Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by All_Around_Brown, Jul 3, 2007.
For the even more stupider peeps:
CIA to Justice Department: "Hello Justice Department....someone leaked the name of a covert operative to some reporters. We know she was covert because we are the CIA and we are now sending this matter to you the Justice Department."
Justice Department to CIA: "Okay, we'll put Mr. Fitzgerald on this"
There is a difference between the CIA definition of Covert (which is everyone who works for them and the definition of Covert as used in the LAw designed to protect the identity of field agents. Apparently you are unable to recognize this. The MSM is spinning to further the story.
Fitz's lack of indictiments of either Rove, Armitage or Libby for revealing her status speaks volumes and trumps a pathetic spin attempt.
YUnless you think Fitz is a Bush gofer.
Look who spins. The investigation was derailed by (surprise surprise) someone lying to a grandjury on multiple occasions and OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE.
Do you have a clue what it means to obstruct justice??? It means "throwing sand in the face of the referee". These are the reasons there was no indictment of the actual leakers.
BECAUSE LIBBY COVERED IT UP
Seriously, 13, you are so far out there its truly astonishing. This is basic stuff and you're willful ignorance aside...this aint going away.
There are different definitions of covert. According to what I've read anyway.
according to the CIA...its pretty straightforward.
Oh, but who do you trust? The CIA claiming someone was covert and the Bush appointed special prosecuter and several judges and a jury re-re-reconfirming it, or a couple of barely-capable-of-thinking-for-themselves Rush Limbaugh acolytes?
According to their definition I'm sure. I'm not disputing what they think. I'm merely stating that I've read that there are different definitions of covert.
I'm just curious for the point of discussion. What, and by whom, are the different legal definitions of covert, and which hold precedent according to the law. This seems to be the point of contention between both sides in this arguement, and I am curious about the facts. Like i've said before, I'm not as up to speed on this topic as most as I've been disenchanted by the banter on both sides. I have paid attention to it though.
No. Its only a point of contention because its been spun that way by some on the right. The same people BTW that have been WRONG ON JUST ABOUT EVERYTHING.
My Wife Works For The CIA, Don't Tell Anybody:singing: :singing:
That still doesn't help answer what the differences are, and why.
well, its been discussed here alot. Catch up and get back to us. Point of this presentation is that she was covert. Regardless of whether the knuckleheads want to believe it.
Its been verified on multiple occasions now.
I've seen other people state that she wasn't according to the law.
Yup, I too have heard and read both sides argue their points vehemently.
For example: The Wall Street Journal editorial this morning - and yes, I know that their editoral page isn't exactly the platform that delivers 'fair and balanced' views - repeated for the nth time this morning that she wasn't covert and ergo, no big deal.
Are they correct or are they ostrich's that have their heads deeply buried?
Rove, Armitage and Libby told reporters of Plame's CIA employment. None were charged by Fitzy under the statute covering Covert FIELD Agents.
This tells the story not the fevered wishes of Bush haters.
Oh, so now YOU are determining the level of her involvement? Im glad to see you finally admit she was covert. Thats a big step for partisan hacks.
But IMO, what tells the story is that Fitz claimed she was covert, but that the investigation into this treasonous act was derailed by a co-conspirator in the OVP, whether the Bush ballwashers admit it or not.
sand in the face of lady justice...just like when Clinton lied about a sex scandal and you had a conniption.
The reason nobody was charged was because Scooter OBSTRUCTED JUSTICE! he lied about all of this to block the investigation as to who leaked the name.
Thats why he was found guilty of OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE.
Its so simple its complex.
Suppose Libby had say, been killed in a car accident before he obstructed justice? Would that have also killed any chance of anyone being charged? Why was that man so key to bringing any charges? I don't understand.
I think he was "key" because he was the man that took the wishes of his boss(s) and ran with it. He was the link between Cheney and the reporters.
The administration had two options with "The Scoot" to keep him from singing.
1. Kill him.
2. Let him know that he will never spend a day in prison, the President will pardon him. Obstruct justice, and refocus this investigation.
They chose option 2.
again, for the 37th time... Fitzgerald knew she was covert, and knew who leaked... But as the Act states, for a violation, he had to prove they KNEW her COVERT STATUS before they ran their mouths... That's where Libby's lies blocked indictments...
Of course they knew she was covert before they ran and blabbered to selective sympathetic journalists... But how do you prove prior knowledge in court when the main guys are just lying for eachother, or in Rove's case, running back to the Grand Jury a fith time to re-remember things he left out?
You got it right. But the Bushies are so willfully ignorant they cannot accept it.
Covert? They have been arguing for years that she wasnt. Then it comes out she was. So now, they dont have a leg to stand on except for more bogus assertions.
And it really comes down to the very real possibility that the chimp offered a quid pro quo for Libbys remaining tight lipped so as not to reveal which higher ups were involved in this treasonous act.
Recall that Libby was going to testify and then, poof...suddenly he just rolled over. Seems that was the moment he got the deal.
This shows to what lengths these criminals will go to hide their crimes.
I just can't buy the fact that there is one and only one person that makes or breaks the case. I just can't see how that would be possible.
Check Press Coverage and All Around Brown's replies too. I think the answr you seek is somewhere within our 3 posts.
Then maybe she shouldn't have recommended her husband for the trip to Niger, because, it was easily traced back to her.
Hi Valeria Plame, CIA agent, and this is my husband.......
its totally HER fault! I keep forgetting that. There is no way that Cheney would pull something like this. He has too much honor to out a covert agent. Its Really HER fault for being so stupid as to suggest her husband a former ambassidor to the region with connections in that country investigate Cheney's request.
She deserved it! stupid Valerie.
Yup, That honorable Dickkk. Five deferment Dickkk. Chief war profiteer and the biggest threat to representative democracy today.
Lets hope his upcoming heart surgery goes off well, like the previous three.
Separate names with a comma.