Fitzgerald Investigation of Leak of Identity of CIA Agent

okie, You are a loser - first class. You can't even defend your criticisms. Loser.

Michael would consider me a loser too. Suits me. If kook's opinions mattered, it would matter, but they don't.

Kook's opinions don't matter. That is why almost everyone here ignores you.

okie, You still haven't identified what is wrong with Michael Moore's "sicko." You lambast with ignorance; typical okie.

Without getting involved in your fight with Okie, lets start with the fact that Michael Moore altered the front page of a newspaper in "Fahrenheit 9/11".

You might want to read this pdf also...

http://www.davekopel.org/terror/59Deceits.pdf

It details 59 lies or deceits in Fahrenheit 911

Then there are the lies he told about Charlton Heston, the ease of getting a gun from a bank in Mi, etc.

F9/11 was all about the truth. BTW, it brought out the deplorable conditions at Walter Reed Hospital years before the Wash. Post made headlines with its story.

The film was swiftboated, which is the treatment given anything or anybody criticizing the right.

Sicko does a great job bringing out the terrible state of healthcare in our country, and is funny to boot.

So, you dont think he altered the newspaper?
Even though he admitted doing it?

I havent seen sicko, so I cant comment on it.
BUT, I have seen F911, and some of his other films.

He took many liberties with the truth. If you dont think he lied, then you have a strange defenition of what truth is.

MM, I love the lies and half truths told to dispute Moore's "lies and half truths"

This one is quite humorous

Was Mel Carnahan dead or not? If he was dead then Ashcroft DID lose to a dead guy on the ballot. Moore didn't lie. It's just that it seems some didn't like the truth as he told it.

This one is quite funny. Bush beat the rap because they didn't' find enough evidence. Not because there was "no evidence." I don't think anyone can deny that 1. Bush was an insider. 2. Bush traded his stock when he had information not available to the public. 3. Bush failed to report that sale as required by law. To claim there was "no evidence" would be the same sort of exaggerated stuff that Moore was accused of. I think Bush was lucky he did it in a period before Enron. If the same action were to be done today he probably wouldn't have "beat the rap" because the investigation would have been more thorough. Think Martha Steward. His failure to "file the proper paperwork on time" would have been under more scrutiny.


Funny... since Moore never claimed Bush met with the Taliban..
But we might as well dispute something Moore never said since we are so interested in "lies and halftruths."
This is what was in the movie...
It seems Moore never said Bush met with the Taliban.

I'm not saying Moore didnt' twist things to his viewpoint but if you want to attack Moore than you damn well better not use his tactics or worse or you look like an even bigger hypocrite than Moore could ever be since Moore admits he has a viewpoint.

I suggest you pull up one of the old threads on F911 that quite surely already refute your allegations rather than waste everyone's time rehashing and refuting the bullshit allegations contained in the swift-boating of the movie.

Still waiting.

I thought you left this board to regain your sanity or something?

I refuse to provide proof that the sun comes up. Michael Moore lies are self evident. If you or anyone else can't figure it out, I feel sorry for you, but I ain't wasting time on such trivial pursuits as to try to prove something to somebody that is that dense. I already said as much.

LOL

She feigned leaving this board in what proved to be just another attempt to garner sympathy and attention for herself. As we have all come to expect, she failed to be true to her word.

Typical Roxxxxxanne/Chrisseee/Harper/Nikkki.

I've met Roxxxanne, and she has more credibility and content in her posts on a2k than Ticomaya ever will; as JTT says, Ticomaya's posts are mostly "throw ups." Over 99 percent of Ticomaya's posts are attacks of one kind or another; he still hasn't grown up from his teen years!

Gonna need an arc welder to get through the irony...

People of the same ilk think and act alike. Even your last post proves that!

Ticomaya almost always scopes out an issue and figures it out for what it is, and this thread is no exception, concerning the Wilsons, who by the way I hope they are happy with their books and movies. Good riddance from the CIA.

By the way, doesn't JTT need to learn not to quote himself and make it look like something Ticomaya said?

Here is an interesting piece on Armitage, in which he blames the White House for his leaking Plame's ID, and tries to lessen his guilt in the matter. He says he was foolish, when he was really treasonous.


Plame leaker blames White House memo for his 'foolish' actionsDavid Edwards and Muriel Kane
Published: Monday November 12, 2007

The outer now agrees with the outed that it was a foolish thing to have done. However, former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage's real motivations when he told columnist Robert Novak in 2003 that Valerie Plame Wilson worked at the CIA still remain in question.

"I think it was extraordinarily foolish of me," Armitage agreed, after CNN's Wolf Blitzer played him a clip of Wilson saying recently, "Mr. Armitage did a very foolish thing. He's been around Washington for decades. He should know better. He's a senior government official."

Armitage insisted, however, that "there was no ill intent on my part. I'd never seen, ever, in 43 years of having a security clearance, a covered operative's name in a memo." This was a reference to an internal White House memo on Ambassador Joseph Wilson's trip to the African nation of Niger to investigate claims that Saddam Hussein has been attempting to purchase uranium.

When journalist David Corn revealed Armitage's role last year, he explained that "Amitage had been sent a key memo about Wilson's trip that referred to his wife and her CIA connection, and this memo had been written, according to special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, at the request of I. Lewis Scooter Libby, the vice president's chief of staff. ... The memo included information on Valerie Wilson's role in a meeting at the CIA that led to her husband's trip. This critical memo was ... based on notes that were not accurate."

Armitage thus appeared to be attempting to cast the ultimate blame for Plame's outing on Scooter Libby and Vice President Cheney. He also took pains in his interview with Blitzer to stress that the memo he'd seen described Ambassador Joseph Wilson's wife only as a CIA analyst who "was publicly chairing a meeting" to discuss the possibility of her husband going to Africa and that he had no way of knowing she was covert.

"The only way I knew a Mrs. Wilson -- not Mrs. Plame -- worked at the agency was because I saw it in a memo," Armitage said. "Even Mr. Novak has said that he used the word 'operative' and misused it. No one ever said 'operative.'"

In focusing on those two specific points, Armitage appeared to be making a case that he could not have been the source for Robert Novak's statement in his July 14, 2003 column that "Wilson never worked for the CIA, but his wife, Valerie Plame, is an agency operative on weapons of mass destruction."

Since his involvement was revealed, Armitage has consistently presented himself as a non-partisan State Department figure with no connection to the White House campaign against Ambassador Wilson and no motivation for having revealed the identify of a covert CIA operative.

However, Robert Novak noted last year, "Armitage did not slip me this information as idle chitchat, as he now suggests. He made clear that he considered it especially suited for my column. ... During his quarter of a century in Washington, I had had no contact with Armitage before our fateful interview. I tried to see him in the first 2 1/2 years of the Bush administration, but he rebuffed me -- summarily and with disdain, I thought. Then, without explanation, in June 2003, Armitage's office said the deputy secretary would see me."

Armitage's claims of non-partisanship are further undercut by a speech he delivered in Australia in August 2003, in which he stated, "I don't want to leave this podium without addressing something that has aroused a great deal of concern here and in my country, and that is the fact that we have not yet found enough evidence of Saddam Hussein's programs to develop weapons of mass destruction. We will. I have absolute confidence about that. Indeed, the fact that it has taken us this long to find the evidence is a chilling reminder that these programs are far too easy to move, and I believe far too easy to hide."

Finally, David Corn has cast doubt on Armitage's excuse that he'd merely gotten carried away in spreading gossip, pointing out that "when Armitage testified before the Iran-contra grand jury many years earlier, he had described himself as 'a terrible gossip.' Iran-contra independent counsel Lawrence Walsh subsequently accused him of providing 'false testimony' to investigators but said that he could not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Armitage's misstatements had been 'deliberate.'"