ace....and anyone else.....your thoughts on the following...i.e., who is and is not telling the truth....who is defending, IMO, the indefensible....what does this say about the integrity of the administration, and who is acting in the interests of "the nation, in a time of war"?
Quote:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070316/..._leak_congress
Plame: My cover was 'recklessly' abused
03/16/06
By MATT APUZZO, Associated Press Writer 6 minutes ago
Quote:
|
host inserts: <h3>"Some People Say......"</h3>
|
........Critics of Fitzgerald's investigation said Plame did not meet that definition for several reasons and said that's why nobody was charged with the leak........
.......Also, none of the witnesses who testified at Libby's trial said it was clear that Plame's job was classified. However, Fitzgerald said flatly at the courthouse after the verdict that Plame's job was classified.
Rep. Tom Davis, the ranking Republican on the committee, said, "No process can be adopted to protect classified information that no one knows is classified. This looks to me more like a CIA problem than a White House problem."
Plame said she wasn't a lawyer and didn't know what her legal status was but said it shouldn't have mattered to the officials who learned her identity.
"They all knew that I worked with the CIA," Plame said. "They might not have known what my status was but that alone — the fact that I worked for the CIA — should have put up a red flag." ..........
|
.....and why...with the prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, saying this:
Quote:
|
.....Fitzgerald said flatly at the courthouse after the verdict that Plame's job was classified.
|
....was it neccessary to add thos "Some People Say....", "critics" lines to the "story".....why would "a liberal press", add "foxisms" to the story, especially after Libby was convicted.
Has there been any official statement from the White House, the DOJ, or the CIA, that contradicts Patrick Fitzgerald's "her employment was classified" statement, made in front of news cameras....so why are "critics say" references in the article that match no official statements, and would directly refute Fitzgerald, a man without a blemish on his record?