VP Cheney's top aide Lewis Libby just got indicted on five counts in the leak of classified information to the press:
(2) perjury, (2) false statement, (1) obstruction of justice.
Technical charges which could later lead to substantive ones. Meanwhile Presidential advisor Rove's still under investigation. Apparently, judge Horgan extended the prosecutor's (Fitzgerald) investigation, probably because of something said by either journalists Cooper or Miller, or even Rove...
At the same time, the related story of forged documents purported to be from Niger is picking up steam again. Fingers point at SISMI (again, because this is not exactly hot off the press), but the interesting thing is that Vice President Cheney and his chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, overruling advice from some White House political staffers and lawyers, decided to withhold crucial documents from the Senate Intelligence Committee in 2004 when the panel was investigating the use of pre-war intelligence that erroneously concluded Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, according to Bush administration and congressional sources.
This just came out, and as it turns out the Niger docs were part of what was withheld.
Share This Page:
Unraveling
-
Wholley
- Guest
I know your good at this Bud.
But it's a storm in a coffee cup.
Fitzgerald has spent two years and God knows how much tax payers money on a pointless partisan effort to disgrace the current Incumbent and his Admin..Libby has resigned and will maybe take an awfull fall for this.
Clinton however got away with an Impeachment which he survived on much the same charges.
Now,More than ever we have to stop these Liberal Lies.
Hill's as a president?
Now she claims to be a centerist,Supports the War.
If she gets in God help you Service People(And us Cops for that matter)
She did say at one point during her election roadshow that she would support a ban on Police Officers being armed in NYC.
I leave it to you.
But it's a storm in a coffee cup.
Fitzgerald has spent two years and God knows how much tax payers money on a pointless partisan effort to disgrace the current Incumbent and his Admin..Libby has resigned and will maybe take an awfull fall for this.
Clinton however got away with an Impeachment which he survived on much the same charges.
Now,More than ever we have to stop these Liberal Lies.
Hill's as a president?
Now she claims to be a centerist,Supports the War.
If she gets in God help you Service People(And us Cops for that matter)
She did say at one point during her election roadshow that she would support a ban on Police Officers being armed in NYC.
I leave it to you.
-
Frank S.
- Guest
I don't think it's small potatoes, but I agree it's not likely to have a major impact, as some hope.
I do not believe partisanship has played in this process: remember that the Senate Intelligence committee DID sign off on last year's investigative report on Pre-war intel use. There was supposed to be a second phase to that investigation, but it failed to take place. Yet not a peep from the Dems, in particular the ranking member (Rockefeller).
The 2nd phase was to look into executive manipulation of WMD intel.
Not a peep, despite Cheney's office blocking access to critical documents and the FBI failing to investigate said docs (even though some at CIA did and found them to be forgeries)...
Sure, now, they're grandstanding. But... Even if Libby happens to be found guilty and sentenced (we're not even there yet), and the next president happens to be a Dem, I'd bet the farm Libby would get pardoned.
This sort of thing really hasn't happened in 130 years. The Clinton thing only led to impeachment. The core of the investigation here is the disclosure of classified information, the nature of which potentially carries grave consequences for national security. This is much bigger than Valerie Plame/Wilson/Whatever and we're not talking about a splooge-soaked blue dress.
Awful consequences for Libby? Perhaps. But that denotes that what he did and in particular his being indicted for it simply amounts to a political 'gotcha'. It's not one of those cases. The indictment is the prosecutor's case, unrebutted by the defense. Here, as you read the whole indictment, it looks like a powerful case:
http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/iln/osc/docum ... 102005.pdf
Here's some conservative lie: Libby stated he'd first learned that Plame worked for CIA from journalist Tim Russert and then heard it from other journalists. Wrong. From page 5 item #9 of the indictment:
On or about June 12, 2003, LIBBY was advised by the Vice President of the United States that Wilson's wife worked at the Central Intelligence Agency in the Counterproliferation Divison. LIBBY understood that the Vice President had learned this information from the CIA.
He was briefed on the state dept. memo about Wilson's Niger trip and received faxed classified docs from CIA in June '04:
4. On or about May 29, 2003, in the White House, LIBBY asked an Under Secretary of State (“Under Secretary”) for information concerning the unnamed ambassador’s travel to Niger to investigate claims about Iraqi efforts to acquire uranium yellowcake. The Under Secretary thereafter directed the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research to prepare a report concerning the ambassador and his trip. The Under Secretary provided LIBBY with interim oral reports in late May and early June 2003, and advised LIBBY that Wilson was the former ambassador who took the trip.
5. On or about June 9, 2003, a number of classified documents from the CIA were faxed to the Office of the Vice President to the personal attention of LIBBY and another person in the Office of the Vice President. The faxed documents, which were marked as classified, discussed, among other things, Wilson and his trip to Niger, but did not mention Wilson by name. After receiving these documents, LIBBY and one or more other persons in the Office of the Vice President handwrote the names “Wilson” and “Joe Wilson” on the documents.
6. On or about June 11 or 12, 2003, the Under Secretary of State orally advised LIBBY in the White House that, in sum and substance, Wilson’s wife worked at the CIA and that State Department personnel were saying that Wilson’s wife was involved in the planning of his trip.
7. On or about June 11, 2003, LIBBY spoke with a senior officer of the CIA to ask about the origin and circumstances of Wilson’s trip, and was advised by the CIA officer that Wilson’s wife worked at the CIA and was believed to be responsible for sending Wilson on the trip. ...
And this goes to motive:
12. On or about June 19, 2003, an article appeared in The New Republic magazine online entitled “The First Casualty: The Selling of the Iraq War.” Among other things, the article questioned the “sixteen words” and stated that following a request for information from the Vice President, the CIA had asked an unnamed ambassador to travel to Niger to investigate allegations that Iraq had sought uranium from Niger. The article included a quotation attributed to the unnamed ambassador alleging that administration officials “knew the Niger story was a flat-out lie.” The article also was critical of how the administration, including the Office of the Vice President, portrayed intelligence concerning Iraqi capabilities with regard to weapons of mass destruction, and accused the administration of suppressing dissent from the intelligence agencies on this topic.
13. Shortly after publication of the article in The New Republic, LIBBY spoke by telephone with his then Principal Deputy and discussed the article. That official asked LIBBY whether information about Wilson’s trip could be shared with the press to rebut the allegations that the Vice President had sent Wilson. LIBBY responded that there would be complications at the CIA in disclosing that information publicly, and that he could not discuss the matter on a non-secure telephone line.
Okay, now back to Jack...
I do not believe partisanship has played in this process: remember that the Senate Intelligence committee DID sign off on last year's investigative report on Pre-war intel use. There was supposed to be a second phase to that investigation, but it failed to take place. Yet not a peep from the Dems, in particular the ranking member (Rockefeller).
The 2nd phase was to look into executive manipulation of WMD intel.
Not a peep, despite Cheney's office blocking access to critical documents and the FBI failing to investigate said docs (even though some at CIA did and found them to be forgeries)...
Sure, now, they're grandstanding. But... Even if Libby happens to be found guilty and sentenced (we're not even there yet), and the next president happens to be a Dem, I'd bet the farm Libby would get pardoned.
This sort of thing really hasn't happened in 130 years. The Clinton thing only led to impeachment. The core of the investigation here is the disclosure of classified information, the nature of which potentially carries grave consequences for national security. This is much bigger than Valerie Plame/Wilson/Whatever and we're not talking about a splooge-soaked blue dress.
Awful consequences for Libby? Perhaps. But that denotes that what he did and in particular his being indicted for it simply amounts to a political 'gotcha'. It's not one of those cases. The indictment is the prosecutor's case, unrebutted by the defense. Here, as you read the whole indictment, it looks like a powerful case:
http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/iln/osc/docum ... 102005.pdf
Here's some conservative lie: Libby stated he'd first learned that Plame worked for CIA from journalist Tim Russert and then heard it from other journalists. Wrong. From page 5 item #9 of the indictment:
On or about June 12, 2003, LIBBY was advised by the Vice President of the United States that Wilson's wife worked at the Central Intelligence Agency in the Counterproliferation Divison. LIBBY understood that the Vice President had learned this information from the CIA.
He was briefed on the state dept. memo about Wilson's Niger trip and received faxed classified docs from CIA in June '04:
4. On or about May 29, 2003, in the White House, LIBBY asked an Under Secretary of State (“Under Secretary”) for information concerning the unnamed ambassador’s travel to Niger to investigate claims about Iraqi efforts to acquire uranium yellowcake. The Under Secretary thereafter directed the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research to prepare a report concerning the ambassador and his trip. The Under Secretary provided LIBBY with interim oral reports in late May and early June 2003, and advised LIBBY that Wilson was the former ambassador who took the trip.
5. On or about June 9, 2003, a number of classified documents from the CIA were faxed to the Office of the Vice President to the personal attention of LIBBY and another person in the Office of the Vice President. The faxed documents, which were marked as classified, discussed, among other things, Wilson and his trip to Niger, but did not mention Wilson by name. After receiving these documents, LIBBY and one or more other persons in the Office of the Vice President handwrote the names “Wilson” and “Joe Wilson” on the documents.
6. On or about June 11 or 12, 2003, the Under Secretary of State orally advised LIBBY in the White House that, in sum and substance, Wilson’s wife worked at the CIA and that State Department personnel were saying that Wilson’s wife was involved in the planning of his trip.
7. On or about June 11, 2003, LIBBY spoke with a senior officer of the CIA to ask about the origin and circumstances of Wilson’s trip, and was advised by the CIA officer that Wilson’s wife worked at the CIA and was believed to be responsible for sending Wilson on the trip. ...
And this goes to motive:
12. On or about June 19, 2003, an article appeared in The New Republic magazine online entitled “The First Casualty: The Selling of the Iraq War.” Among other things, the article questioned the “sixteen words” and stated that following a request for information from the Vice President, the CIA had asked an unnamed ambassador to travel to Niger to investigate allegations that Iraq had sought uranium from Niger. The article included a quotation attributed to the unnamed ambassador alleging that administration officials “knew the Niger story was a flat-out lie.” The article also was critical of how the administration, including the Office of the Vice President, portrayed intelligence concerning Iraqi capabilities with regard to weapons of mass destruction, and accused the administration of suppressing dissent from the intelligence agencies on this topic.
13. Shortly after publication of the article in The New Republic, LIBBY spoke by telephone with his then Principal Deputy and discussed the article. That official asked LIBBY whether information about Wilson’s trip could be shared with the press to rebut the allegations that the Vice President had sent Wilson. LIBBY responded that there would be complications at the CIA in disclosing that information publicly, and that he could not discuss the matter on a non-secure telephone line.
Okay, now back to Jack...
-
Wholley
- Guest
Simple answer there then.
Our country is at War with a Foreign Nation.
Although I personaly hate the loss of so many Troops in Iraq/Afganistan.
It's the lowest body count in recent US History regarding warfare in such a
Situation.
Just so you know we lose more Cops in a year than Troops in Afganistan
I'll Get Me Coat..
Our country is at War with a Foreign Nation.
Although I personaly hate the loss of so many Troops in Iraq/Afganistan.
It's the lowest body count in recent US History regarding warfare in such a
Situation.
Just so you know we lose more Cops in a year than Troops in Afganistan
I'll Get Me Coat..
-
Frank S.
- Guest
We're not at war with any nation, we're conducting military operations in two nations against terrorists and 'insurgents'.
But we're 'warring' all right.
There's glee, fear and loathing coming out of DC, but where is the outrage at this leak of classified information while troops are so engaged?
Where's the outrage?
There's no disputing where the leak came from, only the individual(s) and motive. So again where's the outrage?
It is simple, it is narrow. No outrage on the right, none on the left. Again: yes, some Dems are grandstanding, but not outraged. Dems or Republicans what is the difference?
This is not a partisan issue.
Cops, spooks, soldiers, all pawns? Look at what happens to gen. Poncet in France... Stinks to high heaven.
But we're 'warring' all right.
There's glee, fear and loathing coming out of DC, but where is the outrage at this leak of classified information while troops are so engaged?
Where's the outrage?
There's no disputing where the leak came from, only the individual(s) and motive. So again where's the outrage?
It is simple, it is narrow. No outrage on the right, none on the left. Again: yes, some Dems are grandstanding, but not outraged. Dems or Republicans what is the difference?
This is not a partisan issue.
Cops, spooks, soldiers, all pawns? Look at what happens to gen. Poncet in France... Stinks to high heaven.
-
harry hackedoff
- Member
- Posts: 14415
- Joined: Tue 19 Feb, 2002 12:00 am
Two thousand flags, guys. Count`em.
That`s two thousand homes wrecked.
They shall grow not old as we that are left grow old,
Age shall not weary, nor the years condemn.
At the going down of the sun, and in the morning,
We will Remember them.
We will remember them.
Explain away, Mister Rumsfeld, exactly how easy was all this going to be?
Shock and awe,
aye
That`s two thousand homes wrecked.
They shall grow not old as we that are left grow old,
Age shall not weary, nor the years condemn.
At the going down of the sun, and in the morning,
We will Remember them.
We will remember them.
Explain away, Mister Rumsfeld, exactly how easy was all this going to be?
Shock and awe,
aye
[url=http://www.militaryforums.co.uk/forums/groupcp.php?g=397][img]http://www.militaryforums.co.uk/forums/images/usergroups/listener.gif[/img][/url]
-
Wholley
- Guest
Seems to me that the British got away with their Imperial asperations because they did not have a vindictive and partisan press to deal with.
Now it's all doom and gloom.
Ifen you look back even the Royal Navy had a little prob with the BBC.
Being tossed from HMS Ark Royal is just one instance.
They refuse to report the upside,But just go ape-shit on the downside.
This is a war we have to win or we will be attacked again.
2000 flags for Servicemen who knew what they were getting into,Or 3000 more innocent civilians murdered.
At the going down of the sun
and in the morning,
We will remember them.
Now it's all doom and gloom.
Ifen you look back even the Royal Navy had a little prob with the BBC.
Being tossed from HMS Ark Royal is just one instance.
They refuse to report the upside,But just go ape-shit on the downside.
This is a war we have to win or we will be attacked again.
2000 flags for Servicemen who knew what they were getting into,Or 3000 more innocent civilians murdered.
At the going down of the sun
and in the morning,
We will remember them.
-
Frank S.
- Guest
No.Wholley wrote: This is a war we have to win or we will be attacked again.
2000 flags for Servicemen who knew what they were getting into,Or 3000 more innocent civilians murdered.
.
No.
Nope: 2000 servicemen wasted who knew what they were getting into??? Against 3000 thankless motherfcuking civilians?
Same thing with cops. You think people give a fluying fcuk???
All they care about is the last ticket they got!
Do you seriously believe this is media driven, this Libby thing?
They are PISSING ON ALL OUR HEADS FROM ON HIGH!
-
Mrs. Frank S.
- Guest
Paul, just so you know...I consider ANY loss of military personnel, cops, undercover guys (not all spooks) to be tragic, no matter the reason. That does not mean that I'm a "peacenik". I"m also a "conservative" at heart...though I don't know what that means any more. In the last 30 years, the party has shifted and I haven't.Wholley wrote:Just so you know we lose more Cops in a year than Troops in Afganistan
The "outing" of Valerie Plame hits a sore spot. It doesn't matter to me which "party" did it. I still don't understand the lack of outrage in this matter. Did her contacts undergo what someone that I very much respected, go through? Were they arrested and tortured to death? I don't care WHICH party did it. The fact that it was done really yanks my chain.
As for the fact that more cops are killed in a year than in Iraq...is that supposed to make me feel better???? The one human that I respected and cared for as much as my own family was killed in the line of duty in 1977 and I wasn't even allowed to say goodbye (the bastids in the hospital kept me an extra day so I couldn't attend the funeral). He and his partner are listed on the Memorial in Sacramento. Lots of solace that is.
As for the war dead, I remember my brother's best friend killing himself the day he got the news that his older brother was killed in Vietnam. Three of my schoolmates buried their babies with honors because of Iraq. I'm not anti-war. I'm just questioning the reasons why. Afghastistan I undersand...Iraq, I do not. Even so...
Where is the outrage about the "outing" of a covert officer and the ramifications. I haven't heard that from either side...never mind the "press". I've only heard the "partisan" viewpoint.
Oh, if you're interested in who I was referring to ealier when I mentioned what someone underwent...just look up Kiki Camarena. I had the unfortunate experience of hearing the tapes that were unearthed after they found his body. I'm sorry I did. All I can say is whatever was printed in the papers never came close to the real story. Oh, and just in case...yes, I was acquainted with the man AND his family as they lived a few miles South of me.
No one...not even the media, was all that hot to investigate the Plame case until this very goverment's Justice Department realized that the violation was so grievious that it had to be investigated. I don't really care who the "offending" party is. It doesn't matter. The fact is, it happened and something needs to be done adout it.
While I'm sure you don't think otherwise...remember Paul...I truly give a crud about my country AND it's civilians...of which I'm one.
It's hard to believe, but in spite of the fact that I voted for "the other guy" in the last election...I'm still a conservative and I'm not likely to change.
Anyhow, that's my opinion and Paul (or anyone else) is welcome to argue it. Just don't call me a Commie, America hating whatever and I'll forgive you. This country has been far too divided as of late to make me comfortable.
Julie
ouch...I'll leave it, but I should never post when I'm not quite sober.
-
Wholley
- Guest
-
Mrs. Frank S.
- Guest
From the indictment. The sections in bold are my doing.
The Central Intelligence Agency
c. The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) was an agency of the United States whose mission was to collect, produce, and disseminate intelligence and counterintelligence information to officers and departments of the United States government, including the President, the National Security Council, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
d. The responsibilities of certain CIA employees required that their association with the CIA be kept secret; as a result, the fact that these individuals were employed by the CIA was classified. Disclosure of the fact that such individuals were employed by the CIA had the potential to damage the national security in ways that ranged from preventing the future use of those individuals in a covert capacity, to compromising intelligence-gathering methods and operations, and endangering the safety of CIA employees and those who dealt with them.
f. Joseph Wilson was married to Valerie Plame Wilson (“Valerie Wilson”). At
all relevant times from January 1, 2002 through July 2003, Valerie Wilson was employed by the CIA, and her employment status was classified. Prior to July 14, 2003, Valerie Wilson’s affiliation
with the CIA was not common knowledge outside the intelligence community.
From my thesaurus...
Covert: secret, clandestine, surreptitious, hidden, ulterior, sneaky, stealthy, dissembled, veiled
From my dictionary...
Classified: Said of information: kept secret or restricted by the government
Julie
The Central Intelligence Agency
c. The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) was an agency of the United States whose mission was to collect, produce, and disseminate intelligence and counterintelligence information to officers and departments of the United States government, including the President, the National Security Council, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
d. The responsibilities of certain CIA employees required that their association with the CIA be kept secret; as a result, the fact that these individuals were employed by the CIA was classified. Disclosure of the fact that such individuals were employed by the CIA had the potential to damage the national security in ways that ranged from preventing the future use of those individuals in a covert capacity, to compromising intelligence-gathering methods and operations, and endangering the safety of CIA employees and those who dealt with them.
f. Joseph Wilson was married to Valerie Plame Wilson (“Valerie Wilson”). At
all relevant times from January 1, 2002 through July 2003, Valerie Wilson was employed by the CIA, and her employment status was classified. Prior to July 14, 2003, Valerie Wilson’s affiliation
with the CIA was not common knowledge outside the intelligence community.
From my thesaurus...
Covert: secret, clandestine, surreptitious, hidden, ulterior, sneaky, stealthy, dissembled, veiled
From my dictionary...
Classified: Said of information: kept secret or restricted by the government
Julie
-
Frank S.
- Guest
Thus spake Limbaugh and other media minions.Wholley wrote:She never was Covert.
She was a desk jockey
with a husband who had political aspirations.
She had covert status.
She was returned to Washington from Brussels in '97 due to CIA suspicions that her name was on a list sold by Aldrich Ames to Boris in '94.
Some little bird feeding worms to Limbaugh must have thought that since Plame ended up working out of Langley HQ, her status was not classified. Wrong. There are NOCs commuting daily to that place, and their status is covert.
But set her aside for a moment.
What of the front company she operated out of? The other officers and agents working for that company? What's the price tag on that?
Why is it so hard to understand this is neither a liberal nor conservative cabal? I'm really, and I mean really surprised you don't bring up the name Robert Torricelli, a Democrat. But then, unfortunately, Porter Goss was involved in helping quash it at the time, back in '95...
Only this time, and to use one of your favorite comebacks, they do so "at a time of war!"
Like untrained puppies. They shit and piss all over the place.
