How can you possibly say, 'without basis?' He has said many, many times that he has no idea who the leakers were; given the close nature of his work with Rove, Libby and Cheney, this is impossible. Unless you are suggesting that they all lied to him.
And yes, I do take the opportunity to re-iterate that I consider the whole group of them to be liars, thugs, thieves and crooks. It is finally being exposed to the world what many of us have suspected for a long, long time about this group.
Don't be bitter, your team had to take one on the chin sooner or later; though now that I think of it, the GOP is dealing with:
Kentucky Scandal
Ohio Coingate Scandal
Tom DeLay
Bill Frist
AND the CIA leak probe.
THat's a lot of shots on the chin at once. That's how people get knocked out. Maybe it's time to start getting worried...
Cycloptichorn
Cycloptichorn wrote:How can you possibly say, 'without basis?' He has said many, many times that he has no idea who the leakers were; given the close nature of his work with Rove, Libby and Cheney, this is impossible. Unless you are suggesting that they all lied to him.
As eager you have been in the past to accuse Bush of lying, it's no surprise to see you make this claim .... again, with no basis other than your own wild fantasies.
Interestinger and interestinger....
Quote:Walker's World: Bush at bay
By MARTIN WALKER
UPI Editor
WASHINGTON, Oct. 23 (UPI) -- The CIA leak inquiry that threatens senior White House aides has now widened to include the forgery of documents on African uranium that started the investigation, according to NAT0 intelligence sources.
This suggests the inquiry by special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald into the leaking of the identity of undercover CIA officer Valerie Plame has now widened to embrace part of the broader question about the way the Iraq war was justified by the Bush administration.
Fitzgerald's inquiry is expected to conclude this week and despite feverish speculation in Washington, there have been no leaks about his decision whether to issue indictments and against whom and on what charges.
Two facts are, however, now known and between them they do not bode well for the deputy chief of staff at the White House, Karl Rove, President George W Bush's senior political aide, not for Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby.
The first is that Fitzgerald last year sought and obtained from the Justice Department permission to widen his investigation from the leak itself to the possibility of cover-ups, perjury and obstruction of justice by witnesses. This has renewed the old saying from the days of the Watergate scandal, that the cover-up can be more legally and politically dangerous than the crime.
The second is that NATO sources have confirmed to United Press International that Fitzgerald's team of investigators has sought and obtained documentation on the forgeries from the Italian government.
Fitzgerald's team has been given the full, and as yet unpublished report of the Italian parliamentary inquiry into the affair, which started when an Italian journalist obtained documents that appeared to show officials of the government of Niger helping to supply the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein with Yellowcake uranium. This claim, which made its way into President Bush's State of the Union address in January, 2003, was based on falsified documents from Niger and was later withdrawn by the White House.
This opens the door to what has always been the most serious implication of the CIA leak case, that the Bush administration could face a brutally damaging and public inquiry into the case for war against Iraq being false or artificially exaggerated. This was the same charge t
Read the Rest Here
Well, I mean, Bush DID say that he didn't know who the leaker was. Do you want me to find the quotes?
Cycloptichorn
Cycloptichorn wrote:Well, I mean, Bush DID say that he didn't know who the leaker was. Do you want me to find the quotes?
Cycloptichorn
Clinton DID say he never had sexual intercourse with that woman ... We now know that to be a lie, don't we?
But what we don't know is whether Bush lied or not. That he may have stated he didn't know who the leaker was does not mean he lied.
Tico, this clinton obsession is getting so old it is pathetic and it won't wash with the public. I hope you guys keep trying.
Ticomaya wrote:Cycloptichorn wrote:Well, I mean, Bush DID say that he didn't know who the leaker was. Do you want me to find the quotes?
Cycloptichorn
Clinton DID say he never had sexual intercourse with that woman ... We now know that to be a lie, don't we?
But what we don't know is whether Bush lied or not. That he may have stated he didn't know who the leaker was does not mean he lied.
tico
Your arguments are playground childish. "There are no war plans on my desk"..."I haven't decided whether we are going to war"... We know now from Woodward and other sources that these were lies (lies to the citizens) that plans had been in formulation for months and that the decision to go to war had been much earlier. Etc etc. As regards the above matter, conflicting statements determine that either Bush or Cheney/Libby/Rove were lying (and McClellan obviously). So, take your pick. Who is lying, tico?
It's going to be boring to watch you if indictments come down on these admin figures. You'll be utterly predictable. Scruples and integrity and respect for the truth of things will be no match at all against your silly partisan "I have to win the argument for my team".
Ticomaya wrote:Cycloptichorn wrote:Well, I mean, Bush DID say that he didn't know who the leaker was. Do you want me to find the quotes?
Cycloptichorn
Clinton DID say he never had sexual intercourse with that woman ... We now know that to be a lie, don't we?
But what we don't know is whether Bush lied or not. That he may have stated he didn't know who the leaker was does not mean he lied.
Clinton had intercourse with Monica? It seems that part wasn't in the Starr report anywhere. Since there is NO evidence of Clinton ever having intercourse with Monica, how can you claim a statement by CLinton denying it is a lie? Where did you find this information Tico? Or is this a slight error on your part? A "lie" perhaps to try to further your cause?
Blatham
If Bush didn't know that all this crap was going on around him, then he is too stupid to be trusted with the presidency.
BBB
Blatham
If Vice President Cheney used the CIA to go after a political foe, then he is guilty of the same using the FBI crimes Nixon would have been accused of if he had not resigned.
BBB
parados wrote:Clinton had intercourse with Monica? It seems that part wasn't in the Starr report anywhere. Since there is NO evidence of Clinton ever having intercourse with Monica, how can you claim a statement by CLinton denying it is a lie? Where did you find this information Tico? Or is this a slight error on your part? A "lie" perhaps to try to further your cause?
Do you think Clinton lied, parados? (I'm referring, of course, to his Paula Jones deposition testimony, which I replicated on that other thread.)
Well, I doubt that Clinton is the topic of this thread, now is it? Nice try though.
Cycloptichorn
Cheney, Libby at Odds Over CIA Leak-Case Investigation
Cheney, Libby May Be at Odds Over CIA Leak-Case Investigation
Oct. 25, 2005
Bloomberg
A fissure may be opening between Vice President Dick Cheney and his top aide over the investigation into the leak of a covert CIA agent's identity.
I. Lewis Libby, Cheney's chief of staff, first learned of agent Valerie Plame's identity in a conversation with Cheney weeks before her name became public in July 2003, the New York Times reported last night, citing lawyers involved in the case.
The disclosure doesn't indicate that the vice president did anything wrong, said a senior Republican with ties to Cheney. The person declined to make a similar statement about Libby.
The senior Republican, who spoke on condition of anonymity, sought to portray Cheney as uninvolved in any violation of a 1982 law forbidding the revelation of a covert intelligence agent's identity. The official noted that both Cheney and Libby had the security clearances necessary to discuss Plame's identity.
The Times report focuses new attention on Cheney's role in an affair that holds serious legal and political jeopardy for top officials in President George W. Bush's administration. Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald is nearing the end of a 22- month investigation into potential criminal wrongdoing in the leaking of Plame's identity and is believed to be considering indictments against top White House officials, including Libby and deputy chief of staff Karl Rove.
The Times said it based its account on Libby's notes from a June 12, 2003, meeting between him and Cheney. According to lawyers involved in the case who described Libby's notes to the Times, they indicate Cheney got his information about Plame from George Tenet, then director of the Central Intelligence Agency.
Questions About Wilson
The Times said Tenet was responding to questions from Cheney about Plame's husband, former diplomat Joseph Wilson, who was soon to emerge as a public critic of the Bush administration's decision to go to war in Iraq. Among the issues Fitzgerald is probing is whether Plame's CIA connection was leaked to retaliate against Wilson.
A Cheney spokesman, Steve Schmidt, referred questions about the Times account to Fitzgerald. Libby's attorney, Joseph Tate, didn't return a phone call seeking comment.
Fitzgerald's case began as a probe into whether any White House official violated the law protecting covert agents. Attorneys involved in the case and grand jury witnesses have said the case has evolved in recent months into a probe of whether any official committed perjury, obstructed justice or engaged in a conspiracy to keep secret any administration plans on how to deal with Wilson.
Libby Testimony
The attorneys and witnesses have said that Libby has previously testified under oath that he first learned of Plame's identity from reporters, a statement contradicted anew by the Times account. Libby's statement has already been challenged by NBC News reporter Tim Russert, who has denied Libby's assertion that he learned of Plame's identity from Russert.
Fitzgerald is also looking into any role that Cheney, 64, might have played in the affair. New York Times reporter Judith Miller wrote in the Oct. 16 New York Times that Fitzgerald asked her whether the vice president ``had known what his chief aide,'' Libby, ``was doing and saying'' regarding Wilson, a critic of the war in Iraq.
Miller testified after spending 85 days in jail for initially refusing to cooperate with Fitzgerald.
One lawyer intimately involved in the case, who like the others demanded anonymity, said one reason Fitzgerald was willing to send Miller to jail to compel testimony was because he was pursuing evidence the vice president may have been aware of the specifics of the anti-Wilson strategy.
In her Times account, Miller said she told Fitzgerald and the grand jury that Libby, 55, raised the subject of Wilson's wife during a meeting on June 23, 2003. That was before Wilson, 55, went public in a Times op-ed piece with his accusation that Bush and his aides had ``twisted'' intelligence findings to justify invading Iraq, although administration officials knew he was privately critical.
Cycloptichorn wrote:Well, I doubt that Clinton is the topic of this thread, now is it? Nice try though.
Parados endeavored to pin me down on what constitutes a lie ... so now I'm asking the question of him. Based on his last post, it appears he joins revel in her staunch belief that Clinton did not lie.
I await his response.
Indictments comming Wednesday
Source has a good reputation and good connections.---BBB
October 25, 2005
The Washington Note
By Steve Clemons
An uber-insider source has just reported the following to TWN (since confirmed by another independent source):
Indictments Coming Tomorrow; Targets Received Letters Today
1. 1-5 indictments are being issued. The source feels that it will be towards the higher end.
2. The targets of indictment have already received their letters.
3. The indictments will be sealed indictments and "filed" tomorrow.
4. A press conference is being scheduled for Thursday.
The shoe is dropping.
More soon.
It was interesting being in the states for the past 5 - 6 days, and noting how different the coverage really is between networks. And how different the coverage is here from the options available in the U.S.
Here's to hoping more Americans avail themselves regularly of non-U.S. media options <in addition to what is available locally - it's an interesting effect>.
CBS Reports Fitzgerald Will Make His Decision Known Wed.
BREAKING: CBS To Report Fitzgerald Will Make His Decision Known Tomorrow
From the CBS Evening News, to air at 6:30PM:
10/25/05
CBS' JOHN ROBERTS: Lawyers familiar with the case think Wednesday is when special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald will make known his decision, and that there will be indictments. Supporters say Rove and the vice president's chief of staff, Scooter Libby, are in legal jeopardy. But they insisted today the two are secondary players, that it was an unidentified Mr. X who actually gave the name of CIA agent V alerie Plame to reporters. Fitzgerald knows who Mr. X is, they say, and if he isn't indicted, there's no way Rove or Libby should be. But charges may not focus on the leak at all. Obstruction of justice or perjury are real possibilities. Did Rove or Libby change statements made under oath? Did they deliberately leave critical facts out of their testimony or did they honestly forget? Some Republicans urged Rove to step down if indicted. Not a happy prospect for president Bush.
Any guesses on the identity of Mr. X?
UPDATE: This bit from the CBS segment is also interesting -
SCHIEFFER: John, I am very interested in Mr. X. Is there any clue or hint as to whether he be - maybe someone who outranks Libby and Rove or would he be a lower-ranking official?
ROBERTS: The best guess is that Mr. X, even though his name is not known and some people are just speculating on who he might be or she might be, is somebody who is actually outside the White House, and in that case would be of a lower rank that both Rove and Libby.
BBB
CNN just announced that, via sources, Fitzgerald will not make any announcements today, Wednesday.
BBB
Merry Fitzmas, everybody!
