See other Immigration Articles
Title: Outed CIA officer to tell her story to Congress [C-Span Babe Watch Alert]
Source:
AP
URL Source: http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.d ... TIONWORLD/703160508/-1/ZONES04
Published: Mar 16, 2007
Author: Darlene Superville
Post Date: 2007-03-16 07:54:24 by a vast rightwing conspirator
Keywords: None
Views: 1578
Comments: 80
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 36.
#1. To: All (#0)
Anyone knows whether C-Span is going to cover this?
So I've heard she will be....
Just heard it. C-Span coverage begins at 10:00 a.m. EST.
I'm listening to Waxman on C-SPAN Radio right now.
I'm watching now. Swearing Valerie in. Hey, she'll answer all the questions truthfully, but then she'll have to kill the whole committee!
Check out the pink-haired freak behind Valerie wearing a pink shirt or something that reads: "IMPEACH BUSH NOW". Wow, Valerie just testified that her position as a covert CIA op was not "common knowledge on the Georgetown cocktail circuit". Those were the exact words of some BushCo functionary. I'm guessing it was RushBo, because my barber repeated it as if it was the gospel.
That's their "no foul, no harm" defense. It's a lie. As is the lie that she was not undercover. She was DEEP undercover, and her cover company, which included other agents in the WMD group, was blown when the Bushies outed her.
I'd love to ask each of the leakers (like Novak) just what their intentions were. I'd treat Novak as a hostile witness and ask, "Did you know that BushCo was attempting to punish Joseph Wilson by outing his wife and implying that she was instrumental in his selection to travel to Niger to investigate the yellowcake story?" "Did you know that BushCo was attempting to discredit the yellowcake evidence because the charge that Saddam had attempted to purchase it was untrue and likely "fabbed up" in The White House?" "If you were asked to help the White House discredit Wilson/Plame would you have agreed to do so?" "At any time was the subject of a presidential pardon mentioned in the event of you being criminally charged and convicted?"
Those are the questions Novak is ducking with his "protecting sources" argument. He knew what he was doing would out an operative, but his loyalty to the GOP overcame his loyalty to the United States. In the case of a criminal act, protection of sources is a no-go among journalists. He hasn't got a leg to stand on, but some journalists, worried about a slippery slope, are backing him and Judy Miller, both Bush operatives.
In the case of a criminal act, protection of sources is a no-go among journalists. He hasn't got a leg to stand on, but some journalists, worried about a slippery slope, are backing him and Judy Miller, both Bush operatives. Right, but I wonder whether it is his loyalty to the GOP or perhaps loyalty to something else....
The WH security officer... LOL Man... does he look uncomfortable. Looks like all he wants is to be allowed to go back home. Rove had a DUTY to report any security breach, the officer says, almost in a whisper.
The guy is going to resign if he's a man.
There are no replies to Comment # 36. End Trace Mode for Comment # 36.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#2. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#1)
#3. To: war (#2)
#7. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#3)
#11. To: aristeides (#7)
#16. To: All (#11)
#31. To: HOUNDDAWG (#16)
I'm guessing it was RushBo, because my barber repeated it as if it was the gospel.
#32. To: Mekons4 (#31)
(Edited)
That's their "no foul, no harm" defense. It's a lie. As is the lie that she was not undercover. She was DEEP undercover, and her cover company, which included other agents in the WMD group, was blown when the Bushies outed her.
#33. To: HOUNDDAWG (#32)
#34. To: Mekons4 (#33)
Those are the questions Novak is ducking with his "protecting sources" argument. He knew what he was doing would out an operative, but his loyalty to the GOP overcame his loyalty to the United States.
#35. To: HOUNDDAWG (#34)
(Edited)
#36. To: All (#35)
Replies to Comment # 36.