Pathetic Pusillanimous Parados posts but gives no evidence--Only his unsourced blah-blah-blah.
Try to rebut this-Pathetic Parados---
The essay below describes the findings in the new book by Isikoff from Newsweek---
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
August 29, 2006
Plame and the 'Bush Lied' Meme
By Jack Kelly
A new book by Michael Isikoff, an investigative reporter for Newsweek, and David Corn, who writes for the far left wing magazine The Nation, casts many powerful people in Washington in an unflattering light -- but not the people who Mr. Isikoff and Mr. Corn wish to besmirch.
A brief review for those of you who have lives, and who consequently haven't been following closely the details of the Plame Name Game: In his 2003 State of the Union address, President Bush said: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
First in leaks to reporters, and then in his own op-ed in the New York Times, a retired diplomat, Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, said the president was lying. His claim to speak with authority was that in the spring of 2002, the CIA had sent him to Niger to see if Saddam had tried to buy uranium there.
Mr. Wilson's charge was important because it marked the beginning of the "Bush lied" meme about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. But investigations by the Senate Intelligence Committee; the Robb-Silberman Commission on prewar intelligence, and the British Butler Commission all concluded it was Mr. Wilson who was not telling the truth. Saddam had indeed tried to buy uranium in Africa, as even Mr. Wilson himself had acknowledged to the CIA officers who debriefed him after his Niger trip.
One of the false claims Mr. Wilson made was that he had been sent to Niger at the request of Vice President Dick Cheney. In his July 14, 2003 column, Robert Novak disclosed that he had been sent instead at the insistence of his wife, Valerie Plame, who worked at the CIA.
Ms. Plame had once been an undercover operative. Concern was expressed that the leaker had violated the Intelligence Identities Protection Act.
Mr. Wilson blamed the leak on White House political guru Karl Rove, claiming it was payback for his "whistle-blowing." A special prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, was appointed to investigate the charge. Mr. Fitzgerald eventually indicted I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, then the chief of staff to the vice president, on a charge of having lied to a grand jury about from whom he had learned of Ms. Plame's occupation. He is awaiting trial.
No indictments have been brought on the charge Mr. Fitzgerald was appointed to investigate, because it is clear there was no violation of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. The act applies only to those who are operating under cover overseas, or who have done so within five years of the disclosure of their identities. Ms. Plame had been manning a desk at CIA headquarters in Langley, Va. for longer than that.
Mr. Isikoff and Mr. Corn disclose that it was then Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage who disclosed Ms. Plame's identity to Bob Novak, which is not exactly news to those who have been following the case. But Mr. Isikoff and Mr. Corn provide details which reflect poorly on Mr. Armitage, Mr. Fitzgerald, and the journalists who knew the truth at the time.
Mr. Armitage disclosed to his boss, Secretary of State Colin Powell, and to Justice Department officials his role in the case in October, 2003, after a second Novak column, Mr. Isikoff and Mr. Corn say.
For more than three years, Mr. Rove and Mr. Libby have been accused, falsely, of being the source of the leak. Mr. Armitage, Mr. Powell, and Justice department officials knew the truth, but said nothing. Clarice Feldman, a Washington, D.C. lawyer, described Mr. Armitage's silence as "inexplicable and perfidious."
"Had he spoken out publicly immediately, could there have been a reason for the press to have demanded the appointment of the feckless special prosecutor?" she asked.
Mr. Fitzgerald knew in his first few days on the job that Mr. Armitage was the leaker; that the leak was inadvertent, and that the Intelligence Identities Act hadn't been violated. Yet he has persisted in a sham prosecution.
Mr. Isikoff and Mr. Corn write that: "the Plame leak in Novak's column has long been cited by Bush administration critics as a deliberate act of payback, orchestrated to punish and/or discredit Joe Wilson after he charged that the Bush administration had misled the American public about prewar intelligence."
They add, lamely, that: "The Armitage news does not fit neatly into that framework."
They don't mention that Mr. Isikoff and (especially) Mr. Corn have been among the journalists flogging this meme, and the time that it takes to research and write a book indicates they've known for quite some time that it isn't true. They're only willing to tell the truth, now, for money.
end of quote
Particularly interesting points:
c
**************************************
Anyone who has evidence that any of those points are in error, are asked to provide it!
Then Okie wrote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All correct Bernard, and although I've posted this already, it is a good quick summary:
http://levin.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZjRkNzg4NmRjNTcwZWYzYmI5NjBjOTI1NWVjZjNmNTc=
Here is that article in its entirety, which is a good short summary:
"The more I think about this Fitzgerald investigation, the more astonished I become. Richard Armitage was Bob Novak's "source" ?- i.e., he identified Valerie Plame ?- which, incidentally, is clearly not a crime and Armitage has not been charged with any offense. And prosecutors knew Armitage was the "source" almost immediately after beginning their investigation because Armitage confessed. Indeed, when he thought he may have done something wrong, he appears to have cried on many shoulders. Armitage told his boss, Colin Powell, that he was the source, as well as other State Department and Justice Department officials. He told the Special Counsel's people. And not one of them ?- Armitage, Powell, Patrick Fitzgerald, et al. ?- had the guts or integrity to tell the public that the original source was Armitage. Why were they protecting him from public scrutiny? By their silence, Armitage and Powell allowed two innocent men, Lewis Libby and Karl Rove, to be smeared as speculation about them being Novak's original source ran rampant. Liberal commentators and politicians had a blast. The truth be damned.
I also believe two things are very apparent. First, the media like Armitage and Powell. They've been great anti-Bush sources over the years. They run in the same social circles in Washington. So, many in the media protected Armitage and Powell. Not until later, when Bob Woodward had to come forward and admit that Armitage had also fingered Plame to him, did it become more difficult for the media to continue to cover-up for their favorite Bush administration officials.
Second, Fitzgerald's investigation is a sham. That's right, a sham. He knew several things early on: 1. Armitage was the original source; 2. disclosing Plame's identity was not a crime; and 3. the investigation was launched due to political pressure from Capitol Hill, especially Chuck Schumer (who was working with Joe Wilson, and who is also the head of the Democrat Senatorial Campaign Committee). Rather than put an end to this, Fitzgerald appears to have enjoyed the spotlight and adulation from the president's opponents, pursuing "the case" as if he were chasing mobsters or terrorists. He sought and received from his long-time friend, James Comey, extraordinary authority which Fitzgerald used to put pressure on reporters and news organizations as he widened his investigation in pursuit of anyone who might have revealed Plame's name. But to what end? That's not a crime in itself. To catch officials in memory lapses or ?- to be charitable to prosecutors ?- false statements or perjury? You don't conduct investigations to catch people in lies. You conduct investigations to uncover or expose crimes and punish those who are responsible. Meanwhile, the president's top advisor sat in the dock, waiting for word whether he'd be indicted, during a good portion of the administration. Only a few months ago did Fitzgerald finally inform Rove that he was in the clear.
The fact is that there was never an underlying crime, period. Yet, as I wrote at the time, many of Fitzgerald's comments at his press conference, at which he announced the Libby indictment, were wildly deceiving. The indictment had nothing to do with any underlying crime. This entire enterprise is disgraceful, from beginning to end."
end of quote
**********************************************************
and I am certain that Pathetic Parados cannot bring any evidence to bear( besides his unsourced blah-blah-blah) that refutes the following:
l. Mr. Wilson was not telling the truth about the attempt of Iraq to buy Yellowcake Uranium in Africa.
2. No indictments have been brought on the charge Mr. Fitzgerald was appointed to investigate because it was clear that there was no violation of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act
3. Mr. Fitzgerald knew in his first few days on the case that Mr. Armitage was the inadvertent leaker and that THE INTELLIGENCE IDENTITIES ACT HAD NOT BEEN VIOLATED.
Since Parados knows NOTHING about law, he is unaware that since the special prosecutor did not ISSUE AN INDICTMENT THAT THE INTELLIGENCE ACT HAD NOT BEEN VIOLATED, the issue is MOOT!
The left wing was certain that Vice President Cheney was in error when he met with energy executives and a lawsuit was filed because he did not release the identities of those executives. THE COURTS THREW THAT LAWSUIT OUT JUST AS THEY WILL THROW PLAME'S LAWSUIT OUT!!!
