Fitzgerald Investigation of Leak of Identity of CIA Agent

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Roxxxanne wrote:
Whoa, can I get some of what you are smoking? I thought this White Widow was killah but it pales to whatever you have in your stash!

White Widow?

Gotta get with the Maui-Kush crossbreeds they have in the Mission these days.

I tell ya, the clinics... phenomenal.

Cycloptichorn

You potheads are so hip.

0 Replies

Ticomaya wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
Roxxxanne wrote:
Whoa, can I get some of what you are smoking? I thought this White Widow was killah but it pales to whatever you have in your stash!

White Widow?

Gotta get with the Maui-Kush crossbreeds they have in the Mission these days.

I tell ya, the clinics... phenomenal.

Cycloptichorn

You potheads are so hip.

0 Replies

Hunh?

Oh ... yeah.

Uhhhh .... here ya go. Sorry - looks like it went out.

Where'd those cookies go?

0 Replies

Back to the Fitzgerald investigation

Judge Settles Classified Info Fight in Libby Case

0 Replies

okie wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
Hastert, of course, was looking to set the precedent because he knows for a fact that FBI agents looking through Republican offices will find stuff that they shouldn't. Not hard to figure that one out.

Quote:
If this was a Republican, he would be gone long ago, for more than a couple reasons, one they would probably show remorse and two, their own party would place much pressure on them to quit.

LOL

Tom DeLay? Hello??!?!

The Republicans kicked out several members of the Ethics committee because they censored him, remember?

Where were the Republican calls for him to resign? How about Ney, or Cunningham? They didn't exist.

Cycloptichorn

Aren't Ney and Cunningham gone? And what is DeLay doing now? And if you wish to equate breaking convoluted campaign finance rules with personal embezzlement, I would have to conclude you have things way out of whack in your mind. How many campaign finance rules have been broken by Democrats with hardly a word said, including Gore, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, and even Nancy Pelosi herself, how long would you like the list, cyclops? Did Tom DeLay get campaign funds from China? I don't recall that happening at least, as it did with Clinton, and of course nothing happened, nothing, zip nothing, because your party does not care and never will apparently.

Hillary takes the apparent equivalent of a kickback from a political friend of a hundred grand, and nobody cares, nothing, zip, nothing, cyclops. Its been a few years ago, but corruption is corruption. If the Democrats truly cared, it would matter, but it doesn't does it?

As I recall, the Republicans had a rule that if one of their own was indicted, no matter how ridiculous it was, even by some partisan judge in Texas, it was their own rule to remove them from their leadership position or whatever as I recall. Thats what happened to DeLay as I recall. And Democrats have no such rule in their party, so they skate. Isn't that right, cyclops?

You'd better check your memory, there, Okie: that rule was changed by the Republicans to keep Delay from having to step down in 2004.

It wasn't until it was clear that DeLay was deep in the Abramoff mess that DeLay asked them to change the rule back, and they did, in 2005. So don't give me any moral superiority bullsh*t on that one.

Ney and Cunningham are only gone because they are in jail. They wouldn't have been kicked out by their own caucus, for sure.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Ticomaya wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
Roxxxanne wrote:
Whoa, can I get some of what you are smoking? I thought this White Widow was killah but it pales to whatever you have in your stash!

White Widow?

Gotta get with the Maui-Kush crossbreeds they have in the Mission these days.

I tell ya, the clinics... phenomenal.

Cycloptichorn

You potheads are so hip.

Haha, whatever, square, you know you love it

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

parados, Thanks for the link. It includes this: U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton also ordered the review by national security agencies of classified documents requested by Libby - Vice President Cheney's former chief of staff - for his defense of perjury and obstruction charges in the Valerie Plame, CIA/Leak case, must be completed by December 22.

0 Replies

Did I hear Joe Wilson does not wish to testify? This would be no surprise for this totally, absolutely, phony character that started this whole mess, but now does he have no guts to appear on the witness stand? What could this guy be afraid of?

0 Replies

okie wrote:

Did I hear Joe Wilson does not wish to testify? This would be no surprise for this totally, absolutely, phony character that started this whole mess, but now does he have no guts to appear on the witness stand? What could this guy be afraid of?

If you'd not only heard but additionally read that news, you'd perhaps understood it better.

But here it is:

Quote:

Posted on Wed, Dec. 20, 2006

Wilson challenges subpoena in CIA case

Associated Press

WASHINGTON - Former ambassador Joseph Wilson asked a federal judge Wednesday not to force him to testify in the CIA leak case and accused former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby of trying to harass him on the witness stand.

Libby, who faces perjury and obstruction charges, subpoenaed Wilson as a defense witness this month. Libby's attorney, William Jeffress, said in court Tuesday that was a precautionary move and he did not expect to put Wilson on the stand.

Libby is accused of lying to investigators about his conversations with reporters regarding Wilson's wife, outed CIA operative Valerie Plame. Plame and Wilson have sued Libby and other Bush administration officials, accusing them of plotting to leak Plame's identity as retribution for Wilson's criticism of prewar intelligence on Iraq.

"Mr. Libby should not be permitted to compel Mr. Wilson's testimony at trial either for the purpose of harassing Mr. Wilson or to gain an advantage in the civil case," Wilson's attorneys wrote.

While Wilson and Plame are at the center of the CIA leak scandal, Wilson is a minor figure in Libby's perjury trial. U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton has sought to keep much of the back story of the leak out of the case.

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

okie wrote:
Did I hear Joe Wilson does not wish to testify? This would be no surprise for this totally, absolutely, phony character that started this whole mess, but now does he have no guts to appear on the witness stand? What could this guy be afraid of?

If you'd not only heard but additionally read that news, you'd perhaps understood it better.

But here it is:

Quote:

Posted on Wed, Dec. 20, 2006

Wilson challenges subpoena in CIA case

Associated Press

WASHINGTON - Former ambassador Joseph Wilson asked a federal judge Wednesday not to force him to testify in the CIA leak case and accused former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby of trying to harass him on the witness stand.

Libby, who faces perjury and obstruction charges, subpoenaed Wilson as a defense witness this month. Libby's attorney, William Jeffress, said in court Tuesday that was a precautionary move and he did not expect to put Wilson on the stand.

Libby is accused of lying to investigators about his conversations with reporters regarding Wilson's wife, outed CIA operative Valerie Plame. Plame and Wilson have sued Libby and other Bush administration officials, accusing them of plotting to leak Plame's identity as retribution for Wilson's criticism of prewar intelligence on Iraq.

"Mr. Libby should not be permitted to compel Mr. Wilson's testimony at trial either for the purpose of harassing Mr. Wilson or to gain an advantage in the civil case," Wilson's attorneys wrote.

While Wilson and Plame are at the center of the CIA leak scandal, Wilson is a minor figure in Libby's perjury trial. U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton has sought to keep much of the back story of the leak out of the case.

So now being able to face your accuser and asking them questions on the witness stand is "harrassment." You have to be kidding, Walter? I understand this perfectly, Walter, do you? Wilson does not wish to answer embarrassing questions. He is the one that started this whole thing, Walter. Who is being harrassed here in reality? It isn't the phony Wilson, I can tell you that.

0 Replies

okie wrote:

So now being able to face your accuser and asking them questions on the witness stand is "harrassment." You have to be kidding, Walter? I understand this perfectly, Walter, do you? Wilson does not wish to answer embarrassing questions. He is the one that started this whole thing, Walter. Who is being harrassed here in reality? It isn't the phony Wilson, I can tell you that.

WTF??? Wilson started the whole thing? Wilson is Libby's accuser? How bizarre is that POV? What is Wilson supposed to testify about? I don't see how his testimony would be material. And no, it's not harrassment [sic] but it might be harassment.

0 Replies

Isn't the real question, "who leaked an undercover agent?"

0 Replies

edit duplicate

0 Replies

Wilson's challenge stands a good chance - Joe, Valerie, and the purported leak are somewhere between peripheral to and irrelevant to the matters at issue in the Libby indictment. What/why Libby testified to doesn't much matter; the issue is whether he testified honestly.

0 Replies

Okie, you must know that Wilson is not the accuser. The state is accusing Libby of lying to the FBI and otherwise obstructing justice. Demanding Wilson testimony is a form of grey mail.

It is truly sickening the way the right denigrates decent, accomplished, and patriotic people because they have the temerity of criticizing the administration. Wilson and his wife served the taxpayers with distinction, and have been wrongfully attacked in return. There was similar treatment of Kerry, Pelosi, et al. And this is from people who had a moron and war criminal elected president.

0 Replies

yhowza!

0 Replies

Advocate wrote:

Okie, you must know that Wilson is not the accuser. The state is accusing Libby of lying to the FBI and otherwise obstructing justice. Demanding Wilson testimony is a form of grey mail.

It is truly sickening the way the right denigrates decent, accomplished, and patriotic people because they have the temerity of criticizing the administration. Wilson and his wife served the taxpayers with distinction, and have been wrongfully attacked in return. There was similar treatment of Kerry, Pelosi, et al. And this is from people who had a moron and war criminal elected president.

Technically, yes, you are correct that Wilson is not the accuser. Practically, I think I am correct in believing Wilson and Plame are behind all of this, and started all of this. If they have nothing to hide, I think they have information that could be very pertinent to the case. And I fault Fitzgerald for not accessing what they might know under oath, in terms of Plame's covert status, her behavior, who she told what, who Wilson told and what, and whether it was consistent with the covert status she claimed. Rumor has it they were on the cocktail circuit in D.C. and her job was no secret. After all, we want the truth do we not?

And it is the Wilsons that have filed the civil suit, so they are the accusers in that regard.

And I disagree, I don't think Wilson served the taxpayers with distinction. He went to Niger and came back with information that shed no conclusive light or particularly new light on what the CIA thought about the yellowcake in Niger. And then Wilson began writing oped pieces about his non-conclusive work, as if it was conclusive. I think they had a personal and political vendetta against the administration, and I do not view that as serving with distinction.

0 Replies

From Wikipedia.

The Niger uranium documents refers to falsified classified documents initially "uncovered" by Italian intelligence which depicted an attempt by Iraq's Saddam Hussein regime to purchase yellowcake uranium from the country of Niger during the Iraq disarmament crisis.
On the basis of these documents and other indicators, the United States and United Kingdom governments asserted that Iraq had attempted to procure nuclear material for the purpose of creating "weapons of mass destruction," in defiance of United Nations sanctions.

This claim was one of the political justifications for the 2003 invasion of Iraq and led to considerable embarrassment when discredited.

Yellowcake, a mixture of different uranium oxides and other uranium compounds, is an intermediary stage in the production of enriched uranium for use in a nuclear reactor or a nuclear weapon.

[edit] Iraq and WMD
In late 2002, the George W. Bush administration was soliciting support for a policy of military force to disarm Iraq of weapons. The U.S. government had for some time alleged that Iraq both possessed and was continuing to develop weapons of mass destruction including nuclear, biological, and chemical arms. Among the allegations was that Iraq had attempted to purchase yellowcake. In particular, CIA director George Tenet and Secretary of State Colin Powell both cited an attempted yellowcake purchase from Niger in September testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. At that time, the UK government also publicly reported an attempted purchase from an unnamed African country. In December, the State Department issued a fact sheet listing the alleged Niger yellowcake affair in a report entitled "Illustrative Examples of Omissions From the Iraqi Declaration to the United Nations Security Council."[1] In his January 2003 State of the Union address, President George W. Bush repeated the allegation, citing British intelligence. The administration later conceded that evidence in support of the claim was inconclusive and stated "these 16 words should never have been included" in Bush's address to the nation, attributing the error to the CIA.[2]

[edit] Initial doubts
The classified documents, which appeared to depict an Iraqi attempt to purchase yellowcake uranium from Niger, had allegedly been suspected by some individuals in U.S. intelligence as fraudulent according to news reports. According to other news accounts of the classified situation, by early 2002, investigations by both the CIA and the State Department had found the documents to be inaccurate. Days before the Iraq invasion, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) cast doubt on the documents to the U.N. Security Council. An FBI investigation into the provenance of these documents has been reopened.

0 Replies

Okie, can't you ever stop lying about Wilson (and others)? He correctly determined and reported that Iraq was not buying yellow cake, which backed up two other reports of the same nature. He then exposed the fraud of the Bush administration, which continued in the false claim.

0 Replies

I think this is old news, and that the documents you speak of are not the only sources in regard to the Niger connection. There was other intelligence besides the documents, more specifically I recall from British sources.

Another point is that intelligence officials disagreed over what Wilson's findings indicated, but he did find out that Iraqis had visited Niger to discuss business, and that since one of Niger's main products that might be wanted was yellowcake, which if you connect the dots, Wilson's findings reinforce the assumption that Hussein probably was seeking yellowcake, rather than the conclusion that Wilson derived.

To correct the record again, and again, and again. Nobody has ever said the Iraqis bought yellowcake. The claim was that they were in process of attempting to.

0 Replies

Fitzgerald Investigation of Leak of Identity of CIA Agent

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know