The Thailand expat forum for Travel, Lifestyle and Fun.

Mr Earl · 07-02-2007, 02:25 PM

^still no evidence a crime was committed!

raycarey · 07-02-2007, 04:35 PM

perjury is a crime....and coincidentally it's what libby is charged with.

Mr Earl · 07-02-2007, 05:49 PM

^The question of whether or not Valerie Plame was in fact an undercover CIA operative is real issue and the underlying crime. If no evidence exists to show her status then the whole perjury issue is moot.

raycarey · 07-02-2007, 06:33 PM

she was undercover and apparently tracking WMD to and from iran. ironic huh?

Plame affair - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

and has already been mentioned on this thread....once libby blabbed her name to at least three reporters and they reported it, her name was entered into foreign intelligence service databases of practically every country on the planet.

her husband was a diplomat, and every person she came into contact with became a suspect in the eyes of their governments.
people who provided or were providing intelligence to the US were now at greater risk.

and why did the white house do it? because her husband wrote an op-ed piece which called their bluff. and we now know that wilson was right and that cheney and libby were wrong.

and no crime was committed?

earl, for someone who constantly wraps himself in the flag, you don't seem too concerned about national security.

Milkman · 07-02-2007, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Earl

^The question of whether or not Valerie Plame was in fact an undercover CIA operative is real issue and the underlying crime. If no evidence exists to show her status then the whole perjury issue is moot.

This is NOT the question.

She was an undercover agent for the CIA.

raycarey · 07-02-2007, 09:49 PM

the point, which seems to be escaping the likes of earl and attaboy is that the justice department appointed fitzgerald to investigate how a CIA officer's identity was revealed in the media. can we not agree that this is a serious issue....especially during what the white house calls, 'a time of war'.

and during the investigation, fitzgerald believes libby lied to him.

why shouldn't he prosecute?

Mr Earl · 08-02-2007, 06:34 AM

^ still no one has testified that Plame was "outed" by Libby or anyone else.
Perhaps she was at one time an undercover operative but that doesn't seem to have been her status during the time frame in question.
To convict Libby evidence that a crime was committed has to be forthcoming.
So far Fitzgerald is blowing luke warm air.

attaboy · 08-02-2007, 08:31 AM

In a topic as highly contested as this I think quoting from wiki is proof of nothing. Anyone can edit wiki at anytime. When I argued this topic last year there was no proof she was a "secret agent". Now in the link provoded by Mr Earl we see that the prosecutor is withholding evidence which could clear the argument up. And he has not charged anyone with leaking. This leads to believe she was not a "secret agent".

raycarey · 08-02-2007, 10:05 AM

you're being deliberately obtuse, right?

fitzgerald was investigating a crime--the outing of a CIA officer---and he believes libby lied to him during that investigation....libby claims he 'forgot'.

lying under oath is a crime. forgetting is not. we'll see what the jury decides.

btw, why haven't earl or attaboy addressed the fact that libby admits to telling at least 3 reporters about plame?

Milkman · 08-02-2007, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Earl

Perhaps she was at one time an undercover operative but that doesn't seem to have been her status during the time frame in question.

This has already been proven.

Did you see my post above ^

Butterfly · 08-02-2007, 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by raycarey

btw, why haven't earl or attaboy addressed the fact that libby admits to telling at least 3 reporters about plame?

Because they can't face their truth and they know it. Let them keep dreaming about the innocence of the Bush administration, it doesn't really matter

raycarey · 08-02-2007, 05:48 PM

Quote:

NBC newsman Tim Russert testified Wednesday he never discussed a CIA operative with vice presidential aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, contradicting Libby's version to a grand jury in the CIA leak investigation.

Quote:

Russert, the host of "Meet the Press," testified about a July 2003 phone call in which Libby complained about a colleague's coverage. Libby has said that, at the end of the call, Russert brought up war critic Joseph Wilson and mentioned that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA.

"That would be impossible," Russert testified Wednesday. "I didn't know who that person was until several days later."

That discrepancy is at the heart of Libby's perjury and obstruction trial. He is accused of lying to investigators about his conversations with reporters regarding Wilson's wife, CIA operative Valerie Plame.

Tim Russert Contradicts Libby's Testimony, "Meet The Press" Anchor Tells Courtroom He Never Discussed CIA Operative With Former Cheney Aide - CBS News

he's cooked.

raycarey · 08-02-2007, 06:07 PM

Quote:

A CIA panel has told former officer Valerie Plame she can't write about her undercover work for the agency

Writer's Block: Valerie Plame vs. CIA - Newsweek Periscope - MSNBC.com

clear enough?

stroller · 08-02-2007, 09:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by attaboy

Now in the link provoded by Mr Earl we see that the prosecutor is withholding evidence which could clear the argument up. And he has not charged anyone with leaking. This leads to believe she was not a "secret agent".

No, the withholding of evidence indicates that the nature of her assignments is considered unsuitable to be revealed and made public, if it would prove she wasn't an agent, there would be no reason to withhold the facts.

You're owned, plain and simple - happens to all of us from time to time.

Milkman · 09-02-2007, 12:27 AM

Quote:

Russert, the host of "Meet the Press," testified about a July 2003 phone call in which Libby complained about a colleague's coverage. Libby has said that, at the end of the call, Russert brought up war critic Joseph Wilson and mentioned that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA.

"That would be impossible," Russert testified Wednesday. "I didn't know who that person was until several days later."

That discrepancy is at the heart of Libby's perjury and obstruction trial. He is accused of lying to investigators about his conversations with reporters regarding Wilson's wife, CIA operative Valerie Plame.

Good or bad, I don't know.

This also shows how inside journalists and reporters are inside--the-beltway.

One in the same?

attaboy · 09-02-2007, 05:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stroller

Quote:

Originally Posted by attaboy

Now in the link provoded by Mr Earl we see that the prosecutor is withholding evidence which could clear the argument up. And he has not charged anyone with leaking. This leads to believe she was not a "secret agent".

No, the withholding of evidence indicates that the nature of her assignments is considered unsuitable to be revealed and made public, if it would prove she wasn't an agent, there would be no reason to withhold the facts.

You're owned, plain and simple - happens to all of us from time to time.

No. Fitzgerald is playing games. He won't turn over the documents because he is charging Libby with perjury and obstruction. Her status is not pertinent to those charges according to him.

Okay, is this topic being moved to the SubPar forum or what?

raycarey · 09-02-2007, 09:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Milkman

Good or bad, I don't know. This also shows how inside journalists and reporters are inside--the-beltway. One in the same?

no doubt.

the entire libby / judith miller saga is revealing....

libby fed NY times reporter judith miller false info about WMD and saddam---
the NYT put these 'scoops' on the front page of the paper--
when faced with reporters questions, cheney would respond, 'according to the NY times,......'

yeah, attaboy was 'owned' on the thread, but the american people got owned by the vice president's office in its run up to the war.

Mr Earl · 09-02-2007, 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stroller

Quote:

Originally Posted by attaboy

Now in the link provoded by Mr Earl we see that the prosecutor is withholding evidence which could clear the argument up. And he has not charged anyone with leaking. This leads to believe she was not a "secret agent".

No, the withholding of evidence indicates that the nature of her assignments is considered unsuitable to be revealed and made public, if it would prove she wasn't an agent, there would be no reason to withhold the facts.

You're owned, plain and simple - happens to all of us from time to time.

If Fitzgerald had the evidence the indictement would be for something with more teeth than perjury.
To make the perjury case stick he will have to show motive which will be difficult.

Milkman · 09-02-2007, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by raycarey

Quote:

Originally Posted by Milkman

Good or bad, I don't know. This also shows how inside journalists and reporters are inside--the-beltway. One in the same?

no doubt.

the entire libby / judith miller saga is revealing....

libby fed NY times reporter judith miller false info about WMD and saddam---
the NYT put these 'scoops' on the front page of the paper--
when faced with reporters questions, cheney would respond, 'according to the NY times,......'

yeah, attaboy was 'owned' on the thread, but the american people got owned by the vice president's office in its run up to the war.

Thanks for the info., on the Judith Miller story, Ray.

I didn't know Libby was involved.

I'd like to read more on this. I'll look for it.

08-02-2007, 08:31 AM	#48 (permalink)
attaboy Elite Member Last Online: Today 10:00 AM Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 2,423	In a topic as highly contested as this I think quoting from wiki is proof of nothing. Anyone can edit wiki at anytime. When I argued this topic last year there was no proof she was a "secret agent". Now in the link provoded by Mr Earl we see that the prosecutor is withholding evidence which could clear the argument up. And he has not charged anyone with leaking. This leads to believe she was not a "secret agent". __________________ As a kid I always thought my nickname was "attaboy" until I realized they were rooting for the dog: "Attaboy, get 'em! Get 'em!".

07-02-2007, 02:25 PM	#41 (permalink)
Mr Earl The Grand Wazoo Last Online: Today 08:40 AM Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Ranong Posts: 4,919	^still no evidence a crime was committed!

07-02-2007, 04:35 PM	#42 (permalink)
raycarey texpat's sexual obsession Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: deleting posts in issues Posts: 5,550	perjury is a crime....and coincidentally it's what libby is charged with.

07-02-2007, 05:49 PM	#43 (permalink)
Mr Earl The Grand Wazoo Last Online: Today 08:40 AM Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Ranong Posts: 4,919	^The question of whether or not Valerie Plame was in fact an undercover CIA operative is real issue and the underlying crime. If no evidence exists to show her status then the whole perjury issue is moot.

07-02-2007, 06:33 PM	#44 (permalink)
raycarey texpat's sexual obsession Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: deleting posts in issues Posts: 5,550	she was undercover and apparently tracking WMD to and from iran. ironic huh? Plame affair - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia and has already been mentioned on this thread....once libby blabbed her name to at least three reporters and they reported it, her name was entered into foreign intelligence service databases of practically every country on the planet. her husband was a diplomat, and every person she came into contact with became a suspect in the eyes of their governments. people who provided or were providing intelligence to the US were now at greater risk. and why did the white house do it? because her husband wrote an op-ed piece which called their bluff. and we now know that wilson was right and that cheney and libby were wrong. and no crime was committed? earl, for someone who constantly wraps himself in the flag, you don't seem too concerned about national security.

07-02-2007, 09:49 PM	#46 (permalink)
raycarey texpat's sexual obsession Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: deleting posts in issues Posts: 5,550	the point, which seems to be escaping the likes of earl and attaboy is that the justice department appointed fitzgerald to investigate how a CIA officer's identity was revealed in the media. can we not agree that this is a serious issue....especially during what the white house calls, 'a time of war'. and during the investigation, fitzgerald believes libby lied to him. why shouldn't he prosecute?

08-02-2007, 06:34 AM	#47 (permalink)
Mr Earl The Grand Wazoo Last Online: Today 08:40 AM Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Ranong Posts: 4,919	^ still no one has testified that Plame was "outed" by Libby or anyone else. Perhaps she was at one time an undercover operative but that doesn't seem to have been her status during the time frame in question. To convict Libby evidence that a crime was committed has to be forthcoming. So far Fitzgerald is blowing luke warm air.

08-02-2007, 10:05 AM	#49 (permalink)
raycarey texpat's sexual obsession Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: deleting posts in issues Posts: 5,550	you're being deliberately obtuse, right? fitzgerald was investigating a crime--the outing of a CIA officer---and he believes libby lied to him during that investigation....libby claims he 'forgot'. lying under oath is a crime. forgetting is not. we'll see what the jury decides. btw, why haven't earl or attaboy addressed the fact that libby admits to telling at least 3 reporters about plame?