But you didn’t have a life when you originally posted to this thread? Seems you had plenty of time to make allegations but none to back them up.
No. I had a life then, too. I originally posted to make a joke. I made that joke. I got asked a question and I answered it. That question was doubtless spawned by the fact that I just recently finished posting two a ten page plus thread which exhaustively covered this very subject.
Since it was with most of the same people that are here, it seems like a colossal waste of time to do it again.
Kapisch?
I just graduated, and I already had a life even now. Darn, even your disdain is certifiably pathetic.
Yeah, I also concluded over there that you “got nothing” also.
I’m the one who asked, and I don’t recall any recent posts of yours about Plame and her covert status. Unless I’m getting senile, or your definition of “recently” is 6 months ago, you’re assertion that the question was “doubtlessly spawned” by that, is pure, and unadulterated baloney.
6 months ago isn’t “recently” enough? We have to do it again, biannually?
Look, I’m sorry. I don’t feel like it at the moment and I really don’t have the time to commit to it.
You actually thought that linking to a 6-month-old thread that was active before both Plame and General Hayden (the DIRECTOR of the CIA) testified and it would be given a pass? The corroboration of suspected facts about Plame’s status by both Plame herself and the director of the CIA (both under oath) doesn’t make 6-month-old speculation null?
Well, you know, jayjay, no Republican would ever lie or commit any politically motivated misdeeds. Now, be a good boy and get back in your closet, and I’ll tell you another story. 
Memo to the board’s American conservatives: There may be one or two people associated with these scandals who are in fact innocent of wrongdoing – but the more crap that’s showing up, the less likely it is that there are many of them, or that their number includes any of the people in high places. And the more you go to defend them, the more foolish and less credible you look in anyone else’s eyes.
C’mon, Sparky, you can say it. You can make yourself, without much pain. Here you go: “I, Scylla, was wr…”
See?
Properly: capisce.
Well, we did have the entire Libby trial, Plame testified, Toensing testified, and Hayden’s comments. I thought, you know, maybe those things might be relevant to the issue, but, I guess not.
C’est la vie.
I was all excited to see the basis for the assertion that Plames testimony showed she was not covert.
I’ve seen the assertion parrotted elsewhere on the net, yet there has been no one who has been willing to try to find the part of the testimony that shows such.
It seems odd that there’d be multiple people who all have the time to make such an assertion yet do not have the time to find the relevant sections of the transcript that support that assertion.
What are the odds?
If I were more cynical i surmise that there’s an opinion piece that makes such an assertion and that this opinion piece was read by these divers individuals. Also it would seem that these divers individuals have NOT actually read the transcripts.
If I were more cynical that is…
Perhaps it really just is coincidental that on more than one mb there’re more than one individual who have exceptionally similar time constraints as Scylla- enough time to post that Plame’s testimony shows she wasn’t covert yet not enough time to be able to find that elusive section of the transcript.