Joe Wilson Today

[corplinx]

We've been having some discussion on this forum on whether or not the leak of Plame's name was wrong or not. Even though Plame was no longer working under a cover, it was possible that elements of that cover were still being used or some such.

I think we have an answer. At a press conference at 2:10PM CST, Joe Wilson said "irrespective of whether or not a crime was committed" and went on to shill against Rove.

On top of that, Matthew Cooper of Time has indicated Rove didn't name Valerie Plame.

However, don't let reality stop a grandstand festival. Wilson is on the shill tour and helping the democrats try to add riders to bills to try to hit at Rove.

Another day of maturity, wisdom, and prudence in american politics it seems.

 

[Cleon]

So you don't think what Rove did might be inappropriate even if a crime wasn't technically committed? It's only acceptable to be critical of Rove's actions if he committed an actual crime?

Oh, I'm sorry...Did questioning your comment make me a "shill?"

 

[corplinx]

So you don't think what Rove did might be inappropriate even if a crime wasn't technically committed? It's only acceptable to be critical of Rove's actions if he committed an actual crime?

Oh, I'm sorry...Did questioning your comment make me a "shill?"

I'll ignore your bait. I've said before that I don't like Rove and I won't miss him if he gets fired or resigns. He is religious right.

However, the more the facts come out, the more it looks like this whole "outing an undercover agent" thing is just a partisan ploy.

Rove told Matthew Cooper that Wilson's wife got him the job that he used as a stepping stone to shill against the administration even though the evidence he collected supported the administration's assertions.

It appears Rove didn't do anything wrong. This isn't getting off because it wasn't technically a crime. I don't even think there was anything ethically wrong done unless there are facts that haven't been released yet.

I held out in other threads not to dismiss just because Plame worked at Langley. However, I think its safe to assume at this point that its a political shell game unless more information is brought to light.

 

[headscratcher4]

So, Wilson -- for whatever reason and motive -- pointed out correctly that the White House was lying/wrong about nuclear weapons. The White House's response was NOT to admit the mistake, not to clarify the mistake, it was to call reporters to bring them up to speed on Wilson's issues AND to let them know that his wife was a CIA agent, even if she was un-named by the source of that information (assuming Rove really didn't ID her to Novak or others).


And, the Democrats and Wilson are not being mature about this?

BTW, regardless of Mrs. Wilson's status, one of the issues is that once her name is public here, almost anyone she dealt with in a foriegn goverment (whether knowingly or unknowingly) will be suspect of working for our CIA. That ought to help U.S. intelligence not to mention end the career of people who might have been helpful to the U.S.

But, it was more important to expose Wilson and spin Wilson for political purposes rather than mention that the things the President was saying WERE NOT TRUE, or protecting intelligence sources and CIA agents.

HERE IS THE REAL QUESTION: rather than try to figuer out whey the Dems are in a polticial lather about this and condmen it because it is political, why not ask why this Administration just simply didn't come clean on the whole affair way back when..."I'm sorry, our information was a mistake, we won't base our justification for going to war on this bad information..."

Ultimately, this is all a side show. The Administration mis-used bad informatino either on purpose or by mistake and than tried to discredit the person who pointed it out. The Dems may be playing politics but that is just plain scummy.

 

[crackmonkey]

Wilson lied about every aspect of his trip. He was no expert on WMD, and had no expertise to weigh in on the administration's charges of Saddam's WMD one way or the other. He went to Niger at his wife's behest to look into some allegations. He found some evidence of Iraqis seeking yellowcake, chose to turn his nose up at it, and then lied about it, writing that he found nothing to suggest there was anything to the yellowcake story whatsoever.
Wilson may certainly say whayever he thinks about the administration and any claims made by it. What he did, though, was lie about the reasons for his trip and what he found, and from that, conclude that the entirety of Bush's concerns over Saddam's WMD was a lie.
To be blunt, Wilson is a fraud and a charlatan, and I'm surprised Schumer would be so clueless as to put him in the spotlight. I guarantee you that the White House is delighted to get that lying popinjay back in the spotlight and in their crosshairs. The Intel Committee chewed him up and spat him out - expect this to be cited chapter and verse in the near future. As it should be.

 

[corplinx]

So, Wilson -- for whatever reason and motive -- pointed out correctly that the White House was lying/wrong about nuclear weapons.

The data Wilson turned in indicated that Iraq was indeed trying to aquire materials for Niger.

He was write about the forged receipt though. But he went on to say Iraq was not pursuing these materials at all which is a lie since his own report contradicted it.

 

[Ziggurat]

BTW, regardless of Mrs. Wilson's status, one of the issues is that once her name is public here, almost anyone she dealt with in a foriegn goverment (whether knowingly or unknowingly) will be suspect of working for our CIA. That ought to help U.S. intelligence not to mention end the career of people who might have been helpful to the U.S.

I'm having a hard time accepting that this is the likely outcome of her outing. It might have been detrimental in the sense that Plame can't work undercover at any point in the future. But honestly, if her exposure really presents serious problems for secret contacts of hers, why the hell did she pose for a photo with her husband in Vanity Fair? If the exposure of her name causes problems, wouldn't the exposure of her face (she was wearing sunglasses, but you can still get a good idea) be even potentially more serious? After all, it's easier to go by a fake name than to wear a disguise all the time, and if she used fake names in the past, those certainly haven't been revealed. My only conclusion is that her outing didn't actually put anyone at direct risk, it just limits her future career options.

 

[Upchurch]

I think we have an answer. At a press conference at 2:10PM CST, Joe Wilson said "irrespective of whether or not a crime was committed" and went on to shill against Rove.

On top of that, Matthew Cooper of Time has indicated Rove didn't name Valerie Plame.

Sources, please?

eta:

However, don't let reality stop a grandstand festival.

It appears the reality of the situation has yet to be determined. Wilson's statement, as you quote it, does not indicate whether or not a crime has been committed. Further, I do not believe it is his place to make that determination, is it? Perhaps, he (and his wife) could decide whether or not to sue in civil court, but criminal issues have to be determined by the relevent prosecuter, if I'm not mistaken. Of course, the jury makes the final determiniation if a crime has been committed (or rather committed by a specific individual).

 

[headscratcher4]

Article in Bloomberg...Wilson's assertions hold up two years later...

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=a8dab8rni_Do&refer=us

 

[crackmonkey]

By the way - Wilson just admitted on CNN that his wife was not undercover at the time of Novak's article.

 

[Batman Jr.]

On top of that, Matthew Cooper of Time has indicated Rove didn't name Valerie Plame.

You should be ashamed of yourself for making distortions like these simply because Rove didn't explicitly state her name while identifying her.

 

[Upchurch]

Re: Re: Joe Wilson Today

You should be ashamed of yourself for making distortions like these simply because Rove didn't explicitly state her name while identifying her.

That's why I'd like his source, to understand the context of the claim. If corplinx is refering to Rove's not using the words "Valarie" and "Plame", I will agree with you.

 

[Batman Jr.]

Re: Re: Re: Joe Wilson Today

That's why I'd like his source, to understand the context of the claim. If corplinx is refering to Rove's not using the words "Valarie" and "Plame", I will agree with you.

I'm positive that's what he's referring to. That's the latest and most popular line all the spin-doctoring scumbags are using to try to make us waste our time thinking about completely stupid things. We know that the e-mail identifies her for a fact as Wilson's wife. Last time I checked, Wilson wasn't a polygamist.

 

[corplinx]

My only conclusion is that her outing didn't actually put anyone at direct risk, it just limits her future career options.

My guess is her career options were already limited by the nepotism thing and Wilson being a political tool.

 

[corplinx]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Joe Wilson Today

I'm positive that's what he's referring to. That's the latest and most popular line all the spin-doctoring scumbags are using to try to make us waste our time thinking about completely stupid things. We know that the e-mail identifies her for a fact as Wilson's wife. Last time I checked, Wilson wasn't a polygamist.

Yes, anyone who disagrees with you is a spin-doctoring scumbag apologist. Your RPG character just got a +1 Hyperbole stat gain.

 

[corplinx]

By the way - Wilson just admitted on CNN that his wife was not undercover at the time of Novak's article.

It doesn't matter. If Rove said that Wilson's wife got him the job, that makes him guilty of some ambiguous offense that noone can define for me.

 

[normdoering]

By the way - Wilson just admitted on CNN that his wife was not undercover at the time of Novak's article.

Then why does Rove have a lawyer, I think his name is Robert Luskin.

And what has been investigated for so long?

 

[Upchurch]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Joe Wilson Today

Yes, anyone who disagrees with you...

Does that mean he is correct that you are refering to Rove's reference to her as "Wilson's wife" rather than "Valarie Plame"?

 

[Batman Jr.]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Joe Wilson Today

Yes, anyone who disagrees with you is a spin-doctoring scumbag apologist.

Not always, but I have found this to hold true most of the time.

 

[Mark]

Re: Re: Joe Wilson Today

Sources, please?

eta:
It appears the reality of the situation has yet to be determined. Wilson's statement, as you quote it, does not indicate whether or not a crime has been committed. Further, I do not believe it is his place to make that determination, is it? Perhaps, he (and his wife) could decide whether or not to sue in civil court, but criminal issues have to be determined by the relevent prosecuter, if I'm not mistaken. Of course, the jury makes the final determiniation if a crime has been committed (or rather committed by a specific individual).

You are missing the point: Wilson is an evil tool of satanic forces who are trying to frame Rove.