[Vision2020] ...but they will not testify under oath in thematter

[lfalen]

There is something else that was left out by everyone. Some on the Washington social circuit knew who she worked for. therefore it was not exactly a secret. She mentioned something about this in testimony. I don't have the exact statement.
No one has been charged with leaking her idenity. If they were it would be Armitage. This whole thing is overblown political posturing.
Roger

Roger
-----Original message-----
From: "Art Deco" deco at moscow.com
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 11:10:44 -0700
To: "Vision 2020" vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] ...but they will not testify under oath in thematter

> Gary,
> 
> You are learning very well from your mentor Dale Courtney about failing to include all relevant parts of a quote to make your point:
> 'Plame said she wasn't a lawyer and didn't know her legal status, but said it shouldn't have mattered to the officials who learned her identity.
> 
> [Left out]
> 
> "They all knew that I worked with the CIA," Plame said. "They might not have known what my status was but that alone - the fact that I worked for the CIA - should have put up a red flag."'
> 
> Or perhaps you didn't notice that the article appeared to be from its style an"analysis" or OP/ED piece not a straight-forward news report.
> 
> [Notice also, like Courtney, you didn't write what the quote actually said.]
> 
> As I pointed out, but which you carefully avoided addressing, it is not what Plame thought her status was, but what the way the law defines it which is the germane point here.
> 
> 
> 
> Aside from that, perhaps you might be kind enough, now that we have the whole quote and other relevant information, to comment upon the ethics and perhaps the adherence to government honesty in this case.
> 
> Was the outing of Plame as payback for her husband correctly pointing out that the administration's view of the Iraq/Africa nuclear connection was clearly wrong, if not a deliberate lie, a fine, a honest, ethical act by the administration or a despicably treacherous, if not childish one?  
> 
> Please bear in mind that this charitably called "misinformation" was used by the Bush administration as a key point to persuade a much-too-gullible-about-the-president's-honesty congress to approve entering a horribly destructive morass of which there does not seem to be a practical or honorable way to exit from or of undoing the damage to the image and influence of our country in the world community.
> 
> In the past you have refused to respond to simple questions whose answer might force you to take a stand against one or more of your heroes by saying "I don't do homework assignments."  If that is your position here, then we will all understand that you are afraid to directly comment on the issue raised by the question.  That's hardly a valorous position for someone participating in a discussion of an issue, but such considerations have not deterred your abstinence in the past.
> 
> W.
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: g. crabtree 
> To: Art Deco 
> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 10:01 AM
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] ...but they will not testify under oath in the matter
> 
> 
> My understanding came in part from:
> 
> http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070317/D8NTJUS80.html
> 
> 
> The 1982 statute IS the law. Ms. Plame and her ridicules twit of a spouse, Joe 'sippin tea by the pool' Wilson like to characterize her position with the CIA as 007 when the fact of the matter is she didn't quite manage to ascend to the level of Mrs. Moneypenny. Even the special prosecutor realized that the woman came about as close to being a double naught spy as Jethro Bodine did. Analyst does not equal covert operative, period.
> 
> Perhaps a special prosecutor should look into securities being offered here on the V by unlicensed and unscrupulous vermin. It would make as much sense and net the same minor level of undesirable.
> 
> g
>   ----- Original Message ----- 
>   From: Art Deco 
>   To: g. crabtree 
>   Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 7:56 AM
>   Subject: Re: [Vision2020] ...but they will not testify under oath in the matter
> 
> 
>   Gary writes:
> 
>   "My understanding was that when Ms. Plame was on the stand before congress the other day she was asked if she thought that she met the criterion for being a covert agent under the Intelligence identities Act of 1982, she ruefully admitted that she did not know if she met that standard or not."
> 
>   Although it is unclear where "your understanding" comes from since you did not enlighten us with a source, the rest is irrelevant.
> 
>   Plame was a CIA agent engaged in covert CIA activities including intelligence gathering about Iraq's alleged attempts to buy nuclear material in Africa.  It doesn't matter what she believes her status under the 1982 statute is; what matters is how the law defines her activity.  
> 
>   No evidence has ever been introduced by the Bush Administration to show that they carefully researched such matters before she was outed in retaliation for having the administration's lies with very tragic consequences exposed.  Outing a CIA agent (read spy) without justification is high treason as you clearly understand from your comments about the NYT, although you seem to have forgotten that justification is part of the issue.
> 
>   Gary further writes:
> 
>   "A minor player has been convicted of having a poor memory and will doubtless be pardoned by the Commander in Chief before he does so much as 10 minutes in jail."
> 
>   Let's see.  A person who is one of the highest administrative aides to a very political vice president has a "poor memory."  In high office, almost everything done, save pencil sharpening or fingernail clipping, is considered in the light of its political consequences and ramifications.  One little slip by such an aide on a public matter, and hence from those whom he/she advises, is to be rigorously avoided. A super memory for details, not a poor one, is an absolute prerequisite for such a position.
> 
>   However, if you really think that poor Scooter really has a poor memory, perhaps you'd be interested in purchasing some initial stock in a silver mine that promises to return triple your money for each year you hold it.
> 
>   W.
> 
>   ----- Original Message ----- 
>   From: g. crabtree 
>   To: Art Deco ; Vision 2020 
>   Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 5:44 PM
>   Subject: Re: [Vision2020] ...but they will not testify under oath in the matter
> 
> 
>   My understanding was that when Ms. Plame was on the stand before congress the other day she was asked if she thought that she met the criterion for being a covert agent under the Intelligence identities Act of 1982, she ruefully admitted that she did not know if she met that standard or not. If she wasn't sure of her status under the act, how, exactly would Libby, Rove, and Armitage? The fact that nobody has been charged with her 'outing' belies the notion that a treasonous crime was committed in this regard.
> 
>   I think that it's quite clear that there was zero substance to the 'plamegate' incident and that it was just another instance of the democratic's doing their best to make the current administration look bad. And with the help of a liberal media, their mission was accomplished. And what a monumental accomplishment it was. A minor player has been convicted of having a poor memory and will doubtless be pardoned by the Commander in Chief before he does so much as 10 minutes in jail. Ya'll should ought to be proud.
> 
>   If you really feel that a good hanging would be just the ticket to brighten up your dreary day, why don't you look to the NYT. More secrets harmful to the USA have been leaked from that cesspool in the last six months then from all the current administration members over the entirety of their careers.
> 
>   g
>     ----- Original Message ----- 
>     From: Art Deco 
>     To: Vision 2020 
>     Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 12:28 PM
>     Subject: [Vision2020] ...but they will not testify under oath in the matter
> 
> 
>     And we will believe them?  Yeah, right.
> 
>     What a bunch of irresponsible, lying chickenshits!
> 
>     W.
> 
>     And while we are at it, why weren't Libby, Armitage, and Rove tried and hung for treason in the Valerie Plame matter?
> 
>     White House to allow Rove, Miers to be interviewed in firings of U.S. attorneys
>     WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The White House will allow the president's top political adviser, Karl Rove, and former White House counsel Harriet Miers to be interviewed by congressional committees investigating how the firing of several U.S. attorneys was handled, but they will not testify under oath in the matter, Rep. Chris Cannon said Tuesday.
> 
>     The announcement came after current White House counsel Fred Fielding met with members of the heads of the House and Senate Judiciary committees, who had considered using subpoenas to force Rove, Miers and their two deputies to reveal what they knew about the reasons behind the firings of at least seven U.S. attorneys.
> 
>     But Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., told reporters after the meeting with Fielding that the offer from the White House is incomplete: "We would be able to interview the four people we requested ... but only in private, not under oath and with no transcript."
> 
>     Schumer said lawmakers would try to get tougher requirements for the interviews. And he and House Judiciary Committee head Rep. John Conyers both said their committees will move forward to approve the use of subpoenas to get White House officials to testify under oath.
> 
>     That would not mean that subpoenas would be issued immediately, only that the committees would be able to use them. (Posted 3:16 p.m.)
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
>     =======================================================
>      List services made available by First Step Internet, 
>      serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
>                    http://www.fsr.net                       
>               mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>     =======================================================
>