0
   

Rove was the source of the Plame leak... so it appears

 
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Jul, 2005 09:41 am
Cycloptichorn wrote:
You know things are going right when Timber starts predicting Doom for Dems. The only time I saw him do the opposite, Bush won the election; since then things have not exactly been going the way he states they will...


Got specifics, there, partner? Dunno as there's anything out there to back up your claim in that regard. I could be wrong about this ... but I doubt it. Show me. I'd be interested to see what leads you to that conclusion.
0 Replies
 
Stradee
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Jul, 2005 09:47 am
timberlandko wrote:
Stradee wrote:
Ah, then you concede your list of noted Democrats' sins arn't deserving of incarceration then? You've restored my faith, Timber!

Not likely they'd be partying at a Holiday Inn with booze and ammo though.


<chuckle>

As for "Don't get it", I rest my case.



Timber, I "get" the administrations motives regarding the Pume investigaton - cognizant of the fact that Rove, Cheney, et al will cover their tracks - no matter what the issue.

Aint' politics grand though.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Jul, 2005 09:50 am
Quote:
Got specifics, there, partner? Dunno as there's anything out there to back up your claim in that regard. I could be wrong about this ... but I doubt it. Show me. I'd be interested to see what leads you to that conclusion.


Hmm, well, I guess it will take me some time to track posts down.

On a general level, though, you must admit that things haven't exactly been Roses for your party in '05 so far; and I believe that this may run slightly contrary to certain predictions of yours. Not that you can be faulted; everyone cheers for the home team!

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
PDiddie
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Jul, 2005 09:57 am
This is going to be lengthy.

Quote:
"Even though I'm a tranquil guy now at this stage of my life, I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious of traitors."

-- George Herbert Walker Bush, 1999


The facts of the Plame Affair are singularly grotesque.

Taken at the top layer, you have a White House that appears perfectly willing to go after the family members of its critics. Valerie Plame's career was destroyed, period. That act itself displays a level of viciousness that is dangerous to the functioning of this, or any, democracy.

Peel the second layer and you discover the illegality of their actions. Section 421 of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982 reads as follows:

Quote:
"Whoever, having or having had authorized access to classified information that identifies a covert agent, intentionally discloses any information identifying such covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such covert agent and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent's intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both."


The third layer is where the cancer lurks.

Valerie Plame was not simply an analyst or a data cruncher. She was an operative, a 'NOC'. NOCs are the true "spies out in the cold"; unlike most CIA officers, who are stationed abroad disguised as State Department employees, military officials, or other U.S. government personnel attached to an American embassy, NOCs operate without any apparent links to the U.S. government. The CIA's operations within terrorist, drug trafficking, and arms dealer networks often involve NOCs, who can move more easily in such circles without raising suspicion.

Plame was running a network dedicated to tracking any person or nation that might try to give weapons of mass destruction to terrorists. That sentence deserves to be written twice. She was an operative running a network dedicated to tracking any person or nation that might try to give weapons of mass destruction to terrorists.

"If she were only an analyst, not an operative, we would not have filed a crimes report" with the Justice Department, a senior intelligence official said.

The Bush administration pushed very hard the idea that America is in danger from WMDs being placed into the hands of terrorists. This was one of the central arguments behind the war in Iraq. Yet in order to protect Bush's political standing, a couple of "administration officials" blew Valerie Plame, and by proxy her network, completely out of the water in an attempt to shut her husband up.

There are estimates that as many as 70 of her overseas contacts were "liquidated" as a result of her identity being exposed.

So let's review:

In order to protect Bush from the ramifications of using fake evidence to support his war, this White House destroyed an intelligence network that was protecting us from the threat posed by chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons.

America are less safe now that Valerie Plame is no longer performing this vital task, and the members of her network who haven't already been killed remain still in mortal danger.

Beyond that we face a level of hypocrisy that shatters all previously known boundaries. The fate of Valerie Plame and her network shows without a doubt that the moral standing of this administration is as empty as Saddam Hussein's WMD cache.

Rove has done this kind of thing before, specifically using Robert Novak to cut down a political enemy; he was fired from the 1992 Bush Sr. campaign for trashing Robert Mosbacher, Jr., the chief campaign fundraiser. Rove knows no ideology beyond power, and has no bones about using it to wreak havoc on anyone who gets in his crosshairs.

Last week Karl Rove stood before an assembly of college-age Young Republicans and accused his political enemies of treason.

Treason, Mr. Rove? J'accuse.
0 Replies
 
Chrissee
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Jul, 2005 10:06 am
Well, we haven't heard a single word from Rove. That is very telling in intself.
0 Replies
 
thethinkfactory
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Jul, 2005 10:07 am
thethinkfactory wrote:
I honestly think that Bush's continued suport has one out of three reasons:

1) The vast minority who support him benefit from his policies.

2) A much greater majority simply support Bush because of fear of the 'other' guy. Whomever that is at the time. More voted for not Kerry this last election (and to be fair it was close to the voter who voted not Bush).

3) Simple penis measuring. Many have tied 'their' party to Bush and cannot stand to unhitch it now. So at the risk of looking absurd they hold on.



I am loath to quote myself but in another thread I addressed why Bush and co. have support and defenders. - I think the defense of Carl Rove / Bush at this point in the demise of this presidency can only be #3.

We have a group of people purple in the face about statements like 'that depends on what your definition of 'is' is' now saying that Rove could honestly not know Plame was a CIA operative and give testamony (misleading and lying by ommission at best) that was truthful.

Sad indeed.

TTF
0 Replies
 
Chrissee
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Jul, 2005 10:09 am
For a great background on the evil-doer Rove, view this Frontline documentary: Karl Rove, the Architect
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Jul, 2005 10:11 am
From what I'm reading, and in trying hard to stay neutral until more decisive evidence is presented, I'm still having a hard time with any suggestion that the White House or Bush Administration is innocent of wrong doing.

We already know that evidence was to be "fixed" around the Iraq war policy. Bush wanted to invade Iraq as far back as 1999 according to his own words. (I can source that if someone doubts it, but don't feel like opening yet another window at the moment to search it.) We have documentation that has recently been disclosed regarding his desire to go to war, oust Saddam, free the people, etc, but that points out that the only way to do so that would be politically acceptable would be through claims of WMD.

We have a State of the Union address, which later had to have 16 words redacted that directly dealt with Wilson's claim that there was no yellowcake deal.

(Fleischer: Now, we've long acknowledged -- and this is old news, we've said this repeatedly -- that the information on yellow cake did, indeed, turn out to be incorrect.)

(Rice: What we've said subsequently is, knowing what we now know, that some of the Niger documents were apparently forged, we wouldn't have put this in the President's speech -- but that's knowing what we know now.)


We have an administration that is known to use pysops and propaganda, not just on foreigners, but here at home as well despite it being illegal. (Related Information)

We have two top White House officials on the phone to six reporters following the Novak outing of Plame, revealing the identity and occupation of Wilson's wife. So, even if no one in the White House leaked the information to Novak, the fact that they exploited the leak raises other legal questions. See FINDLAW for more information regarding the Federal Conspiracy Statute.

According to the article:

Quote:
This elegantly simple law has snared countless people working for, or with, the federal government. Suppose a conspiracy is in progress. Even those who come in later, and who share in the purpose of the conspiracy, can become responsible for all that has gone on before they joined. They need not realize they are breaking the law; they need only have joined the conspiracy.


Most likely, in this instance the conspiracy would be a conspiracy to defraud - for the broad federal fraud statute, too, may apply here. If two federal government employees agree to undertake actions that are not within the scope of their employment, they can be found guilty of defrauding the U.S. by depriving it of the "faithful and honest services of its employee." It is difficult to imagine that President Bush is going to say he hired anyone to call reporters to wreak more havoc on Valerie Plame. Thus, anyone who did so - or helped another to do so - was acting outside the scope of his or her employment, and may be open to a fraud prosecution.


What counts as "fraud" under the statute? Simply put, "any conspiracy for the purpose of impairing, obstructing, or defeating the lawful function of any department of government." (Emphasis added.) If telephoning reporters to further destroy a CIA asset whose identity has been revealed, and whose safety is now in jeopardy, does not fit this description, I would be quite surprised.


Now given just these things, doesn't it seem pretty likely that there is White House / Bush Administration involvement in outing a CIA operative for the purpose of supporting their desire to illegally invade a soveriegn nation? I don't think that's such a big jump to make and can't see how anyone can deny the possibility let alone the likelyhood.
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Jul, 2005 10:24 am
For those who want to read ALL of PDiddie's rant...this is the source:

Carl Rove to the Guillotine (They could at least spell his name correctly LOL)

Document Actions


"Even though I'm a tranquil guy now at this stage of my life, I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious of traitors." - George Herbert Walker Bush, 1999

The Most Insidious of Traitors By William Rivers Pitt t r u t h o u t | Perspective

Tuesday 30 September 2003

Karl Rove, senior political advisor to George W. Bush, is a very powerful man. That is not to say he has never been in trouble. Rove was fired from the 1992 Bush Sr. campaign for trashing Robert Mosbacher, Jr., who was the chief fundraiser for the campaign and an avowed Bush loyalist. Rove accomplished this trashing of Mosbacher by planting a negative story with columnist Bob Novak. The campaign figured out that Karl had done the dirty deed, and he was given his walking papers.

Demonstrably, Rove is back in the saddle again. The January 2003 edition of Esquire magazine carried an article by Ron Suskind which quoted comments from John DiIulio, a domestic policy advisor to the White House who had just retired from his post. On October 24, DiIulio had sent a letter to Suskind describing what he had seen while working for the Bush administration. The meat of the letter described an administration far, far more interested in raw political triangulation and ruthless spin than in actual policy and government functionality. Some excerpts from DiIulio's letter:



"Some are inclined to blame the high political-to-policy ratios of this administration on Karl Rove...some staff members, senior and junior, are awed and cowed by Karl's real or perceived powers. They self-censor lots for fear of upsetting him, and, in turn, few of the president's top people routinely tell the president what they really think if they think that Karl will be brought up short in the bargain. Karl is enormously powerful, maybe the single most powerful person in the modern, post-Hoover era ever to occupy a political advisor post near the Oval Office." Even a casual political observer would have trouble missing the fact that this is one of the sharpest political outfits ever to reside in the Oval Office. Bush's team is a unified wall, cemented to their message-of-the-day, and they have done very well for themselves because of this. All of this can be laid at the feet of Karl Rove, the senior political advisor to George W. Bush. According to DiIulio, the preeminence of political considerations within this administration is so complete that any and all policy considerations or contemplation of actual issues are not so much in the back seat as they are in the trunk below the spare tire and the jack. This, again, can be laid at the feet of Mr. Rove.

All of Washington and the country has been buzzing for the last few days over a report that the CIA has asked the Justice Department to investigate the White House regarding a matter of important national security. The wife of a former ambassador named Joseph Wilson, it has been alleged, was outed as an active CIA agent to columnist Robert Novak by this White House in an act of political revenge.

Joseph Wilson was the man dispatched to Niger in February of 2002 by the CIA, after Vice President Dick Cheney asked CIA to figure out whether there was any substance to the charge that Iraq was attempting to procure uranium "yellow cake" from that nation for the purpose of starting a nuclear weapons program. Ambassador Wilson went, investigated, and returned eight days later to state flatly that the evidence was garbage. He has claimed since that his analysis was one of three intelligence reports debunking the Niger story. Ambassador Wilson told this to Cheney's office, the CIA, the State Department, and the National Security Council. Despite the fact that Wilson made it clear that these allegations were untrue - it was revealed that the evidence to support the Niger uranium charge was a pile of crudely forged documents - George W. Bush used the Niger uranium evidence dramatically in his 2003 State of the Union address.

In July, Ambassador Wilson went very public, criticizing the White House for using evidence to support war that they knew was patently false. One week later, Robert Novak reported that Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, was a CIA operative. As it turns out, two senior White House officials cold-called six different journalists and informed them of Valerie Plame's status as a CIA agent, according to an anonymous administration official quoted by the Washington Post. None of the journalists ran the story. That same administration official was quoted about these revelations as saying, "Clearly, it was meant purely and simply for revenge." Joseph Wilson likewise charges that this act was done as an act of revenge for his vocal criticism of George W. Bush and the administration's actions leading up to the Iraq war. Specifically, he views Karl Rove as being possibly involved in, or at least condoning, the cutting down of his wife.

The facts of this story are singularly grotesque. Taken at the top layer, you have a White House that appears perfectly willing to go after the family members of its critics. Valerie Plame's career is destroyed, period. The act itself displays a level of viciousness that is dangerous to the functioning of this, or any, democracy.

Peel the second layer and you discover the rank illegality of it all. Section 421 of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982 reads as follows:



"Whoever, having or having had authorized access to classified information that identifies a covert agent, intentionally discloses any information identifying such covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such covert agent and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent's intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both." The third layer is where the darkness truly lurks, and where the deadly importance of this situation lies. Valerie Plame was not simply an analyst or a data cruncher. She was an operative running a network dedicated to tracking any person or nation that might try to give weapons of mass destruction to terrorists. That sentence deserves to be written twice. She was an operative running a network dedicated to tracking any person or nation that might try to give weapons of mass destruction to terrorists.

The Bush administration pushed very hard the idea that America is in danger from WMDs being placed into the hands of terrorists. This was one of the central arguments behind the war in Iraq. Yet in order to protect Bush's political standing, a couple of "administration officials" blew Valerie Plame, and by proxy her network, completely out of the water in an attempt to shut her husband up. In short, in order to protect Bush from the ramifications of using fake evidence to support his war, this White House destroyed an intelligence network that was protecting us from the threat posed by chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons.

We are less safe now that Valerie Plame is no longer performing this vital task, and the members of her network are in mortal danger of being revealed and destroyed. Beyond that, we are facing a level of hypocrisy that shatters any and all previously known boundaries. This administration ginned up a war in Iraq based upon manufactured evidence and wildly overstated threats, all of which was painted over with rhetoric about defending the country from terrorists and weapons of mass destruction. The fate of Valerie Plame, and her network, shows without doubt that the moral standing of this administration is as empty as Saddam Hussein's WMD cache.

In Ambassador Wilson's words, "Naming her this way would have compromised every operation, every relationship, every network with which she had been associated in her entire career. This is the stuff of Kim Philby and Aldrich Ames."

The current spin from administration defenders within and without the mainstream media is that Valerie Plame was only an analyst, and not an operative. This, somehow, is supposed to lessen the blow of an administration willing to attack the families of its critics. Yet the characterization of Plame as an analyst is factually incorrect. For one, Robert Novak himself indicated that she was an operative in the original report that birthed this scandal. "Wilson never worked for the CIA," wrote Novak, "but his wife, Valerie Plame, is an Agency operative on weapons of mass destruction."

Ray McGovern, who was for 27-years a senior analyst for the CIA, further confirms the status of Plame within the CIA. "I know Joseph Wilson well enough to know," said McGovern in a telephone conversation we had today, "that his wife was in fact a deep cover operative running a network of informants on what is supposedly this administration's first-priority issue: Weapons of mass destruction."

McGovern further elaborated on the damage done when such an agent has their cover blown. "This causes a great deal of damage," said McGovern. "These kinds of networks take ten years to develop. The reason why they operate under deep cover is that the only people who have access to the kind of data we need cannot be associated in any way with the American intelligence community. Our operatives live a lie to maintain these networks, and do so out of patriotism. When they get blown, the operatives themselves are in physical danger. The people they recruit are also in physical danger, because foreign intelligence services can make the connections and find them. Operatives like Valerie Plame are real patriots."

Mr. Rove has done this kind of thing before, specifically using Robert Novak in that one notable attempt to cut down Mosbacher. Rove is a disciple of the undisputed heavyweight champion of political assassins, Lee Atwater, and has often reached into a deep bag of dirty tricks to accomplish his political ends. He knows no ideology beyond power, and has no bones about using it to wreak havoc on anyone who gets in his crosshairs. The Esquire article about DiIulio finds him recounting a singular Rove moment, as he overheard a conversation happening in another room: "Inside, Rove was talking to an aide about some political stratagem in some state that had gone awry and a political operative who had displeased him. I paid it no mind and reviewed a jotted list of questions I hoped to ask. But after a moment, it was like ignoring a tornado flinging parked cars. 'We will **** him. Do you hear me? We will **** him. We will ruin him. Like no one has ever fucked him!'"

Guess who was doing the cursing and threatening.

One last bit of inside baseball. When the Niger scandal erupted, the Bush administration went out of its way to blame the CIA for the mess, despite the fact that the CIA, along with the entire intelligence community, had been cut out of the loop by Don Rumsfeld's Office of Special Plans. The OSP, and its pet Iraqi Ahmad Chalabi, became the source for all of the information regarding Iraq's weapons capabilities, and a number of intelligence insiders have publicly blamed that group for the preponderance of highly erroneous data about Iraq. For the Bush administration to completely usurp the CIA by depending solely on data manufactured by the Office of Special Plans, and then to turn around and blame CIA when the OSPs data did not turn out to be true, is as insane as it is laughable. Yet this is what they have done. The CIA's calling for this investigation is nothing more or less than the Agency defending itself, proving out the oft-repeated warning that one scapegoats the CIA at their mortal peril.

Also, the fact that this data came to the Washington post from a White House official means that another Deep Throat may have just been born.

The White House has denied the allegation, and promises a full investigation. A great many people find it laughable to believe this White House is capable of investigating itself, and are demanding an independent investigation. A quick look at the White House telephone logs will reveal who called whom, and when. It may well be the case that Rove was not involved; there are several administration officials - Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle, Rice, Card - along with a constellation of administration associates and media mouthpieces, who had a vested interest in shutting Ambassador Wilson's mouth. The White House phone logs will be revelatory. If this administration fails to hand those logs over, they will stand in taint of high treason.

J'accuse


http://www.setforpeace.org/Rove-Traitor
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Jul, 2005 10:48 am
They are pretty desperate to get Rove out of business. He's KILLING them in the elections.

Squinney et al--

Wilson was found by the Senate to have lied about his trip to Niger.

The 16 words Bush used in that speech were TRUE.

At least admit the researched and proven facts.
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Jul, 2005 10:51 am
Doesn't anyone wonder how Wilson knew the truth about no yellowcake, but the Bush Administration did not? Anyone wondering how Wilson knew not to believe fake documents, but the Bush administration did not?

Anyone wondering how an Italian on the payroll for France, in an attempt to embarrass the US government by producing fake documents actually DID fool Bush, Rice, Cheney and Rumsfeld?

Anyone wondering why, if they are so incompetent as to not know more than Wilson, a mere former embassador, they are still in office?
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Jul, 2005 10:57 am
Wilson lied, Squinney. The Senate investigation PROVED it.

They proved that fake documents were forged to throw off the actual fact.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Jul, 2005 10:58 am
Iraq DID attempt to buy yellowcake in Niger.

Proven.
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Jul, 2005 11:07 am
They forgot about Wilson being outed as a serial liar. Too busy ordering that guillotine for Rove I guess Smile
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Jul, 2005 11:12 am
"This photograph," said Mathers, "shows the actual item found in one of Saddam Hussein's Presidential Palaces. The photo was sent to the U.S. by operatives in Iraq more than one week before the speech. As the story went along through word-of-mouth, the nature of the photograph was misunderstood. "

http://www.uncoveror.com/niger.jpg

Guess you're right, Lash. Laughing
0 Replies
 
kuvasz
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Jul, 2005 11:13 am
Lash wrote:
They are pretty desperate to get Rove out of business. He's KILLING them in the elections.

Squinney et al--

Wilson was found by the Senate to have lied about his trip to Niger.

The 16 words Bush used in that speech were TRUE.

At least admit the researched and proven facts.


No Lash, once again you are mistaking a lightening bug for lightening.

Wilson was not "found by the Senate" to have lied about his trip to Niger. Either you do not know the facts and are speaking out of ignorance or you do know the truth and are willfully distorting it in pursuit of a political agernda. Either way, your remarks are intellectual buggery deserving of derision by those of us equipped with the facts.

Charges that he lied were made by Sens. Roberts, Bond and Hatch's additional comments to the Senate Select Intelligence Committee's Report on the U.S. Intelligence Community's Prewar Assessment on Iraq.

None of those remarks were supported by the majority of Senators on the committee, even the other Republicans on the committee. That means that most Senators did not believe Wilson lied.

So explain for the rest of the class how such remarks rise to the level of your accusation of
Quote:
"Wilson was found by the Senate to have lied about his trip to Niger.


You just made that $hit up.

Wilson's reply to their politically motivated attacks is linked below.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A56501-2004Jul16.html

Quote:
Debunking Distortions About My Trip to Niger

Saturday, July 17, 2004; Page A17


For the second time in a year, your paper has published an article [news story, July 10] falsely suggesting that my wife, Valerie Plame, was responsible for the trip I took to Niger on behalf of the U.S. government to look into allegations that Iraq had sought to purchase several hundred tons of yellowcake uranium from that West African country. Last July 14, Robert Novak, claiming two senior sources, exposed Valerie as an "agency operative [who] suggested sending him to Niger." Novak went ahead with his column despite the fact that the CIA had urged him not to disclose her identity. That leak to Novak may well have been a federal crime and is under investigation.


http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2004/07/16/wilson_letter/index_np.html

Quote:
July 16, 2004 |

The Hon. Pat Roberts, Chairman, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence

The Hon. Jay Rockefeller, Vice Chairman, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence

Dear Sen. Roberts and Sen. Rockefeller,

I read with great surprise and consternation the Niger portion of Sens. Roberts, Bond and Hatch's additional comments to the Senate Select Intelligence Committee's Report on the U.S. Intelligence Community's Prewar Assessment on Iraq. I am taking this opportunity to clarify some of the issues raised in these comments.


Wilson rebutts each of their accusations with documented details. To date, none of the Senators who made the accusations have responded to negate what Wilson later said.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Jul, 2005 11:17 am
Lash wrote:
Iraq DID attempt to buy yellowcake in Niger.

Proven.


Is there new evedence about this since March 9, 2003 (when Powell acknowledges that the documents concerning the alleged Iraq-Niger uranium deal might be false), June 8, 2003 (when Rice acknowledged that Bush's claim was based [in part] on inaccurate information), July 7, 2003 (when Ari Fleischer conceded that the information should not have been included in the president's speech) ... ?
0 Replies
 
Chrissee
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Jul, 2005 11:18 am
JustWonders wrote:
They forgot about Wilson being outed as a serial liar. Too busy ordering that guillotine for Rove I guess Smile


Oh puhleeeeze, not THAT canard again.

Oh I see the false contention was already outted.
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Jul, 2005 11:29 am
From Wikipedia:

Quote:
...

It is as yet unknown how Italian intelligence came by the documents and why they were not given directly to the U.S. In 2005, Vincent Cannistaro, the former head of counterterrorism operations at the CIA and the intelligence director at the National Security Council under Ronald Reagan, expressed the opinion that the documents had been produced in the United States and funneled through the Italians:

The documents were fabricated by supporters of the policy in the United States. The policy being that you had to invade Iraq in order to get rid of Saddam Hussein . . . . [3]

In an interview published April 7, 2005, Cannistaro was asked by Ian Masters what he would say if it was asserted that the source of the forgery was former National Security Council and State Department consultant Michael Ledeen. (Ledeen had also allegedly been a liaison between the American Intelligence Community and SISMI two decades earlier.) Cannistraro answered by saying: "you'd be very close." [4]

In March 2003, Senator Jay Rockefeller, vice-chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, agreed not to open a Congressional investigation of the matter, but rather asked the FBI to conduct the investigation. As of September 2004, the FBI had not yet interviewed Martino, claiming they were awaiting permission from the Italian government to do so. [5] However, Martino is known to have been in New York in August 2004. [6]

In September 2004, the CBS News program 60 Minutes decided to delay a major story on the forgeries because such a broadcast might influence the 2004 U.S. presidential election. A CBS spokesman stated, "We now believe it would be inappropriate to air the report so close to the presidential election." [7]


Emphasis mine. Hadn't heard this before, but had suspected the documents were forged by US. Makes sense if they were since we needed to fix the facts around the policy.

Not finding anything about the Senate finding Wilson to be a liar. Gotta link on that, Lash?
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Jul, 2005 12:40 pm
Senate Findings on Iraq.

Wilson wrote a couple of lies in a book and in articles. One lie was his wife didn't have anything to do wiht him getting the assignment.

The Senate Committee entered into the proceedings Plame's own handwritten memo suggesting her lying, partisan husband for the job. Proving a Wilson lie.

Another Wilson lie was that he found there was no attempted buy of yellowcake by Iraq.

The Senate rebuff of that lie is on Page 17 of the Report--the Niger Investigation.

On pages 10-11, you will see that the CIA was tweaked about Wilson's half-hearted attempt to follow up on something as simple as a phone number he was given which was a lead in the case. He DIDN'T WANT to find anything, so he didn't.

The British Intelligence STANDS BEHIND THEIR story that back up Bush's 16 words. French Intel does as well.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Karl Rove E-mails - Discussion by Diest TKO
Rove: McCain went 'too far' in ads - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Sheryl Crow Battles Karl Rove at D.C. Press Dinner - Discussion by BumbleBeeBoogie
Texas attorney fired for Rove article comments - Discussion by BumbleBeeBoogie
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 01/04/2025 at 04:27:26