"Meet my CIA Wife," said Joe Wilson.

[What_the]

… according to three different talking heads today.

Now granted, it was on Fox News so you could attack the messenger … or you could question why it wasn’t heard on other outlets.

The question is … did he actually introduce her as such before she was “outed” by Novak and are those crocodile tears he is crying?

[SteveG1]

I find it hard to believe. Why is it supposedly coming out just now? I smell bull shit here.

[Marley23]

I second that.

[John_Mace]

Unlikely, but the claim can hardly be constested w/o a link.

OTOH, I did hear Orrin Hatch on CNN today saying the question was still open as to whether or not Plame was a “covert operative” of the CIA.

[ElvisL1ves]

They’re gonna spin themselves right into the ground at this rate. Hatch is old enough to remember Watergate, and the lesson that the only way to retrieve such a situation politically is full public disclosure and the cleaning out all of the people involved. But Rove isn’t going to counsel anyone to do that, obviously, and Bush won’t be able to figure it out for himself, and nobody else can and will tell him.

[Martin_Hyde]

From what I’ve heard there were certainly several people who knew of Plame’s relationship with the CIA, although I doubt any of them knew the specifics to the degree Rove, Cheney, and Libby did.

And of course, it actually is still up in the air as to whether or not a crime was committed here. There are legal ways in which Plame’s identity could have been exposed.

[Frank]

I’ve heard it said before that Ms. Plame’s job was common knowledge. I doubt that that’s true, but it’s said. However, that doesn’t matter now, does it? Libby is not under indictment for that, but for perjury, obstruction of justice, and lying. I’ll enjoy watching them try to spin that, it they ever get around to it.

[GIGObuster]

@John Mace

Unlikely, but the claim can hardly be constested w/o a link.

I bet it comes from the discredited reports originally from the The Washington Times that had neighbors telling FBI agents stuff like that, problem is, it was not true:

http://mediamatters.org/items/200510260005

the article mentioned only one of Plame’s neighbors by name: David Tillotson, who told The Washington Times that he “absolutely didn’t know” Plame worked for the CIA. Instead, the Washington Times article relied upon the word of Fred Rustmann, a former CIA agent who had left the agency in 1990, had supervised Plame for a year early in her career, and was not her neighbor.

From the October 26 New York Times article by Richard W. Stevenson and Anne E. Kornblut:

In a sign that the prosecutor is continuing to build a case that Ms. Wilson’s covert status was ended when she was named in Mr. Novak’s column, F.B.I. agents questioned neighbors of the Wilsons in northwest Washington in the last few days, seeking to determine whether it was commonly known that she was a C.I.A. officer, a person involved in the case said. Ms. Wilson was identified in Mr. Novak’s column by her maiden name, Valerie Plame.

As the Los Angeles Times noted in its October 26 article, “Critics of the leak investigation have said it was an open secret that Plame worked for the CIA.” But the Los Angeles Times added that “neighbors contacted by The Times said they told the FBI agents that they had no idea of her agency life”:

Of course all the followers of the right wing media saw the corrections to those erroneous reports… no? :dubious:

OTOH, I did hear Orrin Hatch on CNN today saying the question was still open as to whether or not Plame was a “covert operative” of the CIA.

Well, that is an opinion anyhow, my opinion is that Mr “I spilled the beans on the fact that we were tracking Osama’s calls” Hatch allways struck me as the last person to be consulted in matters of secrecy. That he remains in the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence is shameful IMO. I can say that because he is wrong:

http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/004870.php

Check the first talking point, plenty of links like this one to show that Hatch is wrong.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@This Year's Model

I’ve heard it said before that Ms. Plame’s job was common knowledge. I doubt that that’s true, but it’s said. However, that doesn’t matter now, does it? Libby is not under indictment for that, but for perjury, obstruction of justice, and lying. I’ll enjoy watching them try to spin that, it they ever get around to it.

It was just a snow job, people! Get over it–you can’t impeach the president over a snow job!

Daniel

[Lish_Lash]

@Martin Hyde

And of course, it actually is still up in the air as to whether or not a crime was committed here.

Last I heard, wasn’t treason a crime?

[Little_Nemo]

Last I heard, wasn’t treason a crime?

Treason’s a pretty broad term. Defining what is and isn’t treason and/or a crime takes up a lot of legal code.

Releasing the name of a covert government operative is a crime but it’s defined very narrowly. Only one person has ever been convicted of this crime since the law was passed back in the 1980’s. I extremely doubt that anyone will be convicted this time either. What was done wrong but probably not illegal, which is why people are focusing on purgery rather than treason.

[Bricker]

Given the current set of indictments, whether Plame was or was not a covert agent is irrelevant. If Libby lied under oath, then he should be jailed. Period.

[elucidator]

@Bricker

Given the current set of indictments, whether Plame was or was not a covert agent is irrelevant. If Libby lied under oath, then he should be jailed. Period.

I find myself more often in complete accord with friend Bricker. Such commendable progress should not go unremarked.

To my mind, it is more the motivations than the technicality of the crime. Even if we assign the best possible motives…that Libby regarded himself as one of the paladins of our nations security and that Joe W’s insistence on broadcasting inconvenient truths was harmful to the nation’s best interests… the actions reek of arrogance.

Unable to discredit what Joe Wilson said, they sought to undermine Joe Wilson’s credibility by indirect means. This is worse than dishonest, this is seeking to render the truth impotent to protect one’s own lies.

Keep in mind, this is the generous assessment: that, however delusional it may appear now, Libby truly felt he knew what was good for the country, and only employed such methods when compelled by stern duty. An equally valid case might be made that it was done for nothing more than vain spite.

[cosmosdan]

@Martin Hyde

From what I’ve heard there were certainly several people who knew of Plame’s relationship with the CIA, although I doubt any of them knew the specifics to the degree Rove, Cheney, and Libby did.

And of course, it actually is still up in the air as to whether or not a crime was committed here. There are legal ways in which Plame’s identity could have been exposed.

Perjury and obstriction of justice are both serious crimes.

[SteveG1]

@elucidator

I find myself more often in complete accord with friend Bricker. Such commendable progress should not go unremarked.

Same here. Regardless of the why’s, perjury is a felony. The CBS News just said Libby may be facing 30 years (though I doubt he will get that). Rove is still not out of the story right now either. He hasn’t been charged, but he hasn’t been “un charged” either (whatever the right word is).

Anyway, the News show is saying right now the whole thing started because no WMDs were found and “they wanted to discredit Joe Wilson”. Fitzgerald is talking about if they find obstruction of justice by other people (he mentioned the vice president) then he will keep after it. So, it may not be over yet.

[saoirse]

Also, Wilson was 100% correct, and the administration 100% wrong. A lot of media reports are occuring that now. The reports say that he “challanged the adminsitration’s assertion that Saddam was trying to obtain nucler weapons.” Actually he challenged the assertion the Saddam was trying to buy yellowcake form Niger. The document that the adminstration said proved this assertion was a fraud, from all accounts a laughable one. It was signed by someone in the Interior Department, and who left the government of Niger years before.

@What the .... ?!?!

… according to three different talking heads today.

Now granted, it was on Fox News so you could attack the messenger … or you could question why it wasn’t heard on other outlets.

When Fox News quotes itself, that’s not three sources it’s one. There’s a reason why the expression “right-wing echo chamber” has come into being. If one right-winger hears something, the others will repeat it using the first as attribution, who will in turn use the others as validation. The reason no one else ran it is that it is garbage.

[squeegee]

A question:

First, let’s stipulate that both Clinton and Libby’s perjury are serious issues. Libby’s perjury/obstruction was done to block a criminal inquiry. Clinton’s was done during a civil suit. To my mind, that makes Libby’s offense more weighty. Am I off base?

[SteveG1]

No, you’re on base. Blowjob, war. Lying about blowjob, lying about war. Stained dress and soggy cigar, body bags. Yeah, I think a lot of dead people is a lot more serious.

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

Wow - a citeless and clearly bullshit allegation generating 15 posts of discussion.

It’s as valid a claim as this one: Today it was said that Karl Rove read in public a list of 27 dirty liberal CIA spies - 10 of them were subsequently captured by insurgents and beheaded. Sure, you could claim it is complete bullshit… OR … you could ask why this wasn’t discussed on Fox TV. HMMMMM???

[squeegee]

@SteveG1

No, you’re on base. Blowjob, war. Lying about blowjob, lying about war. Stained dress and soggy cigar, body bags. Yeah, I think a lot of dead people is a lot more serious.

I was thinking civil vs criminal.