1
   

Wilson contradictions leave Democrat senators speechless

 
 
swolf
 
Reply Thu 15 Jul, 2004 03:29 pm
Robert Novak, Sun-Times

http://www.suntimes.com/output/novak/cst-edt-novak15.html


Quote:

Like Sherlock Holmes' dog that did not bark, the most remarkable aspect of last week's Senate Intelligence Committee report is what its Democratic members did not say. They did not dissent from the committee's findings that Iraq apparently asked about buying yellowcake uranium from Niger. They neither agreed to a conclusion that former diplomat Joseph Wilson was suggested for a mission to Niger by his CIA employee wife nor defended his statements to the contrary.

Wilson's activities constituted the only aspects of the yearlong investigation for which the committee's Republican chairman, Sen. Pat Roberts, was unable to win unanimous agreement. According to committee sources, Roberts felt Wilson had been such a ''cause celebre'' for Democrats that they could not face the facts about him.

For a year, Democrats have been belaboring President Bush about 16 words in his 2003 State of the Union address in which he reported Saddam Hussein's attempt to buy uranium from Africa, based on British information. Wilson has been lionized in liberal circles for allegedly contradicting this information on a CIA mission and then being punished as a truth-teller. Now, for committee Democrats, it is as though the Niger question and Joe Wilson have vanished from the Earth.

Because a Justice Department special prosecutor is investigating whether any crime was committed when my column first identified Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, as a CIA employee, on advice of counsel I have not written on the subject since October. However, I feel compelled to describe how the committee report treats the Niger-Wilson affair because it has received scant coverage except in a few media outlets. The unanimously approved report said, ''interviews and documents provided to the Committee indicate that his wife, a CPD (CIA counterproliferation division) employee, suggested his name for the trip.'' That's what I reported, and what Wilson flatly denied and still does.

Plame sent out an internal CIA memo saying ''my husband has good relations with both the PM [prime minister] and the former Minister of Mines (not to mention lots of French contacts), both of whom could possibly shed light on this sort of activity.'' A State Department analyst told the committee about an inter-agency meeting in 2002 that was ''apparently convened by [Wilson's] wife, who had the idea to dispatch [him] to use his contacts to sort out the Iraq-Niger uranium issue.''

The committee found that the CIA report, based on Wilson's mission, differed considerably from the former ambassador's description to the committee of his findings. That report ''did not refute the possibility that Iraq had approached Niger to purchase uranium.'' As far as his statement to the Washington Post about ''forged documents'' involved in the alleged Iraqi attempt to buy uranium, Wilson told the committee he may have ''misspoken.'' In fact, the intelligence community agreed that ''Iraq was attempting to procure uranium from Africa.''

''While there was no dispute with the underlying facts,'' Chairman Roberts wrote separately, ''my Democrat colleagues refused to allow'' two conclusions in the report. The first conclusion merely said that Wilson was sent to Niger at his wife's suggestion. The second conclusion is devastating: ''Rather than speaking publicly about his actual experiences during his inquiry of the Niger issue, the former ambassador seems to have included information he learned from press accounts and from his beliefs about how the Intelligence Community would have or should have handled the information he provided.''

The normally mild Roberts is harsh in his condemnation: ''Time and again, Joe Wilson told anyone who would listen that the president had lied to the American people, that the vice president had lied, and that he had 'debunked' the claim that Iraq was seeking uranium from Africa. . . . [N]ot only did he NOT 'debunk' the claim, he actually gave some intelligence analysts even more reason to believe that it may be true.'' Roberts called it ''important'' for the committee to declare much of what Wilson said ''had no basis in fact.'' In response, Democrats were silent.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 636 • Replies: 5
No top replies

 
Redheat
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Jul, 2004 09:54 am
Robert "traitor" Novak should be ashamed to write anything about Wilson.

The man needs to retire before he loses all shreds of credibility or what few he may have left.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Jul, 2004 10:39 am
Yeah, sometimes the truth hurts.
0 Replies
 
blueveinedthrobber
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Jul, 2004 10:40 am
McGentrix wrote:
Yeah, sometimes the truth hurts.


Yes Corrine Brown adeptly demonstrated that.....
0 Replies
 
Redheat
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Jul, 2004 11:32 am
McGentrix wrote:
Yeah, sometimes the truth hurts.


Yes it does but I live in no fear of any pain with your brand of "truth"
0 Replies
 
swolf
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Jul, 2004 11:58 am
Redheat wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
Yeah, sometimes the truth hurts.


Yes it does but I live in no fear of any pain with your brand of "truth"


Pain is a warning sign; ignore it, and you risk major damage to your body. And, in the case of the demmunist party, we're not talking about one or two isolated incidents of pain. Democrats appear to be in danger of having fallen off the planet in terms of their ability to deal with reality.

First we had this Richard Clarke character who turned out to be a major part of the the problem (along with Jamie Gorelick's "wall") and not any sort of a solution to the problem, then Michael fat-drunk-and-stupid-is-no-way-to-go-through-life Moore who this same Richard Clarke is now calling a liar, and then Joseph Wilson's whole schtick about Bush and Blair having lied their way into a war blowing up in all their faces on top of all that.

I mean, it's starting to look like something from Laurel and Hardy or one of the Kingfish's schemes from one of the old Amos&Andy shows.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Wilson contradictions leave Democrat senators speechless
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/18/2024 at 01:55:22