Valerie Plame Confirms Her Covert Status Prior To Novak Leak

[Berzerker]

Did she get outraged at her treatment before or after she appeared in a Vanity Fair photo spread?

Well lets see, you spend years cultivating a career with the CIA and partisan hacks in your own gov't expose you as a CIA agent thereby ending that career. Nah, nuttin to be mad about



Oh, but she appeared on a magazine cover. What exactly thats supposed to mean aint never been clear to me, but the Repugs seem to think that means she outed herself. And now they're making a movie? My God, that should exonerate the lying scumbags who outed her, huh? She does have a future at something, that makes it all okay and we shouldn't be angry with the Repugs who pulled this stunt.

[DRoseDARs]

Originally posted by DaShi


I don't know. Which is worse: Clinton getting a blowjob or lying about it?

Answer: Congress wasting their time and our tax dollars trying to answer that.

[DRoseDARs]

Originally posted by Berzerker


Well lets see, you spend years cultivating a career with the CIA and partisan hacks in your own gov't expose you as a CIA agent thereby ending that career. Nah, nuttin to be mad about



Oh, but she appeared on a magazine cover. What exactly thats supposed to mean aint never been clear to me, but the Repugs seem to think that means she outed herself. And now they're making a movie? My God, that should exonerate the lying scumbags who outed her, huh? She does have a future at something, that makes it all okay and we shouldn't be angry with the Repugs who pulled this stunt.

It should be mentioned Novakula's column outing her appeared several months before the Vanity Fair issue she was in.

[Berzerker]

of course, and yet we see Dino repeating the Repug line - she appeared on Vanity Fair, that means... well... it means she wasn't too concerned with public exposure.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Berzerker
of course, and yet we see Dino repeating the USA Today line - she appeared on Vanity Fair, that means... well... it means she wasn't too concerned with public exposure.

Fixed.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by DaShi
I don't know. Which is worse: Clinton getting a blowjob or lying about it?

Special prosecutors expanding their search for crimes beyond the mandate given, obviously.

[Heresson]

Originally posted by Colon™




She's cute.

she is?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Damn straight she is!

[Dauphin]

If I'd known that's what she looked like I may have taken interest in the story earlier.

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Obviously you need to read more Vanity Fair.

[Berzerker]

and yet we see Dino repeating the USA Today line - she appeared on Vanity Fair, that means... well... it means she wasn't too concerned with public exposure.

I heard Repugs like Hannity making a "point" about her Vanity Fair cover long before you read anything in the USA Today (written by whom?). And where did the USA Today imply or say she wasn't too concerned with public exposure? I dont think so, Dino... You seem to think there's something relevant about the fact she appeared on a cover.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Berzerker
I heard Repugs like Hannity making a "point" about her Vanity Fair cover long before you read anything in the USA Today (written by whom?). And where did the USA Today imply or say she wasn't too concerned with public exposure?

It was written by the editorial board (not a conservative body) after the Libby verdict as part of a pox on all their houses editorial.

[Berzerker]

What was written? The fact she appeared on a cover or that she appeared on a cover so obviously she wasn't concerned about her identity being known? I've heard Repugs pointing out how she appeared on Vanity Fair for a long time, so what is the point? You posted it, what are you saying? That by appearing on a cover she somehow validates what the leakers did because she wasn't covert herself?

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Berzerker
What was written?

Lots of guilt to go around
In one sense, Tuesday's verdict in the long, strange trial of Lewis "Scooter" Libby is a measure of justice. Ample evidence established that Vice President Cheney's former chief of staff had lied to a grand jury, and so he was found guilty of perjury and obstruction of justice.

But it is also a measure of how utterly foolish Washington investigations can become. Like other cases that mystified people outside the Beltway, this one was about a coverup without an underlying crime. And as the trial phase ends (Libby's lawyer is vowing an appeal), it leaves no one looking good:

The administration. The supposed crime under investigation was leaking the name of CIA employee Valerie Plame. At one point, President Bush said he'd fire anyone convicted of leaking. It turned out that the administration housed many culprits.

In their zeal to discredit Iraq war critic Joseph Wilson, administration officials leaked the name of his wife (Plame). The State Department's then-No. 2 man, Richard Armitage, disclosed Plame's identity in 2003 to columnist Robert Novak, setting off this costly and bizarre hunt. Meanwhile, trial testimony implicated other top officials — Cheney through Libby, White House aide Karl Rove and former press secretary Ari Fleischer — as sources of Plame's identity. Even if they didn't break the law by knowingly blowing her cover, it was irresponsible to identify her before finding out her status.

Wilson. The former ambassador initially denied that his wife had a role in an African trip that led to his charge that the administration twisted prewar intelligence. She did. And his outrage over his wife's unmasking rang hollow after the couple — Plame in sunglasses and a scarf — posed for Vanity Fair magazine.

The news media. The press has seldom looked worse or done as much harm to its ability to act as a government watchdog. Top Washington reporters, who should use grants of confidentiality carefully, gave them away like candy. Then several of them, and the huge media companies they worked for, allowed the prosecutor to bully them into revealing sources. The spectacle makes it tougher to win the confidence of true whistle-blowers.

Special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald. Libby lied under oath, and Fitzgerald had every reason to prosecute him. But no one was indicted for the leak Fitzgerald was hired to investigate, and from early on, the case appeared thin. Yet like special prosecutors before him, Fitzgerald kept his futile investigation running on fumes, ruining careers and ultimately making it easier for the government to hide information.

That fallout is worth remembering before the next clamor to turn a leak into a federal case pursued by a single-minded special prosecutor. About the best that can be said for the Plame investigation is that, except for the legal appeals, it's finally over.

http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2007/03/post_20.html#more

[Berzerker]

And his outrage over his wife's unmasking rang hollow after the couple — Plame in sunglasses and a scarf — posed for Vanity Fair magazine.

Okay, now why do you think this is a relevant point? Repugs have been saying this for years but they never explain their point. Was she supposed to continue living the covert life after she was outed?