WMD's Fuck-up.

[CJ7]

Originally Posted by cptjohnstone

here we go again you stupid fuckin donkey's. I have posted this at least 10 times

he says he did not at that time but when the heat dies down he will again

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?...ag=mncol;lst;6

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?...ag=mncol;lst;5


God, I B they do not read anything you post, they just want to babble babble babble

like I said and the interview vids confirms

saddam didnt have any wmd's when Bush invaded Iraq

any god damn president worth the salt in his piss would have made fucking sure the american lives that were about to be lost, the taxpayer money that was about to be spent, and the very reputation of the strongest country in the world was based on THE FUCKING FACTS.

the tapes prove Bush was a fucking traitor then, and without being made accountable, a fucking traitor now.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by CJ7

like I said and the interview vids confirms

saddam didnt have any wmd's when Bush invaded Iraq

any god damn president worth the salt in his piss would have made fucking sure the american lives that were about to be lost, the taxpayer money that was about to be spent, and the very reputation of the strongest country in the world was based on THE FUCKING FACTS.

the tapes prove Bush was a fucking traitor then, and without being made accountable, a fucking traitor now.

CBJ7, the FUCKING FACTS are that the intelligence available at the time supported the conclusions reached by Bush, et al. Those are THE FUCKING FACTS, CBJ7. Your 20/20 hindsight is bullshit, CBJ7.

[CJ7]

the UN stated the facts to Bush you idiot ... the interview confirms the UN destroyed the wmd's and saddam destroyed what was left

like I said, doing what bush did on a fucking guess or ASSUMPTION makes him a fucking traitor

[Sexyeccentric1]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

CBJ7, the FUCKING FACTS are that the intelligence available at the time supported the conclusions reached by Bush, et al. Those are THE FUCKING FACTS, CBJ7. Your 20/20 hindsight is bullshit, CBJ7.

I disagree and that is the mantra they kept chiming over and over in the hopes people like you would believe it. One thing is for sure the war contractors and corporations who were in league with Bush and his cronies got rich destroying that country and trying to steal from them. Bush, Cheney and all the others should be held accountable in a court for their crimes.

[CuteOldGuy]

See, SexyEx? We can agree on something! I'm all for this.

"Bush, Cheney and all the others should be held accountable in a court for their crimes."

[bobo444]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

CBJ7, the FUCKING FACTS are that the intelligence available at the time supported the conclusions reached by Bush, et al. Those are THE FUCKING FACTS, CBJ7. Your 20/20 hindsight is bullshit, CBJ7.

Well, how come the froggies knew it at that time, and opposed us at the UN?

Because bUSH is a fucking liar and should be held accountable for this billion dollar loss (and not counting the cost of lives).

PS:froggies: the french

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by bobo444

Well, how come the froggies knew it at that time, and opposed us at the UN?

Because bUSH is a fucking liar and should be held accountable for this billion dollar loss (and not counting the cost of lives).

PS:froggies: the french

Bobo, you are a bozo!!! France armed Saddam and it was Iraq's largest trade partner throughout Saddam's rule. The French sold 25 billion dollars worth arms to Saddam. The French had a vested interest in letting Saddam run amok, perhaps you might find a less biased party to use to support your POV: maybe you could look to what position Great Britain took on the war.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by CJ7

the UN stated the facts to Bush you idiot ... the interview confirms the UN destroyed the wmd's and saddam destroyed what was left

like I said, doing what bush did on a fucking guess or ASSUMPTION makes him a fucking traitor

The WMD Commission and the Butler report both support Bush's contention that the Intel available indicated Saddam Hussein probably had WMD. CBJ7, your opinion and conjectures otherwise are of no import.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by BigLouie

I B are you claiming to have inside sources with the DC party scene? Here is a pretty good telling of the whole event. You are such a fraud who can't admit the truth.

Thursday, 08 December 2011 22:58
The Truth About the Valerie Plame Case Finally Emerges
Written by Sam Blumenfeld

Now that memoirs by the late Bob Novak, former Vice-President Dick Cheney, and former President George Bush have all been published, we now know much more about the Valerie Plame case than we did before these individuals put what happened to paper. (Plame, if you'll remember, was a CIA agent whose identity was leaked to the press during a newsman's investigation into George W. Bush's explanation for going to war against Iraq.) Yet, the one book that still needs to be written is a memoir by Lewis (Scooter) Libby, the VP’s assistant, the only individual indicted by the Special Prosecutor looking into the leak and found guilty in this highly controversial case.

Vice President Cheney had hoped that George Bush would issue a pardon of Libby, since he considered Libby to have been unjustly punished for something he did not do. But Bush decided not to pardon Libby, and this has left a deep sense of disappointment in Cheney’s otherwise good relations with the former President.

How did this whole controversy start? Bush writes in his memoir: “In my 2003 State of the Union address, I had cited a British intelligence report that Iraq sought to buy uranium [yellowcake] from Niger. That single sentence in my five-thousand-word speech was not a major point in the case against Saddam. The British stood by that intelligence.... In July 2003, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson wrote a New York Times column alleging that the administration had ignored his skeptical findings when he traveled to Africa to investigate the Iraq-Niger connection.”

Wilson’s column in the Times resulted in the President being called a liar, which caused people in the administration to wonder why Joseph Wilson, a Democrat critic of Bush, was sent to Niger by the CIA for this mission. Washington journalist Bob Novak wanted to write a column on the affair and managed to get an interview on July 8, 2003, with Deputy Secretary of State Richard L. Armitage.. He writes in his memoir, The Prince of Darkness:

Armitage was giving me high-level insider gossip, unusual in a first meeting. About halfway through our session, I brought up Bush’s sixteen words.... I then asked Armitage a question that had been puzzling me but, for the sake of my future peace of mind, would better have been left unasked. Why would the CIA send Joseph Wilson, not an expert in nuclear proliferation and with no intelligence experience, on the mission to Niger? “Well,” Armitage replied, “you know his wife works at the CIA, and she suggested that he be sent to Niger.” “His wife works at the CIA?” I asked. “Yeah, in counterproliferation.”

He mentioned her first name, Valerie.... The exchange about Wilson’s wife lasted no more than sixty seconds. Armitage offered no interpretation of Wilson’s conduct and said nothing negative about him or his wife. I am sure it was not a planned leak but came out as an offhand observation.... Shortly thereafter, he secretly revealed his role to federal authorities investigating the leak of Mrs. Wilson’s name but did not inform White House officials, apparently including the President.

Novak got Valerie’s last name from Wilson’s bio in Who’s Who. But after he used it in his column, the name Valerie Plame became big news in the media and caused quite a storm. On October 1, 2003, after reading a second column by Novak on the case, Armitage, alarmed by the clamor in the press for the name of the leaker who had outed a covert CIA agent, revealed his role to his boss Secretary of State Colin Powell. They took up the matter with State Department lawyer William H. Taft IV, who then spoke with White House counsel Alberto Gonzales, who allegedly told Taft that he did not want to know. But why didn't Taft or Powell go directly to the President with this important information?

In January 2004, the Justice Department chose prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald to investigate the leak of Valerie Plame's identity. From the outset, he was made fully aware that the leaker was Armitage, who resigned from the State Department in November 2004 but remained a subject of the inquiry until February 2006 when Fitzgerald told him in a letter that he would not be charged. The New York Times reported on Sept. 2, 2006:

Mr. Armitage cooperated voluntarily in the case, never hired a lawyer and testified several times to the grand jury, according to people who are familiar with his role and actions in the case. He turned over his calendars, datebooks and even his wife's computer in the course of the inquiry, those associates said. But Mr. Armitage kept his actions secret, not even telling President Bush because the prosecutor asked him not to divulge it, the people said.

Why would the prosecutor keep this vital information from the President who had expressed concern over the outing of a CIA operative? Meanwhile, the liberal press hysterically speculated that it was Karl Rove and/or Vice President Cheney who most likely leaked Plame's identity to Novak. Dick Cheney writes in his memoir, In My Time:

Among the many things that should give a thinking person pause about this whole sad story is that Patrick Fitzgerald knew from the outset who had leaked the information about Wilson’s wife to Bob Novak. It had been Deputy Secretary of State Rich Armitage, who told the Justice Department that he had leaked the information to Novak, but kept what he had done from the White House. Armitage would later admit that he had even earlier told journalist Bob Woodward about Wilson’s wife’s employment. Indeed, on Bob Woodward’s tape of the June 13, 2003, conversation, Armitage can be heard leaking the fact that Wilson’s wife worked at the CIA four separate times.

So why did Patrick Fitzgerald spend more than two years conducting “a lengthy and wasteful investigation,” as the Washington Post called it? Members of the White House staff were interviewed by the FBI and dragged before a grand jury at great cost to them in attorney’s fees. Bob Novak wrote:

After Patrick Fitzgerald ... indicated to me he knew Armitage was my source, I cooperated fully with him. At the special prosecutor’s request and on my lawyers’ advice, I kept silent about this — a silence that subjected me to much abuse. I was urged by several friends, including some journalists, to give up my source’s name. But I felt bound by the journalist’s code to protect his identity.

Despite the fact that Fitzgerald knew the source of the leak, he decided to go after reporters who refused to name their sources. Thus, Times reporter Judith Miller spent 85 days in jail for refusing to reveal her sources to the prosecutor. She was finally released when she agreed to testify before a grand jury.

So, why did Fitzgerald go after Scooter Libby, Vice President Cheney's top aide? Apparently, Armitage had read a memorandum Libby had commissioned as part of an effort to rebut criticism of the White House by Joe Wilson. Who wrote the memorandum, and did it mention Valerie Plame? That information may have been revealed during Libby’s trial but has not been made public. Was it the source of any leaks to the press? Apparently not, for it was Armitage who supposedly read the report and made the leak, not Libby.

Nevertheless, it was Libby whom Fitzgerald decided to indict. The jury found Libby guilty, not of revealing Valerie Plame’s name to the press, but of perjury, obstruction of justice, and making false statements. What did he lie about? Libby said that he thought he had gotten the information about Valerie Plame from a conversation with Tim Russert, the news analyst. But Russert denied that he had given such information to Libby. As for obstruction of justice, what was Libby refusing to tell the prosecutor? Could it be that Libby was trying to protect his boss, the Vice President, who may have retrieved the information from his contacts at the CIA? And is that the reason why Cheney tried so hard to get Bush to pardon Libby?

Otherwise, there seems to be no reason why Libby would have lied about where he got the information about Plame, and no reason why he would have refused to answer questions that the prosecutor posed. Apparently, neither Cheney nor Libby knew that it was Armitage who had leaked Valerie Plame’s identity to Novak. Cheney himself had been interviewed twice by the Special Prosecutor in May and August 2004. Even the President himself was questioned by Fitzgerald.

In any case, since Libby was not the person who made Valerie Plame’s name public, he should not have been the subject of a prosecutor, whose aim seems have been to justify his more than two years of investigation in the nation’s capital, with all of its perks, good restaurants, and plush accommodations. Even a prosecutor from Illinois needed a respite from the local grind. So he got a conviction of sorts and was thus able to return to Chicago fully vindicated.

The Vice President knew that all of this could have been avoided had Secretary Colin Powell done his duty and told the President that he knew who had leaked Plame’s identity to Novak. But he preferred to remain silent, and thus opened the door to two years of a needless and wasteful investigation which distracted the administration, forced innocent staff members to undergo a costly inquisition, and led to the conviction of a loyal and highly competent public servant.

Cheney made sure that the public would know the truth and took a parting shot at Colin Powell. He wrote:

For the latter part of 2003, all of 2004, and a good part of 2005, members of the White House staff produced box after box of documents, were interviewed by the FBI, hauled before a grand jury, and repeatedly questioned about these events.

Meanwhile, over at the State Department, Armitage sat silent. And, it pains me to note, so did his boss, Colin Powell, whom Armitage told he was Novak’s source on October 1, 2003. Less than a week later, on October 7, 2003, there was a cabinet meeting. At the end of it, the press came in for a photo opportunity, and there were questions about who had leaked the information that Wilson’s wife worked at the CIA. The President said he didn’t know, but wanted the truth. Thinking back, I realize that one of the few people in the world who could have told him the truth, Colin Powell, was sitting right next to him.

So, who was actually guilty of obstruction of justice? Was it Scooter Libby or Colin Powell? Or was it prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald, who told Armitage to keep his mouth shut or face prosecution, [and] did not tell the President who the leaker was and spent the taxpayers' money in a costly prosecution against an innocent man.

Is it not a crime for a U.S. government official to deliberately withhold vital information from the President of the United States? Is it not a crime for a federal prosecutor to threaten a suspect with prosecution if he dared to tell the President that he was responsible for the leak? Had Powell told the President the truth, there would have been no need for a special prosecutor or grand inquisition.

When is the government going to indict Patrick J. Fitzgerald or Colin Powell for obstruction of justice? Of course, never. Meanwhile, Scooter Libby’s life has been ruined. But we await his own memoirs.

CIA officer named prior to column

The identity of CIA officer Valerie Plame was compromised twice before her name appeared in a news column that triggered a federal illegal-disclosure investigation, U.S. officials say.
Mrs. Plame’s identity as an undercover CIA officer was first disclosed to Russia in the mid-1990s by a Moscow spy, said officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
Once before, Plame was caught up in a case illustrating how costly it can be for a CIA officer to be in danger of having her cover exposed. The agency called Plame home in 1997 in fear that Aldrich Ames, the notorious Soviet mole inside the CIA, had revealed her true identity to his KGB handlers.
In a second compromise, officials said a more recent inadvertent disclosure resulted in references to Mrs. Plame in confidential documents sent by the CIA to the U.S. Interests Section of the Swiss Embassy in Havana.
The documents were supposed to be sealed from the Cuban government, but intelligence officials said the Cubans read the classified material and learned the secrets contained in them, the officials said.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2004/jul/22/20040722-115439-4033r/

Victoria Toensing helped draft the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982 (IIPA). Toensing was retained by media organizations to comment on the Plame Affair. In March 2005 Toensing submitted an amicus curiae brief on behalf of Matt Cooper and Judith Miller, two journalists who were subpoenaed in the Valerie Plame investigation for refusing to reveal information obtained from confidential sources.
In the brief, Toensing "argued that the law couldn't have been broken when Valerie Plame's cover as a CIA agent was blown because her status wasn't really covert per IIPA." She also contended that Ms. Plame didn't have a cover to blow, citing a July 23, 2004 article in the Washington Times which argued that Valerie Plame's status as an undercover CIA agent may have been known to Russian and Cuban intelligence operations prior to the article (by Robert Novak) that revealed her status as a CIA employee. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victoria_Toensing



Spy Games
September 29, 2003, 10:22 a.m.

Was it really a secret that Joe Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA?

It's the top story in the Washington Post this morning as well as in many other media outlets. Who leaked the fact that the wife of Joseph C. Wilson IV worked for the CIA?

What also might be worth asking: "Who didn't know?"
http://old.nationalreview.com/may/may200309291022.asp



The Leak “Scandal”
By Jonah Goldberg
September 30, 2003 9:30 A.M.

I need to see more than what’s out there to think this is anything like the big deal the press and the Democrats are making it out to be. I’m all in favor of having the Justice Department investigate. I’m all in favor of firing whoever did the leaking, if he or she did as the reports suggest. But it sounds like the leaker is dropping in rank and importance as is the transgression. Wilson’s wife is a desk jockey and much of the Washington cocktail circuit knew that already.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/69424/leak-scandal/jonah-goldberg

Robert Novak also wrote that he found Valerie Plame's name in "Who's Who" as Wilson's wife

[WTF]

Originally Posted by cptjohnstone

he says he did not at that time but when the heat dies down he will again

Then why were we looking for them?

Maybe because Powell looked like a lying idiot to the UN showing them that crap. Remember he showed them pictures of them.

What you righties are missing is the fact that he did not have WMDs.

He wanted them ? Hell yes, everybody over there wants them. But did he have them ? No. We knew he didn't or we would not have stationed a shit load of troops right across his border where he could have taken them out if he had had them. Think.

Had the real truth been known, Bush would not have gotten a vote from Congress to go to war.

[i'va biggen]

Originally Posted by WTF

Then why were we looking for them?

Maybe because Powell looked like a lying idiot to the UN showing them that crap. Remember he showed them pictures of them.

What you righties are missing is the fact that he did not have WMDs.

He wanted them ? Hell yes, everybody over there wants them. But did he have them ? No. We knew he didn't or we would not have stationed a shit load of troops right across his border where he could have taken them out if he had had them. Think.

Had the real truth been known, Bush would not have gotten a vote from Congress to go to war.

You will never win a argument with the Bush ass lickers on the WMD'S Cheney said they were in trucks and moved them around every day.LOL

[CJ7]

Originally Posted by WTF

Then why were we looking for them?

Maybe because Powell looked like a lying idiot to the UN showing them that crap. Remember he showed them pictures of them.

What you righties are missing is the fact that he did not have WMDs.

He wanted them ? Hell yes, everybody over there wants them. But did he have them ? No. We knew he didn't or we would not have stationed a shit load of troops right across his border where he could have taken them out if he had had them. Think.

Had the real truth been known, Bush would not have gotten a vote from Congress to go to war.

Two CIA agents knew for a fact there were no wmd's,and told Tenent,Tenet knew and told Bush, Bush told Tenent it didnt matter. Tenent didnt tell Powell and Powell presented what was given to him to congress. The UN ask Bush for a couple more months to complete their sweep making damn sure Saddam/Iraq was clean.. He couldnt wait two months and relied on the word of a thug posing as a chemist who suppposedly worked for saddam ... read about Curveball.

the entire invasion was a lie .. Bush ignored the intel given to him before the invasion.then used the excuse his intel was bad after the invasion.

Hes a fucking traitor and a war criminal.

[CuteOldGuy]

Dammit! CBJ7 is right for once.

[CJ7]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Dammit! CBJ7 is right for once.

you cant count past one

[CuteOldGuy]

Haven't had the need to with you.