2
   

NEWSFLASH: Libby admits Bush Authorized Plamegate Leak

 
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Apr, 2006 11:55 am
Ticomaya wrote:
Roxxxanne wrote:
I might point out that Libby is a liar. Is he telling the truth now?


Pot meet kettle.



You have become competely unhinged. You really need to get help. And stop libeling and harassing me.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Apr, 2006 11:58 am
dagmaraka wrote:
The reports on NPR say that while the report was de-classified, Bush did not authorize releasing Plame's identity. While I don't know if one is possible without the other, that's a point they keep making and I'm sure it's a point that will be highlighted by the administration, too. so, is it possible to release one without the other?


I'm interested in this, too. (This stuff gets so technical...)
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Apr, 2006 12:01 pm
Chrissee/Roxxxxanne/Harper/Nikki wrote:
Ticomaya wrote:
Harper/Chrissee/Nikki/Roxxxxanne wrote:
I might point out that Libby is a liar. Is he telling the truth now?


Pot meet kettle.



You have become competely unhinged. You really need to get help. And stop libeling and harassing me.


Why don't you stop lying?
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Apr, 2006 12:02 pm
Why don't you two get a room?
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Apr, 2006 12:03 pm
FreeDuck wrote:
Why don't you two get a room?


http://img133.imageshack.us/img133/2696/0876la.gif
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Apr, 2006 12:04 pm
There, now that you've purged, maybe we can move on to more interesting things... (really, who cares?)

Tico, do you have any thoughts on the technical side of all of this? Dag's question that I quoted above?
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Apr, 2006 12:21 pm
Interestingly, this was in European media earlier than on Fox news as "breaking news".
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Apr, 2006 12:28 pm
well, the thing is Scooter turns out not to be a loose cannon, he was just obeying orders.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Apr, 2006 12:47 pm
Quote:
so, is it possible to release one without the other?


Of course it is. The admin could have said that Joe Wilson was set up by a 'close associate' in the CIA to do the job. They didn't have to out Valerie Plame to get the point across that they wanted; they did it as an act of revenge towards Joe Wilson for calling them on their lies.

Then, to back up their strategy of discrediting Wilson, they released part of the NIE (national intelligence estimate) which supported their nuclear claims, but did not declassify the part of the same NIE which attacked their claims. This is highly irregular and truly speaks to their knowledge of intel which spoke against their case for war.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Apr, 2006 01:01 pm
dagmaraka wrote:
The reports on NPR say that while the report was de-classified, Bush did not authorize releasing Plame's identity. While I don't know if one is possible without the other, that's a point they keep making and I'm sure it's a point that will be highlighted by the administration, too. so, is it possible to release one without the other?

This recent revelation concerns the disclosure of elements of the national intelligence estimate regarding Iraqi efforts to obtain WMDs. That information had nothing to do with disclosing the status of Valerie Plame.
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Apr, 2006 01:56 pm
Then why wait almost three years to disclose that what Libby told Miller was declassified?

Why didn't the administration come out and say the NIE had been declassified back in 2003? Why wait until 2006?
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Apr, 2006 03:41 pm
Wow! = BM
0 Replies
 
dagmaraka
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Apr, 2006 03:46 pm
joefromchicago wrote:
dagmaraka wrote:
The reports on NPR say that while the report was de-classified, Bush did not authorize releasing Plame's identity. While I don't know if one is possible without the other, that's a point they keep making and I'm sure it's a point that will be highlighted by the administration, too. so, is it possible to release one without the other?

This recent revelation concerns the disclosure of elements of the national intelligence estimate regarding Iraqi efforts to obtain WMDs. That information had nothing to do with disclosing the status of Valerie Plame.


Right. That's what I understood from the NPR. But it seems that the two get fused an awful lot in public perception and on this board.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Apr, 2006 04:03 pm
Quote:
But it seems that the two get fused an awful lot in public perception and on this board.


It isn't as if the issues aren't related. They should be considered in the same context.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
dagmaraka
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Apr, 2006 04:06 pm
yes, yes, of course in the same context. and i don't claim to know one way or another, i don't know enough. i'm here to hear opinions, learn facts, and hopefully figure it out.
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Apr, 2006 04:08 pm
The two get confused in public perception and on this board???

If Bush and Cheney had clarified that Libby spoke to Miller about the NIE, which had been de-classified and had their blessing to do so, then why didn't they say so three years ago?

Who's trying to confuse?
0 Replies
 
Amigo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Apr, 2006 04:11 pm
What the hell is going on over at the whitehouse. It's like a frat house now. They might as well dolly a few kegs throught he front door.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Apr, 2006 04:12 pm
This seems to be where the two things overlap:

Quote:
The court papers from the prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, do not suggest that Mr. Bush violated any law or rule. However, the new disclosure could be awkward for the president because it places him, for the first time, directly in a chain of events that led to a meeting where prosecutors contend the identity of a CIA employee, Valerie Plame, was provided to a reporter.


(Emphasis mine.)

http://nysun.com/timesleak.php

I'm still plenty confused about the whole thing myself, though.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Apr, 2006 04:30 pm
Another version of basically the same thing, from the NYT:

Quote:
The court filing provided the first indication that Mr. Bush, who has long assailed leaks of classified information as a national security threat, played a direct role in the disclosure of the intelligence report on Iraq and was also involved in the swirl of events leading up to the disclosure of the identity of an undercover C.I.A. officer.
0 Replies
 
kickycan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Apr, 2006 04:58 pm
The white house is filled with f*cking scum who will piss all over the law to further their own interests.

But thank god at least nobody's getting blown.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 06/16/2024 at 10:36:24