms. Wilson worked on some of the most sensitive and highly secretive matters
handled by the CIA.

Ms. Wilson served at various times overseas for the CIA.
WAXMAN: Without discussing the specifics of Ms. Wilson's classified work, it
is accurate to say that she worked on the prevention of the development and
use of weapons of mass destruction against the United States.

In her various positions at the CIA, Ms. Wilson faced significant risks to
her personal safety and her life. She took on serious risks on behalf of our
country.

Ms. Wilson's work in many situations had consequence for the security of her
colleagues, and maintaining her cover was critical to protecting the safety
of both colleagues and others.

The disclosure of Ms. Wilson's employment with the CIA had several serious
effects. First, it terminated her covert job opportunities with the CIA.
Second, it placed her professional contacts at greater risk. And third, it
undermined the trust and confidence with which future CIA employees and
sources hold the United States.

This disclosure of Ms. Wilson's classified employment status with the CIA
was so detrimental that the CIA filed a crimes report with the Department of
Justice.

As I mentioned, Ms. Wilson's work was so sensitive that even now she is
still prohibited from discussing many details of her work in public because
of the continuing risks to CIA officials and assets in the field and to the
CIA's ongoing work.

WAXMAN: Some have suggested that Ms. Wilson did not have a sensitive
position with the CIA or a position of unusual risk. As a CIA employee, Ms.
Wilson has taken a lifelong oath to protect classified information, even
after her CIA employment has ended. As a result, she cannot respond to most
of the statements made about her.

I want to make clear, however, that any characterization that minimizes the
personal risk of Ms. Wilson that she accepted in her assignments is flatly
wrong. There should be no confusion on this point.

Ms. Wilson has provided great service to our nation and has fulfilled her
obligation to protect classified information admirably. And we're confident
she will uphold it again today.

Well, that concludes the characterizations that the CIA is permitting us to
make today. But to these comments, I want to add a personal note.

Now I am trying to find the original letter that Plame entered into the official record, but Waxman is saying what he was allowed to say by Hayden. As I've stated numerous times, if shey was lying then where is the perjury charge? If Hayden didn't say these words, why is there no shouting from the rooftop that both Plame and Waxman are liars? Seems with all the accusations coming forward, now would be the time to say they took words out of context or that they didn't say them at all. Honestly the Republicans can use the boost........so why the silence if in fact Hayden didn't say what they said he said?

I'm grateful though that you did give up the Tonesing defense......that one really disappointed me.:beer:

[CockySOB]

As I understood it, Gen. Hayden has refused to comment. Hence Rep. Waxman's statements ARE hearsay until they can be properly documented and corroborated.

[lily]

As I understood it, Gen. Hayden has refused to comment. Hence Rep. Waxman's statements ARE hearsay until they can be properly documented and corroborated.

Cocky, in light of everything that has happend, that makes no sense. Can I have a link to where Hayden refused to comment? Please don't tell me that is what you are getting out of the testimony that you posted earlier.

[theHawk]

Wow you liberals are blooming idiots. Has it ever occurred to any of you that if Plame&Wilson actually cared about keeping her identity a secret he shouldn't had written an op-ed piece full of lies attacking the President? Of course the media was going to find out who he was, and who his wife was, especially since she was the one who sent him to Africa, not Cheney. You all completely ignore the fact that Joe Wilson is a political hack who joined the John Kerry campaign in 2003. But a campaign contributer and speech writer for a Democratic candidate wouldn't have a political agenda would he? The whole thing was a charade cooked up by Wilson soley for the purpose of attacking Bush before the election. Naturally the rabid anti-Bush media jumped all over it. The administration officials such as Rove and Libby were put between a rock and a hard place when asked the logical question any good reporter would ask - who sent Wilson to Africa? The truthfull answer was Plame did. So either remain tight lipped and appear to be "secretive" as the media likes to call the administration, or tell the truth. Someone told the truth. And now you liberals want blood.

[glockmail]

Well then Mr. P, I'm sure they will have no problem trying her for purgery, since she was under oath.
That won't happen, as she's a Democrat, and therefore will get a pass.