Here you go col.

Plamegate special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald had told top White House advisor Karl Rove that he's not a target of his investigation into who leaked the identity of CIA analyst Valerie Plame to columnist Robert Novak. And Fitzgerald has also asked the top Bush aide not to discuss the case in public. Speaking to National Review Online's Byron York late Tuesday, Rove attorney Robert Luskin said Fitzgerald "has told Rove he is not a 'target' of the investigation" - despite media reports suggesting otherwise.

Link

Since you've now sunk so low that your argument is nothing more than calling them "dirt bags," I'm outta here. You're so blinded by your rage that you're incapable of an honest thought. People who ignore the truth in the service of their twisted hatred are the bottom-feeders in my book, but I'll leave it to others to make up their own minds.

Cheers,
Daiwa

Whet is sad is that so many people will not look at what Bush is doing to our country. The truth is Rove lied for two years about not having anything to do with giving the idendity of Wilson's wife to the press. The E-Mails from the times show he is a lier. I do not know if he fooled Bush or if Bush knew that he was part of this sorted chapter in our history. The Wilson report that said Saddam did not try an buy Yellow Cake was TRUE. Bush and his staff did not like it and when the report was not supportive of Bush, Cheney was cought for having sent Wilson on the trip.

As for Lambaugh, he obtained drugs ( about 2,000 pills) via Dctor Shopping. He sits and spouts his right wing BS as if he were great when he violates the law. His comments about the London terrorist attack were just BAD.

Both these people have earned the title, DIRT BAGS!

"The Wilson report that said Saddam did not try an buy Yellow Cake was TRUE."

Col, after all this talk you STILL don't know what you are talking about. Do you not realize how painfully obvious it is that you have just read a couple of blurbs about it?

No one ever said Hussein had bought any uranium from Niger. What was alleged was Iraq had ATTEMPTED to by uranium. In reality the overtures were made, but there was no proof an actual deal was ever made.

Please, for your own sake, when you write an article, know what the hell you are talking about. You said the Rove thing needed to go to the grand jury and it has been there for a long time. You didn't know anything about the political mess that caused the Rove situation.

So, in the end, you don't have any opinion on this, because you aren't really informed enough to. You just have your deranged, hateful bias and want to see a couple of the "dirt bags" that posses your mind "taken down". Take your meds and read a bit more next time.

Bubba? do you mean clinton...cause he was never impeached... when has newt gingrich done anything wrong? never heard anything about him...

Clinton was impeached, since impeachment is the name for the proceedings to decide if punishment is in order. Andrew Johnson was also impeached.

Whet is sad is that so many people will not look at what Bush is doing to our country.

People have looked, and that's why he was re-elected.

Bush and his staff did not like it and when the report was not supportive of Bush, Cheney was cought for having sent Wilson on the trip.

It has already been shown to you that Cheney had nothing to do with it. Plame was the one who sent him on the trip. Where are you getting your information from, the DNC?

Are you ever going to answer the question col? Will you finally admit you are completely partisan and give democrats a pass?

I thought Plame was not a CIA Agent. If she as you claim had the authority to send Amb Wilson on his trip, she must have been an important person in the CIA. The point is he said there was no evidence that supported the Bush claim that Saddam attempted to purchase Yellow cake. As it truns out, Saddam had no viable nuclear program and all the BS from Cheney about the danger from Saddam with nuclear weapons was so much hipe to justify the War!

I thought Plame was not a CIA Agent. If she as you claim had the authority to send Amb Wilson on his trip, she must have been an important person in the CIA.

I didn't say she didn't have authority, I said she was not an agent. Just because she had some authority doesn't mean she was a super spy.

The point is he said there was no evidence that supported the Bush claim that Saddam attempted to purchase Yellow cake. As it truns out, Saddam had no viable nuclear program and all the BS from Cheney about the danger from Saddam with nuclear weapons was so much hipe to justify the War!

Have you read the other posts which tell about how Wilson lied and distorted his report? You should have because it's been posted many times. It must be one of those things you refuse to look at, just like good news from Iraq.

Are you ever going to answer the question col? Will you finally admit you are completely partisan and give democrats a pass?

Key point here col.

Plamegate special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald had told top White House adviser Karl Rove that he's not a target of his investigation into who leaked the identity of CIA analyst Valerie Plame to columnist Robert Novak.

she didn't send him there, she pimped him to her bosses. The memo she wrote is included in the Iraq report.

Given the E-Mails that clearly show that Rove did identify Plame as a CIA Agent it should only be a matter of time before Rove is brought before the Grand Jury. Rove's Lawyer admitted he talked to the reporters but that Rove did not actually say "Valarie Plame" However, according to his lawyer, Rove told the reporter that Wilson's wife was a CIA agent. I want to see Rove's lawyer argue that before a jury.

All this BS about the Wilson Report means NOTHING. You can not justify what Karl Rove did by ANYTHING that was or was not in the report Wilson wrote. The main issue in the Wilson Report was TRUE. Saddam DID NOT attempt to by Yellow Cake and he had NO nuclear weapons program! That was NOT what Bush and Cheney wanted to hear and they most likely retaliated by outing his wife's name as a CIA operative! I would not be surprised to learn that Bush and Cheney knew that Rove had provided that info to the reporters. Bush may have directed Rove to do it. One thing is clear, for the conservatives and the Bush operatives, the END they desire ustifies the means!

How in the hell can you attest to what the Wilson report said, when you haven't read it, and you refuse to even read the report about it? If Wilson didn't have anything to do with it, then you shouldn't have brought up your lies about his report "debunking" Bush in the original document.

You're a digit, col, regurgitating the party line. You're just willing to accept the word of a man who was caught telling lies to the press because he is a Dembot. What WILL you do if a Democrat wins in 2008? From the looks of things your primary reason to be will be gone...

Given the E-Mails that clearly show that Rove did identify Plame as a CIA Agent it should only be a matter of time before Rove is brought before the Grand Jury.

Once again col, she is not an agent. How many times do we have to tell you?

Anyways, what e-mails showed him giving her name out? Where did you obtain these e-mails?

Rove should be commended for calling Wilson on his lies.

I would not be surprised to learn that Bush and Cheney knew that Rove had provided that info to the reporters. Bush may have directed Rove to do it. One thing is clear, for the conservatives and the Bush operatives, the END they desire ustifies the means!

Do you ever make sense? People have shown Wilsons report was debunked and Wilson did not prove anything. Read the report that people have posted.

You're a digit, col, regurgitating the party line. You're just willing to accept the word of a man who was caught telling lies to the press because he is a Dembot. What WILL you do if a Democrat wins in 2008? From the looks of things your primary reason to be will be gone...

I have already asked him several times why he doesn't go after democrats who are accused of wrongdoing. He has totally ignored the question.

White House Admits WMD Error

July 8, 2003



Bush's Bogus Charge


(CBS)



"I am quite sure we did the right thing in removing Saddam Hussein because not merely was he a threat … to the wider world but it was an appalling regime that the world is well rid of."
Prime Minister Tony Blair

In his State of the Union speech, President Bush referred to British claims that Iraq had tried to buy uranium in Africa — a claim that may be false. (AP)

Blair supported the war at great political risk and now appears to be paying for it. Polls show he is deemed less trustworthy than rival political leaders. (AP)


Iraq: After Saddam
Videos:
• Saddam Capture Videos

Interactives:
• Capturing Saddam

• Photos: Saddam In Custody
• Timeline Of Saddam's Life

• Postwar Iraq

• Saddam's Sons Killed

• Daily Photo Diary

• Fallen Heroes

• Inside The Hideout

• World Leaders React

Read:
• Interrogating Saddam

• What's Next For Saddam?

• CourtWatch: Saddam Trial

• Exclusive: Rumsfeld Intv.

• Analysis: Capture's Impact

• Analysis: Ace In The Hole

• Full Text: Bush Statement

• Bush Gets Political Boost

• World Leaders Hail Capture

• Dan Rather/Saddam Hussein Interview




(CBS/AP) Amid questions about prewar intelligence, the White House is acknowledging that President Bush was incorrect when he said in his State of the Union address that Iraq recently had sought significant quantities of uranium in Africa.

Claims about Saddam's weapons of mass destruction were a primary justification for the war, but U.S. forces have yet to find any such weapons. The House and Senate intelligence panels are looking into prewar intelligence on Iraq and how it was used by the Bush administration.

Mr. Bush said in his address to Congress in January that the British government had learned that Saddam recently sought significant quantities of uranium in Africa.

The president's statement in the State of the Union was incorrect because it was based on forged documents from the African nation of Niger, White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said Monday.

"The president's statement was based on the predicate of the yellow cake" uranium "from Niger," Fleischer told reporters. "So given the fact that the report on the yellow cake did not turn out to be accurate, that is reflective of the president's broader statement."

Fleischer's remarks follow assertions by an envoy sent by the CIA to Africa to investigate allegations about Iraq's nuclear weapons program. The envoy, Joseph Wilson, said Sunday that the Bush administration manipulated his findings, possibly to strengthen the rationale for war.

Wilson, a former U.S. ambassador to the West African nation of Gabon, was dispatched in February 2002 to explore whether Iraq tried to buy uranium from Niger.

Writing in a New York Times op-ed piece, Wilson said it did not take him long "to conclude that it was highly doubtful that any such transaction had ever taken place."

In an interview on NBC, Wilson insisted his doubts about the purported Iraq-Niger connection reached the highest levels of government, including Vice President Dick Cheney's office.

In fact, he said, Cheney's office inquired about the purported Niger-Iraq link.

"The question was asked of the CIA by the office of the vice president. The office of the vice president, I am absolutely convinced, received a very specific response to the question it asked, and that response was based upon my trip out there," Wilson said.

Yet nearly a year after he had returned and briefed CIA officials, the assertion that Saddam was trying to obtain uranium from Africa was included in Mr. Bush's State of the Union address.

The International Atomic Energy Agency told the United Nations in March — after the State of the Union — that the information about the uranium procurement efforts was based on forged documents.

A British parliamentary committee concluded Monday that Prime Minister Tony Blair's government mishandled intelligence material on Iraqi weapons — and said key questions remain about the allegations of an attempted uranium deal with Nigeria.



WaPo, Corn on Rove’s Plame-Outing Role

The Washington Post has a page 1 story today on the evidence linking Karl Rove with the outing of undercover CIA agent Valerie Plame: Rove told reporter of Plame’s role but didn’t name her, attorney says.

It seems that Rove’s lawyer, Robert Luskin, has slightly altered the story he’s telling the media (or maybe the media was sloppy in handling the quotes he gave them over the past few days). In the LA Times article from July 3, we read this:

In confirming the conversation between Rove and Cooper, Rove’s attorney, Robert Luskin, emphasized that the presidential advisor did not reveal any secrets.

But in today’s Washington Post article, we read the following:

Luskin said yesterday that Rove did not know Plame’s name and was not actively trying to push the information into the public realm.

Instead, Luskin said, Rove discussed the matter — under the cloak of secrecy — with Cooper at the tail end of a conversation about a different issue. Cooper had called Rove to discuss other matters on a Friday before deadline, and the topic of Wilson came up briefly. Luskin said Cooper raised the question.

“Rove did not mention her name to Cooper,” Luskin said. “This was not an effort to encourage Time to disclose her identity. What he was doing was discouraging Time from perpetuating some statements that had been made publicly and weren’t true.”

In particular, Rove was urging caution because then-CIA Director George J. Tenet was about to issue a statement regarding Iraq’s alleged interest in African uranium and its inaccurate inclusion in President Bush’s 2003 State of the Union address. Tenet took the blame for allowing a misleading paragraph into the speech, but Tenet also said that the president, vice president and other senior officials were never briefed on Wilson’s report.

Um, right. But if Cooper’s notes are to be believed, Rove did tell him that Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA. And it sounds from this as if Luskin isn’t challenging the accuracy of those notes. So if both of these newspaper articles accurately reflect what Luskin said, he had to be lying at least one of those times. Rove could not have both discussed with Cooper that Joe Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA, and failed to reveal any secrets. Because the fact that she worked for the CIA was itself a secret. So as of this point I think I’ll be putting a big flashing asterisk next to anything sourced to Robert Luskin.

For a reality check, be sure to read what David Corn has to say on his blog today: Why Bush has to fire Rove:

But let’s put aside the legal issues for a moment. This e-mail demonstrates that Rove committed a firing offense. He leaked national security information as part of a fierce campaign to undermine Wilson, who had criticized the White House on the war on Iraq. Rove’s overworked attorney, Robert Luskin, defends his client by arguing that Rove never revealed the name of Valerie Plame/Wilson to Cooper and that he only referred to her as Wilson’s wife. This is not much of a defense. If Cooper or any other journalist had written that “Wilson’s wife works for the CIA”–without mentioning her name–such a disclosure could have been expected to have the same effect as if her name had been used: Valerie Wilson would have been compromised, her anti-WMD work placed at risk and national security potentially harmed. Either Rove knew that he was revealing an undercover officer to a reporter or he was identifying a CIA officer without bothering to check on her status and without considering the consequences of outing her. Take your pick: In both scenarios Rove is acting in a reckless and cavalier fashion, ignoring national security interests to score a political point against a policy foe.

This ought to get Rove fired–unless he resigns first.

This entry was posted by jbc on Monday, July 11th, 2005 at 8:55 pm and is filed under george_w_bush. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Plamegate special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald had told top White House adviser Karl Rove that he's not a target of his investigation into who leaked the identity of CIA analyst Valerie Plame to columnist Robert Novak.

In the main body of its unanimous report on pre-war intelligence on Iraq, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence made a startling statement about former Amb. Joe Wilson--whom the CIA sent on a brief trip to Niger in February 2002, and who accused President Bush of lying when the President said in his 2003 State of the Union address that British intelligence indicated Iraq had sought uranium in Africa. The unanimous report states: "The former ambassador also told the committee staff that he was the source of a Washington Post article ('CIA Did Not Share Doubt on Iraq Data; Bush Used Report of Uranium Bid,' June 12, 2003) which said, 'among the envoy's conclusions was that the documents may have been forged because "the dates were wrong and the names were wrong"' when he had never seen the CIA reports and had no knowledge of what names and dates were in the reports. The former ambassador said that he may have 'misspoken' to the reporter when he said he concluded the documents were 'forged.' He also said he may have become confused about his own recollections after the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported in March 2003 that the names and dates on the documents were not correct and may have thought he had seen the names himself." Six days after the committee released this report, the British determined in their own investigation of pre-war intelligence that their conclusion that Saddam was seeking uranium in Niger was credible. Their intelligence, it turns out, was not based on the forged documents cited by Wilson that purported to show an Iraq-Niger uranium deal. More interestingly, those forged documents, the Senate Intelligence Committee reported, did not even

Link