Fitzgerald Investigation of Leak of Identity of CIA Agent

My statement was too tepid, considering his hundreds (or thousands) of vicious and gratuitous attacks on others. Now, his attacks include racist ones, which should disgust everyone. No apology is warranted.

Parados wrote_

Re: genoves (Post 3680281)
I prefer the word "idiot" when it comes to describing you Possum.

As to your use of the word "niggardly", perhaps you should learn how to use it correctly. While I realize you are attempting to pretend you aren't using it in a racist fashion, your failure to use it correctly shows you don't have a clue what it really means and therefore are using it as a slur.

It's "denigrate", Possum. Making it into 2 words is nothing but an idiotic attempt on your part to make it seem racist while leaving yourself an out to claim you didn't mean to do that. If you had only used it that way once, I might allow you to claim you had mistyped it but when you use it more than once you lose the ability to claim you didn't realize it.

So Possum, when are you going to stop being so idiotic and ignorant? Repeating the same unsubstantiated crap when you attack others for not providing support only shows you for what you are.

****************************************************************

Oh, I do know what Niggardly means. Does everyone else know?

note below:

Details of the Niggardly Controversy

Washington, DC's black Mayor, Anthony Williams, gladly accepted the resignation of his white staff member, David Howard, because Mr. Howard uttered the word 'niggardly' in a private staff meeting.

Webster's Tenth Edition defines the word 'niggardly' to "grudgingly mean about spending or granting". The Barnhard Dictionary of Etymology traces the origins of 'niggardly' to the 1300's, and to the words 'nig' and 'ignon', meaning "miser" in Middle English. No where in any of these references is any mention of racial connotations associated with the word 'niggardly'.

In other words, it's a perfectly good and useful word. But there is the unfortunate coincidence that it starts with the same four letters as the word "nigger". The news media are so loathe to use the "N" word, that they've been substituting the phrase "racial slur", as in "...they mistook the word 'niggardly' for a racial slur..."

Washington, DC's population is 60% black, and it's citizens have been very critical of Mayor Williams for "not being black enough" -- especially because he hired several well-qualified whites to help him run this troubled city.

Racial intolerance, ignorance, and misplaced political correctness have cost a white mayoral aide his job in Washington, DC. And, as many of the other stories on Adversity.Net clearly illustrate, the "niggardly" controversy is only the tip of the "intolerance iceberg".

*****************************************************************

The white aide used the word correctly but even using a word which has four letters in it like Nigg is, for the abominably idiotic and overly sensitive Afro-Americans is a real window into American thinking on race.

Parados probably thinks this is RACIST also. In Parados' world it is forbidden to write anything about an Afro-American even if it is the truth--

Parados does not know what he is talking about. He does not know the definition of the word Racist. He does not know what RACISM is. He thinks that anyone who criticizes any Afro-American, is a Racist.

I have posted this definition a few times. None of the brain dead Left wingers can rebut it. If this is the true definition of Racism, then there are some specific criterions to be used when calling something racist.

Note:

RACISM-- A doctrine that INHERENT differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement.

My favorite African-American writers are Thomas Sowell, Shelby Steele and Bill Cosby.

They are obviously high achievers culturally and individually. They are Afro-Americans.

Parados cannot handle that distinction, I am sure!

Parados wrote:

How ironic Possum, after your failed attempt at the debate you wanted to have with me. You didn't provide any evidence. You only provided speculation and pretended that if the speculation wasn't rebutted then it must be true.

Maybe you should learn something Possum before you accuse others of ignorance.
************************************************************

What nonsense. Anyone who goes to the Global Warming site can easily see how you have been thorougly beaten. Give it up, parados!

Advocate wrote:

Re: mysteryman (Post 3680915)
My statement was too tepid, considering his hundreds (or thousands) of vicious and gratuitous attacks on others. Now, his attacks include racist ones, which should disgust everyone. No apology is warranted.

***************************************************

You have a point about disgust, Advocate. Disgust may be called for in some instances. However, if you read the quotes I made quoting the fanatical and rabid black power blacks, you may also feel disgust.

But, I must point out that the only way to get into those quotes by the extremists is to get people to discuss racism.

I have not seen any commentary by the left wing indicating that the statements of extremist black power advocates is disgusting.

Why not?

Advocate wrote:

My statement was too tepid, considering his hundreds (or thousands) of vicious and gratuitous attacks on others.

end of quote>

I am very much afraid, advocate, that your use of the word attacks( vicious, gratuitous and otherwise) does not conform with the definition of attack, gratuitous, vicious or otherwise.

Attack--To blame or abuse VIOLENTLY OR BITTERLY.

It is your contention that my posts are attacks. I emphatically disagree. If you were truly familiar with these threads you would know that the posts I make are calibrated in my defense. If you knew these threads, you would know that my rebuttals of someone like Joe from Chicago are based on his name calling and depiction of me as an animal.

I am polite to those who are polite to me.

If name callers like Parados( he loves to refer to H2O as "squirt", missname me, I will retaliate.

If you call me names, I retaliate. Get used to it!!!!

Obama has a great deal of experience:

l. He has gone through the experience of having his drunken father from Kenya( who was a Muslim)desert his mother and family when he was young.

That was Some experience.

2. He has gone through the experience of having his mother remarry a Muslim from Indonesia.

3, He has gone through the experience of attending a Moslem School in Indonesia for at least one year.

4. He has had experience with cocaine and other drugs( he admitted it in his autobiography.

5. He has had the experience of having some fine mentors--The most prominent of which was a person who had been a card carrying Communist.

6. He has had the experience of going to an obscure college on the West Coast --Occidental( from which no one can obtain a clear story of his success( or failure) there

7. He has had the experience of going to Columbia after Occidental. IT IS TO BE CLEARLY NOTED THAT HIS GRADES AT COLUMBIA WERE NOT, I REPEAT, WERE NOT, HIGH ENOUGH TO GIVE HIM AN ENTRY INTO HARVARD LAW SCHOOL EVEN IF HE SCORED A PERFECT SCORE ON HIS LSAT.( He is, of course, a beneficiary of Affirmative Action--his vaunted promise about 'transparency" does not hold in this regard.

8. He worked for a time in a large Chicago Law Firm. He has had experience in a large law firm but he either thought he was set for higher things or he did not feel he would be able to meet the rigorous demands of a top law firm.

9. He had the experience of being trained for his job by acolytes of Saul Alinsky-the famous Socialist.

10. He had the experience of working in the Ghetto( I am sure that he has a great deal of empathy for the "brothers and sisters" in the Ghetto but I do not think he ever worked with any other ethnic group.

11. He had the experience of being appointed to several Boards by the esteemed former "Weatherman" bomber, William Ayres.

12. He had the experience, while on that Board, of voting to give thousands of dollars to GUESS WHO? ACORN!!!

13. He had the experience of wheeling and dealing his way through the Primary for Senator while his "brothers" in the Legislature saw to it that he had no real opposition.

14. He had the experience of doing almost nothing--introduced no major bills--when he was in the Senate.

15. He had the experience of being identified as the MOST LIBERAL Senator in the Senate.

16. He had the experience of running for President while calling for all out voting help from ACORN.

17. He had the experience of winning the Presidency despite the fact that the majority of white voters did not vote for him.

18. And, now, he has the experience of being president where he has put into motion initiatives which will ruin the country--massive deficits--irrational plans to Socialize Medical care-a very very expensive proposition which will cost Billions---unwise attempts to cut the so-called global warming even though China and India will not cooperate and the US will lose millions of jobs if Obama's plans were enacted--and, last but not least, free( meaning taxpayer subsidized) education for all --even minorities, many of whom cannot read or write when they leave high school.

I dont think nor do I expect you to apologize for attacking his statements or his comments or his views.
I share your opinion of them, FWIW.

It was your comment about him dying that I think you need to apologize for.

0 Reply report Sat 20 Jun, 2009 02:54 am Obama has a great deal of experience:

l. He has gone through the experience of having his drunken father from Kenya( who was a Muslim)desert his mother and family when he was young.

That was Some experience.

2. He has gone through the experience of having his mother remarry a Muslim from Indonesia.

3, He has gone through the experience of attending a Moslem School in Indonesia for at least one year.

4. He has had experience with cocaine and other drugs( he admitted it in his autobiography.

5. He has had the experience of having some fine mentors--The most prominent of which was a person who had been a card carrying Communist.

6. He has had the experience of going to an obscure college on the West Coast --Occidental( from which no one can obtain a clear story of his success( or failure) there

7. He has had the experience of going to Columbia after Occidental. IT IS TO BE CLEARLY NOTED THAT HIS GRADES AT COLUMBIA WERE NOT, I REPEAT, WERE NOT, HIGH ENOUGH TO GIVE HIM AN ENTRY INTO HARVARD LAW SCHOOL EVEN IF HE SCORED A PERFECT SCORE ON HIS LSAT.( He is, of course, a beneficiary of Affirmative Action--his vaunted promise about 'transparency" does not hold in this regard.

8. He worked for a time in a large Chicago Law Firm. He has had experience in a large law firm but he either thought he was set for higher things or he did not feel he would be able to meet the rigorous demands of a top law firm.

9. He had the experience of being trained for his job by acolytes of Saul Alinsky-the famous Socialist.

10. He had the experience of working in the Ghetto( I am sure that he has a great deal of empathy for the "brothers and sisters" in the Ghetto but I do not think he ever worked with any other ethnic group.

11. He had the experience of being appointed to several Boards by the esteemed former "Weatherman" bomber, William Ayres.

12. He had the experience, while on that Board, of voting to give thousands of dollars to GUESS WHO? ACORN!!!

13. He had the experience of wheeling and dealing his way through the Primary for Senator while his "brothers" in the Legislature saw to it that he had no real opposition.

14. He had the experience of doing almost nothing--introduced no major bills--when he was in the Senate.

15. He had the experience of being identified as the MOST LIBERAL Senator in the Senate.

16. He had the experience of running for President while calling for all out voting help from ACORN.

17. He had the experience of winning the Presidency despite the fact that the majority of white voters did not vote for him.

18. And, now, he has the experience of being president where he has put into motion initiatives which will ruin the country--massive deficits--irrational plans to Socialize Medical care-a very very expensive proposition which will cost Billions---unwise attempts to cut the so-called global warming even though China and India will not cooperate and the US will lose millions of jobs if Obama's plans were enacted--and, last but not least, free( meaning taxpayer subsidized) education for all --even minorities, many of whom cannot read or write when they leave high school.

Advocate wrote:

Re: genoves (Post 3680281)
You are the most obnoxious POS ever to post in this forum. Should you drop dead, no one would shed a tear.

*********************************************************************

Now that's not nice, Advocate. But I have an idea which might make you happy.

I must, however, crib from one of my favorite playwrites-Rostand and from his marvelous play-Cyrano De Bergerac.

One who would try to admonish me must have either a great supply of wit or have earned scholastic letters--but of wit, advocate, you never had an atom, and of letters you need but three to set you down--A S S --an Ass.

But, I must really suggest that your feeling that I am obnoxious to the extreme gives me a sort of satisfaction. Since I am aware that you are, in most areas, except for your brave defense of Israel, on the far left, your judgment of Obnoxiousness on my part signals to me that I have indeed been successful in demolishing some of the more erroneous liberal idiocies.

For that, I thank you-Advocate.

But, I have a better suggestions. If my obnoxiousness bothers you so greatly and if you are certain in your defense of your "truths", then you must, you cannot falter, you must bring those truths to bear so that my obnoxiousness will be fully extirpated. If you can do that, Advocate, you need not be faced with my obnoxiousness again!

I have posted this definition a few times. None of the brain dead Left wingers can rebut it. If this is the true definition of Racism, then there are some specific criterions to be used when calling something racist.

Note:

RACISM-- A doctrine that INHERENT differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement.

My favorite African-American writers are Thomas Sowell, Shelby Steele and Bill Cosby.

They are obviously high achievers culturally and individually. They are Afro-Americans.

Parados wrote:

As to your use of the word "niggardly", perhaps you should learn how to use it correctly.


Webster's Tenth Edition defines the word 'niggardly' to "grudgingly mean about spending or granting".

Genoves wrote:


I don't understand,teenyboone. Why do you want to de nigrate me? You really should explain instead of using just one word. Why are you being so niggardly?

I am very much afraid that Parados needs a refresher in basic writing and grammar.

I will rewrite the message I wrote to teenyboone replacing the word "niggardly" with the Webster definition.

Rewrite:

I don't understand, teenyboone, Why do you want to de nigrate me? You really should explain instead of using just one word. Why are you being so GRUDGINGLY MEAN ABOUT SPENDING OR GRANTING?

Pity, but I guess it is all over for the Wilson/Plame civil lawsuit.


June 22, 2009
Categories: Obama Administration

Supreme Court rejects Wilson/Plame suit

The Supreme Court has refused to take up the lawsuit Valerie Plame Wilson and Joe Wilson brought against the Bush administration over the exposure of Mrs. Wilson's employment at the CIA.

The justices denied certiorari without comment this morning. A district court judge also rejected the suit, as did the D.C. Circuit in a 2-1 ruling. The lower courts said individuals like the Wilsons could not sue government employees for alleged privacy violations because the law Congress wrote dealing with such violations, the Privacy Act, directs liability to the government.

Last month, the Obama administration's representative before the high court, Solicitor General Elena Kagan, urged the justices not to hear the case.

The exposure of Wilson's tie to the CIA led to a special counsel investigation of the leak, which in turn resulted in the indictment and conviction of Vice President Cheney's chief of staff Lewis Libby on obstruction of justice charges. Libby's sentence was later commuted by President George W. Bush.



By Josh Gerstein 11:01 AM
Politico.com

Case closed, you lost, no crime ever occurred according to the results. The only thing that happened is Scooter Libby got caught for a supposed procedural crime during an investigation into a supposed crime that apparently never occurred. Conclusion, a waste of taxpayers money.

Your statements don't meet the straight-face test. Obviously, you are a right-wing extremist who can never fault a fellow Republican.

Okie_ I don't think that Advocate is aware of the background of the Plame case. Not the following( If you wish to read a great link, go to "Who is Lying about Iraq" by Norman Podhoretz)

Note:

Libby stands accused of making false statements to the FBI and of committing perjury in testifying before a grand jury that had been convened to find out who in the Bush administration had “outed” Valerie Plame, a CIA agent married to the retired ambassador Joseph C. Wilson, IV. The supposed purpose of leaking this classified information to the press was to retaliate against Wilson for having “debunked” (in his words) “the lies that led to war.”

Now, as it happens, Libby was not charged with having outed Plame but only with having lied about when and from whom he first learned that she worked for the CIA. Moreover, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor who brought the indictment against him, made a point of emphasizing that


[t]his indictment is not about the war. This indictment is not about the propriety of the war. And people who believe fervently in the war effort, people who oppose it, people who have mixed feelings about it should not look to this indictment for any resolution of how they feel or any vindication of how they feel.

This is simply an indictment that says, in a national-security investigation about the compromise of a CIA officer’s identity that may have taken place in the context of a very heated debate over the war, whether some person"a person, Mr. Libby"lied or not.

The interesting thing is, had Libby told the truth to the investigators, there is the likelihood that people would have been charged with outing Plame.

And Valerie Plame, a specialist on WMD in the CIA, wrote in her very own book that she feared WMD would be used on our military as she watched us enter Iraq. I guess she never talked to her husband that claimed he found out Bush lied us into war when he went down to talk to the guys in Niger over tea. Remember, the trip he volunteered to go on at his own expense, just imagine how benevolent that was of him! Why, he was so indignant, he found out Hussein sent his guys to Niger but never bought any yellowcake, so it was all total fiction, he came back and guess what, he did nothing, except tell the CIA not much, but he did write an oped piece to attack that terrible guy he had it in for, George Bush. I wonder why he never told his wife to not worry about WMD anymore, after all he had the final scoop on it over tea down there? I wonder what the Wilsons are up to these days? Calling more lawyers? Maybe some publishers, maybe another book? How about Vanity Fair, anything would be nice.

I DEFY ANYONE TO PROVIDE ANY OFFICIAL CHARGE MADE BY THE PROSECUTOR FITZPATRICK WHICH SAID THAT LIBBY OUTED PLAME.

THERE WAS NO CHARGE BY FITZPATRICK THAT LIBBY OUTED PLAME--NONE--NONE--

Okie_ I don't think that Advocate is aware of the background of the Plame case. Not the following( If you wish to read a great link, go to "Who is Lying about Iraq" by Norman Podhoretz)

Note:

Libby stands accused of making false statements to the FBI and of committing perjury in testifying before a grand jury that had been convened to find out who in the Bush administration had “outed” Valerie Plame, a CIA agent married to the retired ambassador Joseph C. Wilson, IV. The supposed purpose of leaking this classified information to the press was to retaliate against Wilson for having “debunked” (in his words) “the lies that led to war.”

Now, as it happens, Libby was not charged with having outed Plame but only with having lied about when and from whom he first learned that she worked for the CIA. Moreover, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor who brought the indictment against him, made a point of emphasizing that


[t]his indictment is not about the war. This indictment is not about the propriety of the war. And people who believe fervently in the war effort, people who oppose it, people who have mixed feelings about it should not look to this indictment for any resolution of how they feel or any vindication of how they feel.

This is simply an indictment that says, in a national-security investigation about the compromise of a CIA officer’s identity that may have taken place in the context of a very heated debate over the war, whether some person"a person, Mr. Libby"lied or not.

Even Obama, the Messiah, did not back Plame.

Note:

Plame v. Cheney#Appeal
The Wilsons have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to hear their appeal of the U.S. Court of Appeals ruling. On May 20, 2009, the Justice Department, in a brief filed by Solicitor General Elena Kagan, Assistant Attorney General Tony West, and Justice Department attorneys Mark B. Stern and Charles W. Scarborough, took the position that, "The decision of the court of appeals is correct and does not conflict with any decision of this Court or any other court of appeals,...Further review is unwarranted." Melanie Sloan, an attorney for the Wilsons and the executive director of the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, released a statement that read, "We are deeply disappointed that the Obama administration has failed to recognize the grievous harm top Bush White House officials inflicted on Joe and Valerie Wilson...The government's position cannot be reconciled with President Obama's oft-stated commitment to once again make government officials accountable for their actions."[31]

According to the brief filed by the Justice Department:

"Petitioners allege that Novak's July 14, 2003 column publicly disclosed Ms. Wilson's covert CIA employment and that that disclosure 'destroyed her cover as a classified CIA employee.' Petitioners, however, allege that Novak's source was Armitage, and do not allege that any of the three defendants against whom Mr. Wilson presses his First Amendment claim-Cheney, Rove, and Libby-caused that column to be published. In the absence of factual allegations that Mr. Wilson's alleged injury from the public disclosure of his wife's CIA employment is 'fairly traceable' to alleged conduct by Cheney, Rove, or Libby, petitioners have failed to establish Article III jurisdiction over Mr. Wilson's First Amendment claim