Henry Waxman Opening Statement In Plame Hearing

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
A few points are being ignored on this thread.

Its my understanding that its the CIA and not the Wilson's the demanded the probe. After all, its a chilling message to send any agent---that your own government may out you for political revenge. Even if Valarie was not covert at the time--still debatable--its becomes very easy for foreign powers to connect the dots and ANYTHING she was involved with becomes compromised---and in the interest of national security, anyone she was involved with or working with could then find their lives in danger. And how many projects that the CIA had millions invested in had to be scrapped is another answer we will likely never learn.

Its also my understanding that Iraq has some naturally occurring Uranium. Getting large quantities of
fairly pure Uranium is a feat that nearly any Country can manage with relative ease. The far harder feat is to separate out the U235 from the U238. Which is a technical feat of immense difficulty. And the conventional method is to use large numbers of high speed centrifuges in a project that takes many years. While the CIA already knew Saddam was placing large orders on the Asian markets for Aluminum tubes, the CIA also already knew their likely use WERE NOT FOR HIGH SPEED CENTRAFUGE ROTORS.

Which did not stop Condi Rice from lying to the American people and the world in saying "these tubes could only be used for nuclear enrichment." Condi was either grossly ignorant and incompetent---or flat out lying---because the CIA take was that the tubes would be used for artillery rockets---and in fact--post war--we discovered large stocks of artillery rockets made from those tubes.

But in terms of world dangers--mere yellowcake Uranium is not very great---you only become a danger some five years later of you have the means to extract the U235 out---a position Iran may be now in----but Iraq was not in.

The point being--when you politicize intelligence, you have to tell more than one lie--and dismiss alternative explanations---which is maybe why non Prof John did not get hired at the CIA.
 

jman19

Lifer
Nov 3, 2000
11,220
654
126
Originally posted by: Fern
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: Fern
Originally posted by: Harvey
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.

Got a link to Plame testifying to that?

I heard she testified that she was told that. I wanna see where Plame says Chenney told her to send somebody (I don't care if her husband is mentioned or not).

If her testimony is that she heard Cheney did, here testimony is "hear say" and thus inadmissable/meaningless. Get the person who says Chenney ordered it to testify, behind closed doors if necessary.

How come she has soo many contradictions with the Congressional Comittee that investigated this?

Fern
You're right but do you really believe tha Big Dick "Fsck You" Cheney had nothing to do with this?

I admit I don't know.

IIRC, The Bristish intelligence service (M5 or something, haha I lived there and their name is almost like the way they name their Interstate Highway system, I can't keep 'em staright :eek: ) broke the yellow cake story.

I would hope both the CIA and the WH each would've wanted to follow up on it (Congress as well). With the CIA potentially being embarassed, particularly if true.

I can imagine Cheney telling the CIA to follow up on it. I cannot imagine Cheney approving of Wilson being assigned the job.

Fern[/quote]

I think M5 is a highway, but MI (military intelligence, I think?) is the name of their intelligence group.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
Originally posted by: jman19
Originally posted by: Fern

-snip-

[Fern

I think M5 is a highway, but MI (military intelligence, I think?) is the name of their intelligence group.

OK, I just went ahead & searched. MI5 (or MI6) :)

The Security Service, commonly known as MI5 (Military Intelligence, section 5), is the United Kingdom's counter-intelligence and security agency and is part of the intelligence machinery alongside the Secret Intelligence Service (SIS or MI6),
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,586
50,771
136
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?

Are you seriously asking why the deputy secretary of state would have access to classified information?

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?

Are you seriously stating that you can't trust something that someone says in Washington because they are a partisan? Do you trust what Robert Novak says? Do you trust what Karl Rove says? If you're so against these policy meetings... why are you refusing to believe the person that went to the policy meeting, but apparently are perpetuating the story of the guy who CHAIRS republican policy meetings?

 

Phokus

Lifer
Nov 20, 1999
22,994
779
126
It looks like you can be a "covert" agent (legally speaking) if you meet one of the following 2 qualifications:

(4) The term ?covert agent? means?
(A) a present or retired officer or employee of an intelligence agency or a present or retired member of the Armed Forces assigned to duty with an intelligence agency?
(i) whose identity as such an officer, employee, or member is classified information,
and
(ii) who is serving outside the United States or has within the last five years served outside the United States;

OR
(B) a United States citizen whose intelligence relationship to the United States is classified information, and?
(i) who resides and acts outside the United States as an agent of, or informant or source of operational assistance to, an intelligence agency,
(ii) who is at the time of the disclosure acting as an agent of, or informant to, the foreign counterintelligence or foreign counterterrorism components of the Federal Bureau of Investigation;

So it looks like that toensig lawyer lady focused entirely on part B while ignoring part A. And if Plame testified truthfully that she went on covert missions outside of the US within 5 years (and why wouldn't she? She's under oath and it's easily verifiable by the senators if she did go abroad on covert ops), then that means Plame is then covert.
 

trenchfoot

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
14,899
7,428
136
why is it that after reading through this thread an image forced its way into my head whereby a bunch of people all got their forefingers stuck in their ears, their eyes tightly shut, they are all bent over, and in lockstep they are running around in a circle repititiously screaming in unison "bush is immaculate, long live the king! bush is omnipotent, god save the king! oh dear great leader may all our progeny be as one with you!"

needless to say, it gave me the willies.
 

kage69

Lifer
Jul 17, 2003
28,682
40,038
136
Yep, just read the thread, the ostrich-like behavior by the bots is pretty depressing. :(


Says a lot that they're (futilely) trying to emphasize a technicality, and giving the actual motives behind Plame's outing a wide berth. Always interesting to see this behavior exhibited by those who so often preach on and on about 'values' and 'morals'...


 
Jun 27, 2005
19,216
1
61
I know that nobody is going to believe this is an honest question, but it is...

Adminstration misbehavior aside... as it certainly looks as though they were not acting in good faith on the issue...

And my previous comment aside...

We have Plame and others testifying in front of congress. The information they are relating is probably new where the general public is concerned but was likely known to Fitz as he conducted his investigation. Despite all of this information, Fitz did not bring an indictment.

What has changed since two weeks ago when Fitz shut down the investigation? If she was covert, why no indictment? Or are we now examining misdeeds of people in the administration where the yellowcake/Iraq/SOTU are concerned?

Sorry... ordinarily I try to stay on top of the forum but I've been in classes the last week. This thread is kind of all over the place.
 

First

Lifer
Jun 3, 2002
10,518
271
136
Whoozyerdaddy, the leaking of a covert agent's identity (Plame) by itself isn't enough for an indictment. The law specifically states you have to prove intent, authorization to see that information, etc. Very difficult to prove intent.
 
Jun 27, 2005
19,216
1
61
Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
Whoozyerdaddy, the leaking of a covert agent's identity (Plame) by itself isn't enough for an indictment. The law specifically states you have to prove intent, authorization to see that information, etc. Very difficult to prove intent.

Gotcha...
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,986
3,320
126
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?

Rofl and most likely with CIA or diplomatic license plates on the vejhicle....lol
 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,161
7
0
Question for everyone...
How did Armitage learn that Joe Wilson's wife worked at the CIA?

It is highly doubtful that he called the CIA and got the information.
It is know that he is tends to gossip or loves gossip etc and since Wilson also works at the state department it is possible that he learned this info through typical office chat.
"Hey you know Joe's wife works for the CIA" type of stuff.
Which would mean that her 'covert' status was not very 'covert' was it?

Furthermore, it seems that her status as a CIA operative was exposed by a Russian spy in the 1990s and by the CIA itself through the Cubans.
Link
The identity of CIA officer Valerie Plame was compromised twice before her name appeared in a news column that triggered a federal illegal-disclosure investigation, U.S. officials say.
Mrs. Plame's identity as an undercover CIA officer was first disclosed to Russia in the mid-1990s by a Moscow spy, said officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
In a second compromise, officials said a more recent inadvertent disclosure resulted in references to Mrs. Plame in confidential documents sent by the CIA to the U.S. Interests Section of the Swiss Embassy in Havana.
Some major irony from the same link
However, recent reports by the Senate Intelligence Committee and the British government have undermined Mr. Wilson's charges. The Senate says Mr. Wilson's report, contrary to his charges, actually bolstered their view that Iraq was seeking uranium ore from Niger.
Finally, for the blog of a 20 year intelligence officer (someone who I assume knows more about this thing than ALL of us put together)
link
When a public records search - something anyone with a credit card can do - reveals affiliation with one of those laughable "cover" organizations, all the linguistic dancing in the world isn't going to help you if confronted about your non-governmental status. Any half-curious foreign intelligence service could have figured this out and probably did, which means Ms. Plame really needs to answer only one question of merit this morning, though I doubt it will be asked:
Given the ease with which any of your targets could have determined or at least suspected your affiliation with the US government, is it not reasonable to assume that some or all of the intelligence information you obtained while working under the Brewster-Jennings cover was false or misleading?
Isn't it amazing all the details that come out after the politicians are done with their grandstanding?
 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
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?
No PJ, the lie is the BushCo propaganda point that Wilson said Cheney sent him. Wilson did not say that. Here's what Wilson actually said:
What I Didn't Find in Africa

[ ... ]
In February 2002, I was informed by officials at the Central Intelligence Agency that Vice President Dick Cheney's office had questions about a particular intelligence report. ... The agency officials asked if I would travel to Niger to check out the story so they could provide a response to the vice president's office. ...
Got it?
Hey PJ, when you're done spreading damage control propaganda, any chance of acknowledging the FACT that your earlier claims are also lies? Just curious.
 

MonkeyK

Golden Member
May 27, 2001
1,396
8
81
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Question for everyone...
How did Armitage learn that Joe Wilson's wife worked at the CIA?

It is highly doubtful that he called the CIA and got the information.
It is know that he is tends to gossip or loves gossip etc and since Wilson also works at the state department it is possible that he learned this info through typical office chat.
"Hey you know Joe's wife works for the CIA" type of stuff.
Which would mean that her 'covert' status was not very 'covert' was it?

Furthermore, it seems that her status as a CIA operative was exposed by a Russian spy in the 1990s and by the CIA itself through the Cubans.
Link
The identity of CIA officer Valerie Plame was compromised twice before her name appeared in a news column that triggered a federal illegal-disclosure investigation, U.S. officials say.
Mrs. Plame's identity as an undercover CIA officer was first disclosed to Russia in the mid-1990s by a Moscow spy, said officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
In a second compromise, officials said a more recent inadvertent disclosure resulted in references to Mrs. Plame in confidential documents sent by the CIA to the U.S. Interests Section of the Swiss Embassy in Havana.
Some major irony from the same link
However, recent reports by the Senate Intelligence Committee and the British government have undermined Mr. Wilson's charges. The Senate says Mr. Wilson's report, contrary to his charges, actually bolstered their view that Iraq was seeking uranium ore from Niger.
Finally, for the blog of a 20 year intelligence officer (someone who I assume knows more about this thing than ALL of us put together)
link
When a public records search - something anyone with a credit card can do - reveals affiliation with one of those laughable "cover" organizations, all the linguistic dancing in the world isn't going to help you if confronted about your non-governmental status. Any half-curious foreign intelligence service could have figured this out and probably did, which means Ms. Plame really needs to answer only one question of merit this morning, though I doubt it will be asked:
Given the ease with which any of your targets could have determined or at least suspected your affiliation with the US government, is it not reasonable to assume that some or all of the intelligence information you obtained while working under the Brewster-Jennings cover was false or misleading?
Isn't it amazing all the details that come out after the politicians are done with their grandstanding?

Sorry, but the CIA has already definitively stated that she was covert. It doesn't matter how you interpret her life story.

 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
33,952
8,007
136
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
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.

Priceless would be that no one can be or has been convicted of the crime you frivolously claim happened. The people most directly involved were not charged of leaking her name.
 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,161
7
0
Originally posted by: MonkeyK
Sorry, but the CIA has already definitively stated that she was covert. It doesn't matter how you interpret her life story.
Sorry, but covert is a BS title that is being used to make it seem like her cover was really important.
As I said in a post long ago, any CIA employee who works over seas does so in a 'covert' fashion. If I had taken that job as a radio room operator I would have been 'covert' every time I went over sears because my 'official' employer would have been the State Department, but my real employer would have still been the CIA.
Here is more from the Chicago Tribune
link
When the Tribune searched for Plame on an Internet service that sells public information about private individuals to its subscribers, it got a report of more than 7,600 words. Included was the fact that in the early 1990s her address was "AMERICAN EMBASSY ATHENS ST, APO NEW YORK NY 09255."
So much for the whole Brewster Jennings cover huh?
And here is the good stuff...
After Plame left her diplomatic post and joined Brewster-Jennings, she became what is known in CIA parlance as an "NOC," shorthand for an intelligence officer working under "non-official cover." But several CIA veterans questioned how someone with an embassy background could have successfully passed herself off as a private-sector consultant with no government connections.

Genuine NOCs, a CIA veteran said, "never use an official address. If she had [a diplomatic] address, her whole cover's completely phony. I used to run NOCs. I was in an embassy. I'd go out and meet them, clandestine meetings. I'd pay them cash to run assets or take trips. I'd give them a big bundle of cash. But they could never use an embassy address, ever."

Another CIA veteran with 20 years of service agreed that "the key is the [embassy] address. That is completely unacceptable for an NOC. She wasn't an NOC, period."
And just as a reminder, the second she married a former ambassador her ability to work 'under cover' or 'covert' if you prefer was ruined, how covert can you be when you are married to a person known to work for the US government? And they were married in 1998, 5 years before this whole mess.

Yes, at one point in her life Valerie Plame was in fact a covert office of the CIA and she may have in fact been a ?spy?, but those days were long over when this story broke.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
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.

Priceless would be that no one can be or has been convicted of the crime you frivolously claim happened. The people most directly involved were not charged of leaking her name.

You're missing the point. The law is extremely narrow and the people involved did not fit in it. That does not exonerate them (as you do), and they made the false claims quoted.

You can be ProfJohn's assistant apologist.
 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,161
7
0
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Hey PJ, when you're done spreading damage control propaganda, any chance of acknowledging the FACT that your earlier claims are also lies? Just curious.
I went back and read the whole NY Times piece, and you are right he does not come right out and say "VP Cheney sent me to Africa"
However, he certainly makes it appear as if was sent to Africa at his direct request.
Which explains Cheney?s response and Wilson having to ?re-explain? how he ended up in Africa. You left out this part of the story in your quote
The vice president's office asked a serious question. I was asked to help formulate the answer.
Would that not give you the impression that he was acting directly for the VP?s office?
 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,161
7
0
One a side note: Is it not highly ironic to watch the liberals of the forum trip over themselves to defend a former CIA operative.
In any other CIA thread they would be tripping over themselves to blame the CIA for all the worlds problems.
 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
[ Fairy tale deleted ]
Yes, at one point in her life Valerie Plame was in fact a covert office of the CIA and she may have in fact been a ?spy?, but those days were long over when this story broke.
You're not serious, right? It's a great story and all, and I'm sure it would have nicely obfuscated the truth as recently as a year ago, but given that we now have multiple, official sources saying you're full of it, exactly who do you think you fooling? The other Bush faithful? You don't need fanciful stories to sell them.

 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Hey PJ, when you're done spreading damage control propaganda, any chance of acknowledging the FACT that your earlier claims are also lies? Just curious.
I went back and read the whole NY Times piece, and you are right he does not come right out and say "VP Cheney sent me to Africa"
However, he certainly makes it appear as if was sent to Africa at his direct request.
Which explains Cheney?s response and Wilson having to ?re-explain? how he ended up in Africa. You left out this part of the story in your quote
The vice president's office asked a serious question. I was asked to help formulate the answer.
Would that not give you the impression that he was acting directly for the VP?s office?
No, not at all. Indeed it gives the opposite impression, by separating the two requests.

More to the point, it exposes another common BushCo talking point as a lie. Realizing this, a thoughtful person would begin to question whether he had been duped by other BushCo talking points as well. These people wordsmith for a living. It's not a coincidence that their attack against Wilson was a carefully crafted collection of straw men and red herrings they could easily refute rather than the truth which was against them.
 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
One a side note: Is it not highly ironic to watch the liberals of the forum trip over themselves to defend a former CIA operative.
In any other CIA thread they would be tripping over themselves to blame the CIA for all the worlds problems.
:cookie:

No dear. It is GWB and company that used the CIA as their scapegoat, not the "liberals". Try again.