So, will we see apologies from the right, or just spin?

How are you going to blame Clinton for this?

Yes, she can tell us how horribly the CIA was damaged by the leak of her name, even though most of the big journos in town knew the deal (Andrea Mitchell's recanting notwithstanding).

She was the top WMD person, no? Is all this possibly a deflection of her department's miserable record of advising the Pres. on WMD???

This is devastating stuff for the administration, and the apologists on the right.

What is, Barney? You always post empty rhetoric.

Well, that somebody like Plame was on the payroll is embarrassing.
-=Mike

Westmoreland is looking like a fool.

How are you going to blame Clinton for this?

My guess is that she once "shared" a cigar with Mr. Clinton. I could be wrong, it might have been more than once.

I see that kim doesn't have the guts to comment. She is the "expert" on the lying Wilsons.

I also see the moral fiber of the usual suspects on this blog.

Seems the only one here with a hard-on for liars is you, Barn.
-=Mike

Well, Hell's Bell's, the Republicans on the committee sure didn't ask enough of the right questions. However, she is under oath as claiming that she was covert when she breakfasted with Kristoff and when she went to the Democratic Senate Policy Committee meeting, both in May of '03. She is under oath as denying talking about her work, then. Now we know Joe was certainly talking about his. What are the chances she is not lying about keeping mum? This is before Congress, mind you, under oath.
=====================================

Hi, Barney. What was that about moral fibre? How do you defend such a lying sack of shit as the treasonous coward, Joe Wilson?
=================================

Old Coot is most likely correct again.

Based on the actions (and the words of their fearless leader Howling Howie) of the dhimmi's in the past few months does this mean that 'Rove' (nor any one currently working for the administration) can't be fired and will continue to work for whomever is elected president in 08? Sounds that way to me.

Raising hell because 8 lawyers were fired is really the most stupid display of stupidity by the dhimmi's. Just because they employ stupid people doesn't mean the taxpayers should be paying them. Anyone that thinks at least 10% of any government agency's employees aren't worthless is a wasted mind and a mind is a terrible thing to waste. ROFL

If VP is an example of a CIA employee then God help us all.

These hearings are good publicity for their books though.

FLASH!!! This just in: the women appearing was not V. Plame. It was just learned that it was Joe Wilson in disguise. More news to follow. Pictures will be used so barneygoole can understand what is going on.

Scott Ott, Teh Funny.

Not.

What conservatives don't want you to hear...

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Valerie Plame Wilson was called to testify Friday before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform about her work at the CIA before her covert identity was revealed. Here is a transcript of her opening statement.

Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Valerie Plame Wilson and I am honored to have been invited to testify under oath before the committee on oversight and government reform on the critical issue of safeguarding classified information.

I'm grateful for this opportunity to set the record straight. I served the United States loyally and to the best of my ability as a covert operations officer for the Central Intelligence Agency.

I worked on behalf of the national security of our country, on behalf of the people of the United States until my name and true affiliation were exposed in the national media on July 14, 2003, after a leak by administration officials.

Today, I can tell this committee even more. In the run-up to the war with Iraq I worked in the counter proliferation division of the CIA -- still as a covert officer whose affiliation with the CIA was classified.

I raced to discover solid intelligence for senior policymakers on Iraq's presumed weapons of mass destruction programs.

While I helped to manage and run secret worldwide operations against this WMD target from CIA headquarters in Washington, I also traveled to foreign countries on secret missions to find vital intelligence.

It's a shame the legal definition of covert doesn't match up with her personal definition. She should be charged with perjury, as she KNOWS she is lying.

But the GOP is too gutless to do the right thing.
-=Mike

Now, now ... you're all missing the most important aspect of these hearings, namely: who is the saucy brunette sitting to back and right of Val?

Hubba.

Lee:

...and then, in answer to the first series of questions actually about her supposed covertness, her answer was, well, no she wasn't.

You see, in order to be a covert operative, one of the things that happens is that they tell you that you're covert. Nobody ever did, according to Plame. She also admitted that she didn't have any evidence that the administration knew she was covert, and that, after the whole thing blew up, nobody told her that she was covert or mentioned any breach of security.

Of course, we knew a couple of years ago that she wasn't a covert op. Hell, the Cubans and the Russians knew who she was and what she did...

This is pretty thin gruel, but she contradicted herself several times, for instance, about 'covert', and she has lied about the meetings with Kristoff and the Dem Policy C'ttee.
======================================

In Waxman's opening statement, the CIA certified Valerie's status as covert.

So, who is lying Waxman or the CIA?

Please step up righties.

Rep. Daves (R), Plame handled it appropriately!

So is Daves lying?

I just deciphered Valerie Plame's opening statement:

"BE SURE TO DRINK YOUR OVALTINE"

Gosh, that secret decoder ring came in handy...

J.

The news report I've read shows that she just flat-out lied to Congress about her recommendation of her husband for the Niger trip. Wonder if that carries the same penalty as lying about telling the truth about a liar?

Oh, by the way: "Plame said she wasn't a lawyer and didn't know what her legal status was. . ."

Hence, not covert. You do not work covert operations without being keenly aware of the fact.

This is pretty thin gruel, but she contradicted herself several times, for instance, about 'covert', and she has lied about the meetings with Kristoff and the Dem Policy C'ttee.
======================================

Posted by: kim at March 16, 2007 12:31 PM

Kim, since you were at both events, could you please release your notes, or at least tell us about your grand jury testimony on what was discussed at these events?

Come clean Kim, since you "know" you must have been there!

BarneyG, please read the farking article before you swallow your thigh.

It's a bit late for your toes, ankle, and knee, but maybe you can stop before you completely ouroborous yourself.

p'p' you didn't tell us when to start laughing.

barneygoole is Waxman the guy that would look like a roast pig if you stuck an apple in his mouth? Step step step -the roast pig.

All I know is you shouldn't argue with a man who can accurately use ouroboros in a sentence.

I think what's going on here is that she's testified to being at meetings during which her husband disclosed classified information. Here's hopin' anyway.
===============================

"....she just flat out lied to Congress...".

Now John you should know by now the laws for liberals/Dims are different than those for conservatives/Republicans. If they weren't then Armatage, Jefferson, Berger to name just a few would have been indicted long ago. They are still running around loose, and rarely mentioned in the news.

In Waxman's opening statement, the CIA certified Valerie's status as covert.

So, who is lying Waxman or the CIA?

Waxman's a Democrat trying to make political points off of a failed controversy. Of course he's lying.

...and you don't really count as "covert" when you have a day job at CIA Headquarters. For six years.

The connection to the Senate Democratic Policy Committee in May of '03 is quite devastating and insidious. What the h. e. l. l. was a self-described 'covert' CIA agent doing there? Unless that was her job, and then we really have some questions for her.
=========================

Waxman??!! bwhahahahahaha..... a liar many times over. Puhleeease.

Looks like Valerie lies as much as her hubby, and the left sucks it up. Love it.

America yawns. Liberals reach for their lithium one more time. Game over.

I still love the joke about her top-secret code name: "Valerie Plame"
-=Mike

I wholeheartedly agree with Heralder.

So kim, you admit that you have no idea what Valerie's role or participation in either event, yet you call her a lier?

No shame!

cirby, that's why occasionally you'll see people play word games with the term "classified" in regards to Plame, rather than covert. Which of course is bunk in context, referring solely to the specific details her job works with, not her personally.

I'm really disappointed in Congressional Democrats thus far. Waxman is basically the flip side of the coin from Santorum, all sound and fury, and signifying as much.

arneyG, please read the farking article before you swallow your thigh.

It's a bit late for your toes, ankle, and knee, but maybe you can stop before you completely ouroborous yourself.

Posted by: John Irving

John, I am watching the sworn testimony, I will make my conclusions from I am witnessing, and not from a third party source.

I am sure that you wait for Rush's talking points to form your opinions.

From the Washington Post, July 10th, 2004
The report states that a CIA official told the Senate committee that Plame "offered up" Wilson's name for the Niger trip, then on Feb. 12, 2002, sent a memo to a deputy chief in the CIA's Directorate of Operations saying her husband "has good relations with both the PM [prime minister] and the former Minister of Mines (not to mention lots of French contacts), both of whom could possibly shed light on this sort of activity." The next day, the operations official cabled an overseas officer seeking concurrence with the idea of sending Wilson, the report said.

Barney, the fact that Valerie Plame put her husband up to the trip was known almost three years ago. As I said, she just flat-out lied to Congress.

No, Barney, I pay attention to multiple sources, Rush not being one of them, and am quite capable of drawing my own conclusions. But you have certainly outed yourself as a blind follower.

If by Valerie Plame stating that she did not recommend her husband, which is falsified by independent evidence, you still consider her innocent, then you must believe Scooter Libby to be innocent, as he also stated that he did nothing wrong. However, since you are a morbidly blind partisan, you will not.

Personally, I think they're both fark-ups, and only a prosecution and a conviction make the difference between them.

John and Kim, was Valerie covert or not?

Are either of you to prepared to step up and say that you were wrong, or are you going to keep deflecting and spinning?

Barney, no deflection, no spinning, just your complete and utter inability to read.

Valerie Plam was not covert, by her own words. If she did not know if she was covert or not, as she stated in a quote and link provided to you already, then she could not have been.

My guess is you've never held a security clearance in your life, correct?

"If by Valerie Plame stating that she did not recommend her husband, which is falsified by independent evidence.." by John

Val said an associate asked here if Joe would be available. She wrote the email. That is not the same as "sending" Joe. She stated that the associate was misquoted in his statement to the SSCI, and requested a clarification.

She stated that an email will back this up and Waxman asked for a copy of the email. Her comments are consistent with statements made by Joe in the TPM interview.

I do not think that Val would lie about something that could be so easily verified.

A little primer on secrecy:

When someone says a government document is "classified," that could, in theory, mean it's actually okay to mail it in a plain old envelope through the US mail. No signature, no receipt (although they recommend it). A lot of classified material is realy just stuff that anyone could collect, if they spent the time, from unclassified sources.

Well over 90% of US "Classified" documents are "Classified Confidential," the lowest level of classification. A list of people who drive into CIA Headquarters at Langley on a daily basis would be considered "Classified."

"Classified Confidential" isn't much of anything. Violation of that level of document is usually punished by a snarky letter in your personnel file about document handling.

The fact that they're making such a big deal about her status being "classified" means that she was NOT covert at all, or they'd be talking about "Secret," "Top Secret," or other levels. Actually, they're not supposed to talk about the other levels at all, but you get the idea.

I do not think that Val would lie about something that could be so easily verified.

Now who is really acting without verifiable information? I've backed up everything I've said, now you're hoping you have one detail right. Switch around what you just said to describe Scooter Libby's predicament, and you have exactly what a partisan Republican dittohead would have said about him and his perjury.

Sorry Barney, you came in crowing, and you're now eating crow.

"If she did not know if she was covert or not,.." John

She did not say that. She repeatedly stated that she was covert. The CIA has backed her up, and certified before the panel that her status was covert.

Not one Rep on the panel has objected or disagreed with her stated status.

Val said an associate asked here if Joe would be available. She wrote the email. That is not the same as "sending" Joe. She stated that the associate was misquoted in his statement to the SSCI, and requested a clarification.

A liar saying they were misquoted? Gee, I guess that makes it reality, huh? I mean, the Senate Committee has FAR more of a personal stake in this than Val.

She stated that an email will back this up and Waxman asked for a copy of the email. Her comments are consistent with statements made by Joe in the TPM interview.

And, God knows, Joe Wilson has VORACITY. If he says it, you KNOW it's truth.

I do not think that Val would lie about something that could be so easily verified.

But Bush would lie about WMD, eh?
-=Mike

She did not say that. She repeatedly stated that she was covert.

Saying you're not a lawyer and don't know your classification means you aren't covert. I know guys with security clearance and they know, off the top of their head, exactly how much clearance they have.

Not one Rep on the panel has objected or disagreed with her stated status.

Don't you routinely discuss how stupid the GOP is? Why would you expect them being idiots here to prove anything on your behalf?
-=Mike

She did not say that. She repeatedly stated that she was covert.

Barney, Barney, Barney. . . once more for the slow, with emphasis:
Plame said she wasn't a lawyer and didn't know what her legal status was

MikeSC, bwahahahahaha... you're hilarious.

I love watching Barney & Lee desperately working those fingers to the bone typing things to try to keep their pathetic scandals alive, when they know they have nothing.

I love it, I love it, I love it.
(Helen Madden, Joyologist, SNL)

Nice job by Scrappleface! Summed up perfectly!

Positively Clintonian:

"This is what Valerie Plame Wilson just said about her husband's trip: "I did not recommend him, I did not suggest him, I did not have the authority." An officer serving under her was upset to have received an inquiry from the vice president's office about yellowcake from Niger and evidently, while she was comforting that junior officer, some guy walked by her office and suggested her husband should go to Niger to check it out.

She said she was ambivalent about the idea because she didn't want to have to put her 2 year-old twins to bed by herself at night. Still, she and the guy who had just happened to walk by then went to her supervisor.

Supervisor: Well, when you go home this evening, would you ask your husband to come in.

Then her supervisor asked her to write an e-mail about the idea. She did so. That e-mail, she said, was the basis for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence claim that she had been responsible for sending her husband to Niger for the CIA.

In other words, she didn't recommend him or suggest him. Rather, it was a guy who walked by."

Don't you routinely discuss how stupid the GOP is? Why would you expect them being idiots here to prove anything on your behalf?
-=Mike

So, why do keep voting,/sticking up for them? Says a lot about you!

MikeSc, interesting point about that. . . remember the CIA memo leaked a while back that at first the left claimed was "proof" Plame was covert, then sent it down the memory hole.

There was one huge hole blown in her case from that memo right away. The memo was rated Top Secret, while the section she was mentioned in was listed at the lower classification of Secret, which would have applied to several pieces of information contained in that section.

If she had been covert, the section, and therefore the entire memo, would have been classified at TS:SCI under a codeword (highest ranking information in a memo determing the final classification, while sections may be lower).

So we have CIA documentation and Valerie Plame's own statement to Congress against her being covert, as opposed to. . . Barney's personal wishes, hopes, and dreams, which are worth less than a penny a pound.

She's contradicted herself about 'covert' and both she and Waxman are using the term with definitions not the same as the statutory one. Of course, that is the pertinent one.

About the 'behesting'. There are enough smoke and mirrors now about this as to beat all understanding. I've only a little doubt that she told the truth about this, today, but curiously, who is it that asked her to write a memo? Surely that could come out in a proper investigation? And who picked Joe if not her? And why?

But surely, the American people must wonder what she was doing, mute, at the May, 2003 meeting of the Democratic Senate Policy Committee meeting, the minutes of which are not available.
===============================

BarneyG, as stupid as the Repubs can be, the Dems are capable of much more destructive stupidity.

Which is a shame, because I agree with many of their ideals.

Don't you love the part about comforting the junior officer because, omigod, the officer had just received a request for information from the Office of the Vice President. I mean, wait'll Cheney reads this one. Take a valium first, Sir.

This is testimony to Congress from our top CIA WMD specialist. Comforting.
==============================

So, why do keep voting,/sticking up for them? Says a lot about you!

Don't support Lindsay Graham. As bad as Bush is, he's better than the alternatives presented, but he's hardly my favorite.

Want more answers?

MikeSc, interesting point about that. . . remember the CIA memo leaked a while back that at first the left claimed was "proof" Plame was covert, then sent it down the memory hole.

There was one huge hole blown in her case from that memo right away. The memo was rated Top Secret, while the section she was mentioned in was listed at the lower classification of Secret, which would have applied to several pieces of information contained in that section.

Indeed. If her name appeared on a leaked document, the leaker would have been nailed to the wall for it. The CIA, far as I know, doesn't name covert agents BY NAME in memos.

The REALLY funny part is that the moment Bush says she isn't covert, no matter what she was doing, she ceased being covert.

And where the heck IS David Gregory? He has disappeared since the trial and he was mentioned, repeatedly, as somebody who know of her status.
-=Mike

Which is a shame, because I agree with many of their ideals.

It's a double shame since the Democrats don't believe their ideals.

Didn't you get the memo, Mike? Harlow is now working for NBC.
====================================

John Irving, Barney has never held a security clearance, and likely, never held a driver's license, college degree, a professional license, or a building permit; I'm sure there are others I've missed.

I'm sure he does have prescription drug card, tho.

Color me stunned.
-=Mike
...Dang that right-wing press has pull...

Thanks, Mitchell, now I have to clean coffee off of my monitor.

Well done!

Yup, Mike, the coup attempt is ongoing. She is covert.
================================

Kerry probably suggested the demonstration where 'passion' could be demonstrated for the cameras. He's good at these Cong. hearings.
==============================

The woman sitting behind and to Plame's right is her personal assistant, Mistress Savannah, The Snake Lady.

Gen. Haden's words: Valerie's status was, Classified and Covert at the time of the Novak column.

So, Is Haden a lier?

OK, now who is the CIA person who is going to 'fess up to suggesting Joe Wilson. Valerie claims it was her supervisor.
======================================

Oh, please, Barney, the word is 'liar' and we've already shown how casual the use of the term 'covert' is. She was not covert for purposes of the 'Outing' law, but, in fact, her role is still not known; hence, she is still covert. Get it? It's several nuances rolled into an ambiguity, and then frosted. De bon gout.
===============================

Barney, General Haden might be a liar, or misinformed, but it's already been amply demonstrated that she was not covert.

And that's about as much time as I'm going to waste on Barney the Flat-Earther. No matter how many ship masts he sees dropping below the horizon, no matter how many satellite photos he sees, he ignores all evidence and declares the world is flat, and likely on top of four elephants and one turtle named Great A'tuin.

I mean, she's sworn an oath that it was her co-worker who suggested her husband, and her supervisor who recommended him. That's enough people to tangle a tale up, and may even be true. But still, why him if they were all suddenly worried about getting accurate intelligence? They knew they were not up to snuff, or they knew they were up to dirty deeds.
====================================

"Barney, General Haden might be a liar, or misinformed,.." John

O-Really:
Gen. Michael V. Hayden is Director, Central Intelligence Agency, Langley, Va. Appointed by President George W. Bush, General Hayden is responsible for overseeing all activities of the CIA.

Yes I am sure that you know for about the status of a CIA agent than the Director of the CIA.

It just amazes me. I know a lot about this whole mess, and even now I waver back and forth between believing this part, the behesting, was just butt covering of massive incompetence, or sinister plotting. There was a black market in Yellow Cake in Africa at that time. Why were the Plames so interested in suppressing that information?
=========================

Why was the junior officer upset? Because she(why do I use that pronoun) knew she didn't have the answer, or because someone was sniffing at the answer?
=============================

This case illustrates why it is unpleasant working with colleagues who are married to each other. Every time one makes a decision which affects the other, you are usually correct in questioning the motives. In every discussion of office politics, that relationship becomes a dominant issue. Wilson and Plame (Maxwell Smart & Agent 99) were leveraging their semi-secret marriage to play their cutsie office politics games. They were playing everyone.

Furthermore, I doubt they can be compelled to testify against each other. They are good, these two.
============================

But it is a towering precipice of lies. The bigger they come etc. Now, I think she has perjured herself and attracted the attention of some ambitious DoJ lawyer. It's a slam dunk to reveal this pair, now. I expect flight.

Joe Wilson Lied: People are Still Dying.
============================

Yes I am sure that you know for about the status of a CIA agent than the Director of the CIA.

He is the current director of the CIA, he was not the director as of that time.

Interestingly enough, as I look to find confirmation of your claim, I find none. Please provide a link and quote to General William Hayden stating that Valerie Plame was a covert agent at the time of the Novak column.

While I'm waiting, I've been Googling, and have not found one reference to Gen. Hayden making such a statement.

I'm thinking this one came from Barney's colon, or at least his degraded reading comprehension.

CIRBY,
Valerie Plame Wislon,came from the Counterproliferation Division (CPD) which is part of the CIA's Directorate of Operations, i.e., not Directorate of Intelligence, the branch of the CIA where 'analysts' come from, but where the spies come from.

By bringing this case to the Justice Department the CIA was saying that in their opinion Valerie Plame was a covert agent and since they are the agency responsible for assigning that status it's ridiculous to argue this any further.

Val is quite the babe on TV. I wonder what she did to comfort that junior agent who was upset by a request from the Vice President of the United States. I wonder, since she was a CIA agent during the Clinton adminstration, if she ever comforted Bill when he was upset because Hillary was out of town. I think I am beginning to be upset myself. I wonder why this committee is meeting at all. They already know what they want to find. They will bend the evidence, only ask questions that will get the answers they want and discount anything outside of what they are looking for. The fact that we pay these people to do this sort of thing needs to be addressed. A complete waste of tax dollars.

He is the current director of the CIA, he was not the director as of that time.

Interestingly enough, as I look to find confirmation of your claim, I find none. Please provide a link and quote to General William Hayden stating that Valerie Plame was a covert agent at the time of the Novak column.

Posted by: John Irving at March 16, 2007 02:47 PM

Well john, I guess that proves that you didn't even bother to listen to the testimony, but did that stop you from spouting your opinions with certainty?

To answer your question, I guess the directory of the CIA is too stupid find out? It is not like he can just review her job history, or ask Tenet? I mean come on, how can you expect the head of Intelligence to find the answer to that question?

cb, you can't allege that without the referral letter, which Fitz is sitting on as if his case depended upon it.

JI, I think I've seen the Hayden quote, or words to that effect, elsewhere. Remember, there is 'covert' and 'COVERT'.
=============================

Barney, it's quite simple. She has already testified she did not know her status, that has been linked to in an actual news report. Solid evidence.

You make a claim, and cannot back it up. That gives it zero credibility.

Barney, I have no reason whatsoever to trust your opinion of an unverified account of testimony.

Back up your claim with a link and a quote, or withdraw it.

"...and you don't really count as "covert" when you have a day job at CIA Headquarters. For six years."

The CIA's nighttime janitor, AKA "Custodian of the Shadows" will be devestated.

I remember when I was 10, being a 'spy' was my favorite hobby. Aren't these two a little old to pretend?

Isn't this illegal? I ask because I'd like to see some pictures of them cleaning highways in orange jumpsuits. Or as they say at the CIA, "Traveling by foot, incognito."

BarneyG made a claim timestamped at 2:16pm. He was asked for evidence at 2:47pm, and has responded since, but as thus far failed to substantiate his claim.

I really should not waste time with Flat Earthers. I suspect I know what General Hayden's testimony actually was, as I've found several relevant quotes in my search, but none backs up Barney's claim.

As stated earlier, I strongly doubt Barney has ever held a security clearance in his life, or had any occasion to come closer to such material than the New York Times.

"You make a claim, and cannot back it up. That gives it zero credibility." John

I witnessed the testimony you did not, yet you are the one making wild accusations. What does that say about your credibility?

Yes, yes, yes. This 'upset' junior officer being comforted. What a revealing picture, but what does it reveal?
================================

BarneyG, it says I back up my statements with direct evidence. You have proven willful ignorance over and over, hence my dubbing you a Flat Earther.

Still no link. Where did you watch this testimony, in your head during your "me time?"

One primary source, is all you've been asked for. If the testimony was on CSPAN, CNN, MSNBC, even god forbid Fox News, they'd have a transcript of the story. And yet you still provide nothing except your worthless word.

JI: check Firedoglake's liveblog of the Toensing testimony. I think Waxman cited Hayden's confirmation of Plames's status viz. Toensing's parsing of legal vs. recieved use of the term.

Within the CIA, the term 'covert' does not have a meaning identical to that in Toensing's statute. Some JOMer emailed that out of her several weeks ago. I like your terminology, 'legal vs received'.
==========================

And for the record:

Valerie Plame lying to Congress:
Provided, again as she directly contradicts independent testimony from Congressional hearings in 2004

Oh, and for the leaked memo including Plame at a classification level far beneath that of a covert agent here you go.

Although, as stated since you've never had the opportunity to work with classified material under a security clearance, Barney, you may fail to understand the import much as you've failed to understand anything else explained to you thus far.

As an ex CIA employee said on Rush's show today, how covert are you when you walk in and out of Langley everyday?

I will also note that the Seattle Times (surprise!) gets most of the facts about the memo wrong, as they claim that the classification of covert agents is Secret, when in fact it is codeword compartmentalized, and therefore TS:SCI.

I think Waxman cited Hayden's confirmation of Plames's status

Ah, that certainly increases the credibility of the statement, by negative numbers.

BryanD, firedoglake is hardly a primary source, nor very credible. A good primary source, and I'm not real picky there, is required.

By bringing this case to the Justice Department the CIA was saying that in their opinion Valerie Plame was a covert agent

All that means is that one or two people in the CIA decided to cause a bit of trouble for the current Administration by letting a half-assed case be filed, since they knew they'd never get in any real trouble for it. All they had to do was put out a few dithering memos with higher classifications on them, let other people do the dirty work, and sit back to watch people like yourself go crazy over a non-case.

The only person who's gotten in real trouble for the whole thing is a guy who didn't even leak her name - the guy who ADMITS to telling people about it isn't even going to be slapped on the wrist.

...which shows just how minimal this "outing' was. Most big-name news outfits publish more serious leaks than this on a weekly basis.

You keep telling us what you believe people said at the hearing, but for some reason you can't seem to remember the bits Plame said about not ever being told she was covert - which really, really means she wasn't covert. Period.

When I had my USAF security clearance, they reminded us on a refular basis what that clearance was, what it entailed, and what we could say about our jobs. If someone didn't sit down at tell Plame that she was flat-out covert, then she wasn't.

The fact that she had a non-covert desk job at CIA Headquarters for SIX DAMNED YEARS before this happened should give you a teeny bit of a clue. Covert agents don't drive in through the front gate at Langley every morning.

Kim, 'legal vs received': the Toensing statute vs. the political perfidy Bush promised to make "heads roll" over. BTW: NO WHITE HOUSE INVESTIGATION AT ALL!!! according to "Security" Dog Knoller (yes I watched it all, start to finish). PS: Speaking of "watching": Daniela Hantuchova on ESPN2 right this minute! 8OP

Hey, another Airman.
When I had my USAF security clearance, they reminded us on a refular basis what that clearance was, what it entailed, and what we could say about our jobs. If someone didn't sit down at tell Plame that she was flat-out covert, then she wasn't.

Bingo, cirby.

Ex. Order 12958 -- Hayden's approval of Waxman's statement that Ms. Wilson's status was classified, that she was a covert agent protected under the aforementioned Executive Order.

http://firedoglake.com/

Blow-it-out-your-ass John

PS: as soon as the official transcripts are released (not yet even though you wrongly think so) I will provide the direct statement read by Waxman from Hayden.

Anyway, Barney seems to be sulking, and I have work to do.

Later, all. have a good weekend.

Hey barnerG-RUBBLE,can you explain this section of Plame's testimony?

Plame said prior to Armitage's outing of her, her covert status "was not widely known on the Georgetown cocktail circuit."

What's your definition of "widely known?" One, ten, 300 people? And does it really matter whether that number is important?

Even if it was only a single member of the "Georgetown cocktail circuit" it was known which lays to waste any thoughts she would have been of any use by the CIA for covert operations.

(not withstanding driving into the CIA each work day and signing papers and using her cover "employer" as a ref. on said papers)

"You keep telling us what you believe people said at the hearing, but for some reason you can't seem to remember the bits Plame said about not ever being told she was covert - which really, really means she wasn't covert. Period."

and

"When I had my USAF security clearance, they reminded us on a refular basis what that clearance was, what it entailed, and what we could say about our jobs. If someone didn't sit down at tell Plame that she was flat-out covert, then she wasn't." by cirby

Clearance is not the same as status, but you already knew that.

So, she wasn't really covert, even though Gen. Hayden said she was. We should trust a security guard of the Director of the CIA (Ha Ha)?

J I said: "BryanD, firedoglake is hardly a primary source, nor very credible"....(FDL liveblogs well for office pogues and non-cable boob tubers, and I give them props for being real time.) But at their site I notice a link to Waxman's homepage and access to the full transcript of today's hearings. Or was it at Raw Story? One of the two. In those transcripts you'll be confronted with the Bush Admin's DOOM!

Barney, firedoglake, "video for the netroots" and Waxman? Anyone actually credible saying this?

So General Hayden has not actually stood up and said, himself, that she was a covert agent, as of yet. Instead, we have a statement that has been filtered through three consecutively less credible sources, and thats what your hanging your hat on?

Right.

marc, I glad that you get all your information from Rush.

If you had heard her statement, you would have notices that it was said in sarcasm.

Than again, after watching the 1/2-hour news hour, I now know that conservatives don't get sarcasm.

John, take your head out of your ass. Waxman read directly from a prepared statement from Hayden.

If you think that Waxman sat there and read a false statement in his own nationally televised hearing then you are a lost cause, and God help you.

In other words, Barney is lying his ass off here.

marc said: "(not withstanding driving into the CIA each work day and signing papers and using her cover "employer" as a ref. on said papers)" RIGHT! Brewster-Jennings was ostensibly a non-governmental entity and NOT full of spies, but of course it WAS a government (CIA)entity and chock FULL of spies and AT LAST you can see how an intelligence asset has been ruined! i.e. no more Brewster-Jennings OPs in strategic areas (Mid-east or anywhere else, and all foreign national "collaborators" are up shit creek!) (Hantuchova. ESPN2. Now.)

I found a partial transcript of Waxman's statement:
I have met, personally, with General Hayden, the head of the CIA, to discuss what I can and cannot say about Ms. Wilson's service. And I want to thank him for his cooperation and help in guiding us along these lines ...

... I have been advised by the CIA and that even now, after all that has happened, I cannot disclose the full nature, scope and character of Ms. Wilson's service to our nation without causing serious damage to our national security interests ...

... During her employment at the CIA, Ms. Wilson was undercover. Her employment status with the CIA was classified information, prohibited from disclosure under Executive Order 12958.

At the time of the publication of Robert Novak's column on July 14, 2003, Ms. Wilson's CIA employment status was covert. This was classified information.

Waxman did not read directly from the letter given by Hayden, as demonstrated in the quote. He opinionates, then weasels with the "classifed" statement. For Official Use Only is a classification, for instance, and is quite commonly given out to the press.

Let's see if Hayden actually testifies. I'll note that as a sitting Congressman speaking from the House, Waxman cannot be prosecuted even if he lied through his teeth, and mistating a conclusion from a memo is certainly plausible.

Once again, Barney loses. He must be used to it by now.

Crap, misplaced the /i. It should come right after the statement "This was classified information."

Excerpts from Waxman's prepared statement:

"Ms. Wilson was a covert employee of the CIA. We cannot discuss all of the details of her CIA employment in open session."

Yes, she was a covert employee. That stopped in 1997 or so, when she had her twins and got the desk job at Langley.

"I have met with General Hayden, the head of the CIA, to discuss what I can and cannot say about Ms. Wilson's service."

Yeah, and...?

"I have been advised by the CIA that even now, after all that has happened, I cannot disclose the full nature, scope, and character of Ms. Wilson's service to our nation without causing serious damage to our national security interests."

Uh-huh. And..?

"During her employment at the CIA, Ms. Wilson was under cover."

Yes, she was. That stopped in 1997, right before she became a non-covert desk jockey.

"Her employment status with the CIA was classified information prohibited from disclosure under Executive Order 12958."

Yes, but that has nothing to do with much of anything, and if it were a huge secret, she'd be working out of some CIA front company.

"At the time of the publication of Robert Novak's column on July 14,2003, Ms. Wilson's CIA employment status was covert. This was classified information."

Her "employment status was covert" (note the weasel words, instead of saying "she was a covert operative" - a big difference in this sort of thing) because she used to be, and could theoretically be in the future, a covert operative, not because she was a current covert operative. Of course, this wasn't going to happen, because of her six years walking through the front door at Langley, as well as her political ties with various Democratic politicians through her husband.

In other words, they can't tell us everything, because of stuff she did more than ten years ago. Not a surprise, and in line with what we've been telling you.

Wrong John, during the Vickie testimony, Waxman read directly from the Hayden prepared text. You pulled Waxmen's opening statement. You would know this if you actually had heard the testimony.

"Hi, Barney. What was that about moral fibre? How do you defend such a lying sack of shit as the treasonous coward, Joe Wilson?"

You mean the coward Joe Wilson Deputy Chief of Mission at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, Iraq. who was praised by George H. W. Bush after sheltering more than one hundred Americans at the embassy, despite Saddam Hussein's threats to execute anyone who refused to hand over foreigners.

The coward who publicly repudiated the dictator by appearing at a press conference wearing a homemade noose around his neck and saying "If the choice is to allow American citizens to be taken hostage or to be executed, I will bring my own fucking rope,"

is that the coward you mean?

off-topic to John Irving - For each paragraph that you want to be italicized you need to bracket that paragraph with the html italics tag.

To illustrate I will use square brackets[ ] instead of the angled bracket normally use, -- it looks like this..

[i]This first paragraph is italicized[/i]

[i]and so is the second[/i]

email me at "leedamnit at yahoo dot com" if this isn't clear.

With Kim getting hung up on petty distinctions regarding the word "covert," the conservatives here in general failing miserably to understand the significance of the outing, let us turn to the King of the Morons for an assessment on the whole matter:

Question from reporter in June, 2004: And, and, do you stand by your pledge to fire anyone found to have done so [out Ms. Wilson]?

BUSH: Yes. And that's up to the U.S. attorney to find the facts.

McClellan at a September 29, 2003, press briefing:

McCLELLAN: The president has set high standards [what a joke!], the highest of standards for people in his administration. He's made it very clear to people in his administration that he expects them to adhere to the highest standards of conduct. If anyone in this administration was involved in it [the leaking of Plame's identity], they would no longer be in this administration.

Bush Bootlickers, your Leader has made it clear that the outing of Ms. Wilson warranted the firing of anyone involved in it. Why is it that Bush himself can see the damage done to national security by the outing, but you can't??? [Yes, ultimately when it was determined that Rove would have to go, Bush again broke one of his promises to the nation to prevent that from happening, but that's beside the point.]

Bush Bootlickers, your Leader has made it clear that the outing of Ms. Wilson warranted the firing of anyone involved in it.

...and that would be who, exactly?

So far, only one guy has admitted to it (aside from the reporters and Ms. Plame and her husband). The prosecutor in charge has pretty much admitted that he's got no further clues, the one guy who got convicted in connection to the case didn't actually do any leaking...

On the other hand, since you're so much in "get the leaks" mode, what level of prosecution do you have in mind for the New York Times and the Washington Post (for their parts in leaking really vital intelligence information - as well as this piddling crap)?

...and what sort of charges do you have in mind for Plame herself? Her actions and comments prove that she was, at best, not good at keeping her covert life a secret once she stopped being an active undercover agent - multiple people without the right clearances knew about her former life (from the chart shown at today's hearing), from her own lips.

Well, you notice that Val Plame, Powell, Armitage, Grossman, Fleischer and Tenet are no longer members of this administration. Most of them had a hell of a lot more to do with the unloosening of the cover of Val Plame than either Libby, Rove, or Cheney.

crazy libs: here is the reason for my charge of treasonous coward for Joe Wilson. In the 2/6/03 edition of the LATimes, he wrote an op-ed arguing against invading and deposing Saddam on the grounds that he would use his chemical and biological WMD against our soldiers. When he found out that no WMD were immediately found he told lies about what his work entailed and demonstrated to the press, and to the Democrats. This has established a meme which has been destructive to the war effort. He is a well known Arabist. He may have been in the pay of Saudi interests. He had business interests and ambitions in Africa. And I don't think he ever represented the US's position above his own or others, including that clown show in Baghdad.

And Val has some 'splainin' to do about that little visit with the Senate committee. So does John Kerry, and probably Rockefeller. Schumer? He's everywhere you don't want to be.
=================================

What's really cool about this whole affair is the stoichiometry it has with Watergate. There a valiant press was bravely fighting to get the story out. Now a cowardly press is foolishly struggling to keep the story in.

Hey, it's gonna cave. Gravity is too strong against such an unstable structure. Interestingly enough, Woodward is central to both. Perhaps he will redeem himself for prostituting his craft to Mark Felt's craft. Perhaps not.
=====================================

Kim, let me guess, you took a lot of LSD back in the 60's and the 70's.

Nice, Barney.

The legal distinction of Covert vs. covert is important, because no one gets prosecuted unless they are Covert as defined by the statute. Unless you want to be judged by The Law According to BarneyG, this is the way it works.

Kim, you mentioned something about aggressive prosecutors at DOJ getting into this. I wasn't aware that there were any after the Sandy "The Burgler" Berger debacle.

Barney,

I'm with you on that about Kim. Makes no sense wahtsoever.

I haven't read one sentence in any thread where there is ANY continuity to a thought. Scary.

Bush Bootlickers, your Leader has made it clear that the outing of Ms. Wilson warranted the firing of anyone involved in it. Why is it that Bush himself can see the damage done to national security by the outing, but you can't??? [Yes, ultimately when it was determined that Rove would have to go, Bush again broke one of his promises to the nation to prevent that from happening, but that's beside the point.

Note that the man responsible for it, Armitage, isn't at the WH.

There is, of course, a HUGE difference between firing a guy and SENTENCING A GUY TO PRISON TIME.

You can be fired for many things that are not, in fact, illegal.
-=Mike

If Wilson -Plame were so very concerned about her identity why would Joe Wilson write an OP-ED for the NY Times which says CIA sent him to Niger? Any foreign intel agency would certainly look closer at him and his wife.

And, as was pointed out, the first person to mention her NAME was...David Corn.
-=Mike

"Why is it that Bush himself can see the damage done to national security by the outing, but you can't??? [Yes, ultimately when it was determined that Rove would have to go,"

Determined by who? you fucken retards? Mercy killing for two at table 9 to go please, thank you.
Next ! Rove did nothing you lose again, get over it. Say a prayer for those three million that died when Democrats lied. Don't you think the democrats lies have done enough damage? Apparrently not.

I'm sorry you can't keep up, Barney and cb. Barney has certainly made an effort.

Sweetness-light.com has a nice piece with links and documents showing what treasonous coward Joe Wilson was. He believed Saddam had WMD before the war.

Mitchell, yeah, faint hope. The fact is that the Wilsons now have such a towering edifice of lies that it will tumble with the slightest push. No one has to even work very hard to bring them down.
===================

Mike, she has tangled herself up with this one. She has sworn that she didn't talk about her work at the breakfast with Kristof, and at the Democratic Policy Committee meeting. What, really, are the chances she, or Joe, didn't announce her work then? This is probably the most devastating perjury, because it will resonate. What in the name of all that is Just was she doing at a Senate Democratic Policy Committee meeting? This is the dirty politics to which the American people will object.

Corn didn't out her, Armitage didn't out her. She and Joe made her 'Fair Game' and that's why her book will never come out. The publisher has snapped to the irony of the title. But, they'll blame the CIA for not letting her publish, and there may be something to that. This is no longer her father's CIA.
===============================

I mean, really, this super secret spy, talking to powerful Democrats, two months before Novak wrote a thing? I don't have to tell you these things. You know.
========================================

The person that "outed" Plame is Armatige. He is already gone. Whom should GW have let go? Oh, I see. They don't need a conviction or to be guilty. Just because the dimmers want it. Plame is a liar and when the senate committee gets her, it will be revealed. Much brighter, legal scholars on that committee. Oh yeah! The lady that wrote the covert operative law says she was not covert. But those pesky facts shouldn't stop the dimmers from droning on. Pathetic. ww

Remember, Armitage told Woodward that "the 'deleted' Joe Wilson outed his own wife" and that was even included in evidence at the Libby trial. Those biased, misbehaving, jurors.
===========================

Outing a covert agent whose work had to do with nuclear proliferation jeopardizes the security of the country.

"I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious, of traitors."

Why did President Bush use the discredited nuclear claims in his January 2003 State of the Union Address to make the case that Iraq was a nuclear threat?

By showing how evidence of Saddam's WMDs had been cooked, Wilson undermined the very reason Cheney/Bush and the rest of the U.S. military went to war. He was more than "fair game," as Karl Rove called him. He was a mortal threat.

Which is exactly why Joe Wilson's wife was outed. She was working on Iraq wmd and might have blown the whistle on Bush's oil march. We all know there were no wmd's, did we find any? Bush's time to push for hegemony in the Middle East was running out. He was sooner or later going to be found out.

What Bush and his minions have done is an act of treason.

Fooolish stupid Americanos.

cb, Corn outed Plame after Armitage outed Plame after Joe Wilson outed Plame after Val outed herself at breakfast with Kristoff and at the May '03 Democratic Senate Policy Committee meeting.

And if Val was such a hotshot WMD expert, how come she didn't know that Iraq had so little. Her husband thought they had WMD until we got there and didn't find what was expected. The lying, traitorous, coward.

Apparently you haven't been reading the reports from the Democratic Republic of the Congo detailing vast uranium diversion schemes going back years. That's in Africa.

How much longer you can cling to your discredited narrative is entirely dependent on your grasp. And it is slipping.
========================

Again, check out sweetness-light.com The documentation of Joe's treachery is overwhelming.
=============================

Never has the phrase, "sound and fury signifying nothing" had more meaning for me than in the caterwauling of the left on this thread. The special prosecutor appointed for the very purpose of determining whether any crime had been committed with regard to the phony spy, Valerie Plame, ended his lengthy and exhaustive investigation without having been able to produce or manufacture much in the way of crime. Mr. Libby's "lie" to liars about a liar, was not related in any special way to the ferreting out of the alleged loose lips that sank no ship.

If the special prosecutor in the case has determined that no crime has been committed with regard to Ms. Flame....er, Plame, why does the caterwauling continue from the left?

I view it as a sort of national temper tantrum supported in the mind of the Left by the vague, and semi-successful belief that if they make as much noise as possible for as long as possible the gullible will follow along as they have so far in judging the war in Iraq a failure.

This belief in what passes for consciousness among the left is a frightening reality. It is easy to observe how that strategy worked out for a certain European country in the middle of the last century, and the fact that such a strategy is capable in our day and age of drawing so many lemmings into the parade had damn well better scare the hell out of all sensible people.

The very lowest common denominator among us seems to have become the focus of our national consciousness though the underlying psychic structure thus devised is so flimsy that it can be seen through with ever so slight an effort. Frightening indeed how little effort towards truth is exerted in our land at this time.

Fitzgerald has gone home empty handed. It would please many of us here if the rest of you lefties would do the same.

Sing it, MichaelC. These useful idiots are really donning brown shirts. Oh my, there I've Godwinned myself. See the calls for jailing Toensing if her opinion is judged faulty? Re-education camps are actually pretty progressive.
==============================

The true goal of the Un-American incompetant Left is to cause so much chaos and outrage as to insight a riot. Democrats would like nothing better than to believe they can be put into power by force through mob rule. Ya, there arrogance and ego are that swelled. Democrats would be even more pathetic without their propagandist Media and their loonies in Hollywood. Their desperation is really sickening like watching Boxer begging and pleading for power on an outdoor interview with Crissy Matthews at some University packed with freshly indocrinated Dimbots. There is absolutely no shame in their sick game.

Luv ya' Rob. Keep it up. You're not Carol in drag are you? She is a giantess, but colorblinded. As strong as Cyclops, but not as primitive.
================================

MichaelC, you might be interested in an article by Bret Stephens in the OpinionJournal, today, about the alliance between European socialists and Islam. You can hear the cognits dissonating all the way over here.
===================================

Kim brought up a very interesting fact about Plame and her cronies:
She and her convert ability stopped the 1993 bombing of the WTC: NOT

She and her cronies stopped the USS Cole bombing: Not.

She and her cronies stopped the WTC bombing: Not.

She and her cronies has been reporting for 12 years or more that Saddam had WMD: Wrong.

The CIA, lead during the Clinton years was very incompetent. Explains why the dimmers on this sight like it so much. They understand incompetence. The CIA proved themselves to be unable to obtain information, analize it and offer a report that is fairly factual. It took GW to shake it up. They didn't like it, so the turned political to save themselves. Some idiots would by that plan. Intelligient people would support our Country and our great President. ww

Valerie Plame was under oath and told the truth.
Joe Wilson told the truth as history has proven out.

George W. Bush lied.
Dick Cheney lied.
Scooter Libby lied.
Alberto Gonzalez lied.

JFK was killed by Lee Harvey Oswald. Elvis is dead. Bill Clinton murdered no one.

The only one's who can't handle the truth are the sorry saps on this website. How does it feel to be brainless lemmings?

Valerie Plame was under oath and told the truth.

Which time?

The first time she was under oath, or the recent one, where she said the opposite?

As for Wilson, was he telling the truth in his official reports, where his info showed pretty clearly that Iraq was looking into buying uranium, or in his opinion piece for the papers, where he said the opposite?

As for Wilson, was he telling the truth in his official reports, where his info showed pretty clearly that Iraq was looking into buying uranium

From the ACTUAL U.S. Intelligence Community's Prewar Intelligence Assessments on Iraq:

"...the structure of Niger's uranium mines would make it difficult, if not impossible, for Niger to sell uranium to rouge nations, and noted that Nigerien officials denied knowledge of any deals to sell uranium to any rogue states, but did not refute the possibility that Iraq had approached Niger to purchase uranium. Second, the former ambassador said that he discussed with his CIA contacts which names and signatures should have appeared on any documentation of a legitimate uranium transaction. In fact, the intelligence report made no mention of the alleged Iraq-Niger uranium deal or signatures that should have appeared on any documentation of such a deal. The only mention of Iraq in the report pertained to the meeting between the Iraqi delegation and former Prime Minister Mayaki. "

Iraq may be looking to have bought Yellowcake, maybe not.
Here's the actual quote: "The cable concluded that despite previous assurances from Nigerien officials that no uranium would be sold to rogue nations, "we should not dismiss out of hand the possibility that some scheme could be, or has been, underway to supply Iraq with yellowcake from here."

They could not DISMISS it, but then again, what is there in the world that you can completely dismiss.

Fact is, it was questionable intelligence, not confirmed, and, when Wilson heard the administration proclaim it as fact, he spoke out.

But, you know, it doesn't matter what the actual paperwork says or what the congress - or even the President says. You people would refuse to believe the truth if it was dropped on your heads.

Why is it there's alot of scheming and conspiracies going on when you DON'T agree with something and there's not a single one of those two involved when you do?

Keep your heads in the sand. It's what you're all good at.

hansel2:

Nice use of the summary, but you need to go back and read the actual report, not some much-edited bits fed to you from other sources.

Like the bit about how the production there is tightly controlled, but for some reason, they only officially report 3,000 of their 4,000 tons of production.

Then there's the bit about how the mines there are controlled by France (not known for being that good at controlling much of anything in their former colonies).

Then there's this other thing that keeps getting glossed over by apologists for Iraq: "Mayaki said, however, that in June 1999, [deleted], -businessman, approached him and insisted that Mayaki meet with an Iraqi delegation to discuss 'expanding commercial relations' between Niger and Iraq. The intelligencereport said that Mayaki interpreted 'expanding commercial relations' to mean that the delegation wanted to discuss uranium yellowcake sales. The intelligence report also said that 'although the meeting took place, Mayaki let the matter drop due to the UN sanctions on Iraq.'"

That last bit was something Wilson reported, but neglected to mention in his public commentary. In other words, he found exactly what he was supposed to be looking for, and pretended (to people like yourself) that he didn't find it, although he did tell the government about that report.

Unless Iraq was looking to buy some goats or other cattle, there's not much else they'd want to "expand," as far as commercial relations went.

Find the full report, read it, and get back to us.