Why does it feel like Republicans and Conservatives do not give a rats ass about the outing of Valerie Plame

[dahunan]

OR.. am I wrong about this?

This case is not just about some NON-Neocons WIFE..

How about Brewster Jennings & Associates... GONE..

 

[Moonbeam]

I think you should also be wondering where those nice soft hearted, work with the other side, Democrats are. Those phony bastards are so chicken livered, in my opinion, they will allow this travesty of justice slide because it might make them look more like those swine vindictive Republican and they might lose a few votes. Can't have that, now can we. F@cking treason and nobody gives a sh!t.

 

[DerekP]

Valerie who? I'm not quite..... OH LOOK THE CLENIS!

 

[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.

Then there's all those who claimed it was common knowledge that she was a CIA agent, she outted herself long ago etc.

Then, you've got the (potential) "outtee" Richard Armitage who was no freind of the Bush Admin anyway. Remind me, how did HE find out? (I honestly can't remember).

On top of that, a Congressional Bipartisan commitee determined her husband was lying, that what he uncovered did more to support the claim that the Iraqis were seeking yellow cake. Etc etc.

The whole things a freakin mess, a Washington DC BS polital soap opra.

Fern

 

[ebaycj]

Probably for the same reason it felt like Democrats/Liberals did not give a rat's ass about Clinton lying under oath (or getting an extramarital BJ).

DISCLAIMER: I AM NEITHER REPUBLICAN NOR DEMOCRAT.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: ebaycj
Probably for the same reason it felt like Democrats/Liberals did not give a rat's ass about Clinton lying under oath (or getting an extramarital BJ).

DISCLAIMER: I AM NEITHER REPUBLICAN NOR DEMOCRAT.

Don't forget about Sandy Berger.

Its all partisan crap anyways, both sides do whatever fits their agenda, its not about justice, the people, etc..

 

[techs]

I was pretty shocked to hear all the focus on Libby and his defense instead of on the heinous crime committed.
I was interested to hear the jury foreman say the jury was stunned that the "real" criminals, Rove and others, were not being prosecuted.

 

[Moonbeam]

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.

Then there's all those who claimed it was common knowledge that she was a CIA agent, she outted herself long ago etc.

Then, you've got the (potential) "outtee" Richard Armitage who was no freind of the Bush Admin anyway. Remind me, how did HE find out? (I honestly can't remember).

On top of that, a Congressional Bipartisan commitee determined her husband was lying, that what he uncovered did more to support the claim that the Iraqis were seeking yellow cake. Etc etc.

The whole things a freakin mess, a Washington DC BS polital soap opra.

Fern

The only mess I see is the one in your head.

 

[Pens1566]

For the 5280973485927340985729th time, CIA asked for DOJ to investigate the leaking of the identity of a COVERT agent.


And enough with the Berger deflections, he plead guilty. Deal with it. Or drop it like the other thread(s).

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

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.

Then there's all those who claimed it was common knowledge that she was a CIA agent, she outted herself long ago etc.

Then, you've got the (potential) "outtee" Richard Armitage who was no freind of the Bush Admin anyway. Remind me, how did HE find out? (I honestly can't remember).

On top of that, a Congressional Bipartisan commitee determined her husband was lying, that what he uncovered did more to support the claim that the Iraqis were seeking yellow cake. Etc etc.

The whole things a freakin mess, a Washington DC BS polital soap opra.

Fern

The only mess I see is the one in your head.

Your remarks are reflection of your own self-hatred; the insecurity you feel about the mess in your head.

Fern

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: ebaycj
Probably for the same reason it felt like Democrats/Liberals did not give a rat's ass about Clinton lying under oath (or getting an extramarital BJ).

DISCLAIMER: I AM NEITHER REPUBLICAN NOR DEMOCRAT.

The lying under oath business was absolutely deplorable! The extra-marital BJ? That's Clinton's business.

 

[zephyrprime]

In case anyone didn't know yet, people are hypocrites.

Hey Bushie, have you fired all the people associated with the leak from your administration yet?

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: ebaycj
Probably for the same reason it felt like Democrats/Liberals did not give a rat's ass about Clinton lying under oath (or getting an extramarital BJ).

DISCLAIMER: I AM NEITHER REPUBLICAN NOR DEMOCRAT.

I still don't understand how any of these compare to Brewster Jennings & Associates
What-Who is Brewster Jennings & Associates

 

[imported_Shivetya]

because NO LAW WAS BROKEN.

It has already been proven she was not a covert agent and therefor not subject to the law.


Hell the other day a reporter outed a former covert agent (who lost a ring that was found later) and no one is making an issue out of it.


I would care if a law were broken, there wasn't, why don't you think it hasn't made it past a grand jury?

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

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.

Then there's all those who claimed it was common knowledge that she was a CIA agent, she outted herself long ago etc.

Then, you've got the (potential) "outtee" Richard Armitage who was no freind of the Bush Admin anyway. Remind me, how did HE find out? (I honestly can't remember).

On top of that, a Congressional Bipartisan commitee determined her husband was lying, that what he uncovered did more to support the claim that the Iraqis were seeking yellow cake. Etc etc.

The whole things a freakin mess, a Washington DC BS polital soap opra.

Fern

The only mess I see is the one in your head.

Your remarks are reflection of your own self-hatred; the insecurity you feel about the mess in your head.

Fern

Actually I think what I hate about myself that reminds me of you is how willing I am at times to confuse myself over issues that affect my self esteem, a denial of faults in folk I admire, the unwillingness to stand up when they do something wrong. I despise moral cowardliness in myself and thus in others. The only difference, if any, between me and you, however, is that I may be just a bit more aware this is how I can be.

 

[imported_Shivetya]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: ebaycj
Probably for the same reason it felt like Democrats/Liberals did not give a rat's ass about Clinton lying under oath (or getting an extramarital BJ).

DISCLAIMER: I AM NEITHER REPUBLICAN NOR DEMOCRAT.

Don't forget about Sandy Berger.

Its all partisan crap anyways, both sides do whatever fits their agenda, its not about justice, the people, etc..

The Sandy Berger issue is what really riles me. I mean, c'mon, stuffing classified docs in your clothing? Worse, the people who had control of the docs suspected he was disappearing them so they made backup copies before letting him have access.

This is one crime that has me scratching my head. What does he know that people are afraid will come out in court?

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: zephyrprime
In case anyone didn't know yet, people are hypocrites.

Hey Bushie, have you fired all the people associated with the leak from your administration yet?

He's been too busy "supporting the troops" to support the CIA agents. :laugh:

 

[daveymark]

Originally posted by: Shivetya
because NO LAW WAS BROKEN.

It has already been proven she was not a covert agent and therefor not subject to the law.


Hell the other day a reporter outed a former covert agent (who lost a ring that was found later) and no one is making an issue out of it.


I would care if a law were broken, there wasn't, why don't you think it hasn't made it past a grand jury?

libs won't let facts get in the way of their smear campaign

 

[Pens1566]

Originally posted by: Shivetya
because NO LAW WAS BROKEN.

It has already been proven she was not a covert agent and therefor not subject to the law.


Hell the other day a reporter outed a former covert agent (who lost a ring that was found later) and no one is making an issue out of it.


I would care if a law were broken, there wasn't, why don't you think it hasn't made it past a grand jury?

Link???

If so, why would the CIA request the DOJ investigate the leak of the identity of a covert agent? Don't worry, we'll wait ...........................................

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: daveymark

Originally posted by: Shivetya
because NO LAW WAS BROKEN.

It has already been proven she was not a covert agent and therefor not subject to the law.


Hell the other day a reporter outed a former covert agent (who lost a ring that was found later) and no one is making an issue out of it.


I would care if a law were broken, there wasn't, why don't you think it hasn't made it past a grand jury?

libs won't let facts get in the way of their smear campaign

Oh, the irony......

 

[imported_Shivetya]

Originally posted by: Pens1566

Originally posted by: Shivetya
because NO LAW WAS BROKEN.

It has already been proven she was not a covert agent and therefor not subject to the law.


Hell the other day a reporter outed a former covert agent (who lost a ring that was found later) and no one is making an issue out of it.


I would care if a law were broken, there wasn't, why don't you think it hasn't made it past a grand jury?

Link???

If so, why would the CIA request the DOJ investigate the leak of the identity of a covert agent? Don't worry, we'll wait ...........................................

Because her NOC career effectively ended with her marriage in 1988. Also, her resident address was in NY since the 90s. The law only covers outing classified agents within 5 years of their last undercover operation. She had been back for over 10 years and it is most likely her marriage that ended her ability to function properly as a NOC (non official cover) style agent.


Hence that is why the invetigation went no where. What they got instead was someone lieing to a grand jury about a non-crime. Essentially Libby lied about something he thought he did wrong. To give another example, a former President lost his ability to practice law for lieing to a Grand Jury. Regardless of what people think you do not lie in court. That is a crime. You don't have to provide an anwser but if you do it must be truthful. Of course he made many claims "of not recalling" but that defense only works at certain times (never during a witch hunt)..

 

[Pens1566]

And yet she was "working" for a covert CIA front company, which exposed many other agents. I guess the CIA was incorrect then in asking DOJ for the investigation. Then again, what would they know about which agents were classified as what.

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: techs
I was pretty shocked to hear all the focus on Libby and his defense instead of on the heinous crime committed.
I was interested to hear the jury foreman say the jury was stunned that the "real" criminals, Rove and others, were not being prosecuted.

If there was a real crime to prosecute then it should have been prosecuted!

Instead they caught Libby failing to recall a conversation and now they take the rest of his life away. Feel free to correct me if I don?t have his crime accurate, but it?s entirely dishonest and should be illegal to rob a man of the rest of his life because of the investigation for a crime he did not commit.

This is not about Libby, it?s about the next person robbed of their life because of a investigation for a crime they did not commit.

 

[daveymark]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: daveymark

Originally posted by: Shivetya
because NO LAW WAS BROKEN.

It has already been proven she was not a covert agent and therefor not subject to the law.


Hell the other day a reporter outed a former covert agent (who lost a ring that was found later) and no one is making an issue out of it.


I would care if a law were broken, there wasn't, why don't you think it hasn't made it past a grand jury?

libs won't let facts get in the way of their smear campaign

Oh, the irony......

wait for it...

 

[1EZduzit]

Beside the CIA asking for an investigation into the leak, I also have to ask myself why Bush threatened to fire anyone assoicated with the leak, if as they now are trying to claim, that there was no "leak"?

The supposed facts just don't add up??