• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Henry Waxman Opening Statement In Plame Hearing

smashp

Platinum Member
"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. But General Hayden and the CIA have cleared these following comments for these hearings. During her employment at the CIA, Ms. Wilson was undercover. Her employment status at 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."


Wait a second. I think some of the biggest and most exagerated talking points of the rights have just become FUD. But many already knew this to be true.

The rights talking points are going to change today.

"How can we protect classified information that no one knows is classified"

just watch
 
Outed CIA operative blames White House, State officials
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Valerie Plame Wilson, the CIA operative at the heart of a political scandal, told Congress Friday that senior officials at the White House and State Department "carelessly and recklessly" blew her cover to discredit her diplomat-husband.

Plame Wilson, whose 2003 outing triggered a federal investigation, said she always knew her identity could be discovered by foreign governments.

"It was a terrible irony that administration officials were the ones who destroyed my cover," she told the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. (Watch Plame Wilson describe how she felt like she'd been "hit in the gut" Video)

"If our government cannot even protect my identity, future foreign agents who might consider working with the Central Intelligence Agency and providing needed intelligence would think twice," Plame Wilson said in response to a question.

The hearing was the first time Plame Wilson has publicly answered questions about the case, which led to the recent perjury and obstruction of justice conviction of Vice President Dick Cheney's former top aide, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby.

Her appearance was a moment of gripping political theater as Democrats questioned whether the Bush administration mishandled classified information by leaking her identity to reporters. No one has been charged with leaking her identity.

"It's not our job to determine criminal culpability, but it is out job to determine what went wrong and insist on accountability," Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, D-California, said at the outset of the hearing.

The man who led the criminal investigation, Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, was not on the witness list. He told lawmakers Wednesday that federal law prohibited him from offering his thoughts on the case.

Nobody from the White House involved in the leak was scheduled to testify. Neither were officials from the State Department.

Plame Wilson sat alone at a witness table and fielded questions about her CIA career and the disclosure of her name in July 2003 in a syndicated newspaper column. She says she was outed as retaliation against her husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, who criticized the administration's prewar intelligence on Iraq.

"My name and identity were carelessly and recklessly abused by senior officials in the White House and State Department," Plame Wilson testified. "I could no longer perform the work for which I had been highly trained." (Read how Plame Wilson said she worked on secret missions during her time as an operative)

Plame Wilson said she had no role in sending her husband on a CIA fact-finding trip to Niger. Wilson said in a newspaper column that his trip debunked the administration's pre-war intelligence that Iraq was seeking to buy uranium from Africa.

"I did not recommend him. I did not suggest him. There was no nepotism involved. I did not have the authority," she said.

CNN.com
 
Her status is now a matter of public record and she was under OATH.

If the Righties BS Lies are correct, We should expect Purjury charges immediately.

Dont hold your breath waiting.
 
Many years ago I applied for a position with the CIA. I would have worked in embassies communications offices dealing with messages between the state department and ambassadors.
However, had I received the position I would have gone down on paper as being a state department employee.
My point is that the CIA does not make it a habit of identifying ANYONE who works for them, especially anyone who might end up going over seas. Therefore my employment status with the CIA would have been classified.

The big question for Plame is not whether or not she was classified or covert, but how many people knew she worked for the CIA. Supposedly a lot of people knew she worked for them and that her husband made a habit of bragging about his wife the CIA agent at parties.
IF her status with the CIA was such a big secret then how did Armitage learn about it?
 
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Many years ago I applied for a position with the CIA. I would have worked in embassies communications offices dealing with messages between the state department and ambassadors.
However, had I received the position I would have gone down on paper as being a state department employee.
My point is that the CIA does not make it a habit of identifying ANYONE who works for them, especially anyone who might end up going over seas. Therefore my employment status with the CIA would have been classified.

The big question for Plame is not whether or not she was classified or covert, but how many people knew she worked for the CIA. Supposedly a lot of people knew she worked for them and that her husband made a habit of bragging about his wife the CIA agent at parties.
IF her status with the CIA was such a big secret then how did Armitage learn about it?


From My origional post

"How can we protect classified information that no one knows is classified"

Damn I am good
 
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
So much for the cries of "she wasn't covert!" line of BS coming out of the mouths of morons.

No, the issue was she wasn't known to be covert. If the person who divulged that information KNEW she was covert then hang him out to dry. If they did it accidently then move to put something in place to keep it from happening again.

Frankly I am surprised that anyone in the government can use a name of an employee of the CIA or even FBI without first getting clearance from that organization. I mean, what kind of idiocy is the US Federal Governement? (I know, like that question doesn't have an obvious answer.)

 
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Plame Wilson said she had no role in sending her husband on a CIA fact-finding trip to Niger. Wilson said in a newspaper column that his trip debunked the administration's pre-war intelligence that Iraq was seeking to buy uranium from Africa.

"I did not recommend him. I did not suggest him. There was no nepotism involved. I did not have the authority," she said.
Then who sent him?
We know that his story about being sent by Chenney is a lie. And now she claims that she had nothing to do with it... did Wilson just up and go by himself?
 
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Many years ago I applied for a position with the CIA. I would have worked in embassies communications offices dealing with messages between the state department and ambassadors.
However, had I received the position I would have gone down on paper as being a state department employee.
My point is that the CIA does not make it a habit of identifying ANYONE who works for them, especially anyone who might end up going over seas. Therefore my employment status with the CIA would have been classified.

The big question for Plame is not whether or not she was classified or covert (BAA), but how many people knew she worked for the CIA. Supposedly a lot of people knew she worked for them (BAA) and that her husband made a habit of bragging about his wife the CIA agent at parties (BAA).
IF her status with the CIA was such a big secret (BAA) then how did Armitage learn about it? (BAA)

Let the spin begin! :roll:

-------------------------
Bush Apologists of America (BAA): pulling the wool over America's eyes since 1980
 
How does it feel to be wrong?

Originally posted by: Fern
Firstly, it's not even clear if she was a covert agant, for the many reasons that have been discussed in (old) previous threads.

Originally posted by: Shivetya
It has already been proven she was not a covert agent and therefor not subject to the law.

Originally posted by: daveymark
libs won't let facts get in the way of their smear campaign 🙂

Originally posted by: Genx87
If there was anything to the claims of the left about outing plame or her being an undercover agent. Then something from the grand jury would have indicted somebody. Since nobody was indicted for the actual crime the left claims to have happened. Why should anybody need to give a rats ass about something that never happened?

Priceless.
 
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Plame Wilson said she had no role in sending her husband on a CIA fact-finding trip to Niger. Wilson said in a newspaper column that his trip debunked the administration's pre-war intelligence that Iraq was seeking to buy uranium from Africa.

"I did not recommend him. I did not suggest him. There was no nepotism involved. I did not have the authority," she said.
Then who sent him?
We know that his story about being sent by Chenney is a lie. And now she claims that she had nothing to do with it... did Wilson just up and go by himself?
Gee, you sure have a lot of questions! Why don't you go ask your CIA buddies?
 
Originally posted by: Shivetya
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
So much for the cries of "she wasn't covert!" line of BS coming out of the mouths of morons.

No, the issue was she wasn't known to be covert. If the person who divulged that information KNEW she was covert then hang him out to dry. If they did it accidently then move to put something in place to keep it from happening again.

Frankly I am surprised that anyone in the government can use a name of an employee of the CIA or even FBI without first getting clearance from that organization. I mean, what kind of idiocy is the US Federal Governement? (I know, like that question doesn't have an obvious answer.)
You're full of sh!t, as usual, I've got a quote in this very thread where you claim it was PROVEN she wasn't covert.

 
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Plame Wilson said she had no role in sending her husband on a CIA fact-finding trip to Niger. Wilson said in a newspaper column that his trip debunked the administration's pre-war intelligence that Iraq was seeking to buy uranium from Africa.

"I did not recommend him. I did not suggest him. There was no nepotism involved. I did not have the authority," she said.
Then who sent him?
We know that his story about being sent by Chenney is a lie. And now she claims that she had nothing to do with it... did Wilson just up and go by himself?

Stop bleating the talking points. The CIA sent him after Cheney asked for more information.

-------------------------
Bush Apologists of America (BAA): pulling the wool over America's eyes since 1980
 
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
You're full of sh!t, as usual, I've got a quote in this very thread where you claim it was PROVEN she wasn't covert.
And the can't prove that she was covert because they are not allowed to ask those types of question.

However, Robert Novak made a good point... how can she be 'covert' when she was driving to CIA headquarters every day?
 
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
You're full of sh!t, as usual, I've got a quote in this very thread where you claim it was PROVEN she wasn't covert.
And the can't prove that she was covert because they are not allowed to ask those types of question.

However, Robert Novak made a good point... how can she be 'covert' when she was driving to CIA headquarters every day?

Well, you and Novak have something in common then: Stupid questions.
 
Originally posted by: Ldir
Stop bleating the talking points. The CIA sent him after Cheney asked for more information.
We know that, but how did he get picked?
How does a former ambassador get picked for a job like this?
Didn't the intelligence committee just say that he was sent on the advice of his wife? Or that she mentioned him as a good choice etc?

Another question for you guys to answer? Why is she going to Democrat policy meetings? And how can we believe ANYTHING she says knowing she is goes to Democratic policy meetings?
 
So we have a democrat and the woman herself, no friends of the administration, restating the original charges that Fitz was contracted to investigate.

And after three years we have exactly zero indictments in relation to the issue. What's more, Fitz has all but termnated the investigation, having found no cause to indict anyone for outing Plame. I wouldn't get too excited about the hearings. It'll be a lot of red meat aministration bashing and political bluster. Some people will gt worked up and can start the whole "SEE? SEE?" stuff again. But it wont change the fact that the special prosecutor already looked at all of this and failed to indict.
 
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Well, you and Novak have something in common then: Stupid questions.
There are no stupid questions, only stupid answers.

It's only stupid if it hurts your point of view.

BTW would you care to answer the question? How can you be covert when you show up at CIA HQ everyday.
 
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Well, you and Novak have something in common then: Stupid questions.
There are no stupid questions, only stupid answers.

It's only stupid if it hurts your point of view.

BTW would you care to answer the question? How can you be covert when you show up at CIA HQ everyday.

There are not only stupid questions, but there are questions so stupid that they cause physical pain.
 
The usual blow-hard distractions from the right merely serve to underscore how damaging this entire case has been. Valerie Plame was a covert CIA operations officer and the Administration systematically blew her cover on purpose to score political points. You can't argue against the truth, you can only try and distract from it to cover for your political party.
 
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
You're full of sh!t, as usual, I've got a quote in this very thread where you claim it was PROVEN she wasn't covert.
And the can't prove that she was covert because they are not allowed to ask those types of question.

However, Robert Novak made a good point... how can she be 'covert' when she was driving to CIA headquarters every day?

Actually how can she be covert after her marriage?

Still, if her identity was covered by law at the time of her exposure then the person who did so needs to be charged if that person knew she was covert. If that person did not know she was covert then the system needs to be changed.

 
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Then who sent him?
We know that his story about being sent by Chenney is a lie.
Why do we know that is a lie? Because Cheney said so? Because anyone else in this criminal adminstration said so?

Valerie Plame just testified under oath. Has there been any such sworn testimony from anyone in the administration? All I've heard is unsubstantiated denials from the Whitehouse propaganda machine. :roll:

The answer to the specific question doesn't matter. There's enough sworn testimony from the Libby trial that points directly at Dickwad Cheney's and Karl Rove's involvement in outing Valerie Plame to render all of your lame attempts at diversion and spin meaningless.
 
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
The usual blow-hard distractions from the right merely serve to underscore how damaging this entire case has been. Valerie Plame was a covert CIA operations officer and the Administration systematically blew her cover on purpose to score political points. You can't argue against the truth, you can only try and distract from it to cover for your political party.
How can she be covert when she worked at CIA Headquarters!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

As I stated before, whenever any CIA employee goes overseas to work they are classified as 'covert' in order to protect them. However it is hard to be covert when you drive up and park right in front the CIA headquarters every day.
 
Back
Top