thoughts?

<a href='http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8525978/site/newsweek/' target='_blank'>What Karl Rove told Time magazine's reporter.</a>

gruehls Wrote:thoughts?

<a href='http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8525978/site/newsweek/' target='_blank'>What Karl Rove told Time magazine's reporter.</a>

It's a tricky situation. The law that addresses this is very specific. There is a talk radio show on right now on "Talk of the Nation" the NPR show. Here's the link:

<a href='http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4749683' target='_blank'>http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.p...storyId=4749683</a>

Try http://www.wbur.org and you can stream it. It's very interesting.

If he leaked the name, he should face charges in my opinion.

Apparently he didn't say the actual name, but said "so-and-so's wife". So it's kinda like a "I smoked, but I didn't inhale" defense, I believe.

i hadn't realized that matt cooper's wife was mandy grunwald, hillary clinton advisor and image shaper.

that might explain a lot about how this whole thing unfolded.

aerojad Wrote:Apparently he didn't say the actual name, but said "so-and-so's wife". So it's kinda like a "I smoked, but I didn't inhale" defense, I believe.

From what I've read her identity was the worst kept secret in Washington.

And if he did leak the name, he didn't break the law. For the law to apply Plame's case her status as undercover must be classified she must have been assigned to duty outside the United States at the time or in the past 5 years. Neither applies to her.

The fact is she was an analyst at the CIA, not an agent.

This is much ado about nothing.

Ninerfan1 Wrote:

aerojad Wrote:Apparently he didn't say the actual name, but said "so-and-so's wife".&nbsp; So it's kinda like a "I smoked, but I didn't inhale" defense, I believe.

From what I've read her identity was the worst kept secret in Washington.

And if he did leak the name, he didn't break the law. For the law to apply Plame's case her status as undercover must be classified she must have been assigned to duty outside the United States at the time or in the past 5 years. Neither applies to her.

The fact is she was an analyst at the CIA, not an agent.

This is much ado about nothing.

I don't know if it's much ado about nothing. I still think Rove erred.

But, it probably wasn't illegal. Remember, Deep Throat is a hero.

You can leak information, you just can't sell it. :bang:

What's even more ironic is that the news media don't seem to recognize that they are the ones who printed it! If they were so concerned, why didn't they withhold publishing it, and simply report the situation?

Media is too one-up driven to do something like that.

DrTorch Wrote:I don't know if it's much ado about nothing. I still think Rove erred.

If he leaked her name I'd say it was a dumb move more than anything, though I can't seem to buy him being that reckless. However him telling Cooper that Wilson's trip was due to her nepotism is an important point. Especially given that Wilson was telling everyone he was appointed by Cheney to go.

The Senate Intellegence investigation into Iraq exposed Wilson for the fraud and political hack that he was. The rest of this is just a witch hunt because there hasn't been a scandal yet.

DrTorch Wrote:I don't know if it's much ado about nothing.&nbsp; I still think Rove erred.

But, it probably wasn't illegal.&nbsp; Remember, Deep Throat is a hero.

You can leak information, you just can't sell it.&nbsp; :bang:

What's even more ironic is that the news media don't seem to recognize that they are the ones who printed it!&nbsp; If they were so concerned, why didn't they withhold publishing it, and simply report the situation?

I don't remember Deep Throat outing a clandestine agent. There is a difference and the law passed on 1982 will determine his guilt or innocence. The spinning coming out of the administration is dizzying. First, he didn't do anything , then he did but it was out, now she's a paper pusher. What's next, the devil made me do it?

ALso, why isn't Robert Novak being investigated by a grand jury? He's the one that published it.

JTiger Wrote:I don't remember Deep Throat outing a clandestine agent.&nbsp; There is a difference and the law passed on 1982 will determine his guilt or innocence.&nbsp; The spinning coming out of the administration is dizzying.&nbsp; First, he didn't do anything , then he did but it was out, now she's a paper pusher.&nbsp; What's next, the devil made me do it?

1. She wasn't classified as undercover

2. She wasn't working outside the country at the time or in the last 5 years.

3. There is no proof that whoever leaked her name knew there was an effort to keep her name out of public.

4. And most important, there's no proof he outed her name.

Unless the first 3 conditions are met, no law has been broken, no matter who leaked her name.

It's not like she was on the streets of Pakistan about to aprehend Bin Laden. She's an analyst that works from the safety of a desk at the CIA.

And let's also not forget, Rove gave permission to Cooper to ID him as a source. Would he do that if he'd outed her? I think not.

I have heard that on her husband's bio on a government website had something to the effect of, "Married to Valerie Plame, an employee of the Central Intelligence Agency".

If this is the case, what is the problem? If she wasn't a covert operator, no one did a damn thing wrong. It's not illegal to state someone works for the CIA, only blowing the cover of one that is working in the defense of this country.

I am thinking this is being blown out of proportion for the attempt to smear the President. I don't remember hearing a damn thing from Democrats about Sandy Berger stealing secret documents.

Well, nothing about the CIA:

<a href='http://www.cpsag.com/our_team/wilson.html' target='_blank'>Joe Wilson Bio</a>

RebelKev Wrote:I am thinking this is being blown out of proportion for the attempt to smear the President. I don't remember hearing a damn thing from Democrats about Sandy Berger stealing secret documents.

Kinda like Monica Lewinski?

JTiger Wrote:

RebelKev Wrote:I am thinking this is being blown out of proportion for the attempt to smear the President. I don't remember hearing a damn thing from Democrats about Sandy Berger stealing secret documents.

Kinda like Monica Lewinski?

I never gave a damn about the Lewinski ordeal. I've made that clear several times.

RebelKev Wrote:Well, nothing about the CIA:

<a href='http://www.cpsag.com/our_team/wilson.html' target='_blank'>Joe Wilson Bio</a>

Nothing shows up on the <a href='http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.cpsag.com/our_team/wilson.html' target='_blank'>wayback machine</a> either.

RebelKev Wrote:

JTiger Wrote:

RebelKev Wrote:I am thinking this is being blown out of proportion for the attempt to smear the President. I don't remember hearing a damn thing from Democrats about Sandy Berger stealing secret documents.

Kinda like Monica Lewinski?

I never gave a damn about the Lewinski ordeal. I've made that clear several times.

It was kind of a joke, but I'm glad about your stance on it and it's been made clear to me. It seems every other conservative thinks getting a BJ from an intern is worthy of a hangin'.

JTiger Wrote:It was kind of a joke, but I'm glad about your stance on it and it's been made clear to me. It seems every other conservative thinks getting a BJ from an intern is worthy of a hangin'.

No. But lying and committing purjury for which Clinton was disbarred is worthy of impeachment.

Dems have effectively distorted the Lewinsky scandal into being about sex. It was never about that. It was about did the President lie to a grand jury.

Answer?

He did. And was disbarred for it.

Ninerfan1 Wrote:No. But lying and committing purjury for which Clinton was disbarred is worthy of impeachment.

Dems have effectively distorted the Lewinsky scandal into being about sex. It was never about that. It was about did the President lie to a grand jury.

Answer?

He did. And was disbarred for it.

The sale of missile technology via the Loral Corp. should have been the issue.

Ninerfan1 Wrote:

JTiger Wrote:It was kind of a joke, but I'm glad about your stance on it and it's been made clear to me.  It seems every other conservative thinks getting a BJ from an intern is worthy of a hangin'.

No. But lying and committing purjury for which Clinton was disbarred is worthy of impeachment.

Dems have effectively distorted the Lewinsky scandal into being about sex. It was never about that. It was about did the President lie to a grand jury.

Answer?

He did. And was disbarred for it.

Thank you.

It was appalling at how unconcerned the general populace was.

But when the economy changes, suddenly <a href='http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050713/ap_on_bi_ge/worldcom_ebbers_56' target='_blank'>CEO honesty</a> becomes crucial.[

Ninerfan1 Wrote:1.&nbsp; She wasn't classified as undercover

2.&nbsp; She wasn't working outside the country at the time or in the last 5 years.

3.&nbsp; There is no proof that whoever leaked her name knew there was an effort to keep her name out of public.

4.&nbsp; And most important, there's no proof he outed her name.

I won't argue with your third and fourth points because honestly, only the grand jury and special prosecutor will have any information on that. However, with regards to your claim that she was not a covert agent, I offer this published statement by a CIA official.

Quote:The CIA declined to discuss Plame's intelligence work, but an agency official disputed suggestions that she was a mere analyst whose public exposure would have little consequence. "If she was not undercover, we would have no reason to file a criminal referral," the CIA official said, insisting on anonymity because of the sensitivity of the investigation.

<a href='http://www.billingsgazette.com/index.php?ts=1&display=rednews/2003/10/01/build/nation/25-leak.inc' target='_blank'>Link</a>