|
Banned
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
......I think you get my point if you understand that things are not always fair.
Fitzgerald has the freedom to bring the issue to trial, he has not done that for whatever the reason. So when you say the rule of law, I would argue that the rule of law is not on either side at this point because it has not been invited to the party.
|
ace, do you disagree with my expectation that the executive branch, charged with upholding the law, and enforcing it, should itself, respect the rule of law?
This isn't about "fairness", it's about official decisions to elect to disclose classified intelligence agency info, while our "troops are in the field", to punish someone because her husband publicly questioned statements by the president in his attempt to justify going to war.
...again, ace.... you're leaving me to assume that you choose the "Thompson ticket", over Fitzgerald's:
Quote:
From the end of my last post:
....Thompson, a career politician who plays a prosecutor on TV, says that it is wrong to prosecute someone who knowingly used a position in the White House to punish critics of the Bush administration and then lied about his abuses of authority and the public trust.
Fitzgerald, a career prosecutor who tends to avoid the cameras, disagrees.
Thompson is preparing to seek the presidency as the standard bearer of the wing of the Republican Party that turns a blind eye to official misconduct.
Fitzgerald is preparing to return to his work as one of the nation's most trusted enforcers of the rule of law.
<b>Here is a real contest for Americans to decide. They can choose between two tickets: Thompson/Libby versus Fitzgerald/Rule of Law. </b>
|
Which "ticket" do you choose ace, Thompson's, or the rule of law? Isn't it just a tad fucked up, that Thompson still raises money for Libby and writes op-ed attacks on Fitzgerald's motives, and boasts about it to a secret gathering of CNP goons <b>after Libby is convicted on 4 of 5 counts of obstructing Fitzgerald's investigation?</b>
Can you not see that Thompson is leveraging his "image" as the TV character that he plays....the NYC District Attorney in an extremely popular and long running TV show, to run both a PR campaign to counter Fitzgerald's unimpeachable record as a smart, dogged, apolitical, credible, honest, and ethical US Attorney ("Acting" as if Thompson's fictional character is an "equal" offset to Fitzgerald's "real life" one...), and a political campaign to pander to the republican party fringe that swallows the anti "rule of law" bullshit he is spewing about poor "victimized" Libby and his 5 million dollar, eleven lawyer legal team being no match for "hatchet job" prosecutor Fitzgerald and a jury of Libby's peers in DC....
You ace, make it clear that you subscribe to republican official lawbreaking and scorn for the law, because it can all be excused as "political", and therefore, somehow understood, and then excused. Ace, if Libby was witnessed by several citizens who later testified against him in court, driving the getaway car (a witness "made" his license plate numbers...) for a couple of unidentified others who were seen leaving Plame's residence moments before Plame called 911 to report that she had been assaulted and badly beaten, and then Libby falsely told investigators that he had sold his car to a news reporter who he had allowed to drive it home the day before Plame was assaulted, before returning the license plates to Libby, how do you think the opinions from you and Thompson would seem....mainstream...or on the fringe?
Fitzgerald is following the law ace....the "process" is a special one, because the "perp" at the center of this crime is the VP of the United States, and it isn't over....it's playing out as the constitution planned for it, to. You and Thompson are on the wrong side of this, ace:
Quote:
http://www.newsday.com/news/nationwo...,2044545.story
Columnist Blows CIA Agent's Cover
By Timothy M. Phelps and Knut Royce
Washington Bureau
....Novak, in an interview, <b>said his sources had come to him with the information. "I didn't dig it out, it was given to me," he said. "They thought it was significant, they gave me the name and I used it."</b>
Wilson and others said such a disclosure would be a violation of the law by the officials, not the columnist.
Novak reported that his "two senior administration officials" told him that it was Plame who suggested sending her husband, Wilson, to Niger.
A senior intelligence official confirmed that Plame was a Directorate of Operations undercover officer who worked "alongside" the operations officers who asked her husband to travel to Niger.
But he said she did not recommend her husband to undertake the Niger assignment. "They [the officers who did ask Wilson to check the uranium story] were aware of who she was married to, which is not surprising," he said....
|
Quote:
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/R...armitages_leak
Armitage's leak
By Robert D. Novak
Thursday, September 14, 2006
...... First, Armitage did not, as he now indicates, merely pass on something he had heard and that he "thought" might be so. Rather, he identified to me the CIA division where Mrs. Wilson worked, and said flatly that she recommended the mission to Niger by her husband, former Amb. Joseph Wilson. Second, Armitage did not slip me this information as idle chitchat, as he now suggests. He made clear he considered it especially suited for my column........
|
Quote:
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/capitalgames?pid=121165
Posted 09/13/2006 @ 11:51pm
Novak vs. Armitage: Was the Plame Leak Deliberate?
The book I co-wrote with Michael Isikoff, Hubris: The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal, and the Selling of the Iraq War, has set off a dispute between conservative columnist Bob Novak and former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage.....
...At the end of his new column, Novak excoriates Armitage:
Armitage's silence the next 2 1/2 years caused intense pain for his colleagues in government and enabled partisan Democrats in Congress to falsely accuse Rove of being my primary source.
Novak neglects to note that Karl Rove was the source he used to confirm the leak he had received from Armitage--and that Rove also leaked classified information on Valerie Wilson to Matt Cooper of Time magazine before the leak appeared in Novak's column. Nor does Novak mention that Scooter Libby leaked information on Valerie Wilson to Judith Miller of The New York Times weeks before Novak entered Armitage's office--and also confirmed Rove's leak to Cooper. (A source close to Rove is quoted in Hubris saying that Rove "probably" learned about Valerie Wilson from Libby.) Like Armitage, Rove and Libby kept silent, even as the White House claimed they were not involved in the leak. Maybe it's time for all leakers to come clean and tell what happened.....
|
Quote:
http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/iln/osc/do...r_28102005.pdf
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE PRESS CONTACT: FRIDAY OCTOBER 28, 2005
WHITE HOUSE OFFICIAL I. LEWIS LIBBY INDICTED ON OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, FALSE STATEMENT AND PERJURY CHARGES RELATING TO LEAK OF CLASSIFIED INFORMATION REVEALING CIA OFFICER’S IDENTITY
WASHINGTON – Senior White House official I. Lewis Libby was indicted today on obstruction of justice, false statement and perjury charges for allegedly lying about how and when in 2003 he learned and subsequently disclosed to reporters then-classified information concerning the employment of Valerie Wilson by the Central Intelligence Agency. Libby was charged with one count of obstruction of justice, two counts of perjury and two counts of making false statements in a five-count indictment returned today by a federal grand jury as its term expired, announced Justice Department Special Counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald....
...“When citizens testify before grand juries they are required to tell the truth,” Mr. Fitzgerald said. <b>“Without the truth, our criminal justice system cannot serve our nation or its citizens. The requirement to tell the truth applies equally to all citizens, including persons who hold high positions in government. In an investigation concerning the compromise of a CIA officer’s identity, it is especially important that grand jurors learn what really happened. The indictment returned today alleges that the efforts of the
[Page] 2
grand jury to investigate such a leak were obstructed when Mr. Libby lied about how and when he learned and subsequently disclosed classified information about Valerie Wilson,”</b> he added.
Mr. Fitzgerald announced the charges with John C. Eckenrode, Special Agent-in-Charge of the Philadelphia Field Office of the FBI and the lead agent in the investigation. The Washington Field Office and the Inspection Division of the FBI assisted in the investigation.....
|
Later that day, Fitzgerald said the following in a press conference that followed the indictment announcement:
Quote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/28/po...pagewanted=all
Transcript
Fitzgerald News Conference
Published: October 28, 2005
QUESTION: Mr. Fitzgerald, this began as a leak investigation, but no one is charged with any leaking. Is your investigation finished? Is this another leak investigation that doesn't lead to a charge of leaking?
FITZGERALD: Let me answer the two questions you asked in one. OK, is the investigation finished? It's not over, but I'll tell you this: Very rarely do you bring a charge in a case that's going to be tried and would you ever end a grand jury investigation. I can tell you, the substantial bulk of the work in this investigation is concluded. This grand jury's term has expired by statute; it could not be extended. But it's in ordinary course to keep a grand jury open to consider other matters, and that's what we will be doing.
Let me then ask your next question: Well, why is this a leak investigation that doesn't result in a charge? I've been trying to think about how to explain this, so let me try. I know baseball analogies are the fad these days. Let me try something. If you saw a baseball game and you saw a pitcher wind up and throw a fastball and hit a batter right smack in the head, and it really, really hurt them, you'd want to know why the pitcher did that.
[...]
In this case, it's a lot more serious than baseball. And the damage wasn't to one person. It wasn't just Valerie [Plame] Wilson. It was done to all of us.
And as you sit back, you want to learn: Why was this information going out? Why were people taking this information about Valerie Wilson and giving it to reporters? Why did Mr. Libby say what he did? Why did he tell [New York Times reporter] Judith Miller three times? Why did he tell the press secretary on Monday? Why did he tell Mr. [Matthew] Cooper [of Time magazine]? And was this something where he intended to cause whatever damage was caused?
Or did they intend to do something else, and where are the shades of gray?
And what we have when someone charges obstruction of justice, the umpire gets sand thrown in his eyes. He's trying to figure what happened, and somebody blocked their view.
As you sit here now, if you're asking me what his motives were, I can't tell you; we haven't charged it.
So what you were saying is the harm in an obstruction investigation is it prevents us from making the fine judgments we want to make.
|
ace.... Patrick Fitzgerald made it quite clear that Libby's crimes were akin to throwing sand in the eyes of an umpire trying to call a play in a baseball game. Can you point us to anything that came from Libby during his trail that makes "the play"....the deliberate outing of Valerie Plame Wilson by VP Cheney with the complicity of president Bush, significantly clearer to "call". Libby and Cheney were slated to testify in Libby's defense, but they didn't ace...and Libby was convicted. Why do you think that neither Libby or Cheney took the witness stand to defend the actions and statements of the man who Cheney called "one of the finest men that I've known"?
You didn't answer the question I asked about what you have been correct about, in your posted opinions of the Plame CIA leak and it's criminality.
Patrick Fitzgerald got the ball rolling, ace....and now the ball is on the "court" where it belongs, given the process mandated in the US Constitution to deal with "high crimes and misdemeanors" by high federal officials, and the "process" is continuing:
Quote:
http://www.henrywaxman.house.gov/news_letters.htm
Committee Assignments
Rep. Waxman is the Chairman of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and is a member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. For more information, visit Committee Assignments.
March 8, 2007
Rep. Waxman Requests Meeting with Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald Regarding Disclosure of CIA Agent's Identity
Chairman Waxman and the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform today sent a letter to Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald commending him for his investigation and requesting a meeting to discuss testimony by Mr. Fitzgerald before the Committee.
March 12, 2007
Rep. Waxman Renews Niger Queries
Chairman Waxman asked Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to respond to a series of unanswered letters, including two letters raising questions about the President’s claim that Iraq sought uranium from Niger.
April 17, 2007
Chairman Waxman Postpones Vote and Renews Request for Rice Testimony
Chairman Waxman wrote to Secretary Rice announcing a one-week postponement of the Committee’s consideration of a subpoena and asking her to schedule a voluntary appearance before the Committee prior to the Memorial Day recess.
April 27, 2007
Chairman Waxman Invites Former CIA Director to Testify on Iraq War Intelligence
Chairman Waxman has invited former CIA Director George Tenet to testify before the Committee on May 10th regarding one of the claims used to justify the war in Iraq - the assertion that Iraq sought to import uranium from Niger - and related issues.
May 4, 2007
Committee Seeks Niger Documents and Testimony and Instructs State Department Not to Impede Probe
Chairman Waxman sent a letter to Secretary of State Rice informing the Secretary that the legislative affairs officials in the Department should not hinder the Committee’s inquiry into why Secretary Rice and President Bush cited forged evidence to build a case for war against Iraq, advising the Secretary that the Committee will depose a nuclear weapons analyst at the State Department, and requesting relevant documents.
May 11, 2007
Committee Reiterates Request for Documents Related to Plame-Wilson Disclosure
Chairman Waxman and Rep. Davis send a letter to CIA Director General Hayden reiterating their request for documents relevant to the Committee's investigation of the unauthorized disclosure of CIA agent Valerie Plame Wilson
May 11, 2007
Committee Requests Deposition of National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley
Chairman Waxman sent a formal request to Stephen Hadley, the National Security Advisor, to appear for a deposition. The deposition is part of the Committee investigation into why President Bush and other senior Administration officials cited forged evidence in building a case for war against Iraq.
|
Quote:
http://oversight.house.gov/investiga...Agent+Identity
Investigations
Disclosure of CIA Agent Identity
On July 14, 2003, columnist Robert Novak wrote an op-ed that appeared in the Chicago-Sun-Times, the Washington Post, and many other major newspapers publicly identifying Valerie Plame -- the wife of Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson -- as a covert CIA agent. Mr. Novak's column cited "two senior administration officials" as the source of the information. (Source: Robert D. Novak, The Mission to Niger, Chicago-Sun Times [July 14, 2003].)
Rep. Waxman has called for Government Reform Committee hearings on whether White House officials breached national security law by disclosing the identity of a CIA agent and has sought information from National Security Advisor Rice on how the White House responds to allegations regarding the release of classified information. Rep. Waxman and other senior members of Congress, including House Democratic Leader Pelosi and Senate Democratic Leader Daschle, have requested a GAO investigation into whether the White House complied with internal security procedures for protecting Valerie Plame's identity from disclosure and responding to the leak after it occurred.(Last Updated August 30, 2004)
Chronology
Friday, May 11, 2007
Committee Reiterates Request for Documents Related to Plame-Wilson Disclosure
Chairman Waxman and Rep. Davis send a letter to CIA Director General Hayden reiterating their request for documents relevant to the Committee's investigation of the unauthorized disclosure of CIA agent Valerie Plame Wilson.
Monday, April 23, 2007
New Evidence of Security Problems at the White House
Current and former employees of the White House Security Office have reported to Chairman Waxman that there was a systemic failure at the White House to follow procedures for protecting classified information. According to the security officers, the White House regularly ignored security breaches, prevented security inspections of the West Wing, and condoned mismanagement of the White House Security Office.
Friday, April 20, 2007
Committee to Consider Subpoena of Andrew Card
Chairman Waxman informs former White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card that the Oversight Committee will meet on April 25 to consider a subpoena for Mr. Card’s testimony regarding the leak of Valerie Plame Wilson’s covert identity and White House security procedures unless Mr. Card agrees to appear before the Committee voluntarily.
Friday, March 30, 2007
Chairman Waxman Asks Andrew Card for Interview Regarding White House Security Procedures
Chairman Waxman asks former White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card for an on-the-record interview regarding White House security procedures designed to protect classified information.
Monday, March 26, 2007
Committee Requests CIA Documents Related to Disclosure of CIA Agent
Citing concerns that a Senate Intelligence Committee report may be inaccurate, Chairman Waxman asks the CIA for Agency memos related to Ambassador Wilson's February 2002 trip to Niger and the subsequent disclosure of Ms.Wilson’s covert status. Ms. Wilson recently testified before the Oversight Committee that the Senate report incorrectly claims that she was responsible for her husband’s mission, and that the CIA official who authored related memos attempted to correct the Senate’s distortions was denied the opportunity to clarify the matter.
Friday, March 16, 2007
Waxman Questions White House Security Practices
Rep. Waxman asks White House Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten to explain why the White House failed to conduct any investigation following the disclosure of Valerie Plame Wilson’s covert CIA employment. The letter follows the testimony of the Director of the Office of Security at the White House, James Knodell, that the White House Security Office did not follow the investigative steps prescribed by Executive Order 12958.
Friday, March 16, 2007
Hearing Examines Exposure of Covert CIA Agent Valerie Plame Wilson's Identity
The Oversight Committee held a hearing on whether White House officials followed appropriate procedures for safeguarding the identity of CIA agent Valerie Plame Wilson. At the hearing, the Committee received testimony from Ms. Wilson and other experts regarding the disclosure and internal White House security procedures for protecting her identity from disclosure and responding to the leak after it occurred....
|
Last edited by host; 06-01-2007 at 11:26 AM..
|